-- From: Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > While I don't exactly know why the list died, I > suspect it was the fact that most list nodes offered a > feed full of spam, dropped dead quite frequently, and > also overusing that "needs killing" thing (okay, it > was funny for a while). > > The list needs not to stay dead, with some finite > effort on our part (all of us) we can well resurrect > it. If there's a real content there's even no need > from all those forwards, to just fake a heartbeat.
Since cryptography these days is routine and uncontroversial, there is no longer any strong reason for the cypherpunks list to continue to exist. I recently read up on the Kerberos protocol, and thought, "how primitive". Back in the bad old days, we did everything wrong, because we did not know any better. And of course, https sucks mightily because the threat model is both inappropriate to the real threats, and fails to correspond to the users mental model, or to routine practices on a wide variety of sites, hence users glibly click through all warning dialogs, most of which are mere noise anyway. These problems, however, are no explicitly political, and tend to be addressed on lists that are not explicitly political, leaving cypherpunks with little of substance. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG AnKV4N6f9DgtOy+KkQ9QsiXcpQm+moX4U09FjLXP 4zfMeSzzCXNSr737bvqJ6ccbvDSu8fr66LbLEHedb