October 2000 - cypherpunks-legacy

CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk
by Trei, Peter 05 Oct '00

05 Oct '00

> ---------- > > Ralf-Philipp Weinmann[SMTP:weinmann@rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de] wrote: > On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: > > One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to > > addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which > the > > remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom > > addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP > > addresses help? [...] > What one could do however is have the remailer pass on every message which > has a recipient address that is *known to be in a jurisdiction that is > different > from the remailers*. You will not be able to reach each and every target > then, but at least it's better than nothing. > On the other hand I remember that the Curch of Scientology was able to > have an impact on anon.penet.fi despite the fact that this remailer was > outside > of US jurisdiction. Maybe we have to come up with a list of "incompatible" > jurisdiction systems to avoid this sort of thing from happening again. > > Cheers, > -Ralf > So when is the HavenCo remailer going up? Peter Trei

1 0

CDR: Note Broker Programs
by fsbmc＠bellsouth.net 05 Oct '00

05 Oct '00

Our research indicates you have an interest in buying and selling mortgage loan notes FSBMC is a mortgage investor We purchase new and existing loans We allow simultaneous closings We permit investor flips We like unseasoned cash-out refinances Here is an example, which proves the competition can't come close to our programs A+ Credit or 650+ credit score with interest rate of 9% with LTV at 95% and CLTV at 95% is purchased at 95.0% A Credit or 600+ credit score with interest rate of 9.25% with LTV at 90% LTV and CLTV at 95% is purchased at 94.5% B Credit or 550 + credit score with interest rate of 9.99% with LTV at 85% and CLTV at 95% is purchased at 94.0% C Credit or 525+ credit score with interest rate of 10.00% with LTV at 80% LTV CLTV at 95% is purchased at 94. % We suggest you visit our web site for more information at: http://www.fsbmc.com This is a one time mailing. Your name has already been added to our removal list.

1 0

CDR: Protect your Privacy
by Opt-In List 05 Oct '00

05 Oct '00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE The COMSEC C3I (Patented) Telecommunications security device protects Telephone, Fax and Computer Data communications "to a degree never before possible." (Houston, Texas - October 2000) COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY announces its (Patented) COMSEC C3I Telecommunications security device. The COMSEC C3I can detect legal and illegal remote extension drawn loop wiretaps anywhere on the local loop, including at the Telephone Company's Central Exchange. Detect wiretaps the Telephone Company cannot or will not acknowledge. Detect wiretapping professionals and the Telephone Company cannot detect or will not acknowledge. COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY's (Patented) COMSEC C3I Telecommunications security device is the first and only security device that can detect electronically isolated remote extension drawn loop wiretaps that previously had been undetectable. The C3I can detect monitoring units placed on the local loop as well as detecting when Computer Hackers, Government Agencies, Telephone Company employee's, etc. manipulate the switch at the Telephone Company's Central Exchange to monitor Telephone, Fax and Computer communications. Key Product Features: Protect Telephone, Fax and Computer Data communications "to a degree never before possible". Detect eavesdropping previously undetectable. Pricing: COMSEC C3I MSRP $475.00 Full background information and reviews available at: http://www.comsec-c3i.com COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY, based in Houston, Texas has been providing custom solutions since 1988. COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY, a privately held business, has been successful in providing custom solutions. CONTACT: COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY 5315D FM 1960 WEST #152 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77069 Phone: (281) 586-2034 Fax: (281) 754-4047 Email: sales(a)comsec-c3i.com Web: http://www.comsec-c3i.com This is not spam! Your address was purchased from a commercial email list provider who advertises that you have signed up and agreed to receive email. Every effort was taken to ensure list accuracy. You will not be contacted again from this list unless you reply with "More Info" in the Subject Line. This is a one time mailing, your address has been deleted. To remove your name from the commercial opt-in list you are on reply with "Contact Info" in the Subject Line and I will reply with the opt-in list contact information. PS Do not use the word "Spam" anywhere in your message or "Remove" in the Subject Line of your message or your reply will be automatically processed and permanently removed before I can respond with the list contact information. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message is sent in compliance of the new email bill: SECTION 301. Per Section 301, Paragraph (a) (2) (c) of S. 1618, Further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address with the word "remove" in the Subject Line. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

CDR: Is Judge Jackson backing away from Microsoft breakup?
by Declan McCullagh 05 Oct '00

