At 5:19 PM -0700 4/24/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Well, suffice it to say that there are a lot of "clearly special cases."
>>
>And suffice it to say that if we drop probation, financial exchanges and
>corporate topics and stick with conversations ( information exchanges )
>between ordinary individuals all is well but keep pushing the technology
>since the bad guys will never give up.
Exactly, precisely, totally!
The list of "restrictions on communications" from our Hushmail
contributor was expected. I could have generated such a list myself,
obviously.
The problem with the mindset of folks like Aimee and Ms./Mr. Hushmail
is that they have essentially _given up_. They have taken the welter
of laws regarding how corporate officers may communicate with other
corporate officers (dating back to 1890), how draft opponents may
communicate with the public (dating back to 1920), and so on and so
forth, and have said this "means" government has the authority to
order the form, content, and participants in a conversation.
Feh.
--Tim May
--
Timothy C. May [EMAIL PROTECTED] Corralitos, California
Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon
Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go
Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
