December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Automatic Translations
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just discovered an amazing, wonderful service which translates text into and from various European languages. Samples included here, of this text. Ich entdeckte gerade ein Überraschen, wundervollen Service, den Text in und von den verschiedenen europäischen Sprachen übersetzt. Proben hier umfaßt, von diesem Text. J'ai juste découvert stupéfier, le service merveilleux dans lequel traduit le texte et de diverses langues européennes. Échantillons inclus ici, de ce texte. Ho scoperto appena uno stupore, servizio meraviglioso in cui traduce il testo e dalle varie lingue comunitarie. Campioni inclusi qui, di questo testo. Acabo de descubrir sorprender, el servicio maravilloso en el cual traduce el texto y de varios lenguajes europeos. Muestras incluidas aquí, de este texto. The URL is http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/translate? For a more challenging series, here's the following Cypherpunkish text translated into a language, back into English, then into another language, etc., just to see what sorts of interesting things happen. (I mistyped "here" as "hear," through inattention, and this will screw up some of the translations still further...oh well.) Cypherpunks write code. Crypto anarchy. Big Brother Inside. We're from the government, and we're hear to help. National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway. Abandon all hope, all ye who enter here. The tentacles of Medusa are torturing my mind. What have you got to hide? Cypherpunks schreiben Code. Schlüsselanarchy. Grosser Bruder Nach innen. Wir sind von der Regierung, und wir sind hören, um zu helfen. Nationale Ränder sind nicht gleichmäßige Geschwindigkeitsstösse auf der Informationsautobahn. Verlassen Sie alle Hoffnung, alles ye, das hier eintragen. Die tentacles der Medusa quälen meinen Verstand. Was haben Sie erhalten, zu verstecken? Cypherpunks write code. Schluesselanarchy. Large brother inward. We are from the government, and we are hear, in order to help. National edges are not even rate impacts on the information motorway. Leave all hope, all ye, which enter here. Those the tentacles Medusa torment mean understanding. What did you receive to hide? Cypherpunks écrivent le code. Schluesselanarchy. Grand frère centripète. Nous sommes du gouvernement, et nous sommes entendons, afin d'aider. Les bords nationaux ne sont pas des impacts égaux de cadence sur l'autoroute de l'information. Laissez tout l'espoir, tout le ye, qui entrent ici. Ceux la compréhension moyenne de torment de méduse de tentacles. Qu'avez-vous reçu pour cacher? Cypherpunks write the code. Schluesselanarchy. Big centripetal brother. We are government, and we sums hear, in order to help. The national edges are not equal impacts of rate on the motorway of information. Leave all the hope, all the ye, which enters here. Those the average comprehension of torment of jellyfish of tentacles. What did you receive for hiding? Cypherpunks scrive il codice. Schluesselanarchy. Fratello centripeto grande. Siamo governo e sommiamo ci sentiamo, per aiutare. I bordi nazionali non sono effetti uguali del tasso sull' autostrada delle informazioni. Lasciare tutta la speranza, tutto il ye, che entra qui. Quelli comprensione media del torment delle meduse dei tentacles. Che cosa avete ricevuto per nascondersi? Cypherpunks writes the code. Schluesselanarchy. Large centripetal brother. We are government and we add we feel ourselves, in order to help. The national edges are not equal effects of the rate on the freeway of the information. To leave all the hope, all the ye, that it enters here. That medium understanding of the torment of the jellyfishes of the tentacles. Which thing you have received for nascondersi? Cypherpunks escreve o código. Schluesselanarchy. Irmão centripetal grande. Nós somos governo e nós adicionamos-nos sentimo-nos, a fim ajudar. As bordas nacionais não são efeitos iguais da taxa no freeway da informação. Para deixar toda a esperança, todo o ye, que entra aqui. Essa compreensão média do torment das medusas dos tentacles. Que coisa que você recebeu para o nascondersi? Cypherpunks writes the code. Schluesselanarchy. Great centripetal brother. We are government and us we add ourselves we feel ourselves, the end to help. The national edges are not equal effect of the tax in freeway of the information. To leave all the hope, all ye, that it enters here. This average understanding of torment of the jellyfishes of tentacles. That thing that you received for nascondersi? Cypherpunks escribe el código. Schluesselanarchy. Gran hermano centrípeto. Somos gobierno y nosotros nos agregamos que nos sentimos, el extremo para ayudar. Los bordes nacionales no son efecto igual del impuesto en la autopista sin peaje de la información. Para dejar toda la esperanza, todo el ye, que entra aquí. Esta comprensión media del torment de las medusas de tentacles. Esa cosa que usted recibió para el nascondersi? Cypherpunks writes the code. Schluesselanarchy. Great centripetal brother. We are government and we added ourselves that we felt, the end to help. The national edges are not equal effect of the tax in the freeway without toll of the information. In order to leave all the hope, all ye, that enters here. This average understanding of torment of medusas of tentacles. That thing that you received for nascondersi? ---and so on--- I like some of the new versions better! "Great centripetal brother" indeed! And this definition for the 1998 tax code: "The national edges are not equal effect of the tax in the freeway without toll of the information." Not surprisingly, once a translation picked a word not in the reverse translation, as with "Schluesselanarchy" and "nascondersi," the word then persisted in later attempts at translation. A kind of fixed point for the cycle. Anyway, this was a lot of fun. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

4 3

MISTY is patented International Patent
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>MISTY is patented International Patent PCT/JP96/02154 by MITUBISHI Inc. >A license is needed to "make, use or sell". Who gives a flying fuck, chop-chop lameass?

1 0

Guide to Federal Government Sales (start 1998 off right)!!
by sallis327＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Guide to Federal Government Sales: How to buy land, houses, cars and other items from 18 federal sales programs, including seized and unclaimed property!!!! ONLY $7.95! * THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN COMPILED BY THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT * * COMES WITH A 30 DAY FULL MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!!!! * HOW TO ORDER: MAKE CHECK OR MONEY ORDER PAYABLE TO: INFO PLEASE PO Box 182 Post Falls, ID 83854-0182 ONLY $7.95! Include $1.60 for shipping and handling (total = $9.55) >>>Be sure to enclose your delivery address. (We will ship your order AS SOON AS we recieve payment.)

