> > The Internet threatens the powers-that-be, so rather then form, fund
> > and support a task force to fix these problems, they do nothing. > > Then one day they'll declare the Internet a disaster and move in to "fix" it > > with controls such as a positive ID required for logon that will track > > every user and eliminate the concept of anonymity. With that done, people > > will be loathe to visit websites that, for example, talk about rebelling > > against authority, because that will be a crime. > > I think that that's a reach. If you want to put > something on my server, I *should* be able to identify you. That's what sending an > email is: putting a file onto someone else's machine. Browsing a > website is not the same at all. That's not the case I'm arguing, though. What I'm saying is that there are solutions to the different problems that exist with the Internet, but nothing is being done about them because the Internet threatens our information supply and the folks at that helm want the Internet shaped their way, not ours. By doing nothing about the problems that exist with the net, they could build (e.g. we're getting thousands and not hundreds of spams a day) until the case for a heavy-handed solution - such as positive ID for all logons - can be sold. Spam, for example, should have been stepped up to with a national no-spam registry, like the one used for telemarketing (which works for me) - or a requirement that advertising notes include a specific keyword in their subject line. Maybe there are other solutions also, but the fact is that none of them have been implemented and we should be looking into why. Sure, someone will say that you can't stop them because they'll just move offshore, but that's what international treaties are all about. If there are still rogues, they can be disconnected at the ISP level - or some other way, but at least then the problem would be narrowed down and more solvable then it is today. My concern is over the tracking that's taking place. Today the NSA has "the largest database ever built" of telephone calls. The mentality that put that in place is no doubt drooling for another database of Internet usage tracking as another step. For that to be effective, it would require positive ID's at logon. Therein lies the problem, because it would be intimidating, especially for the weaker-at-heart. I can accept that we positive ID's for voting and transactions, as exceptions to the rule, but the rule itself must be that people can read whatever they want without the tracking. The fundamental point is that gov't is compiling dossiers - by any other name - and that is inherently, intrinsically anathema for a free people. A while back, I think we agreed that the best voting system would be open source based. Same thing here: there are plenty of smart people out there who can come up with ways to solve or temper the problems that affect the Internet, such as spoofing, without ever getting to the point where requiring positive ID's at logon is considered. But, if we do nothing, the situation will just get worse, e.g. thousands of spams per day, and by then people will be conditioned to accept any solution. We've got a few that need to be nipped in the bud before we have to listen to those arguments. The Big Brother, authoritarian state is something that creeps in silently, and is happening as we speak (e.g. the NSA database of phone calls; the Patriot Act, those millions of cameras, etc.), and here a case is building for control of the net - the only tool we really have to stop them. Bill > -- Ed Leafe _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
