Re: The Crisis with Remailers

[snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>]

On Sun, 19 May 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
> not!!! I should have made this clear, but imho no matter how favorably
> the public sees anonymity, I still believe there will be little
> incentive to run remailers until there is some kind of ecash

	Sometimes "Just Because" is enough. There are people running them
right now with no incentive. As long as there isn't a _huge_ disincentive
to run one, there will be several running, if only because there are
people who _want_ to use one, so they run one. 

> scheme. you are going to have "bad" uses of anonymity going on as
> long as you provide the capability. ask the remailer operators to
> estimate how much of their mail is simply taunts between college
> students or sexual harassment. I doubt you will ever be able to
> evade this.

	If they know the answer to this question, then they are treading a
dangerous ground. 

> by liability I am also referring to a situation in which the 
> internet provider is pressured to quit the service by *anyone* not
> necessarily agents of the government. past examples are strong evidence
> that it does not at all require a government to shut down a remailer
> via pressure. anon.penet.fi at one point was pressured to shut down
> by "a well known net celebrity"

	Did penet.fi fold? Apparently not. 

Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@crash.suba.com