Re: Something Silly, Something Serious

[nate@VIS.ColoState.EDU]

writes Jamie Dinkelacker:
>
>... Tim continues ...
>>
>>Cypherpunks write code. Cyperpunks write essays. Cypherpunks make puns
>>and jokes and even spoofs. Cypherpunks have fun.
>>
>
>I don't know if there is a Cypherpunk's cause. I doubt there's a movement,
>but that's separate from my holding a belief that crypto and nyms and
>digital cash and privacy and emergent social structures are crucial to a
>preferable form of human survival.
>

I would have to disagree somewhat with this statement.  I think that there
are a loose set of opinions and goals shared between most of us.  We may
have out paranoids (personally, I always got a kick out of LD's rants...
some of them even put us back "on track" when we were straying (as have
many of Tim's posts)).  Most of us share ideas, mostly relating to wanting
widespread use and acceptance of strong cryptography.  There are many 
differing opinions here, but this reflects the fact that we are not some
kind of genetic experiment gone bad ;-)

writes Jamie Dinkelacker:
>
>With the net, we have a wonderous tool and opportunity. But the world isn't
>a safe place. Every time I put a finger or toe into the lovely pacific
>ocean I'm keenly aware of quickly entering the food chain at a much lower
>point. These are times of challenge, to develop new tools and fresh
>perspectives. But many elements of human nature remain the same.
>

Very true.

writes Jamie Dinkelacker:
>
>I thank the Cypherpunks for writing code. I don't (anymore): I write words,
>make videos and build organizations. We do need the code. We also need to
>push at the edges of our understanding of social dynamics. 
>

I agree... Code is good, but one of the most important resources we have
are people who can explain just what it is that we are doing here to the
"outside" world, and to reaise the level of the public's awarness, if not
understanding.

writes Jamie Dinkelacker:
>
>And S.Boxx
>clearly illustrated that puerile visciousness, wounded animal frenzy, and
>pathetic behavior are also here in this new world. One of the brave ones,
>s/he isn't. And Cypherpunks' creations even protect the likes of S.Boxx.
>Reminiscent of Voltaire, yes?
>

Strangely ironic, we hate what we protect.  I think it's important to note
that there will always be people like S.Boxx out there... lunatic ravings
and patheticly malformed logic.  There are also a great deal of good things
that have come out of the remailers and spoofing (not so much spoofing, but
posts to places like alt.whistlblowing, et al. through the remailers and
anon.penet.fi)  I think that the good outweighs the bad in this instance,
at least.

>
>James Dinkelacker (True name)
>--
>................................
>Jamie Dinkelacker   Palo Alto CA  (almost a true name)
>Jamie@netcom.com    415.941.4782    
>
>

Truly,

-nate

-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Nate Sammons   email: nate@VIS.ColoState.Edu
|   Colorado State University Computer Visualization Laboratory
|   Finger nate@monet.VIS.ColoState.Edu for my PGP key
|   #include <std.disclaimer>
|   Title 18 USC 2511 and 18 USC 2703 Protected --> Monitoring Forbidden
+--------+                          Always remember "Brazil"