05 Oct '00

http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/04/1714217&mode=nested Is Judge Jackson Backing Away from MS Breakup? posted by cicero on Wednesday October 04, @12:07PM from the so-much-for-a-quick-and-dirty-breakup-eh? dept. Erick Gustafson writes in about a Valley News article on the Microsoft antitrust case: "Evidently Jackson is on a speaking tour to distance himself from the breakup remedy. Jackson seems to be deliberately lessening pressure for the appellate court to uphold his decision. What do you think?" Gustafson works for Citizens for a Sound Economy, a free-market group that opposes the lawsuit. He may have a point: Judge Jackson recently said similar things at another conference last week. The Valley News (a New Hampshire paper) article isn't online, so we'll include an excerpt below. The Valley News article excerpts: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/04/1714217&mode=nested Judge Jackson's comments from last week: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/30/0150210

3 2

CDR: anarchism = socialism
by Secret Squirrel 05 Oct '00

05 Oct '00

...read on and learn also that capitalism == mass slavery [LART], and that, very definitely, property == theft [LART]. For an anarchist, he also seems a little too eager to invoke the authority of the dictionary to support his claims [CLUESTICK - get 2 free LARTs]. FableOfNamesMonger <http://www.politechbot.com/p-01275.html> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Forwarded from <http://www.radio4all.org/anarchy/guerin.html> Purported Author/Host: <nrkey(a)nospam.juno.com> (Reach out and touch him ;-) TRUE OR FALSE? "Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man." This statement was made by Daniel GuZrin in his excellent book, _Anarchism_. I included it at the top of my web page as a way of making it clear that anarchism isn't merely a lifestyle or is somehow compatible with capitalism, but is a radical, revolutionary social theory that, should it ever be successfully implemented (barring the genocidal force that capitalist powers have and continue to put to bear against any popular socialist revolutions that arise), would transform society in ways we can scarcely imagine today. The ideas of the key thinkers as well as the history and practice of anarchism backs this view up. *_"Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism"_* What does this mean? To the individual raised on decades of unrelenting anti-communist propaganda, the mere mention of the word "socialism" prompts a knee-jerk reaction, typically involving references to evil, repression, mass murder, totalitarianism. This is largely a result of the multi-million dollar campaigns waged for the past 80 years against socialism by the capitalist nations of the world. Apologists cite the brutality of Stalin as "proof" that socialism is synonymous with mass murder. However, it should be noted that the capitalist West actually INVADED the nascent USSR in the immediate wake of the October Revolution. President Woodrow Wilson ordered Marines sent to Russia, who ransacked villages, murdered peasants, and threw their lot in with the Tsarist White Russians (beginning an long-repeated tradition of support for fascist/monarchist regimes at the expense of popular uprisings). So, even before Stalin came onto the scene, the capitalist West was determined that socialism be stamped out! But one thing that is very important to note is that what came about in the USSR wasn't really socialism in practice--rather, the Bolsheviks seized political power and control of the state (and set about destroying the anarchists within Russia, who actually took the revolution seriously--from 1917-1921, the indigenous anarchist movement in the USSR was systematically wiped out, making the anarchists the first victims of Bolshevik repression!) So what we had in the USSR was a party vanguard (the Bolsheviks) seizing power FOR the people. Lenin, Trotsky, and the other Bolsheviks had no intention of allowing the state to "wither away". They, instead, killed the Revolution and spent time consolidating their power. And this, first off, is a very important distinction: the Communist Party ruled in the USSR; NOT the people themselves. Thus was totalitarianism born. Socialism, according to the _American Heritage Dictionary_, is defined as: 1. A social system in which the producers possess both political power and the means of producing and distributing goods. Think about that for a moment. *- Were the Bolsheviks the producers? NO! They were a vanguard party acting (so they said) IN THE INTERESTS OF THE WORKERS. This is an important distinction. They used brutal police and military force to enforce their power over the genuine producers. *- Did the workers of the USSR possess the means of producing and distributing goods? NO! In fact, it was the actions of the anarchists in the Ukraine, in the worker soviets, and in the City of Kronstadt to do precisely that (worker control of production and distribution of goods) that the Bolsheviks put a violent end to! In other words, the Bolsheviks wanted to put an end to SOCIALISM! Why? Because they wanted to secure power for themselves. And that they did, as history has shown. Let's look at the definition of communism, for the sake of completeness... 