4 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
Eric Hughes says: "It's a fine idea, except there's no way such a group can claim to represent cypherpunks at large." True enough -- my idea would be to say that our group is composed of folks who happen to be Cypherpunks subscribers. I agree that claiming to represent an anarchy is illogical and, well, an outright untruth. Curt
>
> Eric Hughes says: "It's a fine idea, except there's no way such a group can
> claim to represent cypherpunks at large."
>
> True enough -- my idea would be to say that our group is composed of folks who
> happen to be Cypherpunks subscribers. I agree that claiming to represent an
> anarchy is illogical and, well, an outright untruth.
>
> Curt
>
You know- I know you all are more individualistic in nature, more
anarchistic than to think of yourselves as belonging to an organized "group",
but I am getting concerned about a certain disassociation with the
political aspects of cryptography which I am seeing by some members of this
list- especially the post awhile back which was of the tone of "leave it to
the other guys to lobby and be political, etc" - meaning throwing the
responsibility over to the EFF people, etc. While I am sure that they are
organized to lobby in this sort of way, my original thoughts on rallying
some of us together was not to try to form yet another lobbying
organization, but rather, to perhaps "fight fire with fire" with some of
the media bad press that we are getting as subscribers to this list, and as
Clipper-opposers.
Secondly, there has been grumblings by certain new members
regarding the political talk, with requests for more 'tech talk' - It seems
to me that these threads are in a sense mutually exclusive in a certain
sense, and could very easily be carried on at the same time. If you want to
talk tech- just jump in and do so- but people are probably not going to
call on you to start the thread..I just am not sure why someone would
object to *both* tech and politics- and anyway- if you don't like the
political talk, you could always write yourself a filter.
Lastly, there has been talk about the old-timers on this list
"sitting back and waiting while the 'newbies' talk over things which have
been said before (politically, I take it)- the thing is, the cryptography/
Clipper policy is being designed and debated *now*- I can't see how
whateve you all talked about 3 years ago can really be relevent to what's
going on in the media today regarding this important issue. It seems to me
this isn't a static, circular discusion, but rather a continuous, ongoing
thread which is informed by the media on a day to day basis..And unless
you all are amazingly clairvoyant, it would have been hard to know all the
events which are going on now three years ago.
I don't know about you all, but if my privacy is threatned, I am
going to do what I can to object to it. I am not of the mindset to "leave
it to someone else" to do.
Well, as this is getting long, I will close.
Julie
"I am not an Internet Cult member"
___________________________________________________________________________
Julie M. Albright
Ph.D Student
Department of Sociology
University of Southern California
albright@usc.edu
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .Julie Albright writes: > You know- I know you all are more individualistic in nature, more > anarchistic than to think of yourselves as belonging to an organized "group", > but I am getting concerned about a certain disassociation with the > political aspects of cryptography which I am seeing by some members of this > list- especially the post awhile back which was of the tone of "leave it to > the other guys to lobby and be political, etc" - meaning throwing the > responsibility over to the EFF people, etc. While I am sure that they are I think you're conflating several different opinions. Some want to lobby, some want to talk algortithms. Some say they are leaving the list because too much political discussion is happening, others that not enough is happening. Such is the nature of a group like our. Anyone is obviously free to go out an lobby. But just as I am not in a position to represent _you_, so, too, no group or indidual out there is in a position to represent _me_. Like, I said, anyone can represent themselves, can lobby, can promote petitions, can phone Congresscritters, and all that. Some of us do this, as a matter of fact. And some of us talk on radio shows, are interviewed for magazines and newspapers, and so on. What more can be wanted? Let anyone lobbying that we--as a group--start to *do more* themselves do more. > organized to lobby in this sort of way, my original thoughts on rallying > some of us together was not to try to form yet another lobbying > organization, but rather, to perhaps "fight fire with fire" with some of > the media bad press that we are getting as subscribers to this list, and as > Clipper-opposers. Deservedly or not, our press has been much more positive than negative. Cf. the pieces in "Wired," "Whole Earth Review," "The Village Voice," and "The New York Times" (only a brief mention there). I can't think of much bad press, frankly. (The NSA guy's comment about Woodstock and trig homework, maybe, but that was more than countered by Bruce Sterling's closing talk at CFP and other talks. No big deal.) > Lastly, there has been talk about the old-timers on this list > "sitting back and waiting while the 'newbies' talk over things which have > been said before (politically, I take it)- the thing is, the cryptography/ > Clipper policy is being designed and debated *now*- I can't see how > whateve you all talked about 3 years ago can really be relevent to what's > going on in the media today regarding this important issue. It seems to me > this isn't a static, circular discusion, but rather a continuous, ongoing > thread which is informed by the media on a day to day basis..And unless > you all are amazingly clairvoyant, it would have been hard to know all the > events which are going on now three years ago. As one of the old timers, some comments: * I haven't said I won't participate....in fact, I still write a lot. So do other old-timers. * The "Clipper debate" started in earnest exactly a year ago, not "3 years ago." My Clipper folder has 4 MB of mail and articles in it, refecting only the small fraction of mail I kept on the topic. It continues to be debated, here and in the Usenet discussion groups. Several of us have written at length about it, and others are always free to. So, I don't follow the point about how the old timers are letting the newbies do all the debating.... It is true that certain comments, along the lines of "What are some arguments against Clipper?," are not conducive to debate (to put it as politely as I can). Interesting comments, or new perspectives, or even articles that indicate the author has at least read some of the FAQ materials distributed frequently in the Usenet groups, are likelier to generate responses. (And this was equally true a year ago, by the way; to participate in a debate one needs to have a certain common vocabulary and an awareness of the main issues.) Having said this, there are many who are tired of the same old Clipper debates. There's no argument that will make most of us accept the concept of "key escrow," so what's to debate? And like I said, there are plenty of grassroots political opportunities for those interested. --Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."
<In mail Curtis D Frye said:> ... > I agree that claiming to represent an > anarchy is illogical and, well, an outright untruth. As do I, for what it's worth. My plan was never to speak as a unified voice representing all Cypherpunks but to rather give evidence that we are not all the college-computer-nerd-woodstock-missing-hippie-wannabe- Cipherpunks. Only that if someone talks to the press and they say, "just what is Cypherpunks?" they can say "Well, I have a document that explains who we are (demographics), what we do, and why." But there are SOME ideas 99% of us agree on... such as we don't want to see the government self-fullfill George Orwell's prophesy. Jim -- Tantalus Inc. Jim Sewell Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ P.O. Box 2310 Programmer Internet: jims@mpgn.com Key West, FL 33045 C-Unix-PC Compu$erve: 71061,1027 (305)293-8100 PGP via email on request. 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3 C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73