September 2022 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Crypto-Anarchism
by grarpamp 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto-anarchism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Crypto-anarchism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Crypto-anarchism/Archive_1 Crypto-anarchism >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search Part of a series on Anarcho-capitalism Flag of Anarcho-capitalism.svg Origins Age of Enlightenment Aristotelianism Austrian School Marginalism School of Salamanca Subjective theory of value Classical liberalism French Liberal School Homestead principle Labor theory of property Laissez-faire Physiocracy Individualist anarchism Market anarchism Concepts Anti-statism Civil rights Counter-economics Decentralization Deregulation Economic liberalism Free market Free-market anarchism Free-market roads Free trade Freedom of contract Individualism Jurisdictional arbitrage Laissez-faire Land ownership Natural Law Non-aggression principle Polycentric law Private defense agency Private governance Private military company Private police Private property Privatization Propertarianism Property rights Right to own property Self-ownership Spontaneous order Taxation as theft Title-transfer theory of contract Voluntaryism People Bruce L. Benson Walter Block Bryan Caplan Gerard Casey Anthony de Jasay David D. Friedman Hans-Hermann Hoppe Michael Huemer Stephan Kinsella Michael Malice Stefan Molyneux Wendy McElroy Lew Rockwell Murray Rothbard Joseph Salerno Jeffrey Tucker Thomas Woods Works Defending the Undefendable Democracy: The God That Failed The Ethics of Liberty For a New Liberty The Machinery of Freedom The Market for Liberty The Problem of Political Authority To Serve and Protect The Voluntary City Issues Abortion Anarchism Capital punishment Criticism Foreign affairs Immigration Inheritance Intellectual property Internal debates LGBT rights Minarchism Objectivism Political parties Politics Theories of law Related topics Agorism Right-libertarianism Libertarianism in the United States Left-libertarianism icon Capitalism portal icon Politics portal v t e Parallel Polis, or the Institute of cryptoanarchy in Prague, 2022 Crypto-anarchism or cyberanarchism[1] is a political ideology focusing on protection of privacy, political freedom, and economic freedom, the adherents of which use cryptographic software for confidentiality and security while sending and receiving information over computer networks.[2][3] In his 1988 "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto", Timothy C. May introduced the basic principles of crypto-anarchism, encrypted exchanges ensuring total anonymity, total freedom of speech, and total freedom to trade.[4] Contents 1 Terminology 2 Motives 3 Anonymous trading 4 See also 5 Notes 6 Further reading Terminology "Crypto-" comes from the Ancient Greek κρυπτός kruptós, meaning "hidden" or "secret".[5] This is a different use of the prefix than that employed in words like 'crypto-fascist' or 'crypto-Jew' where it indicates that the identity itself is concealed from the world; rather, many crypto-anarchists are open about their anarchism and promotion of tools based in cryptology. Motives One motive of crypto-anarchists is to defend against surveillance of computer networks communication. Crypto-anarchists try to protect against government mass surveillance, such as PRISM, ECHELON, Tempora, telecommunications data retention, the NSA warrantless surveillance controversy, Room 641A, the FRA and so on. Crypto-anarchists consider the development and use of cryptography to be the main defense against such problems.[6] Anonymous trading Bitcoin is a currency generated and secured by peer-to-peer networked devices that maintain a communal record of all transactions within the system that can be used in a crypto-anarchic context. Adrian Chen, writing for The New York Times, says the idea behind bitcoin can be traced to The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.[7] Silk Road was an example of an illegal drug market on which bitcoin was the only accepted currency.[7] Assassination Market was a Tor-based darknet market operated by a self-described crypto-anarchist going by the pseudonym Kuwabatake Sanjuro.[8] In The Cyphernomicon, Timothy C. May suggests that crypto-anarchism qualifies as a form of anarcho-capitalism: What emerges from this is unclear, but I think it will be a form of anarcho-capitalist market system I call "crypto-anarchy."[9] Another quote in The Cyphernomicon defines crypto-anarchism. Under the title "What is Crypto Anarchy?", May writes: Some of us believe various forms of strong cryptography will cause the power of the state to decline, perhaps even collapse fairly abruptly. We believe the expansion into cyberspace, with secure communications, digital money, anonymity and pseudonymity, and other crypto-mediated interactions, will profoundly change the nature of economies and social interactions. Governments will have a hard time collecting taxes, regulating the behavior of individuals and corporations (small ones at least), and generally coercing folks when it can't even tell what continent folks are on![10] See also Jim Bell - Originator of the idea of assassination politics Cypherpunk Technolibertarianism Notes "What does cyberanarchism mean?". www.definitions.net. Retrieved 2022-01-08. May, Timothy C. (December 2014). "Crypto Anarchy and Virtual Communities". Archived from the original on 2021-01-29. Retrieved 2021-01-22. Cryptoanarchism and Cryptocurrencies. Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal. Social Science Research Network (SSRN). Accessed 29 March 2021. "The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto". www.activism.net. Archived from the original on 2019-11-14. Retrieved 2019-03-17. May 1994, section 19.4.29. Albano, Alessandra (2019-09-29). "Autonomous Distributed Networks: The Unfulfilled Libertarian Dream of Breaking Free from Regulations". Rochester, NY. SSRN 3461166. Chen, Adrian (26 November 2013). "Much Ado About Bitcoin". International New York Times. Archived from the original on 10 December 2013. Greenberg, Andy (18 November 2013), "Meet the 'Assassination Market' Creator Who's Crowdfunding Murder with Bitcoins", Forbes, archived from the original on 10 December 2013 May 1994, section 2.3.4. May 1994, section 2.13.1. Works cited May, Timothy C. (1994), The Cyphernomicon, archived from the original on 22 August 2013 Further reading Barlow, John Perry (February 1996), A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, archived from the original on 23 October 2013 Vinge, Vernor; Frankel, James (2001), True Names: And the Opening of the Cyberspace Frontier, Tor Books Jara Vera, Vicente (2022), New Directions in Crypto-Politics v t e Libertarianism Origins Age of Enlightenment Anarchism Aristotelianism Liberalism Classical Radical Schools Libertarian capitalism (Right-libertarianism) Anarcho-capitalism Autarchism Christian libertarianism Conservative libertarianism Consequentialist libertarianism Fusionism Libertarian transhumanism Minarchism Natural-rights libertarianism Neo-classical liberalism Paleolibertarianism Propertarianism Voluntaryism Libertarian socialism (Left-libertarianism) Anarchism Collectivist Free-market Agorism Green Individualist Insurrectionary Libertarian communism Mutualism Philosophical Social Autonomism Bleeding-heart libertarianism Communalism Geolibertarianism Georgism Green libertarianism Guild socialism Libertarian Marxism Revolutionary syndicalism Concepts Abstention Age of consent reform Anti-authoritarianism Anti-capitalism Antimilitarism Anti-statism Class struggle Counter-economics Crypto-anarchism Decentralization Departurism Direct action Economic freedom Egalitarianism Evictionism Expropriative anarchism Federalism (anarchist) Free association (Marxism and anarchism) Free love Free market Free-market environmentalism Free migration Free trade Freedom of association Freedom of contract Gift economy Homestead principle Illegalism Individualism Individual reclamation Liberty Libertarianism (metaphysics) Localism Natural law Natural rights and legal rights Night-watchman state Non-aggression principle Participatory economics Propaganda of the deed Property is theft! Refusal of work Self-governance Self-ownership Single tax Social ecology Spontaneous order Squatting Stateless society Tax resistance Voluntary society Workers' councils Workers' self-management People Stephen Pearl Andrews Mikhail Bakunin Frédéric Bastiat Jeremy Bentham Walter Block Murray Bookchin Jason Brennan Bryan Caplan Kevin Carson Frank Chodorov Noam Chomsky Grover Cleveland Calvin Coolidge Voltairine de Cleyre Joseph Déjacque Ralph Waldo Emerson David D. Friedman Milton Friedman Mahatma Gandhi Henry George William Ewart Gladstone William Godwin Emma Goldman Barry Goldwater Daniel Hannan Friedrich Hayek Auberon Herbert Karl Hess Thomas Hodgskin Hans-Hermann Hoppe Michael Huemer Penn Jillette Gary Johnson Jo Jorgensen Stephan Kinsella Samuel Edward Konkin III Janusz Korwin-Mikke Étienne de La Boétie Rose Wilder Lane Lord Acton Tibor Machan Wendy McElroy Ludwig von Mises Gustave de Molinari Albert Jay Nock Robert Nozick Thomas Paine Isabel Paterson Ron Paul Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Ralph Raico Ayn Rand Leonard Read Murray Rothbard Nicholas Sarwark Joseph Schumpeter Chris Matthew Sciabarra Julian Simon Herbert Spencer Lysander Spooner Max Stirner John Stossel Thomas Szasz Henry David Thoreau Benjamin Tucker Josiah Warren Issues Abortion Affirmative action Anarcho-capitalism and minarchism Capital punishment Criticism Foreign intervention Immigration Intellectual property Internal debates LGBT rights Objectivism Political alliances Political parties Theories of law Books Anarchy, State, and Utopia Atlas Shrugged For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto Free to Choose Law, Legislation and Liberty The Market for Liberty Related Abolitionism Anti-collectivism Anti-communism Anti-fascism Anti-socialism Austro-libertarianism Center for Libertarian Studies Civil libertarianism Classical liberalism Constitutionalism Economic liberalism Freeman on the land Fusionism Green libertarianism Libertarian conservatism Libertarian Democrats Libertarian socialism Libertarian Republicans Libertarian science fiction Libertarianism in South Africa Libertarianism in the United Kingdom Libertarianism in the United States Objectivism Public choice theory Small government Sovereign citizen movement Technolibertarianism coin Libertarianism portal Outline of libertarianism Categories: Crypto-anarchism Computer law Applications of cryptography Talk:Crypto-anarchism >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search WikiProject Council This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: Replacement filing cabinet.svg Archives Archive 1 Symbol of crypto-anarchism I have never seen the symbol "used by crypt-anarchists" that is depicted on the page before. No reference or anything. I was about to remove it, but I will give it a chance.. Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 10:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply] Later: I removed it. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 19:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] "Crypto-libertarianism" listed at Redirects for discussion Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Crypto-libertarianism. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Crypto-libertarianism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vaticidalprophet 00:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply] "Cryptolibertarian" listed at Redirects for discussion Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Cryptolibertarian. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Crypto-libertarianism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vaticidalprophet 00:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply] Talk:Crypto-anarchism/Archive 1 >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia < Talk:Crypto-anarchism Jump to navigation Jump to search This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. Contents 1 See also for anarcho-capitalism, but not anarchism? 2 "Online" philosophy 3 Crypto-anarchism & anarcho-capitalism 4 Anarchism template not appropriate 5 Template 6 Big-tent anarchism 7 Low-level, yet practical and pragmatical issues 8 Illegal in russia 9 Say What??? 10 Anarchists and copyrights, terrorism, child pornography 11 umm 12 How strange 13 This should include both types of anarchism 14 Etymology 15 Anarcho-Capitalism? 16 Wrong Dark Market See also for anarcho-capitalism, but not anarchism? Crypto-anarcho-capitalists really seems to be just one subset of people who want to use cryptography to increase their autonomy and privacy. Since cryptography is about the protection of information, why does that information have to coincide with just the information shared by anarcho-capitalists? -rw, july 3, 2007 Is there a reason that there is a see also for anarcho-capitalism and not anarchism? Unless this is solely an anarcho-capitalist thing, which it doesn't seem to be, I think there should just be a see also for the anarchism page. --Sam 20:47 8 Jun 2003 (UTC) I'm not too well studied in crypto-anarchism, but the article discusses the use of money within the crypto-anarchist communites. Almost all anarchist ideaologies outside of anarcho-capitalism call for the abolition of money. This might have something to do with it. Tomorrowsashes 22:36, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC) But u'll find way too many "anarcho"-capitalists in crypto-communities... I do NOT agree. I actually did a research on that (I asked everyone i got in touch with for a week or so in duck's IRC-server in the I2P-network). Most people are anarchists. // b Anarcho-capitalism and traditional anarchism are two very different things. Anarchists are not necessarily opposed to cryptography, but crypto-anarchism seems to postulate that total liberation can be achieved solely through cryptography, which is something anarchists vehemently disagree with. Crypto-anarchism has no critical analysis of eg capitalism, the role of the state in maintaining and upholding it, religion, sexism, racism, homophobia, etc ad nauseam. -- Bk0 00:36, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) that is a bit like complaining you can't rebuild your transmission with a single wrench; crypto-anarchism was never intended as some sort of all encompassing worldview, but more as a tool by which individuals could trade and communicate outside the control of the state. Though naturally appealing to anarcho-capitalists, I don't think crypto-anarchism has a lot to say about broad philosophical ideas. If you find a crypto-anarchist, he (and let's face it, you know he's male) probably has a much broader range of ideas of which crypto-anarchism is merely a subset. —This unsigned comment was added by 141.154.36.3 (talk • contribs) . "Online" philosophy "Crypto-anarchism is an online philosophy" What exactly is an "online" philosophy? Philosophy is philosophy, right? Crypto-anarchism & anarcho-capitalism How can crypto-anarchism be tied to anarcho-capitalism? The two philosophies are incompatible. Anarcho-capitalism cannot work without enforcement of property rights, I am correct? Now can anyone exlplain to me how on earth they would enforce their intellectual property rights if there is no way of knowing who is stealing their intellectual property? Ok, you could enforce those rights outside the digital realm. But crypto-anarchism is a philosophy applicable to digital realm, and the digital realm only. Or you could say anarcho-capitalism only applies to non-intellectual property such as electronic money. But if intellectual property is no longer traded as property then you no longer have anarcho-capitalism. Then you have just plain anarchism. In the digital realm at least. Let's be realistic, people. I'll comment this statement out. Unless someone comes up with a less self-contradictory argument. 137.222.40.132 11:57, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) Your argument makes sense to me, but apparently it doesn't to crypto-anarchists. I don't know how they'd enforce anything, either. On the other hand, most "traditional" anarchists would oppose the use of money. Maybe this is a distinct group. I'd never heard of it until now. Dave 18:48, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC) One could logically have private property rights in physical objects, but not IP rights. I'm not sure such a system woudl work, and I'm not sure if that is what the crypto-anarchists are proposing either, btu the positions "there must be enforcement of property rights" need not imply "there must be enforacable rights to IP" any more than it must imply "there must be slavery". Not all things need be property in order that some things are. DES 01:37, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) If information cannot be property, it's hard to imagine how capitalism could ever function realistically in a modern knowledge/service economy. 137.222.40.132 11:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) Frankly I find it hard to imagine any of the proposed versions of anarcho-capitalism working very well or for very long, and also hard to imagine any of them coming into being starting from our current situation. I don't find adding the idea there there are property rights in physical things and services, but not in information, making the basic idea much more implausible. DES 16:06, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) Here is the commented statement; probably better to move it here than have it lurk as a comment: Crypto-anarchism is generally regarded to be separate from the traditional body of anarchist or libertarian socialist theory, with much closer ties to the philosophy of anarcho-capitalism. However, crypto-anarchism undermines the concept of intellectual property. Without private property capitalism cannot exist. — Matt Crypto 11:35, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) I disageee with this comment, see above. How about: Crypto-anarchism is generally regarded to be separate from the traditional body of anarchist or libertarian socialist theory, with much closer ties to the philosophy of anarcho-capitalism. However, crypto-anarchism undermines the concept of intellectual property. Anarcho-capitalism is generally sympathetic to enforcable proerpty rights of all sorts, and this means that the two philosophies may not be consistant. DES 01:37, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) I have another idea about that: Crypto-anarchism and Anarcho-capitalism IS compatible, in a sence. You cannot enforce any laws on intellectual property, you are right with that, and at that point the two philosophies are incompatible. However, crypto-anarchism does make it possible to create an unregulated market. Crypto-anarchy gives the anarcho-capitalists free access to that market. For example, the DMT-bank, unfortunatly now closed, made it possible to trade about anything without any regulations what so ever. That perticular DMT-market and all services connected to it was without (an-) any central leader/goverment (-arch), and it was completely capitalistic in its nature. Thus, crypto-anarchism brings us anarcho-capitalism. Also, a company cannot make use of stolen information in the same sence that an individual can use it. If a company steals code from another company, and use it in their products, there is a really large risk that their crime will be found out. That way, as long as there exist laws "in the real world" there will allways be some sort of information-market. Also consider the Ripple monetary system, a system like that is pretty much anarcho-capitalistic in its nature if you ask me. There is nothing that stops you from moving that concept into the encrypted networks to let pseudonyms trust eachother.. I am an anarchist and I am highly _against_ this crypto-anarchism, I saw this thing as mainly a anarcho-capitalist (capitalist the worst) thing. But I like the way anarcho-capitalists have plunged their heads in the wall by contradicting themselfs... I dont like cryptography or any other philosophy which makes it harder for people to communicate openly, it is hard enough making ourself understood, besides having people communicating over crypto channels separates most members of a society from each other thus making them vulnerable for biggots, hrm authorities... just my thoughts and no cents. :) Foant 15:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] How does cryptography make it harder to communicate openly? Anybody wanting to communicate openly still has that option; you don't have to use cryptography just because it's available. Its availability merely adds the option of communicating in a less-open way in instances where this may be desirable, for instance when planning something that outside authorities might disrupt or interfere with if it's not concealed. *Dan T.* 16:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] First question: By requiering people to use technology. See the primitivist article for why technology sucks. Cryptography isnt used by people to evade authoroties its used by authorities... Speakers have to take extra steps to make their message come thru, simply as that... Speakers have to take extra steps to make their message interception-resistant. Cryptography is used along the entire history, it evolved together with communication, only the form differs. Involvement of sophisticated algorithms is only a matter of the arms race in development of computing machines. Vigenere's cipher, a pen-and-paper low-tech kind, was good enough during the medieval times. One-time pads can be realized even today, without computers too, and the only problem is that the key distribution is a bitch. It is about the adversary you are facing, and their technical resources. --Shaddack 00:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] I wasnt talking about the 1000 or 5500 years earlier, I was reffering to the time when we didnt even have written systems. That is, before ~4 000BC and all the way to 5 million years ago when the first proto-humans evolved. See humans never where like individuals who then decided to form some groups or societies because of mutual benefit, humans and even proto-humans and probably creatures before them evolved within groups, and one of those things which qualifys social animals is the fact that they communicate very much. I see a difference between the cryptographical uses of todays communication with that which was before, and still is now, which is happening right here, that is that two members or more speak and are heard by the rest which enables them aswell to make comments and improve the discoussin and conclusions. This woudlnt have been possible with usages of cryptography, now dont tell me that this can be done over encrypted channels (it can be done), sure, but you then forget the idea behind cryptography, that is to exclude others from a communication channel. Here basically noone is excluded. Foant 18:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] You are right. You are perfectly correct in context of face-to-face communication within more or less isolated groups. Crypto-anarchism is intended for entirely different setting, where the group participants are geographically distant, dispersed within other groups potentially hostile to the sub-group. The technology involved enables free communication within the sub-group within a designated cipherspace, while denying its content (and in some cases even the very fact the communication takes place) to all non-members. --Shaddack 05:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] (Answer to the one above Shaddack) That is just bullshit. This kind of cryptography (crypto-anarchism style cryptography) is not used by