December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

The Liberty Dollar
by Gary Jeffers 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

My fellow Cypherpunks, The Liberty Dollar My fellow Cypherpunks, I think I may have some really great news here, but you all can check it out to be sure. I found an alternative money on the Internet. It is called the Liberty Dollar. The Internet site is: http://www.norfed.org NORFED is The National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and the Internal Revenue Code. The money is backed by silver and gold and can be redeemed widely in America. As many of you know, the $US is a corrupt, proprietary, debt issued, fait, fractional reserved,illegal, unconstituional, U. S. State enforced monopoly currency. As corrupt as it is I don't know why it hasn't already collasped and dragged us down with it! If the Liberty Dollar is honest and robust, then it may be the vehical to beat the elite bankers tyranny and give us an honest wealth produced money. Yours Truly, Gary Jeffers BEAT STATE !!!!

3 5

RE: Cypherpunks IQ Test
by Aimee Farr 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Mike: Are you often the victim of mercenary females? > -----Original Message----- > From: mmotyka(a)lsil.com [mailto:mmotyka@lsil.com] > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 3:28 PM > To: aimee.farr(a)pobox.com > Subject: Cypherpunks IQ Test > > > It's an obvious setup. The woods are part of a defense installation, > apple is filled with coke, the girl is underage, the woods are full of > trigger happy fibbies. > > You hit the ground and roll into the brush, drawing on the way. You > attempt to locate opponents and identify the safest route away from the > situation. > > Mike > > > >CYPHERPUNKS IQ TEST > > > >QUESTION #1. > > > >You are walking through the woods alone. A beautiful unclothed woman > >magically appears in front of you. She holds out an apple. > > > >1. Please darken in the correct choice using a Number Two pencil: > > > >(a) you bite the apple. > >(b) you take the woman. > >(c) you run away. > >(d) a and b, but not c. > >(e) b and c only. > >(f) all of the above. > >(g) none of the above. > > > >2. Please justify your answer: > > > > > >___________________________________________________________________. > > > > > >Just curious.... > > > > -Aimee

2 1

More on "new physics"
by Tim May 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Someone sent me a private note. I have deleted his name for this public reply. > Tim May wrote: > > >> The "new physics" stuff is quite different. It is scorned in a way >> that plate tectonics was not, and for good reason. Folks should visit >> Bearden's site. http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/index.html > > I did. Oh, dear. > > Not sure what is supposed to be denoted by "Tesla physics", but Tesla's > work with power transmission via HF is fascinating, even if there was > apparently no practical or safe use for it. No one disputes the outstanding work Tesla did on a.c. transmission. And anyone who has seen or used a Tesla coil knows how real it is. "Tesla physics" is all the cruft that has developed around some of his more obscure (and late) writings, usually mixed together with stuff Tesla could not have known about at the time of his death. To wit, the stuff about zero point energy and perpetual motion machines. And, sometimes, mixed together with the usual nutcase stuff about the Hollow Earth theory (zeta reticulans colonizing the hollow earth, Greys, underground UFO bases, secret Nazi weapons, etc.). Tesla is a hero to these "new physics" nuts, even though nothing Tesla ever worked on or built contradicts in the slightest way the predictions of Maxwell's theories. They take Tesla's very real contributions and some of his weirder theories (though none of them so weird as the Hollow Earth/antigravity/time reversal theories of modern nutters) and say that this means "They laughed at Tesla, they laugh at me!" BTW, I was/am an early ("angel") investor in a company doing work on ultrawideband transmissions. Some of the works Bearden cites, like those of Barrett, are familiar to me and others with this company. Saying that there is a role for ultrawideband pulse technology, a la spread spectrum and beyond SS, is NOT the same as saying there are confirmed "problems" with electromagnetic theory. There may be, and there are a handful of folks doing "foundational" work in E&M, but, so far, there are no indications that their foundational work is changing any engineering calculations. Quite the contrary, in my view. Electromagnetic theory basically "works"--to many decimal places of accuracy. Circuits work as expected, antennas work as expected, and there are no "unexplained observations" (as usually exist before a new theory arrives). There may be some _semantic_ issues, e.g., does a square wave or impulse "really" have components that were sent out _before_ the square wave or impulse? (A Fourier decomposition of a square wave starting at time t = 0 has "sine wave components" spread out over time and adding up in such a way as to give the square wave, or the impulse, or any other signal. Some think this means deep and mysterious things are happening, something having to do with time travel and reversing the aging process, blah blah blah. Henning Harmuth may write fairly eloquently about the "dogma of the circle" and how the Fourier decomposition of a signal into (allegedly) a near-infinite series of sine waves is "not real," but for all intents and purposes it all works. And the "new physics" people like Bearden go way beyond what Harmuth and Barrett are talking about: they bring in "curved space-time" and gravitation and antigravity and the ultra-weird notion that aging can be reversed by "pumping the conjugate time-axis of the Minkowski manifold" (OK, I made this up...don't have time to lift one of Bearden's direct quotes...and this will help train me in the jargon if I ever become a "new physicist."). Nut cases like Bearden have the patter of physics down. Very few actual physicists waste their time dissecting and refuting Bearden for obvious reasons. I urge readers of this list not to waste time on this stuff. --Tim May, Citizen-unit of of the once free United States " The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. "--Thomas Jefferson, 1787

5 22

Re: A Trial Balloon to Ban Email?
by Declan McCullagh 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 09:57 AM 5/14/2003 -0400, Sunder wrote: >Yes, but how will you stop the spammer from double spending the same $0.25 >micropayment on all of his 170,000 email addresses? Depending on whether >you check that there is a payment attached or not, and also check it with >the bank before delivering it, you'd have already wasted your bandwith and >possibly have accepted a spam into your mail spool. It is true that the notions of micropayments as applied to spam (that I'm familiar with, at least) would require that the email recipient check with the bank to detect doublespending. This would introduce an additional delay before delivery from unknown senders, yes, but I fail to see how it would impose an unacceptable cost in bandwidth or CPU usage. Spammers could still try the same-micropayment-a-million-times route, just as they could try to spam without micropayments, but if their email is rejected in sufficient quantities, the cost to the spammer would outweigh the benefits. The key is achieving sufficient quantities. -Declan

6 19

Re: AP Al Qaeda
by mattd 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

>>No, no. AP is funny because it's impracticeable. One does not find an assassin exclusively by tracing who paid him to kill. One can (and often does) find him because he makes a mistake in the act of commiting the crime. Which, if I'm >>reading my history right, is what's hampered the noisy proponents of AP up to this point already. Crime? Wot crime,guvnor? Jim and CJ were not 'noisy'.imo. Im a bit noisy cos Im pushing the 'let it all hang out' version. >The point is that Bell's theory does a really good job of sorting out the business end of assassination,...< Oh THATS funny.I get it. HAHAHA! >>Killing one person, especially a public official, pisses a whole bunch of people off. Those people have a tendency to come find their buddy's killer. Mmm,where do we start,lets get some firebrands and go up to the proffrs? Look at sites with no logs for quad anon 'predictors' who may be overseas briefly visiting cybercafes,Good luck china.(you just contradicted yrself btw.) Oh,unless you mean the torture/french village reprisal thang.Win friends and influence people. The one person killed will have had to have done a lot of evil shit to get enough pooled (presumably) to tempt a seasoned pro.Unless some professional killer turns all altruistic,stranger things have happened.The killer could be suicidal.another possibility.Lots of scenarios possible here,movie scripts,even.Pop songs,video games.DoCoMo assasinphones. Someone like a torturer,murderer,terrorist,pedophile is a logical candidate.(stephen roach?)Sometimes these happen to be public officials.Theres one here where I live named dennis Tanner.(vic.au) Those killers by remote control like arbusto might be be made more accountable. What better way than...Bell's theory, "a really good job of sorting out the business end of assassination"according to you. KILL THE PRESIDENT! "Id buy that for a dollar!" >>No kind of real or threatened assassination can weaken a government in which a majority of the governed people >believe. It can only make it seem more righteous and be more strong. Thats true,roll over and go back to sleep,if you live under that govt you have nothing to worry about. More righteous and more smug.

2 15

[Lucrative-L] double spends, identity agnosticism, and Lucrative
by R. A. Hettinga 20 May '05

20 May '05

--- begin forwarded text

4 4

Vengeance Libertarianism
by Tim May 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

On Dec 30, 2003, at 10:01 PM, jal(a)jal.org wrote: >> (This space reserved for former Marxist and now neocon standard-bearer >> James Donald to foam that I am a Saddam lover and a supporter of >> Chomsky.) > > I will say that I was a a former marxist. This is not to bow at the > feet > of some better method, nor to trivialize the past. > > My awakening, as it were, actually happened here, for better or worse. > Tim, Hal, Lucky, Uni and to some extent Detweiler all helped > form my view. More than a few others. This was back in '93, mostly. At > least, the founding, for me was then. I know some things happened later > (I saw Uni present his Coke Presentation in 2002 for the first time), > and I became concerned with business, or at least companies that wanted > cash, and to be a business later. > I never went through a Marxist phase, never even came close. This despite entering college in 1970, this despite going to a school where the dominant paradigm was leftist (UC Santa Barbara). I occasionally wonder what my perspective might be had I ever held leftist, collectivist thoughts. Oh well, I'll never know. Thirty years ago I _was_ more charitable about the various groups which claim to have been aggrieved, and I dutifully referred to negroes as "blacks," argued earnestly with doubting leftists about the importance of the profit motive, cited semi-leftists who had reasonable things to say about capitalism and liberty and the Constitution. But over the years, as I have seen a huge chunk of money taken from me at gunpoint and given to welfare skanks, inner city negro mutants, gay activist buttfucker San Francisco queer groups, foreign nations with dictators like Hussein (both of them), Mubarek, Amin, Meir, Rabin, and a hundred others, and as education has declined while the pigeons demand more handouts...I have become what I call a "vengeance libertarian." While certain theoreticians of 30 years argued for silly ideas about how how it is "immoral" to land on another's balcony while falling from a building, because the property rights had not been negotiated, and thus argued that even self-defense is fraught with moral problems, another camp of us were developing the idea that vengeance is good, that crypto anarchy will not only let some of us "withdraw from the system," a la Galt's Gulch, but also it will let us execute justice on those who stole from us. For every negro welfare momma who took money for the past number of years, tell her to pay it all back, with compounded interest, or face time in a labor camp to repay what she stole. And if she cannot, or will not, which is ovewhelmingly likely, harvest her organs (if any takers can be found) and send the leftovers up the smokestacks. Ditto for the queers who have collected "public health" funds to pay for their sodomy. (I have no issue with their choices of partners, except that the diseases they contract via their habits, and their inability to work, is their problem, not mine. And not any corporations, except by the choice of that corporation.) Vengeance libertarianism is the rational kind. It will result in 20-40 million of the leeches, the bums, the minority grifters, the so-called aggrieved, the winos, the addicts, all being sent up the chimneys. Hitler had only minor reasons to go after the Jews (many of them had manipulated the economy to favor Jews while also preaching a "no defense" loser strategy to their untermenschen), we have much more reason to go after the tens of millions of underpeople who have been using their thugs in government to steal from us. We have much more justification today to liquidate the parsites than Hitler ever had. As for government, I estimate that 99% of those in Congress and government agencies in the past 40 years have earned killing. Of current Congressvarmints, only two seem to be not guilty. Of low-level employees, a bunch are just willing dweebs, and may be able to work off their debts in a labor camp for a decade or two. But probably the cleaner solution is just to do a thermonuclear cauterization of the region surrounding Washington and start fresh from there with a very limited government that honors the Constitution instead of catering to negroes and queers and welfare addicts. Crypto anarchy will make delivering justice to tens of millions a reality. The world will learn a lesson when we burn off these criminals. --Tim May "Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice."--Barry Goldwater

