-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:54 PM 2/5/96 -0500, Decius wrote:
I am posting this pondering to cypherpunks in hopes that it will be refuted. [stuff deleted]
Crypto-Absolutism decius@ninja.techwood.org [more stuff deleted]
On the other hand, we have the crypto-anarchists. They believe that the existence of anonymous transactions will naturally lend itself to a situation where everyone is anonymous, no transaction can be tracked, no communications can be monitored, and basically, no government can possibly control the transactions and interactions of its citizens. They support the broad use of military grade cryptography and anominity. Let no message be crackable or traceable. This, also, is an absolute belief and it is also flawed. We have governments for a reason, we came together and founded societies for protection, and if we tore apart our current social structure and created an anarchy, people would immediately form small societies for their own fiscal protection. Creating an anarchy is a massive step backward in social development, not a step forward. Furthermore, PEOPLE WANT TO BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
<sigh> Well, I suppose that if there is anyone who is most opposed to the opinion you expressed in the paragraph above, it is myself. I believe: 1. Governments will no longer be "necessary," if they ever were. 2. Protection will no longer depend on having a "government." 3. Anonymous networking technology will protect our rights, to the extent they can be protected. 4. Your statement, "...anarchy is a massive step backward..." is absolutely incorrect. Note for the others: I am forwarding this person a copy of my essay. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMRb5FfqHVDBboB2dAQFvlQP/Wmsc0OLvEowD3rQ2Rvu2UDcg34ovQt/S g5HDiraykfk8SpBxyYDWlq+EEO21GssY0w9wmOaf0PKGwk81gZsqqccVpXpJq2Ha H+ABrgmzCEkiMnL6anFs2RGkZZrlwB2ZGityvV0YZ8HvpP1Ek1Xj0ZD97hYMmYBz P3gxGE2VCEQ= =nhzg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----