1 0

copyright legislation
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 20:59:27 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: procmail set sender to rre-request(a)weber.ucsd.edu using -f X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: Processed from queue /usr/spool/mqueue/rqueue Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 20:54:17 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Agre <pagre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> To: rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu Subject: copyright legislation Resent-From: rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu Reply-To: rre-maintainers(a)weber.ucsd.edu X-URL: http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/rre.html X-Mailing-List: <rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> archive/latest/1781 X-Loop: rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: rre-request(a)weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help(a)weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: ALAWASH E-MAIL (ALAWASH E-MAIL) <ALAWASH(a)ALAWASH.ORG> Subject: ALAWON v6, n117 - ACTION ALERT: COPYRIGHT LEGISLATION (1 of 3) Reply-To: pub-adv(a)s1.net ================================================================= ALAWON Volume 6, Number 117 ISSN 1069-7799 December 18, 1997 American Library Association Washington Office Newsline In this issue: (200 lines) - - -ACTION ALERT: PRESIDENTS OF MAJOR LIBRARY ASSOCIATIONS ISSUE JOINT APPEAL FOR IMMEDIATE CONGRESSIONAL CONTACTS IN SUPPORT OF PENDING DIGITAL COPYRIGHT LEGISLATION - - -AN OPEN LETTER TO THE LIBRARY COMMUNITY . . . _________________________________________________________________ NOTE: This message, and important supporting material, has been transmitted in 3 parts. This ALAWON is part 1 of 3. ACTION ALERT: PRESIDENTS OF MAJOR LIBRARY ASSOCIATIONS ISSUE JOINT APPEAL FOR IMMEDIATE CONGRESSIONAL CONTACTS IN SUPPORT OF PENDING DIGITAL COPYRIGHT LEGISLATION As detailed in the unusual letter that immediately follows this alert, ALA President Barbara Ford and her counterparts at three of the nations other major library associations have jointly called upon librarians to act **immediately** in support of two pieces of landmark copyright legislation now pending before Congress. Specifically, the presidents of AALL, ALA, ARL and SLA are jointly urging each of their 75,000 combined members to encourage both of their Senators to cosponsor Sen. John Ashcroft's (R-MO) "Digital Copyright Clarification and Technology Act" (S. 1146) and their House Representative to cosponsor the "Digital Era Copyright Enhancement Act," introduced by Reps. Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Tom Campbell (R-CA) (H.R. 3048). ALAWON readers will recall substantial activity in Washington (and last winter in Geneva, Switzerland) directed toward updating the nation's copyright laws for the digital age. The introduction of the separate Senate and House bills cited above constitutes tremendous legislative progress toward ALA's goal of preserving the current balance in copyright law between protecting information and affording access to it. This progress is attributable in large measure to the work of the Digital Future Coalition (DFC), which ALA helped to found and in which it takes an active role. (DFC summaries of both S. 1146 and H.R. 3048 are included in the third part of this transmission.) Both Sen. Ashcroft's bill (S. 1146) and the Boucher/Campbell proposal (H.R. 3048) would affirmatively modify current law to make clear that Fair Use fully applies in the networked environment and that preservationists may use the latest technologies and methods. In addition, Rep. Boucher's bill would extend the First Sale Doctrine -- the basis of all library lending -- to the electronic environment. All three bill sponsors also have demonstrated their commitment to assuring that no library or librarian should be legally liable for any copyright infringement committed by a library user acting independently. The presidents make clear in their letter that they view S. 1146 and H.R. 3048, taken together, as the best approach to updating the Copyright Act to meet the challenges of the digital environment while, at the same time, preserving the critical balance between copyright owners and users in the electronic age. ACTION ALERT: Your help is needed in the next several weeks in assisting Sen. Ashcroft and Reps. Boucher and Campbell to persuade other members of the Senate and House to cosponsor S. 1146 and H.R. 3048, respectively. All ALA members -- and library supporters or all kinds -- are urgently requested to: - - -- study the attached fact sheets detailing the intent and provisions of S. 1146 and H.R. 3048; - - -- write to your House and Senate delegations requesting co-sponsorship of these bills (separate sample letters for the Senate and House are included in part 2 of this message); and - - -- call and visit the members of your Congressional delegation before January 25, 1998 and ask them specifically to "cosponsor" S. 1146 or H.R. 3048, as appropriate. Let Congress know that you care about updating copyright law for all Americans. Libraries' effectiveness and vitality in the 21st century depends on them...and on you. For information about contacting your Senators and Representatives and further background on this critical legislation, please consult the ALA Washington Office website at http://www.ala.org/washoff or the Digital Future Coalition's home page at http://www.dfc.org. Inquiries also may be directed to Adam Eisgrau, legislative counsel for the ALA Washington Office, at 800/941-8478. ________________________________________________________________ AN OPEN LETTER TO THE LIBRARY COMMUNITY . . . December 5, 1997 Dear Library Supporter: As the presidents of four of the nation's major library associations, we write to ask for your assistance in garnering support for two pieces of federal legislation of critical importance to the library community, indeed to libraries in every community. These bills are Sen. John Ashcroft's (R-MO) "Digital Copyright Clarification and Technology Act" (S. 1146) and the "Digital Era Copyright Enhancement Act," jointly introduced by Representatives Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Tom Campbell (R-CA) (H.R. 3048). In our view, these proposals present the best approach to updating the Copyright Act to meet the challenges of the digital environment while, at the same time, preserving the critical balance between copyright owners and users in the electronic age. Both bills include provisions which are essential to libraries if we are to effectively serve our patrons, scholars, researchers, and students in the networked environment. We seek your immediate help in assisting Sen. Ashcroft and Reps. Boucher and Campbell to persuade other members of the Senate and House to cosponsor S. 1146 and H.R. 3048, respectively. WHY THIS EFFORT IS IMPORTANT TO ALL LIBRARIES Each year, millions of researchers, students, and members of the public benefit from access to library collections -- access that is supported by fair use, preservation programs, interlibrary loan, and more. We must ensure that the Copyright Act continues to serve the public who rely upon these collections and services. The Ashcroft and Boucher-Campbell bills seek to update the Copyright Act by extending the balance that we currently enjoy so that owners, creators, and users alike may benefit fully from the opportunities of the digital environment. These bills appropriately extend the balance by clarifying or updating selected privileges granted to libraries, researchers, educational institutions and others under current law. ACTION IS NEEDED NOW! Accordingly, we are asking the members of our Associations -- and all other library supporters -- to: -study the attached fact sheets and sample letter detailing the intent and provisions of S. 1146 and H.R. 3048; -write to your House and Senate delegations requesting co-sponsorship of these bills; and -call and visit the members of your Congressional delegation and ask them to cosponsor S. 1146 or H.R. 3048, as appropriate. Senator Ashcroft, and Representatives Boucher and Campbell, would appreciate our help in achieving passage of this potentially landmark legislation. The most critical first step in this process is to engage members of Congress and seek their endorsement of these bills. Let Congress know now the importance of updating the Copyright Act for your institution, your users, and of ensuring that libraries will be able to effectively serve the nation in the information age. Thank you. Our associations stand ready to assist you in any way that we can. Please do not hesitate to call upon us and to let us know of your efforts. Sincerely, Judith A. Meadows, President American Association of Law Libraries Barbara J. Ford, President American Library Association James G. Neal, President Association of Research Libraries Judith J. Field, President Special Libraries Association _________________________________________________________________ ALAWON is a free, irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office. To subscribe, send the message: subscribe ala-wo [your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc @ala.org. To unsubscribe, send the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc(a)ala.org. ALAWON archives at http://www.ala.org/ washoff/alawon. Visit our Web site at http://www.alawash.org. ALA Washington Office 202.628.8410 (V) 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, #403 202.628.8419 (F) Washington, DC 20004-1701 800.941.8478 (V) Lynne E. Bradley, Editor <leb(a)alawash.org> Deirdre Herman, Managing Editor <alawash(a)alawash.org> Contributors: Adam Eisgrau All materials subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits. ================================================================= To: pub-adv(a)s1.net From: ALAWASH E-MAIL (ALAWASH E-MAIL) <ALAWASH(a)ALAWASH.ORG> Reply-To: pub-adv(a)s1.net ================================================================= ALAWON Volume 6, Number 118 ISSN 1069-7799 December 18, 1997 American Library Association Washington Office Newsline In this issue: (106 lines) SAMPLE LETTERS FOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE RE: REQUEST FOR COSPONSORSHIP OF CRITICAL COPYRIGHT LEGISLATION _________________________________________________________________ NOTE: This message, and important supporting material, has been transmitted in 3 parts. This ALAWON is part 2 of 3. NOTE: To contact your Senators or Representatives, one source is a Library of Congress compilation at http://lcweb.loc.gov/global/legislative/email.html. SAMPLE LETTER FOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hon. (Name of Representative) United States House of Representatives Room #, (Cannon, Longworth, or Rayburn) House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Re: Request for Cosponsorship of Critical Copyright Legislation Dear Representative (Last Name): I recently learned that bipartisan legislation has been introduced in the House by Reps. Rick Boucher of Virginia and Tom Campbell of California which would broadly update United States copyright law for the future in a way that will both protect the owners of information and continue to allow librarians and educators access to information under reasonable circumstances. I am writing to you today to ask that you lend your name to that legislation, the Digital Era Copyright Enhancement Act, which has been assigned number H.R. 3048. As a [librarian/school librarian/library user/library trustee/friend of libraries], I feel strongly that any changes made to the Copyright Act must be balanced in a way that allows the benefits of the Internet to reach all sectors of society, especially library users and students. The Boucher/Campbell bill will accomplish this very important goal in several important ways. When Congress reconvenes in January, please add your name to H.R. 3048 as a cosponsor. Thank you for your assistance in this important debate. Sincerely, _________________________________________________________________ SAMPLE LETTER FOR MEMBERS OF THE SENATE Hon. (Full Name) United States Senate Room #, (Dirkson, Hart, or Russell)Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Re: Request for Cosponsorship of Critical Copyright Legislation Dear Senator (Last Name): I recently learned that legislation has been introduced by Senator John Ashcroft of Missouri which would broadly update United States copyright law for cyberspace in a way that will both protect the owners of information and continue to allow librarians and educators access to information under reasonable circumstances. I am writing to you today to ask that you lend your name to that legislation, the Digital Copyright Clarification and Technology Education Act, which has been assigned number S. 1146. As a [librarian/school librarian/library user/library trustee/friend of libraries], I feel strongly that any changes made to the Copyright Act must be balanced in a way that allows the benefits of the Internet to reach all sectors of society, especially library users and school children. The Ashcroft bill will accomplish this very important goal in several important ways. When Congress reconvenes in January, please add your name to S. 1146 as a cosponsor. Thank you for your assistance in this important debate. Sincerely, _________________________________________________________________ ALAWON is a free, irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office. To subscribe, send the message: subscribe ala-wo [your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc @ala.org. To unsubscribe, send the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc(a)ala.org. ALAWON archives at http://www.ala.org/ washoff/alawon. Visit our Web site at http://www.alawash.org. ALA Washington Office 202.628.8410 (V) 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, #403 202.628.8419 (F) Washington, DC 20004-1701 800.941.8478 (V) Lynne E. Bradley, Editor <leb(a)alawash.org> Deirdre Herman, Managing Editor <alawash(a)alawash.org> Contributors: Adam Eisgrau All materials subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits. ================================================================= To: pub-adv(a)s1.net From: ALAWASH E-MAIL (ALAWASH E-MAIL) <ALAWASH(a)ALAWASH.ORG> Subject: ALAWON v6, n119 - ACTION ALERT: COPYRIGHT LEGISLATION (3 of 3) Reply-To: pub-adv(a)s1.net ================================================================= ALAWON Volume 6, Number 119 ISSN 1069-7799 December 18, 1997 American Library Association Washington Office Newsline In this issue: (213 lines) - - -THE BOUCHER-CAMPBELL BILL (H.R. 3048) WHAT DOES IT DO? WHY DOES DFC SUPPORT IT? - - -THE ASHCROFT BILL (S. 1146) WHAT DOES IT DO? WHY DOES DFC SUPPORT IT? _________________________________________________________________ NOTE: This message, and important supporting material, has been transmitted in 3 parts. This ALAWON is part 3 of 3. NOTE: The Digital Future Coalition (DFC) is a coalition of library, education, public interest and industry organizations committed to balanced copyright policy. ALA helped to found the coalition and takes an active role in its work. THE BOUCHER-CAMPBELL BILL (H.R. 3048) WHAT DOES IT DO? WHY DOES DFC SUPPORT IT? Representatives Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Tom Campbell (R-CA) have introduced the only comprehensive bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that will maintain balance in the Copyright Act by preserving for consumers, educators, librarians, researchers, and other Netizens fundamental rights in the digital era. Like a similar bill introduced by Senator John Ashcroft (S. 1146), this comprehensive, balanced bill has the strong support of the DFC. If you agree with us that the House of Representatives should adopt the Boucher-Campbell bill instead of the legislation proposed by the Clinton Administration (H.R. 2281), we encourage you to send an e-mail to your elected Representative in the House. SECTION 1--TITLE. The bill is known as the "Digital Era Copyright Enhancement Act." FAIR USE. Section 2 would amend section 107 of the Copyright Act to reaffirm that a finding of "fair use" may be made without regard to the means by which a work has been performed, displayed, or distributed. Thus, just as teachers, librarians, and others may make "fair use" copies of portions of copyrighted works today in the analog world, they may do so tomorrow in the digital world. LIBRARY PRESERVATION. Section 3 would amend section 108 of the Copyright Act to allow libraries and archives to use new forms of technology to make three copies of endangered materials for archival purposes. FIRST SALE. Section 4 would amend section 109 of the Copyright Act to establish the digital equivalent of the "first sale" doctrine. Under current law, a person who has legally obtained a book or video cassette may physically transfer it to another person without permission of the copyright owner. Section 4 would permit electronic transmission of a lawfully acquired digital copy of a work as long as the person making the transfer eliminates erases or that copy of the work from his or her system at substantially the same time as he or she makes the transfer. DISTANCE LEARNING. Section 5 would amend sections 110(2) and 112(b) of the Copyright Act to ensure that educators can use personal computers and new technology in a broad range of educational settings in the same way they now use televisions to foster distance learning. In addition, Section 5 would broaden the range of works that may be performed, displayed, or distributed to include the various kinds of works that might be included in a multimedia lesson. EPHEMERAL COPIES. Section 6 would amend section 117 of the Copyright Act to make explicit that electronic copies of material incidentally or temporarily made in the process of using a computer or a computer network may not serve as the sole basis for copyright infringement liability, such as when a work is viewed on the World Wide Web. UNFAIR LICENSES. Section 7 would effectively preclude copyright owners from using non-negotiable license terms to abrogate or narrow rights and use privileges that consumers otherwise would enjoy under the Copyright Act, such as their fair use privilege, by preempting state common and statutory law, such as the proposed changes to the Uniform Commercial Code. BLACK BOXES. Section 8 would implement the anti-circumvention and copyright management information provisions of the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. The treaties do not require the broad prohibition of software and devices that might be used by infringers as proposed in the legislation drafted by the Clinton Administration. Consistent with the treaties, section 8 would create liability only for a person who, for purposes of infringement, knowingly circumvents the operation of an effective technological measure used by a copyright owner to limit reproduction of a work in a digital format. The bill also would create liability for a person who knowingly provides false copyright management information or removes or alters copyright management information without the authority of the copyright owner, and with the intent to mislead or induce or facilitate infringement. _________________________________________________________________ THE ASHCROFT BILL (S. 1146) WHAT DOES IT DO? WHY DOES DFC SUPPORT IT? Senator John Ashcroft (Missouri) has introduced the only comprehensive bill that will maintain balance in the Copyright Act by preserving for consumers, educators, librarians, researchers, and other Netizens fundamental rights in the digital era. The bill contains three separate titles. They are summarized below. If you agree with us that Congress should enact this law instead of separate legislation proposed by the Clinton Administration, we encourage you to send an e-mail to Senators on the Judiciary Committee. TITLE I. OSP/ISP LIABILITY To foster the continued growth of the Internet, this portion of the bill would-- -clarify that merely providing network services and facilities for transmitting an electronic communication will not result in liability under the Copyright Act; -confirm that providing a site-linking aid, a navigational aid (including a search engine or browser), or the tools for creating a site-linking aid will not result in liability under the Copyright Act; -clarify that Internet and on-line service providers will not be liable for third-party copyright infringement unless they have received notice and have a reasonable opportunity to limit the third-party infringement; and -confirm that an employee of an educational institution, library, or archives will not be deemed to have received notice and thus will not be required to "take down" an allegedly infringing work if she believed the use was a fair use or otherwise lawful. TITLE II. TECHNOLOGY FOR TEACHERS AND LIBRARIANS Section 202 would amend section 107 of the Copyright Act to reaffirm that a finding of "fair use" may be made without regard to the means by which a work has been performed, displayed, or distributed. Thus, just as teachers, librarians, and others may make "fair use" copies of portions of copyrighted works today in the analog world, they may do so tomorrow in the digital world. Section 203 would amend section 108 of the Copyright Act to allow libraries to use new forms of technology to make three copies of endangered materials for archival purposes. Section 204 would amend section 110(2) and 112(b) of the Copyright Act to ensure that educators can use personal computers to foster "distance learning" in a broad range of educational settings in the same way they use televisions in traditional classrooms today. Section 205 would amend section 117 of the Copyright Act to make explicit that electronic copies of material incidentally or temporarily made in the process of using a computer or a computer network may not serve as the sole basis for copyright infringement liability, such as when a work is viewed on the World Wide Web. TITLE III. WIPO IMPLEMENTATION Sections 1201 and 1202 would implement provisions of two international copyright treaties adopted by the World Intellectual Property Organization. The WIPO treaties oblige signatory nations to offer legal protection against circumvention of technology intended to protect copyrighted material against infringement, but do not require the broad prohibition of software or devices that might be used by infringers. Section 1201 would only create liability for a person who--for purposes of infringing a copyrighted work--knowingly circumvents the application of an effective anti-copying measure used to protect a work in a digital format. In contrast, the legislation proposed by the Clinton Administration at the urging of Hollywood and other content owners could outlaw new PCS and digital VCRs, and frustrate the fair use rights of information consumers. Section 1202 would create liability for a person who knowingly provides false copyright management information or who removes or alters copyright management information without the authority of the copyright owner. _________________________________________________________________ ALAWON is a free, irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office. To subscribe, send the message: subscribe ala-wo [your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc @ala.org. To unsubscribe, send the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc(a)ala.org. ALAWON archives at http://www.ala.org/ washoff/alawon. Visit our Web site at http://www.alawash.org. ALA Washington Office 202.628.8410 (V) 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, #403 202.628.8419 (F) Washington, DC 20004-1701 800.941.8478 (V) Lynne E. Bradley, Editor <leb(a)alawash.org> Deirdre Herman, Managing Editor <alawash(a)alawash.org> Contributors: Adam Eisgrau All materials subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits. ================================================================= --- 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/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: <http://www.fc98.ai/>

1 0

Re: White House admits censoring Chinese dissident
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> The Clinton administration was in the middle of a firestorm yesterday >after officials admitted blocking a global broadcast of a Wei Jingsheng >interview for fear of annoying China. > Officials tried in vain to stop the government radio station, Voice of >America (VOA), from broadcasting the interview, but succeeded in blocking >it from Worldnet. Both are propaganda arms of the US government. For better or worse the idea is to allow the US President to promote his political agenda across the world. If the US president decides not to allow a person access to his propaganda machine thats not censorship, its an editorial decision. There is a great new history of both agencies called 'Warriors of disinformation' written by Wick's second in command. I am not opposed in principle to governments having a propaganda agency but VoA and Worldnet should be shut down completely. Unlike the BBC they have entirely failed to gain credibility, the propaganda they broadcast is as obvious and transparent as radio Moscow, and about as interesting. To appreciate the subtlty of World service propaganda you have to listen very hard. For example during a refuge crisis there is a long piece about the ex-pat Kurd communities in Australia and Toronto. The propaganda objective being to make refugees make those places their destinations of choice. CNN has made VoA entirely obsolete. The best thing the US could do would be to give them the VoA shortwave transmitters and retire. The only place where Worldnet has had a measurable impact is in the West generally and the US in particular. Worldnet spin allowed the Russian shooting down of KAL 007 over Russian Airspace to be presented as an act of unconsionable perfidy while the Vincent's shooting down of an Iranian civilian airplane in international airspace was presented as 'an unfortunate accident'. The piece de resistance of US propaganda efforts is TV Marti which costs the US millions of dollars each year to broadcast from a blimp moored in Florida. It costs Castro a few thousand dollars to jam it using cheap transmitters. Television is much easier to jam than radio, both because of the frequencies used and the need for a clear timing signal. Ironically the Cubans have said that they are quite happy to have US TV, they just can't resist an opportunity for a cheap propaganda victory of their own. The idea that Cubans can keep the Imperialist Americans at bay by being smarter is the big idea keeping Castro in power. ABC, NBC and CNN signals are quite wellcome. There is good reason to believe them since in Dresden the East German authorities errected a relay station to broadcast west german TV. They were finding it difficult to persuade people to work in Dresden which is out of range of the West German TV signal. The best propaganda a democratic government can create is that outside its control. Political change in South Africa came partly as a result of US TV shows which showed Blacks in positions of authority. The Web will effect political change through person to person interactions, on USEnet, IRC and mailing lists. I don't think it is a good idea for a democratic government to spend money propagandising to its own people. I don't think that the US has the subtlety to propagandise effectively to others. Ergo it should get out of the propaganda business entirely. Phill

