From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 94 16:24:54 PST
To: sergey@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu (Sergey Goldgaber)
Subject: Newbies on the List
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9403031715.C23725-0100000@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu>
Message-ID: <199403040025.QAA03656@mail.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Sergey Goldgaber writes:

(quoting Jef P.)

> > By the way, this discussion is an example of something I have labelled the
> > "silence is invisible" phenomenon.
> 
> > Jef 
> 
> I think this "silence" has a good side.  I've only read this list
> for a short time, but I already respect the oppinions of a few regulars.
> I don't expect every idea I post to the list to be completely new (quite 
> the opposite, usually).  The few replies I, and most other newbies, get are 
> usually not very thought out, and have as many holes in them as the original 
> suggestion.  We debate back and forth for a short while, but seem to be 
> generally ignored.  The 'elders' on the list stay silent.

I want to take this opportunity to say that I do _not_ disparage the
enthusiasm of newcomers like Sergey G. and Gary Jeffers. The
"problem," to the extent theere is one, is that newcomers frequently
have a bunch of things they really want to say (which is good), but
lack the context to see how their points fit in with what's possible
to do, what's already been done, and what is naive (which is bad). And
after a while, having said what they wanted to say their posts taper
off.

(A few of us are still blabbing incessantly a year and a half after
joining the list. Hey, it beats working for a living.)

Gary sent me some e-mail inquiring about the archive of past
postings--regrettably, my current understanding is that the toad.com
archives are not (yet?)  available for browsing and retrieval of past
posts. Maybe someday.

Chronological age has little to do with being an "old-timer" or a
"newcomer." For example, Sameer Parekh is but a freshman at Berkeley,
but he is surely and old-timer. Stick around for several months on the
list, and you'll be an old-timer.

> Its when those respected few regulars speak that my ears prick up.  I, for
> one, haven't read all the literature on the subject.  So the oppinions of
> someone who has are greatly valued.  If genuine intrest is shown in
> something you've proposed it tells you that you're on the right track.
> Input coming from the 'elders' is doubly important.

Here are some things newcomers can do:

1. Immediately run out and buy a copy of Bruce Schneier's "Applied
Cryptography." Do this before doing anything else. It covers so many
of the areas we deal with that to not have it handy is a waste of your
and our time. The book is pricey, at $45, but go out and mow some
lawns or donate some blood if you can't afford it. You can't afford to
be on this list without it (or some equivalent texts).

2. Read the various articles on crypto that are mentioned here fairly
often (and which will be in the FAQ).

3. Speaking of FAQs, some good ones already exist in sci.crypt. The
"Crypt Cabal" puts out a good one every month or so. Others exist.
Read them.

4. In general, read sci.crypt and talk.politics.crypto. And
comp.org.eff.talk. And maybe the Clipper and PGP groups.

5. Speaking of PGP, some good stuff in the documentation for PGP.

6. Finally, hold off on posting for at least a few weeks after joining
the list. Too many folks "shoot their wad" by hyperenthusiastically
expounding on a basically flawed idea too early in their history on
the list. 

> It would be nice if constructive, intelligent criticism was offered on
> every post.  Unfortuantely, newbies tend to get flamed more often than
> praised.  In that regard, I believe that the "silence" from those who 
> know better is usually good.

The problem is that about 700-800 people are on this list--though I
find this hard to believe...and certainly many of them must be
deleting nearly everything unread. If each "Has anyone ever heard of
foo?" post was carefully replied to....

> If I recieved the sort of annoyed response that Gary Jeffers got from you
> on one of my first post, I don't think I would have stuck around for long.
> Perhaps some of the senior cypherpunks would prefer a moderated list
> where all newbie discussion is nipped in the bud.  In that case, I 
> suggest that they form the "eLyTe-cYpHeRpUnKs" list, and distribute it 
> privately among themselves.  I believe that fresh blood is essential for 
> the development of the "cypherpunks"; so, this route is not recommended.

I think the response Gary got were actually quite polite, especially
the ones that stated the fact that his views were likely wrong and
should not, by silent assent, be taken as the consensus of the list.
No one called him names or told him to get off the list. Even my
comments on "stenography" were not all that harsh, in my opinion. 

(And we've since exchanged e-mail.)

I don't think any of us want to see newbies "nipped in the bud." But
we certainly all want to see newbies brought up to speed. A moderated
list is not being sought by anyone I know, at least not for the
Cyperpunks list (though Perry Metzger has proposed his own moderated
list on crypto issues).

Many newcomers to crypto have become serious contributors in short
order. Likewise, many old-timers (like David Sternlight) have never
reached the point of being a "contributor," so draw your own
conclusions.

--Tim May


-- 
..........................................................................
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: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."