Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
Thanks for that, Joel. The "Taxed Enough Already" (TEA) party movement has been the unfortunate victim of a very successful smear campaign - partly because it's managed to attract a handful of the wrong sorts of people, but mostly because it's become a very real threat to the Washington establishment. We "scum" are Freenet's best hope - as you can see, the current, supposedly "tech-savvy" U.S. political administration hasn't lived up to your expectations. "Joel C. Salomon" wrote: > On 09/28/2010 08:13 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Legislation will be introduced in the new year by the obama administration > > to (amongst other things) force peer to peer software developers to > > redesign their systems to allow intercept warrants to be serviced. > > > The Tea Party scum use the constitution in their rhetoric but are unlikely > > to stand against intercept powers to beat terrorists etc. > > We scum of the TEA Party are concerned about *all* unconstitutional > extensions of Federal power; in fact I learned about this legislation > first from a TEA Party news alert. > > On Tuesday 28 September 2010 00:02:32 Ian Clarke wrote: > > I expected better from Obama's administration. > > Repeat after me, "Four legs good, two legs bad." > > --Joel Salomon > ___ > chat mailing list > chat@freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On Tuesday 28 September 2010 20:17:26 Ian Clarke wrote: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:57 PM, wrote: > > > Thanks for that, Joel. The "Taxed Enough Already" (TEA) party movement has > > been the unfortunate victim of a very successful smear campaign - partly > > because it's managed to attract a handful of the wrong sorts of people, but > > mostly because it's become a very real threat to the Washington > > establishment. We "scum" are Freenet's best hope - as you can see, the > > current, supposedly "tech-savvy" U.S. political administration hasn't lived > > up to your expectations. > > I certainly don't think the tea party are scum, I just think that a lot of > libertarians, who think that the tea party is about libertarianism, are > going to get a rude awakening once they get into power, just as they did > when the Republicans took over the house and congress in the mid-90s. > > Also, a lot of their positions are contradictory. They claim they oppose > the deficit, yet they want a tax cut for people who don't need it, paid for > by increasing the deficit. They oppose spending, yet supported the Bush tax > cuts and the Iraq war, which together dwarf the combined effect of the > recovery measures, tarp, and the economic downturn, in terms of their impact > on the deficit. I am replying to the two tea party fans off-list since even on chat@ there is some expectation that content be vaguely Freenet-related. For the record, if I had originally written the mail for wide distribution I wouldn't have called the Tea Party scum, but that *is* what I believe, and I will justify this position off-list. (I might post it on my blog too). signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On Tuesday 28 September 2010 19:21:12 Joel C. Salomon wrote: > On 09/28/2010 08:13 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Legislation will be introduced in the new year by the obama administration > > to (amongst other things) force peer to peer software developers to > > redesign their systems to allow intercept warrants to be serviced. > > > The Tea Party scum use the constitution in their rhetoric but are unlikely > > to stand against intercept powers to beat terrorists etc. > > We scum of the TEA Party are concerned about *all* unconstitutional > extensions of Federal power; in fact I learned about this legislation > first from a TEA Party news alert. I hope you are right. Sorry, that mail was originally going to be private and I changed it to mass distribution after it got longer. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:57 PM, wrote: > Thanks for that, Joel. The "Taxed Enough Already" (TEA) party movement has > been the unfortunate victim of a very successful smear campaign - partly > because it's managed to attract a handful of the wrong sorts of people, but > mostly because it's become a very real threat to the Washington > establishment. We "scum" are Freenet's best hope - as you can see, the > current, supposedly "tech-savvy" U.S. political administration hasn't lived > up to your expectations. > I certainly don't think the tea party are scum, I just think that a lot of libertarians, who think that the tea party is about libertarianism, are going to get a rude awakening once they get into power, just as they did when the Republicans took over the house and congress in the mid-90s. Also, a lot of their positions are contradictory. They claim they oppose the deficit, yet they want a tax cut for people who don't need it, paid for by increasing the deficit. They oppose spending, yet supported the Bush tax cuts and the Iraq war, which together dwarf the combined effect of the recovery measures, tarp, and the economic downturn, in terms of their impact on the deficit. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, SenseArray Email: i...