Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!walt.cc.utexas.edu!petrilli
From: petrilli@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Musing on Constitutionality
Summary: Just a ramble, but a point perhaps
Message-ID: <36823@ut-emx.UUCP>
Date: 27 Aug 90 02:18:18 GMT
Sender: news@ut-emx.UUCP
Reply-To: petrilli@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 64

(Excuse me if I ramble, but I must say this...)

	I think we have all missed the true mission of the EFF, which is
quite simple, to protect the Constitution, and nothing less noble, and
nothing pompous.  We have all been spoiled by UseNet and its realatively
free exchange of ideas, but what would you all say if the governement
decided that this was some clandestine project to undermine national
security?  You may scoff, but such a topic has come up, and such actions
were considered several years back (1987 to be exact).

	The Constitution was designed to protect speech that we (the
people, and the government) find "unsuitable."  Speech that no one
dislikes doesn't need protection.  I find it amusing that the SS sees
"electronic publishing" as inferior to conventional paper printing.  If
such things as "Phrack" had been published on paper, and distributed as
such, the SS wouldn't have dared to attack; fear of the reaction of the
"press" (newspapers/television) would have stoped them, even if they
ignored it's unconsitutionality.  

	It is simply the fact that "electronic publishing" such as
Phrack, and even UseNet, never truly exist on paper, that the SS though
they could supress the free flow of information.  I find the very idea
that Prack was considered "dangerous" a misplacement of monies and
effort on the part of the government.  What was to be gained by the
prosecution of Craig?  Make an example of him so that no one would ever
publish an underground journal again?

	I consider myself a hacker (please, think of the original term),
and I do not consider myself a threat to society, nor a "loose axe" that
may at any moment destroy the entire infrastructure that society is
based on.  I am a person deeply entrenched in computers (maybe too
much), and dedicated to showing what computers can do.  I am not some
destructive individual whos entire goal in life is to destroy as much
information as possible... I am not what the government calls a hacker
(I have my own term for those kind of people, but dignity prevents me
from using it).

	I am good friends however with two of the people who's homes were
searched in Operation SunDevil (specifically: The Mentor, and Erik
Bloodaxe are their "pseudonims"), and I for one can testify that they
are far from a threat to society, in-fact, as one stated in
comp.dcom.telecom a while back, "hackers have closed more holes, and
saved more systems that they have ever damaged."  Most hackers leave the
system in better shape than they found it, often times closing security
holes that the system administrator had no knowledge of (obviously).  

	I will say that there are a few "hackers" who are destructive
(and receive
all the press), but there are alot that have ethics and subscribe to the
"hacker ideals," one of which is that information should be free... he
who controls information controls the power is their view, therefor,
no-one should control information, it's too precious a resource to be
hoarded like little kids with their marbles. 

	Well, that's all I have time to type (I pehave vi!), but I think
that the consitutionality is being ignored by Gene Spafford... I don't
care how much you are affraid of them, you can't afford to make
exceptions to rights.
 
+ Chris Petrilli                                    "Opinons represented here
| University of Texas at Austin                      do not necessarily
| INTERNET: petrilli@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu              represent those of a sane
| SNAILMAIL: 429 Brady Lane, Austin, Texas, 78746    person.  Take them as
+ PHONE:     +1 512 327 0986                         simply that."