> That's fine unless the people with the incorrect impressions are
> a judge and a prosecutor...
Good point--I suppose it's not paranoia if they /are/ out to get you.
>> Perhaps Brin's and my discomfort with cypherpunks is only that,
>> but I think it is more: as I said, in my experience, those who
>> attach great value to preventing the spread of information about
>> themselves I find strange. It is not a reasoned judgment, only
>> an emotional reaction, but it is a prejudice that serves me.
> Thank you for explaining this to me, because until now I found
> Brin's stance on these issues to be incomprehensibly extreme.
Just for the record, I find the specifics of Brin's arguments
just as incomprehensibly extreme: distrust of those who value
"privacy" and spreading openness memes is one thing; banning a
communication technology is quite another. Not only irrational
in its goals, but a complete waste of time to even consider as
a possible reality. It makes about as much sense as gun control
or nuclear weapon bans; yeah, let's just pass a law against the
/things/ and pretend that they'll go away, and pay no attention
to the reasons people do evil with those things.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC