At 10:24 AM -0700 10/17/00, Ray Dillinger wrote:
>
>Basically, whether it's math or crypto, there are some ideas that
>people just aren't going to "get" because they always lump unfamiliar
>things together if those things violate the same assumption.
>
>In math, they used to look at me blankly when I explained that there
>was more than one kind of infinity -- Or about transfinite numbers
>that *weren't* an infinity -- because they only know finite mathematics.
>Anything outside that realm is, well, infinity, and one infinity,
>as far as the sheeple are concerned, is as good as another.
>
>Likewise, people who only understand speech and business mediated
>by absolute identities are going to have trouble with the "subtle"
>difference between anonymity and pseudonymity. It's a model
>where you are dealing with someone but don't know who they are,
>and as far as the sheeple are concerned, one not-knowing is as
>good as another. It violates the same assumption, therefore in
>popular view, it must be the same thing.
>
Very well said. This is indeed what's happening.
More reason not to trust the laws of man.
--Tim May
--
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
