December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: MIME
by patrick＠Verity.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> : Content-Type: application/pgp > : Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > : Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > : Precedence: bulk > : Content-Length: 1092 > > I think that it must be the content-type that is causing problems, as > the rest of the message is completely standard. To the people whose > mailers broke out in hives at that message: Do you get the same behavior > with any message having an unknown content-type? > -- > Shields. > I've only ever seen the problem with Content-Type: application/pgp using Sun's mailtool. I don't know that I've ever gotten mail with unknown Content-Type though...wait let me whip some up... Mailtool assumes anything with a content type is an attachment. The type is used as the name of the attachment. A Content-Type: of application/foo or of just foo both yeild an attachment named foo. Patrick _______________________________________________________________________ / These opinions are mine, and not Verity's (except by coincidence;). \ | (\ | | Patrick J. Horgan Verity Inc. \\ Have | | patrick(a)verity.com 1550 Plymouth Street \\ _ Sword | | Phone : (415)960-7600 Mountain View \\/ Will | | FAX : (415)960-7750 California 94303 _/\\ Travel | \___________________________________________________________\)__________/

1 0

Re: Please send me SSL problems...
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Jeff, the SSL specification has a severe *architectural* problem - it > assumes that Internet Protocols are APIs ... > The IETF quite explicitly doesn't care about APIs With one exception so important that it might blow away your whole complaint... ...GSSAPI. /r$

1 0

DCSB: A Future Garrisoned
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Sender: rah(a)mail.shipwright.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 08:55:11 -0400 To: dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu, dcsb-announce(a)ai.mit.edu From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: DCSB: A Future Garrisoned Sender: bounce-dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Digital Commerce Society of Boston Presents Peter Cassidy Author, Technology Analyst A Future Garrisoned: How Long Can Military Fiat Control Digital Commerce Technologies? Tuesday, October 7, 1997 12 - 2 PM The Downtown Harvard Club of Boston One Federal Street, Boston, MA It is the wonderful American expectation of the new that informs a belief that what is technically possible is inevitable. Peter Cassidy's presentation - "A Future Garrisoned: How Long Can Military Fiat Control Digitial Commerce Technologies?" - will measure the political distance between what is possible in digital commerce and the reality of trying to establish it in the face of a campaign of disruption orchestrated by as influential an actor as the military-intelligence complex. Mr. Cassidy will discuss the decades-long twilight engagement that has been fought between the military intelligence agencies and the civilian sector since the late 1970s when it became apparent that cryptography would not long remain the preserve of the military without political intervention. (In his research, Mr. Cassidy has discovered that military intelligence agencies in the United States have a larger scope of interest in communications technologies than that which makes its way into the mass media, including such vital parts of the modern infrastructure as the civilian telephone network.) Mr. Cassidy will extrapolate what political and industrial barriers this campaign of disruption presents for the wide-scale adoption of strong cryptographic technologies, digital specie and other electronic financial instrumentation - such as adaption of Federal Reserve policy to the digital commerce space. As well, Mr. Cassidy will look at the routes of evasive action that are taken by creative digital commerce pioneers to end-run the most palpable of military barriers to electronic commerce: the export control regulations. For the public presses, Peter Cassidy covers technology, white collar crime and national affairs and, for research firms, he authors analyses on technologies and their relevant markets. His reportage and opinion pieces have appeared in WIRED, Forbes ASAP, The Economist, The Covert Action Quarterly, The Progressive, The Texas Observer, Telepath Magazine, Bankers Monthly, American Banker, InformationWeek, CFO Magazine, OMNI, The Boston Sunday Globe, Boston Magazine, The Sunday Sacramento Bee, ComputerWorld, National Mortgage News, Mortgage Technology, The International Digital Media Yearbook (Japan), NetscapeWorld, CIO Magazine, Webmaster Magazine, Datamation Magazine, World Trade Magazine and dozens of magazines and newspapers worldwide. Several of his pieces have been included in anthologies and college social studies texts. His expertise in information technologies has garnered him contracts with some of the most prestigious industrial research firms in America - Giga Information Group, Dataquest, CI-InfoCorp, Business Research Group, Inc., a subsidiary of Cahners/Reed Elsevier, and NSI Information Services - for whom he has authored analyses on a range of subjects including cryptography and the network security industry. This meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston will be held on Tuesday, October 7, 1997, from 12pm - 2pm at the Downtown Branch of the Harvard Club of Boston, on One Federal Street. The price for lunch is $30.00. This price includes lunch, room rental, various A/V hardware, and the speaker's lunch. ;-). The Harvard Club *does* have dress code: jackets and ties for men (and no sneakers or jeans), and "appropriate business attire" (whatever that means), for women. Fair warning: since we purchase these luncheons in advance, we will be unable to refund the price of your lunch if the Club finds you in violation of the dress code. We will attempt to record this meeting and put it on the web in RealAudio format at some future date We need to receive a company check, or money order, (or, if we *really* know you, a personal check) payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", by Saturday, October 4, or you won't be on the list for lunch. Checks payable to anyone else but The Harvard Club of Boston will have to be sent back. Checks should be sent to Robert Hettinga, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02131. Again, they *must* be made payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", in the amount of $30.00. Please include your e-mail address, so that we can send you a confirmation If anyone has questions, or has a problem with these arrangements (We've had to work with glacial A/P departments more than once, for instance), please let us know via e-mail, and we'll see if we can work something out. Upcoming speakers for DCSB are: November Carl Ellison Identity and Certification for Electronic Commerce December James O'Toole Internet Coupons January Joseph Reagle "Social Protocols": Meta-data and Negotiation in Digital Commerce We are actively searching for future speakers. If you are in Boston on the first Tuesday of the month, and you would like to make a presentation to the Society, please send e-mail to the DCSB Program Commmittee, care of Robert Hettinga, <mailto: rah(a)shipwright.com> . For more information about the Digital Commerce Society of Boston, send "info dcsb" in the body of a message to <mailto: majordomo(a)ai.mit.edu> . If you want to subscribe to the DCSB e-mail list, send "subscribe dcsb" in the body of a message to <mailto: majordomo(a)ai.mit.edu> . We look forward to seeing you there! Cheers, Robert Hettinga Moderator, The Digital Commerce Society of Boston -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNBABAcUCGwxmWcHhAQF45wf+JDd6Iz0LvZkGBTQZ3ASM8lNEgwW0/oOI RXR3BZW+9j3+2+BtZZzVIDIeCHHjNdWp4DfVB9RYalLf5nVrtB9go5JRJbQZ9L/7 pYq4w5/a3YJpf4voIO+MtcbK0iVMyfskHs+VZMLztu5ZnBrb4xcjkncZH3qfULy+ Gf00ehqK8VZM3f3Bx+MfXX3xadvv6l5xJQWY5GC+pIKeaoptIkuOxaZYPVWyYnJg aMm0iapqalOGAeK+cB6uQI3xdg94EjNZ5aUwaJVHEV4WFm01g3PVxMcRWQy2Bd6Y ypj1e4SBA4LyyMki/Br4NY4suO2L/PiXAJsJ7VA5fhzYy6Qr/NR8Zw== =eDqt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 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' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request(a)ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

