Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!necis!encore!fay From: fay@encore.UUCP (Peter Fay) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Re: UUCP - USSR Message-ID: <2052@encore.UUCP> Date: Tue, 20-Oct-87 10:58:26 EDT Article-I.D.: encore.2052 Posted: Tue Oct 20 10:58:26 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 21-Oct-87 21:16:33 EDT References: <11217@orchid.waterloo.edu> <7445@boring.cwi.nl> Reply-To: fay@encore.UUCP (Peter Fay) Organization: Encore Computer Corp, Marlboro, MA Lines: 76 In article <7445@boring.cwi.nl> varol@cwi.nl (Varol Akman) writes: >In article <11217@orchid.waterloo.edu> imprint@orchid.UUCP (U of Waterloo Student Newspaper) writes: >>In response to several items on UUPC to the USSR. . . >> >>............. (lotsa stuff deleted)............. >> >>Further, you can be sure that Soviet "agents" can, if they >>want, read everything on Usenet. If any student at this >>university can, any "agent" who wants to can also get >>access. So there is nothing "secret" on Usenet. >> >>Doug Thompson >>!watmath!orchid!imprint >>Fido 221/162 >>voice (519-746-5022) > >Just the fact that something is available for Russian agents doesn't >imply that Americans should make life easier for them. In an ideal world, >I would be all for your proposal but I believe that as long as the Russians >continue their dirty aggressions and secret, harmful operations directed >towards the free world, U.S. should try *hard* to make life difficult >for them. Computer technology/science is one field where Americans >excel and Russians stink. Why should we let them have a free lunch -- >especially when it is obvious that they are going to use this technology >against freedom-loving people all around the globe (including their own >kingdom and the Eastern block)? > > >Varol Akman, CWI, Amsterdam >varol@cwi.nl "Dirty aggressions and secret, harmful operations..." - is this really a criticism directed against the USSR? Espionage is a dirty business by any standards. And if you want to make charges, then go straight to the source - the CIA wrote the book on dirty aggression (see Agee's, Stockwell's, etc. books on the CIA campaigns in Vietnam, assasinations in Africa, Latin America, etc.). But all this is not even the issue. The issues in international informational exchange have been cloaked in terms of "security", but (especially in cases like USENET) are in fact political issues only: 1. The U.S. State Dept. (and of course FBI, CIA) wants to prevent all contact possible between people of the U.S. and socialist countries. This contact seriously undermines publicity campaigns against them in the U.S., and thus makes U.S. foreign policy more difficult to justify. 2. There are many ordinary people here who seriously believe there is a "security" threat and want no part of information exchange. (For example, many believed the "Libyan Hit Squad" stories planted by the CIA, -- and later exposed -- used to justify a military attack against Libya.) They are merely blinded by ignorance and naivete. 3. A major obstacle to overcome is the assumption that little is to be gained by such information exchange. I am not speaking of the Soviets - they understand this very well. Also many scientific circles in the West understand this very well - the above comments notwithstanding. In many fields the Soviets are far ahead of the U.S. (just ask NASA). This includes some fields of science, and much of the arts, music, sports, general education, etc. And probably more important, many fields exist there that don't exist here. (The converse is also true.) The people of the West certainly have something to gain in this. The question (as always) is: who wins the battle for control? The Western governments who stand to lose credibility by East-West exchange, or the rest of us, who stand only to gain? -- peter fay fay@multimax.arpa {allegra|compass|decvax|ihnp4|linus|necis|pur-ee|talcott}!encore!fay