mainly, that over the past year or so, neo-cypherpunks have started coming out of the woodwork to prosthelitize things like bitcoin,
OK, fair point about bitcoin. But other than that, I really feel like the cypherpunk types have been fairly invisible lately. Maybe it's just that there was a certain period of time, back in the /. heyday, when discussions of cryptography, surveillance, data-havens, etc. were at a peak, and now they've leveled off. But in any case, I would argue that we (still) need an active and efficient cypherpunk community to promote technological freedom.
I think what's changed is that the discussions during the heyday were around the technology, which at the time was the limiting factor. The technology isn't really the issue anymore (with some specific exceptions).
The problem with crypto-currency isn't the "crypto", it's the "currency". I think that same phenomena is the culprit for most "cyperpunk-related" discussions.
10 years ago I'd have said that I was really hoping for the "Star Trek" future, but that if I was forced to bet, I'd bet on a "BladeRunner" future being way more likely.
Now I'm old, and I think if I was forced to bet, "Brazil" is a more likely model (the movie, not the country).
But I don't want to sound like I'm dismissing the value of a healthy "cypherpunk" community. I think you can look at a lot of things that came out of the original community and see value there.
Here's a link to a list, by year, of how the future is portrayed in films. I'm not sure if it's listed in the infographic, but the film 'Code 46' (Tim Robbins) tells an intriguing story of where I see things heading.
Another image I can't locate showed how we used to see the future, from a 1980's standpoint (think: Jetsons), and how we see it today (think: "The Road", "Book of Eli" or "I am Legend").
The problem is the vision these techno-libertarians promote is one of isolation, not connection. The world has shifted. People want to share. They want privacy, but when privacy must be eroded to allow greater connectivity, they trade it willingly.
Crypto solutions lead to technical complexity which in turn raises the barrier to entry and makes it difficult for outsiders to join in. It's some kind of isolationist community. Who uses Diaspora, anyway? Anyone? Doesn't it offer precisely what everyone's allegedly in need of?
OK, fair point about bitcoin. But other than that, I really feel like the cypherpunk types have been fairly invisible lately. Maybe it's just that there was a certain period of time, back in the /. heyday, when discussions of cryptography, surveillance, data-havens, etc. were at a peak, and now they've leveled off. But in any case, I would argue that we (still) need an active and efficient cypherpunk community to promote technological freedom.