From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 21:19:23 -0800 (PST)
To: Omegaman <omega@bigeasy.com>
Subject: cryptoanarchy
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.961224182704.3135A-100000@jolietjake.com>
Message-ID: <199612270519.VAA24202@netcom11.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


omegaman taunts me to rant about cryptoanarchy. frankly I find
it tiresome given its originator repeatedly refuses to answer
point-blank questions about key aspects of it. lacking this, I 
fail to take it seriously, given nobody else has a similar idea.



>THESIS:The deconstruction of democracy enabled by the inevitable genesis of
>cryptoanarchy will result in a more just (fair?) society.  

actually TCM tends to avoid talking about the demise of democracy
to avoid spilling his real opinions on it, namely that it is a pile
of crap that has corrupted civilization. this from someone who likes
to wrap himself in the constitution when the issue is free speech
or something else like that.

>Brutality amongst human beings has little to do with what type of
>government (or lack thereof) we have established.

bzzzzzzt, history readily denies this.

  Nor is brutality
>inevitable amongst human beings; governments have little or no affect on how
>individuals think and behave.

bzzzzzt, history readily denies this. but again it is amusing to see
the patently incorrect assertions that cryptoanarchists embrace and
flout.

>1) Do you agree that these things are an inevitable consequence of anonymous
>untraceable payment systems?

murder, assassination, kidnapping, they all already exist. I am dubious that
the existence of anonymous payments will change much in this area. I don't
think it will become any more prevalent. what TCM seems to imply in much
of his writing, but fails to outrightly assert because he's such a weasel,
is that the world would be a *better*place* with all these
things, which I vehemently reject.

>2) Do you agree then that all it would take is just one?  Or could one alone
>be stopped or controlled?  how?

it is not so much the point that these things can happen, that I am
debating, but that they are inevitable and even something to look
forward to that I think mark TCM as a wacko.

>3) How can these bad things be prevented with an anonymous untraceable 
>payment system?

terrorism has existed for centuries, and will continue to exist. it
cannot be prevented, in a sense, and in another way, it can be 
minimized. it's not a black or white issue as feebleminded people
would like to portray it as. 

I'm in favor of anonymous cash, but
I am also in favor of social/legal mechanisms to minimize its subversive
impact. note that "not dealing with kidnappers or terrorists" is
one such approach that does not involve police.

consider this: the cash is normally anonymous, but the govt would
have the ability to "tag" it in special circumstances, such as the
way stolen money from banks may explode red ink over the culprit.

the fact that cpunks would totally reject any such reasonable compromise
I find highly repellent.