Cypherpunk criminalization

The occasion of Jim Bell's arrest provides an opportunity to consider
a number of points:

Are Federal Agents Evil?
Why is there an attempt to persecute Jim Bell, one that has many
similarities to the Olympic Park Bombing rush-to-judgment, Ruby
Ridge, Waco, OK City, etc.?  Are we to believe that government
agents are 'evil,' or True Believers that _we_ (those who are _not_
true believers) are evil?  I personally think not.  I think we are
seeing a phenomenon that is rather simple--government agents will tend
to pursue cases that may get them recognition or promotion.  People
like Jim Bell pass some mobile threshold where their case is media
'hot' or sexy enough to make it worth pursuing--the Feds get a collar
and media attention, a prosecutor gets similar benefits, judges are
notoriously easy to inflame for the proper paperwork to be obtained,
etc.  Are the rest of the cypherpunks at risk?  Looking at it with
my game theorist hat on, I suspect not--while Tim May has been
pushing the envelope recently, I don't think he's crossed any line
would allow the appearance of a 'good bust,' nor has anyone else on
the list (to my direct knowledge).  I think we're witnessing a bit
of the same mentality that literally did allow the operation of the
Nazis--they're just doing their job, just following orders, just
being part of their bureaucracy, with perhaps a few True Believers
to leaven the mix.

Technology vs. Public Relations/Propaganda
Cypherpunks write code, we hear it often enough as the credo of the
'movement.'  On the other hand, as valuable a social service as it
actually has been, the war is being fought on other terms.  Crypto
has been characterized as 'offensive' technology, in two senses of
the term--a regulated weapons technology, and a socially unacceptable
act.  This manifests in the 'what have you got to hide' mentality,
coupled with the trotting out of the Four+ Horsemen.  We're losing this
part of the war, and the cutting of more code isn't going to help us
one bit.  We need to turn the public perception around.  What we're
seeing in this case is a rather rapid erosion of the legal principles
of an expectation of privacy (I won't engage in the rather lengthy
discussion of this, but I recommend the interested parties do take
the time to read in a good law library, or hunt down the materials on
the Bork nomination to the Supreme Court).  We've become a society
that is expected to publicly air our dirty laundry, to march onto a
television talk-show and expose our faults, foibles, and felonies.
We need to fight back in ways that communicate to Joe Sixpack, also
known as the Common Man--we all have secrets, we all have things we
don't want people to know.  Build the database!  Get the testimonials!

Let me briefly mention some of the sorts of need for privacy, secrecy,
anonymity that are socially acceptable, and which we need to use to
reinforce our own message:
--AIDS testing;
--Illness diagnosis, such as cancer;
--Financial information: credit card numbers, bank balances, net worth;
--Dropping the dime on crime: mob witnesses, corporations, your noisy
neighbor who abuses their kids but owns a shotgun;
--Donations to needy causes, but not wanting everyone to have their
hand out;
--Personal habits: alcoholism, drug use, gambling addiction, sexual
preferences;
--Common law privileges: confessional, physician or attorney relation
to their client.

In short, we all have things we want to remain secret, and we certainly
don't want them to be 'exposed,' or to fall into the wrong hands. We
need to take the issue back from the criminalization of having secrets
to a place where crypto is viewed as a defensive technology--we're
entitled to it, and our privacy.

Crypto vs. the Government
This is the biggest area of contention.  The cypherpunk case is that
strong, unescrowed cryptography is essential--we have no reason to
assume that government is our friend (pull out the file of long-term
government abuses here, from using the IRS to pursue political
targets to the mail-opening programs of the FBI/CIA), and more to the
point, this isn't a 'local' issue that is categorized by a singular
stance on the part of the U.S. government.  The cryptosystems we
build and promote are used in places where they protect human rights
workers, economic security and competitiveness, privacy, etc.  The
Internet and the tools are global, so we're on a battlefield that also
includes:
-Europe, including the Former Soviet Republics and Bosnia, where strong
crypto is critical for freedom-loving movements;
-Asia, where users of strong crypto use it to prevent competitive
intelligence or organized espionage programs from impacting on their
business, in particular, from actions of those U.S. 'allies' Japan,
Korea, China;
-the Middle East, where strong crypto protects human rights workers,
businesses, and individuals who have an un-Islamic taste for things
like pornography, or news; see 'rogue' States like Iran, but also
U.S. 'allies' like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, etc.

