--
On 5 Aug 2001, at 16:07, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> AFAICS, it's likely a matter of priorities -- currently anonymity does not
> pose a significant threat to governments. If that changes, the heat will
> intensify, possibly to a point where means currently unimaginable could be
> employed (e.g. national firewalls, regulation of nonconduct, creative
> interpretation of laws on criminal collaboration, RICO, whathaveyou).
The great firewall of China is somewhat effective, but by no means as effective as the
chinese government would wish. The Russian equivalent is dead in the water. We do
not have magic armor, but, governments do not have magic bullets either.
To effectively repress, a government must be lawless. But a lawless government risks
either disintegrating, as in post 1990 Russia, or succumbing to a cult of personality,
as in the 1930s russia. A bunch of very old men currently keep china wobbling between
these two extremes. When they drop
dead, it will wobble one way or the other. Since the cult of personality has proved
so deadly to government officials everywhere, they will probably choose the safer
course of wobbling in the direction of disintegration.
--digsig
James A. Donald
6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
wew6MK1X7o6m4yRVDWkDvm7xAIqUnFwOPMyVMxMN
4ljKTpl8pf+CmhVEGgTUk33zfdnbgqg7Qs9heEWDz
