Graham Toals writes:
(What I'm really saying is that this list clearly serves a purpose, and it is evolving into its own character, whatever that may be, despite the efforts of the early founder members to keep it on some tightly defined track that they once conceived it as. I don't see this evolution as being a problem, and I'm slightly (though not to Detweilerian proportions) annoyed whenever people like Tim or Perry pull rank and try to limit the topics of discussion, when on closer inspection they're just as bad as the rest of us at drifting 'off topic'.)
The point of my last article was exactly this, that I drift "off topic" all the time. Far from "pulling rank" and limiting the topics (how could this be done? Eric has only twice, that I recall, called for a halt in some especially unproductive topic, one that Perry and I were involved in, ironically). It is true that we see messages of the form "Let's not waste time on topic foo, let's stick to our charter bar. Cypherpunks write code." I try to avoid this form, as my interests are all over the map. The political, legal, and economic issues surrounding crypto seem to me to be fair game for this list. More basic debates about the validity of taxation, the abortion/antiabortion debate, and religious arguments about Christians vs. pagans (or whatever) seem generally unfruitful and probably would be a waste of list bandwidth. (Which doesn't mean, I think, that they shouldn't come up now and again. It's just that back-and-forth arguments that are nothing more than restatements of initial postions are pointless.) On a more recent topic, the NII, I have several things to say that connect with this thread. First, I dropped out of the debate with Godwin and Perry and others when it seemed to reach a point of repeating initial positions. Second, I now have all three major NII position papers (Kalil's NII docs, the EFF Open Platform paper, and the CPSR position paper) and am rereading them with a more analytical eye, trying to figure out what the _real datahighway_ is intended to be....it's not at all clear. Third, the NII could have profound implications for crypto. For example, suppose the various law enforcement and business regulation goals (NII will be a business infrastructure, too) are used to limit strong crypto? Perhaps data packets will have to be tagged, analogously to license plates and to business licenses (have to be able to trace packets to ensure NII laws are complied with, that the originator has hired sufficient numbers of persons of color, and so on). (I can construct many plausible worries, and will do so in a longer piece.) So, I don't use the "Cypherpunks write code" mantra as anything more than a kind of ideal goal. Let a thousand flowers bloom. --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: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.