From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 93 12:11:02 PDT
To: extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Subject: Fighting the Wiretap Chip Plan
Message-ID: <9304181911.AA04196@netcom.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


(I'm using the "Wiretap Chip" name instead of "Clipper," as someone has
suggested. It _does_ carry a better message.)

This essay is bit rambling, as I'm in my lousy editor and don't have
time to rearrange things into a more formal essay. Instead, I'll just
make a number of points.

I've seen a lot of discussion here about who to talk to, how to phrase
the issues, and so forth. Fax numbers (good!), phone numbers, etc. But
let me point out that the public discussion is not likely to do very
much, for several reasons.

1. A very tiny universe of listeners. Crypto is too abstract for most
people. I doubt anything we say can change this. And "privacy" is a
complicated theme....the anti- and pro-abortion sides have been
bandying it about for over a decade, to little avail. The key is to
reach the relatively small fraction of policy shapers, both outside
government and inside.

2. Journalists want the pithy quote, the sound bite, the attention
grabber. They don't really care if 37 faxes have been received in
support of some position--that just isn't news. 

I often shake my head in despair at the demands for "good quotes," but
I still try to spew them out.  Ironically, my .sig block, with all the
comments about "crypto anarchy," "information markets," "zero
knowledge," etc., often were the triggers that got me in touch with
journalists. For example, Julian Dibell of the "Village Voice" saw my
stuff in sci.crypt last fall and called me...only then did he learn of
the existence of the Cypherpunks group. Likewise, Kevin Kelly, of
"Whole Earth Review" fame, and now editor of "Wired," contacted me to
ask about the terms in my cryptically cryptic sig.

(Some people have already put good stuff about "Stop the Big Brother
Chip" and "Say No to the Wiretap Chip" in their sigs...this is great
advertising!) 

3. I've been interviewed on crypto matters by several journalists, all
of whom I respect. (They were, for the record: Steven Levy, for the
"Wired" piece, Kevin Kelly, as editor of "Wired" and for a possible
story in "Whole Earth Review," Julian Dibell, for "The Village Voice"
(forthcoming, he tells me), Dave Mandl, for a radio station in New
Jersey, and a couple of minor quotes here and there. (I can't begin to
compete of course with John Gilmore or Eric Hughes, in terms of
numbers of interviews.)

4. My conclusion is that the very term "Cypherpunks" was useful--even
though I had little to do with choosing the name and sometimes find it
distasteful (I prefer Miles Davis to Nine Inch Nails, for example).
Consider that there are already several well-publicized groups devoted
to various aspects of computer privacy: the EFF, the CPSR, the ACLU,
etc. (these groups should be well-known to all of you). Before we came
along, complete with our semi-outlaw, trendy name, the standard
process when a crypto or privacy issue came up would be to get
obligatory interviews with John Perry Barlow (I like him, but if I
read one more account of his experiences as a lyricist for the
Grateful Dead I'm going to puke...this is overexposure with a capital
"O"), Mitch Kapor, and various folks from the ACLU and CPSR. The
Cypherpunks provide a useful contrast, in my opinion.

5. And the Cypherpunks turn out to have a lot of very bright and
interesting people, including many from the phone phreaker community,
the PGP development community, and various other subcultures (like
FidoNet, modem makers, wireless communications, and so on). This
automatically makes us more diverse than groups like the CPSR and
ACLU.

6. In a sense, we occupy an ecological niche that meets certain
journalistic needs.

7. In summary, I wouldn't place a lot of emphasis on standard
political actions...it just doesn't go very far. Talking to our
friends and family will have a miniscule effect, both in raw numbers
and because the next election is a long way off. Need I say more?

Subversive actions that generate media attention, that trigger other
people to begin to do things (such as homebrew voice encryption with
SoundBlaster boards and CELP compression, as just one example), and
that create new communities (Cypherpunks, Extropians, etc.), are much
more effective.

By the way, in a more standard way of doing things, I've been in touch
with Jim Bidzos, President of RSA Data Security. I sent out a note on
this recently.

And I'll be meeting this evening with Eric Hughes, who's visiting the
Monterey Bay area. We may be calling an emergency meeting of the
Cypherpunks soon. Stay tuned.

Don't get me wrong, folks. These are crucial times. A "War on Crypto"
that mimics the "War on Drugs" is a distinct possibility. Any actions
we take, from writing letters to calling t.v. stations to boycotting
vendors of the "Wiretap Chip," will be useful.

-Tim


-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.