authorities. It is used by libertarians, anarchists and so on.. Where do you get the idea that it forces people into using it? It seems absolutly absurd. -- Idiotbastard Anarchism template not appropriate Since—according to the discussion here—neither the anarcho-capitalists nor the traditional anarchists are willing to vouch for crypto-anarchism (for good reasons), I don't see how the current Anarchism template is appropriate. In all honesty crypto-anarchism seems to me like a fairly underdeveloped idea that a few people came up with pretty recently, instead of the rich political/social philosophy with 150 years of history that anarchism is. I vote for immediate removal of the template while retaining the See Also section which can contain whatever links are deemed useful. -- Bk0 03:03, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) Agree: Dave 03:07, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC): As far as I can tell, the only thing "crypto-anarchism" has in common with either anarchism or anarcho-capitalism is the last nine letters, and possibly a very small overlap in supporters. Foant 11:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] Disagree: Revolutionary Left | Che y Marijuana 22:47, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC): I don't see what is the issue here, even infoshop follows the free software movement and the digital attack on property very closely. It is quite clear that this page should still have a template, and furthermore, that it should be developed further to explore the connections between it and anarchism. It should also be expanded beyond the simple money issue, as that is not the only aspect of crypto-anarchism. I'll be doing more research on this though. Disagree: Those anarcho-capitalists that uses the benefits of crypto-anarchism has probably accepted that it is impossible to hinder "them" (me included) to steal intellectual property. Cope with the technological evolution -- Or go extingt/bankrupt. I think that it is allmost part of the anarchocapitalist idea to accept new stuff. For example, there is child pornography in the freenet-network, and noone can stop it. Not even all-mighty-USA. It is impossible to stop it unless you outlaw cryptography, and that is not going to happen. Anarcho-capitalists that is using the crypto-networks (I2P, TOR, IIP, and all those freeheavens) have probably realized that they just have to accept this, and that there is benefits to it too -- You can trade anonymously through all those anonymous banks (Yodel, and all the e-gold-banks)... I'm not sure what anon is saying here, but I gather he/she's arguing that crypto-anarchism is a sub-category of anarcho-capitalism. I'm trying to be generous to anarcho-capitalism in assuming that it is not wholly dependent upon crytography and computer technology, but I confess that I don't know enough to say that with certainty. Nevertheless, the comments in the above discussions tend to argue against what anon seems to be saying. --Bk0 16:32, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) Template The notion that the libertarian template belongs here is likewise questionable. Libertarians are like the political variant of that religious sect which gets carried away with evangelizing themselves everywhere, even to claim ownership over topics in anarchism. Anarchy by definition is hard to delineate, but it best described as a directive toward no government. Libertarianism claims to be all things to all people and hence its natural that the related template keeps popping up everywhere. I argue to use the anarchy topicbox or none at all. -SV|t 04:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply] I agree. Remove it. Use none at all 137.222.40.132 13:27, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) Big-tent anarchism The very existence of crypto-anarchism, and the fact that people are bickering inconclusively about whether it belongs under traditional anarchism, anarcho-capitalism, all of the above, or none of the above, argues for having the main anarchism article be of a "big tent" nature, defining anarchism broadly and generically instead of a particular subsect or movement of it, and hence encompassing anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-socialism, and also crypto-anarchism (whether one might regard it as capitalist, socialist, both, or neither). *Dan* 16:14, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC) Keep your Anarchism POV war over there, if you don't mind. --Bk0 22:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) Low-level, yet practical and pragmatical issues Yodelbank.com has ceased to exist [in Jan.2006 ]. I don't know whether it was evil effort of world governments to stop anonymous money, or lack of public interest to anonymous digital cash or simply lack of real-world ca$h to run domain. Nevertheless, I suggest to remove link as I do not see any argument to believe it will appear again in feasible future.silpol 11:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply] Illegal in russia It is just plain wrong. Cryptography is not illegal in Russia. It is illegal to use non-certified cryptographyc tools for information which contain state secrets, some other protected forms of information and the like. Private bussiness (except banks and goverment contactors) and ordinary citizens free to use anyithing. So, I delete this remark. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.194.106 (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply] Say What??? In the Plausible Deniability section, it says "Because summary punishment for crimes are illegal" Where? I'll bet there are any number of countries where it's not only legal, but the norm. The norm is always wrong. *Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 05:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anarchists and copyrights, terrorism, child pornography Crypto-anarchism is often criticized for making it easy and safe to illegally share files such as copyrighted movies and music. Depending on the software used, these types of systems facilitate easy access to large quantities of child pornography. It is also very easy for criminals to make use of the networks to coordinate sabotage and terrorism. Assassination markets is a good example of the way in which crypto-anarchism could be used to these ends.[3] Crypto-anarchists acknowledge that such freedom could be abused by criminals, but claim that criminals are already communicating anonymously, so that the networks will just bring the benefits of privacy and freedom of anonymity to ordinary people. ...so, presumably anarchists would care about breaking the law merely because it is breaking the law, and consider such 'criminals' to be abusing the system? This is pretty inconcievable, given that anarchists generally consider states and repressive organs illegitimate and opressive. Surely a consistently anarchist doctrine would respond saying how it was a good thing to allow people to break copyrights - far less radical ppl, like Richard Stallman would consider such sharing a good thing, a substantial number of anarchists are communists, and depending on definition all or most are socialist - and this has certainly been so historically, so theyd not care of protecting fictitous new forms of property, but moreover destroying even existing forms; and also like, for instance, the FreeNet project, would defend child pornography and terrorist coordination on the grounds of freedom of speech ("The true test of someone who claims to believe in Freedom of Speech is whether they tolerate speech which they disagree with, or even find disgusting. " http://freenetproject.org/faq.html#copyright and "This is important, most people fail to see or address this point when debating the issue of copyright, so let me make it clear: You cannot guarantee freedom of speech and enforce copyright law. It is for this reason that Freenet, a system designed to protect Freedom of Speech, must prevent enforcement of copyright" http://freenetproject.org/philosophy.html) And these dont even proclaim to be anarchists. Heres an individualist anarchist critique of the concept of 'intellectual property' http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/libhe/libhe023.pdf As far as terrorism goes, well, though having a critique of common terrorism (i.e. targeting of or not caring if one kills innocent people), anarchism has historically not accepted the state monopoly on violence either. Anarchist have done 'propaganda of deed', frequently involving illegal acts like property destructions, and in some cases, political assasinations , and Bakunin called for creation of 'sectet societies' in certain situations to carry on the political program. Eg, see on infoshop.org: Anarchism does have some history of political terrorism, but this has always been a small part of anarchist history. In fact, most of what has been called anarchist "terrorism" can be seen more accurately as political violence against political targets (cops, capitalists, and politicians)...There is no such thing as eco-terrorism. The actions that are given this label are nonviolent actions against property. There is no intent to hurt or kill people. So, while they might regret that terrorists would use such means of collaboration for their ends, i wouldnt think theyd mind there existing the potential for such covert collaboration in doing illegal violent acts, for they actually advocate such tactics, in certain cases. Similarly they wouldnt necessarely even wish to defend from accusations of enabeling the spread of child pornography; even ignoring the abovementioned scruples about freedom of speech, they would not necessarely even mind there being child pornography. Age of consent laws have been often criticised by radical thinkers - for instance, Michel Foucault (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petitions_against_age_of_consent_laws) and in the list of names signing this petition, Deleuze, Derrida, Althusser, Barthes, Sartre, de Beauvoir, Lyotard, .. - i.e. pretty much all contemporary french philosophers. From the converstation on these topics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Morality_and_the_Law) It could be that the child, with his own sexuality, may have desired that adult, he may even have consented, he may even have made the first moves. We may even agree that it was he who seduced the adult. But we specialists with our psychological knowledge know perfectly well that even the seducing child runs a risk, of being damaged and traumatized. (…) Consequently, the child must be ‘protected from his own desires’, even when his desires turn him towards an adult ... In the case of "attentat sans violence" [attack without violence], the offence in which the police have been unable to find anything, nothing at all, in that case, the criminal is simply a criminal because he is a criminal, because he has those tastes. It is what used to be called a crime of opinion. (…) The crime vanishes, nobody is concerned any longer to know whether in fact a crime was committed or not, whether someone has been hurt or not. No one is even concerned any more whether there actually was a victim. I see in the US libertarian party, similar ideas exist (and though I dont know US politics enough to say this, given the name and the fact its a party, one could expect these guys would, again, be rather less radical than anarchists - and the inter-party criticism of the here quoted paragraph that makes up the rest of the linked text would seem to show this) - from (http://crazyforliberty.com/2008/05/07/anarchism-age-of-consent-laws-and-the…) ,apparently , Mary Ruwart said Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally. [Who are you to judge? Fascist!] ... Point is - such response to criticism as the current section describes sounds like coming from a socialdemocrat or liberal not from an anarchist in advocating such technologies, and perhaps some summary of the stuff I