And the global battle means that we have to set an example, allow access,
and fight those efforts on our own turf (does anyone really think that
Asian or European competitive intelligence or espionage efforts don't
also take place on American soil?).

The U.S. government has made good use of the insinuation that if we
have things to hide, then in a free and open democracy, we must be
actively engaged in criminal activity.  Certainly, strong cryptography
of many sorts is being used to protect criminal activity.  It is also
a principle upon which the American system is based that you don't
deprive the rights and freedom of the majority, those who have not
committed any crime, merely in an effort to pursue the felonious.
This is why you still need a properly executed warrant to search an
area which has an expectation of privacy (which _is_ being slowly
eroded as a legal principle, which we need to point out as a trend).
As Tim May likes to point out, there are an increasing number of laws
that individuals can be pursued under, with ever more general levels
of interpretation.  Convictions make convicts.  Bureaucracies tend
to grow, seeking more power for themselves, until 'that which is not
compulsory is illegal, and that which is not illegal is compulsory.'
Students of history are well aware of what comes next in the cycle--
revolution.  My only observation on this is that America has always
been willing to speed through trend curves, and it looks like she is
flooring the accelerator in this case--from growing State, to global
Power, to dying Empire.  Think of it like an organic system, and
like any entity, it reacts poorly to what it rightly views as being
a threat to its own survival--cypherpunks among many.

Sign me:
A Man With Many Secrets and Much to Hide
Michael Wilson
5514706@mcimail.com

At 9:35 AM -0800 5/21/97, Michael Wilson wrote:
>The occasion of Jim Bell's arrest provides an opportunity to consider
>a number of points:
>
>Are Federal Agents Evil?
>Why is there an attempt to persecute Jim Bell, one that has many
>similarities to the Olympic Park Bombing rush-to-judgment, Ruby
>Ridge, Waco, OK City, etc.?  Are we to believe that government
>agents are 'evil,' or True Believers that _we_ (those who are _not_
>true believers) are evil?  I personally think not.  I think we are

I almost never think government agents, even most rulers, are in any
meaningful sense "evil."

I've written in the past about "institutional" issues, and about
Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil." The problems in the United States, with
bloated welfare roles, a "policeman for the world" mentality, an overly
litigous/litigious society, etc., come not from any personal evil on the
part of the elected or appointed officials, but rather from an inexorable
growth of certain institutions in predictable ways. Any enity, be it an
organism or an institution, a living plant like a tree or a corporation
like PGP, Inc., grows and thrives by how well it competes, how well it
bends toward the sources of food and energy, and what genes or memes it
received. "The purpose of any organism is to survive" is a telelogical
truism, of course. But it is still true. All institutions--corporations,
clubs, Cypherpunks--seek to prosper and grow, in various ways. Even if not
directed by a central nervous system.

In corporations, even individual departments seek to grow. This aids in
career advancement. "Empire building" happens with countries, government
bureaucracies, corporations, clubs, and so on.

There are perfectlylogical game-theoretic reasons why the Washington
bureaucracy has gotten so large, why every one of the 500+ Congresscritters
has a staff of dozens working for him or her, why each of the dozen or so
major Cabinet departments has dozens of buildings and thousands (even
millions, as with DoD) of worker bees, why each entity in government seeks
constantly to expand its scope and powers, and why the number of rules,
regulations, laws, emergency orders, and edicts expands inexorably every
day.

"Evil" is not a useful way to analyze this problem. In this sense, everyone
in government is an "innocent." But the problem still needs to be fixed.

