the nature of the internet

[juan.g71@gmail.com (juan)]

On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 22:14:05 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> 
>  From: juan <juan.g71@gmail.com>
> >> I've argued for years that the invention of the Internet will
> > >eventually be seen as a very slow-motion suicide by government. 
> 
> > Â  Â Not sure if you mean that government embarked in slow motion
> Â Â Â  suicide?
> Government will kill itself.


	Is that some kind of libertarian-marxist magical thinking
	according to which the 'material forces' of 'technology' will
	magically do what libertarians want? 

	Why is it that technology won't be used to further control
	people, *exacly like it's being used now*? 

	Sorry about re-stating what I said in my previous message but I
	don't think I got any meaningful answer.


	

> 
> 
> Â Â Â  There are tons of evidence showing that the internet is
> Â Â Â  amplifying the power of government in...exactly the way good
> Â Â Â  old Orwell predicted.
> The following is still true:
> https://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto/Crypto_misc/crossbows_to_cryptography.paper
> The Libertech Project, by Chuck Hamill. 


	I browsed that paper in the past.

	I see absolutely no coherent theory in it. It's just a bunch of
	cliches and wishful thinking.


	Tell me Jim, did the invention of 'personal' firearms meant
	that ordinary people, serfs and peasants could now defend
	themselves from the state?  Rhetorical question of course
	and the anwer is a big NO. 

	Why is that the case? 


> 
> 
> Â Â Â  You are of course free to be as 'optimistic' as you want but I
> Â Â Â  feel curious about the rational grounds for your optimism.
> 
> 
> Need I say it yet again? Â  Â  Â https://cryptome.org/ap.htm
> The world has had 21 years to figure out a say to stop it. Â If as
> much effort were put into implementing it as was put into Bitcoin,
> we'd all be free today.             


	Bitcoin should provide 'financial freedom' but so far it
	hasn't.

	The bigger and yet completely unsolved problem is how to make
	online communications untraceable. It would seem wise to solve
	that problem before starting any 'prediction' market.

J.


>Jim Bell