[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Reverse engineering case law

At 8:35 AM -0500 on 1/7/00, John Young wrote:

> That's why cypherpunks has become a blackhole
> of once thoughtful people now totally obsessed with swimming
> up their own salmonic fountainheads, shrugging Atlases
> obeying nature's call to Tim May nirvana.

Actually, I think it's much better than it used to be, say, even as much as
6 months ago, though that observation may be some combination of fatigue
and effective kill-filing. :-).

Bill Stewart, for instance, and others, have been doing a great job of
answering newbie questions with intellegent decorum, we don't get
Vulis-spambotted like we used to, and, even a certain 'nury out there
hasn't hit my kill-filter for same for months.

The 'punk part is still there, as it should be, but there's been a lot more
cypher here lately, in spite of a whole slew of other lists dedicated to
subsets and supersets thereof.

The place has devolved into a rather tolerable watering hole, I think, with
of course, the inevitable preditors and prey, mudbaths and battles royale.

At the very least, it's same as it (reeently) ever was.

As others have observed, recursion of past issues only goes so far. So, to
my mind, there is a reason this list is here long after others would have
flamed out: the current regular contributors, who, in the main, are a
fairly clueful bunch.

Yourself included, John, in particular.

R. A. Hettinga <mailto: [email protected]>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'