And in fixing these institutions it is unavoidable that "non-evil" persons
will be affected. How could it be otherwise? Some will lose their careers,
some their current jobs, some may even lose their lives. (No, this is not a
threat, just a statement of the obvious, a prediction.)

Innocents in Washington and elsewhere will, if they have any sense of their
own future security, seek to avoid the institutions and power centers which
will be affected by the necessary restructurings.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Wed, May 21, 1997 at 11:41:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
> 
[...]
> I almost never think government agents, even most rulers, are in any
> meaningful sense "evil."

Ah, good.  Sanity has returned for a moment.

> I've written in the past about "institutional" issues, and about
> Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil." The problems in the United States, with
> bloated welfare roles, a "policeman for the world" mentality, an overly
> litigous/litigious society, etc., come not from any personal evil on the
> part of the elected or appointed officials, but rather from an inexorable
> growth of certain institutions in predictable ways. Any enity, be it an
> organism or an institution, a living plant like a tree or a corporation
> like PGP, Inc., grows and thrives by how well it competes, how well it
> bends toward the sources of food and energy, and what genes or memes it
> received. "The purpose of any organism is to survive" is a telelogical
> truism, of course. But it is still true. All institutions--corporations,
> clubs, Cypherpunks--seek to prosper and grow, in various ways. Even if not
> directed by a central nervous system.
> 
> In corporations, even individual departments seek to grow. This aids in
> career advancement. "Empire building" happens with countries, government
> bureaucracies, corporations, clubs, and so on.
> 
> There are perfectlylogical game-theoretic reasons why the Washington
> bureaucracy has gotten so large, why every one of the 500+ Congresscritters
> has a staff of dozens working for him or her, why each of the dozen or so
> major Cabinet departments has dozens of buildings and thousands (even
> millions, as with DoD) of worker bees, why each entity in government seeks
> constantly to expand its scope and powers, and why the number of rules,
> regulations, laws, emergency orders, and edicts expands inexorably every
> day.
> 
> "Evil" is not a useful way to analyze this problem. In this sense, everyone
> in government is an "innocent." But the problem still needs to be fixed.

I don't think this problem can be "fixed" in any meaningful way.  You
just argued that the problem is a consequence of "perfectly logical
game-theoretic reasons".  There is nothing in the crypto-anarchy
agenda or your revolutionary rhetoric that are going to make those
game-theoretic reasons go away.  "Meet the new boss, same as the old
boss".  The new boss may hide behind a cryptographic curtain, but he
will still scheme and plot to expand his power, and join with his
allies to attack his enemies, and after he has defeated those enemies
he will attempt to stab his allies before they stab him.  Thus it is 
with you; thus it is with me; thus it is with humanity.

Americans especially are spoiled: the European colonists, like
Darwin's finches, were able to expand freely into a whole virgin
economic ecosystem, and evolve to fit many unoccupied niches.  Now the
niches are full, and competition is hard.  Now those free-ranging
Americans have to deal with diminishing expectations.  All the free
stuff is gone; the pie gets cut into thinner and thinner pieces.  In
every field there are thousands of talented competitors.  In the
compressed time of high tech we now see patents on trivial and
picayune ideas that not too many years ago would have been considered
too obvious to bother with.  Groups of 40 scientists coauthor papers
concerned with esoteric minutia.  Musicians scrabble to get "their" 
music copyrighted.  Athletes talk about patenting their "moves".  

The frustrations of the bubba-cypherpunks with their ego-bolstering
arsenals are yet another symptom, same as the bubba-militiamen.  They 
fixate on the "gubmint" as the source of all that's wrong, hatch 
conspiracies, and keep muttering obscenities and veiled threats, until 
their imagined enemies become real.

> And in fixing these institutions it is unavoidable that "non-evil" persons
> will be affected. How could it be otherwise? Some will lose their careers,
> some their current jobs, some may even lose their lives. (No, this is not a
> threat, just a statement of the obvious, a prediction.)
> 
> Innocents in Washington and elsewhere will, if they have any sense of their
> own future security, seek to avoid the institutions and power centers which
> will be affected by the necessary restructurings.

