RE: [projectvrm] Does this list welcome natural law/rights wonks?

["Crosbie Fitch" < >]

ADDENDUM:

> From: Crosbie Fitch 
> You CAN make non-disclosure a CONDITION of an exchange, e.g. 
> "I'll let you keep this dollar if you don't mention the 
> surprise party to anyone before it happens on Saturday". 
> There is no surrender of liberty, and there's nothing wrong 
> in disclosing the forthcoming party. It's purely a matter of 
> negotiating the value of non-disclosure, just as one might 
> negotiate the value of working for 7 hours. One cannot be 
> forced to work. One cannot be forced to remain silent.

I forgot to point out, that the other problem with making non-disclosure a
condition is that it is EXTREMELY difficult to police, detect, and prove
that suspected disclosers really did disclose what they agreed not to and
therefore should forfeit respective securities/rewards.

So, even incentivised non-disclosure hasn't a chance at constraining the
dissemination of 'personal data'.

Human beings have always operated on the basis of liberty, trust, and
discretion

Even threats of violent retaliation don't really work.

It's not the nice, meek and conscientious folk you have to worry about
(they'll be discreet anyway), but the unscrupulous mercenaries - and they're
incorrigible.

Best not reveal what you don't want to reveal than kid yourself you can hold
back the tide of its dissemination.