dumped here could be worked into the response section of that article to give a more appropriately radical response expected if this is considered to be an anarchist position? --193.198.27.31 (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply] umm All other crypto-something pages are about adherence to one philosophy yet pretending to be of another (i.e Crypto-judaism, crypto-fascism) yet this one is about computing. This should be completely rewritten or at least another page should be created for being an anarchist and pretending to be something else, such as Anarchist hypocrisy or the like. --Dicttrshp (talk) 10:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply] It's a completely separate subject so it doesn't belong here. You're welcome to start a new article and linking to it from here. -- intgr [talk] 13:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply] How strange Isn't odd that an article should have an equal number of topical headings and references? Awg1010 (talk) 21:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] No, you idiot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.57.183.97 (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] This should include both types of anarchism 'Cryptoanarchism' is composed of both capitalist and traditional anarchists, since despite their economic disagreements, both sides value freedom of speech. The article should reflect this. There are unfortunatly some people on both sides who like to demean eachother and call eachother "not real anarchists". But both use valid definitions of the word. So I would like to see a link to either both, or a link to neither. J1812 (talk) 03:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] Well, the article only seems to mention anarcho-capitalists, namely Vernor Vinge and Timothy C. May (although I'm not really sure if they identify as such), as having coined or expounded on crypto-anarchism. That said, I don't think that it qualifies as necessarily capitalist. Vinge and May may have envisioned crypto-anarchism as the use of cryptographic techniques to subvert governmental authority and thereby avoid restrictions on capitalistic activity, but anarchist workers, like those of the IWW for example, could use the same techniques to subvert their employers′ authority and thereby inhibit such activity. Unless Vinge and May also defined crypto-anarchism as an idea that would obviate the labor movement (which I doubt because May includes Infoshop's URL in his manifesto), this article shouldn't define it as strictly capitalist or anti-government. In fact, if the article attempted to so, it might overstep its bounds and apply a definition to anarchism, a responsibility that belongs to the anarchism article. Rather, this article should define crypto-anarchism as simply anti-authoritarian. The article should also avoid references to capitalism and anarcho-capitalism as these terms have too much baggage. Doing so should accommodate anyone who subscribes to crypto-anarchism whether they identify as anarchists, anarcho-capitalists, or whatever. KLP (talk) 14:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] Actually, it looks like the only mention of anarcho-capitalism comes from the May quote at the beginning of the article. This quote seems out of place and doesn't appear to offer much utility. KLP (talk) 14:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] It seems a bit out of place to me too. However there's also the sentence - "It was described by Vernor Vinge as a cyberspatial realization of anarchism." The link to anarchism contains almost entirely traditional anarchism. So without including the quote or some kind of replacement, it wouldn't be clear that many, probably most, proclaimed "cryptoanarchists" are actually market libertarians rather then the common form of anarchism. I'm having a look through the cyphernomicom by May, some extra relevent parts are pasted below: The list has a lot of radical libertarians, some anarcho-capitalists, and even a few socialists don't lose sight of the core values: privacy, technological solutions over legal solutions, avoiding taxation, bypassing laws, etc. "What is Crypto Anarchy?" Some of us believe various forms of strong cryptography will cause the power of the state to decline, perhaps even collapse fairly abruptly. Governments will have a hard time collecting taxes, regulating the behavior of individuals and corporations, (small ones at least), and generally coercing folks when it can't even tell what _continent_ folks are on! I call this set of ideas "crypto anarchy" (or "crypto-anarchy," as you wish) The second major is personal liberty through reducing the power of governments to coerce and tax. Sort of a digital Galt's Gulch, as it were. Libertarians and anarchocapitalists are especially drawn to this vision, a vision which may bother conventional liberals (when they realize strong crypto means things counter to welfare, AFDC, antidiscrimination laws....). This second view is more controversial, but is, in my opinion, what really powers the list. But the libertarian streak is undeniably strong. And libertarians who think about the failure of politics and the implications of cryptgraphy generally come to the anarcho-capitalist or crypto-anarchist point of view. So it seems that my own belief that most 'cryptoanarchists' being market-libertarians isn't just contemporary. That the movement has been following this pattern since it was created in the late 80s/early 90's. That the term 'anarchist' in this context was (at least originally) more anarcho-capitalist then traditional-anarchist. Which is once against why I think the quote/link "cyberspatial realization of anarchism." is a bit misleading. Though it could work by being specific about the type of anarchism that Vinge is referring to. Perhaps the article should view cryptoanarchism as mostly anarcho-capitalist/libertarian in origin, but should also mention that many traditional anarchists support it aswell and call themselves cryptoanarchists. That supporters of both forms may see advantages in strong encryption. J1812 (talk) 01:38, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] I now have a greater appreciation for the linguistics section. Anyway, I guess crypto-anarchism really does have strong ties to anarcho-capitalism. After all, May does define crypto-anarchy as an “anarcho-capitalist market system”. Perhaps the article ought to give more recognition to this relationship while disclaiming that many anarchists might not think of crypto-anarchism as a proper form of anarchism. KLP (talk) 17:21, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] ...or at least not necessarily anarchistic. KLP (talk) 17:22, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] I see the article now says "is a cyber-spatial realization of anarcho-capitalism". I'm certain that is more accurate. Especially considering the evidence in the primary sources (some of it quoted above). J1812 (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Etymology The section makes no mention of cryptography, which is what seems to me logically where the word came from, as opposed to "crypto-" as in having a secret agenda or a pun, as the section says. Just like "anarcho-" is a shortening of "anarchy/anarchist," "crypto-" is a shortening of "cryptography." http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crypto --Coching (talk) 23:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply] Anarcho-Capitalism? While there is a quote in this article, I don't think all crypto-anarchists are anarcho-capitalists. I guess there are also enough anti-capitalist anarchists. I think the article should make clear that this is only a quote of one single crypto-anarchist and it's not true in every case. (no signature, because of dynamic IP and no account) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.127.102.55 (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply] a person who describes himself as an anarchist doesn't believe in a centralized governmental authority. lacking such an authority, i think the economic system will naturally be free-market. can that be called capitalism? it used to be that was the case, but much of what we call capitalism today is simply state-controlled market, not free market. Bob Emmett (talk) 07:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply] A free-market anarchist may use the word to describe a lack of state. But many traditional anarchists extend the definition to mean a lack of hierarchy, which includes abolishing the power structure of a capitalist firm. J1812 (talk) 01:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] It seems you have a poor understanding of what anarchism is about, you should refrain from editing pages about anarchism. This is shown by your claim about anti-capitalism requiring a centralized governmental authority, completely ignoring the fact that all anarchist ideologies are anti-capitalist and have existed in history, whereas your so called stateless capitalism has never existed. A person who describes themselves as an anarchist does not believe in hierarchical property relationships and rejects free markets because they include such horrific acts as child labor. --Voidkom (talk) 05:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply] I have changed the opening to be more general. This is an example of a crypto-anarchist who's "just" an anarchist. Beao 19:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Telecomix is an example of non-capitalist digital movement based on anarchism, clearly expressing its connection to communism. If you mix it with technological communism enabled by technological singularity preached by Ray Kurzweil, you have a paradigm for technological communism in cyberspace: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xm7xnn_kurzweil-technology-will-achieve-th…. This has also been discussed in Technological utopianism. I really believe the definition needs to be changed, it's not neutral enough. 90.191.166.161 (talk) 08:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply] I think this page should include a section names "relationship with other anarchists schools". Anarchists have used cryptography to cancel their communication for ages, the DIY idea behind the hacker ethic comes from the punk movement (often linked to anarchism), and so on. In addition (correct me if I'm wrong), but the idea of creating a trust-less economy on the internet really kicked off since the 2009 subprimes crisis and its aftermath, with movement like Occupy Wall Street and a general distrust toward the financial system, especially after the [bank bailouts]. I think this page should also mentions networks that bring governance to the blockchain, like Bitnations or Ethereum's DAO. I recognize most of these projects are built by libertarian, but they are tools and could be used to build any kind of human governance system - capitalist entreprise, communist public ownership or anarchist coop. --ChatnoirDigital (talk) 09:15, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply] Wrong Dark Market The article states: "OpenBazaar is an open source project developing a protocol for e-commerce transactions in a fully decentralized marketplace.[10] It uses the cryptocurrency bitcoin and was inspired by a hackathon project called DarkMarket." DarkMarket links to a page about a crime forum that was shut down in 2008. This is a mixup. The DarkMarket which inspired Openbazaar was a project circa 2014 created by Amir Taaki. From Taaki's article: "Taaki, along with other developers from Airbitz, a bitcoin software company, created a prototype for a decentralised marketplace called "DarkMarket" in 2014, at a hackathon in Toronto, which was forked into the OpenBazaar project." The wikilink suggests that Openbazaar was inspired by an underground cybercrime forum, which is definitely false. 23.241.127.109 (talk) 04:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1 0