My friend, we are on this train together.  If it wrecks we are all at
risk.  You can hide in your abatis on your hill, but the protection it
offers is a complete and utter illusion.  There isn't going to be any
"restructuring" that doesn't affect us all.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

At 5:41 PM -0800 5/21/97, Kent Crispin wrote:

>I don't think this problem can be "fixed" in any meaningful way.  You
>just argued that the problem is a consequence of "perfectly logical
>game-theoretic reasons".  There is nothing in the crypto-anarchy

Game-theoretic reasons depends on the rules of the game. Actually, the
rules are already changing, e.g., Clinton's agreement to end welfare in the
next few years, which will without a doubt alter the rules of the game
which have made welfare a viable career for so many millions...these folks
are on the verge of either learning a real trade (doubtful) or starving
(hooray).

But more rules need to change. Many of us (most of us?) expect strong
crypto to be a catalyst for some major changes. You, Kent, obviously
disagree, and push for more government involvement to shore up the existing
rules.

You are not evil, as per my point, but your kind will be swept aside,
possibly violently but probably through a shut-down of the Livermore Labs.

(My spies within LLL tell me of desperate efforts to find alternative
funding sources, e.g., the "Extreme UV" project. Ultimately, hopeless. A
government lab which loses its main raison d'etre cannot reconfigure itself
as a "think tank" for private industry. Gimme a break.)



>The frustrations of the bubba-cypherpunks with their ego-bolstering
>arsenals are yet another symptom, same as the bubba-militiamen.  They
...

Back into my kill file you go, Kent. I had hope that by looking at your
messages after a few weeks of ignoring you I might find something fresher.
Same old insults.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <v03007807afa968fc0dbe@[207.167.93.63]>, on 05/21/97 
   at 09:16 PM, Tim May <tcmay@got.net> said:

>(My spies within LLL tell me of desperate efforts to find alternative
>funding sources, e.g., the "Extreme UV" project. Ultimately, hopeless. A
>government lab which loses its main raison d'etre cannot reconfigure
>itself as a "think tank" for private industry. Gimme a break.)


"think" and "government" should never be used in the same paragraph. I was
laughing so hard at the prospects of government drones trying to compete
in the private sector I pulled a muscle.

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
                          
Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info
- -----------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: Rumour: NT means Not Tested

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBM4PXCI9Co1n+aLhhAQHZSwP+KyBe6YBoJya4QIAq+1wXLwnQ6z93hpT8
TsX5quzhAa8fYIqQSwC6+nGGKqD6BCcB5JPa+Ni2GDL0H2pD+u6tR7HhCJ1hYCH8
Qwi1lWt0gmwW3np8BMKyyIMfpCIBTVQx/EdnR55kJ3DdoQgCnR4Rxm/lZSeR2n2m
4H4Ivw87pKg=
=ObEC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

At 8:07 PM -0800 5/21/97, Willaim H. Geiger III wrote:

>In <v03007807afa968fc0dbe@[207.167.93.63]>, on 05/21/97
>   at 09:16 PM, Tim May <tcmay@got.net> said:
>
>>(My spies within LLL tell me of desperate efforts to find alternative
>>funding sources, e.g., the "Extreme UV" project. Ultimately, hopeless. A
>>government lab which loses its main raison d'etre cannot reconfigure
>>itself as a "think tank" for private industry. Gimme a break.)
>
>
>"think" and "government" should never be used in the same paragraph. I was
>laughing so hard at the prospects of government drones trying to compete
>in the private sector I pulled a muscle.

Believe it. I suspect the "we can help you" program Kent Crispin is working
on (some form of key recovery) is just such a program. When we hire people
to design and build H-bombs and they instead collect their paychecks by
working on "key recovery" schemes for Big Brother, something is drastically
amiss.

(I'm surprised no whistle-blowing journalists are picking up on this story.)