Re: NYT on Netscape Crack
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> You could do that, but thats not how C does things. C allocates these > things on the stack. Nope. Just because almost all machines anyone is every going to use in their lifetimes are stack-based doesn't mean C is stack-based. The C compiler I once used on a LispMachine had no stack. /r$

2 1

Why couldn't it have been 42?
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[drand48 is supposed to return a random number] From: Arve Kjoelen <akjoele(a)shiva.ee.siue.edu> To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 10:38:58 -0500 Kun Luo, one of our grad students here recently found a bug in Sun's implementation of the drand48() function. We reported it to Sun, and they acknowledged the bug exists - it seemed to be the first time they had heard of it, though. The bug affects Sun's ANSI C compiler shipped with SPARCWorks3.0 and consists of the following: If you're compiling using the -Xc flag (strict ANSI C, no SUN C compatibility extensions), the function drand48() is BROKEN. It ALWAYS returns the number 9.000000 ...

1 0

EFF $10,000,0000 Challenge
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Electronic Forgery Foundation is proud to announce a major breakthrough in encryption technology -- Forged Encryption. We are offering a prize of $10,000,000.00 for anyone who can correctly decipher the following Forged Encryption message. -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 MessageID: od2CIT3fELE7K6bkIkKGJBj0MPUJ2TT8 hQCMA6ozRjzmqceZAQQAh02x0Dxer5vzZiSJ+v7bnMZQdgp425z5OH0NF/f/mXXc vInw+UsuTXqWNEV5rEQKYjU3qHoe6suCz5f9hEEnOIBacsD28pYU4ahkGOCTuTY6 N3xKrtDRqLPInB8PY7Kfd56jjQsVVRKmJBwXqHbPax4YyUB6ZbKKvSPiuUsAAQSl BAH3CFNKcmYjf+VtpjAVOpDNM/PMm1e6m33rZ01Sq6pXC0TTabCf7hkWscet0PCL VX0l1Zw5IKaFqo+pZ3EICRMF6HQrc30G7L9TFeKr//3YsO3/bC4VBgNQHA0qf2nD ldxAsTGPlRthBTxrzE0LjeOKi/pQOLXQMPQUwEIaL9rncjFgniplFoL6Nj0guJvW VvS+gxth8hpeWss7WlFFioV0vShsS/lahA+eg/9nVy8ken8pr4m484w2vwoiSdce CarVigVaRh6tCgh0jub7CHuDFg== =Q9+G -----END PGP MESSAGE----- The EFF doesn't have a copy of the correct answer locked away in a secret underground cave in Tibet, for verification, because the above Forged Encryption message is just a bunch of crap we typed in pretty much at random. Does the government want to keep your private key in escrow? Give them a copy of your EFF private key. Hell, give them _two_ copies, in case one is corrupted.{;>) Smile when you give them to the government agent. Ask him how his day has been. Offer him some coffe, and ask about his family. Tell him you will send him a Christmas card with another copy of your EFF private key, just in case the government misplaces the copies you gave them. Put your hand over your heart, salute the flag, and sing "God Bless America" as the government agent leaves. Then fart. Use the EFF Forged Encryption sofware regularly, to send messages with Subject:'s like "The Plot Against the PREZ," "Confirmation of the date of our armed assault," "The Nuke has arrived." Keep a copy of your EFF Forged Encryption secret key in a directory named "Off the Pigs." Most importantly, never reveal in your private email to others that you are a deaf, dumb and blind quadraplegic who has been homebound since birth. That way, the outrageous claims that government agents make against you in their secret deposition for a warrant to kick in your door and terrorize you will look all the more foolish during your trial. We at the Electronic Forgery Foundation realize that some of you wise guys are thinking that, for $10 million, it is well worth your while to write a program that will decipher the above message into something meaningful. Well, knock yourself out, dudes, but if you think that known forgers couldn't possibly be lying about the $10 million, then go directly to http://www.clueserver/fucking_idiot, do not pass GO and do not collect $200. --------------------------------------------------------------------- This message is copyrighted under the auspices of the Electronic Forgery Foundation. Any misquoting, misrepresentation, or other abuse of this message would be greatly appreciated. Hell, you can tell people you wrote it, if you want to. We don't really care. ---------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Re: traffic cameras, the latest issue of the "Computer Currents" local to NY has an url that supposedly reports the location of these cameras in New York City: http://www.panix.com/~sshah/ss-nyred.htm Have fun. FedPlunger

1 0

No Subject
by thad＠hammerhead.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I talked to somebody from RSA yesterday, and she said that they issued a press release yesterday that she expected to see in the papers today (I didn't see it) and would be on their web site "soon" that would explain their position. They say that the arbitration agreemment maintains the status quo pretty much, and while it doesn't limit what RSA can do, it severly limits what Cylink can do. I think that what RSA needs to do is hire Cylink's PR agency... thad -- Thaddeus Beier email: thad(a)hammerhead.com Technology Development vox: 408) 286-3376 Hammerhead Productions fax: 408) 292-8624

1 0

Re: FCPUNX:FBI calls for mandatory key escrow
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:40 AM 9/4/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote: > Who is going to stop them? They have the guns! When our elected > officials in Congress delved into the INSLAW affair, the Department > of Justice told them to "Fuck off." and refused to cooperate with > those who represent the citizens. Congress's reaction was to say, > "Yup. They're defying us." > Ipso facto--Congress is not running the country. The LEA's are running > the country. Go figure... It used to be that normal federal agencies did not have their own goons. They relied on the fibbies. Now every federal agency is creating their own goon squad. Sometimes they send in the goons to illegally enforce the laws that they are lobbying for. Congress then has to make it legal, or crack down on illegal use of force by a federal agency. Frequently they make it legal This is reminiscent of the latter days of the Soviet Union. Towards the end in the Soviet Union, armed government agencies would raid other agencies for valuables, and set up road blocks at random times and places, and confiscate anything valuable being trucked through by another government agency. No kidding. A government factory would be working on producing widgets, and suddenly guys with guns would come in and take their stuff for another government factory. The west is beginning to show the same symptoms, though as yet not nearly as severe. The state is visibly losing cohesion, and at the same time, through improved communications, the citizenry is gaining cohesion. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

