It tolls for thee

At 7:29 AM 6/7/96, jim bell wrote:

>Even so, given how much noise we've been hearing out of DC on the subject
>of the Internet, digital cash, and good encryption, I'd say SOMEBODY is
>getting a bit worried.  I haven't exactly been keeping this stuff a secret:
>What do you think their reaction has been, so far?  When those
>government-types start considering various scary scenarios, what do you
>think they are imagining?

I don't think any significant amount of the current stuff coming out of
Washington has anything to do with my words, your words, or the words of
anyone on this or any other forum I know about.

Importantly, I'm including my own words, explicitly. Sorry to burst _our_
bubbles, but I just don't think the lawmakers and burrowcrats are being
driven by loose talk by us.

Rather, the reasons for their actions and hyperbole about the Net, the Web,
online porn, money laundering, the "information highway," and all that
trendy stuff is because they can see many of the same trends we see.

While I have a certain amount of pride that my single-page "Crypto
Anarchist Manifesto" essentially nailed a bunch of trends which have become
obvious to all in the 8 years after I issued it, I don't for a picosecond
think anything I wrote then or since has had any significant effect on
proposed leglislation.

While some of our writings and talk may have inspired "sound bites" in
their own reports, the concerns governments have about strong cryptography,
transparent borders, alternative forms of money, data havens, etc., are
easy to understand.


>Not quite yet, anyway.  I'm very disappointed to have waited over a year for
>some slick lawyer to show me how I'd be violating some law or another to do so.

This is factually incorrect. I recall at least one law professor and at
least one assistant DA publically commenting on the legal implications of
your actual deployment of AP (as opposed to merely speculating about such
things, which all agree is protected speech). And this was soon after your
initial flurry of posts describing your "wonderful idea."

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" 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,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Fri, 7 Jun 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> Importantly, I'm including my own words, explicitly. Sorry to burst _our_
> bubbles, but I just don't think the lawmakers and burrowcrats are being
> driven by loose talk by us.

Perhaps not the lawmakers, but...

There was this moment last summer, on a Friday, when loose
talk on the cp-list (and, explicitly, some comments from TC May)
made me 99% sure that selling Netscape stock (short) would be a
great idea. Still next Monday it sold for something like $145.
Next Wednesday it fell to around $120. I know for sure that if
I had been in a position then to conveniently (and immediately)
act on the NY Stock Exchange (which I was not) I would have
risked something like $5,000 on such a deal - I'm not rich but
so strong was the cypherpunkish momentum towards this development.

Asgaard