A dead duck? (Was RIP s22 notices SI)

[Bettina Jodda (Twister)]

Hi

> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Owen Lewis wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the defence of abstract rights is the province of a small
> > sector of the population.  The vast mass believe that (a) they have
> > nothing of interest to the powers that be and (b) those that do have
> > something to be ashamed of.  So they aren't interested in rights either
> > for themselves or others.
>
> I agree (and have said so here in the past). That is what makes the present
> extension of powers interesting. I believe it *may* represent that step
> which passes from a defence of abstract rights to that of a popular gut
> issue. 

Well, I must admitt I do not think it is a matter of abstract or real rights. 
I merely think it is a matter of
- rights which can lead to (financial) disadvantage

If this sounds strange, let me explain:
For example "a digital right" like the copyright is also abstract.
But it more "real" or important for people as it can lead to disadvantages, 
especially financial ones.
Your copyright means a "real right" as it can help you to get "real money" so 
if someone violates this right there is this disadvantage of loosing money.

Loosing a bit of your privacy through technology means "nothing" as far as it 
does not affect you personally - if you get more Spam for example ...so what?
But people tend to only think about the consequences if they start to suffer 
(hence the explaination with the frog in the hot water).

I think until some people will not get any life insurance because their data 
shows that they have bought too much vine so far (for example) or until they 
will have to answer to the police just because they have visited certain 
websites they will not think about the danger.

It is like those famour words of M. Niemoeller:
When they took away the Catholics I did not protest...I was no Catholic...
in the end there was noone left to protest.

> As always, its more important to draw a line in the sand than to quibble
> about exactly where it should be drawn. The point at which it should be
> drawn in these matters is the point at which people will respond to it as a
> gut rather than an intellectual issue. Get it on the gut level and neither
> this nor any other govt will touch it again. I say its time to draw the
> line.

Yep, I agree, I totally agree regarding the line in the sand.
This is the problem which is often realized when it comes to human rights 
organisations or so on - while discussing whether they should become involved 
or not, whether to get heavily involved or just a bit or which way they miss 
the moment to get involved at all.

As I said:
It is time to fight for our privacy with the same enthusiasm we do fight for 
our other rights!

btw: 
silly question at the end of the letter:
who has founded ukcrypto?

I want to add some important mailinglists to our homepage (like politech, 
ukcrypto etc) and therefore would like to have some basic information before 
writing totally utterly :-) nonsense (like women tend to do sometimes...)

Twister