Topic: The Cypherpunk Manifesto - We all should read it (Read 932 times)
This is interesting and the website is very nostalgic. There used to be only these sort of websites back in the day which are just using , , and the pre-defined HTML tags available to them. The post by GazetaBitcoin is also amazing, it's like many of them were actually trying to create something great back in the previous century. But I really love the implementation of Bitcoin. It's the best one could get or ask for.
BUMP, just to interact with the The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto - We all should read it by @GazetaBitcoin
Added the whole article in TT tag, looks good IMO.
Added the whole article in TT tag, looks good IMO.
Quote
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
Glad to see Bitcoin achieve those goals. Bitcoin deplore regulations, and is basically immune to them (if we manage to keep it decentralized)
Except for the privacy part. The only way to get privacy in Bitcoin is to use mixers and similar technologies, and even then you're not guaranteed anything, because chainanalysis companies are working on "un-mixing" as well as other forms of tracking and deanonymization. Monero is a beter fit for this description, but it comes with its own problems and tradeoffs, so it will never even have a chance of taking Bitcoin's place.
I guess this short documentary could sparkle some interest on the Chyperphunk movement
Not if you post that screenshot of Adam Back, it's not a documentary about him or blockstream 
I think you have a point here.
I have just replaced the screenshot with a new one. I think it better tells what the documentary is all about, actually.
I guess this short documentary could sparkle some interest on the Chyperphunk movement
Not if you post that screenshot of Adam Back, it's not a documentary about him or blockstream Joke on side, this is interesting tech history documentary to watch and it's not that long.
The documentary per se I find rather fast paced, in terms of how it introduces names and whips through them. If one wants to see who is who, you’d need to look elsewhere for a more focused approach, but for a good general oveview of the movement, it serves its purpose nicely.
Totally agree.
But we are writing on a 10 year old forum after all.
I have been told attention span has shortened dramatically recently, in an unknown cause-effect with social media popularity.
The focused approach is so 2010.
<…>
Besides the content and the core explanation, I often enjoy watching accompanying retro images. The ones that accompany this documentary, as a background to the story, are likely to be near to novel, and close to displaying unknown stone age artefacts to 90% of forum members ... The documentary per se I find rather fast paced, in terms of how it introduces names and whips through them. If one wants to see who is who, you’d need to look elsewhere for a more focused approach, but for a good general oveview of the movement, it serves its purpose nicely.
I guess this short documentary could sparkle some interest on the Chyperphunk movement:
Cypherpunks Write Code by Reason TV
Really interesting and in an enjoyable format.
EDIT: Previous Adam Back screenshot replaced with a more compelling one.
Cypherpunks Write Code by Reason TV
Really interesting and in an enjoyable format.
EDIT: Previous Adam Back screenshot replaced with a more compelling one.
The problem is that most third-party services have become in one way or another subject to governments and this problem is constantly increasing and we have to deal with it. How can we benefit from Bitcoin - ideally - in the presence of such bad things??
Just avoid third party services which you believe are not legit to bitcoin fundamentals. There are many interesting third party projects and legit third party contributors in this ecosystem.
I will name a few which I believe are insteresting projects:
Electrum.org
btcpayserver.org
bitcointalk.org
some mixers
and some others.
All of yours complaints are related to third party services, specially exchanges.
Those service providers have nothing to do with bitcoin protocol. Exchanges kyc doesn't affect bitcoin fundamentals neither its network.
You don't need exchanges to use bitcoins. Bitcoins doesn't need exchanges to survive.
Yes, true, all the complaints that I submitted related to the third-party service, I never complain about bitcoin, but I am a bitcoin lover and I am confident that one day bitcoin will be able to overcome all these difficulties that they put in the way, but more than that I dream that one day Bitcoin will be the currency The number one in the world and replaces Fiat.
