At 12:20 AM 9/14/2001 +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>You're about to begin running a remailer. Apparently you haven't done
>so before. Well, it should be quite an education.
Ah, no. Try a Google search for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", and
you'll find plenty of references to the remailer I ran in 1994-1995. (I
don't remember when I started - there's a reasonable chance it was in the
fall of 1993, but honest remailers don't keep logs . . )
I think remailers are ideally run either by people/organizations with very
few resources (so they're not attractive litigation targets) or substantial
resources (so they can defend themselves vigorously & aggressively vs.
litigation) and right now I find myself somewhere in between those two
poles. Nevertheless, the events of the past few days have changed the
risk/benefit ratio such that I believe the risks of inaction on my part are
worse than the risks of acting.
> Keep it up for a
>year and you'll be more qualified to judge whether this technology is
>good or bad, on balance. One thing is certain: if you go into it just
>because you think it will be an "interesting project", you won't stay
>with it for long.
I'm going into it because I think it's important to provide actual and
symbolic support for freedom and privacy when those values appear to be
under attack by people like you, who would assume the title of "conscience"
and "protector" in order to render people helpless, practically or legally.
If you're still hung up on judging whether technology is "good" or "bad",
you're not ready for this list, nor are you qualified to discuss policy
beyond deciding what color the balloons and streamers should be at the
homecoming dance.
--
Greg Broiles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We have found and closed the thing you watch us with." -- New Delhi street kids
