Re: NYT's _Unmuzzling the Internet_

["Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>]

>At first, the Jaron proposal sounds like an interesting thought
>experiment but a total waste of bandwidth, both CPU and network, to
>me.  The unconstitutional Bill must be defeated in Congress, by that
>Presidential veto pen that Clinton has become so fond of using
>recently or the Court system, if absolutely necessary.  If none of
>that happens, then surely technology can be used to route around this
>"political" problem.  It just seems like a shame to have to expend
>technical effort and valuable network resources to play games to meet
>the letter of a law, which would so clearly break the direct spirit of
>the Constitution, if signed into Law and later found during a Supreme
>Court battle to "pass constitutional muster," as they like to say.

the laws are very likely to be challenged almost from the instant they
become active by EFF et. al-- there are a lot of powerful legal allies
against it.

however, to borrow from Nietzche, "that which attempts to destroy the
net will only help it grow stronger".

Congressmen and governments have a choice: be a friend or enemy of cyberspace. 
if they choose the latter, they will simply become increasingly irrelevant.

cyberspace will inevitably transcend local regulatory laws and feebleminded 
bureacrats in the long run. if parts of it have to go "underground" to 
do so, that will be the approach.

a network that is impervious to these misguided bureacrats, far from
being a waste of time developing as you write, would be a very, very 
significant achievement. it would be a form of technology that resists
attack on more than merely technological grounds but work in 
ideological areas as well.

I am all for helping congressmen "get a clue" at this moment in time.
the Digital Telephony bill is not a declaration of war. when they try
to tax Cyberspace or get the FCC to regulate it, or outlaw cryptography,
*that* will be a declaration of war.