9 10

Re: Vengeance Libertarianism
by Freematt357＠aol.com 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

In a message dated 12/31/2003 4:44:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, jya(a)pipeline.com writes: > Nowhere in Tim's spew is the recognition that the largest > beneficiaries of government favoritism are corporations and > wealthy individuals like himself Government favoritism? It sounds like you don't believe a raising tide lifts all ships. Tim is entitled to keep the wealth he has earned, when it's taken its called stealing. > The rich fear the poor, and rightly so, for they know who pays > for their perks. What commie nonsense. > Wasn't it a leftist who coined Goldwater's most memorable > phrase? > The libertarian Karl Hess wrote most of Goldwater's speeches, but the quote you mention was one popularized by Ben Franklin who in turn was using an unattributed Latin quote. Regards, Matt Gaylor-

6 5

Re: [camram-spam] Re: Microsoft publicly announces Penny Black PoW postage project
by Scott Nelson 02 Jan '04

02 Jan '04

At 01:43 PM 12/29/03 -0500, Eric S. Johansson wrote: >Bill Stewart wrote: > >> At 09:37 PM 12/26/2003 -0500, Adam Back wrote: >> >>> The 2nd memory [3] bound paper (by Dwork, Goldber and Naor) finds a >>> flaw in in the first memory-bound function paper (by Adabi, Burrows, >>> Manasse, and Wobber) which admits a time-space trade-off, proposes an >>> improved memory-bound function and also in the conclusion suggests >>> that memory bound functions may be more vulnerable to hardware attack >>> than computationally bound functions. Their argument on that latter >>> point is that the hardware attack is an economic attack and it may be >>> that memory-bound functions are more vulnerable to hardware attack >>> because you could in their view build cheaper hardware more [....] >> >> >> Once nice thing about memory-bound functions is that, >> while spammers could build custom hardware farms in Florida or China, >> a large amount of spam is delivered by hijacked PCs or abused >> relays/proxies, >> which run on standard PC hardware, not custom, so it'll still be slow. The Microsoft Penny Black system (not to be confused with the IBM Penny Black paper) is supposedly limited by memory /speed/ not memory size. The only nice thing about that is that memory speed doesn't vary as much between machines. About 5 to 1 vs. 100 to 1. > >do the math. > >d*b >--- > s > >where: d = stamp delay in seconds > s = spam size in bytes > b = bandwidth in bytes per second > I don't understand this equation at all. It's the rate limiting factor that counts, not a combination of stamp speed + bandwidth. Assuming 128Kbps up, without a stamp it takes about .6 seconds to send a typical 10K spam. If it takes 15 seconds to generate the stamp, then it will take 15 seconds to send a stamped spam. It won't even take 15.6 seconds, because the calculation can be done in parallel with the sending. >assuming unlimited bandwidth, if a stamp spammer compromises roughly the >same number of PCs as were compromised during the last worm attack >(350,000) at 15 seconds per stamp, you end up with 1.4 million stamps >per minute or 2 billion stamps per day. When you compare that to the >amount of spam generated per day (high hundred billion to low trillion), > Not according to the best estimates I have. The average email address receives 20-30 spams a day (almost twice what it was last year) and there are only 200-400 million email addresses, which works out to less than 10 billion spams per day. But there's a much easier way to do the math. If 1% of the machines on the internet are compromised, and a stamp takes 15 seconds to generate, then spammers can send 50-60 spams to each person. (86400 seconds per day / 15 seconds per stamp * 1% of everybody = 57.6) You can reduce that by factoring in the average amount of time that a compromised machine is on per day. I fully expect that stamps will rise in "price" to several minutes, if camram actually gets any traction. >they are still a few machine short of what is necessary to totally >render stamps useless. Yes, maybe one spammer could muster a few >machines to be a nuisance but that's the extent of it. > >When dealing with hardware acceleration, it becomes a hardware war. If >they can make a custom hardware, Taiwan can make us USB stamp >generators, postage goes to a period of rapid inflation, and the world >goes back to where was before with no advantage to spammer's. > Custom hardware? I can buy a network ready PC at Fry's for $199. If it takes that machine 30 seconds to generate a stamp, and I leave it running 24/7, and replace it after 5 months, then the cost of a hashstamp is still less than 1/500 of a snail-mail stamp. Granted it's a significant increase in costs over current email, and therefore potentially a vast improvement, but it's still not expensive. Scott Nelson <scott(a)spamwolf.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)metzdowd.com

