🚀 go-pugleaf

In <CnDJ96.AGp@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> rjwells@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Enhanced 911 Services) writes:

>That's right -- it's information, it's sacred, it wants to be free, and
>we're going to make it free no matter who gets trod on, no matter whose 
>rights we abuse, or what constitutional guarantees we have to strip away 
>in the process.  

I never said that information wants to be free. That's a cop out.
Information can't want anything, only people can want things, and its
only people wanting the spread of information to be unfettered which
can make it so.

>Damn -- this is even better than the "war on drugs."  No wonder 
>governments like the "information highway" so much -- if you drive
>fast enough you can splatter the bill of rights like roadkill (or the
>Charter, or Canadian justice, as the case may be.)

Well, this advantage seems to be enjoyed by the people by this point,
rather than their governments. I am not anti-Canada, nor even
anti-Canadian law. I am anti-ban. Here is the corollary, and the help
I hope we get from our Canadian neighbors:

Let us say that the US decides that it is going to outlaw all
non-Clipper public key encryption, and they begin removing PGP from
ftp sites, and closing crypto newsgroups which publish source code. I
will expect that the Canadians will view this with contempt, and help
us get to ftp sites on Canadian soil, publish sourcecode in a variety
of newsgroups, and generally do everything in their power to prevent
US law enforcement from acheiving their aim. The idea that you would
sit back and say "Oh, their government doesn't want us to do this, 
so it must not be a very good idea," terrifies me. The *last* people
whose opinions about the net we should let rule our own are the law
enforcement agencies.


-- 
Clay Shirky