1. A social system characterized by the absence of classes and by common ownership of the means of production and subsistence. 2.a. A political, economic, and social doctrine aiming at the establishment of such a classless society So we see that the defining principle of communism proper is by definition common ownership of productive means and an absence of classes. - *_Were productive means commonly owned in any "state socialist" regimes?_* NO! They were owned by the state, by the government. The workers had no say in what was produced, hence the "command economy" or state-planned economy that characterized this system. - *_Was Soviet society classless?_* NO! For, after all, the concept of the "state" is largely an abstraction. What is the state, or government? It is an idea. Without people, there could be no free-standing state. Thus, the government is actually whomever controls the means of authority in a given region. And in the USSR (and the other "state socialist" regimes) that was the Communist Party. Thus, within these societies, there WAS a class: it was membership within the ruling political elite, or failure to belong...two classes: worker and vanguard party member. So we find that the "cardinal example" of "socialism" and "communism" to not be much of an example at all, to not even match up to a couple of basic definitions of the terms. Thus, what resulted in the wake of the Bolshevik coup of 1917, in the Maoist uprising of 1948, and in the Cuban revolution of 1959 (and elsewhere) followed the party vanguard (or Marxist-Leninist) model of POLITICAL, and not SOCIAL, revolution. The Marxist-Leninist model of political revolution was an aberration, producing vanguardist, command-economy states, and NOT true socialist communities. Rather than liberating the oppressed workers by dissolving the power structure of government, the vanguardists merely put themselves in charge of the same power structure, confident that THEY would not succumb to the temptations of power. So, when you compare the definitions of socialism and communism with anarchism, you see that far from being antithetical, they are complementary... *- For a society to be anarchistic (e.g., no rulers) would it have to classless? YES. *- For a society to be anarchistic, would producers have to have common control of the means of production? YES. *- For a society to be anarchistic, would all people have to have political power? YES. It is in this sense that the first part of GuZrin's statement is, in fact, accurate. It is also for this reason that some anarchists term themselves "libertarian socialists" as a way of showing the obvious link between the theories: libertarian polity, socialist economy. For, when you contrast what happened in the vanguardist regimes with the core principles of socialism, you can see how socialism is, in fact, incompatible with the desire to secure power for oneself or one's party. *_"The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man."_* This is the key statement to explore, for if someone doesn't have a problem with the exploitation of man by man, they are in no way an anarchist. It simply isn't ideologically consistent, and, as radicals, we put much importance on this. The anarchist rejection of rulers stems from our opposition to exploitation. Why do we oppose the government? Because the government's purpose is to control the populace: the only reason people "need" to be controlled is to allow their exploitation to continue (and expand) unfettered. Government exists to protect property. That is the sole reason for its existence. Without a government (of some sort, meaning a relative and systematic monopoly of influence in a given region) to enforce property rights, there is simply NO WAY for capitalists to make their profits from others' labor. The fiction of "natural law" establishes that property rights are a "natural state" for mankind; however, this is simply not true: property rights can only be maintained through force. Once a given group "claims" X plot of land, they have to defend that claim. If property rights were natural, they wouldn't need force to maintain them. Anarchists have always opposed property for this reason; property is claimed to make the owner rich. That is why property exists. It's not unlike a profit-generating battery, although it's important to note that the profit comes from the labor of the workers, rather than simply magically appearing...money does not as yet grow on trees. Workers are routinely and systematically exploited by capitalism. After all, if workers were actually paid the value of their labor (represented by the goods they produced), the owners wouldn't make a profit! Profit is, in its nature, SURPLUS. This surplus comes from selling the manufactured goods at a higher cost than it did to make them (anywhere from a 30% to a 300% markup, even more, if demand is high). Which means that no worker is ever paid the full value of what they produce. It is this con-game that allows the owner to grow rich atop the backs of the workers. Because this is not an equal transaction between owner and worker, the worker is being exploited. Would the workers *voluntarily* accept