[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cypherpunks "Exposed"
>X-Authentication-Warning: teal.csn.net: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
>Attn Reporters and Writers!!
>who are the CYPHERPUNKS?
First, most of those on this list, rather easily discernible since most of
them make no attempt to conceal their views. Second, anyone who agrees
substantially that the universal deployment of strong cryptology tools will
increase individual freedom, and that this is desirable.
>what are they talking about?
Since you're subscribed to this list, you can easily find out.
>what have they done in the past?
See a few web pages or FTP archives. "L. Detweiler's" page has plenty of
links to other places, although there are a few things I'd like him to
clarify (see below).
>who are the "leaders"?
Tim May says there are none. LD repeatedly contends that May, and anyone else
who agrees with his statement, are either ignorant or deliberately lying. (By
virtue of this post, I'm sure I'm now on this list.) Neal Stephenson's *The
Diamond Age* description of "CryptNet" is remarkably similar to this whole
situation. I wonder if Neal used any aspects of the LD "phenomenon" as a
template. (Aside: If you haven't yet read Diamond Age, do so immediately. My
highest possible rating.)
>what do they believe in?
See above. But individuals always differ.
>what are their *real* goals?
Why don't you join the guild, get your barcode tattoo and find out?
>My name is L.Detweiler, and I've made a serious study of the more ulterior
>aspects of the CYPHERPUNKS for several years,
Ulterior? I'd say it's right out in the open. The statists want the state to
have power over the individual. Most people on this list believe this would
be bad. Both are pretty well "represented" by a number of outspoken, public
individuals. It's reassuring to see the number of computer industry pros and
average folks alike who don't buy into the claim that freedom can be
preserved by outlawing it... or the equally likely claim that freedom itself
is bad, and people who advocate it are evil, right up there with violent
criminals (but see how many people who make these statements also advocate
"might makes right" rule of force by the creation and enforcement of coercive
laws, and the mass robbery of as many people as possible?). Best that these
people be as open and outspoken as those they disagree with, the better to
know their methods and goals.
>and I invite you to peruse my findings at the web site below.
I have, and I quote therefrom further below.
>I've been quoted in various articles and I'm available for serious interviews
>with anyone who wants the REAL STORY BEHIND THE CYPHERPUNKS.
Now that's blatant advertising. Where were you when all these so-called
"journalists" descended on the net, desperately searching for people who
would tell them the Internet was a festering pool of child molesting, money
laundering slime? Will we soon see you defending organizations like FinCEN?
>note: be forewarned that key cypherpunks consider me a heretical
>blasphemer because of the tenacious, unforgiving honesty and
>zealous antisychophancy by which I have pursued this herculean study.
Perhaps if you were less pompous and self-aggrandizing in your presentation,
people would be more willing to seriously entertain your ideas. Anyway, for
those who wish to browse
go ahead, and make up your own mind. Your page doesn't have a mailto:
button, Lance. But I figured this was perfectly appropriate for public
> + Raph Levien's remailer page - amazing how long it took to get
> this simple and basic utility from the cypherpunk crowd --
> and surprise! written by an outsider
The rest I'll let pass, but why is Raph an "outsider"? And what is "inside"?
Does agreeing with the above statements I've generalized make one "inside"?
http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information
To be a skeptic is to refuse to be a victim.
"This is my .sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine."