[3178] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: An Essay on Freedom, Anonymity & Financial
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perry E. Metzger)
Mon Aug 10 13:06:32 1998
To: dianelos@tecapro.com
cc: cryptography@c2.net
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Aug 1998 23:32:05 CDT."
<199808100432.XAA01139@tecaprocorp.com>
Reply-To: perry@piermont.com
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 11:10:20 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
(Continuing our discussion of Mr. Georgoudis' hypothetical system in
which cryptographic protocols are used to eliminate *all* anonymous
transactions, thus permitting the state to "prevent crime" by
observing and recording all transactions...)
Dianelos Georgoudis writes:
> Perry Metzger writes:
> >You are essentially advocating the "surveillance state". If all of
> >everyone's activities are always tracked, how can anyone do evil? [=85=
]
> =
> I was only talking about a new form of money. I don't quite see
> why this means that everyone's activities will always be tracked.
> Very few of my own activities are financial transactions.
Every time you take a taxi to a cafe to meet someone with the wrong
political beliefs, the cab ride and the coffee you buy will make you a
marked man. If you go to a bookstore and buy a copy of the "wrong"
book, you'll be noticed. If you rent the "wrong" video, you'll be
noticed. If you stay over at someone's house, and leave the apartment
in the early evening to buy a newspaper or a pack of cigarettes,
suddenly, your presence will be on the scope of the worldwide tracking
mechanism. They'll know where you are and what you are doing at all
times. It will be possible to correlate most of your meetings,
travels, interests, etc.
The temptation to use such information for evil will be very
powerful. I do not know how we could possibly stop it.
> As far as freedom is concerned, the worldwide rise of criminality
> is already restricting the freedom of most people - rich or poor.
> Tax evasion and government corruption are putting the breaks on
> economic growth, efficiency and justice.
I'm not sure there is any "worldwide rise in criminality". There is a
perpetual hysteria generated to increase police budgets, of course,
but anyone who believes that, say, city life today is more dangerous
than it was, say, one hundred years ago, should actually do some
research on the topic. The book "Low Life" by Luc Sante comes to mind
as an interesting work on exactly what life was *really* like a
century ago.
Perfect crimelessness is not an option. One must weigh the costs and
benefits of every potential tool to give law enforcement. In this
particular instance, I'm far from certain that the goal will be
achieved (I've not bothered to discuss that, but I doubt it will be
possible to prevent people from inventing new ways to pay each other
if the government run money becomes too dangerous to use for criminal
purposes) and I'm far from certain that the tool will not become an
instrument of tyranny.
Perry
