Where have all the cypherpunks gone?

[CoinHoarder]

The only people that seem to want cryptocurrencies regulated are the people that simply want to leave with more FIAT than they came with. I still have faith that the cypherpunks will beat out regulators and profiteers and that decentralized & private technologies will win out in the long run, but it seems like an uphill battle- now more than ever.

The problem is that the cryptocurrency community has slowly become a large majority of profiteers rather than cypherpunks. The community ethos has changed dramatically for the worse since I joined in 2012, when most Bitcoiners seemed to be of similar cypherpunk-like mentality. How can we ensure the cypherpunk movement is not stifled by regulators and profiteers?

I think the best way forward is to make sure of two things (even if it requires hard forks to maintain them):

1. Cryptocurrencies, and the surrounding infrastructure, need to be made to be as decentralized as possible (including exchanges, markets, social media, etc.)
2. Cryptocurrencies need to be made to be as private and fungible as possible (by leveraging tor, i2p, ring signatures, zk proofs, coin join, etc.)

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

[1713558411]

1713558411

[1713558411]

1713558411

[1713558411]

1713558411

[mk4]

The profiteers are just a larger majority as expected. Money simply just attracts a lot of people; I mean, just read most of the threads here. Most look at bitcoin as a "job" or just a moneymaking/investment scheme, which is sad, but there's just going to be those kinds of people on any other industry in my opinion(the same people who are easily panicked by FUD) . I don't think there's something we can do about that.

Don't get me wrong, I myself, am here because of my passion for cryptocurrencies, but also for monetary purposes. I like giving out my opinions on forums and helping out other people, but doing that alone doesn't help pay the bills. So signature campaigns has been a lifesaver for me; I do what I like doing, at the same time I earn. Win:win situation.

[HabBear]

The only people that seem to want cryptocurrencies regulated are the people that simply want to leave with more FIAT than they came with.

Can you cite some facts for this statement because I think you're making a grand and inaccurate generalization. There are lot of people that are into cryptocurrencies for the investment that don't want regulation, that fear government intervention or attention.

Fortunately any regulation can only go so far - like determining the transaction power of cryptocurrency in a country and mandating the tax treatment of its use.

The problem is that the cryptocurrency community has slowly become a large majority of profiteers rather than cypherpunks. The community ethos has changed dramatically for the worse since I joined in 2012, when most Bitcoiners seemed to be of similar cypherpunk-like mentality. How can we ensure the cypherpunk movement is not stifled by regulators and profiteers?

These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

There's nothing "seemingly" about it, they are the majority over cypherpunks because the cypherpunks commmunity is tiny.

What effort has the cypherpunks community had in inviting and educating crypto currency enthusiasts to join their ranks? Very little. If Bitcoin was to succeed it would have to expand well beyond the cypherpunks community...if it had not than Bitcoin would still be traded among the 10-20 people included in Satoshi's original communication of the white paper.

Either you want crypto currency to grow globally or you want to keep it for yourself (for the cypherpunks), you can't have both!

I think the best way forward is to make sure of two things (even if it requires hard forks to maintain them):

1. Cryptocurrencies, and the surrounding infrastructure, need to be made to be as decentralized as possible (including exchanges, markets, social media, etc.)
2. Cryptocurrencies need to be made to be as private and fungible as possible (by leveraging tor, i2p, ring signatures, zk proofs, coin join, etc.)

These sound like great ideas...for the purists and profiteers alike.

[alyssa85]

You sound a lot like the people who lamented that the internet, which was supposed to level the playing field and allow the little guy as much power as a big corporation, got taken over by bigger and bigger corporations, to the point that the old style small blogger with their own lovingly tended domain, has just disappeared.

This is how adoption looks...

[mrciphertext]

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

I think we need majority by our side. Yes, they are profiteers. But that does not mean they do not stand by the ethos. We do not need to fight them off, we need to have them with us and consider them as assets. Cypherpunks just got another problem statement to solve and am sure they are pleased they aren't fighting orgs or govts. for now.

[Notcalculator]

The presence of profiteers is a symptom that crypto currency is gaining value. It's not necessarily a bad thing, since this is the first step. We establish that bitcoin has value first then is gets widely used.
The reason why people leave with fiat is that currently, you cant spend your bitcoin to buy coffee. You need your fiat for that. Naturally people would take this opportunity to make more fiat as we decide the value of btc. There will come a point where its technology and adoption will be able to compete with the modern financial system but for now, let it gain traction.