1 0

Find Info You Never Thought Possible...ONLINE!
by daegi16＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Find information you wouldn't believe possible...... online!!! You will not receive any more correspondence from us!!!!! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- We have done the research for you!!! With this power tool you can access information all over the World Wide Web about your employees, friends and rivals. We give you the access to hundreds of sites that will supply you with information about DMV records, credit profiles, medical and criminal records, most anything you would want to know. With this information you can track down phone numbers,social security info, E-mail addresses, surnames, birth, marriage, divorce, and death records. Look up a long, lost relative!! With sites like Birth-Quest, look for biological parents! Get a map of any place in the country. Find out where speed traps are in your area, get info about legal issues, Check out politics anywhere in the U.S.(access past congressional votes, campaign finance, election results, etc.) Most of these sites have links to other sites to allow you access to even more information.You will be guided to thousands of pages all over the world! The internet can be rather complicated. Take advantage of these simple, easy web sites containing tons of information. These are just a few items to look for, there are many, many MORE! You can know EVERYTHING about EVERYBODY with this information!! Your satisfaction is guaranteed, Just return the material within 30 days for a full refund! Send $11.95 to; INFOREVOLUTION 875 Lawrenceville Suwanee Rd.,N.W. Suite 310-314 Lawrenceville GA 30243-5484

1 0

ECB, CBC, CFB, OFB
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can somebody more experienced than I am explain the strengths and weaknesses of these encryption modes as applied to CAST, IDEA, DES, and Blowfish? > -m mode > Set the transfer mode. > > Valid ENCRYPTION modes are: > > ecb Electronic codebook mode > c[i] = f1(K, p[i]) > p[i] = f2(K, c[i]) > > cbc Ciphertext block chaining mode > c[i] = f1(K, p[i] ^ c[i-1]) > p[i] = f2(K, c[i]) ^ c[i-1] > > cfb Ciphertext feeback mode > c[i] = f1(K, c[i-1]) ^ p[i] > p[i] = f2(K, c[i-1]) ^ c[i] > > ofb Output feeback mode > h[i] = f1(K, h[i-1]) > c[i] = p[i] ^ h[i] > p[i] = c[i] ^ h[i]

