# Cryptonomicon \[spoilers\] -- Whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 14, 2005, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970 "2005-02-14T04:34:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2005, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/41 "2005-02-16T15:36:58Z")
**Zsofia** and **Podkayne** – Just curious here, but I’ve always wanted to find someone else who read _The Big U_. Were you at all familiar with _The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind_ (by Julian Jaynes) before or after you read it? Did you feel you missed anything by not knowing what ‘bicameral mind’ meant? (Jaynes is not worth reading by the way, unless you’re interested in seeing how he took a patently ridiculous idea and writes hundreds of pages of lucid argument for it. Kind of like a four-hundred page book presenting detailed, historically-based arguments for why George Washington was a time-travelling space alien. Interesting to see how they try to pull it off, but there are better things to do with your time). Stephenson’s entertaining, and fixates on interesting ideas, but, while he may get details right, his big ideas are usually so impossible that I have to continually remind myself to suspend disbelief, and just have fun with the idea. _Snow Crash_ being the best example. Hmm. I guess I understand why he liked Jaynes so much. ---
**Author:** ![lee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lee/32/7455_2.png) [@lee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lee)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/42 "2005-02-19T16:19:36Z")
I picked up _The Cryptonomicon_ yesterday and just finished it. I think the ending was stronger than _Snowcrash_’s or _The Diamond Age_’s. I rather like the penthouse letter diversion, and it does give much needed backgroung for the rest of the book. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/43 "2005-02-19T18:32:16Z")
> [@Myler Keogh](#): > > I find Stephenson’s books really fun to read, great characterisation and ideas. Even when he is padding the shit out of the story with meaningless discursion I don’t mind too much - his prose style is really easy on the eye I think. > > That said, I was profoundly disappointed with the drop in quality between Crypto and Quicksilver. I had a feeling that Crypto was the book were he was ironing out some of his writing flaws, and he would follow it up with something right out of the top drawer. Instead he dishes up Quicksilver, IMO a book having none of his strengths and all of his weaknesses writ large. Not read the rest of the Baroque cycle, does it get better? I think Stephenson requires a certain amount of Technology to work with ,to achieve his full effect, and the steam age is the absolute minimum for him. A tech heavy author can only do so much with a bronze/Iron age world. Out of the three baroque cycle books , I found system of the world to be the most interesting to read , as the other two seemed like a Michael Palin guide to the demented world. I get together with a group of people who like to read books and drink lots of coffee, but not what you would call a book club, but for the most part the people that picked it up and read it, only got through several chapters before moving on , but one person thought that cryptonomicon was vaguely subversive in a way that it would put a customs agent to sleep , while slipping in that pearl script( did not work in the original form) for an encryption cypher. Dont buy the Baroque series , get it from your local library. Declan ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/44 "2005-02-19T18:46:02Z")
> [@Beadalin](#): > > _Cryptonomicon_ biggest unforgivable digression was the part where Randy (working from memory here, not the book) essentially eavesdrops on what someone else is typing on his computer, all about his fetish for pantyhose and his uncle’s funeral. Good God. How in the hell was that allowed to stand? Because it was technical in nature as an example of van eck freaking , in real life I think its a bit of a stretch for anyone but the NSA to be able to read a computers emissions real time. But the point was made that anyones private thoughts can be read by anyone that wants to make the time to do so. Avi makes the case that its not the next ten years that he worrys about ,with computers brute forcing encryption schemes ,but the next thirty or fifty. So basically by adding a voyeur scene , he establishes with the reader in a very real way that you really should be using some sort of encrytion in your daily life. Declan ---
