Cyphernomicon Top
Cyphernomicon 4.7

Goals and Ideology -- Privacy, Freedom, New Approaches:
Free Speech Issues


    4.7.1. Speech
           - "Public speech is not a series of public speeches, but
              rather one's own
              words spoken openly and without shame....I desire a society
              where all may speak freely about whatever topic they will.
              I desire that all people might be able to choose to whom
              they wish to speak and to whom they do not wish to speak.
              I desire a society where all people may have an assurance
              that their words are directed only at those to whom they
              wish.  Therefore I oppose all efforts by governments to
              eavesdrop and to become unwanted listeners." [Eric Hughes,
              1994-02-22]
           - "The government has no right to restrict my use of
              cryptography in any way.  They may not forbid me to use
              whatever ciphers I may like, nor may they require me to use
              any that I do not like." [Eric Hughes, 1993-06-01]
    4.7.2. "Should there be _any_ limits whatsoever on a person's use of
            cryptography?"
           - No. Using the mathematics of cryptography is merely the
              manipulation of symbols. No crime is involved, ipso facto.
           - Also, as Eric Hughes has pointed out, this is another of
              those questions where the normative "should" or "shouldn't"
              invokes "the policeman inside." A better way to look at is
              to see what steps people can take to make any question of
              "should" this be allowed just moot.
           - The "crimes" are actual physical acts like murder and
              kidnapping. The fact that crypto may be used by plotters
              and planners, thus making detection more difficult, is in
              no way different from the possibility that plotters may
              speak in an unusual language to each other (ciphers), or
              meet in a private home (security), or speak in a soft voice
              when in public (steganography). None of these things should
              be illegal, and *none of them would be enforceable* except
              in the most rigid of police states (and probably not even
              there).
           - "Crypto is thoughtcrime" is the effect of restricting
              cryptography use.
    4.7.3. Democracy and censorship
           - Does a community have the right to decide what newsgroups
              or magazines it allows in its community? Does a nation have
              the right to do the same? (Tennessee, Iraq, Iran, France.
              Utah?)
           - This is what bypasses with crypto are all about: taking
              these majoritarian morality decisions out of the hands of
              the bluenoses. Direct action to secure freedoms.
  

Next Page: 4.8 Privacy Issues
Previous Page: 4.6 Technological empowerment

By Tim May, see README

HTML by Jonathan Rochkind