November 2000 - cypherpunks-legacy

CDR: synthetic images still k-porn to appeals ct
by anonymous＠openpgp.net 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Federal appeals panel upholds computer child-porn law By David Hudson The Freedom Forum Online 11.07.00 The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has become the third federal appeals court to uphold a federal law expanding the definition of child pornography to include computer-generated images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct even if the images only appear to be of a minor. http://www.freedomforum.org/news/2000/11/2000-11-07-03.htm

1 0

CDR: Authenticating John Young
by Anonymous Remailer 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

John, It would be nice if you start to sign everything you post on cryptome, so once you really get abducted theyll have to rubberhose you for the passphrase as well ...

1 0

CDR: Re: Rants and sour grapes ...
by Gil Hamilton 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Ernest Hua writes: >It is abundantly clear to me that much of the ranting going on here on this >list is at least 50% sour grapes. > >Not to pick on Tim, but he just seems like a convenient example; it is >clear in Tim's mind that he does not want the possibility of Gore being the >next president. He may have some procedural reasons to back this rant up, >but he definitely does not like Gore. You arrogant pinhead. It is you who have been whining that these poor dimwitted voters in Palm Beach County must be allowed to vote again; after all, "the voters should get what they want." In any case, if they did hold a revote in Palm Beach County, what happens after that? What if Bush is still ahead and there are more spoiled ballots? What if Gore is ahead, but there are spoiled ballots? Or, is the objective to just allow them to re-vote again and again until you and Gore get the outcome you're looking for? And what about other states? There were spoiled ballots in every state and probably every precinct, and I have no doubt there was some idiot confused by the ballot in every such case. What is the threshold at which we allow that state or precinct to vote over again? I'm beginning to think Tim is right: The fuse on this powder keg is lit. The NAACP and its ilk, along with Gore partisans like you, will never accept the outcome of this election. And holding a re-vote is the beginning of the end. Republicans aren't likely to let the Dems get away with stealing it back. In the end, I guess Slick Willie will just have to declare himself dictator-for-life and invoke martial law to "maintain order". Better stock up on ammo, folks. (Maybe Y2K was just a few months late.) - GH _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

2 1

CDR: Yer Mahm...
by R. A. Hettinga 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

At 1:38 PM -0500 on 11/10/00, Furlong, Steven wrote: > Robert Hettinga wrote: >>...The one person I fear more than Tim May, maybe even >>my Roslindale Attorney, being me dear Mum... :-)) > > You think you got it bad? _My_ mom is a small-town deputy. > And she drives a pickup. The only saving grace is there isn't > a shotgun rack in the pickup. *My* mom will be 79 next month. She has spent most of her spare hours, as long as I can remember, in Republican politics in various places, from El Paso to St. Thomas to Anchorage to St. Louis to Dallas, and, finally, to Albuquerque, where she's now lived for almost 20 years. The Republican Party being where, as most people probably know, the women do all the work and the men just walk around like they own the place -- just so you know where *I* got it from. :-). She retired with real estate broker's licenses in three states that I know about, Missouri, Alaska, and Texas. Maybe also New Mexico, too, for all I know. She's personally gotten a couple of dozen people elected, the one of longest record being Alaska's Congressman Don Young, for whom she run an RCC-decorated phone-room get-out-the-vote operation. Young's still on the Hill, stuffing those pork barrels and with yours and my money and packing them off the almost-wilds of Alaska, or at least Los Anchorage, where all his votes *really* live. One of her memories (besides telling Ronald Reagan to his face in no uncertain terms that he was damn well going to get Carter elected in 1976 if he didn't sit down and shut up :-)) was baby-sitting one George Herbert Walker Bush one St. Louis day in the middle 70's, when he was between jobs and nobody really wanted to talk to him at the time... At the moment, if she's not contemplating the Ruin of the American Republic at the Hands of Albert Gore, Jr. (our favorite scenario was him buying off the electoral college), her having been a poll-judge at almost every election I can remember until the last few, she's probably yelling "Recount!", into the phone, at the top of her lungs, an the Appropriate Duly-Constituted Legal Official about that something-hundred-vote squeaker in New Mexico that she *knows* Bush *really* won. :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- 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

CDR: Rants and sour grapes ...
by Ernest Hua 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