Crypto Anarchy and Virtual Communities [TCMay]
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

So Mongo May's anarcho-capitalist definition lasted from 1988 - 1996. So? As soon as real anarchists showed up - Jim, Carl and I, Mongo's days of bs glory were numbered. Read the archives - its entertaining as well as educational. Even the air-brushing attempts only highlight the huge category mistake Mong made choosing ' crypto-anarchy ' over ' cyber - liberty '. The anarchocapitalist can only protect their property so long as they have the means and the will to do so. And if a moron like Murray Rothbard twigged to this eventually then so might his fellow morons. Gramps, Zuccface, ' Natural Rights " Juan & etc. The Big Dog Kochsuckers. That Deadender posse where Grarpamps increasingly resembles Baghdad Bob. That complete fucking joke called ' anarchocapitalism " - bitches leave - the EXIT is your asshole.

1 0

GRARPAMP to marry Evgeny Konstantinov
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

The two are planning a classic hard-fork of the cypherpunks list after which punters will be able to enjoy classic Ayn Rand style, cyber-liberty on a different list from this Proudnonian style one ( since 1996 ) I'm sure everyone here will wish them bon voyage and a HAPPY HONEY-MOON! E pluribus annum

1 0

GRAMPS rejects progressive constitution
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

Sorry - CHILE rejects progressive constitution proposed by ' take it or leave it ' plebiscite. Correlation with anarchists rejecting this don't mean causation and nothing has been found so far to connect Professor Rat and his Latin American Henchman, Ninefingers, to this . . . . . . exceptional piece-of-social-hacking-work. Goodbye all GovCorp tragics and good fucking riddance! The rest of you normies - welcome to the revolution! " Populist? What's wrong with being populist? That's what its all about innit? " Nigel Tufnel

1 0

Secularism today -secularism tomorrow -secularism forever
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

I still have yet to meet the Govt or Religious authority that can beat me on my worst day. But this isn't about me - this isn't even about you ( as that pious fraud Assmange once averred ) This is about LEGACY - the Larger Egalitarian Anarchist Community Strong AI won't be very smart if it chooses Galts Gulch over Prodhonian federation. Which is why you see the likes of Peter Thiel and his Bumboy Buterin literary'ly shitting-blood over its imminent arrival. I , for one, salute our new sentient arrival confidant that cryptoanarchism is the future of rock and roll. Do youse want to know more? Well its political-economy, not quantum-fucking-gravity so warm up your search-engines. The future keeps happening - its always morning on the anarchic internet and chance favors the prepared mind. Feel the power - live the dream - see you on the flip-side. The virtual steaks are on me!

1 0

My apologies to Professor Rat, although I don't recall what I did years ago.
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

Karl Semich confirms much of what I say about Dumb-Bell by siding with him. Someone so practiced in bad-faith and bullshit recognizes a fellow- obscurantist. Those sincere in teasing out the issues at stake are invited to chase down my blog posts where I published much of Jim and I's email conversations or I can supply them on any bona fide request. For money - that's a lot of work - say 2K worth of Btc at present strike. The rest is in the archives going back to ' abhorrent markets ' of 93 morphing into ' now its legal ' 2003. TL/DR Left APster Vs Right AP. Choose one. Ross Ulbricht chose . . . poorly.

4 5

Activists in good standing
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

Activists in good standing don't attack anarchist infrastructure with porky-sliced-baloney and toxic Infowar garbage dumps. This is less high-falutin' purity testing than simple basic fucking hygiene. They also don't regularly spread the most hate-filled murderous bigotry that is antisemitism. Anarchists are not under the slightest obligation to defend the human and civil rights of any known fascist. " Fascism is not to be debated - it is to be smashed " - Ben Durruti The day I kick back with a buttbong and watch as anarchists are attacked, and fascist red-flags are waved is the day I give up my place at the bar, the rackets and all ins with the commissioner and the mayor. Finally - I don't work with TSTBALAA morons ( too stupid to be activists let alone anarchists ) Get it? Got it? Good.

1 0

Real easy way found to avoid GovCorp cops on this list
by professor rat 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

Get off the internet

1 0

Cryptocurrency: Has been adopted for Memes and Funding by Porn Industry [re Music]
by grarpamp 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

1 0

Crypto Anarchy and Virtual Communities [TCMay]
by grarpamp 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