14 22

Re: Vengeance Libertarianism
by Harmon Seaver 01 Jan '04

01 Jan '04

On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 01:59:50PM -0500, Sunder wrote: > If those are your beliefs, then by all means, set the first example, and > go kill yourself. Better yet, sacrifice yourself to your goddess... By > doing so, you'll also earn yourself a Darwin Award... unless you've > already fathered kids... But from your tone of voice, I'd say you've > probably castrated yourself years ago. No, I have offspring. But what makes you think I'm human? -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com

3 2

Re: Vengeance Libertarianism and Hot Black Chicks
by Tyler Durden 01 Jan '04

01 Jan '04

Tim May wrote (and fairly cogently, I might add)... "If a person thought he was not being paid enough, it was his option to go elsewhere, to start his own business, etc. If a business wanted to raise or lower prices, their option. Customers were free to purchase or not." This is an idealization, of course, and to the extent that it was true I agree with some of the main conclusions here. Another idealization is that, once in a while, someone will get caught in a downsizing or without a job for a while. Knowing that some small cushion existed allowed those with fairly minimal capital to take the kinds of risks implicit in what you're talking about. "The meme which Tyler Durden and John Young--not surprising to me that both are Manhattanites, representing the East Coast view of capitalism--are popularizing is the one that says that what made companies successful was *government spending*, not this compact which needed little or no government role, and that this makes government intervention in business justifiable. Even more mendacious is the claim that those who worked hard and risked their capital by investing in companies are profiting at the expense of the "less privileged." " Well. I wasn't exactly trying to say that. At least, "Intel was successful because the government gave it tax breaks..."...that's what I'm NOT saying. However, add my point above to the notion that the whole American social fabric probably can not be separated into small discete chunks, and you get my point. Or at least, the logic that compels one to conclude that the murder of 40 million African Americans is justifiable should somehow make one take those notions with a grain of salt. Intel or National Semiconductor doesn't and never did exist in a vacuum. They were started by great engineers and physicsts that were educated in places like Stanford, or that worked in Bell Labs. And this isn't an argument for tax-and-spend 'statism' per se, but simply that there's a social/political/economic environment that can't be diced and sliced. You'd dice and slice an African American population, but then again it's from these inner cities that much of popular American culture has arisen (ie, between pro sports, various forms of music and so on...). Who knows the impact these people have had in terms of providing 'content' for the chips and TV screens and so on. Am I therefore arguing that this justifies US tax policies? Hell no. I might bother trying if I thought $$$-towards-blacks amounted to anything more than mere mollification and storage. (Hell, my household probably pays more than the whole rest of the Cypherpunks list in annual taxes...including May, I'd bet.) No, blacks aren't the enemy. I'm not even convinced that the basic notion of the "state" is the enemy. But those who currently adminster the state and utilize it for various ends have morphed themselves, and (most likely) the American State into the defacto enemy that billions of people throughout the world are starting to resent. For that reason I'd like to cut out the cancer that eats my hard-earned resources and utlizes them to benefit a preselected few. -TD PS: Is there any comment that Mr May would like to profer on the issue of having been rejected by some hot black tail back in the day? (ie, aside from "I'd like to see you are your infant children stripped of epidermis and dipped in seasalt") >From: Tim May <timcmay(a)got.net> >To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com >Subject: Re: Vengeance Libertarianism and Hot Black Chicks >Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:06:29 -0800 > >On Dec 31, 2003, at 10:51 AM, Tim May wrote: >>> >>>Add to that the fact that Mr May seems to lead a fairly bucolic life >>>(from his accounts)...working in his gardens, installing tripwires and >>>landmines and so forth, apparently without worrying about cash or >>>physical needs. So this system has served him pretty well, insofar as >>>there was a place for him to apply his skills in order to make his $$$. >>>That system was payed for by somebody else's taxes, and now it's asking >>>(well, demanding from) him for some $$$ that he apparently can easily >>>afford. >> >>Nonsense. The chip companies were NOT "payed for by somebody else's >>taxes." (Nor was the invention of the IC or the microprocessor paid for by >>DARPA or anyone else in government, despite factually incorrect lore to >>the contrary. I was there, at least for the onset of the micro, and I can >>say precisely what role government contracts played: none.) >> >>Engineers and scientists who work an estimated 8 months out of each year >>to pay their taxes (Federal plus state plus local plus payroll plus >>property plus sales plus.....) see the minority layabouts working not one >>_day_ for their "entitlements" and "benefits" and "social services." > >I'm going to elaborate on this point, as there seems to be a growing meme >in the tech culture (especially amongst the anti-free trade, >twentysomething, self-described "geeks") that somehow government built or >paid for technology, business, high tech, etc. > >What built our "system" was essentially a _compact_, an agreement codified >in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and even centuries of common law that >a bunch of things would happen: > >-- that interference in the business choices of a business would be minimal > >-- that failing businesses would not be bailed out (and, indeed, none of >the leading companies in 1850 last much beyond 1900, few in business in >1900 are still dominant, etc.) > >-- that owners, employers, etc. and their employees, customers, etc. would >themselves negotiate wages, prices, benefits, etc., without a top-down >order about who might be employed, at what rates, etc. > >(This of course began to change when the socialists assumed power in the >1930s, and then dramatically changed when the Great Society socialists >assumed power in 1961. It then came to be seen as the role of government to >set wages, to force businesses to deal with those they wished not to, to >let debtors off without repaying debts or even having their kneecaps >smashed, etc. This was the start of the Era of Entitlements, when some >ethnic groups decided that reading be for whitey and that they would coast >on freebies paid for by the "suckas" still working.) > >This compact, based essentially on voluntary interaction in trade, >employment, and investment, worked quite well for many decades. This >compact, this way of doing things which is usually called "liberty" or >"laissez faire," was not "built" by government...until relatively recent >times the size of government was small and tax rates for most workers and >investors were low. What made the system work was that the system largely >worked on the "non-initiation of force" principle, which is what begets >voluntary transactions. If a person thought he was not being paid enough, >it was his option to go elsewhere, to start his own business, etc. If a >business wanted to raise or lower prices, their option. Customers were free >to purchase or not. > >The meme which Tyler Durden and John Young--not surprising to me that both >are Manhattanites, representing the East Coast view of capitalism--are >popularizing is the one that says that what made companies successful was >*government spending*, not this compact which needed little or no >government role, and that this makes government intervention in business >justifiable. Even more mendacious is the claim that those who worked hard >and risked their capital by investing in companies are profiting at the >expense of the "less privileged." > >"You are successful because of the taxes paid by the less-privileged, so >now it is right that you be taxed at high rates so that welfare benefits >can be maintained." is the essential message here. > >This is hokum. Very few U.S. or even European and Asian businesses were >built with public funds. Neither Sony nor Honda, two examples of post-war >successes, were built by MITI (MITI, in fact, frequently criticized Sony >and Honda for the courses they pursued...meanwhile MITI was funding the >now-defunct TRON microprocessor and the Fifth Generation Computer, utterly >missing out on workstations, PCs, modern microprocessors, CAD, routers, and >the Internet). > >None of Intel's achievements, whether the first dynamic RAM (the 1101), the >first EPROM, the first microprocessor, the first single board computer, the >first...., etc., was paid for by any kind of DARPA or DOD or government >grant. In fact, the military was pissed off at us for not developing their >kind of "mil-spec" components, for not bidding on military contracts. We >made our products by selling to those who wanted to buy them. Period. And >we risked our savings by buying stock in the company and others of its >kind. > >Make a list of companies of the past 50 years, in the U.S., Japan, and >Europe, and virtually none of them had significant U.S. funding. Sure, some >of them had a lot of government purchases...aircraft companies, for >example, will almost always end up selling heavily to national governments. >But Boeing beat out Convair (on the 707 vs. 880 race) for very basic >reasons. Likewise, Boeing again "bet the company" on the 747, between 1965 >and 1970. It succeeded, and only partly because of government purchases. >Mostly it was just competency. > >And so on. The best examples are in Silicon Valley, now being taxed at >cumulative rates exceeding 75%. For what? To pay mostly for things they >will not, and cannot, ever benefit from. > >This is one of the reasons Intel and other companies are expanding so >rapidly in other countries, places where the work force is not made up of >increasingly illiterate high school kids, mall rats, and whiggers. In China >and India and Malaysia they have no translation of "reading be for whitey." > >In 30 years America and Europe are going to be in a precarious position. > >--Tim May > > >"The whole of the Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the >people at large or considered as individuals... It establishes some >rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no >majority has a right to deprive them of." -- Albert Gallatin of the New >York Historical Society, October 7, 1789 _________________________________________________________________ Take advantage of our limited-time introductory offer for dial-up Internet access. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup

2 1

Vengeance Libertarianism and Hot Black Chicks
by Tyler Durden 01 Jan '04

01 Jan '04

"Nowhere in Tim's spew is the recognition that the largest beneficiaries of government favoritism are corporations and wealthy individuals like himself, especially those associated with the greeders of the defense industry, rather the national security state." Yes...that's the thing I don't fully get. If we assume that Mr May made a big chunk of $$$ at Intel, isn't it rather naive of him to assume that the same system that helped make Intel the global $$$-generator it is isn't the same system that keeps black folks quiescent and so on? I think it's doubtful that Intel could have become what it is in any other country in the world. Add to that the fact that Mr May seems to lead a fairly bucolic life (from his accounts)...working in his gardens, installing tripwires and landmines and so forth, apparently without worrying about cash or physical needs. So this system has served him pretty well, insofar as there was a place for him to apply his skills in order to make his $$$. That system was payed for by somebody else's taxes, and now it's asking (well, demanding from) him for some $$$ that he apparently can easily afford. This doesn't necessarily annhilate his "arguments" or main thesis, but in this light the call for the killing of millions so that he can afford a few more landmines seems perplexing. As for the middle east and US foreign policy, I'd be more convinced if Mr May and others pointed to that as a main reason to stop paying taxes and back out of the system. In other words, that there may or may not be any 'inherent' flaw to a fairly light form of "statism", but that it's defacto application (in the case of the US) is creating a seriously destabilized global political environment, while decreasingly serving (though a piss-poor education system) those that ought to benefit from taxes and spending. (This was why I became interested in "Crypto-Anarchy".) Of course, I'll add the usual boiler-plate notion invoked by physicists, mathematicians, and hard-scientists almost universally, in their heart of hearts: Only mathematics and experimental physics (as a thought system or philisophy) are truly reliable and able to make definitive conclusions about the world...all other so-called systems of thought (including sociology, political 'science', economics and so on) are half-baked hodge podges at best. Therefore, any thought system that has as a corrollary "...and 40 million negros should die..." should immediately be suspect of having been based on a foundation of non-mathematical muck, likely relating to penis envy and getting rejected by some hot black chick Mr May tried to date back in 1957 or whatever. -TD >From: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com >Subject: Re: Vengeance Libertarianism >Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 04:38:04 -0800 > >What's pleasurable about reading the fiction of ideologues like >Tim is the smack-down tone of their prejudices. Fake, fake, >fake. > >Nowhere in Tim's spew is the recognition that the largest >beneficiaries of government favoritism are corporations and >wealthy individuals like himself, especially those associated with >the greeders of the defense industry, rather the national >security state. No US institution has been uncontaminated >by the wealth generated by the illusion of US enemies and the >raping of the economy to simulate battle with such fictional >threats, at home and abroad. > >Welfare is puny by comparison, and Tim's castigation of >it is like the master of the house bitching about health needs >of his servants while requiring them to wipe his ass. Standard >nouveau riche conceit which reveals a fear of again being >a poor asswipe himself, the stench of self-loathing inescapable. > >The favorite mindlessness of the ideologue, is to rehash endlessly >comfortable old prejudices, chanting repetitively the same >accusations, avoiding self-criticism in the manner of the >self-righteous, professing of certainty to conceal doubt, >working hard to present an image of confidence, most often >by blaming and attacking easy targets. > >The rich fear the poor, and rightly so, for they know who pays >for their perks. And the answer to this fear is always threats >of violence, the dominant paradigm of those who reap the >most benefits from house rules of the United States. > >Cloaked, as ever, in blind faith in the "Constitution," or another >rigged fat cat document used to fleece the peasants at home >and abroad, based as they always are on justification of the >supremacy of the over-privileged. > >Eveready to shoot those who disagree, send them up the >chimneys, the teenie-bopper ideologue struts mightily >against imaginary demons. > >Wasn't it a leftist who coined Goldwater's most memorable >phrase? Extremists are all alike, full of shit and hatred, their >own worst enemy. Suicide prone, but afraid to go alone. _________________________________________________________________ Enjoy a special introductory offer for dial-up Internet access limited time only! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup

4 4

Re: Singers jailed for lyrics
by Major Variola (ret) 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

At 07:48 PM 12/26/03 -0500, Michael Kalus wrote: >Then I guess you better start liberating the world. If I were a neocon asshole, I would. Instead, I regard liberation as a local task, and interfering with sovereignty as the initiation of force, ie an act of war. >Nice... So in the US you have : > >- Walmart which censors music to make it "clean". >- Blockbuster who edits movies (or has in the past, not sure if they >still do) >- TV Stations who edit movies >- Censors at TV stations who "watch" over the programming. >- What about the FCC who restricts what can be aired? You need to be clear: only governments can censor. Walmart etc can do whatever they want. That's what private property means. You don't have a right to put your bumper sticker on my car (compelled speech, see the 1st), or prohibit me from putting my sticker on my car. (I just drove 400 miles in a car with the US flag upside down and "Fucked" written over it. Its a magnetic sticker I remove when I travel with my pharmaceutical of choice.) TV stations which exploit the aetherial commons are a tricky case. The government licensors have to be very careful not to induce censorship. >> Fuck censors dead. > >I agree. Well, ok then :-)

4 3

Re: Vengeance Libertarianism
by Harmon Seaver 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:48:21PM -0500, Sunder wrote: > > > > > No, I have offspring. But what makes you think I'm human? > > > Ok, so, you're not human, you're a lunatic. Well, with an emphasis on the "luna" ... > Howl at the moon much lately? > As a matter of fact, yes. Good for the soul, and "what ails ye". Also often a fairly sociable event, at least among my volken. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com

1 0

Re: Vengeance Libertarianism
by Tyler Durden 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