3 2

Re: FCPUNX:Krispin Preaches Revolution!
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:47 AM 9/4/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: > And this is what I think they may try: a global crackdown to try to stamp > out the wildfire of anarchocapitalism before it spreads beyond any hope of > control. I think it already too late: A global crackdown, by creating a visible confrontation, would simply accellerate matters. If instead they simply rely on social inertia, it will take a long time for existing institutions to fade away. We have all victories except for one very important one. Money. Now once we take that key bastion, and it is being besieged on every front, everything else will fall in due course, but it will still be a slow process, only unusually far sighted politicians will see and fear what is happening. There is vast inertia in social institutions. > Louis Freeh is no dummy. He understands the power struggle. But he has to > speak babytalk to Feinswine and Kyl to let them glimpse what the issues are. Career civil servants have more reason to take the long view than do politicians. Politicians do not really care if the state is being undermined in the long run, provided they are re-elected in the short run. Although politicians are our enemies, they are a lesser enemy than career civil servants. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Hypermail gateway
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yesterday, I started a new hypermail gateway at: http://kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu/~cpunks/ Please try not to overload the site; it's a research machine. Raph

1 0

Re: Please send me SSL problems...
by Erik E. Fair 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:22 9/20/95, Rich Salz wrote: >> Jeff, the SSL specification has a severe *architectural* problem - it >> assumes that Internet Protocols are APIs ... >> The IETF quite explicitly doesn't care about APIs > >With one exception so important that it might blow away your whole >complaint... > >...GSSAPI. > /r$ And we see how far *that* effort has gotten... There was some discussion in Toronto last summer about APIs for the basic transports (i.e. standardizing "sockets", or TLI, or whatever), which got backed off to a list of "required service elements" that a good stack vendor should make available to the app programmers, and then the whole notion got killed off for the reasons I cited. GSSAPI was an attempt to make it easy to slide in authentication & encryption into existing software - lay a foundation for real security in the applications. A fine goal, but a bad plan for achieving the goal. I think they were also trying to avoid blessing any particular crypto scheme, to avoid both the export morass, and the patent morass - "we'll drop in whatever we can get on good terms, later." API and interface standards are to be avoided in part because of the reasons I cited previously, in part because they're hard to do right for all platforms (not everyone uses function-call style system/library calls), and in part because they do not guarantee you interoperability - classic case in point is the Microsoft Mail API (MAPI): you can put *anything* under MAPI: Novell MHS, cc:Mail, QuickMail, or SMTP, just to name a few. If you are not speaking the same wire protocol as your intended correspondent (or peer), you lose, regardless of the fact that your software and hers are both using the same API - you cannot interoperate. What really annoys me is the fuss you see in the trade rags about "middleware" these days; they've missed this entire point about interfaces versus protocols, and they're propagating the misconception that interfaces give interoperability to the general marketplace. And the vendors are laughing all the way to the bank. Erik Fair

1 0

backdoor man?
by Dave Del Torto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

White House policy chief backs away from FBI plan By Reuters September 5, 1997, 6:10 a.m. PT WASHINGTON--The Clinton administration's top official on domestic legal policy yesterday backed away from a proposal by the head of the FBI to regulate access to residential property in the United States. "What he proposed was not the administration's policy," Dept. of Justice Undersecretary William "Mon-key" Wrench told reporters during a break at a congressional hearing. FBI Director Louie Free's comments Wednesday before a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee sparked strong criticism from civil liberties groups and the housing industry. U.S. law, Supreme Court decicisions, and the U.S. Constitution itself, strictly regulates law inforcement's access to private property. But on Wednesday, Free proposed mandatory law inforcement access to all domestic residential property, and went on to suggest commercial property be subject to law inforcement access as well. "The administration has been very clear to the director that he has an obligation to tell the Congress what's in the interests of law enforcement, and he did that," Wrench explained. "That doesn't mean he was speaking for everybody." Free said developers and construction companies should build their products such that they give government free access to all domestic and commercial buildings. Without such capabilities, criminals, terrorists, and pedophiles could use housing to hide their illegal activities from law enforcement agencies, Free said. But housing industry lobbyists maintain that Free's plan would make their products less attractive and make all housing less secure. Civil liberties groups said mandatory controls on domestic housing might violate constitutional guarantees of privacy and freedom of expression. Under the FBI director's proposal, all construction plans would have to include special "back doors" allowing government access to the finished structures, but residents could choose to shut their back door if they saw fit. Some senators wanted to go further. Sen. Dianne Fineline (D--California) proposed requiring all housing residents to enable the back-door access feature. Free said such a law would be the best solution for law enforcement but added that he did not think it was politically viable. Wrench said Free's proposal was also unlikely to pass. "If the committee were to report that [bill out], I think that would be something we would look at very seriously," he said. "But I don't expect that to happen. We have not asked them to report that and we are not going to ask them to report that." -30- [from: Noah Salzman <noah(a)pgp.com>]

