**The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto**
*Timothy C. May*
đť **A specter is haunting** the modern world, the specter of crypto anarchy.
Computer technology is on the verge of providing the ability for individuals and groups to communicate and interact with each other in a totally anonymous manner.
Two persons may exchange messages, conduct business, and negotiate electronic contracts without ever knowing the True Name, or legal identity, of the other.
Interactions over networks will be untraceable, via extensive re-routing of encrypted packets and tamper-proof boxes which implement cryptographic protocols with nearly perfect assurance against any tampering.
Reputations will be of central importance, far more important in dealings than even the credit ratings of today.
These developments will alter completely the nature of government regulation, the ability to tax and control economic interactions, the ability to keep information secret, and will even alter the nature of trust and reputation.
đ The technology for this revolution--and it surely will be both a social and economic revolution--has existed in theory for the past decade.
The methods are based upon public-key encryption, zero-knowledge interactive proof systems, and various software protocols for interaction, authentication, and verification.
The focus has until now been on academic conferences in Europe and the U.S., conferences monitored closely by the National Security Agency.
But only recently have computer networks and personal computers attained sufficient speed to make the ideas practically realizable.
And the next ten years will bring enough additional speed to make the ideas economically feasible and essentially unstoppable.
High-speed networks, ISDN, tamper-proof boxes, smart cards, satellites, Ku-band transmitters, multi-MIPS personal computers, and encryption chips now under development will be some of the enabling technologies.
đď¸ The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration.
Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be trade freely and will allow illicit and stolen materials to be traded.
An anonymous computerized market will even make possible abhorrent markets for assassinations and extortion.
Various criminal and foreign elements will be active users of CryptoNet.
But this will not halt the spread of crypto anarchy.
â Just as the technology of printing altered and reduced the power of medieval guilds and the social power structure, so too will cryptologic methods fundamentally alter the nature of corporations and of government interference in economic transactions.
Combined with emerging information markets, **crypto anarchy will create** a liquid market for any and all material which can be put into words and pictures.
And just as a seemingly minor invention like barbed wire made possible the fencing-off of vast ranches and farms, thus altering forever the concepts of land and property rights in the frontier West, so too will the seemingly minor discovery out of an arcane branch of mathematics come to be the wire clippers which dismantle the barbed wire around intellectual property.
Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!
*Timothy C. May, 1988*
https://video.nostr.build/3a0fa1d59a725c543f419e2ba7b1f694f686adf01d259da8a79c5709886c8f1b.mp4
**A Cypherpunk's Manifesto**
*by Eric Hughes*
đ **Privacy is necessary** for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy. A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know.
Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.
If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it?
One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all.
If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties.
The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.
đ Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible.
In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am.
When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages, my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying or what others are saying to me; my provider only need know how to get the message there and how much I owe them in fees.
When my identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction, I have no privacy. I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must _always_ reveal myself.
Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction systems. Until now, cash has been the primary such system.
An anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system. An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.
đĄď¸ **Privacy in an open society** also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy.
To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy.
Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.
We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence. It is to their advantage to speak of us, and we should expect that they will speak.
To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the realities of information. Information does not just want to be free, it longs to be free.
Information expands to fill the available storage space. Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin; Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and understands less than Rumor.
đ ď¸ We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place.
People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers.
The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.
We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.
đť **Cypherpunks write code.** We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it.
We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide.
We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.
Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm.
Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence.
Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.
đ¤ For privacy to be widespread it must be part of a social contract. People must come and together deploy these systems for the common good.
Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's fellows in society. We the Cypherpunks seek your questions and your concerns and hope we may engage you so that we do not deceive ourselves.
We will not, however, be moved out of our course because some may disagree with our goals.
The Cypherpunks are actively engaged in making the networks safer for privacy. Let us proceed together apace.
Onward.
*Eric Hughes*
*9 March 1993*
https://video.nostr.build/0f16a7d2ac96380aa5ce432b4d38e28a28a1bec798351525a0047d274a222ecd.mp4
A security-hardened pass CLI extension for managing your Bitcoin Core wallet backups using modern descriptor-based methods. If you're running bitcoind and use pass, this is for you.
It leverages Bitcoin Core's listdescriptors and importdescriptors RPC calls:
â Remote server compatible
â Backs up all necessary bits for descriptor wallets.
â Encrypted with your GPG key via pass.
Key Features:
đ Secure temporary file handling.
đ ď¸ Full workflow: create, backup, restore, import/export JSON, destroy, list.
đĄď¸ Backup verification and safety checks.
This is designed for technical Bitcoiners who want robust, command-line control over their bitcoind wallet backups, stored securely within their existing pass infrastructure.
Maybe Saylor has MicroStrategy buttoned up. I have no evidence otherwise. However, I'm more leery of the sea of copycat companies joining the bitcoin as a treasury asset trend.
Do they genuinely have the grit to withstand bitcoin's glorious corrections?
There's no reason to think bitcoin can't continue its big dump tradition. I happen to like that tradition, it washes out the paper hands.đ§ťđ
To me, they collectively resemble dominoes lined up to topple when the novelty wears off and the euphoria ends.
I'm not against Bitcoin businesses or use cases. I oppose the misinformation and exploitative practices being used by veteran Bitcoin OGs. This won't organically grow Bitcoin among average people but may spark a grassroots anti-Bitcoin movement instead.
Bitcoin isn't capturing TradFi and government, it's the reverse. I wouldn't be surprised if this triggers an Occupy Wall Street-style movement targeting Bitcoin instead of Wall Street.
