-Caveat Lector-

from alt.conspiracy
-----
As always, Caveat Lector.
Om
K
-----
<A HREF="aol://5863:126/alt.conspiracy:478013">The Pirate Issue</A>
-----
Subject: The Pirate Issue
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mik*_ Schn*der)
Date: Tue, Jan 12, 1999 11:49 PM
Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

(This is why I will always be using Macs, even if Steve Jobs is a bozo.)


Mac Addict #30 Feb 99
"Special Pirate Issue"

...among other featured articles:


BEAT THE MAN:


Set up a renegade internet radio station!

 (That's right, blowhard! You can take your incoherent ramblings to the
web and reach more people than Rush and Howard combined. All you need is
Quicktime 3.0, a Mac, and a modem.)


Fake IDs: cheap, easy and illegal!

 (The latest round of printers and scanners makes is easier and cheaper
than ever for the unscrupulous to fake an identity. Our own Robert Capps
discovers just how easy it is -- and reports on what hardware to watch
for.)

   -- What a great article!  Scanners, printers & software reviewed.

   This would be a killer combo with John Newman's "Understanding US
Identity Documents" (Available through Loompanics Unlimited).


* * * *

   And the very best reason to own a Mac:


A Customs Check in the Peoples Republic

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 14:18:12 -0400
From: "K. N. Cukier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Searched at UK Border for Net Porn
Sender: "K. N. Cukier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Some days it's a bad hair day, other days you see the suite of Western
values since the Enlightenment quashed in an instant by a single,
soulless, civil servant. Here's what happened to me last Friday when I
arrived in London from Paris on the channel tunnel train:

As I walked through UK immigration, two guys pulled me aside, flashed
badges, and said: "UK Customs. Come with us." They walked me behind a wall
where they handed me off to one of a fleet of waiting agents.

A customs officer told me to lay my computer bag on the table, and
inspected my ticket and passport. After learning I was a reporter, she
demanded to see my press card (issued by the French Ministry of Foreign
Affairs), and asked about where I was going in London, why, and for how
long.

"Do you know there are things that are illegal to bring into the UK?" she
asked.

"Uh, yeah.... There are *many* things that are illegal to bring across
borders -- do you have in mind any thing in particular?," I said.

"Illegal drugs, fire arms, bomb making materials, lewd and obscene
pornographic material...."

I felt a rush of relief. I was late and now was assured I could get on
with my journey. "I am carrying none of that," I replied, staring directly
at her, with a tone of earnest seriousness.

"Is that a computer in your bag?"

"Yes."

"Does it have Internet on in?"

Here, I confess, I really didn't know how to answer. What does one say to
a question like that?? I was struck dumb. "I use the computer to access
the Internet, yes," I said, rather proud of myself for my accuracy.

"Is there any pornography on it?" she said, stoically.

Here, I figured out what's going on. But I'm mentally paralyzed from all
the synapses sparkling all at once in my head: Does she not understand
that Internet content is distributed around the world? That I'm just
dialing a local number, be it in France or the UK, and that whether I
cross a border is moot to what I'm able to access?

"There is no pornography stored on the hard drive," I stated.

"Do you mind if I check." she says rather than asks, and begins to take
the computer out of the bag. "I'm just going to hook it up over there and
scan the hard drive..." she continues.

And then her face turns dour. "Oh! It's an Apple," she says, dejectedly.
"Our scanner doesn't work on Apples."


   [And by the time they figure that out, I'll be they wouldn't have the
slightest clue how to extract porn from an encrypted Shrinkwrap archive!]


At this point, it's all a little bit too much, too fast, for me to handle.
>From seeing my personal privacy ripped out from under me with a
computer-enema to an immediate about-face and witnessing my oppressors
flounder in the pap of their own incompetence was just too much to bear.

Then, of course, I sort of relished the irony of it all. I swung into
naive-mode:

"Oh. Oh well," I said and began packing up. "Why not?"

"I dunno -- it just doesn't," she said.

"Is this a common thing that you do? Scan PCs?"

