Cypherpunk failures
Declan McCullagh wrote: > I'm told this bill is expected to become law by Christmas. > > >The Secretary of State shall issue, and may from time to time revise, a > >code of practice relating to the retention by communications providers of > >communications data obtained by or held by them... Speaking of laws by Christmas, anyone want to give odds on the accuracy of Tim May's prediction on September 13: Dark times are coming. I'll bet a complete ban on strong, unescrowed crypto is passed in all European countries, Russia, China, Japan, and the U.S. by, say, December 15th. and I'm betting, as I said in my last post, that strong unescrowed crypto will be illegal by December 15th. Does anyone think this prediction will come true? Or is it as mistaken as so many other Tim May predictions over the years? And by the way, who was Tim May betting with? Hopefully the sum they stand to gain is substantial. The larger question is, what is it about the cypherpunk worldview which is so wrong? Why do cypherpunks constantly predict events which don't come true? And is this faulty vision responsible for the failure of the cypherpunks to maintain their cultural and technological influence, and to make progress towards their goals? The most crippling error of the cypherpunks has been their unremitting pessimism. Ever since the group was created they have predicted imminent crackdowns on cryptography. And yet the trend has consistently been in the opposite direction. Rather than keeping to an optimistic vision of a better world, cypherpunks have sunk into a morass of doomsaying. The Y2K debacle was perhaps the most prominent example of failed pessimism. Why work on crypto if the world is coming to an end? Another mistake has been to view the world in simplistic terms of black and white, true patriots versus those who "need killin'". Government in this view is a monolithic entity with the single-minded goal of destroying individual rights and creating a tyrannical dictatorship. Society is composed of "sheeple" who are ignorant of their own best interests and easily manipulated by those in power. This view ignores the complex nature of political and corporate influence and the many competing groups which vie for power in the world. And of course much energy has been wasted in internal debate and rhetoric which, because founded on these erroneous points, has been useless and irrelevant. It's easier to moan and complain when bad things happen than to adopt a positive view of the world and work in an optimistic way to make it happen. Meanwhile the most interesting technological changes are passing the cypherpunks by. The open source movement, peer to peer exchange, the music and copyright wars, all have had little impact in the cypherpunk world. Peer to peer technology alone has tremendous potential as a foundation for long-term cypherpunk dreams like anonymizing proxies, encrypted data sharing, eternity, even DC nets. Encryption should be a fundamental part of file sharing systems. Digital reputations are the solution to the problem of bogus data being maliciously inserted into networks in order to clog them and interfere with searches. Crypto protocols can help against some kinds of denial of service attacks. If cypherpunks had been engaged in the world over the last few years instead of staring into their pessimistic navels, they could have played a part in today's revolutions. As it is, they appear to be "headed for the trash heap of history," to use Tim May's unfortunate phrase. Maybe it's not too late. But if this group is ever to resume its role as an exciting place where the future of computing is visible, it must refocus its efforts. Cypherpunks should think positively, look past current troubles, and start talking again about crypto technology and how it can change the world. That would be a conversation worth having.
Re: Cypherpunk failures
On 19 Nov 2001, at 19:43, Ken Brown wrote: > Much too 1990s. These times suit more loyal-sounding names. > "Programmers Rally Against Terrorism"? I wonder how many non-Brits will get this... -- Roy M. Silvernail Proprietor, scytale.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cypherpunk failures
"Roy M. Silvernail" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : >On 19 Nov 2001, at 19:43, Ken Brown wrote: > >> Much too 1990s. These times suit more loyal-sounding names. >> "Programmers Rally Against Terrorism"? > >I wonder how many non-Brits will get this... > > >-- >Roy M. Silvernail >Proprietor, scytale.com >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Oh, I get it OK, it just doesn't sound cuddly.
