Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!uwvax!shemp.cs.wisc.edu!samuel
From: samuel@shemp.cs.wisc.edu (Samuel Bates)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: EFF & CPSR
Message-ID: <1991Mar27.193824.29232@spool.cs.wisc.edu>
Date: 27 Mar 91 19:38:24 GMT
Sender: news@spool.cs.wisc.edu (The News)
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Lines: 61
Originator: samuel@shemp.cs.wisc.edu

I do not want to get into an argument about what CPSR does and does not do,
but the last post contained some rather misleading information.

Mike Van Pelt writes:
> I was (briefly) on CPSR's mailing list.  It mostly looked to me like
> "Unilateral Disarmament *NOW*" stuff, with a technogeek spin:  "Because
> There's Always One More Bug..." prefix to the unilateral disarmament
> demand.  These topics have little to do with the Electronic Frontier.
> 
> For starters: Unilateral disarmament.  Anti-strategic-defense.  Socialism.
> None of this has anything to do with keeping the Electronic Frontier open.
> 

CPSR was started as an anti-strategic-defense organization, but very 
specifically because of the "technogeek" angle:  the founders felt that
they could point out solid technical reasons why SDI would not work as
designed.  The idea of unilateral disarmament is not a CPSR stand, though 
some of its members would think that is the logical next step; there are
other members who believe that a good space-based defense CAN be built.
There is even less evidence to say that CPSR supports socialism; CPSR is
primarily concerned with raising issues of computers in society and discussing
the implications, not with fostering a particular political agenda (in fact,
as a non-profit organization, there are specific limits to how political
it can be!).

The anti-SDI stance is only one of several of CPSR's concerns; others are
computers and health, computers in the workplace, and privacy and civil
liberties issues.  The last of these has been progressing quite nicely in
conjunction with the EFF, which gave CPSR a major grant immediately upon its
startup.

Mr. Van Pelt is correct that CPSR has other concerns that do not have 
anything to do with keeping the Electronic Frontier open.  However, CPSR 
does share the EFF's concern with over-restrictive legislation of 
"electronic liberties."  Hence one could join CPSR to talk about EFF issues,
depending on how comfortable he/she is with the rest of CPSR's concerns.

He is also right that this is getting off the topic of the group; I will
be glad to have further discussions about CPSR on e-mail, but will not
post further on the topic.

> -- 
> The powers not  delegated to the United States by the | Mike Van Pelt
> Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are | Headland Technology
> reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.| (was: Video Seven)
> U. S. Constitution, Amendment 10.  (Bill of Rights)   | ..ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp
> 
> 

For those who are interested in finding out more about CPSR, you can write to:

   CPSR
   P.O. Box 717
   Palo Alto, CA 94302-9917

or send e-mail to: 

   eroberts@cs.stanford.edu (Eric Roberts, president of CPSR)

						--Samuel Bates
						  Chair, CPSR-Madison