Lowell Wood's O-Group (or W-Group...I don't have my papers handy) tried
this some years back, as did the "laser pantography" group. Laser
pantography was one of those technologies the trendy science magazines,
like "Science '86" and "High Technology" once gushed over as being
TEOSVASWKI (The End Of Silicon Valley As We Know It). Not very
surprisingly, laser pantography is nowhere to be seen.

And there was the attempted commercialization of LLL's (alleged) CAD tools.
Silvar-Lisco was the name I recall from those days, c. 1984-86, though I
may be confusing it with another of the late-lamented CAD companies.

And the S-1 supercomputer project, using all of the above-named G-job
technologies.

None of these "commercialization" efforts went anywhere, nor was it ever
appropriate for taxpayer-funded labs to enter into competition with
privately-funded enterprises like Cadence, Daisy, Cray, etc.

To be sure, LLL and LANL do pretty nice jobs of making hydrogen bombs. Now
that H-bombs are passe, "remediation" is one way they're seeking contracts
to survive. (Remediation of nuclear waste and existing weapons.)

And things like the Extreme UV project. Look for an announcement soon.

Hey, it's seemingly a good idea for these national labs, paid for by the
taxpayers, to "do work for industry." However, a moment's thought will
point out the problems implicit in such deals: if they do the Extreme UV
work for Intel, say, what about TI and Motorola?.

And an even better thing to tell them is this:

"You did your work well. The Cold War is over. No job lasts forever, not in
Detroit, not in Seattle, and not in Livermore. Thank you, and good luck in
the private sector. Your work here is done."

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Wed, May 21, 1997 at 09:39:57PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
> At 8:07 PM -0800 5/21/97, Willaim H. Geiger III wrote:
[...]
> >"think" and "government" should never be used in the same paragraph. I was
> >laughing so hard at the prospects of government drones trying to compete
> >in the private sector I pulled a muscle.
> 
> Believe it. I suspect the "we can help you" program Kent Crispin is working
> on (some form of key recovery) is just such a program.

Nope.

[...]

> None of these "commercialization" efforts went anywhere, nor was it ever
> appropriate for taxpayer-funded labs to enter into competition with
> privately-funded enterprises like Cadence, Daisy, Cray, etc.
> 
> To be sure, LLL and LANL do pretty nice jobs of making hydrogen bombs. Now
> that H-bombs are passe, "remediation" is one way they're seeking contracts
> to survive. (Remediation of nuclear waste and existing weapons.)
> 
> And things like the Extreme UV project. Look for an announcement soon.

As I said in a previous post, your spies aren't serving you well.  
However, it is just as well that you remain poorly informed.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

At 6:41 PM -0700 5/21/97, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Wed, May 21, 1997 at 11:41:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
>> There are perfectlylogical game-theoretic reasons why the Washington
>> bureaucracy has gotten so large, why every one of the 500+ Congresscritters
>> has a staff of dozens working for him or her, why each of the dozen or so
>> major Cabinet departments has dozens of buildings and thousands (even
>> millions, as with DoD) of worker bees, why each entity in government seeks
>> constantly to expand its scope and powers, and why the number of rules,
>> regulations, laws, emergency orders, and edicts expands inexorably every
>> day.
>
>I don't think this problem can be "fixed" in any meaningful way.  You
>just argued that the problem is a consequence of "perfectly logical
>game-theoretic reasons".

I expect Kent is right.  Fixing the problem is a bit like closing tax
loopholes, as soon as you close the ones people are using, a lot of very
smart, motivated people start looking for new ones.  In the case of
personal power, the same thing happens.  You have a revolution (peaceful*
or otherwise) and the power relationships get stirred up and there is
enough looseness in the system so people can breath freely.  Then the power
hungry start learning how to work the new system and the looseness goes
away and you are back, more or less where you started.  I think Thomas
Jefferson said something about this.