Re: Cypherpunk failures
> Maybe it's not too late. But if this group is ever to resume its role > as an exciting place where the future of computing is visible, it must > refocus its efforts. Cypherpunks should think positively, look past > current troubles, and start talking again about crypto technology and > how it can change the world. That would be a conversation worth having. The basic problem with cpunks is misunderstanding of the ground rules. Most cpunks are/were cube slaves, albeit with decent salaries, and some have cashed out (you know who you are.) As well-paid hired hands they tend to forget who masters are and how masters function. Trying to shove the privacy down the throat of unsuspecting citizenry is an exercise in futility. Not unlike organising the church of atheists. "Ordinary" people will do what they are fed with. Cypherpunks have no means of conquering even 0.001% of the input bandwidth of "ordinary people". There is no money and no means for that. So, what is left ? - Sell out and help various "rights" groups that do good (as defined by USG - always groups outside US and sympathetic to US) use crypto. - Sell out and do commercial crypto which will never have any impact on individual's privacy. - Sell out and radiate negative vibes and pipe dreams about killing. The point is, we have not found a killer app that: a) can be sustained by a small group of disorganised individuals b) has huge appeal to "ordinary" people. Remailers satisfy a) but not b), for example. What looks most promising at the time being are P2P apps that need protection from snooping. Let's make trading .mp3s a crime with capital punishment. = end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals http://personals.yahoo.com
Re: Cypherpunk failures
At 02:00 AM 11/18/2001 +0100, Nomen Nescio wrote: >The larger question is, what is it about the cypherpunk worldview which is so wrong? Why do cypherpunks constantly predict events which don't come true? And is this faulty vision responsible for the failure of the cypherpunks to maintain their cultural and technological influence, and to make progress towards their goals? >The most crippling error of the cypherpunks has been their unremitting pessimism. Ever since the group was created they have predicted imminent crackdowns on cryptography. And yet the trend has consistently been in the opposite direction. Rather than keeping to an optimistic vision of a better world, cypherpunks have sunk into a morass of doomsaying. The Y2K debacle was perhaps the most prominent example of failed pessimism. Why work on crypto if the world is coming to an end? You're way off base. Many CP on and off this list have attempted, some to a relatively creditable degree, to create technologies (many open source) or launch ventures consistent with CP goals. >Another mistake has been to view the world in simplistic terms of black and white, true patriots versus those who "need killin'". Government in this view is a monolithic entity with the single-minded goal of destroying individual rights and creating a tyrannical dictatorship. Society is composed of "sheeple" who are ignorant of their own best interests and easily manipulated by those in power. This view ignores the complex nature of political and corporate influence and the many competing groups which vie for power in the world. It emphasizes that to keep one's civil rights in the face of those who would trade them away, it may sometimes be necessary to temper their ignorance, greed, or other self interest with the specter of personal consequences untempered by law. >And of course much energy has been wasted in internal debate and rhetoric which, because founded on these erroneous points, has been useless and irrelevant. It's easier to moan and complain when bad things happen than to adopt a positive view of the world and work in an optimistic way to make it happen. >Meanwhile the most interesting technological changes are passing the cypherpunks by. The open source movement, peer to peer exchange, the music and copyright wars, all have had little impact in the cypherpunk world. Peer to peer technology alone has tremendous potential as a foundation for long-term cypherpunk dreams like anonymizing proxies, encrypted data sharing, eternity, even DC nets. Again you appear to be ignorant of the many CPs (Adam Back, Adam Shostack, Ian Goldberg, Ian Grigg, Doug Barnes, Sameer Parekh, Marc Bracino, Jim McCoy, and many others) who have contributed heavily in these areas. As Tim says read the archives. Its all there. While it may be true that some were too early and somewhat idealistic I expect that their efforts will directly or indirectly encourage others to take up the banner and push on to success.
