[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CryptoAnarchy: What's wrong with this picture?
On Sun, 28 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote:
[...]
> "Military technologies" only work effectively against a military target.
While generally I agree with you, I believe Esper Sata, Gerald Bull and
Pablo Escobar might have more specific disagreements.
> Kill civilians and you just make other civilians angry. At that point
> they'll be look for a weapon that "military technologies" cannot effectively
> oppose. That weapon is already known to be possible.
While strong cryptography is powerful, and secure communications
liberating, unplugging the phones would about cripple that 'weapon' for a
while. Any group rebelling based only on high technology communication is
an extremely vulnerable group, both to widespread denial of service, and
more specific 'surgical' attacks. (Motorola stock anyone?)
> Quite the contrary, I think that a "successful popular uprising" will
> require only a very small investment in time and money, in which some of
> they key players in government are targeted and the prospect exists for
> easily and cheaply getting the rest. At that point they will resign in
> droves.
Firstly, uprising, even kicking people out of power might take only a
small investment in time and money, but consolidating a new system (even a
decentralized one) will be extensively expensive and time consuming.
To the extent that a successful uprising depends on organizing the new
power structure, I can't see how a successful popular uprising can be
cheap.
In addition I believe the assumption that a few, even several official
deaths will cause mass resignations ignores history. See e.g., Columbia,
South Africa, and any number of other examples.
[...]
> Government feeds on its own size; once government is dramatically reduced
> below its current size, it will become even less able to resist further
> contraction. Probably few government employees realize this.
While I understand the point, I think that a slim efficient government is
much better able to resist "contraction." The most effective covert
action/terrorist/political agitation groups have all been small and
closely held. It's easier to control all aspects of operation and a
greater concentration can be put into internal security concerns as
government shrinks. Obviously there is a critical mass, but I don't think
you will see the "runaway refrigerator" effect with government shrinkage.
> Jim Bell
> [email protected]
---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:[email protected]
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: [email protected]