4.11.1. The Crypto Anarchy Principle: Strong crypto permits unbreakable encrypion, unforgeable signatures, untraceable electronic messages, and unlinkable pseudonomous identities. This ensures that some transactions and communications can be entered into only voluntarily. External force, law, and regulation cannot be applied. This is "anarchy," in the sense of no outside rulers and laws. Voluntary arrangements, back- stopped by voluntarily-arranged institutions like escrow services, will be the only form of rule. This is "crypto anarchy." 4.11.2. crypto allows a return to contracts that governments cannot breach - based on reputation, repeat business - example: ordering illegal material untraceably and anonymously,,,governments are powerless to do anything - private spaces, with the privacy enforced via cryptographic permissions (access credentials) - escrows (bonds) 4.11.3. Technological solutions over legalistic regulations + Marc Ringuette summarized things nicely: - "What we're after is some "community standards" for cyberspace, and what I'm suggesting is the fairly libertarian standard that goes like this: " Prefer technological solutions and self-protection solutions over rule-making, where they are feasible. "This is based on the notion that the more rules there are, the more people will call for the "net police" to enforce them. If we can encourage community standards which emphasize a prudent level of self-protection, then we'll be able to make do with fewer rules and a less intrusive level of policing."[Marc Ringuette, 1993-03-14] + Hal Finney has made cogent arguments as to why we should not become too complacent about the role of technology vis- a-vis politics. He warns us not to grow to confident: - "Fundamentally, I believe we will have the kind of society that most people want. If we want freedom and privacy, we must persuade others that these are worth having. There are no shortcuts. Withdrawing into technology is like pulling the blankets over your head. It feels good for a while, until reality catches up. The next Clipper or Digital Telephony proposal will provide a rude awakening." [Hal Finney, POLI: Politics vs Technology, 1994-01-02] - "The idea here is that the ultimate solution to the low signal-to-noise ratio on the nets is not a matter of forcing people to "stand behind their words". People can stand behind all kinds of idiotic ideas. Rather, there will need to be developed better systems for filtering news and mail, for developing "digital reputations" which can be stamped on one's postings to pass through these smart filters, and even applying these reputations to pseudonyms. In such a system, the fact that someone is posting or mailing pseudonymously is not a problem, since nuisance posters won't be able to get through." [Hal Finney, 1993- 02-23] 4.11.4. Reputations 4.11.5. I have a moral outlook that many will find unacceptable or repugnant. To cut to the chase: I support the killing of those who break contracts, who steal in serious enough ways, and who otherwise commit what I think of as crimes. + I don't mean this abstractly. Here's an example: - Someone is carrying drugs. He knows what he's involved in. He knows that theft is punishable by death. And yet he steals some of the merchandise. - Dealers understand that they cannot tolerate this, that an example must be made, else all of their employees will steal. - Understand that I'm not talking about the state doing the killing, nor would I do the killing. I'm just saying such things are the natural enforcement mechanism for such markets. Realpolitik. - (A meta point: the drug laws makes things this way. Legalize all drugs and the businesses would be more like "ordinary" businesses.) - In my highly personal opinion, many people, including most Congressrodents, have committed crimes that earn them the death penalty; I will not be sorry to see anonymous assassination markets used to deal with them. 4.11.6. Increased espionage will help to destroy nation-state-empires like the U.S., which has gotten far too bloated and far too dependent on throwing its weight around; nuclear "terrorism" may knock out a few cities, but this may be a small price to pay to undermine totally the socialist welfare states that have launched so many wars this century.
Next Page: 4.12 Loose Ends
Previous Page: 4.10 Libertarian Issues
By Tim May, see README
HTML by Jonathan Rochkind