anti-prosecution tactics. (Was Re:)
Troy Benjegerdes
hozer at hozed.org
Thu Jan 16 13:33:07 PST 2014
;)
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 09:49:33PM +0100, rysiek wrote:
> OHAI,
>
> Dnia czwartek, 16 stycznia 2014 14:25:51 Troy Benjegerdes pisze:
> > > So please tell us, oh enlightened one, what is the threat model?
> > >
> > > Because I would say the exact same thing about those who badmouth privacy
> > > advocates and privacy itself: obviously those in power have vested
> > > interests in violating privacy, be it for monetary, or political gain.
> > >
> > > They have vested interests in convincing the unwashed masses that either
> > > "privacy is dead", "privacy is not needed" or "privacy is impossible". So
> > > that they can more easily spy upon us all, and so that it gets that
> > > harder for privacy-conscious people to maintain their privacy (as that is
> > > an ecology, if you do not maintain your privacy, information about you
> > > might help somebody to deduce information about me).
> > >
> > > I would say that the vested interest is more clear in the above than in
> > > what you stated. So please tell me, what do I not see, or (if I am
> > > "working for the man"), where's the cash that I must've gotten for my
> > > services over the years?..
> >
> > I'm going to trust you when you say you are an advocate for all the right
> > reasons.
>
> Cool. :)
>
> > I also like to trust, but verify. I cannot verify without invading your
> > privacy, and since that's important to you, I won't.
>
> Not true. You can verify my public actions, my public statements. What matters
> in the end is if the result is right. If my actions, my statements were
> conducive towards better privacy or bettering of our common human condition,
> one can assume with high degree of certainty that my reasons were right. If
> not, well, woe is me.
>
> > The vested interests absolutely would love us all to believe privacy is
> > dead, but will not themselves give it up, making for an extreme imbalance
> > of power.
>
> And information assymetry. That's why we have to build our own tools and use
> them to guard our own privacy.
pgp and gnupg are 'pretty good'. Bitcoin is a disaster because the vested interests
appear to have achived complete regulatory capture through FINCEN and the
Banking Secrecy Act
> > I, on the other hand, am a person. I am not, however, particularly private,
> > because it costs me too fucking much in terms of money, time, and paranoia
> > to actually test and verify that shit I think is supposed to be private
> > actually is.
>
> Well, there is always the element of trust. I have to (I don't have the time,
> money, etc to verify myself) trust my hardware and software to some extent.
>
> But I *can* choose hardware and software in a way that should make that trust
> better founded. Free software, open hardware. I use an "ancient" Nokia N900,
> which is by far not ideal, still much better than any iPhone.
>
> I can make listeners' lives harder. And I do.
>
> > What I want is for private cypherpunks and transparent cypherpunks to
> > respect each other's values and spill the secrets of the fuckers who say
> > privacy is dead but will only themselves give it up in the cold grip of the
> > grave.
>
> Abso-fucking-lutely! Still, I would like to know what is the threat model you
> were talking about. I don't see how advocating privacy and anonymity can be
> sinister -- apart from using these terms in context that these terms have no
> purpose other than muddying the waters (i.e. "privacy of government agencies
> or corporations").
>
> --
> Pozdr
> rysiek
The cost of privacy is the threat. There's a lot we can do with things that are
Free, as in Freedom (software). I think there's also a great advance waiting when
a viral-freedom copyright license (GPL/AGPL) cryptocoin can figure out how to
clearly express the cost tradeoff of doing verifiably secure anonymous transactions
vs what it costs to just tell the world you are sending $20 to your grandma and
making sure it gets there.
The problem with bitcoin is all the developers who know what they are doing are now
part of the 1% that benefits from exploiting privacy asymmetry.
I can't trust someone talking with forked tongue about how cryptocoins are BOTH a
serious business currency, AND protect your privacy.
-- Troy
More information about the cypherpunks
mailing list