"It happens quite often," she said. (Note: I wrote this entire dialogue
immediately after the incident, but that particular quote I wrote the
moment we parted, to have it exactly right.)

"Do you catch a lot?"

"Sometimes," she says, cautiously.

What's the fine? The penalty?" I asked.

She started to become uncomfortable and tried to move me along. "It
depends. Every case is different. It depends what they have."

"What about if I had encryption -- do you check for that too?" I said,
disdaining the risk that she might want to check the computer "by hand"
since I'd mentioned the dreaded C-word....

"Huh?! I don't know about that...."

"You don't know what cryptography is?" I asked.

"No. Thank you, you can go now," she said.

And thus ended my experience with inspector "K. PARE_," whose name tag was
partially torn at the final one or two letters of her last name.

Of course I was burning up. Lots of thoughts raced through me.

For example, would I have really let her inspect my hard drive, even
knowing I was "innocent." That, of course, was entirely irrelevant to me
-- it's about a principle. I thought of my editor -- or ex-editor -- if I
didn't make the day-long meeting. And I immediately thought of John
Gilmore, and how much I respected him when he refused to board a flight a
few years ago when the airline demanded he present a form of
identification. Had I acquiesced to their mental thuggery?

As soon as I realized I was "safe" from being scanned, I was tempted to
pull out my notepad, go into reporter-mode, and make a small scene getting
names and superiors and formal writs of whatever.... but suspected it
would only get me locked in a room for a full day.

Then I thought of how, despite in their kafakain zeal to abuse my privacy,
they couldn't even get that right. Not only did they not have a clue what
the Internet is, they confirmed their ignorance by not even being able to
digitally pat me down. Insult to injury! It brought back something John
Perry Barlow once told me about why he doesn't fear US intelligence
agencies. "I've seen them from the inside," he said (as I recall), "they
will suffer under the weight of their own ineptitude."

What's at the heart of this is "thought crime"; and scanning one's
computer is paramount to search and seizure of one's intellectual
activity. What if they found subversive literature about the proper role
of government authority in civil society? Would that have gotten me
busted? And do they store what they scan? Are business executives with
marketing plans willing to have their data inspected under the umbrella of
public safety from porn?

Just the night before I read in the memoirs of William Shirer, who wrote
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, about how he was blacklisted for a
decade after his name was cited in Red Currents, a magazine that destroyed
hundreds of careers during the McCarthy era. He was powerless to defend
himself.

I see parallels: We are approaching the point were we are incapable of
reasonable discourse on Internet content. Refuse to boot up for inspection
means you've got something to hide. Defend civil liberties of the accused
means you condone guilty acts. Question the nature of the censorious
policies in the first place means you are filthy, and as unhealthy as the
wily-eyed porn devourer.... State the obvious: That a large part of the
drive for Net content regulation is driven by hucksters seeking
recognition, and that it is taken to idiotic extremes by a mass movement
of simpletons ignorant of the history of hysteria in the US, and, well,
you're just a typical lawless cyberlibertarian.

Finally, it dawned in me. This wasn't an aberration at all, but part of a
much deeper trend. It's a British thing, really.


   [It's an *asshole* thing, really; and they live EVERYWHERE.]


"As might be supposed I have not had the time, not may I add the
inclination to read through this book," wrote Sir Archibald Bodkin, the
director of public prosecutions, on 29 December 1922. "I have, however,
read pages 690 to 732 ... written as they are, as it composed by a more or
less illiterate vulgar woman ... there is a great deal of unmitigated
filth and obscenity."

And so James Joyce's Ulysses was banned in Britain for 15 years.

Interesting, that. The policy was made by a chap who didn't actually read
the work he felt justified to prohibit others from reading. Wonder if the
fellows who implemented Britain's scan-for-skin policy actually use the
Net themselves...?


------------------------------

Replace stuff before @ with mike1. === Democracy: the expression of the
 innate need of most humans to have an Alpha leader tell them what to do.
 They like the idea of creating one via an "election". It's a vicarious,
 Frankenstein-esque dependancy enablement syndrome. -- Bill Kasper =====
===================================================================






-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to