Many of the major trends in crypto right now are leading to the development of structures that are fundamentally aligned with anarcho-mutualism (community ownership and control, community credit).
You have to wipe off the icky layer of rentier capitalism settling on the surface.
There has never been more excitement around the concepts of community ownership, funding and shared responsibility combined with general scepticism of authoritarian constructs. There is so much potential there.
It frustrates me endlessly when I see organizers and other figures on the left unilaterally reject "crypto" because of some skewed idea about the philosophies that they perceive to be involved or promoted. Look at what the people are doing (and feeling) and be excited.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I started programming simple real mode operating systems in my teens and it's fluctuated as a hobby for me over the course of the last 2 decades.
In between I've built hobby emulators, (dis)assemblers, fuzzers, compilers, and uncountable weird hybrids.
I'm going to assume you know at least one high level programming language. If you don't then you should learn one. Any one will do. People may tell you the choice matters, it doesn't.
The basic principles you will learn in one are transferable to others.
I spent my recent evenings writing an operating system in an assembly language that I also developed to compile to a custom bytecode that I also designed to run on an virtual machine that I also implemented.
A meditation on recursive complexity and what actually makes me happy.
It is completely useless. All that work, and you can only run a few commands, and one of them is QUIT.
I have never loved a piece of software more.
The kernel is 832 lines of custom assembly. ~300 are dedicates to embedding binary data like font bitmaps.
Encrypted communication tools should be designed such that devs *don't* have access to things like "where [and when] accounts are created, how [data] travels, which [messages] are fastest to spread"
Basically this. The underlying expectation that "responsible encryption" requires some kind of metadata surveillance to be safe seems to be to be a deeply flawed narrative that can only result in greater and greater privacy harms.
I'm not sure people really understand this, so I'm going to say this again:
The current argument by the anti-encryption side is that the threat of state violence should be used to prevent the offering of math-as-a-service.
I will grant that there are legitimate sounding arguments that may prompt someone to consider pointing weapons at anyone who dares to carry out the dark arts of arithmetic but I would hope that by now most would have outgrown such childish notions of how the world aught to work.