this ripoff in the absence of a government power to enforce this? Of course not. The government (whatever that particular government is, e.g., whoever rules) protects the owners from the consequences of their exploitation and allows them to profit accordingly. It is for this reason that *_anarchists were among the most militant opponents of capitalism, and remain so today_*. Government and capitalism walk hand-in-hand, partners in crime, robbing the vast majority of the people for the private gain of an elite. Capitalists continue to underpay and overwork their workers (one California sweatshop paid its workers $.60 an hour and forced them to work 70-80 hour weeks), make use of child labor (this is on a comeback, sadly; anarchists around the turn of the century fought child labor vigorously, forcing reformists to draft child labor laws--this has been largely circumvented by NAFTA, where less-stringent restrictions on child labor can allow capitalists to make use of this cheap pool of labor now more than ever by relocating their factories in Third and Fourth World nations). The exploitation will continue and will expand unabated, because capitalism is, in fact, synomyous with exploitation. The exploitation produces the profit by which owners grow very, very rich. So, far from being hyperbole, GuZrin's statement is an accurate one, as has been shown in history by the direct action and commitment to social revolution that characterizes true anarchism. Anarchists have uniformly risen against exploitation wherever it has arisen, at the cost of many of their lives. It is why we oppose vanguardist state socialists as much as capitalists and their fascist cronies. It is our dream to ultimately bring about a successful social revolution that will put an end to the institutionalization of exploitation that is characterized, practiced, and manifested by government and capitalism. *- DO CAPITALISTS OPPOSE EXPLOITATION? *_Economists are agreed that there are four methods by which wealth is acquired by those who do not produce it. These are: interest, profit, rent and taxes, each of which is based uupon special privilege, and all are gross violations of the principle of equal liberty. --Charles T. Sprading, _Liberty and the Great Libertarians_* First, I'll define my terms: exploit: 1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage; utilize; 2. To make use of selfishly or unethically. exploitation: 1. The act of exploiting; 2. The utilization of another person for selfish purposes. The capitalist is one who profits from the labor of others by virtue of their ownership of productive means, like a business, or factory, or even the tools used by workers. The capitalist makes money by not paying the workers the full value of what they produce. If workers were paid the full value of a given product they manufactured, there would simply be nothing "left over" for the capitalist to steal. The justification for this theft is that, without the capitalist, the workers would be unemployed, and therefore the capitalist is doing the workers a favor by even hiring them in the first place. However, this is a circular, self-serving argument, viewing workers as simple drudges -- capital assets waiting to be used. However, it _does_ illustrate the utility of unemployment to the capitalist -- it creates a labor pool of individuals suitably desperate enough to take _any_ job offered, no matter how demeaning. If the "choice" is homelessness and starvation to employment in a bad job, the rational worker "chooses" continued survival. So, this arrangement, erroneously termed "free agreement" (in which the worker is "free" to starve if they don't want to work for someone) is innately exploitative, because it: 1. Allows a privileged owner, the capitalist, to profit from others' labor 2. Eliminates the free choice of the worker -- in propertarian society, you cannot choose not to work and expect to thrive What is considered a "fair" wage is one that the worker will accept -- in other words, a wage that is better than the alternative of homelessness and starvation, which is invariably the bludgeon used to control the worker in capitalist society. Only capitalist apologists can deny the exploitative nature of their economic system with a straight face. However, they do so only by ignoring the realities of the transaction involved. The worker will never, ever get rich; the capitalist will, by virtue of the unequal, unjust distribution of profits inherent in this system. Thus, the definition _cannot_ read: *-The capitalist is one who opposes the exploitation of man by man. because exploitation is build directly into the system. A better definition is: *_The capitalist is one who exploits the labor of others for personal profit by virtue of private ownership of productive means!_* This is an accurate definition of what it means to be a _capitalist_. The libertarian socialist model of production revolves around the collective or the commune, where all workers within the given collective profit _equally_ from what they produce. *_The ones who actually do the work get the profit_*. This is, in essence, the core of our economic ideology. Return to the Anarchy for Anybody Homepage. <http://www.xs4all.org/anarchy/>

