Also, most well-known “cypherpunks” are not even anonymous. Satoshi is basically the only one.
I’m sorry, but this is simply untrue.
Arguing about who or what is more punk is kind of a (possibly entertaining) waste of time. It can be fun to measure courage, ethical purity, or disrespect of established authority, but what does it really accomplish?
I think @outgoing.doze is expressing frustration that many active, influential players in the ecosystem are not engaging in strong privacy practices on a personal level, and there are not many active influential contributors who engage in strong privacy practices. I happen to agree with this.
If there are active, influential contributors, I also would like to see where they are engaging.
Isn’t that nicer than seeing who has more spikes on their jackets or in their hair? 
1 Like
-
I am aware of the work of @hanh and I see as a step in the right direction.
-
There’s an ocean between polling ZEC users for their opinion and having them control something. I won’t be playing the polling game for the most part, we ought to have control over what is ours.
A cypherpunk would advocate for power structures that are written in machine readable code; I advocate for that. To minimize the plutocratic impact, I advocate for a strong culture of delegation.
In your circle of KYC’d people, that makes sense.
Thank you for saying it out loud.
You care about the technology. You care about banks. You care about the WEF.
You must read the FT given those traits. Even the FT knows:
“Deeply libertarian in philosophy, the movement is rooted in principles of decentralization, individual autonomy, and freedom from centralized authority.” — wikipedia
You’ve completely lost the plot long ago @Dodger.
Although very much an understatement of my view on the situation, this is correct.
And we have yet to see a single person come out.
Could you mean more specific about what you mean by what is ours ?
Anything relating to the economics of ZEC is to be controlled by ZEC holders; there’s no debate here as far as I am concerned. It follows that, nobody is to touch the dev fund without approval from us, ZEC holders.
There’s definitely room to argue that it would be wise to involve ZEC holders into governance decisions in other areas, but baby steps first in here.
Governance will be way better when proof of stake (POS) come in the picture.
It sounds like you have some problems in mind, and beyond those problems, some solutions to propose!
That’s great. Please share your ideas for how we can build a better relationship to technology, and build better technology to be in relationship with.
It sounds like you believe that @hanh 's voting system is a step in the right direction.
It also seems like you have some ideas about what the next step should be? What would you like to see?
What would be the correct next step?
How should we take it?
How can you contribute?
Thanks for your energetic engagement!
1 Like
Yes, please tell us all the next step.
1 Like
I am holding Zcash.
Likewise. Finally I’d like to suggest we all abide by the CoC.
“We strive to keep this forum organized we want everyone to be respectful of others discussions and time. Please do not:” […] “* Go Off-Topic: Derailing topics to a different subject other than the intent of the threads original post (OP).”
Going forward I’d appreciate that this thread is kept for its original intent.
Can you please [re]explain the original intent?
What are you trying to accomplish?
If we understand each other better, then it’s easier to collaborate.
Or if someone else understands it, can they please explain it?
If you’re a Zodler… then maybe invest some of your ZEC in projects that are likely to increase the value?
We want to discuss “actual cypherpunks”? OK.
I think it’s really cool that you’re a Zodler.
Why do you love ZEC?
I love it because it already has the killer feature that I most value…
I can spend it permissionlessly!
Without the consent of any third party… no friend, no bank, no committee, no governor, no president…
I can just choose to spend it!
And I do!!
One thing I spend it on, is the massive payments on this “Zingoista Lambo”:
I know… I know… sooo expensive!
But the luxury… other people envy me, and that makes me feel good about myself!!
Also it has killer features like, really clear 360 degree visibility and the controls to an air-conditioner that was fully functional until late 1997!
But… after I get tired of showing off with my Ski Chalets, my private island, and my army of personal chefs who must cook perfectly for me, because they’re under threat of deportation! MUAHAHAHAHA!!..
Then I think… jeeez… what else can I buy with this “money”…
I guess I could give it to another hedge fund that specializes in weapons manufacturers… those seem so profitable yay!
Or… wait… justasec… there is something else I can invest in!
A Novel Economy
I can allocate my “wealth” to invest in people! I can choose to help other people be healthier, happier, and more independent… so that they will help me build Zcash!
Geez… that actually sounds like a pretty good idea… so good, that maybe somebody else said something like it before! Maybe Adam Smith, and Yuval Harari… did think carefully about this!
Soo… all the tongue in cheek aside, I believe that it’s a morally correct action to invest in people. I believe that’s pretty well reasoned in books like: “The Wealth of Nations”, “The Theory of Moral Sentiments” and “Sapiens” and to a lesser degree “Nexus”.
I know it’s not fashionable nowadays… I guess I am out of sync with the Parasitic Economy.
So, if you’re looking for a criteria for being “Cypherpunk”, I’d like to argue that:
Carefully reasoned consideration of fundamental values.
should be considered a candidate.
But… beyond that, I don’t believe labeling another person without their explicit consent can ever really be consistent with the CypherPunk ethos, as I understand it.
So… sure, if you want to call yourself a CypherPunk… my opinion is that you ought to consider what and why you value things… but at the end of the day… whether you’re a CypherPunk or a CipherPunk or not… must be up to you…
Identification of the Self, cannot be delegated.
3 Likes
I did not make this about myself, why do you put words I have never said in my mouth.
I’d happily engage constructively with you, but respect will be the starting point.
Indeed, I do not see KYC’d people as cypherpunks. To each their own.
1 Like
I didn’t intend to put words in your mouth.
I meant:
"If *One* wants to call *Oneself* a cypherpunk..."
In general I think it’s best for people to decide what to call themselves. I do my best to respect the identities that people self-assign. It seems to me that alternative forms of identity assignment often have more costs than benefits.
In other words, would you say that you felt pressured to KYC in order to have a voice in the Zcash governance?
I’m going to be honest with you @zerodartz. If you say yes, I will use your answer as a way to highlight that ZF is hypocritical as it has rules on the forum against doxing people, but they seem to have no problem deanonimizing people wishing to remain private.
1 Like
no i didnt feel much pressure. it was my choice to do it cause i got a zcon scholarship few years back - maybe wasnt right decision in some way but the event was good. (its easier to stay anon online - harder in irl)
i asked it, and now after ZCG is not under ZF anymore but FPF there is no KYC for ZCG members also. only Conflict of Interest docs and u give a name.
so not 100% anon but also not kyc
very minimal compared to registering a centralized exchange account or traditional banking account.
1 Like
Thanks for your answer @zerodartz.
To me, it’s very ridiculous that not a single anon cypherpunk is around to say something in here. I bet I do the same post in the monero forum and it’s full of them. What the heck when wrong in here? It’s a rhetorical question as the answer is rather obvious.
With that said, I’m not here to impose my definition of cypherpunk and I’m glad to collaborate with KYC’d people if that’s their thing. It’s clear we need each other to make Zcash successful.
Even if we may disagree on that definition, I feel @zancas and I’m sure many others in here have their values in the right place. I’ll therefore make a step towards peace and adjust the title of this post. I’m still hopeful some kick-ass anon cypherpunk will come say hi someday.
2 Likes