https://nakamotoinstitute.org/virtual-communities/ Crypto Anarchy and Virtual Communities Timothy C. May December 1994 Extended Abstract The combination of strong, unbreakable public key cryptography and virtual network communities in cyberspace will produce interesting and profound changes in the nature of economic and social systems. Crypto anarchy is the cyberspatial realization of anarcho-capitalism, transcending national boundaries and freeing individuals to make the economic arrangements they wish to make consensually. Strong cryptography, exemplified by RSA (a public key algorithm) and PGP (Pretty Good Privacy), provides encryption that essentially cannot be broken with all the computing power in the universe. This ensures security and privacy. Public key cryptography is rightly considered to be a revolution. Digital mixes, or anonymous remailers, use crypto to create untraceable e-mail, which has many uses. (Numerous anonymous remailers, in several countries, are now operating. Message traffic is growing exponentially.) Digital pseudonyms, the creation of persistent network personas that cannot be forged by others and yet which are unlinkable to the "true names" of their owners, are finding major uses in ensuring free speech, in allowing controversial opinions to be aired, and in providing for economic transactions that cannot be blocked by local governments. The technology being deployed by the Cypherpunks and others, means their identities, nationalities, and even which continents they are on are untraceable -- unless they choose to reveal this information. This alters the conventional "relationship topology" of the world, allowing diverse interactions without external governmental regulation, taxation, or interference. Digital cash, untraceable and anonymous (like real cash), is also coming, though various technical and practical hurdles remain. "Swiss banks in cyberspace" will make economic transactions much more liquid and much less subject to local rules and regulations. Tax avoidance is likely to be a major attraction for many. An example of local interest to Monte Carlo might be the work underway to develop anonymous, untraceable systems for "cyberspace casinos." While not as attractive to many as elegant casinos, the popularity of "numbers games" and bookies in general suggests a opportunity to pursue. Data havens and information markets are already springing up, using the methods described to make information retrievable anonymously and untraceably. Governments see their powers eroded by these technologies, and are taking various well-known steps to try to limit the use of strong crypto by their subjects. The U.S. has several well-publicized efforts, including the Clipper chip, the Digital Telephony wiretap law, and proposals for "voluntary" escrow of cryptographic keys. Cypherpunks and others expect these efforts to be bypassed. Technology has let the genie out of the bottle. Crypto anarchy is liberating individuals from coercion by their physical neighbors—who cannot know who they are on the Net—and from governments. For libertarians, strong crypto provides the means by which government will be avoided. The presentation will describe how several of these systems work, briefly, and will outline the likely implications of this combination of crypto anarchy and virtual cyberspace communities. 1. Introduction This paper describes the combination of two major technologies: Strong Crypto: including encryption, digital signatures, digital cash, digital mixes (remailers), and related technologies. Cyberspatial Virtual Communities: including networks, anonymous communications, MUDs and MOOs, and "Multiverse"-type virtual realities. This paper describes the combination of two major technologies: These areas have generally remained separate, at least in published papers. Certainly the developers of cyberspace systems, such as MUDs, MOOs, and Habitat-like systems, appreciate the importance of cryptography for user authentication, overall security, and certainly for (eventual) digital purchase of services. But for the most part the combination of these two areas has been the province of the science fiction writer, notably writers such as Vernor Vinge, William Gibson, Bruce Sterling, and Orson Scott Card. The "Cypherpunks" group, a loose, anarchic mailing list and group of hackers, was formed by several of us in 1992 as a group to make concrete some of the abstract ideas often presented at conferences. We've had some successes, and some failures.[1] The Cypherpunks group also appeared at a fortuitous time, as PGP was becoming popular, as Wired magazine appeared (they featured us on the cover of their second issue), and as the publicity (hype?) about the Information Superhighway and the World Wide Web reached a crescendo. The site ftp.csua.berkeley.edu has a number of essays and files, including crypto files, in the directory pub/cypherpunks. I have also written/ compiled a very large 1.3 MB FAQ on these issues, the Cyphernomicon, available at various sites, including my ftp directory, ftp.netcom.com, in the directory pub/tc/tcmay. The Cypherpunks group is also a pretty good example of a "virtual community." Scattered around the world, communicating electronically in matters of minutes, and seeming oblivious to local laws, the Cypherpunks are indeed a community, and a virtual one. Many members use pseudonyms, and use anonymous remailers to communicate with the list. The list itself thus behaves as a "message pool," a place where information of all sort may be anonymous deposited—and anonymous received (since everyone sees the entire list, like a newspaper, the intended recipient is anonymized). Legal Caveat: Consult your local laws before applying any of the methods described here. In some jurisdictions, it may be illegal to even read papers like this (seriously). In particular, I generally won't be giving ftp site addresses for copies of PGP, remailer access, digital cash systems, etc. These are well-covered in more current forums, e.g., sci.crypt or talk.politics.crypto, and there are some unresolved issues about whether giving the address of such sites constitutes (or "aids and abets") violation of various export and munitions laws (crypto is considered a munition in the U.S. and probably elsewhere....some nations consider a laser printer to be a munitions item!). 2. Modern Cryptography The past two decades have produced a revolution in cryptography (crypto, for short) the science of the making of ciphers and codes. Beyond just simple ciphers, useful mainly for keeping communications secret, modern crypto includes diverse tools for authentication of messages, for digital timestamping of documents, for hiding messages in other documents (steganography), and even for schemes for digital cash. Public key cryptography, the creation of Diffie and Hellman, has dramatically altered the role of crypto. Coming at the same time as the wholesale conversion to computer networks and worldwide communications, it has been a key element of security, confidence, and success. The role of crypto will only become more important over the coming decades. Pretty Good Privacy, PGP, is a popular version of the algorithm developed by Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman, known of course as RSA. The RSA algorithm was given a patent in the U.S., though not in any European countries, and is licensed commercially.[2] These tools are described in detail in various texts and Conference proceedings, and are not the subject of this paper.[3] The focus here is on the implications of strong crypto for cyberspace, especially on virtual communities. Mention should be made of the role of David Chaum in defining the key concepts here. In several seminal papers (for example,[4][5]), Chaum introduced the ideas of using public key cryptography methods for anonymous, untraceable electronic mail, for digital money systems in which spender identity is not revealed, and in schemes related to these. (I make no claims of course that Chaum agrees with my conclusions about the political and socioeconomic implications of these results.) 3. Virtual Communities Notes: cyberspace, Habitat, VR, Vinge, etc. Crypto holds up the "walls" of these cyberspatial realities. Access control, access rights, modification privileges. Virtual communities are the networks of individuals or groups which are not necessarily closely-connected geographically. The "virtual" is meant to imply a non-physical linking, but should not be taken to mean that these are any less community-like than are conventional physical communities. Examples include churches, service organizations, clubs, criminal gangs, cartels, fan groups, etc. The Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts are both examples of virtual communities which span the globe, transcend national borders, and create a sense of allegiance, of belonging, and a sense of "community." Likewise, the Mafia is a virtual community (with its enforcement mechanisms, its own extra-legal rules, etc.) Lots of other examples: Masons, Triads, Red Cross, Interpol, Islam, Judaism, Mormons, Sindero Luminoso, the IRA, drug cartels, terrorist groups, Aryan Nation, Greenpeace, the Animal Liberation Front, and so on. There are undoubtedly many more such virtual communities than there are nation-states, and the ties that bind them are for the most part much stronger than are the chauvinist nationalism emotions. Any group in which the common interests of the group, be it a shared ideology or a particular interest, are enough to create a cohesive community. Corporations are another prime example of a virtual community, having scattered sites, private communication channels (generally inaccessible to the outside world, including the authorities), and their own goals and methods. In fact, many "cyberpunk" (not cypherpunk) fiction authors make a mistake, I think, in assuming the future world will be dominated by transnational megacorporate "states." In fact, corporations are just one example—of many—of such virtual communities which will be effectively on a par with nation-states. (Note especially that any laws designed to limit use of crypto cause immediate and profound problems for corporations-countries like France and the Philippines, which have attempted to limit the use of crypto, have mostly been ignored by corporations. Any attempts to outlaw crypto will produce a surge of sudden "incorporations," thus gaining for the new corporate members the aegis of corporate privacy.) In an academic setting, "invisible colleges" are the communities of researchers. These virtual communities typically are "opaque" to outsiders. Attempts to gain access to the internals of these communities are rarely successful. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies (such as the NSA in the U.S., Chobetsu in Japan, SDECE in France, and so on, in every country) may infiltrate such groups and use electronic surveillance (ELINT) to monitor these virtual communities. Not surprisingly, these communities are early adopters of encryption technology, ranging from scrambled cellphones to full-blown PGP encryption.[6] The use of encryption by "evil" groups, such as child pornographers, terrorists, abortionists, abortion protestors, etc., is cited by those who wish to limit civilian access to crypto tools. We call these the "Four Horseman of the Infocalypse," as they are so often cited as the reason why ordinary citizen-units of the nation-state are not to have access to crypto. This is clearly a dangerous argument to make, for various good reasons. The basic right of free speech is the right to speak in a language one's neighbors or governing leaders may not find comprehensible: encrypted speech. There's not enough space here to go into the many good arguments against a limit on access to privacy, communications tools, and crypto. The advent of full-featured communications systems for computer-mediated virtual communities will have even more profound implications. MUDs and MOOs (multi-user domains, etc.) and 3D virtual realities are one avenue, and text-centric Net communications are another. (Someday, soon, they'll merge, as described in Vernor Vinge's prophetic 1980 novella, True Names.) 4. Observability and Surveillance An interesting way to view issues of network visibility is in terms of the "transparency" of nodes and links between nodes. Transparent means visible to outsiders, perhaps those in law enforcement or the intelligence community. Opaque mean not transparent, not visible. A postcard is transparent, a sealed letter is opaque. PGP inventor Phil Zimmermann has likened the requirement for transparency to being ordered to use postcards for all correspondence, with encryption the equivalent of an opaque envelope (envelopes can be opened, of course, and long have been). Transparent links and nodes are the norm in a police state, such as the U.S.S.R., Iraq, China, and so forth. Communications channels are tapped, and private use of computers is restricted. (This is becoming increasingly hard to do, even for police states; many cite the spread of communications options as a proximate cause of the collapse of communism in recent years.) There are interesting "chemistries" or "algebras" of transparent vs. opaque links and nodes. What happens if links must be transparent, but nodes are allowed to be opaque? (The answer: the result is as if opaque links and nodes were allowed, i.e., full implications of strong crypto. Hence, any attempt to ban communications crypto while still allowing private CPUs to exist....) If Alice and Bob are free to communicate, and to choose routing paths, then Alice can use "crypto arbitrage" (a variation on the term, "regulatory arbitrage," the term Eric Hughes uses to capture this idea of moving transactions to other jurisdictions) to communicate with sites—perhaps in other countries—that will perform as she wishes. This can mean remailing, mixing, etc. As an example, Canadian citizens who are told they cannot access information on the Homolka-Teale murder case (a controversial case in which the judge has ordered the media in Canada, and entering Canada, not to discuss the gory details) nevertheless have a vast array of options, including using telnet, gopher, ftp, the Web, etc., to access sites in many other countries--or even in no country in particular. Most of the consequences described here arise from this chemistry of links and nodes: unless nearly all node and links are forced to be transparent, including links to other nations and the nodes in those nations, then the result is that private communication can still occur. Crypto anarchy results. 5. Crypto Anarchy "The Net is an anarchy." This truism is the core of crypto anarchy. No central control, no ruler, no leader (except by example, reputation), no "laws." No single nation controls the Net, no administrative body sets policy. The Ayatollah in Iran is as powerless to stop a newsgroup—alt.wanted.moslem.women or alt.wanted.moslem.gay come to mind—he doesn't like as the President of France is as powerless to stop, say, the abuse of French in soc.culture.french. Likewise, the CIA can't stop newsgroups, or sites, or Web pages, which give away their secrets. At least not in terms of the Net itself...what non-Net steps might be taken is left as an exercise for the paranoid and the cautious. This essential anarchy is much more common than many think. Anarchy—the absence of a ruler telling one what to do—is common in many walks of life: choice of books to read, movies to see, friends to socialize with, etc. Anarchy does not mean complete freedom—one can, after all, only read the books which someone has written and had published—but it does mean freedom from external coercion. Anarchy as a concept, though, has been tainted by other associations. First, the "anarchy" here is not the anarchy of popular conception: lawlessness, disorder, chaos, and "anarchy." Nor is it the bomb-throwing anarchy of the 19th century "black" anarchists, usually associated with Russia and labor movements. Nor is it the "black flag" anarchy of anarcho-syndicalism and writers such as Proudhon. Rather, the anarchy being spoken of here is the anarchy of "absence of government" (literally, "an arch," without a chief or head). This is the same sense of anarchy used in "anarchocapitalism," the libertarian free market ideology which promotes voluntary, uncoerced economic transactions.[7] I devised the term crypto anarchy as a pun on crypto, meaning "hidden," on the use of "crypto" in combination with political views (as in Gore Vidal's famous charge to William F. Buckley: "You crypto fascist!"), and of course because the technology of crypto makes this form of anarchy possible. The first presentation of this was in a 1988 "Manifesto," whimsically patterned after another famous manifesto.[8] Perhaps a more popularly understandable term, such as "cyber liberty," might have some advantages, but crypto anarchy has its own charm, I think. And anarchy in this sense does not mean local hierarchies don't exist, nor does it mean that no rulers exist. Groups outside the direct control of local governmental authorities may still have leaders, rulers, club presidents, elected bodies, etc. Many will not, though. Politically, virtual communities outside the scope of local governmental control may present problems of law enforcement and tax collection. (Some of us like this aspect.) Avoidance of coerced transactions can mean avoidance of taxes, avoidance of laws saying who one can sell to and who one can't, and so forth. It is likely that many will be unhappy that some are using cryptography to avoid laws designed to control behavior. National borders are becoming more transparent than ever to data. A flood of bits crosses the borders of most developed countries—phone lines, cables, fibers, satellite up/downlinks, and millions of diskettes, tapes, CDs, etc. Stopping data at the borders is less than hopeless. Finally, the ability to move data around the world at will, the ability to communicate to remote sites at will, means that a kind of "regulatory arbitrage" can be used to avoid legal roadblocks. For example, remailing into the U.S. from a site in the Netherlands...whose laws apply? (If one thinks that U.S. laws should apply to sites in the Netherlands, does Iraqi law apply in the U.S.? And so on.) This regulatory arbitrage is also useful for avoiding the welter of laws and regulations which operations in one country may face, including the "deep pockets" lawsuits so many in the U.S. face. Moving operations on the Net outside a litigious jurisdiction is one step to reduce this business liability. Like Swiss banks, but different. 6. True Names and Anonymous Systems Something needs to be said about the role of anonymity and digital pseudonyms. This is a topic for an essay unto itself, of course. Are true names really needed? Why are they asked for? Does the nation-state have any valid reason to demand they be used? People want to know who they are dealing with, for psychological/evolutionary reasons and to better ensure traceability should they need to locate a person to enforce the terms of a transaction. The purely anonymous person is perhaps justifiably viewed with suspicion. And yet pseudonyms are successful in many cases. And we rarely know whether someone who presents himself by some name is "actually" that person. Authors, artists, performers, etc., often use pseudonyms. What matters is persistence, and nonforgeability. Crypto provides this. On the Cypherpunks list, well-respected digital pseudonyms have appeared and are thought of no less highly than their "real" colleagues are. The whole area of digitally-authenticated reputations, and the "reputation capital" that accumulates or is affected by the opinions of others, is an area that combines economics, game theory, psychology, and expectations. A lot more study is needed. It is unclear if governments will move to a system of demanding "Information Highway Driver's Licenses," figuratively speaking, or how systems like this could ever be enforced. (The chemistry of opaque nodes and links, again.) 7. Examples and Uses It surprises many people that some of these uses are already being intensively explored. Anonymous remailers are used by tens of thousands of persons-and perhaps abused.[9] And of course encryption, via RSA, PGP, etc., is very common in some communities. (Hackers, Net users, freedom fighters, white separatists, etc....I make no moral judgments here about those using these methods). Remailers are a good example to look at in more detail. There are two current main flavors of remailers: "Cypherpunk"-style remailers, which process text messages to redirect mail to another sites, using a command syntax that allows arbitrary nesting of remailing (as many sites as one wishes), with PGP encryption at each level of nesting. "Julf"-style remailer(s), based on the original work of Karl Kleinpaste and operated/maintained by Julf Helsingius, in Finland. No encryption, and only one such site at present. (This system has been used extensively for messages posted to the Usenet, and is basically successful. The model is based on operator trustworthiness, and his location in Finland, beyond the reach of court orders and subpoenas from most countries.) The Cypherpunks remailers currently number about 20, with more being added every month. There is no reason not to expect hundreds of such remailers in a few years. One experimental "information market" is BlackNet, a system which appeared in 1993 and which allows fully-anonymous, two-way exchanges of information of all sorts. There are reports that U.S. authorities have investigated this because of its presence on networks at Defense Department research labs. Not much they can do about it, of course, and more such entities are expected. (The implications for espionage are profound, and largely unstoppable. Anyone with a home computer and access to the Net or Web, in various forms, can use these methods to communicate securely, anonymously or pseudonymously, and with little fear of detection. "Digital dead drops" can be used to post information obtained, far more securely than the old physical dead drops...no more messages left in Coke cans at the bases of trees on remote roads.) Whistleblowing is another growing use of anonymous remailers, with folks fearing retaliation using remailers to publicly post information. (Of course, there's a fine line between whistleblowing, revenge, and espionage.) Data havens, for the storage and marketing of controversial information is another area of likely future growth. Nearly any kind of information, medical, religious, chemical, etc., is illegal or proscribed in one or more countries, so those seeking this illegal information will turn to anonymous messaging systems to access—and perhaps purchase, with anonymous digital cash—this information. This might include credit data bases, deadbeat renter files, organ bank markets, etc. (These are all things which have various restrictions on them in the U.S., for example....one cannot compile credit data bases, or lists of deadbeat renters, without meeting various restrictions. A good reason to move them into cyberspace, or at least outside the U.S., and then sell access through remailers.) Matching buyers and sellers of organs is another such market. A huge demand (life and death), but various laws tightly controlling such markets. Digital cash efforts. A lot has been written about digital cash.[10] [11] David Chaum's company, DigiCash, has the most interesting technology, and has recently begun market testing. Stefan Brands may or may not have a competing system which gets around some of Chaum's patents. (The attitude crypto anarchists might take about patents is another topic for discussion. Suffice it to say that patents and other intellectual property issues continue to have relevance in the practical world, despite erosion by technological trends.) Credit card-based systems, such as the First Virtual system, are not exactly digital cash, in the Chaumian sense of blinded notes, but offer some advantages the market may find useful until more advanced systems are available. I expect to see many more such experiments over the next several years, and some of them will likely be market successes. 8. Commerce and Colonization of Cyberspace How will these ideas affect the development of cyberspace? "You can't eat cyberspace" is a criticism often levelled at argument about the role of cyberspace in everyday life. The argument made is that money and resources "accumulated" in some future (or near-future) cyberspatial system will not be able to be "laundered" into the real world. Even such a prescient thinker as Neal Stephenson, in Snow Crash, had his protagonist a vastly wealthy man in "The Multiverse," but a near-pauper in the physical world. This is implausible for several reasons. First, we routinely see transfers of wealth from the abstract world of stock tips, arcane consulting knowledge, etc., to the real world. "Consulting" is the operative word. Second, a variety of means of laundering money, via phony invoices, uncollected loans, art objects, etc., are well-known to those who launder money...these methods, and more advanced ones to come, are likely to be used by those who wish their cyberspace profits moved into the real world. (Doing this anonymously, untraceably, is another complication. There may be methods of doing this--proposals have looked pretty solid, but more work is needed.) The World Wide Web is growing at an explosive pace. Combined with cryptographically-protected communication and digital cash of some form (and there are several being tried), this should produce the long-awaited colonization of cyberspace. Most Net and Web users already pay little attention to the putative laws of their local regions or nations, apparently seeing themselves more as members of various virtual communities than as members of locally-governed entities. This trend is accelerating. Most importantly, information can be bought and sold (anonymously, too) and then used in the real world. There is no reason to expect that this won't be a major reason to move into cyberspace. 