3 2

CDR: A Bomb Has Just Been Dropped!
by nl998＠usa.net 04 Oct '00

04 Oct '00

AN AMAZING 96,000 MEMBERS ENROLLED IN JUST 8 WEEKS! IT HAS BEATEN EVERY PROGRAM LAUNCHED ON THE NET! IT'S YOUR TURN TO SUCCEED! So, please take advantage NOW! Hello, My name is Nils Luyt and I have just come across an opportunity that is like finding a Huge Pot of Gold at the end of a Rainbow and quite frankly.....I wanted to share this with as many people as I can. I want to tell you that I'm really excited and you probably will be too. I know you are looking to make a good income from your home based business and I am confident THIS IS THE ONE! This program will have a Major...Global Impact upon all of us. This is proof that the GREAT POTENTIAL of this SENSATIONAL OPPORTUNITY has been widely acknowledged! Everybody who enrolls will benefit from this UNIQUE NEW PAYMENT CONCEPT! Have you ever heard of a system that pays you a commission check after you've enrolledjust TWO people? WELL, THIS COMPANY DOES!!!! And after that, you receive commissions on ALL SALES the company makes! Not only on YOUR sales, but ON ALL SALES! This company is rapidly becoming bigger than Skybiz and you can still join & get in at the top! YOU WILL BE ABSOLUTELY BLOWN AWAY WHEN YOU HEAR ABOUT THE AWESOME PRODUCT AND COMPENSATION PLAN THIS COMPANY HAS TO OFFER! No products to stock - no meetings to attend - & it's GLOBAL. You can make $5,000 per week in 30 - 45 days from now with very little effort! THAT'S THE POWER OF THE INTERNET! OUTSTANDING company backup and promotion! They have a server 100 times stronger than Ebay! NOW....how would you like to be in on the ground floor of a Dot Com Company that has combined the best of SkyBiz, Freenet, Km.Net,Evision, BigSmart and Priceline.net (and an international long distance service as well as an E-Mall where you will be able to purchase Brand Name Merchandise at a HUGE DISCOUNT)? BUT LET'S FORGET ABOUT THE HYPE FOR A MOMENT.......and be realistic... Would an extra $200 per week pay some bills? An extra $500 per week could pay the mortgage! And would an extra $1,000 per week change your lifestyle? It is all possible. If you introduce only 2 members, (your sister and your brother in law perhaps?) you will qualify already for your first paycheck! Here are some of the major selling points of this opportunity combining the major trends.... 1. Low start up cost. 2. Unique marketing plan...A New Hybrid Plan. a. Straight-line b. Non Flushing Binary. c. 3 x 10 Matrix with matching bonus' (when you cycle in the straight line you are entered into the Non Flushing Binary (like SkyBiz) and then finally... into the 3 x 10 Matrix. 3. They are catching all the major, huge trends. Web sites & education, "tools for internet marketers, international Long Distance "Flat Rate," and a plan to offer ISP and DSL service (FREE). 4. They are doing everything they can to develop a formula to pay a matching bonus on the straight-line, as well as the Binary part of the compensation plan! Think about that...has it hit you yet? 5. THIS COMPANY IS GLOBAL! To find out more about this HOT, Dot-Com Opportunity, send me an email with !!youre first + last name!! in the subject, to: ep1(a)soneramail.nl and I'll rush you the URL of our web site. Do it NOW! If you don't take a look you'll NEVER know what you are missing. Sending an email to ep1(a)soneramail.nl will take you only 10 seconds......and it will be your best 10 seconds ever spent. YOU CAN FINALLY BE INVOLVED IN SOMETHING THAT WORKS! GET READY TO BE EXCITED!!!!! See you AT THE TOP!!! Have a great day. Nils Luyt ----------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301. Per Section 301, paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618. This message is NOT Spam as long as you are provided with a way to remove your name from this mailing list. All further transmissions to you from me may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address (ep1(a)soneramail.nl) with the word "REMOVE" in the subject line. -----------------------------------------------------------

1 0

CDR: free satelite tv
by Herman Bailey 04 Oct '00

04 Oct '00

How can I get a free satellite tv. I am from St.VincentThanks Herman Bailey

1 0

CDR: Signing data in IE
by Augusto Jun Devegili 04 Oct '00

04 Oct '00

Hi all, I've been able to sign data in an HTML form (prior to sending it to the Web server) using crypto.SignText (Netscape Navigator JavaScript function). However, I haven't found a way to do the same thing in Internet Explorer. Has anyone got any ideas? TIA, Augusto

1 0

Re: A .cash domain?
by Somebody 04 Oct '00

04 Oct '00

Diebold has applied for .cash, , .global, and .secure. For their internet ATMs? An ip address for every bank vault? http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Re: A .cash domain?
by Somebody 04 Oct '00

04 Oct '00

Diebold has applied for .cash, , .global, and .secure. For their internet ATMs? An ip address for every bank vault? http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0