From: "Omegaman" <omega@bigeasy.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 08:41:34 -0800 (PST)
To: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: cryptoanarchy
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.961224182704.3135A-100000@jolietjake.com>
Message-ID: <199612271638.KAA03014@bigeasy.bigeasy.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> >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. 

Exactly my point.  I believe interactions between individuals have 
far more to do with our (dis)inclinations towards brutal behavior 
that governments do.  Governments have little influence over human 
attitudes.

> 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

I agree, actually.  I don't see an increase in these types of crimes 
because of the existence of anonymous payment methods.  What TCM and 
others have argued is that getting away with these crimes will be 
much easier due to anonymous payment schemes.

I would argue that anonymous payment protocols are not necessarily 
any easier for the foolish criminal to fuck up than current methods 
of payment for, ahem, services rendered.

Only if untraceable anonymous digital cash becomes a ubiquitous 
(and easy-to-utilize) standard will such crimes be more difficult to 
catch.  (TCMay says only one such system is necessary.  I disagree 
and will get back to this point in a later message)

> 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.

I think you're reading a little more into it than is there, but 
that's your perogative.
 
> 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.

I'm not in favor of legal mechanisms.  I think social mechanisms are 
all but inevitable. (more on this later) I don't think it's necessary 
or even desirable to build in orwellian schemes.  

The government's desire to limit untracability has far more to do 
with taxation than the four horsemen scenario.  Yes, I've heard of 
memes.

me
--------------------------------------------------------------
 Omegaman <mailto:omega@bigeasy.com>
 PGP Key fingerprint =  6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2  
                        59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 
Send a message with the text "get key" in the 
"Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key.
--------------------------------------------------------------