James Donald wrote... "You just issued the "sovereignty" rationalization for Saddam's crimes," Hey...I just heard that a country that's even MORE free than the US has decided to liberate us from our oppressors in Washington DC. Don't stand on your balcony to cheer for them as they roll through your town, however...some of the "instigators" that support the old regime have been causing trouble, so you're bound to mistaken for one of them and get shot. Just remember: this is so you can be FREE.... -TD >From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd(a)echeque.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com >Subject: Re: Vengeance Libertarianism >Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:36:01 -0800 > > -- >On 30 Dec 2003 at 22:49, Tim May wrote: > > I never went through a Marxist phase, never even came close. > >You are real close right now. > >You just issued the "sovereignty" rationalization for Saddam's >crimes, and your peculiar recollection of the speakers at those >Vietnam war demonstrations sounds like a marxist's >recollection, and of course theire are your regular call for >various groups to be sent up the chimney's, which presupposes >some benevolent vanguard group wise enough and virtuous enough >to identify which individuals belong to these undesirable >categories and need to go up the chimneys. > >It is not that you never were close to being a communist, it is >that you have never been close to repenting, except on tax and >spend issues. > >Apart from taxes, you are still as commie as ever. > > --digsig > James A. Donald > 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG > n3CKSWZU6+m1x4nkwGwK0eRrgkUtI5TMsXWBKz5E > 4FWnzNBI3XNIbvyHNKS2VTD1t7nF94SM3amrrE8Lu _________________________________________________________________ Have fun customizing MSN Messenger learn how here! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_customize

1 0

Re: [IP] FBI Issues Alert Against Almanac Carriers
by Tim May 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

On Dec 30, 2003, at 7:30 AM, Trei, Peter wrote: > My first thought on reading this was that it was from > The Onion, but its real. > > I guess being well-informed is now a cause for suspicion, > as it was in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. > > Well, they've been working on the mountains of skulls in Iraq (of course, we have to destroy the country in order to save the country), so going after eyeglass wearers, the college-educated, and those who watch PBS is the logical next step. Today's news is that analysts are saying a successful prosecution of Saddam on "war crimes" is going to be nearly impossible, given that he was a sovereign leader attacked by a foreign power and that none of the "WMD" were found (not that having WMD has been grounds for war crimes convictions, else the U.S., U.S.S.R., P.R.C., U.K., France, Zionist Entity, and numerous other states would have been prosecuted.). So, I expect that even as I write CIA toxins experts are preparing what will make Saddam go away the quiet way. Look for him to go "of natural causes" before any War Crimes Tribunal can ever actually happen. (This space reserved for former Marxist and now neocon standard-bearer James Donald to foam that I am a Saddam lover and a supporter of Chomsky.) --Tim May, who owns both a Farmer's Almanac and a Rand-McNally Atlas (apparently the illiterates who recorded the Maximum Leader's thoughts on the dangers of "almanacs" may have gotten the two confused, we are now hearing, and the order for the droids to search for "almanacs" apparently got confused...so now they're looking for evildoers who have either of these banned books)

2 1

Re: [IP] FBI Issues Alert Against Almanac Carriers
by whellman＠mail.utexas.edu 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

Hrm, apologies for the piss-poor formatting (or so it appears to me) and lack of subject line in my last post (reproduced below with better formatting (I hope)). I'm stuck using a webmail interface for the time being and I've not quite gotten used to it yet. Wes Hellman >Tim May wrote: >>So, I expect that even as I write CIA toxins experts are preparing what will >>make Saddam go away the quiet way. Look for him to go "of natural causes" >>before any War Crimes Tribunal can ever actually happen. >Wouldn't that be completely obvious? If Saddam just happened to die of "natural >causes" it seems to me like anyone with half a brain would be able to figure >out what probably happened. Maybe I'm remembering this incorrectly, but I think >that when he was captured they said he was healthy. Regardless of whether or not >that was actually the case, if it is in fact the official position, it seems >like it would create troubles for a "natural death" scenario. >What would seem more likely to me is a Jack Ruby-style assassination. US forces >let Iraqi security escort Saddam from prison to the beginning of his trial, for >a nice photo-op. Unfortunately, as everyone knows, these Iraqi guards are still >adjusting and what have you, so oops, somehow a vengeful individual gets >through and shoots Saddam in front of all the cameras. Sure, we would have >rather had him tried in a just court, but he /did/ make a lot of enemies over >the years, and you know how that works... >Hell, they might not even have to explicitly hire anyone to do it. Just make >sure security is kind of slack and let word of this slip out, and the problem >takes care of itself...

1 0

None
by whellman＠mail.utexas.edu 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > So, I expect that even as I write CIA toxins experts are preparing what will > make Saddam go away the quiet way. Look for him to go "of natural causes" > before any War Crimes Tribunal can ever actually happen. Wouldn't that be completely obvious? If Saddam just happened to die of "natural causes" it seems to me like anyone with half a brain would be able to figure out what probably happened. Maybe I'm remembering this incorrectly, but I think that when he was captured they said he was healthy. Regardless of whether or not that was actually the case, if it is in fact the official position, it seems like it would create troubles for a "natural death" scenario. What would seem more likely to me is a Jack Ruby-style assassination. US forces let Iraqi security escort Saddam from prison to the beginning of his trial, for a nice photo-op. Unfortunately, as everyone knows, these Iraqi guards are still adjusting and what have you, so oops, somehow a vengeful individual gets through and shoots Saddam in front of all the cameras. Sure, we would have rather had him tried in a just court, but he /did/ make a lot of enemies over the years, and you know how that works... Hell, they might not even have to explicitly hire anyone to do it. Just make sure security is kind of slack and let word of this slip out, and the problem takes care of itself... Wes Hellman

