Re: Freedom of technology

[Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net>]

John E. Kreznar scripsit
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> Crim Tideson writes:
> 
> > > That being said let it be known that I consider the following as a
> > > "Cypherpunk victory."
> > >
> > > 1.  Complete freedom of technology, particularly encryption technology,
> >                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > regulated only by market forces.  This implies the lack of import/export
> > > restrictions, and a complete absence of projects designed to limit
> >                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > technology, or to standardize it for nefarious ends like Clipper.
> >   ^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> > I think you overgeneralize.  No limits on toxic waste incinerators,
> > low-mileage automobiles, unsafe medical devices, genetically tampered
> > food, or nuclear reactors?  "Market forces" in such cases positively
> > encourage dangerous technology (e.g. incinerators are superficially
> > cheap) or are marked by their inability to distinguish the good from the
> > crap (e.g. medical devices).
> 
> Who decides what's good and what's crap?
> 
> Let me see if I understand.  Are you advocating that personal choice in
> medical devices, food, etc., be supplanted by government dictate?
> 
> Do you understand that in many cases, a person is interested in strong
> cryptography just so that she can make her own choices in such matters,
> free of interference by a do-gooder who thinks he knows better than she?
> That she sees crypto as a way to defend against him (e.g. by buying
> ``unsafe medical devices'' through BlackNet)?

This is especially true with products that are pulled from the market to 
save the average (read idiot) consumer from him/herself.  Or products put 
there for the same reason.

The amount of law that is intended to safeguard the world and cater to 
the bottom of the barrel when it comes to intellect and intelligence is 
significant.

I really don't want a function on all cars sold in the United States 
which prevents people from starting their car with the clutch engaged.  I 
actually find use for starting with the clutch engaged.  I can't stand 
ABS, and can usually threshold brake much more effectively than ABS can 
pulse brake.  I turn ABS off.  It's an idiot button.  It's the product of 
a culture that presses the button on the ATM machine, but has no idea 
what's going on behind the screen.

Who's to tell me I have to have ABS or the "safety starter" if I don't 
want the thing?

Who's to tell me that I need a backdoor in my crypto?

Where do you draw the line?  Outlaw sugar perhaps?  It would save 
consumers millions in dental bills.

> 
> ``Market forces'' are just the sum of personal choices.
>

And a "failed market" is when the market doesn't match up with the 
administrator's choices.


> 	John E. Kreznar		| Relations among people to be by
> 	jkreznar@ininx.com	| mutual consent, or not at all.
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.3a
[...]
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 

-uni- (Dark)

-- 
073BB885A786F666 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est
6E6D4506F6EDBC17 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa    -    wichtig!