3 2

Re: Completely anonymous communications ARE only for "Criminals"
by Charlie Comsec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- politas(a)dynamite.com.au (Politas) wrote: > >And if someone makes what you consider an annoying telephone call from a > >public telephone, should the phone company remove the telephone? Sure, they > >may be able to trace the telephone used, but not who used it. > > You are making unnecessary and incorrect parallels. Tracing the > telephone used _is_ the equivalent of the sending email address. Yes but tracing a call to a pay phone is the equivalent to tracing an anonymous e-mail back to a remailer. In fact, anonymous e-mail already contains information identifying the remailer it came from, so no additional tracing effort is required. > >Just as the anonymous person is paying for his own access to the internet. > >The anonymous caller to your telephone is not paying your monthly telephone > > with anonymous email, you also don't get any information about the > whereabouts of the person, which you do from the snail mail post > office. Perhaps you're unaware that snail mail "remailers" existed long before their e-mail counterparts came along. (Perhaps they still do, I haven't checked.) You'd address a letter, place a stamp on it, and place it inside another envelope addressed to the remailer service along with whatever fee they charged, in cash. When they received it, they'd open the outer envelope, place the inner envelope back in the mail, throw the outer envelope away, and pocket their fee. All the recipient saw was a postmark from a certain post office. You'd know that SOMEBODY mailed the letter at that post office, or at least somewhere withing their collection area. It wasn't necessarily the person who wrote the letter, though. Let's say that you get a letter that's postmarked "Chicago, IL". Upon further investigation, you determine that it was mailed from somewhere withing the boundaries of the post office branch which also serves O'Hare International Airport, which is the USA's busiest airport. How does that solve your professed need to know who sent it? > >> You'd be amazed > >> how often people who send "anonymous" letter bombs get caught. > > > >Yes, for both the e-mail and snail mail variety. It's much easier to send > >an e-mail bomb from a throwaway ISP account than from a remailer, anyway. > >Most remailers have fairly small size restrictions, for one thing, and if you > >start sending too many individual e-mails through a remailer, the software > >WILL take note of that fact and flag that fact for the operator. > > And your point is? Email bombs aren't the only thing I am concerned > about here. If you'll be specific, then perhaps I can address those concerns. > >> Because I'd like it to be so. I'm not really calling for anything > greater > >> than we currently have with the phone system. > > > >Then you already have that. > > Not if there are anon remailers that store _no_ information about the > sender of a message. You said earlier that you were concerned about *REPEATED* abuse. If you can do something to prevent a repetition after (or even before) receiving the first e-mail you consider abusive, then your problem is solved, is it not? > > If you don't want calls from a certain caller, > >you can arrange to have them blocked. If you don't want "anonymous" calls, > >you can have incoming calls without caller ID information blocked, just as > >you can request that the remailers not send you any anonymous e-mail. > > Each remailer separately. That means at least one message from every > remailer in the world. It's almost as bad as spammers offering > "remove lists" There aren't that many remailers around, and a request to one of them to have your address blocked, with a further request that they pass it on to their fellow remailer operators should do the trick. If someone is sending you SPAM via a remailer, then you need to notify the remailer operator. They usually act very quickly to stop that from happening, since it wastes their resources as well as yours. By its very nature, spam is detectable in a content-neutral and sender-neutral fashion. > >(None of this really has anything to do with anonymous PUBLIC posts.) > > None of what? I included public postings in my statement. I may not > have done it explicitly enough. I really do believe that people > should be accountable for what they do online. If they cannot find > anywhere in the world where those activities are acceptable, then they > shouldn't be doing it. That's the whole point of using remailers -- so that some country that wants to be tyrranical can't hunt down someone in another country that does something it considers "politically incorrect". If something annoys you, then stop reading it. Killfile the author. Killfile all remailers if you like. Don't use dynamite (pun intended) to exterminate cockroaches. > >"Presumed innocent until proven guilty" is still in force here. I might well > >say that I can see no purpose for owning a printing press other than to print > >"subversive" material, yet I still retain that right here in the USA until > >you can prove that I've used it for illegal purposes. If you can prove that, > >then you can get a court injunction against me. But you can't take away that > >right based on what you think I *MIGHT* do. > > YEs, and if I can get a court injunction against an anonymous account, > I expect to be able to trace that back to a person eventually. > *Possible* NOT *easy*. You're welcome to TRY, but nothing says that the person has any duty to make it easy for you. > >Of course, sometimes "breaking laws" IS the reason for anonymity. If the > >government were to outlaw the dissemination of certain politically incorrect > >ideas, then the only way to safely do so might be anonymously. > > Yes, so you find a remailer in a country that will support your > "political incorrectness". What's the problem? None. The solution you suggest is what already exists. > You guys have to stop thinking insularly. Please define "you guys". > Yes a single country's govt may not be able to be > trusted. But unless we change to a single world totalitarian govt > (which I think unlikely), there will always be somewhere that > political freedom will be promoted. There is. And there are places that allow anonymous remailers to operate as they currently do. I have no problem with that. Do you? > >If you feel that strongly about anonymous e-mail, then simply ask the > >remailer operators to have your address blocked from receiving any. Your > >(potential) problem is then solved. > > I'm not really worried about it. I don't normally annoy people enough > for them to worry about me. Although, I hardly think that it is a > "simple" thing to tell everyone who runs an anonymous remailer > anything. Have you even TRIED? You seem to be inventing problems where none exist. If you're not worried about yourself, how do you know that others appreciate your worrying on their behalf? > >> Oh come now, you make it sound like Hotmail are doing it all out of the > >> goodness of their hearts. They *are* making money, you know. > > > >I'm sure they are, but the extra costs of positively IDing users would have > >to be paid somehow. > > What extra costs? storing the IP address or the email address used to > register the account? Are you offering to donate the disk space? If you can convince Hotmail and other providers to do what you're suggesting, and provided they properly inform all new and existing users of this new policy far enough in advance to make other plans if they so desire, I would not object. Just don't expect anyone with a need for more than superficial "anonymity" to use such a service. Indeed, they probably already don't, anyway. > >Of course they can. Ultimately, each person is responsible for maintaining > >his own privacy. There's always a risk. > > Not if you can use an anonymous remailer that keeps no information to > trace you with. That's just making it too easy. "Too easy"? How so? Are you saying that protecting one's privacy should be difficult? You're also being redundant when you say "anonymous remailer that keeps no information to trace you with". If they store the information you're suggesting, then you're quite obviously NOT anonymous, even if some users mistakenly think they are. > > Those who anonymously (and illegally) > >used fax machines to send uncensored news out of China during the Tianamen > >Square uprising were obviously taking such a risk. Does it bother you that > >the technology did not exist to identify and prosecute those who did so? > > The technology did exist. The necessary information may not have been > available to those who wanted to use it, but it did exist. If all the > countries involved had been cooperating, they could have been found. > Freedom from the oppressive regime is provided by the other country. And so if you convince the Australian government to ban truly anonymous remailers, they may still exist in other countries to protect Aussies. There already are countries that have banned encryption and anonymous communication. AFAIC, any regime that's that paranoid about anonymity is an "oppressive regime" as you've termed it. To quote one of the USA's founders, "When the government fears the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny". > >No, but that's a different scenario than the telephone company requiring a > >form of positive identification before using a pay phone. You aren't > >assuming that these "repeated offenses" involving pay phones all were made > >using the SAME TELEPHONE each time, are you? Not all harrassing callers > >would be that stupid, although some might be. > > Of course not. But if someone is repeatedly phoning me, it is quite > possible that spread out police could be able to catch the person > calling with a good enough organisation. The effort required is > immense, fairly similar to the effort required to convince another > country to accept a warrant to break privacy of an anonymous remailer. And if the remailer stored no information to tempt litigious individuals, firms, and governments, then that problem would be solved altogether. It's the same principle that stores use when they leave their cash registers EMPTY and UNLOCKED at night. A thief will often cause more damage to the cash register breaking into it than the amount of the money that it contains. What you're suggesting is that the person's privacy be violated BEFORE any law is broken, just in case he MIGHT break a law later. > >In the case of anonymous e-mail, you can trace it back to the remailer > >utilized just like you can trace a phone call back to the telephone used. > >But what does thay buy you? You still don't know WHO made the call or sent > >the e-mail. Actually in the case of anonymous e-mail you have one additional > >safeguard. You can ask to be blocked from receiving anonymous e-mail. Try > >telling the telephone company that you want to be blocked from receiving > >calls from any pay phone! > > So, if I want to not receive anonymous email, I'd have to contact > every single anonymous remailer in the world, and ask to be excluded? > Sorry, that kind of argument just doesn't wash. Anyway, what if I > want to be able to receive anonymous messages, but I just want this > one person who is trampling on my rights to stop? Why should I give > in to them? It's your choice. Go visit the list of remailers currently in operation and count how many there are. If it's too much trouble for you to send a single block request, CCed to a dozen or so addresses, then you probably don't have a strong enough case to go to court, obtain a warrant or subpoena, either. By the time you go through that process, you'll have invested far more time and effort than sending an e-mail or two to prevent the problem. > And Peter da Silva was calling me silly? I don't speak for him, nor he for me. > About the main one I can > think of is harassment. That can be anonymous, and can certainly be > illegal, depending on the level of harassment. If it's not serious enough for you to request that your e-mail address be blocked, then why should the authorities think it's serious enough to devote the resources to hunt down your harasser? > >And if something is merely annoying, then prevention makes more sense than > >building in the ability to hunt down the sender. > > Why not both? Trying to 100% prevent something without crippling your > own lifestyle can be difficult. I wouldn't want to prevent all > anonymous email reaching me, and I wouldn't want to give up on the > usefulness of email. If the only purpose of anonymous e-mail is to break the law, then why WOULDN'T you want to block it? Do you have some reason you'd want to hear from people you consider lawbreakers? > If someone really wants to send me email, there > is no way I can prevent it short of not allowing any untrusted > accounts to email me. And that's reducing my lifestyle. It's giving > in. That's your choice. The solution exists if you choose to use it. > >Like anonymous e-mail itself, any surefire means of identifying the sender of > >a message is also prone to abuse. That's why the "Big Brother Inside" > >concept is a cure that's worse than the disease. > > Only within a single country. With an international network like this > one, it is ridiculously easy to get around the laws of any one > country. Getting around the laws of EVERY country on the net is a lot > harder, and should rightly be so. So if somebody in Argentina decides to harrass someone in England, how would what you're proposing solve that problem? > Besides, there's no such thing as a 'surefire' means of identifying > the sender with the method I proposed. It would still be possible to > get anonymous messages out. It's good to see that you're finally coming to that realization. I'd just like to keep it so. > Consider who needs to cooperate in order to trace an anonymous- > remailer message when tracing information has been stored: > > The recipient > The recipient's local law enforcement > The recipient's local court system (possibly) > The anonymous remailer's local law enforcement > The anonymous remailer (even if forced to assist by law, they can > still refuse to divulge information, and/or tip off the sender) > The anonymous remailer's local court system (possibly) > The anonymous remailer's local government > The sender's local law enforcement > The sender's local court system > The sender's local government > > Still think that "Big Brother" is a problem here? Even a public > posting only removes the top three layers here. All this to nail a public poster who's offended you? The problem with an idealistic approach like this is that the prohibitive expense of defending against frivolous litigation tends to circumvent most of the safeguards you're hypothesizing here. If the remailer doesn't have the financial resources to match those of the attacker, whether it be the Church of Scientology trying to silence a dissident ex-member or the government of Iran trying to prosecute an anonymous poster for "blasphemy against Islam", what protects the anonymous poster's legitmate privacy concerns? The point you're missing is that you're trying to bypass due process and violate the privacy of every sender on the theory that he MIGHT eventually do something illegal. Unless the remailer had already violated the sender's privacy by storing identifying information, then your hunt would stop right there. The remailers have found from experience that it's easier to simply not store unneeccessary identifying information on the sender in the first place, rather than spending money on needless litigation trying to keep it confidential later on. How would your proposal be implemented? Some international law requiring remailers to start keeping logs of their users' e-mail? By your own admission, all it would take is one hold out who refused to host "Big Brother Inside" to defeat your scheme. - --- Finger <comsec(a)nym.alias.net> for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNJwboAbp0h8ZvosNAQFSDQf+JdYWHlNfjN26ORY3igmU9MwjqZ1+4ePA Qq3duSGRPyX2p0b2miY1iFjz5jo8AgBb7H8kq4c3pM8/8/NHnqTQHDQNwwuH3492 IqGhBq7STvtNalhiifIyLkC5x7DG7PAn7KcthfKt0JA/Ii7oXWOgGojmr/yVwdPt vq0TKUs6G7lzKYMexMfRN0pJJPT40B6GqKlp+x/9CRDeYZotu3xpN4vFxHp4ysFI f1o3lIrDlH15iRVcKSwi4a0dOHUhpiAalB7OK+my402q4uIIR8iSX5l9lfvSau4D lCSvXZgtdvwEszbjwCeTLYY0JXE0Rnmozedjralt/34fAOuzDEPJ1w== =+f0t -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Hate speech in Germany
by an401＠hotmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There is no doubt that the speech emsrunding holocaust denial is hate speech. Ernst Zundel, one with whom I am very familiar portrays Jews as terrorists, criminals and states that the Jews themselves are to blame for the holocaust. No doubt that holocaust denial is hate speech. At the issue of freedom of speech is also the hypocrasy of most of those who claim to be victims of Orwellian thought crime laws. Ernst Zundel is in fact in support of censorship of Jewish films such as Holocaust and Schindler's List. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z}zundel-ernst/ I don't think Mr. Zundel or Aryan for this matter should be punished for their lies, but they should neither gain any credibility in the free speech movement.