Re: Cypherpunk failures
On Sun, Nov 18, 2001 at 02:00:15AM +0100, Nomen Nescio wrote: > Speaking of laws by Christmas, anyone want to give odds on the accuracy > of Tim May's prediction on September 13: > >Dark times are coming. I'll bet a complete ban on strong, unescrowed >crypto is passed in all European countries, Russia, China, Japan, and >the U.S. by, say, December 15th. Yes, this will turn out to be an incorrect prediction. Not one country has taken serious steps to ban or limit crypto; in the U.S., even Gregg never introduced his bill. > The larger question is, what is it about the cypherpunk worldview which > is so wrong? Why do cypherpunks constantly predict events which don't > come true? And is this faulty vision responsible for the failure of > the cypherpunks to maintain their cultural and technological influence, > and to make progress towards their goals? Tim does not equal cypherpunks, and not all of his predictions turn out to be so off. It's difficult to predict the future accurately -- what would be more interesting is to compare relvant predictions made by cypherpunks against predictions made by, say, groups of politicians, academics, think tank types, and so on. Go for it. > Meanwhile the most interesting technological changes are passing the > cypherpunks by. The open source movement, peer to peer exchange, the > music and copyright wars, all have had little impact in the cypherpunk > world. Peer to peer technology alone has tremendous potential as a This is actually partly true -- even Freenet, perhaps the most promising cypherpunkly project with live code right now, barely gets a mention on the list. -Declan
Re: Cypherpunk failures
-- Someone wrote: > Speaking of laws by Christmas, anyone want to give odds on > the accuracy of Tim May's prediction on September 13: > >Dark times are coming. I'll bet a complete ban on >strong, unescrowed crypto is passed in all European >countries, Russia, China, Japan, and the U.S. by, say, >December 15th. > > and > >I'm betting, as I said in my last post, that strong >unescrowed crypto will be illegal by December 15th. > > Does anyone think this prediction will come true? No, will not come true. All wars are good for government and bad for freedom, but a short victorious war against a far away regime is likely to be less bad than most. If we lost the war, and the war on terror turned inward, against Americans, and became like the war on drugs, then it would have come true. As I write this, the Taliban appears to have entirely collapsed, which will presumably soon result in the Northern alliance killing Bin Laden, and probably his children, relatives, associates, and everyone in his general vicinity. Problem solved. Perhaps they return to the good old afghan tradition of the women folk slowly skinning the foreigners alive. This was women's work, since men lack the patience and manual dexterity required. However, a wise government can always snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It seems we are going to do some nation building, fresh from our great successes in building the nations of Iran and Somalia. Right now the Afghans are chanting "death to Arabs" but if we stick around too long, doubtless we will once again be hearing "death to Americans" Of course, the problem with building nations is that soldiers cannot build nations. At best, soldiers kill bad guys and break their toys. For nation building something rather more is required, starting with a consensus. It would seem they are fair bit short of consensus in Afghanistan, though I saw on television that they are working very hard at it. The Afghan economy is entirely dependent on trade and smuggling, as it has been for the past two thousand years, which is a bit odd for a land-locked country occupied by xenophobic people. When local warlords put up roadblocks to collect tariffs every short distance, the economy collapses, as it did before the Taliban took over. The obvious solution is for the various tribes, warlords, militias, and armed mosques to agree on freedom of trade and movement, and agree to leave each other alone apart from enforcing that. Needless to say, such a solution does not seem to be on the cards, particularly if we "help" them form a government with a bunch of UN troops from various islamic tyrannies and one islamic democracy. Afghanistan cannot survive economically if divided into mutually hostile ethnic and religious enclaves, nor can it survive politically if one centralized unitary government is imposed on this quarrelsome patchwork of very different tribes, races, and religions. It will be hard for Afghan politicians to steer a path between these two catastrophes. For foreign politicians, it will be near impossible. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG sKNc0ZkzESI+/W74xc3mXuPDGrsBVO0GDRe9P7aw 4wEInsJIbFPzALwa1k4byM0nkV5lqxkVQzAnfrnsw
Re: Cypherpunk failures