I do not complain about bitcoin but I complain about those who try to circumvent the best of bitcoin, of course they can neither influence the bitcoin protocol nor the bitcoin survival because it has become a reality that no one can ignore.
The problem is that most third-party services have become in one way or another subject to governments and this problem is constantly increasing and we have to deal with it. How can we benefit from Bitcoin - ideally - in the presence of such bad things??
But my question is, are we beginning to lose this?
First there is KYC as most of the exchanges and important service sites have become required to activate KYC and this completely corrupts privacy,
Second, exchanges have recently become refusing to deposit bitcoin mixture !!!
Third, there are some large institutions that have acquired a lot of important services and sites in Crypto (Binance, for example). This puts all of these things in the
hands of one organization and this is close to centralization.
All of these things corrupts privacy and decentralization and make this beautiful dream an illusion on the ground !!
For example, I am from a banned country. Most exchanges prohibit me because I am from this country !!! Where is privacy and decentralization here??!! Is this freedom that I was dreaming??!!
First there is KYC as most of the exchanges and important service sites have become required to activate KYC and this completely corrupts privacy,
Second, exchanges have recently become refusing to deposit bitcoin mixture !!!
Third, there are some large institutions that have acquired a lot of important services and sites in Crypto (Binance, for example). This puts all of these things in the
hands of one organization and this is close to centralization.
All of these things corrupts privacy and decentralization and make this beautiful dream an illusion on the ground !!
For example, I am from a banned country. Most exchanges prohibit me because I am from this country !!! Where is privacy and decentralization here??!! Is this freedom that I was dreaming??!!
All of yours complaints are related to third party services, specially exchanges.
Those service providers have nothing to do with bitcoin protocol. Exchanges kyc doesn't affect bitcoin fundamentals neither its network.
You don't need exchanges to use bitcoins. Bitcoins doesn't need exchanges to survive.
Quote
Glad to see Bitcoin achieve those goals. Bitcoin deplore regulations, and is basically immune to them (if we manage to keep it decentralized)
Indeed we are happy to see Bitcoin achieve these goals, the most important thing that attracted me to Bitcoin is these things I mean privacy and decentralization. This space gives you freedom and keeps you out of the sight of observers and the arms of governments trying to control all of our actions.
But my question is, are we beginning to lose this?
First there is KYC as most of the exchanges and important service sites have become required to activate KYC and this completely corrupts privacy,
Second, exchanges have recently become refusing to deposit bitcoin mixture !!!
Third, there are some large institutions that have acquired a lot of important services and sites in Crypto (Binance, for example). This puts all of these things in the
hands of one organization and this is close to centralization.
All of these things corrupts privacy and decentralization and make this beautiful dream an illusion on the ground !!
For example, I am from a banned country. Most exchanges prohibit me because I am from this country !!! Where is privacy and decentralization here??!! Is this freedom that I was dreaming??!!
I think our biggest enemy to absolute privacy is "comfort". If you think about it, comfort and convenience created the "check" system, credit cards, loans and all sorts of nifty protocols and gadgets that make our life easier and quicker. Every time a true piece of software or technology comes around that provides true privacy, we start to nibble away at it, to make it easier to use, or safer to use. We constantly exchange our personal rights and our personal privacy for a faster internet, or a quicker login to Facebook. I, myself, have a huge number of saved passwords and logins, to avoid memorizing and/or writing them down. I keep a good solid hold on my computer protection, but the most private way would be a pen and paper record. I speak for myself, and for a load of others, when I say that it is truly hard to embrace the ideals we speak of to the full extent, when technology has made life so much more convenient. There used to be a social media question that people would post and share to the idea of "Would you give up the internet for a year for a million dollars?", something like that, and most people would, but the subtle little things is what gets you.
It's hard to be the person we want to be and the person we have become at the same time, maybe one day the two will meet.
It's hard to be the person we want to be and the person we have become at the same time, maybe one day the two will meet.
Where website/s you usually cite this kind of article if there's any?