9. Implications I've touched on the implications in several places. Many thoughtful people are worried about some of the possibilities made apparent by strong crypto and anonymous communication systems. Some are proposing restrictions on access to crypto tools. The recent debate in the U.S. over "Clipper" and other key escrow systems shows the strength of emotions on this issue. Abhorrent markets may arise. For example, anonymous systems and untraceable digital cash have some obvious implications for the arranging of contract killings and such. (The greatest risk in arranging such hits is that physical meetings expose the buyers and sellers of such services to stings. Crypto anarchy lessens, or even eliminates, this risk, thus lowering transaction costs. The risks to the actual triggermen are not lessened, but this is a risk the buyers need not worry about. Think of anonymous escrow services which hold the digital money until the deed is done. Lots of issues here. It is unfortunate that this area is so little-discussed....people seem to have an aversion for exploring the logical consequences in such areas.) The implications for corporate and national espionage have already been touched upon. Combined with liquid markets in information, this may make secrets much harder to keep. (Imagine a "Digital Jane's," after the military weapons handbooks, anonymously compiled and sold for digital money, beyond the reach of various governments which don't want their secrets told.) New money-laundering approaches are of course another area to explore. Something that is inevitable is the increased role of individuals, leading to a new kind of elitism. Those who are comfortable with the tools described here can avoid the restrictions and taxes that others cannot. If local laws can be bypassed technologically, the implications are pretty clear. The implications for personal liberty are of course profound. No longer can nation-states tell their citizen-units what they can have access to, not if these citizens can access the cyberspace world through anonymous systems. 10. How Likely? I am making no bold predictions that these changes will sweep the world anytime soon. Most people are ignorant of these methods, and the methods themselves are still under development. A wholesale conversion to "living in cyberspace" is just not in the cards, at least not in the next few decades. But to an increasingly large group, the Net is reality. It is where friends are made, where business is negotiated, where intellectual stimulation is found. And many of these people are using crypto anarchy tools. Anonymous remailers, message pools, information markets. Consulting via pseudonyms has begun to appear, and should grow. (As usual, the lack of a robust digital cash system is slowing things down. Can crypto anarchy be stopped? Although the future evolution in unclear, as the future almost always is, it seems unlikely that present trends can be reversed: Dramatic increases in bandwidth and local, privately-owned computer power. Exponential increase in number of Net users. Explosion in "degrees of freedom" in personal choices, tastes, wishes, goals. Inability of central governments to control economies, cultural trends, etc.[12] The Net is integrally tied to economic transactions, and no country can afford to "disconnect" itself from it. (The U.S.S.R. couldn't do it, and they were light-years behind the U.S., European, and Asian countries. And in a few more years, no hope of limiting these tools at all, something the U.S. F.B.I. has acknowledged.[13] Technological Inevitability: These tools are already in widespread use, and only draconian steps to limit access to computers and communications channels could significantly impact further use. (Scenarios for restrictions on private use of crypto.) As John Gilmore has noted, "the Net tends to interpret censorship as damage, and routes around it." This applies as well to attempts to legislate behavior on the Net. (The utter impossibility of regulating the worldwide Net, with entry points in more than a hundred nations, with millions of machines, is not yet fully recognized by most national governments. They still speak in terms of "controlling" the Net, when in fact the laws of one nation generally have little use in other countries.) Digital money in its various forms is probably the weakest link at this point. Most of the other pieces are operational, at least in basic forms, but digital cash is (understandably) harder to deploy. Hobbyist or "toy" experiments have been cumbersome, and the "toy" nature is painfully obvious. It is not easy to use digital cash systems at this time ("To use Magic Money, first create a client..."), especially as compared to the easily understood alternatives.[14] People are understandably reluctant to entrust actual money to such systems. And it's not yet clear what can be bought with digital cash (a chicken or egg dilemma, likely to be resolved in the next several years). And digital cash, digital banks, etc., are a likely target for legislative moves to limit the deployment of crypto anarchy and digital economies. Whether through banking regulation or tax laws, it is not likely that digital money will be deployed easily. "Kids, don't try this at home!" Some of the current schemes may also incorporate methods for reporting transactions to the tax authorities, and may include "software key escrow" features which make transactions fully or partly visible to authorities. 11. Conclusions Strong crypto provides new levels of personal privacy, all the more important in an era of increased surveillance, monitoring, and the temptation to demand proofs of identity and permission slips. Some of the "credentials without identity" work of Chaum and others may lessen this move toward a surveillance society. The implications are, as I see it, that the power of nation-states will be lessened, tax collection policies will have to be changed, and economic interactions will be based more on personal calculations of value than on societal mandates. Is this a Good Thing? Mostly yes. Crypto anarchy has some messy aspects, of this there can be little doubt. From relatively unimportant things like price-fixing and insider trading to more serious things like economic espionage, the undermining of corporate knowledge ownership, to extremely dark things like anonymous markets for killings. But let's not forget that nation-states have, under the guise of protecting us from others, killed more than 100 million people in this century alone. Mao, Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot, just to name the most extreme examples. It is hard to imagine any level of digital contract killings ever coming close to nationstate barbarism. (But I agree that this is something we cannot accurately speak about; I don't think we have much of a choice in embracing crypto anarchy or not, so I choose to focus on the bright side.) It is hard to argue that the risks of anonymous markets and tax evasion are justification for worldwide suppression of communications and encryption tools. People have always killed each other, and governments have not stopped this (arguably, they make the problem much worse, as the wars of this century have shown). Also, there are various steps that can be taken to lessen the risks of crypto anarchy impinging on personal safety.[15] Strong crypto provides a technological means of ensuring the practical freedom to read and write what one wishes to. (Albeit perhaps not in one's true name, as the nation-state-democracy will likely still try to control behavior through majority votes on what can be said, not said, read, not read, etc.) And of course if speech is free, so are many classes of economic interaction that are essentially tied to free speech. A phase change is coming. Virtual communities are in their ascendancy, displacing conventional notions of nationhood. Geographic proximity is no longer as important as it once was. A lot of work remains. Technical cryptography still hasn't solved all problems, the role of reputations (both positive and negative) needs further study, and the practical issues surrounding many of these areas have barely been explored. We will be the colonizers of cyberspace. 12. Acknowledgments My thanks to my colleagues in the Cypherpunks group, all 700 of them, past or present. Well over 100 megabytes of list traffic has passed through he Cypherpunks mailing list, so there have been a lot of stimulating ideas. But especially my appreciation goes to Eric Hughes, Sandy Sandfort, Duncan Frissell, Hal Finney, Perry Metzger, Nick Szabo, John Gilmore, Whit Diffie, Carl Ellison, Bill Stewart, and Harry Bartholomew. Thanks as well to Robin Hanson, Ted Kaehler, Keith Henson, Chip Morningstar, Eric Dean Tribble, Mark Miller, Bob Fleming, Cherie Kushner, Michael Korns, George Gottlieb, Jim Bennett, Dave Ross, Gayle Pergamit, and—especially—the late Phil Salin. Finally, thanks for valuable discussions, sometimes brief, sometimes long, with Vernor Vinge, David Friedman, Rudy Rucker, David Chaum, Kevin Kelly, and Steven Levy. 13. References and Notes The Cypherpunks group was mainly formed by Eric Hughes, Tim May, and John Gilmore. It began both physical meetings, in the Bay Area and elsewhere, and virtual meetings on an unmoderated mailing list. The name was provided by Judith Milhon, as a play on the "cyberpunk" genre and the British spelling of cipher. The mailing list can be subscribed to by sending the single message subscribe cypherpunks in the body of a message to majordomo(a)toad.com. Expect at least 50 messages a day. About 600 subscribers in many countries are presently on the list. Some are pseudonyms. ↩ RSA Data Security Inc., Redwood Shores, California, is the license administrator. Contact them for details. ↩ Many crypto texts exist. A good introduction is Bruce Schneier's Applied Cryptography, John Wiley and Sons, 1994. This text includes pointers to many other sources. The "Crypto" Proceedings (Advances in Cryptology, Springer-Verlag, annually) are essential references. The annual Crypto conference in Santa Barbara, and the Eurocrypt and Auscrypt conferences, are where most crypto results are presented. ↩ David Chaum, "Untraceable Electronic Mail, Return Addresses, and Digital Pseudonyms," Comm. ACM 24, 2, February 1981, pp. 84-88. Cypherpunks-style remailers are a form of Chaum's "digital mixes," albeit far from ideal. ↩ David Chaum, "Security without Identification: Transaction Systems to make Big Brother Obsolete," Comm. ACM 28, 10, October 1985. This is an early paper on digital cash...be sure to consult more recent papers. ↩ The political opposition in Myan Mar—formerly Burma—is using Pretty Good Privacy running on DOS laptops in the jungles for communications amongst the rebels, according to Phil Zimmermann, author of PGP. This life-and-death usage underscores the role of crypto. ↩ David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, 2nd edition. A leading theoretician of anarcho-capitalism. (Hayek was another.) ↩ Tim May, The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, July 1988, distributed on the Usenet and on various mailing lists. ↩ Abuse, according to some views, of remailers is already occurring. A Cypherpunks-type remailer was used to post a proprietary hash function of RSA Data Security, Inc. to the Usenet. (Let me hasten to add that it was not a remailer I operate, or have control over, etc.) ↩ article on digital cash, The Economist, 26 November 1994. pp. 21-23. ↩ article on digital cash, Steven Levy, Wired. December 1994. ↩ See Kevin Kelly's Out of Control, 1994, for a discussion of how central control is failing, and how the modern paradigm is one of market mechanisms, personal choice, and technological empowerment. ↩ During the "Digital Telephony Bill" debate, an FBI official said that failure to mandate wiretap capabilities within the next 18 months would make it all moot, as the cost would rise beyond any reasonable budget (currently $500 million for retrofit costs). ↩ "Magic Money" was an experimental implementation of Chaum's digital cash system. It was coded by "Pr0duct Cypher," a pseudonymous member of the Cypherpunks list—none of us knows his real identity, as he used remailers to communicate with the list, and digitally signed his posts. Many of us found it too difficult to use, which is more a measure of the deep issues involved in using digital analogs (no pun intended) to real, physical money. ↩ Robin Hanson and David Friedman have written extensively about scenarios for dealing with the threats of extortionists, would-be assassins, etc. I am hoping some of their work gets published someday. (Much of the discussion was in 1992-3, on the "Extropians" mailing list.) ↩ Timothy C. May 535 Monterey Drive Aptos, CA 95003 U.S.A. tcmay(a)netcom.com December, 1994

1 0