-- On 18 Nov 2001, at 2:00, Nomen Nescio wrote: > The larger question is, what is it about the cypherpunk > worldview which is so wrong? Why do cypherpunks constantly > predict events which don't come true? Those who plan revolution always overestimate the pace of change, just as those who start companies always overestimate the profits, and those who schedule software projects always under estimate the time and cost. The trend has mostly been as predicted. The timing has been badly off. Nonetheless, revolutions happen, companies get started and sometimes become profitable, and once in a while, very rarely, software projects even get completed. > And is this faulty vision responsible for the failure of > the cypherpunks to maintain their cultural and > technological influence, and to make progress towards their > goals? I write code. Right now that code is being used for purposes I very much approve of. I expected that code to move mountains. In actual fact it has made a small dent in one mountain, but not an entirely insignificant dent. I intend to write some more code. So though the cypherpunks list is moribund, and cypherpunks are no longer fashionable, I see progress towards our goals. > The most crippling error of the cypherpunks has been their > unremitting pessimism. Could have fooled me. The predictions of imminent cataclysmic national ruin are from our point of view more a matter of optimism rather than pessimism. Further, these predictions should not be taken all that seriously. The typical cypherpunk has a small amount of gold and ammo buried in some peculiar place, and occaisionally practices his shooting and martial arts, but these are a matter of insurance rather than real expectations. From the smallness of the amount of gold buried, and the rather second rate accuracy of his shooting, one can infer he really does not expect imminent catastrophe. > Another mistake has been to view the world in simplistic > terms of black and white, true patriots versus those who > "need killin'". Government in this view is a monolithic > entity with the single-minded goal of destroying individual > rights and creating a tyrannical dictatorship. Obviously government is not a monolithic entity. The movement towards tyrannical dictatorship is more like a wall slowly slumping, than any cynical and well worked out plan. Nonetheless, it moves towards tyrannical dictatorship. > Meanwhile the most interesting technological changes are > passing the cypherpunks by. The open source movement, peer > to peer exchange, the music and copyright wars, all have > had little impact in the cypherpunk world. Peer to peer > technology alone has tremendous potential as a foundation > for long-term cypherpunk dreams like anonymizing proxies, > encrypted data sharing, eternity, even DC nets. Encryption > should be a fundamental part of file sharing systems. > Digital reputations are the solution to the problem of > bogus data being maliciously inserted into networks in > order to clog them and interfere with searches. Crypto > protocols can help against some kinds of denial of service > attacks. Mojo nation. Of course the reason a really strong product like mojo nation has not proven popular is precisely because there is not enough of a crackdown. If the authorities really got heavy on the napster clones, then our skills would be more in demand, and our plans would move forward faster. As the left is fond of saying, "repressive tolerance". This crack down on the hawalas network may well personally profit me. In this case it may well be that the laws advance, rather than prevent, the development of digital money. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG EPFIzwETMpz6qjYGZsYx40AuxWjJ2ExSKGIyrKh+ 4fq7FOlO/GPsVvXBLjn1a3g5NeZgDJk4q6nN6tbGB
Re: Cypherpunk failures
On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: > This is actually partly true -- even Freenet, perhaps the most > promising cypherpunkly project with live code right now, barely gets a > mention on the list. Mojonation is ailing, too. Barely a trickle of few posts/week on all mojo lists taken together.
Re: Cypherpunk failures
On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 08:03:49PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > So though the cypherpunks list is moribund, and cypherpunks > are no longer fashionable, True. The DC cypherpunks are thinking of changing their name to something more cuddly. (At least that's according to discussions on the local mailing list. I was traveling at the time and didn't participate.) -Declan
Re: Cypherpunk failures
At 01:34 PM 11/18/01 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 08:03:49PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> So though the cypherpunks list is moribund, and cypherpunks >> are no longer fashionable, > >True. The DC cypherpunks are thinking of changing their name to something >more cuddly. Harmless Little Nerds? Cryptotubbies? Happy Fun Infosec Society?
Re: Cypherpunk failures
On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 01:48 PM, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: > On 19 Nov 2001, at 19:43, Ken Brown wrote: > >> Much too 1990s. These times suit more loyal-sounding names. >> "Programmers Rally Against Terrorism"? > > I wonder how many non-Brits will get this... A few. -- "Remember, half-measures can be very effective if all you deal with are half-wits."--Chris Klein
