Replies (22)
I see this discussed every time an "ex" 3-letter agent appears on a podcast.
idk i'll keep an eye out and return if i find anything related to or circling around a term or phrase for this
i know at this point, im personally emotionally suspicious of anything labeled: freedom tech
there are plenty of other "solutions" to this paradox, of course. part of the reason i want to see if it is discussed elsewhere is to find more proposed solutions
A heuristic
I think there's a bit of part 3 but part 2 is the main thing.
Bitcoin still isn't really a (existential) threat to the State, not yet at least... The most recent US admin even scrambled what should be an "adversarial" relationship a bit.
But it will be.
The other thing is, the State had to basically "give up" with Bitcoin in certain ways.
Previously they could just "one-shot" any eCash system. Bitcoin made this impossible because of its decentralized nature. So there's both a ceding of ground on the part of the State, as well as an attempt to adapt to the new reality.
James C. Scott (author of Art of Not Being Governed) talks about this in a topological metaphor. Ancient States basically couldn't police "the highlands" because it took too many resources to march their armies up the mountain. Bitcoin by its design operates in "the highlands."
The state is not as bad as you think
Because they are incompetent, esp re tech. See doge.
I'm not sure what gives you that impression given the state crackdown on developers in the space. The tools obviously work.
yep, this is one of the paradox solutions :)
keep em coming! maybe i'll start a nostr wiki on it
if you take at face value the combined messages of authors, devs and podcasters, the only thing standing in the way of 10,000 untraceable, tax-free Silk Roads is people simply choosing to NOT do it.
that's like the State letting 10,000 nukes just lie around on the highways because they're confident people will simply choose not to detonate them.
Why you think every cyberpunk public person could be going for some state sponsored agenda?
I do not get what is the bigger picture you are looking for behind it?
To fullfill the need for some imagined complot to do whatever?
Quem manda na superestrutura não precisa se preocupar com a infraestrutura. BTC já está dominado, apenas os bitcoiners não perceberam ainda. Pelo menos os idealistas e irrelevantes na cadeia de poder. Michael Saylor com certeza sabe.
"the state is evil and will crush us all, here are the exact tools to destroy it!"
- someone on a big podcast, using their real name and likeness
i'm saying the above picture presents a paradox. i'm not proposing any plots or bigger picture, just noticing that there is an incongruity there
I’m not confident in this conclusion either. If the state weren’t actively involved in putting certain developers in prison, trying to pass regulations in this realm, continuing to invest and improve their surveillance mechanisms ala Palantir, chain analysis etc. then maybe.
But they are, aren’t they? In which case they’re not ‘letting’ anything happen, there’s an active battle going on.
vinney...axkl
proposed terms for this so that we can usefully discuss it. please add more suggestions. we can have a poll
the CIA Paradox
(Cypherpunk yet Identifiable Anarchist Paradox)
the ParaDOXxed
PRIVACY (Paradox of Radical Ignorance towards Verifable Anarcho-CYpherpunks)
PRIVATE (Paradox: the Referenced Insidious Violent Agencies Tolerate Extremists)
View quoted note →
which "side" do you think saylor is on? bulwark against the state or facilitator of it?
Anyway thanks for thoughtful provocation!
When an agent grows to the point of becoming a historical agent, he comes to see himself as the center of everything. Saylor is already a meta biticoiner. If his interests converge with BTC's ettos, he will be his most defender, otherwise he can work to demolish or change the BtC ettos to align with his goals. Anyway, mere mortals like me can't do much. Just look and try to understand things so you don't die like a mouse, without knowing what's going on.
Remembering that this is not constant. It's a dialectical situation. A meta agent can work according to the winds of change, often on more than one front at the same time. I never look at a meta agent in terms of friend or enemy. They are never friends in the sense of the terms, but they also never play as enemies on a personal basis.
Ah this is something you heared?
I assume eather it is real and the state is in decline towards inexistance. Or it is a simple bluff.
But I do not understand what it would even mean to destroy the state. What would be the thing one wants to exchange it for. I think this question has to be answered by many in more or less the same words (consensus) in order to bring a state out of order.
For me a state is a collective of institutions from schools, constitution, laws, police, courts, parlaments and executives.
But it is still a state even, when some institutions vanish or new instritutions come into place.
So I assume all these services would have to be substituted by something. What would it be and how would this not be a state? Why would it be preferable?
gotta love spending a sunday chasing your tail
vinney...axkl
maybe i get to obvious-and-well-known conclusions through circuitous pathways with far too much thinking aloud on nostr, but after some reflection and writing, i've come to this practical upshot:
the most effective and safe path forward is to BUILD, fast and hard.
Be extremely defensive and **expect the worst** - increasingly so as success accumulates to the overall space.
Do not _ultimately_ trust ANY public figures in the privacy space, but especially not those who are identifiable and not obviously seeking martyrdom. don't trust, verify.
Operate **as if** the enemies of privacy are highly-effective and motivated to stop you - but pay attention to signals that this may actually be untrue (and consider what this would mean about everything you've been told).
it just always comes back to personal responsibility and skepticism.
Either way, seeking to do no harm and build peaceful Exit is always the best approach.
and seriously consider full pseudonymity.
View quoted note →
Govt are lazy, and feel they can "harvest" these cypherpunks whenever it would be most advantageous to do so.
Probably when the largest share of other people's savings are in the bitcoin bag.
They figure this strategy works for them with low-level drug dealers, fraudsters, padeophiles and terrorists, so why not cypherpunks?
Well, the government is largely incompetent. So yeah. Maybe.