**Author:** ![sjc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e5b9ba/32.png) [@sjc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sjc)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/45 "2005-02-19T21:29:59Z")
> [@Stranger On A Train](#): > > Besides, I still have a big pile of Wodehouse, some out of print A. C. Doyle books, the small remainder of unread Highsmith, and a fairish amount of Shakespeare’s canon to work through before I’m crushed by a falling overpass in an earthquake. > > Thanks to all that responded. > > Stranger You criticize Neal Stephenson’s writing as having broad stereotyped characters and then you mention Wodehouse, Shakespeare and Doyle? You criticize it for being long and having a hodge-podge of styles? Seems like most of Shakespeare’s plays have excess verbiage up the wazoo (I have no problem with this, I like it, but the fact remains that Shakespeare was anything if economical with his words). As for the hodge-podge styles, what were the clowns doing in a serious tragedy like _Hamlet_ (you can find this sort of stuff in his other plays, _Romeo & Juliet_ for example. I just picked this example because it sprung to mind). I don’t know about Highsmith, never read any. My point is that the things I like about Wodehouse, Doyle and Shakespeare are often the things I like about Stephenson. ---
**Author:** ![Khampelf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Khampelf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khampelf)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/46 "2005-02-21T04:27:44Z")
I’ve been keeping my eye on this thread, I love Neal Stephenson’s work. I agree that his style doesn’t put much emphasis on denouement, and his ending could even be said to take sudden left turns off of cliffs. Often at the end, you’re left with a WTF? or worse. That There is more enjoyment in reading Stephenson than having read him is putting it well. Re: The end of _Cryptonomicon_, the symbolism was I felt, of final release and healing. Gotu Dengu and Waterhouse spoke of the Gold being concentrated, festering evil of WWII. Blowing it out of there and back into the world was a healing act, like squeezing a zit. It also parallels Shaftoe’s suicide mission atop the bunker. As for the Andrew Loeb complication being to no purpose, I think it may just be an Issue of the Author’s. There’s Techie geeks hunting each other through the Forest scenes aplenty in _Zodiac_. It also set up further Bonding for Randy and America Shaftoe, and the cognitave dissonance of a sudden real threat in a jungle as opposed to his former role of annoying person in a newsgroup. Those who wish Neal Stephenson tied up his Novels more neatly will be Ironically disapointed in the End of the Baroque Cycle. (My first spoiler box, Mods, please fix if I felch it up.) ‘Half-Cocked’ Jack Shaftoe winds up a retired adventurer, kept companion of the Duchess Du Acheron, Shooting Ducks with the King of France, and other persons of no reputation. ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/47 "2005-03-04T03:30:47Z")
I was intending to start the Baroque Cycle next week, once finals finished up. However, it’s been years since I read Cryptonomicon and I don’t really remember the details of its plot all that well. Should I invest the time in re-reading it before starting the Baroque Cycle? ---
**Author:** ![fiddlesticks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddlesticks/32/18129_2.png) [@fiddlesticks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fiddlesticks)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/48 "2005-03-04T07:35:05Z")
> [@cckerberos](#): > > I was intending to start the Baroque Cycle next week, once finals finished up. However, it’s been years since I read Cryptonomicon and I don’t really remember the details of its plot all that well. Should I invest the time in re-reading it before starting the Baroque Cycle? If you skim this thread and you can recall the last names of the major players (Waterhouse & Shaftoe especially) you’ll be mostly up to speed just fine. The only direct connection between the two is the mysterious Enoch Root. If your memory of him and his role from _Crypto_ is fuzzy or non-existent, you might want to skim to refresh your mind. ---
**Author:** ![aenplusone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@aenplusone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aenplusone)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/49 "2005-03-04T08:05:10Z")
Slightly off-topic but there is an interesting interview with Neal Stephenson on slashdot [HERE](http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/20/1518217&tid=192&tid=214&tid=126&tid=11) ---
**Author:** ![DefyingGravity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@DefyingGravity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DefyingGravity)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/50 "2005-03-04T18:34:52Z")
(This is Mr. Tripletmom, not Mom herself). I’m not Jurph but I’ll try to answer your questions. > [@Reno Nevada](#): > > All right, **Jurph** , I am not the OP but I will take up the challenge. Here are some non-rhetorical questions that I don’t know the answer to, after reading Cryptonomicon. > > (1) Who owned the gold at the end of the book? Note that apparently the Roman Catholic Church owned the land that the gold was on. The Pope does employ a lawyer or two. The church owned the land, and it’s a good bet that the Societas Eridtorium specifically had a hand in it, or has influence with the people who would make a stink. In any case, the gold is war loot - as Goto Dengo says, it is blood money. The Church would be insane to try and corner it for their own gain. (Note, also, that by melting it all any chance of individuals