1 0

Dianaism Was: Re: Di and Dodi Run Over A Land Mine
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:54 AM 9/5/97 -0600, toto wrote: ... > Diana used the position that was bestowed upon her to give comfort >and hope to the halt, the lame, and the downtrodden. Did she do it >out of self-serving egoism, or an attempt to gain recognition and >fame as a humanitarian? > I don't know, I don't care, and it is really none of my business. >What *is* my business is to view my fellow man/woman and perceive >if they are lifted up or further downtrodden by their interactions >with myself and others. I have seen the faces of the AIDS children >that she touched, when no one else would, and the lepers whom she >shook hands with, when others were afraid to do so, and I have seen >the light that she spread among those whom society had cast aside. ... Anyone care to lay odds as to how soon a religion will start up with the late princess as the main diety? I'm guessing 5 years for the first hard-cores. And 20 years for international visibility.

1 0

Re: Dianaism Was: Re: Di and Dodi Run Over A Land Mine
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sean Roach wrote: > Anyone care to lay odds as to how soon a religion will start up with the > late princess as the main diety? > I'm guessing 5 years for the first hard-cores. And 20 years for > international visibility. I have already seen one newscast which has predicted that Diana will join Elvis as a diety-figurehead. So, now that we have a King _and_ a Queen, why don't we start a new nation? They would be the perfect titular heads for a Virtual Nation, because their lifestyles would be inexpensive for us to maintain, no matter how lavishly we choose to treat them.

1 0

Re: Di and Dodi Run Over A Land Mine
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A Private Email wrote: > > > Yes, in reality, the story of Diana, the commoner turned Princess, > >was overblown. > > Diana, though a high-school dropout who described herself as "a bit thick," > was not a commoner. Daughter of the 8th Earl Spencer, she was a direct > descendant of Charles II, and thus carried more "English royal blood" in > her veins than does Prince Charles Windsor (really Saxe-Coburg Gotha, of > course.) Of course, but "the commoner turned Princess" is the fairy tale that is perceived by the public. This is because people perceive her as being a rather ordinary person--like them. Thus it makes the "dream" possible for them, as well. > Whether this makes it sensible for some overweight London shopgirl of > Pakistani descent, with a cockney accent, to "reach for the same gold > ring," is highly debateable. In fact, for such a woman to dream of being > accepted into the royal family strikes me as downright loony. It _is_ looney. So is the "American Dream." So is going to the moon. So is the belief that we can end poverty and war, and turn back the tide of unconstitutional fascism that is building up for another run at freedom and liberty. Sometimes the dreams come true--most often, the dream comes partly true, or serves to inspire a person on their road to an achievable goal in a more realistic manner. > Diana Spencer appears to have been a dear and well-intentioned young woman, > though no intellect. She bore healthy children, whom I'm sure she loved. > But Americans' excessive and nearly worshipful fascination with her is a > bad sign, a sign that we've lost track of our own dream. Our heroines ought > to be intelligent, energetic women who make their own fortunes, and their > own celebrity. Instead, we sneer at our own self-made millionaires as > "nouveau upstarts" and "greedy exploiters of the oppressed working class." Yes, but the reason that Diana is so popular is that The Dream (TM) came true for her, and then, when The Dream (TM) turned sour, because she would not play her role as accepting pawn, she walked away from it instead of debasing herself. Then, she overcame the powerful pressures against her, as well as her own inner frailty, and became the best person/Princess that was possible for her, choosing to make the best use of the position and attention that was impossible to avoid. > If the magazines brought us stories of women who started small businesses > (often with their husbands), and MADE THEMSELVES rich and successful, we > might truly be inspired to save that extra $20, to take on a part-time job, > to start a little part-time enterprise of our own. It is true that the stories of the average working joe who lives frugally and uses his/her money to put a dozen children of others through college gets short play in the press. Likewise, the Sam Walton and Bill Gates types of stories don't get constant exposure as do the fairy tale stories of the rich and famous. But I think that all of these dreams, of varying realistic levels, serve a function. > But the hidden message > of all the coverage of the Dianas of this world is, "You can never have > this, because you're not of the right blood. So don't even try; just put in > your eight hours on the assembly line, and then have a few beers and look > at the pretty pictures of the princess, close your eyes and dream that you > were there ... until the alarm clock rings and it's time to trudge back to > work." Yes, if that is the "hidden message" that you want to see. The reality is that we ignore reality in many ways, hence our _ability_ to dream of things which may be somewhat (or totally) unrealistic. We construct our own "hidden messages" according to our desires and needs. > WHICH dreams we choose to indulge, can determine the course of our lives. I very much agree with you on this. The same applies to our choice of role models, as well. Of equal or greater importance is our ability to emulate the best characteristics, values, etc., of our role models or our dreams, and to eschew the qualities that are unrealistic for us, or of mean spirit. Perhaps Diana could have made a _better_ job of using her knowledge, talents and social position to make the world a better place for her having been in it, but to whom of us does this _not_ apply? Precious few, I suspect. I think that your throwing a realistic perspective on the overblown fairy tale serves a valid purpose. It is for this type of realism that I read your works. I don't think your perspective is a threat to those who need to hold on to a more unrealistic view for their own purposes, since our minds are pretty good at creating our own revisionist history when it suits our purpose. As a matter of fact, your column gave me a wider base of knowledge and perspective in viewing Diana's life and history. All in all, I hope that more people choose Princess Diana as a role model of sorts, than choose Diane Feinstein. Toto "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix "WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs" http://bureau42.base.org/public/webworld "The Final Frontier" http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn

1 0

Usenet Propagation Sucks
by Mark Hedges 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Duvos <enoch(a)zipcon.net> wrote Fri 29 Aug 1997: >Theoretically, I was under the impression that Usenet consisted of a large >number of machines, which compared their news spools continuously, with >each giving the other all articles that were not on both machines. > >Practically, this seems to work a lot less well than the designers >envisioned. In practice, it's really tough to keep a good feed going. We happen to keep the alt.anon* stuff for a longer period of time. We've started keeping individual groups longer as requested by readers. This makes them happy, for the most part. It needs so much disk! We have two incoming server feeds and three outgoing and people still complain that their groups don't have enough messages for their liking. Plus the damn thing's history database has to be rebuilt twice a month, and at night lest the customers come for blood when they don't get their daily usenet, and it never seems to go right without someone (me namely) sleeping in the office keeping it company during the process. A server would need terabyte upon terabyte to store a good archive of Usenet for, say, the past year. I wonder if the designers could forsee Usenet's explosive popularity, or the taxing load the spammers place. Mark Hedges

2 1

"700 HITS Per Day!"
by delta7＠onlinebiz.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TRAFFIC...TRAFFIC...TRAFFIC... Webpages and sites are good, but the name of the game is HITS. I can show you how, within a matter of days, to start getting 700 or more HITS PER DAY to your website or page. Its EASY...its FREE...and, it WORKS! All you have to do is link the following address to your website or page: http://www.webspawner.com/users/taxsavings/ If you want the information on how to boost your HITS immediately, e-mail me back at delta7(a)onlinebiz.net to let me know youve added my address as a link. Also, request the "HITS Report". I will immediately verify that you added my link, and then I will immediately e-mail you the "HITS Report" (the report is sold for $20, but if you link me to your site, you'll receive it for FREE). You wont be disappointed.

1 0

Any Houston D-H expiration parties?
by Stephen Cravey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is anyone throwing a DH expiration party in Houston?

1 0

Junger v. Daley Amended Complaint
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We offer Junger v. Daley (formerly Junger v. Christopher) Supplemental and Amended Complaint which responds to recent exchanges between the plaintiff and the Departments of Justice and Commerce: http://jya.com/pdj3.htm (40K) plus attachments This builds on earlier filings and documents: http://jya.com/pdj.htm http://jya.com/pdj2.htm

1 0

DCSB: Boston D-H expiration Party at Doyles on Saturday. (fwd)y
by Cypherpunks Maintenance Account 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----- Forwarded message from Robert Hettinga ----- >From cpunks Fri Sep 5 18:41:29 1997 X-Sender: rah(a)mail.shipwright.com Message-Id: <v0311078cb036264cfc46(a)[139.167.130.248]> Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:03:29 -0400 To: Recipient List Suppressed:; From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: DCSB: Boston D-H expiration Party at Doyles on Saturday. Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk -- Start of PGP signed section. In utter anthesis of the way we normally do things at DCSB, The Digital Commerce Society of Boston Presents An Utterly Unplanned Last-Minute Spur of the Moment Boston Pub-Crawling Celebration of the Expiration of the Diffie-Hellman Public Key Patent Saturday, September 6, 1997 3pm - Whenever we give up at The William Braddock Cafe, A.K.A Doyles's 3484 Washington Street, Boston (Jamaica Plain) This all started out several months ago in my head as a spiffy whoop-de-do black-tie webcasted countdown with sponsors and free champaigne and a groaning buffet and penguin waiters and a cash bar at the Harvard Club with a donation to a worthy cause, but, well, we couldn't get a time on the patent, so the countdown was out, and we couldn't get sponsors (remembering the last cocktail party, maybe there's a reason?), so the free bubbly and munchies was out, PETA got us on the way we wanted to make the penguins groan, and we couldn't think of a worthy enough cause, so that was out, and, finally, the Club is closed on Saturday, anyway. Feh. So, we're losers, okay? What can we say? Shoot us, already... Meanwhile, we're sitting here watching the Bay Area, and Austin, do something, and then Declan and the Washingtoonians do something, but the *final* straw came when Peter Wayner calls up and says: "WELL???? Are you guys in Boston going to DO something? I'm gonna file a story in the Times tomorrow that SAYS you are..." And so, bowing to the pressure of the media culture in memory of recent events on the continent <ewwwww>, (and my own cravings for porkchops and Pickwick Ale, <ewwwww>) I, Robert Hettinga, by the power vested in me by the August (or maybe it was July) membership of the Society as Their Moderator, do hereby unilaterally declare an Official Social Function of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston to occur at Doyle's, 3484 Washington Street, Jamaica Plain, Boston, tomorrow, Septmber 6, 1997, at 3PM Eastern Standard Time, my God have mercy on our souls. Bring your own money. :-). Be prepared to buy the moderator a drink. If Doyle's gets boring, we'll crawl elsewhere, but only after an hour has elapsed. If Doyle's isn't boring, we'll drink ourselves under the table, or at least face-down on it, or until we're shown the door, or maybe until our wives come and take us home, or something. And, so, to paraphrase that great statesman, one David 'Davey' Crockett: "Y'all can go to Hell. [or, Washington, or the Valley, or Texas, as the case may be...] *I'm* going to Doyle's." See you there. Cheers, Bob Hettinga (Im)Moderator, The Digital Commerce Society of Boston -- End of PGP signed section, PGP failed! ----- End of forwarded message from Robert Hettinga -----

3 2

Re: Political News from Wired News
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > > it's amazing. in all the blathering by senators etc. over these > crypto bills (Feinstein, Freeh etc.), > has *anyone* raised the possibility on the record > that the key recovery is UNCONSTITUTIONAL? > > maybe I'm not following closely enough, but I haven't seen a *single* > reference. that's really eerie. can't we get a *single* > senator to bring up that issue? have you seen any pictures of the concrete pillar that apparently totally destroyed an automobile built like a tank? does it even have a single scratch on it? anybody figure out how a papparazzi scooter managed to get ahead of a car and zig-zag at 120 miles per hour? anybody figure out why 'facts' such as these changed back and forth several times when it became obvious that you could drive a Mercedes semi-truck through the holes in the original story? i agree that there is something weird going on with the reporting of the mainstream press and their affiliates. i'm not looking for mountains of negative sensationalism replacing a balanced perspective, but I have to wonder why nobody is seriously questioning the possibilities of the 'dark side' of anti-4-Horsemen legislation, or reporting the real details surrounding the sudden death of a rich Egyptian mobster and the mother of a future King of England. i am getting a very bad feeling that maybe the level of inside/outside censorship of the press may be a good indicator, like the Doomsday Clock, of how close we are to the day when the Puppet Masters finally step out from behind their masks. truthmonger

