Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

John Gilmore interviewed by Greplaw

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the spam-and-liberty dept.

mpawlo writes "I have just published another one of those Greplaw interviews. This time, John Gilmore had the courtesy of answering a wide range of questions on various subjects such as terrorism and security, spam blocking, censorship, secret laws in airports and of course - sarongs. Gilmore starts: 'I'm a civil libertarian millionaire eccentric.' Enjoy!"

5 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Judge Kafka? by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the linked interview, on the subject of secret airport laws: (emphasis orthogonal's) "[i]t even worked at the District Court; our judge decided that if she couldn't see the law then it must by definition be constitutional (she ruled that I had no possible way to show it is unconstitutional)."

    Is this the United States the Founding Fathers built, or Stalinism by way of Kafka?

    --
    Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
  2. ahem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Domain Name: GROKLAW.NET
    Created On: 03-Oct-03

    Domain Name: GREPLAW.ORG
    Created On: 11-Apr-2002

  3. Re:And I thought I was alone... by jcr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Speaking of drivers' licenses, I've always liked John's idea of a driver's license which was NOT an ID. It would prove that the person presenting it was the person who had passed the driver's test, but would not identify that person further.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  4. Re:And I thought I was alone... by damiam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'll notice he's not fighting driver's licenses any more than he's fighting pilot's licenses. It's possible to travel anonymously in a car as long as you're a passenger. Similarly, he thinks it should be possible to travel anonymously in a plane. Aside from hijacking, it's pretty hard to hurt other people while riding in a plane. And having to show ID didn't stop the 9/11 hijackers; they all showed perfectly valid official IDs under their own names. So what's the point?

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  5. Re:And I thought I was alone... by Feztaa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would have figured it the other way around, as a non-named ID. Think about it: if you have an ID without a photo, somebody could easily steal that and claim to be you. But if you just had an ID with your photo and the note "this person has passed the driver's test in state/province X", with no other identifying information, that would be proof that you are licensed to drive, without actually identifying yourself.

    Of course, it'll never happen. But it's a nice thought.