Hacker conference: against authoritarian government, with talk about security, privacy, opsec etc.
Also: can only buy ticket online with credit card and real name, no onsite sell available, your name is probably give to conference administrator for checking ticket, he will probably give it to third parties or keep it for "good reasons", etc.
Don't get me wrong, I like the talks, they are very good. It is just a bit funny for me. They can't try harder to be hackers? Or is it like this in germany always?
I believe when you sign in at the door they don't give you any identifier, just a wristband identical to everyone else's. They are trying to prevent ticket scalping, however.
I don't expect them to give any data to anyone besides the payment processor, and knowing the CCC, their own system is probably either self-hosted or at a European cloud vendor. Bank transfer is a payment option, so you don't have to use an American card network - when you use a European bank transfer, no data goes to America on purpose (they are presumably still wiretapping it).
When I was at CCCamp, there was a power outage that included the network hub, and the network was down for an additional half hour while they tried to find the person with the disk encryption password of the DHCP server.
Go to the local smaller CCC conferences, where you can pay with things like GNU Taler or cryptocurrency, and the entry is often free anyway, with a donation being appreciated or buying event merch being a nice alternative to simply donating.
I think the hacker spirit is definitely alive & kicking in those smaller CCC events.
I'd never heard of GNU Taler but the FAQ left me even more confused.
> Can I send money to my friends with Taler? Taler supports push and pull payments between wallets (also known as peer-to-peer payments). While the payment appears to be directly between wallets, technically the operation is intermediated by the payment service provider which will typically be legally required to identify the recipient of the funds before allowing the transaction to complete.
Also the funds have an expiration date (forced spending). Who is this for? My naive read seems like it has all the downsides of bitcoin and more with none of its upsides
The doc won't point it out explicitly and I apologize if my explanation offends anybody, but the intention is basically leftist, state-friendly bitcoin. The authors took a look at the anarchy of real cryptocurrencies and realized they don't actually like anarchy, so instead they want to make something "wholesome" that governments would be willing to go along with (since they can tax it).
They are funded by EU and banks in an attempt to claw back some market share from cryptocurrencies which are slowly getting banned.
> The doc won't point it out explicitly and I apologize if my explanation offends anybody, but the intention is basically leftist, state-friendly bitcoin. The authors took a look at the anarchy of real cryptocurrencies and realized they don't actually like anarchy, so instead they want to make something "wholesome" that governments would be willing to go along with (since they can tax it).
While this is correct, I want to add a point:
Many hackers are not per se opposed to taxation (how else should public services be financed), but deeply distrustful about the red tape involved (the taxation laws in Germany are insanely complicated). Basically, their attitude is: if the government wants to tax "my" cryptocurrency, it is the government's responsibility to make the taxation laws as elegant, privacy-conscious and hassle-free as humanly possible.
In other words: if the government does not create taxation laws that are as hassle-free and privacy-conscious as possible (in a very strong sense: if in terms of effort (including the time to understand and apply the laws), it is much easier to ignore the laws than to turn in your taxes, the government failed its job), the government failed its job, so it does not deserve a concession from the cryptocurrencies' developers side.
Unfortunately that's accurate. From the SNB whitepaper linked at https://www.taler-systems.com/en/digital-currency.html you get to https://www.snb.ch/de/publications/research/working-papers/2... and then to https://www.snb.ch/public/asset/de/www-snb-ch/publications/r... :
> In addition, charging an exchange fee would allow the central bank to implement negative interest rates, if deemed necessary. The central bank could also impose a conversion limit per customer for AML/CFT (“cash” limits) or financial stability reasons (to prevent hoarding or bank runs), if desired.
Well goody.
The idea of blind signatures is cool, as is the fact that the merchant doesn't need to identify the customer, as is the fact that you could deploy neat local currencies with something like this, but AFAIK you still can't give 20€ to your friend without the exchange knowing and approving, or it becoming a race to see who spends the tokens corresponding to the 20€. And that's not very privacy-preserving.
IIRC isn't part of the idea that there are multiple central banks, you can choose which one you want to use, and currencies are exchanged automatically when needed?
Good summary.
To others reading, it's just gimped Chaumian ecash, as the privacy is removed for the receiver. It actually seems like it could be useable now (was just terrible for a long time) but Cashu (bitcoin based ecash) is streets ahead.
It's the usual open source problem of building a protocol and neglecting the network that runs it... Imagine a perfectly coherent messaging protocol... what are the messages that are sent? Out of scope! Just use our protocol!
If you're looking for an event where you don't have to use a credit card I can recommend the Gulaschprogrammiernacht in Karlsruhe. It has a similar vibe and is funded entirely by donations and the sale of goulash.
That's the official position. I'm pretty sure, but of course I'm not suggesting you do so, that if you pay with a prepaid credit card and call yourself Random Person you will have no problem. As I said in another thread you can also just show up and buy ticket cash at the entrance from whomever sells them, but of course you risk not getting a ticket. Depends on your concerns. I'm pretty sure if you have a better solution but such large scale event you can contribute directly.
I'm also pretty sure if you have something genuinely uniquely valuable to contribute but can only participate anonymously you can contact organizers and they'll find a way, regardless of ticket availability.
That's for the likes of Edward Snowden though.
> Hacker conference: against authoritarian government, with talk about security, privacy, opsec etc.
> Also: can only buy ticket online with credit card and real name, no onsite sell available, your name is probably give to conference administrator for checking ticket, he will probably give it to third parties or keep it for "good reasons", etc.
I am indeed quite certain that many hackers in Germany independently already devised the same thoughts ...
You don't need to give them a name, and you can pay with SEPA transfer. You only need an email address, and they delete those after the event.
The organisation has to still pay their suppliers, and have to comply with anti money laundering laws
I can pay cash at store, cinema, museum and not give my name. Why not at conference too? And it is not only this conference, all of them require it now.
Think about it :)
Yeah honestly fair point
Though I imagine it’s more about getting upfront payment for tickets to cover suppliers
I mean, DEF CON still allows cash at the door with no ID and manages to make it work.
Do they sell out of tickets within, literally literally, three seconds?
Hopefully this move to the bigger venue improves the situation.
The politics of C3 is mixture of older anarcho communist hackers and contemporary progressive statists. So against authoritarian government, if it's right-wing, and privacy to protect against surveillance capitalism (rather than from the state).
So things like bitcoin are not liked as they're outside of the state and money should be a function of a benevolent left-wing state.
I'm pretty sure you are making a straw man here. Bitcoin is disliked because it's hyper-capitalist and a huge waste of energy, not because it isn't the state.
Those two reasons are also given but the deeper belief is that private or extra statal monies shouldn't exist. Like monero draws the same ire despite it being outside of the crypto trading and financial industry world as well as low energy usage.