1 0

Frank Olson
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just saw a very interesting story on the Discovery Channel. In 1953 the US was actively pursuing bio warfare (a subject of current interest to me). Frank Olson was a good bacteriologist working for the gubmint (NIH?), in close contact with the CIA. One night he attended a work-related party, where everyone acted strangely; the next day, he a) decided to resign his job, b) discussed his classified bio warfare work with people on his car pool. But the gubmint didn't accept his resignation and instead sent him to NYC for a psychiatric evaluation. He was sharing a hotel room with a CIA employee, who claims that he was woken up the sound of breaking glass: Frank Olson supposedly jumped out the window. In 1975 it was revealed that at the party the attendees were given LSD without their concent as part of a CIA experiment, which is why everyone was acting strangely. Pres Ford issued an official apology to Olson's family and gave them $750,000 in compensation. Now there's a new twist. In 1953, the gubmint insisted that Olson be buried in a closed casket, claiming he had cuts and bruises on his face. The family never saw him. In 1994 his son has the body exhumed and re-examined. There were no cuts and bruises, but forensic evidence suggests very strongly that he was hit with something over the head and then thrown out the window. The NYC DA has now started a murder investigation. This has little crypto relevance, except for the bio warfare angle, and the question: do you want these guys to have access to your cryptographic keys? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Your Broadway Code
by 77311018＠06232.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message contains a ticket purchase code which offers you substantial savings on a Broadway show for a limited period. If you would prefer not to receive mail on this subject please reply to progress(a)drlr.com with the word REMOVE in the subject header field. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Mogul... Why buy tickets to THE LIFE?, Cy Coleman's brilliantly evocative new musical? BECAUSE: 1. THE LIFE won a truck-load of BEST MUSICAL awards. 2 The women in the cast are universally regarded as the most dazzling and talented on Broadway. 3. There's Friendship, Love, Betrayal, Heartache, Greed, and Sacrifice... And that's only in the first 20 minutes. 4. Vincent Canby (New York Times) said the show was "the best musical of the season." (And he knows what he's talking about.) 5. Newsweek Magazine said the musical was a "masterpiece." (And they know what they're talking about.) 6. Joey McKneely's choreography smolders in its own sensuality. 7. Lillias White blows the roof off the theatre TWICE in Act I. (That's why they gave her the Tony Award.) 8. In-Theatre Magazine says that "Chuck Cooper is so intimidating as the pimp, Memphis, that even tough guys in the audience have been known to recoil in fear." (And that's why they gave him the Tony Award.) 9. At the end... the audience stands up, goes nuts, and generally carries on like it's never seen a musical. (One guy stood on his chair one night and tried to recreate the choreography.) 10. There are DISCOUNT TICKETS January 5th through February 12th. ORDER BY PHONE: Call TELE-CHARGE at (212) 947-8844 (8 AM - Midnight) or outside Metro New York call (800) 432-7250. MENTION THE CODE: "TLDM". THE LIFE. At the Barrymore Theatre. The best show on Broadway. Bye. All Seats: $50 (Orch. and Front Mezz.) All Seats: $40 (Rear Mezz.) Offer good for Monday through Thursday shows at 8 PM, January 5th through February 12th, 1998. Tickets must be ordered by January 11th, 1998.

1 0

Subliminally Seduce Women Instantly!
by ls6Q1MOb7＠yahoo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Win over any woman you want in less than an hour. GUARANTEED! Start dating women that until now were 'out of your league' GUARANTEED! I know it sounds too good to be true, but it is now possible for you to achieve in minutes, what typically takes most men days, months, and sometimes even years to accomplish...SEDUCING A WOMAN! Skeptical? Read this. Then visit our web site to learn the FACTS! Scientists worldwide agree that, in certain applications, subliminal mind control can accomplish amazing things. You might have heard how in the 1950s subliminal advertising was used in movie theaters to induce an unnatural craving for popcorn and an unquenchable desire for Coke. There are many types of subliminal thought control. Certain subliminal influence techniques work AMAZINGLY well, while others hardly work at all! If you don't think modern subliminal technology can change your life, THINK AGAIN! For less than the cost of a single good meal you can instantly and permanently change the way women treat you. GUARANTEED! And the best part is that (due to a legal loophole) this is perfectly legal! If your luck with women has been anything other than GREAT, find out the FACTS by visiting our web site. Once you have received and tested one of our audio tapes you will be AMAZED! Don't make the mistake of confusing the antiquated technology used in the past with newly developed digital mastering techniques. We have spent years developing computer enhanced techniques that enable us to produce mood altering products that work on any woman, anywhere, anytime... GUARANTEED! You cannot turn women into mindless sex slaves with this or any other technology. You can, however, induce at will, natural urges that would otherwise lie dormant. It is simply a fact that any natural human desire such as sleep, hunger or sexual impulses can be GREATLY INTENSIFIED by using subliminal commands. When you play these recordings in the presence of any female who has a normal sexual appetite, look out! She won't know what has come over her! It is completely undetectable! Even women you barely know, when subjected to this invisible aphrodisiac will find you more interesting and better looking. They will find themselves mysteriously drawn and sexually attracted to you. GUARANTEED!! Each of our musical recordings comes with a second 'demo' tape (free of charge) that has the subliminal messages brought forward for you to hear loud and clear. Don't let your girlfriend hear this one! WARNING: We have given you the opportunity to be more successful with any woman you choose. If you do not at least check out the facts for yourself, you will only be cheating yourself out of happiness and romance. To find out more about these AMAZING tapes at our web site at: http://www.ivpco.com/~speccass/index.html or, if your mail reader supports hyper-links, CLICK HERE If you have any problems accessing our main page, try our new mirror site at: http://www.emptyshell.com MIRROR SITE ********************************************************************** This message was sent by Overseas Internet Promotions, Inc. of Miami. If you have a product or service you want to market on the Internet, call us today @ 305-668-7502 **********************************************************************

1 0

Internic may be required to return money
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Holy shit. > > Court: Domain fees appear illegal > By Brock N. Meeks > > WASHINGTON, Feb. 2 - A federal court Monday issued a > temporary injunction barring the federal government from > spending some $50 million it has collected from the > registration of Internet domain names. That money forms a > pool of funds intended to be spent for improving the > Internet. On Monday, the court sided with the plaintiffs in a > lawsuit that claims those fees constitute an illegal tax. > > The money is part of a so-called "intellectual infrastructure > fund," which is funded by 30 percent of all fees paid to > register an Internet domain name. Initial domain names cost > $100; renewal of domain names is $50 annually. The > remainder of registration fees goes to Network Solutions > Inc. (NSOL) to cover its cost of maintaining the registration > service. > > Network Solutions operates as a monopoly, stemming from > a National Science Foundation government grant. That > grant is supposed to end in March; the White House issued > a proposal Jan. 30 that would move domain name > registration into the private sector. > > In October, six domain-name holders filed suit in U.S. > District Court alleging that the National Science Foundation > had no authority to allow Network Solutions to collect any > money in excess of its cost of providing the registration > service. Further, the suit charged, the 30 percent > set-aside amounts to an unconstitutional tax. > > Judge Thomas Hogan said Monday that the plaintiffs "have > made a significant showing that the (intellectual > infrastructure fund) is an illegal tax." > > Hogan said there is "no litmus paper onto which the Court > can drop a regulatory assessment such as this one, hoping > to see whether the paper comes up blue for tax or pink for > fee." Justice Department lawyers had argued in court that > the domain-name registration fee was exactly that, a fee, > because it was paid voluntarily and therefore couldn't be > considered a tax. > > But Hogan disagreed, writing that "there is no dispute that > the assessment (registration fee) is involuntary - it is > automatically charged to every domain registration." > > In 1995 Network Solution's contract was amended to allow > it to begin collecting fees for the registration process, > which it had done for free since 1993, when its contract > was issued. The registration fees set off a firestorm of > criticism in the Internet community. The Intellectual > Infrastructure Fund was supposed to be used for the > betterment of the Internet for the community as a whole; > however, no plan has ever developed on how to spend the > money, which is held in escrow. > > Because no plan had been developed to spend the fund > money, Congress rushed into the vacuum late last year > and simply appropriated some $23 million. Congress > earmarked that money to be spent on the Next Generation > Internet project, which President Bill Clinton highlighted in > his recent State of the Union speech. > > "Under federal law, no independent executive agency - > such as the National Science Foundation - can collect > fees that exceed the cost of providing the service they are > administering," said William Bode, attorney for the plaintiffs. > "NSI, the agent of NSF, spends less than $5 to register > domain names, yet it charges a registration fee of $100 and > renewal fees of $50 per year," he said. > > Network Solutions did not return calls for comment. > > Bode also argued that only Congress has the authority to > tax and that no such authorization has taken place. The > Justice Department argued that because Congress > appropriated the $23 million from the infrastructure fund, it > had essentially ratified the tax. > > Bode argued that ratification of a tax can't take place in > authorization bills. Judge Hogan agreed, noting that > ratification is a legislative function and that "it is well known > that Congress does not normally legislate through > appropriations bills." Hogan added: "Congress may have > intended to grant NSF the authority to collect the > assessment, but it has not effected a legal ratification." > > The suit also is seeking antitrust damages, alleging that the > NSF violated the competition in contracting act when it > allowed Network Solutions to begin collecting the $100 fee. > Bode says the competition act requires the NSF to re-bid a > new contract, not simply amend it. > > The temporary injunction "paves the way for our motion, > which we'll file in two days, to require NSI to return all > registration renewal fees which exceed the cost of > providing that service," attorney Bode said. "We think that > cost [to NSI for the registration process] is significantly less > than $10, probably $2 to $3," he said, "which would mean > that there would be a refund of approximately $100 million > in our judgment."