It is abundantly clear to me that much of the ranting going on here on this list is at least 50% sour grapes. Not to pick on Tim, but he just seems like a convenient example; it is clear in Tim's mind that he does not want the possibility of Gore being the next president. He may have some procedural reasons to back this rant up, but he definitely does not like Gore. The same can be said of the rants about the dead guy. The same can be said of the disgruntled voters of Palm county. The same can be said of Republicans and Democrats desperately trying to manipulate the rules to gain some tiny margin of hope of winning. Yes, in all of these cases, the interested party can cite many legal issues and keep lots of lawyers fed and happy. But if the opposing party was the one who might stand to gain from the same procedural maneuvers, these rants and whines would never have come from the same people. I know Tim will be offended because I am accusing him of being less than objective, but I really have trouble believing he would hold the same position so firmly if his favorite candidate might stand to gain from the post-election-day legal challenges. (Like I said, Tim, I'm sorry it looks like I'm picking on you, but you've made yourself so easy to pick on. Perhaps you would just think about what would happen if your candidate was the one who WOULD stand to gain from the legal challenges.) It's just sour grapes. Ern

1 0

CDR: RE: Where is John Young?
by Vin McLellan 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

At 11/10/00, Trei, Peter wrote: >There are new articles, dated today, in the cryptome. There is >a gap from Nov 5 thru Nov 9. Maybe he went on vacation. Naaah. John doesn't go on vacations. I would be surprised if he sleeps. According to well-informed US government sources --speaking in their private capacities, with a promise of ZKS-protected anonymity) -- subject JYA is, in any case, never further than 7.6 meters from a keyboard whether he is awake or asleep. Could it be he was off on a binge celebrating the continuation of the DC gridlock? _Vin

1 0

CDR: Re: A very brief politcal rant
by Furlong, Steven 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Robert Hettinga wrote: >...The one person I fear more than Tim May, maybe even >my Roslindale Attorney, being me dear Mum... :-)) You think you got it bad? _My_ mom is a small-town deputy. And she drives a pickup. The only saving grace is there isn't a shotgun rack in the pickup. Regards, Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel sfurlong(a)acmenet.net

1 0

CDR: RE: A very brief politcal rant
by Ernest Hua 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Ok ... so we are now splitting hairs on language. Fine. Have it your way. My statement that every voter actually knew was improper. However, you are just going off on a tangent ... I am sure that months or years after JFK was assasinated, you can find someone who didn't even know he was in office. There is just no way to deal with this level of cluelessness. In these days of mass media, Internet, etc ... If you didn't know the guy was dead, and his wife was to take his place, you aren't trying. I don't care. It's not my state. I still had no choice but to be bombarded with that news. Sorry. My point still stands. Ern -----Original Message----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan@well.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 10:01 AM To: Ernest Hua; Ernest Hua Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: A very brief politcal rant As a working journalist writing about politics, I get lots of feedback from voters. Many are, sadly, clueless. But it is a stretch to assert, as you blithely do, that every voter knew that the guy was dead. My own experience shows otherwise. -Declan At 09:55 11/10/2000 -0800, Ernest Hua wrote: >To believe your assertions, you would have to assume that the >voter walked into the booth never picking up on any news and >never spoke to anyone, and just had no clue who he/she was >voting for. This behavior is clearly legal. But just as Tim >cannot be concerned about inner city welfare mothers ("maggots"? >what word did he use?), I simply cannot be concerned about this >uninformed segment of the electorate.

1 0

CDR: RE: A very brief politcal rant
by Ernest Hua 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

I'm sorry, but we just clearly disagree. Every voter had enough opportunity to know that the guy was dead, and that the wife was to succeed him. If some voters did not know, I'm sorry to them. It was all over the news. Every person has a right to be hermit or to be generally clueless. But I cannot help those people. In the original message, the central issue was whether it was legal for the governor to appoint the wife. I spoke to that issue assuming that the voters had enough opportunity to know what was going on. To believe your assertions, you would have to assume that the voter walked into the booth never picking up on any news and never spoke to anyone, and just had no clue who he/she was voting for. This behavior is clearly legal. But just as Tim cannot be concerned about inner city welfare mothers ("maggots"? what word did he use?), I simply cannot be concerned about this uninformed segment of the electorate. Ern -----Original Message----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan@well.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 7:14 AM To: Ernest Hua Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: A very brief politcal rant On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 12:51:05AM -0500, Ernest Hua wrote: > My original point still stands. The voters should get what they > want, unless they want something clearly illegal. That's a clear > principle in our pseudo-democracy. Every principle has a point No, your original point was muddled. It's not clear that every voter who chose the dead guy knew that his widow would take the slot. Since the election is so close, that matters. If you want to make sure the voters are getting what they want, put the non-dead-guy's name on the ballot. -Declan

1 0

CDR: Your Faq-O-Matic authentication secret
by www-data 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

To validate your Faq-O-Matic password, you may either enter this secret into the Validation form: Secret: be1da4fe1d5a Or access the following URL. Be careful that, when you copy and paste the URL, the line-break doesn't cut the URL short. http://www.debian.org/cgi-bin/fom?_id=cypherpunks%40toad.com&_pass=cypherpu… Thank you for using Faq-O-Matic.

1 0