cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-01-06 - Re: Siegel and Lewis

Header Data

From: Carol Anne Braddock <carolann@mm.com>
To: Dan Harmon <harmon@tenet.edu>
Message Hash: 8744c7343eb64855bc904de298c36da3fc294d38552ac371484e3ce11da70fe0
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9501060235.C12234-0100000@downburst.mm.com>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9501060003.C6821-0100000@Joyce-Perkins.tenet.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1995-01-06 07:59:42 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 23:59:42 PST

Raw message

From: Carol Anne Braddock  <carolann@mm.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 23:59:42 PST
To: Dan Harmon <harmon@tenet.edu>
Subject: Re: Siegel and Lewis
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9501060003.C6821-0100000@Joyce-Perkins.tenet.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9501060235.C12234-0100000@downburst.mm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Guess I'm worse than Siegel & Lewis now, huh?

On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, Dan Harmon wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 1995, Doug Barnes wrote:
> > Why is it that so many cypherpunks like the economist?
> > I learned recently that Eric is a big fan. So am I. You're certainly 
> > not the first other cypherpunk to mention this. Weird. I mean, it's
> > not exactly a radical publication... it just gets its *&#$*#$ facts
> > right. Probably this is it.
> > Doug
> The reason is, and I do not presume to speak for other individuals on 
> this list, the Economist looks at the world from an independent (i.e. not 
> owned by one of the major publishing houses, if I'm not mistaken) point 
> of view, and is not afraid to pursue different analysis of a topic.
> 
> I will also venture that the closest that we have in the US is Forbes.
> 
> Dan
>   
>

Thread