1 0

Rogue EFF Dir Brad Templeton
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This jerk should be kicked out of EFF. Brad had stated he wants to eliminate one-way anonymous remailers, make two-way anonymous remailer users identify themselves as the same person every time they use one, and: o require digital signature identification for all email o require digital signature identification for all Usenet posts --------- previously shown ------------- Brad Templeton emailed: * Information Security emailed: * > Nor does your digital signature idea do anything to prevent * > throw-away accounts from doing major spams; you'll have to * > put even MORE controls on people. * * Correct, no throw away accounts. It's coming. * * > The digital signature idea is an astonishingly bad idea, that * > only frustrated control-freaks will accept. * * You are mistaken. I surveyed a roomful of usenet admins at a * conference last year. They were 95% in favor of it. [I replied that those were the control-freaks I was talking about] Brad Templeton emailed, formatted by guy: > As far as I am concerned, no fake addresses is one of my non-negotiable > requirements, because > > the eventual USENET is going to have digital signature requirements. > > It's the only way to stop [people from] posting under fake addresses > where we can't find them, and that means stopping honest users from > doing it too. [I said false: ALL problem posters are locateable to their ISP] http://www.clari.net/brad/spam.html [snipped] [by Brad] Solutions... First, improve internet mail systems and protocols to identify mail with a fake or forged return address. There are some simple steps to do this, and eventually digital signature allows complete verification of the sender. http://polka.clari.net/usenet-format/cert.html Q: What about anonymous remailers? A: A person with an anonymous address that sends mail back will probably be able to get a certificate. They can post without revealing their name, except perhaps to the person who gives them a certificate. Digital signature works fine to prove the same person sent two messages without saying at all who that person is in the real world. Forced to authenticate they are the same person, even through the anonymous remailer. --------- end of previously shown ------------- What's new is Brad has inserted his declaration that access to the Net must require you to authenticate yourself with a digital signature to post to Usenet in the draft text for the new Usenet RFC, which he is heading: Brad's draft Usenet digital signature text: # Systems MAY insist that an article be signed, at least the # body and the minimal header set, or they MAY reject the # article. This policy may vary from group to group and # subnet to subnet. Eventually it is expected that a site # SHOULD reject any article that is not signed. Hey, fine if an individual group wants to vote it in. But ALL OF USENET??? I asked him if he would change the wording to: # An individual group MAY insist that an article be signed, # at least the body and the minimal header set. This is # subject to the normal news standards of users of a group # deciding this issue themselves. Dead silence. He REFUSES TO DISCUSS the last statement: # Eventually it is expected that a site # SHOULD reject any article that is not signed. It is a purely political statement on his part, pushing his vision of a tightly authenticated Net, like they have in China. In fact, it is utterly clueless of him, especially since he was one of the original CDA plaintiffs. [Not to mention it is an "agreement to make an agreement"] NONE of the other list participants has said they agree everyone should authenticate themselves using digital signatures for all Usenet posts, which is the language I am contesting. Yet, he won't even discuss the ramifications. Yep, power corrupts: he's running the show, and answers to no one. ------- begin Crypto Manifesto excerpt ------- * Sandia and Coms21, currently engaged in an agreement to support the * People's Republic of China's driver license and national ID card * program, have partnered to create a fraud-proof solution for on-the-spot * positive identification of card bearers. * "China Tells Internet Users To Register With Police" * The New York Times, 2/15/1996 * * China ordered all users of the Internet to register with the police, as * part of an effort to tighten control over information. * * The order came from the Ministry of Public Security. * * Network users have been warned not to harm national security, or to * disseminate pornography. Well, there's a new way to control Internet users: require them to identify themselves, no doubt your U.S.-created National ID Card will be required for access. That ought to stop pornography: identify each and every user. # "The Great Firewall of China", by Geremie R. Barme & Sang Ye, Wired, 6/97 # # Xia Hong, China InfoHighway's PR man: "The Internet has been an important # technical innovator, but we need to add another element, and that is # control. The new generation of information superhighway needs a traffic # control center. It needs highway patrols; USERS WILL REQUIRE DRIVER'S # LICENSES. THESE ARE THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR ANY CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT." The Supreme Court's CDA ruling: Once most people are fingerprinted, a cheap (say $50) fingerprint scanner that attaches a timestamp and government digital signature will be sold for allowing Internet access to "adult" locations---chat rooms, USENET, WWW sites---and it will be mandatory. The Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court said as soon as the "Internet driver's license" is technically feasible, CDA becomes legal. "Such technology requires Internet users to enter information about themselves--perhaps an adult identification number or a credit card number--before they can access certain areas of cyberspace, 929 F. Supp. 824, 845 (ED Pa. 1996), much like a bouncer checks a person's driver's license before admitting him to a nightclub." ------- end Crypto Manifesto excerpt ------- If everyone has a digital signature, CDA becomes legal. I do wish EFF would kick him out! ---guy

1 0

Cryptography empowering human rights.
by WebWarrior3＠InfoWar.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Looking for opinions and leads to resources about human rights and the potential abuse of said rights with public key 'escrow' or recovery agents. Please send info to: mailto:webwarrior3@infowar.com Thanks in advance, Scott R. Brower Electronic Fronteirs Florida http://www.efflorida.org effla(a)efflorida.org

1 0

Fountain of youth found? [SciAm] (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: >From owner-tesla(a)ssz.com Wed Feb 4 13:00:02 1998 From: Jim Choate <ravage(a)ssz.com> Message-Id: <199802041857.MAA05778(a)einstein.ssz.com> Subject: Fountain of youth found? [SciAm] To: tesla(a)ssz.com (Experimental Instrumentation) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 12:57:23 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2511 Sender: owner-tesla(a)ssz.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tesla(a)ssz.com Note this file has been edited. Forwarded message: > X-within-URL: http://www.sciam.com/explorations/1998/020298telomere/ > Telomere Image: Southwestern Medical Center > > LIFE'S CLOCK. Telomeres are repeating DNA strings (TTAGGG) that cap > chromosomes. Each time a mortal cell divides, its telomeres become > shorter. When they reach a preset length, the cell ceases to divide, > ages and dies. > > Scientists have found a major factor > that controls whether a cell dies or thrives > > It may not sound as appetizing as aquavit, but telomerase--an enzyme > discovered only a decade ago in a single-celled protozoan--may well be > the elixir of youth. This chemical acts in immortal cancer cells, > sperm and ovum to repair telomeres, the strands of DNA that tie up the > ends of chromosomes. And now it seems that activating telomerase in > sundry other cells grants them a longer lease on life as well. > > The finding, which was published in the January 16 issue of Science, > finally proves what was a highly controversial model linking telomeres > to cellular aging. More important, it opens up new avenues for > research into diseases that occur when cells grow old, including > macular degeneration in the eye and atherosclerosis, and those that > arise when cells don't age at all, such as cancer. [text deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: RIP, Carl Gorman, Code Talker
by rdew＠el.nec.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oh-Oh! Us "newbies" slipped up. Except, when I signed up, my entry notice said: "To post to the whole list, send mail to cypherpunks(a)toad.com" Soooo, maybe you want we should send it elsewhere, to the same lists you send to, you should publish the correction, not just flame ... Until then, we just have to do as told by the list-admin ... On Sat Jan 31 12:20:56 1998 Dr.Dimitri Vulis wrote: > From dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 31 12:20:56 1998 > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: RIP, Carl Gorman, Code Talker > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Comments: All power to the ZOG! > Date: Sat, 31 Jan 98 14:23:21 EST > > Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> writes: > > > (As Gary seems to be a newcomer, let me remind him and others that > > "cypherpunks(a)toad.com" is not the place to send messages to the list. > > Please use one of the distributed addresses. It's been a year since the > > list moved off of toad.com. I wish John would just start bouncing messages > > sent to toad.com and be done with it.) > > When are cocksuckers John Gilmore and Guy Polis planning to die from AIDS? > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > Ciao, Bob De Witt, rdew(a)el.nec.com