or institutions getting individual claims in has evaporated.) See my answer to (3) below for more thoughts about the future of the gold. > [@Reno Nevada](#): > > (2) Why did Enoch Root arrange for Waterhouse to crack the code? I loved that scene, but Enoch _already knew the answer_. Because Enoch works through others. Enoch isn’t human in the way that everyone else is; he is an outsider that shepherds progress along. He tweaks things that lead other people to improve the world, rather than doing so himself. There’s the obvious good reason for that - it would be hard for his relative immortality to go unnoticed if he was pushed front-and-center - but I think there’s also reasons to be found in his speech about Societas Eruditorium and the cult of Minerva. The world is a struggle between technology-cum-Minerva and technology-cum-Mars, and in order for the former to succeed people must vote with their actions, not let Enoch do it for them. > [@Reno Nevada](#): > > (3) Why did anyone think their problems were resolved? We established X-hundred pages before that simply knowing where a few hundred tons of gold were located, in the middle of the Phillipine jungle, did you no good at all. …did you no good at all if your goal was to move it all out, because it was tremendously well defended by terrain, politics, and natives. However, if your goal is to create backing for a currency, then it’s particularly well suited. In the US, Fort Knox serves this purpose - our paper money is backed by the promise that the US Government has enough gold in Fort Knox to allow people to exchange their paper for gold. In turn, Fort Knox is well-defended and access to the site and for normal operations are both carefully controlled. Remember Avi going on about how they were going to become a bank? Epiphyte will provide currency backed by the gold there - the goal of a Fort Knox or a Bundok is not to actually dispense gold, but to back the currency with the ability to dispense gold. The inability to easily shift massive amounts of gold out does not mean that smaller extracts couldn’t be made, thus the promise is valid. Refer also to Avi’s discussion of all the Asian currencies tanking because of inflation and poor backing. That’s essentially the problem; if your currency isn’t properly backed, commerce may collapse. The goal of Epiphyte is to create a digital currency, solidly backed by gold, that will enable anonymous and reliable commerce across borders. Reliable commerce will have the end effect of helping pull the poorer societies in Asia up out of the crapper. I’ll make a separate post about this, but the point of Stephenson novels for me is not the endings, but the ties between different books. The currency system that Epiphyte is creating in Cryptonomicon ties into Snow Crash, where Stephenson describes how the spread of anonymous digital currency destroyed the federal government and the status of international states by killing the ability to tax. The anonymous nature of it also foretells the global communication network described in The Diamond Age (which itself is described as the replacement to the cable system that tanked, remarkably similar to L. Bob Rife’s global telecom network in Snow Crash.) ---
**Author:** ![DefyingGravity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@DefyingGravity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DefyingGravity)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/51 "2005-03-04T20:33:33Z")
Neal Stephenson works are best viewed as quanta along a virtual timeline. Each book contains themes and trajectories that correlate loosely to what we see in other books. The Phyles of The Diamond Age are a natural progression from the Franchulates of Snow Crash. Neal Stephenson has a vision of the future and of where human civilization is going, and it’s clearly tied to each book or set of books - The Baroque Cycle leads to Cryptonomicon quite directly, and The Diamond Age is a combination of the futures of Cryptonomicon and Snow Crash. Just to make it mind-bogglingly obvious how the ideas are connected, for example, at the end of The Baroque Cycle Waterhouse comes to the conclusion that the continual search for new science and new explanations is the means as much as an end to itself, and that the pinnacle of scientific discovery is as much like magic that some descendent in the future will be an Alchemist. And The Diamond Age ends with the realization that a shadowy figure named the Alchemist is working to replace the current technology (hierarchical nanotechnology distribution systems, “the feed”) with the next disruptive technology (autonomous self-organizing nanotechnological systems, “the seed”). As another example, the idea of money, monetary systems, trading systems, and their influence on society ties into the Baroque Cycle, Cryptonomicon, Snow Crash, and The Diamond Age. Stephenson makes an interesting case that the upcoming shift from paper money to electronic money is going present as big a paradigm shift as the mercantile exchange did when it evolved. The regularization of currency in the Baroque Cycle empowered the state, and Stephenson proposes that the regularization of anonymous e-currency will dis-empower the state in Cryptonomicon and Snow Crash. Everyone complains that Neal Stephenson endings are too abrupt. The endings aren’t the point for me; pulling out the threads from each book and linking them to their equivalents from other books is enjoyable, and often these threads represent interesting insights and ideas. ---
