Cypherpunks Goals: Bad debate drives out good debate
(I sent this out on Saturday, apparently just after the Great Outage began. I never saw it, so I presume few if any of the rest of you did either. While we're only 200-strong now, down from our 700+ peak recently, I suppose the most diligent and interested readers have by now managed to get back on the list. The alternately clued readers will have to miss this one.) Cypherdenizens, I guess it's a fact of cyberspace that well-reasoned, well-written posts don't get the followup responses that clueless, inflammatory, or otherwise controversial posts do. This has been driven home to me recently as I sort many thousands of posts and many hundreds of threads accumulated these last 19 months (and I deleted some of the true crap long ago, so my sample is skewed toward the good stuff!). I look at recent examples, like the analysis by Greg Broiles of what "Cyperpunks write code" means, and I see no follow-ups. I look at the thoughtful words of Harry Bartholomew, including a book review, of what can go wrong in software and what this means for crypto protocol tools, and I see no follow-up commnents. I look at Ray Cromwell's detailed presentation of his WEB-based remailer, and I see only comments by a few of us (me, Hal Finney, as I recall). Plenty of similar examples. What is going on? Without getting into particulars, clueless posts generate flurries of denunciations, "your mother codes in Fortran" insults, and alien abduction responses. A nobody name Nabalandian drools all over the list, mailbombs us, and generates several dozen responses. (Including from me, so I'm not blameless.) The Detweiler Perversion nearly brought the list to its knees for over two months recently. (And lesser flame wars, involving Thomas Tso, Xenon, and now Nabalandian, have similarly distracted us.) Cypher version of Gresham's Law: bad posts drive out good posts. (The same is being seen in talk.politics.crypto, with the neverending Sternlight vs. Everybody Else dominating the traffic by a factor of 20-to-1. Detweiler recently reappeared (as tmp@netcom.com) and is back to debating _himself_ and answering his own delusional posts.) Some fine work is being done, both by those who are posting here and by those who are apparently holding their counsel for the time being. But the crumb bum posts are definitely winning out. To be sure, posts by the stronger posters--who I won't name now--can still generate significant debate, but not nearly as well as the inflammatory posts can. (Part of this is predictable: the stronger posts are often technically deeper, meaning that more of the reading population feels unable to add signicantly.) I hope there's something we can do about it. I may start reposting, at not too frequent intervals, interesting articles from the past. "Golden Oldies," I called them on the Extropians list. Newcomers to the list often publically speculate that the old-timers are not "interested" in debating what drew them, the newcomers, to the list in the first place....things like Clipper, PGP, the loss of privacy, etc. What they may not realize is that many of us have spent literally many hundreds of hours writing articles for this list. That we have no wish to repeat the widely-accepted reasons for why Clipper is bad, or why RSA has not been broken, or why income taxes are about to become obsolete, is not surprising. While I'm not predicting the imminent death of the Cypherpunks list, it seems clear we have to stop the slide into inconsequential chatter and paranoid speculation. Cypherpunks write code. Or at least they work on ways to *make things happen*. They don't fall into the trap both the Marxists and the Libertarians have fallen into, of idly discussing theory and hoping that somehow the glorious future will arrive. Cyperpunks understand that the genie of strong crypto is out of the bottle and that a relatively small number of people working on new tools and capabilities can produce a phase shift of immense proportions in the world. There's work to be done, and I know of no other groups even one tenth as prepared as we are to do this work. Let us get on with it. --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." .......................................................................... 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."
Good post. Here's a reply. =) Tim said:
What is going on?
You have a good summary of what's going on. Personally I've found it useful to create a filter for my cypherpunks mail to send posts from people whom I respect more into a seperate folder such that the signal-to-noise ratio in that folder is higher. When I have more time I read the folder with the lower signal-to-noise ratio, but I often do not have those resources. I don't really have to deal with bad posts because I don't see most of them unless I have some extra time on my hands... Others interested in rational discussion and debate and actual-doing-things might find this a useful technique.
<In mail Timothy C. May said:>
Some fine work is being done, both by those who are posting here and by those who are apparently holding their counsel for the time being. But the crumb bum posts are definitely winning out.
To be sure, posts by the stronger posters--who I won't name now--can still generate significant debate, but not nearly as well as the inflammatory posts can. (Part of this is predictable: the stronger posts are often technically deeper, meaning that more of the reading population feels unable to add signicantly.)
Tim, You are right about the excess fluff on the list, of course. I also think a very good explanation is what you and another poster have mentioned about the "masses" being or feeling unable to contribute to such a technical matter. Everyone can respond to a jerk though. There are three points I'd like to make: 1. The technical posters should strive to talk to the masses and not each other. It's the same old catch 22 of "The professor has a PhD and knows his stuff, but he can't talk to students on their level." Why not set up a tutorial posting where someone who intimately understands crypt tries to explain some of the basics to those of us who are along for the ride instead of studying for the Grand Master of the Universe Degree in Cryptography and Math. Perhaps your "golden oldie" idea is a step in the right direction. Of course, this assumes the techies are mostly interested in helping newbies become techies. If their intention is to send info back and forth among themselves please tell us so we can look elsewhere for instructional help. 2. Many people on the list are time-challenged :) A short post from J.Random Jerk is much easier to read than a 5 page eloquent speach from you which, although it contains very good information, is difficult to "hang with". Some of the more knowlegable people here have a tendency to ramble and make their postings flowery and they lose us normal folks that want to read "just the good stuff". 3. We are human and it is human, or at least societally inborn, to argue back when insulted. We all have to continually remind ourselves to ignore the jerks and not jump back. If everyone ignores them they will go away. (as an aside: Nalbandian isn't some punk kid! He's an older person in his mid 50's. It's a shame to see someone who has that many years of experience to act that way, but they do sometimes and we just have to learn to ignore them all. << Yes, Tim, I know I am among the worst flamers here sometimes, but I'm trying >> ) Please don't take this as an insult. It is only meant as MY OPINION of what's "wrong" with the list and what could be improved. Take care Jim -- Tantalus Inc. Jim Sewell Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ P.O. Box 2310 Programmer Internet: jims@mpgn.com Key West, FL 33045 C-Unix-PC Compu$erve: 71061,1027 (305)293-8100 PGP via email on request. 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3 C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73
participants (3)
-
Jim Sewell -
Sameer -
tcmay@netcom.com