Why is cryptoanarchy irreversible?

[Peter Hendrickson]

At 5:18 PM 11/7/1996, Ted Cabeen wrote:
>At 02:38 PM 11/7/96 -0800, you wrote:
>>>Jeremiah A Blatz wrote:
>>>ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) writes:
>>> Well, once I've got my strong crypto and electronic commerce, and 20
>>> or so virtual identities to do things for me, and the gub'ment can't
>>> tell what money I'm making and spending, so they can't tax me. So if
>>> they can't tax me, and they can't tax lots of folks, then they can't
>>> pay their jack-booted thugs. So the goverment becomes irrelevant. It
>>> can't support a huge police state infrastructure, and certainly can't
>>> but mega-crays to break my crypto, so how're they going to retain
>>> control?
>>> When we say anarchy, we mean anarchy.

>> This only works if there are large numbers of people who think it is
>> a good idea.  Otherwise, the resources of the Federal Government
>> may be directed quite effectively against a small number of people.

>> If you can get a life prison term for your strong crypto you may
>> hesitate to use it.  If not, then you may get to be an example
>> for everybody else.

> That's why we have to develop stealth PGP and good stego so that the
> government doesn't even know that you're using the strong crypto that has
> been outlawed.  If they can't prove that there's actually a message in the
> picture of the catsgills you just downloaded off of
> alt.binaries.pictures.nature, you can't get a life sentence in jail.

What happens when they find it on your disk?  Remember, you don't have
an encrypted virtual disk, or if you do, the consequences are the same
if you didn't.

Peter Hendrickson
ph at netcom.com