Re: Key Servers

["L. Detweiler" <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu>]

>I think its because we don't see pseudospoofing as a "danger" like you
>do.  Personally, I consider it a necessity.  I like being able to hide
>behind an anonymous identity (not that I do, mind you).  I don't see
>pseudospoofing as "constraining".  On the contrary, I see it as
>freeing us.

DAMNIT! will you CYPHERPUNKS stop CONFLATING 

1) pseudonymity
2) anonymity
3) pseudoanonymity

you jerks CONTINUE to claim that (1) (2) and (3) are EQUIVALENT

>No the software isn't mine, but I consider myself it's God Father.
>Mike Graff (explorer@iastate.edu) and I were talking about this a long
>time, and he just beat me to learning enough PERL to write the thing.
>But I'd like to think that the two of us did most all of the design of
>it.  So, in a way, it is my software.

Oh. I see. And you would regulate its use on the Internet. Gosh, that
sounds kind of like one of those fascist oppressive restrictions by an
outside authority. Something to bludgeon.

>And, as I said, it is not the job of the Keyserver to provide any sort
>of policy.  The job of the Keyserver is to distribute keys.  Nothing
>more.  Nothing less.  The job of identifying True Names is solely a
>job for Digital Signatures, not a job for the Keyserver.  

Call it a Keyserver, or a Digital Signature Server or a Toxic Waste
Dump, frankly, I don't care what you call it.

>I am a cypherpunk.  I don't believe in trusting something on faith
>alone, but you seem to be asking for that.

you `cypherpunks' have no idea what a true society constitutes. trust
is inherent to one. you guys all subscribe to the idea, `nothing is bad
if you can get away with it.' `if you can get away with it, you should try it.'

we'll see who has the last laugh.

HA, HA.