> Cryptography rearranges power: it configures who can do what, from what. This makes cryptography an inherently political tool, and it confers on the field an intrinsically moral dimension.
Admittedly, this is true for other types of innovation as well. For example the invention of the decentralized Internet and its basic properties. Have the Internet not been decentralized, it would not have allowed folks in countries without infrastructure and money to build their own networks which are on par with the developed countries' ones. Also, free and open source software in general.
There isn't anything cryptographic in that and yet it was a big power re-arranger in a way.
Yes, i think we take it for granted by now but its obviously an invented layer and a-priory it might not have been even clear if such an architecture is workable at this scale.
The emerging picture is of a (still) wide open canvas where cryptography along with patterns like ocap models play the role of ink for drawing boundaries.
What is still unclear if all pre-existing social arrangements can be re-expressed on this new canvas and where the feedback loops between power centers and the technically skilled people will lead us.
So far the track record is not good. There are various initiatives for moral manifestos concerning digital tech here and there, but they dont seem to make much of a difference
It is interesting that this (otherwise great piece) does not mention cryptocurrencies / blockchain at all (by 2015/16 this was a "thing" already) or the triumph of surveillance capitalism. It only goes to show that cryptographic work is, if anything, even more critical and influential to how to digital realm will be shaped.
From the beginning of time till just a decade or so ago, our political, social and economic/financial structures were based on certain assumptions about information privacy. These assumptions are being violated massively as we speak, Sometimes the "experiments" are giant flops, sometimes they are frighteningly successful.
The discussion about the global distribution of interconnected silicon and who has what access and control over which parts has barely begun. What geopolitical segmentation will we see. Is its economy going to be
free or some sort of digital feudalism? Will it encode humanistic concepts or introduce new types of segmentation into first/second class humans? etc.
> It is interesting that this (otherwise great piece) does not mention cryptocurrencies / blockchain at all
The term "crypto bro", and its societal connotations, is relatively new. Even if cypherpunk work is decades old. Google Trends shows that.
I recognize that, for most citizens, all cryptography work gets tainted by that term, "crypto bro". If I meet somebody at a social event tomorrow and tell them I build NFT crypto libraries for Woozle, vs. CRC32 crypto libraries for Tooble, are they going to differentiate? A lot of the current progressive crowd will wrinkle their nose, regardless.
I recognize the trend-makers who coined that term did so with political means in mind.
I recognize that they were attempting to say, "We're all part of this system. Unrestrained pursuit of work above all else can be harmful. By coining this term multiple people are taking a social hit."
But I also recognize some may want to re-orient allegences not just for the benefit of those we may spend less time with if we work more, but to reinforce other power structures.
Decades have been spent iterating on that idea. Good puzzles and enigmas take a while to work out.
Anyways, I'm happy they're proud of their work. There are some good points hidden in there, even if I'm more hardened to the reality now.
That's what my thought was as well. The people or groups that I think can benefit from reading this simply won't even if I presented it to them. They are no where near this type of content in their normal lives anyway, and I'm not interested in being an activist at all times.
And honestly — even the cryptography community. Convince me that the academic crypto community is not living in a vacuum echo chamber. How have they given you any impression that they care about about the moral character of their work?
Admittedly, this is true for other types of innovation as well. For example the invention of the decentralized Internet and its basic properties. Have the Internet not been decentralized, it would not have allowed folks in countries without infrastructure and money to build their own networks which are on par with the developed countries' ones. Also, free and open source software in general.
There isn't anything cryptographic in that and yet it was a big power re-arranger in a way.