At 11:05 AM 4/24/01 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>"The laws of mathematics, not the laws of men." (I think Eric Hughes
>came up with this, but I could be wrong.)
Gilmour I think.
>Again, just so. The laws about tape-recording conversations have no
>basis in any moral theory I can support. If I choose to "gargoyle"
>myself and have a tape recorder, even a video recorder, running at
>all times, how is this doing physical violence to others?
Indeed. If you are a minor in a mandatory youth re-education camp ("public
school")
in Calif, it is illegal to bring electronics into school. As wireless
(with cameras)
permeates the culture, this becomes ridiculous; I could point to letters to
the editor
in a local (yuppie) paper calling for removal of this law, and using
Columbine/Santee/etc.
as the excuse.
Personally I plan to teach Jr. how to do covert recording; otherwise it might
be his word vs. a schoolyard bully or state-employed bully. [FWIW, I think
some girl
was recently acquitted of wiretap charges for taping or imaging a teacher's
lecture
(for review later) because there was no expectation of privacy. Teachers are
after all your employees.]
>(Even contractual issues are amenable to this analysis. If Alice
>doesn't want to be taped in her interactions with Bob, she can
>negotiate an arrangement that he turns off his tape recorders in her
>presence. If he violates this contract, perhaps she can collect. Some
>day this will likely be done via polycentric law, a la "Snow Crash.")
Nice.
......
Sci Fi: its becoming possible to separate [1] various effects of
benzodiazepines
so that you could have a pharm tool which knocks out memory reliably (but
doesn't depress respiration, cause ataxia, addiction, etc.) which could
replace the NDA. "We'll tell your our bizplan if you take this amnesic"
Sort of Johnny Mnemonic without the recall. Interesting for resumes, too:
"Consulted for XYZ company, presumably using my ABC skills, but I don't
recall."
[1] see recent studies in mice with particular subclasses of receptors
knocked out
