Sergey Goldgaber writes: (quoting Jef P.)
By the way, this discussion is an example of something I have labelled the "silence is invisible" phenomenon.
Jef
I think this "silence" has a good side. I've only read this list for a short time, but I already respect the oppinions of a few regulars. I don't expect every idea I post to the list to be completely new (quite the opposite, usually). The few replies I, and most other newbies, get are usually not very thought out, and have as many holes in them as the original suggestion. We debate back and forth for a short while, but seem to be generally ignored. The 'elders' on the list stay silent.
I want to take this opportunity to say that I do _not_ disparage the enthusiasm of newcomers like Sergey G. and Gary Jeffers. The "problem," to the extent theere is one, is that newcomers frequently have a bunch of things they really want to say (which is good), but lack the context to see how their points fit in with what's possible to do, what's already been done, and what is naive (which is bad). And after a while, having said what they wanted to say their posts taper off. (A few of us are still blabbing incessantly a year and a half after joining the list. Hey, it beats working for a living.) Gary sent me some e-mail inquiring about the archive of past postings--regrettably, my current understanding is that the toad.com archives are not (yet?) available for browsing and retrieval of past posts. Maybe someday. Chronological age has little to do with being an "old-timer" or a "newcomer." For example, Sameer Parekh is but a freshman at Berkeley, but he is surely and old-timer. Stick around for several months on the list, and you'll be an old-timer.
Its when those respected few regulars speak that my ears prick up. I, for one, haven't read all the literature on the subject. So the oppinions of someone who has are greatly valued. If genuine intrest is shown in something you've proposed it tells you that you're on the right track. Input coming from the 'elders' is doubly important.
Here are some things newcomers can do: 1. Immediately run out and buy a copy of Bruce Schneier's "Applied Cryptography." Do this before doing anything else. It covers so many of the areas we deal with that to not have it handy is a waste of your and our time. The book is pricey, at $45, but go out and mow some lawns or donate some blood if you can't afford it. You can't afford to be on this list without it (or some equivalent texts). 2. Read the various articles on crypto that are mentioned here fairly often (and which will be in the FAQ). 3. Speaking of FAQs, some good ones already exist in sci.crypt. The "Crypt Cabal" puts out a good one every month or so. Others exist. Read them. 4. In general, read sci.crypt and talk.politics.crypto. And comp.org.eff.talk. And maybe the Clipper and PGP groups. 5. Speaking of PGP, some good stuff in the documentation for PGP. 6. Finally, hold off on posting for at least a few weeks after joining the list. Too many folks "shoot their wad" by hyperenthusiastically expounding on a basically flawed idea too early in their history on the list.
It would be nice if constructive, intelligent criticism was offered on every post. Unfortuantely, newbies tend to get flamed more often than praised. In that regard, I believe that the "silence" from those who know better is usually good.
The problem is that about 700-800 people are on this list--though I find this hard to believe...and certainly many of them must be deleting nearly everything unread. If each "Has anyone ever heard of foo?" post was carefully replied to....
If I recieved the sort of annoyed response that Gary Jeffers got from you on one of my first post, I don't think I would have stuck around for long. Perhaps some of the senior cypherpunks would prefer a moderated list where all newbie discussion is nipped in the bud. In that case, I suggest that they form the "eLyTe-cYpHeRpUnKs" list, and distribute it privately among themselves. I believe that fresh blood is essential for the development of the "cypherpunks"; so, this route is not recommended.
I think the response Gary got were actually quite polite, especially the ones that stated the fact that his views were likely wrong and should not, by silent assent, be taken as the consensus of the list. No one called him names or told him to get off the list. Even my comments on "stenography" were not all that harsh, in my opinion. (And we've since exchanged e-mail.) I don't think any of us want to see newbies "nipped in the bud." But we certainly all want to see newbies brought up to speed. A moderated list is not being sought by anyone I know, at least not for the Cyperpunks list (though Perry Metzger has proposed his own moderated list on crypto issues). Many newcomers to crypto have become serious contributors in short order. Likewise, many old-timers (like David Sternlight) have never reached the point of being a "contributor," so draw your own conclusions. --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."