@sensearray.com Ph: +1 512 422 3588 ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Joel C. Salomon wrote: > On 09/28/2010 08:13 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Legislation will be introduced in the new year by the obama > administration to (amongst other things) force peer to peer software > developers to redesign their systems to allow intercept warrants to be > serviced. > > > The Tea Party scum use the constitution in their rhetoric but are > unlikely to stand against intercept powers to beat terrorists etc. > > We scum of the TEA Party are concerned about *all* unconstitutional > extensions of Federal power; in fact I learned about this legislation > first from a TEA Party news alert. > So far as I can tell the "tea party" is all things to all people, even when it is contradictory. Some of them want it to be about libertarianism, for some its about opposing the "gay agenda", etc etc. The only thing that seems to unite them is that they all hate Obama, they are almost all republicans or republican-leaning, and 99.9% of them are white. > Repeat after me, "Four legs good, two legs bad." > Yeah, Obama is a socialist because he implemented the healthcare plan that the GOP came up with in the 90s. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, SenseArray Email: i...@sensearray.com Ph: +1 512 422 3588 ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On 09/28/2010 08:13 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > Legislation will be introduced in the new year by the obama administration to > (amongst other things) force peer to peer software developers to redesign > their systems to allow intercept warrants to be serviced. > The Tea Party scum use the constitution in their rhetoric but are unlikely to > stand against intercept powers to beat terrorists etc. We scum of the TEA Party are concerned about *all* unconstitutional extensions of Federal power; in fact I learned about this legislation first from a TEA Party news alert. On Tuesday 28 September 2010 00:02:32 Ian Clarke wrote: > I expected better from Obama's administration. Repeat after me, "Four legs good, two legs bad." --Joel Salomon ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On Tuesday 28 September 2010 00:38:51 you wrote: > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Matthew Toseland > wrote: > > > One very bad thing about this, should it pass (which depends mostly on > > whether the Tea Party folk actually defend the constitution, which seems > > unlikely) > > I don't agree here - the teabaggers are a relatively small group of angry > white economic conservatives who only really agree on the fact that they all > hate Obama. They only get the air-time that they do because they make for > good TV. The teabaggers didn't exist when the Clipper Chip was defeated in > the 90s. You are going to have almost every technology company in the US up > in arms about this, as they were with the Clipper Chip. They make up ALL of the new Senate candidates. > > > and be upheld (which is a more plausible battleground) is that we are > > dependant on paypal. Even if we move outside the US, paypal would have to > > kick us, and nobody trusts any other service. Same would be true of Google > > Checkout; we might be able to get credit card handling from some > > non-US-based bank (like WorldPay), but it'd be expensive. > > I don't know if its necessarily true that we could no-longer use Paypal, but > in any case I think this thing passing is actually quite a remote > possibility. > > > Plus once it happens in the US it will happen everywhere else... Combined > > with laws in Europe allowing blocking copyright infringing sites (xenu.net? > > wikileaks.org?), things could get very bad. > > Ultimately we can move development onto Freenet itself if it came to it, but > I really think it is unlikely that it will. There are so many powerful > groups that will be opposed to this. Hopefully you are right. And it will reinforce an important precedent - that restricting software is very dodgy in the US. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids
On Tuesday 28 September 2010 00:02:32 Ian Clarke wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB > > Its a proposal that would force all communication providers, including > software providers, to provide a back-door to enable wire-tapping. > > I strongly suspect it will go the way of the failed "Clipper chip" of the > 90s. I also think that there is a strong first-amendment argument that > requiring that communication software include a back-door is an infringement > of the first-amendment rights of the software author. > > In short, expect a major backlash. > > That being said, if it does go through it will force us to move any > Freenet-related development out of the US, unless we want to make it a > test-case. It may even mean that I need to give up my role as project > coordinator should I decide to remain in the United States. > > Whatever happens, the one thing that will never be an option is compliance > with this law (even if Freenet's current developers went insane and agreed > to install a back-door, the project would be forked in a millisecond). > > I expected better from Obama's administration. One very bad thing about this, should it pass (which depends mostly on whether the Tea Party folk actually defend the constitution, which seems unlikely) and be upheld (which is a more plausible battleground) is that we are dependant on paypal. Even if we move outside the US, paypal would have to kick us, and nobody trusts any other service. Same would be true of Google Checkout; we might be able to get credit card handling from some non-US-based bank (like WorldPay), but it'd be expensive. Plus once it happens in the US it will happen everywhere else... Combined with laws in Europe allowing blocking copyright infringing sites (xenu.net? wikileaks.org?), things could get very bad. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
