Talk:Crypto-anarchy/Archive 1

message: Since—according to the discussion here—neither the anarcho-capitalists nor the traditional anarchists are willing to vouch for crypto-anarchism (for good reasons), I don't see how the current Anarchism template is appropriate. In all honesty crypto-anarchism seems to me like a fairly underdeveloped idea that a few people came up with pretty recently, instead of the rich political/social philosophy with 150 years of history that anarchism is. I vote for immediate removal of the template while retaining the See Also section which can contain whatever links are deemed useful. -- Bk0 03:03, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what anon is saying here, but I gather he/she's arguing that crypto-anarchism is a sub-category of anarcho-capitalism. I'm trying to be generous to anarcho-capitalism in assuming that it is not wholly dependent upon crytography and computer technology, but I confess that I don't know enough to say that with certainty. Nevertheless, the comments in the above discussions tend to argue against what anon seems to be saying. --Bk0 16:32, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anarchism template not appropriate

message: The notion that the libertarian template belongs here is likewise questionable. Libertarians are like the political variant of that religious sect which gets carried away with evangelizing themselves everywhere, even to claim ownership over topics in anarchism. Anarchy by definition is hard to delineate, but it best described as a directive toward no government. Libertarianism claims to be all things to all people and hence its natural that the related template keeps popping up everywhere. I argue to use the anarchy topicbox or none at all. -SV|t 04:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Remove it. Use none at all 137.222.40.132 13:27, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template 

message: The very existence of crypto-anarchism, and the fact that people are bickering inconclusively about whether it belongs under traditional anarchism, anarcho-capitalism, all of the above, or none of the above, argues for having the main anarchism article be of a "big tent" nature, defining anarchism broadly and generically instead of a particular subsect or movement of it, and hence encompassing anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-socialism, and also crypto-anarchism (whether one might regard it as capitalist, socialist, both, or neither). *Dan* 16:14, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
:Keep your Anarchism POV war over there, if you don't mind. --Bk0 22:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big-tent anarchism 

message: Yodelbank.com has ceased to exist [in Jan.2006 ]. I don't know whether it was evil effort of world governments to stop anonymous money, or lack of public interest to anonymous digital cash or simply lack of real-world ca$h to run domain. Nevertheless, I suggest to remove link as I do not see any argument to believe it will appear again in feasible future.silpol 11:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low-level, yet practical and pragmatical issues 

message: It is just plain wrong. Cryptography is not illegal in Russia. It is illegal to use non-certified cryptographyc tools for information which contain state secrets, some other protected forms of information  and the like. Private bussiness (except banks and goverment contactors) and ordinary citizens free to use anyithing. So, I delete this remark.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.194.106 (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illegal in russia 

message: In the Plausible Deniability section, it says
   "Because summary punishment for crimes are illegal"
Where?  I'll bet there are any number of countries where it's not only legal, but the norm.
The norm is always wrong.
*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 05:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Say What??? 

