Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-08 Thread Alan Olsen
At 04:30 PM 10/8/00 -0400, you wrote: > -- >At 03:33 PM 10/8/2000 -0400, David Honig wrote: > > Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about > > when the latter term was sickeningly popular? > >Everything on the internet is a packet with a destination address and a >re

Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-08 Thread Alan Olsen
At 03:33 PM 10/8/00 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:39 AM 10/8/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: > >Require ISPs to get a license to operate. Terms can be set arbitrarily > >high. (Bonus points if you make them pay for the monitoring hardware, > >software, and governmental labor.) > >Wasn't a "license to dr

Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-08 Thread James A.. Donald
-- At 03:33 PM 10/8/2000 -0400, David Honig wrote: > Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about > when the latter term was sickeningly popular? Everything on the internet is a packet with a destination address and a return address. To create a police state on th

Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-08 Thread David Honig
At 02:39 AM 10/8/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >Require ISPs to get a license to operate. Terms can be set arbitrarily >high. (Bonus points if you make them pay for the monitoring hardware, >software, and governmental labor.) Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about w

Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-08 Thread Jim Dixon
On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > In general, look at what China is doing. Britain and Russia, too. Britain is doing a lot less than you seem to think. The RIP act has been passed, but to a rising chorus of protests from all sides, including industry. Actual implementation of the bill

Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-07 Thread Steve Furlong
Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >... Restricting strong > >anonymity means key escrow.) > > Perhaps I overstated my argument above. It seems to me that if the Feds > want to restrict strong anonymity, they have some choices: <> > Anything else? Routinely monitor communications lines. Allow unlimite

How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity

2000-10-07 Thread Declan McCullagh
I wrote in another thread: >framework to reasonably exist. Cypherpunkish technology will create >underground markets, anonymous distribution methods, and so on, and the >only way to enforce such regulations will be for the Feds/Mounties to take >drastic steps. (For instance, strong anonymity is