1996-02-22 - Re: “This is not Coderpunks–we don’t need no steenking cryptography!”

Header Data

From: Peter Monta <pmonta@qualcomm.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 1f9ec2799666937043664a417948e196a8df4fbc059bbdb63c3392d4d7aecd2e
Message ID: <199602212227.OAA14459@mage.qualcomm.com>
Reply To: <ad50b3ff09021004c04a@[205.199.118.202]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-22 03:24:30 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 11:24:30 +0800

Raw message

From: Peter Monta <pmonta@qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 11:24:30 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: "This is not Coderpunks--we don't need no steenking cryptography!"
In-Reply-To: <ad50b3ff09021004c04a@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <199602212227.OAA14459@mage.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Tim May writes:

> So, if anyone asks "What does this have to do with cryptography?!?!,"
> point out to him that this is Cypherpunks, not Coderpunks!

This is a reasonable distinction, and it's certainly the interface
between cryptography and social/net/monetary/freedom issues where
I find cypherpunks valuable.

Your laundry list is amusing, and I think the IPG debunking
traffic is useful, but sooner or later there has to be
effectively an "end of story".

Cheers,
Peter Monta   pmonta@qualcomm.com
Qualcomm, Inc./Globalstar






Thread