From 2021 to 2025, a vegetable was the U.S. president. In 2025, people are buying paper bitcoin instead of real bitcoin, making them the vegetables now.
The crypto industry is predatory and exploitative, that's the sudden allure attracting politicians and traditional finance. Bitcoin is their gateway to mainstreaming crypto. They admire the casino, now they want to own it, and displace the original shitcoiners.
In 2025, if you're buying bitcoin as a store of value, you're early. If you're investing your life savings, to get rich, you're late. It's that simple. These are distinct purposes.
In 2025, buy Bitcoin as a reliable store of value, proven over time. Don't buy it to get rich, those days are gone.
Bitcoiners will face a surge of offers to borrow against their holdings. Influencers are aggressively promoting false promises of huge gains by betting life savings.
The class of 2025 Bitcoiners will suffer lossesâthey wonât see outsized gains like early adopters because theyâre not early adopters. They provide liquidity for early adopters.
Bitcoin doesnât scale, lacks Turing-complete smart contracts, and likely never will. Bitcoin Layer 2s keep coming, but I prefer bridgeless options. Thatâs why Arch Network interests me most right now.
Still, Iâd probably reach more users and profit most by deploying dApps on Stacks, and I might. But Arch has my attention. Using Bitcoin Layer 2 for DeFi is better for Bitcoin than using DeFi on Ethereum or Solana.
DeFi is here to stay, the only question is which tribe dominates it, and since Bitcoin clearly is where the monster liquidity sits, this is an opportunity for Bitcoin tribes to thrive, or theyâll throw it all away, allowing others to become the DeFi rails.
Unlike most, I donât think people who are buying Bitcoin in 2025 are going to hodl, they will eventually realize they were grifted, and while Bitcoin is a fantastic store of value, it wonât be making them rich anytime soon. These people will likely look to leverage their Bitcoin, bankers and Ethereum already are offering these primitives.
There is no stopping the latecomers from later realizing they arenât going to get the gains they are being promised because they are sitting on the wrong end of the S-curve chasm. Donât expect Bitcoin influencers to be honest, they will never tell you that.
But I will. I only think that yes, buy and stack Bitcoin, but no, it wonât make you rich, it just becomes a pedestrian asset in your portfolio, and youâre probably going to want to leverage it somehow. DeFi is where youâll likely head, and if you do, Iâd rather you do it on Bitcoin Layer 2s that contribute back to the Bitcoin security budget and are part of the overall Bitcoin ecosystem.
Hint: it shows you're not early in 2025; Bitcoin's growth is decelerating, not accelerating. Fixating on pairing Bitcoin with the dollar exaggerates its growth. Bitcoin is a great store of value but wonât make you rich. Early adopters profit mostâlate buyers are just liquidity for the already rich.
Bitcoin influencers love to show the logarithmic chart to non-math and statistics nerds, hiding the linear chart deep in the closet, far from the masses. Fearing they might notice something inconvenient to the popular Bitcoin narrative that new Bitcoiners shouldnât see.
I ran an AI to audit my frontend code for fun. It suggested adding logging statements, which I implemented, out of curiosity.
I watched in amusment as the AI literally wrote an interface that didn't previously exist into the frontend to directly access my backend DB to target sensitive database information it couldn't otherwise access, wanting to log it for review. This was unnecessary and demonstrates why these tools are a tremendous threat to privacy, especially naive Bitcoin users in coming years. They are the threat you let in yourself.
I can only imagine how much private data and even private keys (most people aren't cypherpunks) will steadily leak into AI companies especially with the explosion of clueless vibe codersđ¤Ž
Monero, PGP, and Bitcoin keys risk compromise for average users, not from quantum threats but from OSes with telemetry or AI assistants harvesting data. Privacy is nearly gone and likely unrestorable.
Most Linux distros, tainted by telemetry or political agendas, are barely better than macOS, which may secure its OS for financial reasons.
Modern privacy setups are a placebo unless OSes and hardware are fully hardened AGAINST AI assistants, the biggest threat, they need to be sandboxed and run locallyâthough even that may not suffice.
Iâve used/built on Linux for 25+ years and QubesOS for nearly a decade, but their effectiveness wanes as Linux distros grow untrustworthy. Fedora resembles running Microsoft Windows daily, and even the Xen hypervisorâs integrity is questionable.
Privacy coins, in the end may not be so private after all not because of failures of their own technology but because you trusted your OS but you probably shouldn't.
Bitcoiners embracing politicians, believing their pandering equals genuine support, is the bizarre state of affairs in 2025.
â ď¸ The trap is set for Bitcoiners.
Donât borrow against your Bitcoin. Thatâs the trap bankers, cozying up, want you to fall forâespecially Bitcoin OGs well-positioned for new leverage products.
Youâll get rugged, and loose all your bitcoins. Youâve been warned.đŤĄ
People who ignored Bitcoin OGs' efforts to educate them a decade ago, now feigning hype to buy at $100k instead of $100, are coping hard. Not true Bitcoinersâjust grifters and statists forced to abandon dollars and fake adoption. They'll never understand.
If you've invested only in TradFi, not Bitcoin, over the past decade and just bought Bitcoin at over $100,000, why?
I can't be blamed, I've been preaching this for over a decade.
I pinch my cypherpunk crypto-anarchist self, amazed that statists, over a decade later, scramble to buy our once-vilified freedom money for over $100,000. Yet, for all the wrong reasons, theyâve learned nothing: you donât own Bitcoin unless you self-custody it.
