bzs@BU-CS.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) (10/22/87)
Well, obviously the whole USA/USSR thing is a rather touchy issue and tends to bring out a lot of low-grade barroom political debate in people, not their best side. Unfortunately it also brings out the competitiveness in people as each fears that the other might get the last word or score some points or, well, who knows what. Emotions tend to run that course. I don't think trying to appeal to people's common sense that we've heard it all before will help a lot. At best we can either wait for it to calm down (which it invariably will after a few dozen messages) or, better, try to perhaps channel the energy towards something more constructive. For example, forgetting the specific countries (let's face it folks, neither the US nor the USSR have a monopoly on dangerous foolishness) it is interesting to ask questions like: 1. Are (free and open) computer networks a threat to totalitarianism in general? Is technology a potential savior in this regard? It certainly is a very hard to censor media once it's allowed at all (as this list amply demonstrates.) 2. Does anyone envision computer networks, bulletin boards etc becoming a common resource for information (even bad information) for large segments of the population? There are experiments in France trying to establish this sort of thing. We (yes, I mean you and I) could do a lot to further such efforts in this country by simply familiarizing ourselves with the technology (eg. installing and administering FIDOnet and UUCP) so we can show our neighbors how, calling our neighbors in to see what it is and getting them all to buy systems (granted they have to be mildly affluent, but not much, you can get a terminal emulator on an ATARI-800 these days for less than $100, didn't say they needed cray's to get access.) 3. What do you think their reaction would be to some of these newsgroups? (I'll tell you one, "you mean even *I* could put a message on there?!?!") 4. Why hasn't it happened already? I think it's more than not being able to get your hands on the technology, where there's a will there's a way (go down to Eli's in Cambridge and you can pick up a VT52 for $75, etc.) I suppose one could argue that it *is* happening, it is to some extent. 5. Does anyone know of any apartment buildings, communities, neighborhoods, suburban blocks which have gotten themselves networked? I know a friend of mine was trying to talk a few of his neighbors in Brookline, MA into running an ethernet through their backyards, he figured it would cost a few $K (maybe $500 per household) and he would run the time-sharing system. Not sure what happened. 6. Anyone think that perhaps a way to combat totalitarianism in other countries is to stand at the border handing out equipment to set up community computer networks? (I know, they'll find out, they'll stop it, maybe, maybe not, other than that...) 7. Anyone think any of this will ever play a significant role in popular politics in the future? What is needed (technologically) to make it happen? -B
rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. Rupp) (10/22/87)
Imagine that, a truly constructive suggestion! Well done! We should indeed try to foster wider and more complete communications at all levels of society. Secrecy is the best friend a tyrant ever had. (I feel compelled to point out one more time that we do ourselves a disservice by not recognizing the vast difference in the amount of personal freedom that exists in the West vs the Soviet block. This nonsense of saying "Well, we can't travel to Cuba" as a response to the fact that Soviet citizens can't, apart from Soviet government business, travel *anywhere*, is getting a bit old. By the way, it seems to me that a lot of Americans *have* gone to Cuba lately.) Bill ====================================================================== I speak for myself, and not on behalf of any other person or organization .........................How's that, Gary? ======================================================================
nmm@ers.UUCP (Neil McCulloch) (10/23/87)
In article <869@cod.NOSC.MIL>, rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. Rupp) writes: > This nonsense of saying "Well, we > can't travel to Cuba" as a response to the fact that Soviet citizens can't, > apart from Soviet government business, travel *anywhere*, is getting a bit > old. By the way, it seems to me that a lot of Americans *have* gone to Cuba > lately.) It's not nonsense. The point is that your government passed a law forbidding travel to Cuba. The fact that they passed the law should tell you that you don't have any freedom but what the government permits. The only restriction a state can reasonably make is to withdraw its protection if such travel is made. But let's get it straight, Soviet citizens do travel anywhere, for all kinds of reasons, not simply Soviet Government business. The fact that you must apply for a passport which has limited applicability differs only in degree from the procedures in the West. Given the state of the Soviet economy, the number of people able to travel is perhaps low. I suspect also that controlling foreign exchange is a major reason why foreign travel is closely controlled. Many non communist countries also impose foreign travel controls. Neil
varol@cwi.nl (Varol Akman) (10/26/87)
In article <248@ers.UUCP> nmm@ers.UUCP (Neil McCulloch) writes: > > [material deleted] > >But let's get it straight, Soviet citizens do travel anywhere, for all >kinds of reasons, not simply Soviet Government business. The fact that >you must apply for a passport which has limited applicability differs only >in degree from the procedures in the West. > >Given the state of the Soviet economy, the number of people able to >travel is perhaps low. I suspect also that controlling foreign exchange >is a major reason why foreign travel is closely controlled. Many non >communist countries also impose foreign travel controls. > >Neil Dear Neil, If you could kindly give me an address I would like to send you as a present THE BOOK OF LAUGHTER AND FORGETTING by Milan Kundera. Kundera is not really talking about Russia but ``what a difference a name makes'' huh? Varol Akman Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica, Amsterdam It is perilously easy to conclude that, because one has a program which works (in some sense), its representation of knowledge must be more or less correct (in some sense). Now this is true, in some sense. -- P. Hayes
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (10/26/87)
This is silly. Once one has elected to become part of a governed society (or been born into one), it is always the case that one doesn't have any freedom but what the government permits. This is as true in Canada and the USSR as it is in the USA or the Luna Colonies. I think the amount of justification one must give to get a passport should also be looked at as a criterion of freedom, though. My perception is that one does not need to justify oneself in the Northern American countries named unless one is going to a certain small number of countries, namely, those that have historically subscribed to the doctrine that one of their main missions is to overthrow and take over foreign governments. (This is part of the writings of that doctrine mis-named Communism; and of c o u r s e I'm aware that not all folks or even officials in those countries really believe that any more.) However, I understand that, even if one is not going on "official business" from the USSR, one is generally subjected to some rather thorough scrutiny of one's purposes for making the visit and/or the purity of one's ideology. (That perhaps is an advantage of living in a society that's so confused about what its ideology is, or whether it has one -- nobody can complain about your own, unless it presents that body with a clear and present danger.) Joe Y
fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (10/26/87)
In article <248@ers.UUCP>, nmm@ers.UUCP (Neil McCulloch) writes: > In article <869@cod.NOSC.MIL>, rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. Rupp) writes: > > This nonsense of saying "Well, we > > can't travel to Cuba" as a response to the fact that Soviet citizens can't, > > apart from Soviet government business, travel *anywhere*, is getting a bit > > old. By the way, it seems to me that a lot of Americans *have* gone to Cuba > > lately.) > > It's not nonsense. The point is that your government passed a law forbidding > travel to Cuba. The fact that they passed the law should tell you that > you don't have any freedom but what the government permits. The only Close...but not quite. We (like Canada, unless things have changed) are free to do anything in the eyes of the government except for those things that have been expressly forbidden. The set of forbidden things, in both cases, are substantially smaller than the set of permitted things. (Though it's sometimes difficult to believe, given size of the stack of books required to contain the text of laws that apply in tot.c,@offof