In the interests of brevity, I'll make my points without quoting Robert Hettinga's article. 1. Like I said a couple of times, no flaming was intended. I was only urging what I ordinarily urge, that super-enthusiastic newcomers get some idea of context, the better to see how ideas fit together and the better to avoid making "Cypherpunks are doing enough" types of comments in any form. 2. Many newcomers seem to arrive on the List excited about the Glowing Digital Future and then learn that things are not on the verge of Happening....some of them urge us to "Do something!" or aver that we are not really "writing code." I think it's important that Cypherpunks understand that Changing the World is exciting, and likely, but will not happen easily or casually, and that most Cypherpunks are not able to work on things full-time, with budgets, assistants, etc. 3. Enthusiasm is good. In fact, it is necessary. But too many newcomers arrrive on the list, rail against the lack of progress in some area they favor, and then either leave the list or become dormant. A few become coders of important new capabilities, or analysts of events and directions. 4. I urge all those interested in digital cash, Chaumnian anonymity, etc., to read the many articles. These have been cited many times, and are referenced at the soda site. "Scientific American" had an article in July 1992 on this, for example. And as we have said so many times, the "Crypto" Conference Proceedings (and Eurocrypt, Auscrypt) carry the key research articles. 5. Robert mentioned "egging Chaum on" with his comments. Let me assure you all, Chaum does not need egging on by cheerleaders...he does not even read this List, and the stakes in digital cash are so enormously high that our comments are as nothing. I'm just being realistic here. 6. What we can do is to continue to prepare for this, to look for technial or political weaknesses in proposed protocols, lobby others we may talk to, and so on. Just as with other aspects of crypto. It is also remotely possible that a Zimmermann-like person (or group) may develop a PGDC scheme. Maybe. But PGP took PRZ a lot of time, and that of the v 2.0 crew that helped (many of them on this List!), and hence it may not be too likely for a while. (Also, absent banks that will honor PGDC--though some efforts may change this--the challenge will be enormous. And straight encryption is vastly more understandable, conceptually and practically, than digital cash protocols.) 7. The "voice encryption" is probably more important right now, and much "easier" to implement. It also can be done by independent groups without as much need for "buy-ins" by institutions. In any case, the "occupational disease" of Cypherpunks is to become convinced that some facet of crypto is so important that all other efforts should be abandoned. In the past, we have had folks strenuously argue that random number generators were crucial, others that "stealth PGP" was by far the number one priority. And so on. 8. We're an anarchic band. Lots of advantages here (nobody to arrest and charge with the crimes of the group, strenth in diversity, etc.). Some disadvantages, of course. In any case, no budget, no staff, no formal goals, no group projects. Only what sufficiently-motivated individuals or small groups will choose to work on. Thus, most of the "we all ought to work on X" posts are flawed. We may slip into this language as shorthand for saying we think something is especially important, but is seriously in error to ever think that we can make something a "group" goal. This came up in a different, non-technical context several weeks ago when one bunch wanted Cypherpunks to become a "spokesperson" group (like EFF), with a database of "resumes" of oppononents of Clipper ("to show that not all Clipper opponents are hippie hackers" or somesuch) and when another bunch (or one or two people) wanted Cypherpunks to become a lobbying group. In both cases, failure of the others to rally behind these proposals produced apparent anger or frustration on the part of the proponents. Which was too bad, but typical of an anarchy. ("Herding cats" is the usual metaphor.) Robert Hettinga writes:
I figure that somebody acted. Somebody wrote code. Is it shipping? I have a product I'm dying to sell this way right now.
It will likely be at least a few years, in my estimation, before enought peopole are using this so as to create a market. Meanwhile, sell your product the normal way...unless the privacy/anonymity issues are critical, why wait?
Maybe I should wait a day before I post when I get excited about something... As it is, I feel like Garth and/or Wayne. "I'm not worthy!, I'm not worthy!" I really didn't want get into it with Tim May of all people...
How many lawns do I have to mow to pay for the window, mister? ;-).
Just read the articles. You don't have to be a number theory expert, debating birthday paradoxes with Eli Brandt, Hal Finney, Jay PP, Eric Hughes, and the other number theory savvy folks, but some overall sense of where things are going (and where they have been, etc.) is best gotten from the literature. Cheers, --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."