Re: [Buthurt awwwww] unsubscribe

On 09/05/2016 08:39 AM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:

unsubscribe

The bottom of the page Buhbye https://lists.cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks

...

On 5 Sep 2016, at 18:13, Razer wrote:

On 09/04/2016 10:30 PM, Zenaan Harkness quoted, I believe John Young:

...

That sounds like what cypherpunks was set up to combat, the withdrawal from politcial affairs into safe sanctuary of infallible mathematics...

That's how ALL the problems start. Cloistering and it's whorehouse, Academia.

Einstein said if he had known what they were going to do with his theoretical works he would have never cooperated.

Don't be "Einstein".

Rr

...

Forwarding the following for our collective prayer:

----- Forwarded message ----- Could not, agree, more !

Identify yourselves, all defeatists, trolls, counter intelligence "professionals", cold water bots, and horsey nay sayers all polluting relevant, indeed dire discussion with distracts and "comedy" !

Better still, don't !

Read. Absorb. Imbibe.

Then contemplate for at least three nights.

Then, carefully, draft even the smallest, as long it be constructive.

Then re-read that draft. Consider it be useful for those who might have but a small flame, that flame which might be gently fostered and fanned with others into a bright and future defining flame!

And if your soul weeps for truth, for compassion as much as passion, warmth and empathy as much as strength and bold eclat, and with your humble words you have passed your own test, then post!

Speak to this world which so desperately needs your care, your ability, your genuine contribution.

anon

On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 09:12:25AM -0400, John Young wrote:

...

What is striking about discussion on the two cryptography mail lists, both set up to minimize discussing political and social issues to avoid cypherpunks acceptance of them, is the tentative reconsideration of those issues due to Snowden's revelations, miniscule as they are.

Notable among those raising the political threat are those who disdained the issue on cypherpunks and stomped off to set up alternatives ham-handedly moderated to cease and desist the "off-topic."

A few now say, bray more like it, NSA has betrayed us through political manipulation of officials and the public, and that is an important point which often came up on cypherpunks and still does, with somewhat less complaining about it.

For Snowden has shown the political has won out over the technical, and the technicals are fraught with what to do about it, and much fingerpointing is going on along with a few claims of having forewarned this betrayal would happen. No moderation yet has shut down this "off-topic." But much gumming and gnawing of the futility of technical means against the vulgar political.

What has been shown in the discussion is that the technical wizards are not nearly as competent at the messy political as they are at technical sophistication. The resulting conversation is a mish-mash of fairly high level technical discourse interleaved with fairly clumsy political opinionating. So technical clubs are being swung to answer political jabs, that is petty squabblling and exchange of slurs has replaced rational discourse. Thus the convo has become politicized with as much stupidity and ignorance as sharp thinking and mutual respect.

NSA and its bosses would be happy if this became the norm in cryptography as in the real world. And some opine that this outcome is being, and has been in the past, and will be in the future, orchestrated for just that result.

That sounds like what cypherpunks was set up to combat, the withdrawal from politcial affairs into safe sanctuary of infallible mathematics coated with unending challengences to implement illusory protection from political mayhem. So it has come to pass, there is no refuge from politics, and the once reviled tin-hats of conspiracy theories are replacing anomymous masks, especially by the best and brightest cryptographers who have been hoodwinked far more than dreamed of in earliest days of cypherpunks.

Still, there are die-hard PR-driven comsec experts rolling out advice for what to do to protect the public -- meaning, cynically protecting their severely damaged reputation of "concern for the public interest (R)". Not yet willing to admit losing the comsec and privacy war so avidly promoted with HTTPS, SSL, PGP, PFS, OTR, Tor, on and on, they continue to hustle comsec customers with promises of here's what we have got to do, take it from us experienced veterans (read my remarks, hear my TV interviews, read my messages on cryptography, gorge on recyclings on Slashdot, Twitter, Reddit, Voice of America, EFF. Guardian, New York Times, ProPublica, ACLU, EPIC, on and on):

Lo, special prosecute NSA, take it to the courts, a tired political gambit for media semaphoring, fund raising, conceding technical defeat and begging political rescue by what's that you say, account churning lawyers, political lobbyists and journalistic hacks.

That is so obnoxious, murmurs the cryptography mail lists, so opportunistically off-topic, moderator do your censoring, let's get back to the good stuff. Despite the murmurrings there recurs calls for "cut the cowardly shit, let's fight." One guess who said that.