1 0

Eureka! Thu Feb 5 '98
by eureka＠eureka.abc-web.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Welcome to Thursday's issue of Eureka! FRESHTEENS! Is there no end to it? Yet again we have succeeded in obtai- ning a FREE one week trial, for all Eureka! subscribers at another of the net's finest websites. Freshteens offers over 200 video feeds, hot live, sex shows, hard XXX movies, hot XXX stories, exclusive Texas Teens, and a comprehensive gay area too. You need a credit card to verify you are an adult, but will not be charged for your FREE membership. Excellent! Freshteens ........... http://www.freshteens.com/cproot/1217 Oriental Beauty http://www.orientalbeauty.com/entry.phtml 100% Free site with softcore and (some) hardcore pictures of the most beautiful Asian women I have ever seen! All pictures can be found in easy to navigate picture galleries with thumbnail previews, so you only download the pictures that you like! There are two fresh pictures every single day. Finally, there is also an extensive links section with links to other Asian sites worthy of a visit. More than enough reasons to visit us! SINK THE PINK Go there now if you want to see a lot of great free pix. They have so much brown bush in here we may have to call in a weed wacker! This is a cool site, easy to navigate thumb- nails of high quality images and tons of great pix. Featur- ing group sex, asian, anal, oral and brunettes and more! Sink The Pink ................... http://www.sinkthepink.com CYBERJOY Yes, this is yet another great site for some free pix! Text links on a light colored background lead you to double dicks in one box, blowjobs, cumshots and all that jazz! Just the way you like it. Point your browser over there and see it! Cyberjoy ......... http://www.cyberjoy.inter.net/accept1.htm ASSES & PUSSIES We got butts and bush. Not a bad mix. This webmaster has built a quick loading website with a good interface. By that I mean that you will have great looking butts and pussy in your face really fast! High resolution and high desire. Yes! Asses & Pussies ................... http://www.asspussy.com/ HOT CAMILLE There is a membership in here but to entice us there are a few free pix of one hot little sexpot! She likes showing us her pussy and ass and she love dick. Not a bad way to go. There are even two free videos, small but some serious pink! Hot Camille ..................... http://www.hotcamille.com/ #READ THIS!! WIN $25,000 and a Fantasy Date - Click Here Now! #$25,000! ---> http://208.195.150.31/us/us_main.cgi/us_5267/A # HOORAY! THE ADULT SEARCH ENGINE Now you can search for the sex sites you are looking for and fast! This new search engine is setting the standard others will follow. It offers pop-up search and detailed listings! Hooray! -----------------> http://eureka.abc-web.com/hooray/ FREE STREAMING VIDEO Please note that most of these feeds require a Netscape bro- wser in order to successfully view them. Unfortunately Micr- osoft's browser does not have all the features of Netscape's yet. However, many of the feeds use the RealPlayer and will work in most browsers. If you do not have Netscape and want a free copy click here --> http://www.netscape.com/download/ Max Hardcore --------> http://207.240.169.121/max/start.html CHAT WITH OTHER READERS Hey, if you haven't checked out the Eureka! Chat sites yet, you're missing out on some great stuff. Every day you'll find hundreds of other readers just like you looking to chat have fun and maybe a little 'cyber'. We know you'll love it! Adult/Sex Chat -----------------> http://137.39.63.229/chat/ General/Fun Chat -------> http://137.39.63.229/chat/funchat/ HOT LIVE PHONE SEX TO MAKE YOU CUM! LD Call only! - Live Hot Girls!!!!----------->1-664-410-3912 LIVE: 1-on-1, 2-on-1, Group, Dateline-------->1-800-644-8779 FREE: Live 1-on-1 (international call only)--->011-678-77416 NEW! CENTERFOLD PIC OF THE DAY Exclusive! We proudly present unpublished Pictures of your favorite Centerfolds. Featured This Week: Dec 80-PMOY Terri Welles, Dec 89-Petra Verkaik, Sept 93-Carrie Westcott, Kerri Kendall, Rebecca Ferratti, Lydia Schone and many more too! ---------------------------> http://www.gatefold.com/eureka/ AMATEUR SITE OF THE DAY Jan: She is what excites all of us about amateurs. This gal is hot and raw! Her web page design and graphics may not be the best, but she loves to show off. A wife and mother of three, she wants the entire world to see her great body! Not only is she a babe, but she has a very active imagination. Stop by and see if you can be her next fantasy! ---------------------------> http://amateurindex.com/eureka/ EROTIC STORY SITE OF THE DAY VoyeurStories.com: Want some sizzling free voyeur erotic stories accompianied by GENUINE hidden camera pics? Satisfy your peeping tom curiosity by visiting VoyeurStories.com.... .............................. http://www.voyeurstories.com/ DAILY CARTOON ----------> http://www.erosinorbit.com/eureka/ ADULT STAR PIC OF THE DAY Woah, our Adult Star pics are getting hotter and hotter, so make sure you stop by and check out today's - definitely not to be missed! --------> http://www.xxxadultstars.com/eureka/ OTHER EUREKAS! GAY EUREKA! ----------> http://eureka.abc-web.com/gayeureka/ DEUTSCH ------> http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/deutsch.htm ESPAÑOL ------> http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/espanol.htm FRANÇAIS ----> http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/francais.htm ITALIANO ----> http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/italiano.htm PORTUGUESE > http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/portuguese.htm TODAY'S FREE PIX Pic 1 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?050 Pic 2 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?051 Pic 3 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?052 Pic 4 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?053 Pic 5 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?054 Pic 6 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?055 Pic 7 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?056 Pic 8 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?057 Pic 9 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?058 Pic 10 --------------------------> http://137.39.63.229/?059 ============================================================ TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS NEWSLETTER, USE THE REPLY FUNCTION IN YOUR EMAIL PROGRAM, AND SEND THIS EMAIL RIGHT BACK TO US. ============================================================

1 0

HUMOR: Bill Gates gets it, True CNN Story!!
by Steve Orrin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9802/04/belgium.gates.ap/ A Picture Tells A Thousand Words. STEGO

3 2

FW: SEC Rule Announcement
by Trei, Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I haven't been able to confirm this report. Note that it refers to monitoring employee's HOME computers. Peter Trei > -----Original Message----- > From: Larry Layten [SMTP:larry@ljl.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 1998 11:04 AM > To: cryptography(a)c2.net > Subject: SEC Rule Announcement > > I received information in an Electronic Mail Association (EMA) > bulletin that said the Securities and Exchange Commission > approved a rule that would go into effect February 15th that > requires securities employers to have the ability to monitor > electronic communications between employees and customers > on employees' home computers or through third party systems. > > Does anyone have any more information on this and how it > might apply to encrypted email? > > Larry

1 0

FW: SEC Rule Announcement
by Trei, Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[sorry if you get this twice - pt] I have not been able to confirm the claim in this letter - the EMA does not seem to have a web site. Note that it refers to employers monitoring employee's HOME computers. Peter Trei > -----Original Message----- > From: Larry Layten [SMTP:larry@ljl.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 1998 11:04 AM > To: cryptography(a)c2.net > Subject: SEC Rule Announcement > > I received information in an Electronic Mail Association (EMA) > bulletin that said the Securities and Exchange Commission > approved a rule that would go into effect February 15th that > requires securities employers to have the ability to monitor > electronic communications between employees and customers > on employees' home computers or through third party systems. > > Does anyone have any more information on this and how it > might apply to encrypted email? > > Larry

2 1

Re: The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of Anonymity"...) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "Attila T. Hun" <attila(a)hun.org> > Date: Wed, 04 Feb 98 22:14:36 +0000 > Subject: Re: The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of Anonymity"...) > >You don't know Texas or Texans very well... > > well, I do, real well --but you dont know rural Utahns. Actualy I do, know quite a few people in Utah; both in and out of the Mormon Church and in and outside the handfull of cities. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 17:07:19 -0500 > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: Re: The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of > Anonymity"...) > > 1. those who buy for price alone are this man's lawful prey. > > Those who *don't* buy for price alone are usually somebody's lunch sooner > or later. There is *always* somebody higher up the foodchain. No matter how big or tough sooner or later you end up somebodies lunch. Price is irrelevant except in regards the time frame. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

implementing an export control policy on a web site
by jfrancis＠netscape.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am seeking information on what constitutes legal conformance to U.S. ITAR when webserving encryption software from within the U.S. I have read pretty much everything I can find online that looked like it might be relavent. Apologies if this is a FAQ that I have some how missed. Part of my confusion stems from the different policies implemented by different vendors on their sites, and also by how those policies have changed over time. For instance, at Netscape one has to provide a tremendous amount of personal info in order to download the domestic version of Communicator. Phone number is required, and there appears to be some automated sanity checking on the phone number/address supplied. This is a sharp contrast to the Cypherpunks Home Page (ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/Home.html) where a simple request not too export and an explanation of the ITAR appears to be all that is done. PGP has yet a different standard, directing you to the MIT page which eventually leads to a form (at http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pgp-form.html) that forces you to affirm your citizenship, agree to obry ITAR and obey the RSAREF license, and state that you will only use PGP for noncommercial use. It then appears to do some minimal checking of your ip name/address (it would allow me to download from netscape.com but not from ricochet.net) If anyone can point me at any legal analysis of these different approaches, or has any info to offer on the matter, I'd love to hear about it. thanks, Joe Francis

1 0

IBM cpu breaks 1GHz barrier [CNN]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > IBM breaks 1,000 MHz > > More related sites... NEW YORK (CNNfn) - Engineers at an International > Business Machines Corp. research facility in Austin, Texas, Wednesday > demonstrated the world's first computer chip to break the 1,000 MHz > barrier. > [INLINE] The chip operates at 1 billion cycles per second. The fastest > commercial microprocessors today operate at around 300 MHz. However, > computer users won't be able to run out and buy a PC containing the > chip anytime soon. IBM isn't expected to make it available > commercially for at least two years. > [INLINE] The news comes just days after rival Digital Equipment > introduced a new version of its Alpha chip that it said would break > the 1,000 MHz barrier. Digital Equipment, which hasn't yet hit that > mark, also said it would take at least two years for the chip to be > available. > [INLINE] IBM will issue a research paper detailing the chip, along > with two related microprocessor papers, at the International Solid > State Circuit Conference in San Francisco Friday. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0