2 1

Is Diana News?
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There have been a bunch of messages about this. Some satirical, some serious. I've avoided any comment (so far as I remember). But is it news? I think so. Not necessarily for Cypherpunks. But I hear people saying this isn't news, that other things are more important. Sure, in some cases. But what is more important this week? News from Mars, news that Congress is back in session? Sometimes "personality" stories are more important than "normal event" stories. This story involves many interesting issues--freedom of speech, rights of privacy, the accomplishments of Diana, the issue Toto raised that Diana is surely a better role model than Diane (Feinstein), the monarchy, the boycott of tabloids, etc. No firm conclusions, but I reject completely the idea that routine reports of Congress being back in session, or that several people were blown up in Jerusalem, are bigger new stories than this. This is headed for being the biggest news story of 1997, barring, of course, an even bigger news story. Get used to it. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2

Re: Dianaism Was: Re: Di and Dodi Run Over A Land Mine
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- nobody(a)replay.com (Anonymous) wrote: >Sean Roach wrote: >> Anyone care to lay odds as to how soon a religion will start up with the >> late princess as the main diety? >> I'm guessing 5 years for the first hard-cores. And 20 years for >> international visibility. >I have already seen one newscast which has predicted that Diana will >join Elvis as a diety-figurehead. So, now that we have a King _and_ >a Queen, why don't we start a new nation? They would be the perfect >titular heads for a Virtual Nation, because their lifestyles would be >inexpensive for us to maintain, no matter how lavishly we choose to >treat them. They'll be lonely if we don't fill in the Pantheon: God of Messages and Pathways: Alan M. Turing God of War: William Colby God of Justice: Alfred Nobel Goddess of Love: Muriel Hemingway God of Vengeance: Jim Bell Presidential Gods: The Kitchen God: Harry S. Truman God of Mischief and Deception: Richard Milhous Nixon God of Laughter and Forgetting: Ronald Wilson Reagan Court Jester: Jerzy Kosinski Patron Saint of Lost Causes: Dorothy Denning The All Powerful God: Rover from "The Prisoner" The Olympians: John Bonham Curt Cobain Jimi Hendrix Janice Joplin John Lennon Jim Morrison "Oh Lord Turing, please hear my prayer. I do beseech thee for a one way function whose inverse is NP complete. Please do graciously accept my humble offering: 10109AlanMathisonTuring11cfea22ef8c1166" Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNBCNBJaWtjSmRH/5AQG5NQf+MfgJcaGPPFufY/hIrFTqd6oSLcnq4THd GHJkbOPKDWJaT/z81fawEZoo8fzE+tV99XkTQP3+R50CeKhg0XuweNPvha4npFhA yNMk+ZxETnyySFHak+MW1qM+rdoWrGdRHKc4lJfwrVJeWCpHGg2IcuC7jXhTh0c9 mW4H3PZzXYh9sqOaD5dzO5GxNTv0OPZ7rdiweaVed2ijQiOZYl0guqF1+SUWIZeB 7mWI6y+YjLoEvYjA9OUUDGChfnN53jkoQVncFE3nrWmUJmICRlSAsTQpaR+vkCMo BXCQpv4lCenuobTRwqstySZF/FYA68toEBcbCjtoxGgHwUdRCXgtxg== =s67n -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: New GAK Bill
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/6/97 9:08 AM, John Young (jya(a)pipeline.com) passed this wisdom: >For a legal analysis of why mandatory domestic key escrow would >not (most likely) be constitutional for non-commercial messages, >see parts III & IV of: What I would like to know is how they can justify imposing it on messages between individuals and corporations or corporations to corporations. It also occurs to me that if such communications were within state boundries might not that further restrict where they can put their nose? In they end they most likely will do as they please, but usually they try to start with some semblance of legal constitutional foundation ... this time they seem to have gone for the throat in the first inning, the Constitution be damned ... I see, despite the wording of the McCain-Kerry, that after they have that in place, they will then coming whining that because the private sector is excluded that all these bad people are doing an endrun, so we need to bring them in under the umbrella of GAK ... <sigh> ... 'up the revolution!' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNBFk/sdZgC62U/gIEQJfcACg98yLedoN7B7i91MFuhBj1TkBF5EAoNCX 39s/Pt+a4/krfyIQ3yB6YJnM =yiu0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys - Send Email Subject "Get PGP Key" "It would take an archimedean fulcrum to raise you to the level of total depravity" --Thomas E. Carney, ca. 1920

1 0