**Author:** ![Chairman\_Pow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Chairman\_Pow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chairman_Pow)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2005, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/52 "2005-03-06T21:04:06Z")
Just finished reading this after two 500-page marathon weekends. > [@Stranger On A Train](#): > > He had a conflict (Andrew Loeb) come out of nowhere and do nothing that made sense in relation to the rest of the story. I think this is a rather metaphoric way of saying: A) the Dentist has no more power over them and Andrew’s got to figure out another way of making Randy’s life hell for their previous disagreement about D&D character’s eating habits and B) Randy’s entering a Whole New Phase of his life. Charlene’s gone, Amy’s in, he’s accepted as a Shaftoe and now has the “metnal stance” to be a killer/Rootesque Athena who guides the world out of the darkness of the Dentist/Ares/Crocodile/Nipponese/blahblahblah factions. > [@karenow](#): > > However, if your goal is to create backing for a currency, then it’s particularly well suited. In the US, Fort Knox serves this purpose - our paper money is backed by the promise that the US Government has enough gold in Fort Knox to allow people to exchange their paper for gold. In turn, Fort Knox is well-defended and access to the site and for normal operations are both carefully controlled. You are incorrect. The US currency is not backed by gold. ---
**Author:** ![DefyingGravity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@DefyingGravity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DefyingGravity)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2005, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/53 "2005-03-07T20:11:53Z")
> [@](#): > > You are incorrect. The US currency is not backed by gold. I stand corrected. The US currency was backed by gold up until 1971. I think the original plot conjecture, that a gold standard is a sound basis for a new currency, especially an intangible e-currency, still stands. The biggest problems with the gold standard system, as I understand it, had to do with reserves being depleted by national trade imbalances - but an a-national e-currency might not have that problem, with tendrils everywhere the net reaches. ---
**Author:** ![Chairman\_Pow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/838e76/32.png) [@Chairman\_Pow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chairman_Pow)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2005, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/54 "2005-03-08T00:49:20Z")
[Check this out yo.](http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=E-gold&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1) ---
**Author:** ![lawoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/35a633/32.png) [@lawoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawoot)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2005, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/55 "2005-03-08T02:59:31Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > Am I the only one who’s read _The Big U_? It’s one of my favorite bits. The ending is okay, I guess - beats his other endings. The hilarious/alarming send-up of “modern” academia is so, so great, though. Not only have I read it, I own a first edition, that I bought when it was new. I just had him sign it last year. ---
**Author:** ![DefyingGravity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@DefyingGravity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DefyingGravity)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2005, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970/56 "2005-03-08T15:41:07Z")
> [@Chairman Pow](#): > > [Check this out yo.](http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=E-gold&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1) Of course - I didn’t think to bring that up. If I recall correctly (and I have to recall because I can’t find it via google) one of the articles that Stephenson wrote for “Wired” had something to do with e-gold. He’s also written about cable laying and offshore data havens for them. It’s interesting to see how he does the research on these things for his novels, and is able to spin out interesting quasi-technical pieces on them too. So not only can you tie his books together, you can see where he’s getting his ideas from by cross-referencing with his articles. (Having said that, I stopped subscribing to wired 3 years ago, when the stack of half-read copies got too heavy to justify keeping or adding to, so I haven’t kept up on recent things he’s written except for books). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cryptonomicon-spoilers-whatinaheckisthissupposedtobe/289970.md?page=2)