I suspect that the Paul aides are over-estimating how easy it will be to end End the Fed. I could give two shits about internet freedom; it's historically unprecedented and hasn't really produced any great results for the advance of human freedom as a whole. The money is still the issue. It always has been and always will be. Is that system organized in a way that incentivizes responsible individual behavior, or is it designed to help an uber-connected few retain their spot on top? Fix that, and fuck the internet. And fuck the Pauls, too, if they exchange something important for a Google talking point.
It saddens me that Ron Paul is now going for a low-hanging fruit. Rand, I couldn't care less about.
Without the Internet, the communications of the Paul supporters would be heavily hampered, and thus the same for the supporting of the audit bills. I think this is the biggest reason that the audit bill is now going to the floor of the House. Never before has it been so easy for people to learn about the evils of the Fed and coordinate efforts to destroy it.The free Internet is the number one most important item in all activist activities, and there are many bills, executive orders, and bureaucrats that could be used to bring down almost any community.
We, the internet freedom-fighters, don't need the Pauls or any other statist - we're doing just fine without them (Tor, pgp, Second Realm, etc.). To the previous commenter above who discounts the internet: we've already created our own money (bitcoin) and our own free-markets (Silk Road). Come join us and see what real freedom tastes like!
None of these things you list can be considered as supporting evidence that the Government will not intrude upon and destroy the currently free Internet. The things you list exist while we have free Internet. However, as China has well demonstrated, the Internet can be locked down well enough that the unauthorized usage is effectively blocked. I suspect that if the U.S. Government began funding such tech, then they would likely be able to shut down nearly all unauthorized activity.The problem is inherent to the structure of the www, specifically the DNS. As long as we are all operating in the www, it is definitely possible for nearly all Internet freedoms to be lost.
Do a little more homework. There are workarounds in development that will make these objections you bring up "moot" issues. Google any or all of the following: Open Transactions, mesh networks, bitcoincard.com, namecoin, onion browsing, Tor, Second Realm, etc., etc.
China is able to close Tor connections in a matter of minutes. When I visited China I could tell that their server was able to identify my SSH or VPN connection and shut it down within a few minutes if the traffic was browsing. Certainly they had no idea what the content was, but it was obvious to me that they knew I was browsing, because if the traffic was only server commands, the connection would not be interrupted.I haven't looked in a while, but when namecoin launched it required use of the DNS - a fatal flaw.Mesh nets take some time to get going, and as I delved in to try and support the various communities, what I found is that most people working on these are communists at heart. They want everything to be provided without charge, which means those projects will likely never be free (as in speech) or large enough to replace the www.Cryptobanking does not set users free of the Government in individual communications and organizing.
MyNameIsPaul - How could they know you were browsing by an ssh tunnel vs. any doing other task without either breaking the encryption or conducting an analysis of traffic timing and volume? Do you think they are doing the former, or the latter, or something else?
Internet freedom = information freedom = spread of ideas and truth = people learning about how money and banking and government works = neutering of government and FedTake away step number one and it curtails their efforts elsewhere. I think they are also going in this direction because of the direct assault on internet freedom that has been taking place. It is moer important to defeat it now before it becomes the rule and gets out of hand and extremely hard to combat, like the Fed and the TSA.
I removed myself from the CFL e-mail list last month because of the whole issue of Rand Paul.I really hope Wenzel is wrong about Ron though...maybe it's just more of the "machine" associated with him doing stuff he's not aware of...
WIthout the internet, the Ron Paul movement wouldn't have been 1/10 as powerful as it has so far, let alone what it will do on sites like this from here on out. Whatever moron advisor, probably Jesse Benton, who said this nonsense, I guarantee this never replaces ending the Fed to Ron Paul. Maybe to Rand or Benton, but not Ron.Ron correctly realizes, however, that there is a winning strategy and movement in play on the internet largely thanks to him and the austrian sites that provide the intellectual daily firepower to convert the masses. I have long thought that instead of going after guns, the government correctly realizes that the internet freedom for liberty groups to organize is an even bigger threat, and there will be serious attempts made to censor it to stop the anti-Fed, anti-war, anti-police state crowing movement on the internet.
"Private property rights on the Internet should exist in limited fashion or not at all, andwhat is considered to be in the public domain should be greatly expanded."being associated with "Internet collectivism", does this mean Ron and Rand Paul are about to fight voluntary use/waiving of Creative Commons, GPL, and public domain material? What happened to the Austrian economic background to Ron and Rand, which clearly accepts that intellectual "property" is an Ayn Rand invention (with influence from Spooner), and understands that having a "property right in ideas" is impossible without the exact same government regulation Ron and Rand claim to oppose?I can't believe this is happening without any complaints from libertarians, especially given the fact that opposition to intellectual "property" is largely via voluntary waivers.
What's up with the false choice? Is Rand too dumb to understand the Fed enough to want to explain it, or does he think that we're all too dumb to care? Does being a technical issue make something off-limits? Are we supposed to gauge what we focus on on the ease of its communication rather than on its importance to our civilization?Low hanging fruit indeed.