message: Crypto-anarchism is often criticized for making it easy and safe to illegally share files such as copyrighted movies and music. Depending on the software used, these types of systems facilitate easy access to large quantities of child pornography.
It is also very easy for criminals to make use of the networks to coordinate sabotage and terrorism. Assassination markets is a good example of the way in which crypto-anarchism could be used to these ends.[3] Crypto-anarchists acknowledge that such freedom could be abused by criminals, but claim that criminals are already communicating anonymously, so that the networks will just bring the benefits of privacy and freedom of anonymity to ordinary people.
...so, presumably anarchists would care about breaking the law merely because it is breaking the law, and consider such 'criminals' to be abusing the system? This is pretty inconcievable, given that anarchists generally consider states and repressive organs illegitimate and opressive. 
Surely a consistently anarchist doctrine would respond saying how it was a good thing to allow people to break copyrights - far less radical ppl, like Richard Stallman would consider such sharing a good thing, a substantial number of anarchists are communists, and depending on definition all or most are socialist - and this has certainly been so historically, so theyd not care of protecting fictitous new forms of property, but moreover destroying even existing forms; and also like, for instance, the FreeNet project, would defend child pornography and terrorist coordination on the grounds of freedom of speech ("The true test of someone who claims to believe in Freedom of Speech is whether they tolerate speech which they disagree with, or even find disgusting. " http://freenetproject.org/faq.html#copyright and "This is important, most people fail to see or address this point when debating the issue of copyright, so let me make it clear: You cannot guarantee freedom of speech and enforce copyright law. It is for this reason that Freenet, a system designed to protect Freedom of Speech, must prevent enforcement of copyright" http://freenetproject.org/philosophy.html). And these dont even proclaim to be anarchists.  Heres an individualist anarchist critique of the concept of 'intellectual property' http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/libhe/libhe023.pdf 
As far as terrorism goes, well, though having a critique of common terrorism (i.e. targeting of or not caring if one kills innocent people), anarchism has historically not accepted the state monopoly on violence either. Anarchist have done 'propaganda of deed', frequently involving illegal acts like property destructions, and in some cases, political assasinations , and Bakunin called for creation of 'sectet societies' in certain situations to carry on the political program. 
Eg, see on infoshop.org:
Anarchism does have some history of political terrorism, but this has always been a small part of anarchist history. In fact, most of what has been called anarchist "terrorism" can be seen more accurately as political violence against political targets (cops, capitalists, and politicians)...There is no such thing as eco-terrorism. The actions that are given this label are nonviolent actions against property. There is no intent to hurt or kill people.
So, while they might regret that terrorists would use such means of collaboration for their ends, i wouldnt think theyd mind there existing the potential for such covert collaboration in doing illegal violent acts, for they actually advocate such tactics, in certain cases. 
Similarly they wouldnt necessarely even wish to defend from accusations of enabeling the spread of child pornography; even ignoring the abovementioned scruples about freedom of speech, they would not necessarely even mind there being child pornography. Age of consent laws have been often criticised by radical thinkers - for instance, Michel Foucault (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petitions_against_age_of_consent_laws), and in the list of names signing this petition, Deleuze, Derrida, Althusser, Barthes, Sartre, de Beauvoir, Lyotard, .. - i.e. pretty much all contemporary french philosophers. From the converstation on these topics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Morality_and_the_Law): 
It could be that the child, with his own sexuality, may have desired that adult, he may even have consented, he may even have made the first moves. We may even agree that it was he who seduced the adult. But we specialists with our psychological knowledge know perfectly well that even the seducing child runs a risk, of being damaged and traumatized. (…) Consequently, the child must be ‘protected from his own desires’, even when his desires turn him towards an adult
...
In the case of "attentat sans violence" [attack without violence], the offence in which the police have been unable to find anything, nothing at all, in that case, the criminal is simply a criminal because he is a criminal, because he has those tastes. It is what used to be called a crime of opinion. (…) The crime vanishes, nobody is concerned any longer to know whether in fact a crime was committed or not, whether someone has been hurt or not. No one is even concerned any more whether there actually was a victim.
I see in the US libertarian party, similar ideas exist (and though I dont know US politics enough to say this, given the name and the fact its a party, one could expect these guys would, again, be rather less radical than anarchists - and the inter-party criticism of the here quoted paragraph that makes up the rest of the linked text would seem to show this) - from (http://crazyforliberty.com/2008/05/07/anarchism-age-of-consent-laws-and-the-dallas-accord-wayne-allyn-root.aspx) ,apparently , Mary Ruwart said
Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally. [Who are you to judge? Fascist!]
 ... 
Point is - such response to criticism as the current section describes sounds like coming from a socialdemocrat or liberal not from an anarchist in advocating such technologies, and perhaps some summary of the stuff I dumped here could be worked into the response section of that article to give a more appropriately radical response expected if this is considered to be an anarchist position? --193.198.27.31 (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Anarchists and copyrights, terrorism, child pornography

message: All other crypto-something pages are about adherence to one philosophy yet pretending to be of another (i.e Crypto-judaism, crypto-fascism) yet this one is about computing. This should be completely rewritten or at least another page should be created for being an anarchist and pretending to be something else, such as Anarchist hypocrisy or the like. --Dicttrshp (talk) 10:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a completely separate subject so it doesn't belong here. You're welcome to start a new article and linking to it from here. -- intgr [talk] 13:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  umm 

message: Isn't odd that an article should have an equal number of topical headings and references? Awg1010 (talk) 21:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How strange 

message: The section makes no mention of cryptography, which is what seems to me logically where the word came from, as opposed to "crypto-" as in having a secret agenda or a pun, as the section says. Just like "anarcho-" is a shortening of "anarchy/anarchist," "crypto-" is a shortening of "cryptography." 
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crypto
--Coching (talk) 23:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: The article states: "OpenBazaar is an open source project developing a protocol for e-commerce transactions in a fully decentralized marketplace.[10] It uses the cryptocurrency bitcoin and was inspired by a hackathon project called DarkMarket."
DarkMarket links to a page about a crime forum that was shut down in 2008. This is a mixup. The DarkMarket which inspired Openbazaar was a project circa 2014 created by Amir Taaki. From Taaki's article: "Taaki, along with other developers from Airbitz, a bitcoin software company, created a prototype for a decentralised marketplace called "DarkMarket" in 2014, at a hackathon in Toronto, which was forked into the OpenBazaar project." The wikilink suggests that Openbazaar was inspired by an underground cybercrime forum, which is definitely false. 23.241.127.109 (talk) 04:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Dark Market 

message: I have never seen the symbol "used by crypt-anarchists" that is depicted on the page before. No reference or anything. I was about to remove it, but I will give it a chance.. Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 10:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symbol of crypto-anarchism 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Crypto-libertarianism. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Crypto-libertarianism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Vaticidalprophet 00:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Crypto-libertarianism" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Cryptolibertarian. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Crypto-libertarianism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Vaticidalprophet 00:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cryptolibertarian" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]