Tim said:
> At 2:24 PM -0500 4/28/01, Aimee Farr wrote:
> >Reading the IMC gag order, Henson, the latest anonymous poster stuff, and
> >Tim et. al. beating my head in pavement....
> >
> >Since many forums don't allow for 'nymity, (or people just don't), what
> >about a protected/offshore self-destruct quicktopic-like service:
> >http://www.quicktopic.com/7/H/Kf6X7D9whDPx
> >
> >I use a quicktopic link in hyperlinked forums and email lists to
> avoid snoop
> >bots, archival, and to disassociate the conversation to someplace that
> >allows people to slip into a nym jacket. (I even have "Aimee's Fightin'
> >Rooster Pit" for flame warrin' lawyers.)
> >
> >I'm sure this is a stunningly stupid idea... but it would seem
> to put people
> >in (more) control of their content, instead of depending on the
> web site or
> >service to adopt a solution for them.
>
> You're conflating many diverse issues, and, yes, picking a "weak"
> approach as a cure-all.
Well, if you tricked out an offlink solution, maybe it wouldn't be "weak."
Obviously, if there was a solution here, somebody would have already done
it.
> (Note that I didn't even choose to heed your
> "Kick me!" sign by agreeing with you that it is a "stunningly stupid
> idea."
Always the gentleman, Mr. May.
> It's not stunningly stupid to use Hotmail, MyDeja (before it
> went away), etc. Many on this list have been doing so for years.)
> The conflation comes as follows:
>
> * Keith Henson chose to post under his own name, to appear in person
> at COS offices and recruiting centers, to picket, and so on. He was
> not trying to be anonymous or pseudonymous, so your proposal above
> would be pointless in his case. Likewise, I choose to post under my
> own name for most of my posts.
Yes.
> (And, BTW, as you are new, Keith was on our list for a while. I've
> known Keith since 1976, and he's in the same Bay Area circles that
> overlap so often.)
Hm.
> * Lots of ways exist to disassociate articles and comments from True
> Names. Remailers, nym servers, Hotmail, MyDeja, throwaway accounts,
> Web-to-mail, etc. Not having looked at the "quicktopic" thing you
> recommend, I can't say whether it's better or worse than most of
> these other methods.
Look it up. It's easy, 20 seconds. Sheeple food. Again, I was thinking about
a crypto-savvy offlinking solution. Obviously, this is a dumb idea for some
reason, or not doable.
> * Many posters on Cypherpunks are already using such methods...or did
> you think "Lucky Green" and "Eric Cordian" are government-sanctioned
> meatspace names?
No, I did not think so.
> * Interestingly, most of the recent publicity over courts being asked
> to force names to be revealed has involved services like Silicon
> Investor, Raging Bull, and Yahoo fora, which DO support pseudonyms.
> In some cases the services have refused to reveal the true names
> associated with nyms on their boards.
I know this.
> None of the non-cryptographic methods are very resistant to legal,
> technical, sniffing, and black bag attacks. And only multiply-chained
> encrypted-at-each-stage messages, a la remailers, are adequate for
> high-value messages.
Well, I was thinking.... obviously something dumb.
> If you plan to stay on this list, I think it's long past time that
> you spend several hours reviewing past developments in these areas.
I think it's long past time that you spent several hours kissing my ass. I
too, suffer from delusional fantasies. :)
> (You see, the "quick review" process is much better than the method
> you suggested re: economics, that people read the main textbooks.
> People don't need to spend several months wading through cryptography
> textbooks to come up to a level that is sufficient to understand the
> real issues.)
That other <"chick"> said that, as you were kind enough to note.
~Aimee