* Peaceful revolutions since 1950 in the USA: (1) Civil Rights/Vietnam war
- Civil disobedience and reasoned argument changed the moral compass of the
nation over the opposition of the bureaucracy, congress, and the president.
(2) Repeal of the federal 55 MPH speed limit.  Massive law breaking caused
the politicians to support an issue over the massed opposition of the
bureaucrats and beltway bandits.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

On Wed, May 21, 1997 at 07:16:03PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
> At 5:41 PM -0800 5/21/97, Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> >I don't think this problem can be "fixed" in any meaningful way.  You
> >just argued that the problem is a consequence of "perfectly logical
> >game-theoretic reasons".  There is nothing in the crypto-anarchy
> 
> Game-theoretic reasons depends on the rules of the game. 

The game of personal power isn't going to change.

[...]

> But more rules need to change. Many of us (most of us?) expect strong
> crypto to be a catalyst for some major changes. You, Kent, obviously
> disagree,

Yep.  I disagree.

> and push for more government involvement to shore up the existing
> rules.

False.  How *do* you come up with these?

> You are not evil, as per my point, but your kind will be swept aside,
> possibly violently but probably through a shut-down of the Livermore Labs.
> 
> (My spies within LLL tell me of desperate efforts to find alternative
> funding sources, e.g., the "Extreme UV" project. Ultimately, hopeless. A
> government lab which loses its main raison d'etre cannot reconfigure itself
> as a "think tank" for private industry. Gimme a break.)

Well, your spies aren't doing a very good job.  The new buzzword is 
"stockpile stewardship" -- and in the face of a comprehensive test ban 
treaty, there is no way to be sure that things will go off when you 
want them to.  So the importance of computer simulations has grown, 
and lots of money is being put into that.  These new teraflop 
machines cost lots, and need lots of infrastructure -- the one on tap 
in the 3 year timeframe, I hear, requires over 10 megawatts of 
electricity (that includes the cooling).

Still, computers are probably cheaper than physical tests...but I'm a 
computer scientist, and not a physicist...

[...]

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

On Thu, 22 May 1997, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Wed, May 21, 1997 at 07:16:03PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
> > At 5:41 PM -0800 5/21/97, Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > But more rules need to change. Many of us (most of us?) expect strong
> > crypto to be a catalyst for some major changes. You, Kent, obviously
> > disagree,
> 
> Yep.  I disagree.

Strong crypto is one facet of the internet.  I can now form a group with
people around the world (like the volunteer organizations DeToqueville
speaks of which organize to solve problems).  Data can now flow across
national borders.  Things like prices and ideas are data.  Even money is
to a large extent data.  When government begins trying to take action to
prevent data from flowing, it will simply be hidden from them.  It is one
mechanism for routing around "faults", though I don't think the designers 
of the internet considered taxation and censorship as faults.

Strong crypto by itself won't change anything.  Worldwide communication
that can be both point-to-point and broadcast already is changing quite a
lot of things.  When that needs to be, or even if it would just help to be
completely private or authentic strong crypto comes in. 

The steam engine changed very little except to remove water from coal
mines.  The production line and railroads had a greater impact.
In the same sense, PK systems were invented long ago and were a mere
curiosity.  Strong crypto won't catalyze any major change, but worldwide
private and authentic communications will.

> > and push for more government involvement to shore up the existing
> > rules.
> 
> False.  How *do* you come up with these?

To continue on a more general level:  Going back to "Economics in one
Lesson" - one restriction invariably leads to another.  Rent controls keep
down prices.  So Landlords cannot maintain their buildings, so slumlord
laws are passed to try to force them to keep them open.  No buildings get
built so new subsidies have to be given to build rent-controlled
buildings.  People who live there will stay even when their income goes up
so more laws to means test must be passed.  So people hide their assets to
qualify so financial disclosure laws have to be added.  At each level, the
restriction needs several more restrictions to work.  (I think Hazlit uses
tariffs or food subsidies to illustrate it, but you can use almost
anything). 

Everytime government passes an illegitimate restriction, it starts a race
between those seeking to evade it and the lawgivers who have to close
the loopholes or increase enforcement.

But to close the circle, the internet is much faster than government ever
can be.