Re: We are ALL guests (except Eric)

[eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)]

   From: cactus@bb.hks.net (L. Todd Masco)

Todd's good discussion of social lists addresses well some of the
social aspects of a decision to modify the server to do something.

   It is certainly not a clear case in my mind: Eric might be able to
   pull it off without pissing too many people off, he might not.
   This discussion is part of what will determine that.

What is certainly clear enough to me is that the list is certainly
social enough that without discussion the endeavor would certainly
fail.

   I'll make a prediction: requiring digital signatures will annoy most 
   those people who are independant and don't care to be told that they
   should at least ostensibly provide a strong identity/posting mapping.

1. Independence.  Higher levels of richness (and I mean much more than
wealth) require higher levels of interaction.  There is a qualitative
difference between, on one hand, violence and coercion and, on the
other, inducements and interactions.  Both can reduce independence.
Then again I don't feel that liberty and independence are what I
desire most.

2. Strong mappings.  Two solutions already presented here allow a
workaround.  Pseudonymous and one-time keys both work, as does an
autosigning alternate entry point.  I say great, build them.

Apropos of one-time use keys, will PGP function properly on a 20 bit
modulus?  Another non-key would be to generate a short key and post
both public and private halves.

   thought that this was one of the common assumptions of this list: that
   anonymity as well as pseudonymity was a goal worth achieving.  Requiring
   signatures seems several steps backwards.

The first time a signature appears, it's anonymous.  The second time
it appears it's pseudonymous, and references the preceding message.
Requiring signatures does not prevent anonymity.

   as I suggested last night, such a list address could be set to
   automatically sign all posts

Why do I suspect that such a service will be available at
cypherpunks@hks.net?  I don't mind; I think it would be useful service
and entirely compatible with what I want to accomplish.

Eric