I'm not arguing for State-supported monopolies!

["Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>]

At 4:57 PM -0800 1/4/97, jim bell wrote:

>I don't fault you for being "elitist."  However, Rich Graves was right: I
>think that  cryptoanarchy, while obviously eliminating taxation and income
>redistribution sounds cozy for economic elites, actually also eliminates the
>basis for those elites to be formed in the first place.  To cite just one
>example that will hit close to home for you, without copyrights or patents
>(which
>are, obviously, monopolies enforced by governments) it would be far harder
>for companies such as Intel to maintain a near-monopoly on the
>DOS-compatible microprocessor market.

Of course. Please read my various sections in the Cyphernomicon on what
will be the likely effect of liquid information markets on
corporations--both Gibson and Chomsky have similar views, by the way. I
have explicitly cited the role of crypto anarchy in undermining large
corporations (changing the "nature of the firm"), and have said quite
directly that crypto anarchy means as much for the nature of corporations
as for government institutions.

On the issue of my particular financial situation, no firm conclusions can
be drawn. While Intel might not have existed as it did--always a tough
thing to argue subjunctive realities--it is also the case that the very
high tax rates (counting the various taxes, not just Federal) I paid for my
working career could have allowed me to accumulate money in other ways. In
any case, I don't make my arguments based upon "could have beens" like this.

(Vis-a-vis my current expectations and my plans for securing my
wealth...alternative pasts, such as "What if Intel had not had patent
protection?." are meaningless. All that counts is the future from now on
out. And in the time period I expect some semblance of crypto anarchy to
evolve, which is a matter of decades, not months or years, there will be
plenty of time for me to shift assets and move to a non-U.S. locale, if
need be.)

>And it has long been observed in libertarian discussion circles that far
>from hating regulation, most large (American; and others) corporations
>actually receive a net benefit from it as compared with smaller companies:
>The cost of complying with regulations doesn't increase linearly with the
>size of company, which means that those same regulations are a way of
>fighting competition if they are played right.  Bring in crypto-anarchy and
>this effect is no longer operating.

Of course. I've said this very thing several times...perhaps you are
remembering points I myself made.

Again, don't attempt to refute my ideas by casting me as a Defender of
Intel and Protector of State-Supported Monopolies. I'm not such a thing.

>Despite all this, I still see nothing inconsistent in even an "elitist"
>pushing for crypto-anarchy:  The current political system has become so
>dramatically inefficient and keeps so many people (through welfare,
>Socialist Insecurity, and government employment) well-fed through income
>redistribution, that I think finally even an "elitist" would be happy to
>chuck the whole system and adopt a crypto-anarchy-equalized system.

Indeed. And when you stop thinking I'm somehow arguing for State support of
Intel and other corporate entities, my position will be even more obviously
consistent.

(As to my particular wealth from my investments, only part of it is
directly attributable to having worked at Intel. Much of it is due to
_investments_ in various companies over a 20-year period. I have confidence
that had a less constrained market existed, I could have done about as
well, or even better.)

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."