From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> Sent: Oct 28, 2005 12:09 PM To: cypherpunks@jfet.org Subject: Return of the death of cypherpunks.
From: Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> ...
The list needs not to stay dead, with some finite effort on our part (all of us) we can well resurrect it. If there's a real content there's even no need from all those forwards, to just fake a heartbeat.
Since cryptography these days is routine and uncontroversial, there is no longer any strong reason for the cypherpunks list to continue to exist.
Well, political controversy seems like the least interesting thing about the list--to the extent we're all babbling about who needs killing and who's not a sufficiently pure libertarian/anarchocapitalist and which companies are selling out to the Man, the list is nothing special. The cool thing is the understanding of crypto and computer security techology as applied to these concerns that are political. And the coolest thing is getting smart people who do real crypto/security work, and write working code, to solve problems. The ratio of political wanking to technical posts and of talkers to thinkers to coders needs to be right for the list to be interesting. ...
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG AnKV4N6f9DgtOy+KkQ9QsiXcpQm+moX4U09FjLXP 4zfMeSzzCXNSr737bvqJ6ccbvDSu8fr66LbLEHedb
--John Kelsey
-- James A. Donald:
Since cryptography these days is routine and uncontroversial, there is no longer any strong reason for the cypherpunks list to continue to exist.
John Kelsey
The ratio of political wanking to technical posts and of talkers to thinkers to coders needs to be right for the list to be interesting.
These days, if one is seriously working on overthrowing the state by advancing to crypto anarchy (meaning both anarchy that is hidden, in that large scale cooperation procedes without the state taxing it, regulating it, supervising it, and licensing it, and anarchy that relies on cryptography to resist the state) it is not necessary or advisable to announce what one is up to. For example, Kerberos needs to be replaced by a more secure protocol. No need to add "And I am concerned about this because I am an anarchist" And so one discusses it on another list. (Kerberos tickets are small meaningful encrypted packets of information, when they should be random numbers. Being small, they can be dictionary attacked.) --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Y068Cy3Zv9GExXRbP24QJP5WmHGLz5VKyqNYFKbx 45fkOIGeiTkFnaM7p/URjB/kgn+0mcg8fMsMLmDy7
participants (2)
-
James A. Donald -
John Kelsey