Thanks to all for the responses to my "Black Cryptoanarchy" post (flames and all!) I apologize for rehashing old libertarian debates, on which I am not well-informed, and I will focus here exclusively on the subject of "crypto anarchy". As I wrote the following post, it grew in size to the point where it made sense for me to cast it into "essay" format (at the risk of looking like just another net-kook). CRYPTO ANARCHY AND THE SOCIAL BODY (META STRONG CRYPTO) Let me begin by making it clear that it is not my intent to discredit cypherpunks or the goals of crypto anarchy. I have embraced these notions wholeheartedly until quite recently, when I began to question some of the assumptions about the consequences of this technology. I wish to raise these concerns openly here, and if my reasoning is flawed, I hope to have the flaws exposed. It seems likely that the complete suite of tools for crypto anarchy *will* become widely deployed in the next few years -- certainly by the end of the decade. I will argue that there are aspects of this technology which have the potential to induce powerful changes in the structure of the "social organism" of man, which have no counterpart in prior human history. The qualitatively fundamental nature of these changes makes their impact very difficult to predict. Therefore it is imperative that cypherpunks, who are perhaps best qualified to examine these issues, consider carefully what social impact these changes may have. We should discuss what, if anything, may be done with respect to development and deployment of the tools of crypto anarchy, in order to influence the final outcome for the greater liberty and standard of living of mankind as a whole. I will argue that cypherpunks should examine ways to influence the deployment and patterns of use of strong crypto tools in society, and not merely consider the construction of the tools alone. The study of social dynamics in the presence of strong crypto, and of how to introduce strong crypto tools in such a manner so as to achieve desirable patterns of deployment and social dynamics, is what I term "meta strong crypto". THE SOCIAL ORGANISM My background is in the disparate fields of biology and mathematics, so I begin in these areas. In biological terms, man is a social animal. We are evolved to survive through cooperative interactions with each other. We are by no means unique in this regard... cooperating societies of individuals have evolved many times throughout nature, often arriving at similar structures from independent origins. Almost all primates are social animals of one type or another, and the social structures of the larger primates such as baboons and chimpanzees are particularly complex. Very complex social structures also occur in distantly related (but highly intelligent) species such as porpoises and elephants. In all such cases, the social interactions are complex enough to justify describing the whole in terms of a "social body". There are universal properties of interaction which create the social body in these species, and in all human societies throughout history. These properties depend fundamentally on the publicly visible nature of most social interactions. Individual social animals exist in a relationship to the social body deriving from the visibility of their actions to others. This *defines* individuality. Relationship to group is fundamental, and creates the context of consequence, reprisal, negotiation, and positioning upon which all animal or human societies are based. Strong crypto -- the tools of crypto anarchy -- represents a break in these primal functions upon which the social body is based. The significance of this break is difficult to comprehend... it is not only a first for human societies, but a first for all of biological evolution. Picture a visual image for the traditional social body as a graph. The graph consists of numerous nodes -- individuals -- and a complex web of interrelationships between them. Now consider what the tools of strong crypto do to this graph. Nodes -- "individuals" -- may appear and disappear over extremely short time periods, as anonymous identities come and go. All nodes may have any number of unknowable links, or links which are unknowable by arbitrarily large sections of the net. Links may have new properties, such as asymmetry of identity. Individual nodes may "unknowably" represent (equate with) entire collections of other nodes. The point is that the social structure is altered along dimensions that have been constant since the dawn of the evolution of social animals. This picture implies the development of something radically different than what we now think of as a social body. It is far more complex, with new types of basic components and operations. There is no reason to expect it to resemble any society in the history of man, or to bear any resemblance to any social body which has evolved to date. It is something radically new and different. POSSIBILITIES Many people have embraced with unreserved enthusiasm the dawn of a new era to be ushered in by strong crypto. There is an expectation that the power of the new tools, and the extent of the social changes, must necessarily lead to desirable improvements. For my purposes, desirable changes would include an increased standard of living for all humans, increased communications and interactions between individuals across the whole of human civilization, as well as increased personal liberty to pursue any desired avenue of exploration/growth. On the other hand, undesirable changes would include a massive lowering in the standard of living for most peoples, the creation of Orwellian societies, increased fragmentation and decreased communications between the peoples of the world, or more marked catastrophes such as the advent of massive terrorism on a global scale (whether nuclear, biological, or merely conventional terrorist attacks are involved). SIMULATIONS/SPECULATIONS Since the effect of strong crypto on the social body of man is so difficult to understand or predict, it seems that a reasonable approach would be to conduct computer simulations of the spontaneous forms of self organization that occur in populations participating under various game-theoretic and economic models, when these populations have access to strong crypto. It would be very instructive to examine what kinds of long-term stable structures can arise under various initial conditions. It would be particularly relevant to attempt to model what structures can develop when the strong-crypto tools are introduced in various ways, rather than starting out as a ubiquitous presence in society. Various models for the spread of the technology could be developed. These are the tools of meta strong crypto. I will here venture into the realm of blatant speculation: I speculate that stable patterns of organization with the highest degrees of global liberty and prosperity would arise from scenarios in which the access to strong crypto tools is ubiquitous and uniform. I speculate that many of the more disastrous scenarios and unpleasant steady-state societies would be characterized by inhomogeneities in the deployment of strong crypto. SELF-CATALYSIS AND INSTABILITY When reading the views of those who are most optimistic about the potentials of crypto anarchy, there seems to be an implicit assumption that the advent of strong crypto will be self-catalytic and rapidly spread throughout all segments of society. I think this assumption is natural, given the history of the information age, wherein technological advances have inevitably become ever more accessible to the general public. I believe that strong crypto does indeed have the potential to be "auto-catalytic" and to rapidly spread throughout society in an unstoppable wave. However, I see this auto-catalysis as susceptible to various forms of instability that may result from immaturity in its initial deployment. The principle weakness of this auto-catalysis is the fact that strong-crypto relies upon technology which requires a certain standard quality of living. It requires computers of adequate speed and networks of sufficient bandwidth and interconnectivity. If the threshold standard of living necessary to acquire this technology lies well below the average standard of living in society, then the deployment of strong crypto may spread rapidly and uniformly throughout society. However, if this threshold standard of living is very near or above the average standard of living, then the tools of strong crypto will necessarily spread only through certain privileged channels of society. Any pre-existing class divisions in the society may become greatly pronounced, and in general inhomogeneous dynamics make predictions in the absence of simulations very difficult. CONCLUSIONS Strong crypto and crypto anarchy may well provide the mechanisms for a type of social body never before seen in the history of biological evolution. However, the mere existence of this technology in and of itself does not guarantee any particular qualities for this new social body. The new dynamics are extremely complex and will be unlike anything previously encountered. Computer simulations of populations of individuals with access to strong crypto tools under various models may give us some clues as to the stable patterns of organization likely to emerge. The modeling skills of sociobiologists, economists, and game theorists could all be applied to this problem. The exact details of the introduction and spread of the tools of strong crypto into the population may be expected to have important effects on the eventual new stable patterns which emerge. Cypherpunks should consider not just the implementation of the tools of strong crypto, but also the dynamics of its spread throughout society and the dynamics of its pattern of use. Although it is tempting to focus exclusively on the mathematical algorithms and protocols, economics and sociobiology are critical to understanding and influencing the eventual impact of strong crypto on the quality of human life. History teaches that it is a mistake to assume that a ground breaking new technology will necessarily produce the most positive changes it is capable of. Let us not follow in the foosteps of those who have made this mistake in the past.