[ga-full] A bit off topic - but fun Re: Sealand rant (pragmas) (fwd)
were discussing sealand - it maybe a good dot.god place for the archives.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:50:23 -0400 (EDT)
To: Multiple recipients of list <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Sealand rant (pragmas)
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Tim May wrote:
> >Exactly - for the last two years I've discussed the concept of datahaven
> >with Richard Sexton. It requires a certain legislative framework - i.e. a
> >computer systems - it's associated networks etc. etc. are imune and
> >protected from tampering and interference by the state.
> Not gonna happen. There will never be any "legislative framework" such as this.
I think it will. I completely understand your position and objections
raised. Essentially - yes - nations like the US and Islam like to carry
out holy wars against information - right or wrong. But those are bully
tactics and have little relevance in international law. This however does
not discount their effectiveness (bully tactics) nor the potential outcome
you predict - in fact it reinforces it.
However these are not the only factors or forces which dictate the success
of the datahaven. These are potential problems - which may or maynot come
to term. The factor or force which will dictate sucess is market
At this time few corporations/business even understand the deployment of
PGP or other methods of encryption. There is a limited understanding of
the issues, processes or technical aspects of using such a technology.
I think the same limitations of understanding apply to the data haven at
However, once business understand the benefits of the data haven - I feel
the market will develop.
There are also existing nations which may join the datahaven
crowd. Hungry has considered it. And I think it has an appeal to those
jurisdictions which specialize in bank secrecy.
The protection of financial transaction details in law is not much
different from the protection of data. And data transaction exceed
financial transaction in profitability.
This is why I feel the datahaven is a reality. The market will exists, it
is extremely profitable and viable.
In the worst case senario - if it does not happen on terra firma - don't
be surprised if we end up with an orbiting sealand type platform in space,
or mars - or the moon - where-ever it may be - it will eventually happen.
> Most European countries ban some of this material. Ditto for Canada,
> which has onerous laws about hate speech. Canada also practices prior
> restraint on news, pace the Homolka/Teale case. (Canada is an
> interesting case to consider because of the single point of failure,
> as currently set up, for ZKS's Freedom Network.)
I am very familiar with the Homolka/Teale case as I was intimately
involved in breaking the law by assisting in the distribution of those
details - which see;
I cost wired magazine a few 100 thousand dollars - lame article - served
them right - which see;
I can say with absolute confidance that the Homolka/Teale issue clearly
demontrated that it is easy to use the net to bypass government
censorhship. Now a adays - when a Canadian Court issues a press ban - it
does so quietly - so as not to alert the population and cause a possible
challenge to it's authority.
The whole Homolka/Teal issue was a laught. We had the press running from
one end of the country to the other end of the country pursueing
homolka/teal leaks. Meanwhile - police departments in three diffferent
levels of government (federal, provincial and municipal) were chasing the
press people who were chasing the leaks. It was a wonderful and
entertaining carnival - real family entertainment.
So - in my opinion homlka/teal was a real eye opener to government that
they had no control - and a clear win for freedom of information.
> Sorry to be blunt, Joe, but this is a terribly naive line of
> thinking. We used to debate this a number of years ago, but the
> notion of a "Declaration of Independence for Cyberspace" is just
> plain naive.
I disagree. You have clearly outlined in your argument the insanity which
surronds information - making information (data) a crime based on
content. It is my position that data of any content is a record - and
nothing more. It is a reflection of only one thing - our humanity, and
any embarrassment we may feel concerning the data content is strictly our
As such - this insanity is error - and error is routed around on the
internet - therefore error will be corrected.
You have a nice brain Tim - it's been good to correspond.
+1 (805) 753-8697
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html