"This is not Coderpunks--we don't need no steenking cryptography!"

At 6:51 PM 2/21/96, Peter Monta wrote:

>Cypherpunks used to be a place where I could fairly reliably see
>high-SNR commentary from real cryptographers/number theorists.
>Now we have the blind replying to the blind's obfuscatory
>nonsense, and the useful posts take some effort to find.

I believe this is why the "real cryptographers/number theorists" are now
supposed to post to "Coderpunks."

While I agree with your points, it now appears that this is the way things
are dividing up:

* Coderpunks -- number theory, DES, Haval, C/C++/Java, IETF and TCP/IP
stuff, digital signatures, crypto libraries and APIs, Diffie-Hellman,
BSAFE, RSAREF, etc.

* Cypherpunks -- nuclear bomb triggers, why women are more free under the
will of Allah than in Western decadent societies, movie reviews, SS
Obergruppenfuhrer Zimmermann, Zambian newspapers, alien bases in
Antarctica, Himalayan treks, etc.

Coderpunks is a membership-only list, with a list.cop who approves
membership and who expels those who post inappropriate material.
Cypherpunks is an open list, with no one ever having been expelled.

So, if anyone asks "What does this have to do with cryptography?!?!," point
out to him that this is Cypherpunks, not Coderpunks!

"Cryptography? You want _crytography_? This is not _Coderpunks_! We don't
have to show you no steenking cryptography!"


--Tim

Boycott espionage-enabled software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we 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: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Tim May writes:

> So, if anyone asks "What does this have to do with cryptography?!?!,"
> point out to him that this is Cypherpunks, not Coderpunks!

This is a reasonable distinction, and it's certainly the interface
between cryptography and social/net/monetary/freedom issues where
I find cypherpunks valuable.

Your laundry list is amusing, and I think the IPG debunking
traffic is useful, but sooner or later there has to be
effectively an "end of story".

Cheers,
Peter Monta   pmonta@qualcomm.com
Qualcomm, Inc./Globalstar

> Coderpunks is a membership-only list, with a list.cop who approves
> membership and who expels those who post inappropriate material.
> Cypherpunks is an open list, with no one ever having been expelled.

I'm sort of surprised that no one besides Tim seems to be bothered by
coderpunks.  The idea of a cliquish technical elite developing crypto code
out of the public eye isn't very cyberpunkish. 

But at the same time, we ought to keep a couple of things in mind.  First
of all, the problem that coderpunks was organized to solve is a real one
-- cypherpunks takes a lot of time, there's a lot of noise, and it's often
frustrating.

What's more, the coderpunks list is a lot more open than some of the early
rhetoric suggested it would be.  Making the list archives available at
hks.net is a very positive gesture.  There was a post here last week 
claiming that no one had been denied membership to coderpunks -- that's 
very different from the policy advocated in some early coderpunks posts, 
which called for allowing new subscriptions by invitation only.  
Coderpunks seems to be shaping up as a reasonably open list that demands 
that its members stay on topic.  That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

I hope the new list catches on, and that it makes it easier for its
members to develop new tools.  But I'd also like to be able to continue 
to read it -- I hope that the members will see the value of not closing 
it off any tighter than necessary to keep their s/n ratio high.