[anti-abuse-wg] abuse of the internet by multinationals and nation states

In message <60cf421.bf1cb7eb.163301149ea at gmx.ch>, 
Tobi <jahlives at gmx.ch> wrote:

>I don't want to defend whois hiding but you forget to mention that this does
>not only help criminals to hide but also protects (a bit at least) the
>privacy of the wast majority of "uncriminal" normal users. So the question is
>to "forbid" something just because it can also be abused by criminal people
> which probably are not the majority of affected people at all...

I don't like to participate in this mailing list anymore, because it is
largely if not entirely a waste of time.  But I can't help responding to
the above.

The rationale put forward here for why "honest citizens" should be able to
do some particular thing... in this case hide their WHOIS details... is
identical to the rational used, here in my own home country (U.S.A.) by an
organization known as the National Rifle Association (NRA) for why "honest
citizens" should have no restrictions whatsoever placed on their ability
to purchase all manner of firearms.

Anyone who is not aware of how well THAT has worked out needs to pay a bit
more attention to the constant stream of news from over on this side of
the pond.


Regards,
rfg


P.S. I am ceaselessly amazed and befuddled at the way certain profoundly
idiotic concepts seem to take root in societies, and then grow and spread,
until, in some cases, they even become the predominant viewpoint, even as
virtually no one within the relevant societies ever seems to question any
of the underlying assumptions.  (See also: Religion.)

One quintessential example of this specific type of mass delusion, which has
apparently taken root and festered, particularly in Europe, is the apparently
widespread belief/theory/notion that in the modern world it is no longer
even possible for any person or organization to meaningfully participate
in modern life or society without having his/her/its very own domain name
or IP address block, and that thus (as the demented reasoning goes) we all
absolutely MUST allow any and all persons and/or entities that might, in
theory, suffer some backlash (aka "accountability") arising from the public
exposure of their thoughts, beliefs, or lifestyles to possess domain names
and IP addresses anonymously.

The self-evident illogic of such a view is almost so obvious as to not even
require explicit statement.  Even ignoring the innumerable -other- outlets
and venues for unpopular viewpoints that are readily available to anyone
able to access the modern internet... outlets and venues that do not
require the participant to have his or her own domain name or IP address
block... there still remains the inescapable (and inconvenient) truth
that even many well known persons holding distinctly unpopular viewpoints
(see: Milo Yiannopoulos) seem to have no trouble at all -openly- owning
their own Internet resources, e.g. domain names.

Regardless of these easily obtainable facts, these days anyone publically
expressing the veiwpoint that WHOIS data should be neither cloaked nor
hidden is instantly labeled (by the "privacy" advocates) as a homophobe,
a racist, or an anti-anti-neo-Nazi, because after all, how else could anyone
possibly be against the notion of pervasive and universal unaccountability?

This is the exact same underhanded and dishonest retorical tactic used in
my country (USA) against anyone who isn't in favor of open borders and
unlimited immigration.  By definition, it is argued, we must all be racists.

I will just close by suggesting to all of the so-called "privacy advocates",
in Europe and beyond, that you all should henceforth and immediately
paint over your car license plates, so as to make them unreadable, and
henceforth attend all public meetings of any kind wearing a balaclava.
Because after all, privacy.

If it's good enough for the Russian mercenaries in Eastern Ukraine, then
it should be standard practice for everyone else in Europe too.