Subject: law vs technology

From: Wei Dai

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 13:32:02 -0800

Recently there's been a great deal of discussion on this list

about upcoming legislations (HR666 S314 etc.). Maybe it's time

to step back a little and look at the bigger picture. I've

been assuming (perhaps incorrectly) for some time that most

cypherpunks hold a belief somewhat like the following:

There has never been a government that didn't sooner or later

try to reduce the freedom of its subjects and gain more control

over them, and there probably never will be one. Therefore,

instead of trying to convince our current government not to

try, we'll develop the technology (e.g., remailers and ecash)

that will make it impossible for the government to succeed.

Efforts to influence the government (e.g., lobbying and

propaganda) are important only in so far as to delay its

attempted crackdown long enough for the technology to mature

and come into wide use.

But even if you do not believe the above is true, think about

it this way: If you have a certain amount of time to spend on

advancing the cause of greater personal privacy (or freedom, or

cryptoanarchy, or whatever), can you do it better by using the

time to learn about cryptography and develop the tools to

protect privacy, or by convincing your government not to invade

your privacy? I argue that since there are many more people

doing the former (EFF, CPSR, etc) than latter, that you'd be

more effective if you spent the time on the former.

Wei Dai