1 0

Re: Singers jailed for lyrics
by Major Variola (ret) 30 Dec '03

30 Dec '03

At 10:52 AM 12/27/03 -0500, Michael Kalus wrote: >> So a question for you: If I want to write a book on the history of the >> swastika, or teach about the holocuast in Germany, do I need a license >> or something? (And let's just assume I have a "politically correct" >> view.) >> >> >To my understanding Historical documents are exempt from this. My "Handbook of Regular Patterns" (Stevens) includes Swastikas under the obvious symmetry group. Do I need a license?

1 0

swastika
by Harmon Seaver 30 Dec '03

30 Dec '03

Ah, now I finally understand why the PRC is so down on the Falun Gong. 8-) http://www.falundafa.org/eng/falun.htm -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com

1 0

unsubscribe cypherpunks
by Adam Lydick 30 Dec '03

30 Dec '03

unsubscribe cypherpunks

1 0

Re: FW: [IP] FBI Issues Alert Against Almanac Carriers
by Freematt357＠aol.com 30 Dec '03

30 Dec '03

In a message dated 12/30/2003 10:36:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, ptrei(a)rsasecurity.com writes: > My first thought on reading this was that it was from > The Onion, but its real. > > I guess being well-informed is now a cause for suspicion, > as it was in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. > > Peter Trei > You know if the "terrorists" didn't know they could use an almanac to plan attacks, they do now. Regards, Matt-

1 0

FW: [IP] FBI Issues Alert Against Almanac Carriers
by Trei, Peter 30 Dec '03

30 Dec '03

My first thought on reading this was that it was from The Onion, but its real. I guess being well-informed is now a cause for suspicion, as it was in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. Peter Trei -----Original Message----- From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 8:03 PM To: ip(a)v2.listbox.com Subject: [IP] FBI Issues Alert Against Almanac Carriers FBI Issues Alert Against Almanac Carriers December 29, 2003 By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 7:43 p.m. ET WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI is warning police nationwide to be alert for people carrying almanacs, cautioning that the popular reference books covering everything from abbreviations to weather trends could be used for terrorist planning. In a bulletin sent Christmas Eve to about 18,000 police organizations, the FBI said terrorists may use almanacs ``to assist with target selection and pre-operational planning.'' It urged officers to watch during searches, traffic stops and other investigations for anyone carrying almanacs, especially if the books are annotated in suspicious ways. ``The practice of researching potential targets is consistent with known methods of al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations that seek to maximize the likelihood of operational success through careful planning,'' the FBI wrote. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the bulletin this week and verified its authenticity. ``For local law enforcement, it's just to help give them one more piece of information to raise their suspicions,'' said David Heyman, a terrorism expert for the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. ``It helps make sure one more bad guy doesn't get away from a traffic stop, maybe gives police a little bit more reason to follow up on this.'' The FBI noted that use of almanacs or maps may be innocent, ``the product of legitimate recreational or commercial activities.'' But it warned that when combined with suspicious behavior -- such as apparent surveillance -- a person with an almanac ``may point to possible terrorist planning.'' ``I don't think anyone would consider us a harmful entity,'' said Kevin Seabrooke, senior editor of The World Almanac. He said the reference book includes about a dozen pages out of its 1,000 pages total listing the world's tallest buildings and bridges but includes no diagrams or architectural schematics. ``It's stuff that's widely available on the Internet,'' he said. The publisher for The Old Farmers Almanac said Monday terrorists would probably find statistical reference books more useful than the collections of Americana in his famous publication of weather predictions and witticisms. ``While we doubt that our editorial content would be of particular interest to people who would wish to do us harm, we will certainly cooperate to the fullest with national authorities at any level they deem appropriate,'' publisher John Pierce said. The FBI said information typically found in almanacs that could be useful for terrorists includes profiles of cities and states and information about waterways, bridges, dams, reservoirs, tunnels, buildings and landmarks. It said this information is often accompanied by photographs and maps. The FBI urged police to report such discoveries to the local U.S. Joint Terrorism Task Force. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-FBI-Almanacs.html?ex=1073745956& ei=1&en=04d038b602802322 Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

1 0

unsub from lne
by Harmon Seaver 29 Dec '03

29 Dec '03

Hmm, maybe Eric needs to undo his spam filter so people can unsub from lne.com. I just tried to, but it was rejected as undeliverable "spam". Tried sending it thru a remailer but don't know if majordomo will go for that. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com

4 7

Microsoft publicly announces Penny Black PoW postage project
by Steve Schear 29 Dec '03

29 Dec '03

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3324883.stm Adam Back is part of this team, I think. Similar approach to Camram/hahscash. Memory-based approaches have been discussed. Why hasn't Camram explored them? steve BTW, Penny Black stamp was only used briefly. It was the Penny Red which was used for decades. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)metzdowd.com

6 6