Re: Cypherpunks vs. Coderpunks

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

Leslie Todd Masco writes:
> My concern is that the two lists will become more disjoint than they
> already are.  I believe that the content of Cypherpunks is enhanced
> by having the programmers present, just as the coders benefit from
> the guidance of seeing the possibilities opened by their endeavors.

I agree and would like to amplify.

I'm really sick of the folks who can post to libernet, com-priv,
talk.politics.guns, etc, pissing on the parade.

The thing that makes Cypherpunks worthwhile is that its a place where
you could, once, get news updates about GAK, information on the latest
research into cryptography, organize mass key crackings, discuss APIs,
talk a bit about the politics of cryptography, etc.

Now, we get anonymous posters putting up bits on corruption in the
DEA, sections of Tsutomu Shimomura's sex life, and other garbage. I
don't give a damn if you think "Perry's a whining asshole; no one
appointed him God", the stuff I'm mentioning is almost totally
irrelevant to the topic at hand. (I *still* see no relevance to the
late great Kevin Mitnick discussion, and frankly, I don't give a damn
if he's in jail.) I also really am not impressed enough with the
justification for why Jim Bell's "ideas" need to be discussed here.

For some people without jobs (I won't name names) there is no problem
with this. However, some of us have trouble keeping up, and
unfortunately Cypherpunks has content that is key to our work and
interests. 

Sadly, there isn't another place with the momentum where people are a
bit more polite and talk about the same information.

Yet.

Perry