[Ranly123]

The only people that seem to want cryptocurrencies regulated are the people that simply want to leave with more FIAT than they came with. I still have faith that the cypherpunks will beat out regulators and profiteers and that decentralized & private technologies will win out in the long run, but it seems like an uphill battle- now more than ever.

The problem is that the cryptocurrency community has slowly become a large majority of profiteers rather than cypherpunks. The community ethos has changed dramatically for the worse since I joined in 2012, when most Bitcoiners seemed to be of similar cypherpunk-like mentality. How can we ensure the cypherpunk movement is not stifled by regulators and profiteers?

I think the best way forward is to make sure of two things (even if it requires hard forks to maintain them):

1. Cryptocurrencies, and the surrounding infrastructure, need to be made to be as decentralized as possible (including exchanges, markets, social media, etc.)
2. Cryptocurrencies need to be made to be as private and fungible as possible (by leveraging tor, i2p, ring signatures, zk proofs, coin join, etc.)

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

I know you have bigger knowledge than me in terms of cryptocurrencies, but for me i think people invest in cryptocurrency because of potential profit and not the technology. The more people will know about bitcoin the more it will be prone to profiteers and the cypherpunk you say are also adopting to the method of profiteers in order for them not to get behind by these people.

[Kronos21]

The only people that seem to want cryptocurrencies regulated are the people that simply want to leave with more FIAT than they came with. I still have faith that the cypherpunks will beat out regulators and profiteers and that decentralized & private technologies will win out in the long run, but it seems like an uphill battle- now more than ever.

The problem is that the cryptocurrency community has slowly become a large majority of profiteers rather than cypherpunks. The community ethos has changed dramatically for the worse since I joined in 2012, when most Bitcoiners seemed to be of similar cypherpunk-like mentality. How can we ensure the cypherpunk movement is not stifled by regulators and profiteers?

I think the best way forward is to make sure of two things (even if it requires hard forks to maintain them):

1. Cryptocurrencies, and the surrounding infrastructure, need to be made to be as decentralized as possible (including exchanges, markets, social media, etc.)
2. Cryptocurrencies need to be made to be as private and fungible as possible (by leveraging tor, i2p, ring signatures, zk proofs, coin join, etc.)

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

It seems to me that we are all to blame for the fact that speculators have occupied the cryptocurrency market. Everyone wants to touch the easy money. But there are many users who do not trade constantly on exchanges. They keep their coins to get rich in the future. It seems to me that our society is not yet ready for decentralization.

[gemajai]

We cannot expect the cypherpunks to go public, conduct seminars, post video tutorials on youtube, etc about Crypto. I mean, c'mon guys! Anonimity is one of the claimed strengths of cryptocurrencies. If these guys are doing something to support the movement, they do it discreetly (just like how Satoshi Nakamoto introduced bitcoin in a very discreet manner). We cannot say the movement is doomed just because we cannot see or feel or hear some new exciting news about it. We are not even sure that the cypherpunks are behind this but we do know that Nakamoto (he, she or they) shared the same principles with them. Probably they are connected. Probably they just influenced Nakamoto. But I think, after seeing the impact of crypto, these guys will be working on something else that is still crypto-related.

[CoinHoarder]

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

We do not need to fight them off, we need to have them with us and consider them as assets.

That is a good point. Perhaps I worded that question poorly.

I am just worried about the profiteers lobbying for more regulations or for changes to the Bitcoin's and other cryptocurrencies' protocols that go against cypherpunk ethos. Almost like a hostile takeover. This is what I mean by fight them off.... fight them off from changing things for the worse.

I don't have a problem with their participation or profiteering, as long as core cypherpunk ethoses are able to be maintained despite their participation.

We cannot expect the cypherpunks to go public, conduct seminars, post video tutorials on youtube, etc about Crypto.

Good point. I hope more work is being done behind the scenes than I realize. It is hard to tell without really digging for it due to all the "lambo" noise on cryptocurrency social media and forums.

[joebrook]

The only people that seem to want cryptocurrencies regulated are the people that simply want to leave with more FIAT than they came with. I still have faith that the cypherpunks will beat out regulators and profiteers and that decentralized & private technologies will win out in the long run, but it seems like an uphill battle- now more than ever.

The problem is that the cryptocurrency community has slowly become a large majority of profiteers rather than cypherpunks. The community ethos has changed dramatically for the worse since I joined in 2012, when most Bitcoiners seemed to be of similar cypherpunk-like mentality. How can we ensure the cypherpunk movement is not stifled by regulators and profiteers?

I think the best way forward is to make sure of two things (even if it requires hard forks to maintain them):

1. Cryptocurrencies, and the surrounding infrastructure, need to be made to be as decentralized as possible (including exchanges, markets, social media, etc.)
2. Cryptocurrencies need to be made to be as private and fungible as possible (by leveraging tor, i2p, ring signatures, zk proofs, coin join, etc.)

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

These are the people who are mostly concerned about making money, they don't care about the principles and ideas which lead to the creation of bitcoins in the first place. They are currently in the majority but i don't think they have any influence about the matter at all.

[CoinHoarder]

You sound a lot like the people who lamented that the internet, which was supposed to level the playing field and allow the little guy as much power as a big corporation, got taken over by bigger and bigger corporations, to the point that the old style small blogger with their own lovingly tended domain, has just disappeared.

This is how adoption looks...

Perhaps you are right that I am naive to assume decentralized technologies and cryptography can change the world. I'd like to still remain hopeful that they can do so in the long run due to their decentralized nature, despite the challenges adoption brings, and change the world for the better.

I think it is naive to not understand (and proactively combat) the risk that such profiteers introduce. They can perform a hostile takeover, and make drastic changes to Bitcoin that go against the cypherpunk ethoses. Things such as blacklists, kyc, confiscation, whitelists, surveillance, regulations, laws, accredited investor advantages, etc. will likely become commonplace if cypherpunks underestimate the threat profiteers pose.

They are currently in the majority but i don't think they have any influence about the matter at all.

I hope this is correct. I am not so certain though- doubtful even.

[Twentyacoin]

The only people that seem to want cryptocurrencies regulated are the people that simply want to leave with more FIAT than they came with. I still have faith that the cypherpunks will beat out regulators and profiteers and that decentralized & private technologies will win out in the long run, but it seems like an uphill battle- now more than ever.

The problem is that the cryptocurrency community has slowly become a large majority of profiteers rather than cypherpunks. The community ethos has changed dramatically for the worse since I joined in 2012, when most Bitcoiners seemed to be of similar cypherpunk-like mentality. How can we ensure the cypherpunk movement is not stifled by regulators and profiteers?

I think the best way forward is to make sure of two things (even if it requires hard forks to maintain them):

1. Cryptocurrencies, and the surrounding infrastructure, need to be made to be as decentralized as possible (including exchanges, markets, social media, etc.)
2. Cryptocurrencies need to be made to be as private and fungible as possible (by leveraging tor, i2p, ring signatures, zk proofs, coin join, etc.)

What do you guys think? Is the movement doomed, or is it just becoming harder to notice support for the cypherpunk cause due to the influx of the profiteers? These profiteers are seemingly a large majority now, can Bitcoin fight them off and remain true to the cypherpunk ethos?

You're right. It's when btc hit mainstream media that all the mainstream, nontech people got involved and are only in it as an investment. That's what happens when your try to make crypto really popular and widely used, it's the negative consequence.

And when all the normal investors flood to bc, they bring with them the regulators who care about these normies' votes.

That said, onen solution would be to run away into a new crypto that's highly technical to use. Something that will never be user-friendly on purpose. A safe haven for cybephunks. Something with only a command line wallet and never a gui or web wallet. And it can only be traded on exchanges that work with a special command line desktop client that required the user to learn how to connect via a special designated port.

The exchange client works much like ubuntu command -- very codish. All this technicality will keep the normies away.

[squatz1]

They're still here without a doubt, but at the moment they're not seen as the majority due to the influx of money / news from people who are simply here to make as much FIAT money as they can. They're not here for any other reason, and it downs out the effects that cypherpunks had before when they were in the majority.

They may still even be in majority, though they're being drowned out by the louder people.