I like coindesk, blockgeeks, techcrunch, wired, Gizmob, theverge.
All of those have good and bad articles, justook for good ones
Interesting articles but reading both of them it seems the Cypherpunk Manifesto is just a motivation from Timothy's article, well, just knowing it's published year it is evident AFAIK.
(I love to read these kinds of articles, I read many per day).
Where website/s you usually cite this kind of article if there's any? 
Also interesting to see this article today, The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.
Few months ago I discovered the Cypherpunk Manifesto. I didn't discover it in bitcointalk forum, but in articles that I read about crypto and technology (I love to read these kinds of articles, I read many per day).
I think more people here should be talking about the Cypherpunk Manifesto, as it is strictly related to bitcoin and to privacy. No doubt it influenced bitcoin creation a lot.
Cypherpunk Manifesto was written in 1993 by Eric Hughes. It is amazing to see something that was written almost 30 years ago to be so relevant today.
A Cypherpunk's Manifesto
by Eric Hughes
Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy. A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.
If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it? One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all. If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties. The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.
Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible. In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages, my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying or what others are saying to me; my provider only need know how to get the message there and how much I owe them in fees. When my identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction, I have no privacy. I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must always reveal myself.
Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction systems. Until now, cash has been the primary such system. An anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system. An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.
Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy. Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.
We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence. It is to their advantage to speak of us, and we should expect that they will speak. To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the realities of information. Information does not just want to be free, it longs to be free. Information expands to fill the available storage space. Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin; Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and understands less than Rumor.
We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
For privacy to be widespread it must be part of a social contract. People must come and together deploy these systems for the common good. Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's fellows in society. We the Cypherpunks seek your questions and your concerns and hope we may engage you so that we do not deceive ourselves. We will not, however, be moved out of our course because some may disagree with our goals.
The Cypherpunks are actively engaged in making the networks safer for privacy. Let us proceed together apace.
Onward.
Eric Hughes <[email protected]>
9 March 1993
Some comments:
Now this is the part where he almost describes Bitcoin technology. Look
Glad to see Bitcoin achieve those goals. Bitcoin deplore regulations, and is basically immune to them (if we manage to keep it decentralized)
I think more people here should be talking about the Cypherpunk Manifesto, as it is strictly related to bitcoin and to privacy. No doubt it influenced bitcoin creation a lot.
Cypherpunk Manifesto was written in 1993 by Eric Hughes. It is amazing to see something that was written almost 30 years ago to be so relevant today.
Quote
A Cypherpunk's Manifesto
by Eric Hughes
Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy. A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.
If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it? One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all. If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties. The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.
Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible. In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages, my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying or what others are saying to me; my provider only need know how to get the message there and how much I owe them in fees. When my identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction, I have no privacy. I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must always reveal myself.
Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction systems. Until now, cash has been the primary such system. An anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system. An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.
Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy. Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.
We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence. It is to their advantage to speak of us, and we should expect that they will speak. To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the realities of information. Information does not just want to be free, it longs to be free. Information expands to fill the available storage space. Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin; Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and understands less than Rumor.
We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
For privacy to be widespread it must be part of a social contract. People must come and together deploy these systems for the common good. Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's fellows in society. We the Cypherpunks seek your questions and your concerns and hope we may engage you so that we do not deceive ourselves. We will not, however, be moved out of our course because some may disagree with our goals.
The Cypherpunks are actively engaged in making the networks safer for privacy. Let us proceed together apace.
Onward.
Eric Hughes <[email protected]>
9 March 1993
Some comments:
Quote
Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.
Quote
Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible. In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. ..... I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must always reveal myself.
Quote
Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy
Now this is the part where he almost describes Bitcoin technology. Look
Quote
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
Glad to see Bitcoin achieve those goals. Bitcoin deplore regulations, and is basically immune to them (if we manage to keep it decentralized)
Jump to: