December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Off Topic But Truly Beautiful (fwd ) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 13:11:21 -0800 > From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka(a)lsil.com> > Subject: Off Topic But Truly Beautiful (fwd ) > > A Florida Biochemist designs a citrus tree with THC. Geesh, it's about time. I was wondering what the hell was taking these folks so long to map those mechanisms over into other organisms. Good for him! ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness) (fwd)
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> > > Jim Choate writes: > > > > Ah, true but I was addressing the last sentence about the cost being so low > > nobody will charge for it.....sounds like the nuclear industry marketing > > speal of the 50's.... > > One barrier to such an enterprise is the domain name recognition, > people want wired, they type wired.com; what do they type if they want > the lower priced mirrors? Uno momento... http://www.altavista.com Ask AltaVistaTM a question. Example: "Where can I find information on bicycles?" Okay, let's give it a spin... Where can I find information on low priced mirrors? Results AltaVista found about 1,045,119 Web pages for you. 1. In this site you'll find low priced computer hardware including Pentium CPU 2. Pasadena Pins & Patches - Low Priced Jewelry - Die Struck Enamel 3. Pasadena Pins & Patches - Low Priced Jewelry - Photo-Etched 4. BUSINESS BOOK SALE! Excellent online, low-priced books here! 5. Low Priced Beanie Baby Link List Guide 6. Pentium Computer Systems and Low priced computer components 7. Inexpensive Software Cheap Software Low Priced Software 8. D&R Computer - Your source for great low priced home PCs and business systems. 9. THE UNDER $10 STOCK REPORT - Low Priced - High Yield Stocks 10. Spider Web Designs - low priced web-site design, development, hosting, and cre Hmmm, let me try that again. The "+" is a meta-search character, meaning required. Where can I find information on low priced +mirrors? 1. Miscellaneous Optical Suppliers. Polarizers. 2. The Bronze Face Mirror is a large (14 x 12 cm) mirror made out of clay. 3. The Eye Rings that have a diameter of 2cm are made from a special clay. 4. This Mermaid of Flower ? make up shelf (24 x 84cm) is made from wood. 5. This large (20 x 30 cm) Corset mirror is made from clay and wood. 6. The Large Space Ship Mirror is now made from wood (70 x 45 cm) 7. Gold-Leafed Oval Mirrors. Original designs, sophisticated finishes, and remarkable wholesale prices. [ DING DING DING DING! ] 8. These Wooden Lips are available in Red, Pink and Purple (76 x 53 cm). 9. The Little Devil is a large (14 x 16 cm) face mirror made out of clay. 10. Goderich Chrysler Plymouth Dodge Trucks, Goderich, Ontario, Canada, new and used vehicles Wow. Just like 4th-generation development languages put programmers out of business, these search engines will eliminate the need for any other form of advertising. ---guy

1 0

PiCoBello-Web-Speed-Installation-Instructions
by PCBSUPPORT＠PICOBELLO.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Thanks for downloading our software.Please go through download-instruction. PiCoBello Web-Speed wird vorerst wie eine volle Version laufen. Nach 20 mal Abspeichern, oder nach 30 Tagen ab Installationsdatum, folgt ein passives Demonstrationsprogramm ohne die Funktionen Speichern und Drucken. Bei Bezahlungen mit Kreditkarte gewährt PiCoBello Web-Speed für 2 Wochen eine Geld zurück Garantie. Sollten Sie Probleme haben, schreiben Sie uns bitte eine Email,wir helfe Ihnen gerne. Ihr PiCoBello Web-Speed Team. http://www.web-speed.com

1 0

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:40:16 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone > (fwd) > No, I am saying that since EVERY government at one time or another > treats its citizens like roaches, it's time to radically change the nature > of it so that it basically can't be called a government any more. The problem isn't government, it's the people who enforce the government that abuse it. > >Well actualy it's whether it has a tax stamp whether you sell it out of a > >storefront or a truckbed is irrelevent. Considering the number of people wh= > Wanna bet? Absolutely. I happen to know a whole passel of beer, wine, and liqour makers. Austin as aswim in micro-breweries. I'd be more than happy to pass your email address to the enibriated set and let them argue the point with you. > Most states have fairly strict laws concerning where liquor can be > sold. Actualy it's not the states (at least Texas and Louisiana), it's the local cities. The state of Texas doesn't care as long as you pay your liquor license and don't sell to minors and obey the local zoning ordinances. Texas Alchohol and Drug Abuse Commission 9001 N. IH-35, #105, 78753 512-349-6600 Texas Attorney General Office Taxation: 512-463-2002 Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission 512-458-2500 > Which is completely irrelevant as to wheter or not it is currently > black market or not, which is the context I was working in. > > Stay on target. I am on target. The fact that a unregulated alcohol industry led to death, debilitation, and financial hardship justified the imposition of regulation on alcohol and its related operations. You just don't want the entire picture painted because it cast a harsh light on the premise that un-regulated economies are good things. > >Not necessarily. The doctor has to have a medicaly supportable reason to > >dispence those drugs. Otherwise it's just as black market as Joe's. > > Quibble Quibble. You know EXACTLY what I meant. Yeah, you meant to commit an act of ommission so that your position looks more favorable than it actualy does. > >Didn't think of theft? Jesus H. Christ, you gotta be on Joe's drugs. The > >vast majority of material sold on *ANY* black market is stolen from its > >rightful owner. It is *the* example of black market trading that most folks > >think of first. > > No, the vast majority (in terms of dollars) of stuff sold on the > black market is Drugs. Really? Drugs are what $10B US a year or so. I bet stolen automobiles when taken as a whole gross more loss than that. And what makes you think that the vast majority of that drugs aren't purchased at the street level with funds gotten from theft? The drugs may not be stolen, the dollar that they were bought with was in most cases. > Treat theft like any other economic activity, and figure out how to > make it unprofitable. Let me know when you figure that one out. > >How the hell do you sell something on the black market if you don't have > >possession of it? And exactly who is going to prosecute anyone for > > Easy, it's called a Con. > > Seriously tho, I said that the _selling_ of stolen goods might not > be illegal, but the possesion of such things, and the stealing of them are > seperate acts to the selling of them. Still doesn't answer my question. > There isn't a need to. Shoot them. Ah, so you admit that the general mechanism to settle inter-personal dispute under your plan is to allow people to run around shooting each other. Well, at least we've got an honest admission that murder would be legal in this system. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 11:13:07 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone > (fwd) > Really, you are saying they couldn't possibly recognize the > benefits of teaming up and co-locating fire stations, or that they wouldn't > sub-contract to a company that handled fires? So, you want to sub-contract out which is going to raise the cost and doesn't alleviate the insurance company from regulatory and supply issues. It'd cost a fortune. > This could still be more effcient than government. I'd love to see your cost breakdown... > "reasonable" in cost? There is a LOT if inefficiency in the system > that competition could eliminate. Yep, and a lot of people the competition would eliminate as well. I'll live with the inefficiency as long as the cost is affordable for the quality of service delivered. I don't mind fireman sitting around eating bar-b-q unless somebodies house burns down. > Read that last bit. They got so carried away, that they spent > themselves out of existence. That is one example, I know of several fortune 100 companies that are equaly extravagant. The problem with Compu-Add was they shot their whole wad. > Governments just raise taxes, there is no penalty for ineffcientcy, > or lousy spelling. Sure there is, it just takes longer than a rifle bullet to settle. > Ok, so you limit the senators and congressmen, then the unelected > beaureacrats have the power since they know the system and run the system. Not at all, they are limited in what they can do by the laws. It's not like they're running around sending bills to people out of the blue and making up the system as they go along. Despite your protestations to the contrary the system just don't work that way. > Wearing a painted leather jacket & ripped up blue jeans is NOT a > reason to get hauled off the street, searched and questioned. If it happened to you and you didn't file a harrassment complaint then you got what you deserved. If you don't use the system it won't work. Never happened to me or anyone I knew unless they were in particular places at particular times. If a cop busts people at a corner every nite for breaking the law it isn't the cops fault, it's the stupid people who keep doing the same damn thing at the same place knowing full well the consequences. > Looking different is not illegal. > > Thinking different is not illegal. Nobody said it was and it isn't. Now if you happen to fit the description of another perp well that's just too damn bad. > With a bunch thrown in at the federal level. Federal Matching Funds > & etc. Oh, malarky (and stay away from my business books). It's obvious you never do accounting. The matching funds are for roads outside of the city or for highways that transit cities. They are not supposed to be used for city street or FM or RM roads. > Then why do they keep building them? Because we still hav an Army whose job it is to defend this country you nit-wit. If we didn't keep fixing them and expanding the system as people move around and expand the Army might find it a tad hard to do their job when called to it. And yes, I know the Militia is the one who is supposed to be called in for that sort of stuff - that's a whole other topic. > Promote does not mean "give away", it means "promote", do things > which incourage. Absolutely. While I agree that there are some particular issues that need fixing in a major way that is not the same (as you would have us believe) as saying as a result the whole system should be scrapped. > They were the heads of the governments. The skills and abilities it > takes to get to that level insure that the people who get there have no > concern for those underneath them. Oh, you mean insanity, egotism, neurosis, etc.? > There is no making up my mind. I never claimed the a government > could or should, rather I am claiming that it can't and won't, and to > expect it to be able to, much less willing to is foolish. Ah, but it does try and in some cases it succeeds. So my expectation is not completely without merit. > So we agree that any government is doomed from the start, since > w/out people of honesty and integrity no system will work properly. No, *all* people are not such. Most people I know are honest and have integrity. What has to happen is a set of checks and balances, which we are admittedly short of at the moment. The system isn't perfect, never claimed to be (read the 1st paragraph if the Constitution), and if it remains so then it's *OUR* fault and not the systems. > No, that face that stares back from the mirror makes every effort > to be as honest and forthright as it can. It causes grief sometimes, but > it's the principle. You claim to be honest yet promote a system that allows slavery, murder, theft, and other horrendous crimes against man.... ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

3 3

Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 16:40:11 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the > Foregone(fwd) > I left the good ol' USA too. I now live in a European country with a strong > socialistic government and I actually find very little interference in my > day to day life. In fact there seems to be a much higher awareness that > each I find very little interference in my daily life as well (except when one of you anarcho-cooks starts dropping bombs and threatening people). > Crap. They take 60+ percent of your income in taxes, that means > that they take 60+ percent of your working day. They take 40% of my income, or are you talking of France taking 60% of your income. Disagreement over the level or specific policies for spending it do not justify eliminating the system. > They (at least france) throw up HUGE barriers to anyone wanting to > start a business, especially if they will need to hire workers. This not > only makes it difficult for you to start a business (which would never > happen since you've indicated you like someone else making decisions for > you) but also increases unemployment (prevents others from creating jobs > rather than just begging for them). And you find that a better place to live then the US? > individual is responsible for his and her actions. At the very least there > aren't as many lawyers claiming everyone is a victim of something or > another (ie. too hot coffee, slippery floors, home owners that shot the > poor intruder who didn't get a warning first, etc.) What is the percentage of lawyers in France to the total population? > Ain't no where perfect, anarcho-whatever was done about 4000 years ago, I > generally prefer to look forward... > > So, the fact that it hasn't been tried in 4000 years means it will > never work? > > I guess it's a good thing the wright brothers didn't take that > attitude, nor Robert Goddard. We tried anarchy, it's called cave men. As to Wright and Goddard, they had ample evidence in physics (that's been around what 4.5B years) to build their expectations on. In the field of politics and social system the only thing we have to go with is our imagination, patience, understanding, and past practice. 5k years or a little more. All of those say anarcho-anything systems won't work. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 16:35:16 -0500 > From: Michael Hohensee <mah248(a)nyu.edu> > Subject: Re: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd) > No, the intent *is* to make the system better and more equitable. It's > just that we don't favor the socialist definition of "equitable". Taxation doesn't imply socialism, socialism is the state ownership of property. In case you didn't know it, Russians didn't pay taxes because they dind't have to. The Chinese still don't pay taxes (except for businesses that are licensed by the state). > We support voluntary systems, not coercive ones. The US is a voluntary system, you can always leave. > Except that it's personal improvement for *everyone* (except for tyrants > and other politicans, but we didn't like them much anyway). And those who are stolen from, killed in petty disputes, wronged in business deals gone bad with no legal recourse and no hope of future legal ramifications for the perps, starve to death because some asshole who values a dollar more than a human life won't give somebody a meal, those who can't start businesses because the existing markets have locked up the necessary resources, etc. > Our proposals do not leave things up to chance any more than the current > system does. In fact, it can be argued that our system leaves less up > to chance than yours does. Lets do a comparative analysis. It leave a lot up to chance, the chance of making a profit in the market with no regulations or other mechanism to stop abuse or other wrongs. The implication is that the vast majority of participants won't be the one making the profit and will as a consequence suffer because of it. > 1: Social Ill exists. > 2: Social Ill is identified by someone. > 3: That someone makes a lot of noise, and lobbies the state to supply > money to finance the correction of the Social Ill. This is done by > convincing a majority of voters in some election or other, which may not > take place for at least a year, that this Social Ill is very important > --more important than all the other Social Ills. No, it simply says that the current society has recognized a need, determined that it can be addressed and chooses to do so. > 4: Someone who wants the Social Ill corrected gets into power, and > proceeds to try to correct the Social Ill with a huge rumbling > centralized governmental machine. This often excacerbates the Social > Ill, rather than correcting it. Well actualy the huge rumbling centralized government is a result of the economic impact of business on government, not the folks who want to address social ills. The vast majority (well over half of each tax dollar) goes to military or military related issues, not social ills. This is a strawman. > The net result: The Social Ill is not likely to be corrected until the > next election, and will be paid for by taking more money away from > everyone else (since the state gets its money from taxpayers, and cannot > create value out of thin air). Even worse, the person lobbying for the > correction of the Social Ill may not get into power, since he may have > lost the election to someone who used lots of money to make him look > bad. Thus, the Social Ill may not get corrected for some time, if ever. > Under a truly free system: > > 1: Social Ill exists. And in spades. > 2: Social Ill is identified by someone. > 3: That someone makes a lot of noise, alerting everyone else to the > existance of this Social Ill. Those who agree with the first someone > will contribute time, money, and resources to correcting this Social > Ill. And what if that noise is contrary to the interest of a the business that is perpetrating it. Since there are no protections of speech and press under your system what keeps somebody from simply shooting the loud-mouthed trouble maker? Historicaly there is plenty of evidence for this sort of behaviour in un-regulated markets. Why would a business allow such a vociferous display? > 4: Social Ill is dealt with in the most effective manner possible, since > people will be free to try to correct it in any number of ways, and will > of course prefer to contribute their money to an effort that has the > best effect. The most effective manner is to never have it happen in the first place. While it's clear it isn't possible to legislate individual behaviour past a grossly crude point it is possible to put breaks on the sorts of laws that a given government can pass and enforce. At least with a bill of rights we have a guide that we can use to measure extant and future legislation against. This can occur now under the present system, why doesn't it happen more? There is absolutely no regulations that would prevent such activity; hell the currrent system will even allow you to be exempt from taxes and give you loans, will yours? But to address the point, given that there are no courts, laws, etc. How does one go about addressing the social ill? Buy the company out? How realistic is it to expect the human slave to have the resources to buy themselves out? Not very damn likely. > This is an improvement upon today's system. Only if you believe your smarter and faster on the draw than everyone who is alive and will be alive during your life. Ain't gonna happen, there is always a bigger fish, and they're hungry. We no longer need to have > the majority of voters approval to start correcting the Social Ill. All No, you simply need to have the majority of social participants (I don't think we should call them citizens) involved first person. The time drain alone of that is enough to guarantee that nothing will be done. > of the Social Ill. This makes the most sense, since we obviously don't > need to draw on *everyone'* resources to correct every Social Ill. (of > course, some rare Social Ills will be that large, but the larger the > Social Ill, the more people wil recognize it as such.) They will? Historicaly the majority of social ills have been recognized as such by a minority and were corrected by a political mechanism that recognizes things like civil liberties and limits on government purvue a priori. > Better yet, frivilous problems (i.e. those invented for the advancement > of some politician's career, or out of sheer stupidity) will not have > large amounts of resources wasted upon them. And what makes you think that under your system a silver tongued devil won't be able to garner the same sorts of support? People are social animals and will follow the leader they believe will get them to where they need to be. Whether that is government or a marketing puke is irrelevant. > So, is it now clear to you why your above statement was somewhat > premature? It is clear to me that you neither understand human psychology, politics, economics (macro or micro), or what freedom means. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 21:09:38 GMT > From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> > Subject: Re: fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness) (fwd) > One barrier to such an enterprise is the domain name recognition, > people want wired, they type wired.com; what do they type if they want > the lower priced mirrors? The same question can be asked of the shopper who wants the lowest priced tomato's. It isn't the vendors responsibility to provide those sorts of mechanism for the consumer (or user of a system). The interpretation of what lowest price means is so varied that trying to talk of it as some sort of universal given is like talking about rational consumers. It's a non-sequitar. If the consumer wants the lowest price (in their personal estimation) goods then they have several choices (at least): - They can look for it themselves - They can ask a friend - They can pay somebody else to look for them - Or they can sit back and wait for the relevant production sites to contact them (eg Wed's glob of shiney adverts) There is also the very real question of why would wired allow a 3rd party sell their product at a lower cost than they can sell it themselves? Not a rational or good business practice anyway you look at it. > service. Therefore one might (somewhat weakly) argue that they > deprive wired (and others) of click through revenue and they charge > you thus diverting funds wired et al might otherwise have got. Yeah, so? Just because I window shop in HEB down the street doesn't mean I am required to buy anything. And if I walk past a shop and don't register their window display doesn't mean the store lost anything from me - the very fact that I ignored it means they weren't going to get my money at that point. Now if they follow me down the sidewalk and bellow at me I can guarantee that I (and most other folks) won't buy there even if the price is lower. I'd say "quit your whinning". ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone(fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 16:05:08 -0500 > From: Michael Hohensee <mah248(a)nyu.edu> > Subject: Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone(fwd) > > Explain how the system works. Explain how the various systems operate, how > > the costs are calculated, and how they're paid. I want to see the same level > > of *specificity* that I and others have agreed to provide you in our > > examples. > > Do you have any idea what you're asking for? More than you can produce apparently. > Quite frankly, I do not have the time (nor the space) to explain to you, > in detail, how an entire civilization operates. In fact, any attempt by > me to explain such a system would fail, since there are doubtless many > innovations which specialists in the respective fields would make, and > there are many more which have already been made, which I am not > necessarilly aware of. If you can't explain your system to me in sufficient detail then perhaps it's because you don't understand it. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Your Web Site location
by poc＠searchengine-secrets.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Would you like to improve your web site's position on the Search Engines? Over the past two years we've been acknowledged by Internet Experts as the definitive source for information on how to obtain top placement on the major search engines. My name is Stephen Mahaney. I am the president of Planet Ocean Communications. My web marketing company has literally "written the book" on how to position your website on the front page -- the Top Ten -- of each of the major search engines... and we guarantee your satisfaction! The "UnFair Advantage Book on Winning the Search Engine Wars" is an 85 page manual that identifies every known trick & technique being used on the Internet to gain top search engine positioning -- right where you need to be so that potential customers who are seeking your services or products can find you. Our monthly "Search Engine Wars Update Newsletter" keeps you informed of the latest techniques and frequent changes that take place in the dynamic world of "search engine" positioning. However, understanding the process does not require a degree in "rocket" science -- nor do you need to be "technically oriented". Whether your website is a "do-it-yourself" project or you are paying someone to maintain your site, you (or your webmaster) need to know the tricks in this book in order to compete with the professionals who are dominating the front pages of the various search categories. To learn more about how you can obtain this essential information and receive a free subscription to our monthly update Newsletter, go to.... http://www.search-engine-secrets.com/se_help/ Sincerely, Stephen Mahaney - President Planet Ocean Communications *************************************************** Note: We have contacted you based on information that we gathered while visiting your website - If you would prefer not to receive mail from us in the future, simply reply with the word "remove" in the subject line and you will be automatically excluded from future correspondence. ***************************************************

1 0

Re: charity at the point of a gun (Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 13:28:11 -0700 (MST) > From: Jim Burnes <jvb(a)ssds.com> > Subject: Re: charity at the point of a gun (Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone) (fwd) > (1) Social transfer payments at the point of a gun are involuntary > compassion. > > (2) Involutary compassion is usually called rape. No, thats' lust not compassion. Involuntary lust is called rape. > Combine this with the US Govt defining a sex life as a "right" > (witness free Viagra) and you come up with some pretty > chilling scenarios. > > (do people have the "right" to a sex partner?) Read the 9th Amendment. I'd say so. > Whats to stop rape of selected human beings by agents of > the federal government? (ok, maybe thats going a little > too far The 4th Amendment among others. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone(fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 15:57:04 -0500 > From: Michael Hohensee <mah248(a)nyu.edu> > Subject: Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone(fwd) > > Without some government the Bad Guys will be the only ones with anything. > > It is only with the threat of losing their power that leaders do good. If > > they had no power which could be lost or taken they will always do what's > > best for them in the short term, which is usually to shit on the peons. > > Dictators (like Pinochet and Gates) do their dirty deeds because they feel > > no need to placate the masses. > > If they wield no real power, and proceed to do whatever is best for them > in the short term, they will be screwing themselves over in the long > term (or short term, if doing what they want results in someone shooting > them in self defense). If they have that kind of power they will have the shooter shot, look at the history of leaders and assassinations. The reality is that the vast majority of them fail. There is the other aspect that if one is willing to assassinate (murder in plain english) simply because somebody else murdered then we are in fact trading one tyrant for another. > And precisely what dirty deeds has Mr. Gates ever done? Every un-fair market practice he could get away with (why is it that anarcho-whatever types always leave that 'fair competition' out of their discussion?). Why do you believe the Halloween documents are so enlightening? Because they demonstrate without a shadow of doubt that Billy wanted to exist as the sole market force, not a force limited by fair competition. The concept of fair-competition is anti-thematic to the world-domination memes that are currently making the rounds. > Excluding those > actions in which the judicious use of state regulation was involved. Hell, if we just look at the business practices within the context of a market with fair competition it's clear he's so far out in left field he's playing by himself. > Yah, and then somebody else points a gun at Mr. would-be warlord and > goes Bang, Bang, he's dead (it's unsafe having warlords about --sorta > like scorpions). That is, if Mr. would-be manages to shoot me without > being shot himself. Well I'd say if you're running around shooting people for any reason other than immediate self defence you deserve what you get. > > Try to lift yourself out of the bullshit of your theory and give us at > > least one REAL example (current or historic) of a large scale, long lasting > > anarcho-capitalist society. Hippie communes are too small, and make sure > > it's capitalistic. If you can't think of one in the next year or so then > > come back and tell us. > > It hasn't happened yet. But then, neither had the USA, before 1776. > The above is not a reasonable argument. It is at least a start, there was ample evidence historicaly that democracy (you ever hear of the Dutch?) was tried to varying degrees. It seems to work out better than any other system we've developed. If you want to see a discussion of democracy prior to the US check out: On the improvement of the understanding; The Ethics; Correspondence Benedict de Spinoza ISBN 0-486-20250-x $7.95 (Dover) They were written in the mid to late 1600's (shortly before the birth of the founding fathers). > You can, of course, as me how it *could* happen. And unfortunately, > you're partially correct, it couldn't happen under current conditions. > The amount of personal firepower that is easily accessible by everyone > is not sufficient to back up the soverignity of each individual. So, in your mind the only way to defend oneself is to have a bigger dick..um I mean gun than the other guy.... I've a couple of quotes for you to ponder: Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% persperation. T.E. Edison If Mr. Edison had though smarter he wouldn't have had to perspire as much. N. Tesla ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: most of what govts do can be done by business, and done (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:00:44 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: Re: most of what govts do can be done by business, and done > better (Re: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force) > Roads are the easiest (assuming a government model) things to apply > road use taxes to, simply tax gasoline, oil, and tires. Scale your tire tax > based on weight and apply it to bicycles as well, then everyone (execpt > peds) who uses pays. Screw that, tax the shoes. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

most of what govts do can be done by business, and done better (Re: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 20:39:05 GMT > From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> > Subject: most of what govts do can be done by business, and done better (Re: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force) > Even when government does sub-contract, the inefficiency is usually I > think pretty horrendous by industry standards: The same can be said for business in general as well (especialy if there is no competition). ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 12:33:04 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the (fwd) > Theft, violence and extortion are already legitimate, not only does > the government use them all the time, but corporations and indivuduals do > as well. True, at least under a democratic system we can prevent some of the more gross abuses by government and can address the inter-personal issues with something besides a nylon jacketed .357. Your anarcho-whatever doesn't even provide that. > There is no (or little) justice under the current system. When was > the last time a cop went to jail for a murder that he/she committed while > on duty. Is OJ behind bars? Several cops in Houston were fired (they got no-billed by the Grand Jury) just last week because of a similar issue. There are two cops here in Austin who went to jail because of a murder (they held a kid down on a water bed and he suffocated) charge. The current public overwatch group was the result of a police call that got out of hand last year and the police had two choices - either give the people what they asked for or end loose the civil rights case. The two cops who beat Rodney King ended up doing time. Nobody proved to the jury beyond a shadow of a doubt he was guilty. It is far better to let a dozen guilty men go free than to imprison a single innocent one. Our legal system may have its problem but I guarantee that a lot more guilty people get off scott free than innocent people end up in jail. There is more than a little justice under the current system (OJ being the perfect example - like it or not). > We have courts of Law, Justice is ashamed to show her face. Somehow I doubt that. If justice is ashamed of anything its that citizens of this country don't participate more and express their views with more conviction. > We recognize that these interactions exist, but guess what, for any > sort of anarchy to exist, it has to happen globally. We are as concerned > about the people on the other side of the planet as we are about the people > in the next city over. Just not much. Which, considering that anarchic systems permit murder, theft, rape, extortion, etc. without reprisal or limits, means that the vast majority of people are probably going to sleep a sounder sleep knowing they don't have to go out and buy a tank tomorrow just to make sure they have a home to come to in the evening. > No, we assume the opposite, that nothing works for large numbers of > people, and everyone should be free to find their own level. If nothing works for large numbers of people then why should this? Anarchy isn't freedom, it's opportunity to make huge profits with no responsiblity and at the expence of others (who are treated as a market commodity and not human beings). ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: Off Topic But Truly Beautiful (fwd )
by Petro 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:11 PM -0500 11/10/98, Michael Motyka wrote: >> In the summer of 1984, 10th-grader Irwin Nanofsky and a >> friend were driving down the Apalachee Parkway on the way >> home from baseball practice when they were pulled over by >> a police officer for a minor traffic infraction. ... >> As policy analysts and hemp advocates alike have been >> quick to point out, the apparent legality (for now) of >> Nanofsky's "pot orange" may render debates over the >> legalization of marijuana moot. In fact, Florida's top >> law enforcement officials admit that even if the >> cultivation of Nanofsky's orange were to be outlawed, it >> would be exceedingly difficult to identify the presence >> of outlawed fruit among the state's largest agricultural >> crop. Once again technology makes the laws irrelevant. Gotta love it. -- "To sum up: The entire structure of antitrust statutes in this country is a jumble of economic irrationality and ignorance. It is a product: (a) of a gross misinterpretation of history, and (b) of rather naïve, and certainly unrealistic, economic theories." Alan Greenspan, "Anti-trust" http://www.ecosystems.net/mgering/antitrust.html Petro::E-Commerce Adminstrator::Playboy Ent. Inc.::petro@playboy.com

1 0

Question about insurance managed fire services...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How does company A guarantee that company B won't begin to burn down the customers of company A so that the economic impact on A is sufficient they can't participate in the market? ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Strange brew (was Off Topic But Truly Beautiful)
by Frederick Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Michael Motyka wrote: > Clyde wrote: > > > > Long but fascinating... > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 9 November 1998 > > > > DATELINE--Tallahassee, Fla. > > Oranges that get you high > > =========================== > > > > A Florida Biochemist designs a citrus tree with THC. [savagely pruned] > > Copyright 1994-98 San Francisco Bay Guardian. Satirization or prophesy, the walls are coming down. Whether they be the borders of nationstates or the dna of species, the boundaries that once defined are now dissolving. Look for transgenic terrorists to engineer terror down to the genetic level. Psilocybin from Saccharomyces, now that'll make a heady wine. Developments along these lines are advancing in Brazil and South Africa. Freeze dried packets (with psychedelic holographic label designs) are available via mail order to csychomimetic enologists.

1 0

Question about anarchic systems and natural disasters
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What would be the responce of a anarchic system that was based on profit in regards something like Mitch's impact on Ctl. America and their plea for food and aid? ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

secF9.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

F.9 IS MEDIEVAL ICELAND AN EXAMPLE OF "ANARCHO"-CAPITALISM WORKING IN PRACTICE? Ironically, medieval Iceland is a good example of why "anarcho"-capitalism will not work, degenerating into de facto rule by the rich. It should be pointed out first that Iceland, nearly 1,000 years ago, was not a capitalistic system. In fact, like most cultures claimed by "anarcho"-capitalists as examples of their "utopia," it was a communal, not individualistic, society, based on artisan production, with extensive communal institutions as well as individual "ownership" (i.e. use) and a form of social self-administration, the thing -- both local and Iceland-wide -- which can be considered a "primitive" form of the anarchist communal assembly. As William Ian Miller points out "[p]eople of a communitarian nature. . . have reason to be attracted [to Medieval Iceland]. . . the limited role of lordship, the active participation of large numbers of free people . . . in decision making within and without the homestead. The economy barely knew the existence of markets. Social relations preceded economic relations. The nexus of household, kin, Thing, even enmity, more than the nexus of cash, bound people to each other. The lack of extensive economic differentiation supported a weakly differentiated class system . . . [and material] deprivations were more evenly distributed than they would be once state institutions also had to be maintained." [Bloodtaking and Peacemaking: Feud, Law and Society in Saga Iceland, p. 306] Kropotkin in Mutual Aid indicates that Norse society, from which the settlers in Iceland came, had various "mutual aid" institutions, including communal land ownership (based around what he called the "village community") and the thing (see also Kropotkin's The State: Its Historic Role for a discussion of the "village community"). It is reasonable to think that the first settlers in Iceland would have brought such institutions with them and Iceland did indeed have its equivalent of the commune or "village community," the Hreppar, which developed early in the country's history. Like the early local assemblies, it is not much discussed in the Sagas but is mentioned in the law book, the Grágás, and was composed of a minimum of twenty farms and had a five member commission. The Hreppar was self-governing and, among other things, was responsible for seeing that orphans and the poor within the area were fed and housed. The Hreppar also served as a property insurance agency and assisted in case of fire and losses due to diseased livestock. The Hreppar may have also have organised and controlled summer grazing lands (which in turn suggests "commons" -- i.e. common land -- of some kind). Thus Icelandic society had a network of solidarity, based upon communal life. In practice this meant that "each commune was a mutual insurance company, or a miniature welfare state. And membership in the commune was not voluntary. Each farmer had to belong to the commune in which his farm was located and to contribute to its needs." [Gissurarson quoted by Birgit T. Runolfsson Solvason, Ordered Anarchy, State and Rent-Seeking: The Icelandic Commonwealth, 930-1262] However, unlike an anarchist society, the Icelandic Commonwealth did not allow farmers not to join its communes. Therefore, the Icelandic Commonwealth can hardly be claimed in any significant way as an example of "anarcho"-capitalism in practice. This can also be seen from the early economy, where prices were subject to popular judgement at the skuldaping ("payment-thing") not supply and demand. [Kirsten Hastrup, Culture and History in Medieval Iceland, p. 125] Indeed, with its communal price setting system in local assemblies, the early Icelandic commonwealth was more similar to Guild Socialism (which was based upon guild's negotiating "just prices" for goods and services) than capitalism. Therefore Miller correctly argues that it would be wrong to impose capitalist ideas and assumptions onto Icelandic society: "Inevitably the attempt was made to add early Iceland to the number of regions that socialised people in nuclear families within simple households. . . what the sources tell us about the shape of Icelandic householding must compel a different conclusion." [Op. Cit., p. 112] In other words, Kropotkin's analysis of communal society is far closer to the reality of Medieval Iceland than David Friedman's attempt in The Machinery of Freedom to turn it into a capitalist utopia. However, the communal nature of Icelandic society also co-existed (as in most such cultures) with hierarchical institutions, including some with capitalistic elements, namely private property and "private states" around the local godar. The godar were local chiefs who also took the role of religious leaders. As the Encyclopaedia Britannica explains, "a kind of local government was evolved [in Iceland] by which the people of a district who had most dealings together formed groups under the leadership of the most important or influential man in the district" (the godi). The godi "acted as judge and mediator" and "took a lead in communal activities" such as building places of worship. These "local assemblies. . . are heard of before the establishment of the althing" (the national thing). This althing led to co-operation between the local assemblies. Therefore we see communal self-management in a basic form, plus co-operation between communities as well. These communistic, mutual-aid features exist in many non-capitalist cultures and are often essential for ensuring the people's continued freedom within those cultures (section B.2.5 on why the wealthy undermine these popular "folk-motes" in favour of centralisation). Usually, the existence of private property (and so inequality) soon led to the destruction of communal forms of self-management (with participation by all male members of the community as in Iceland), which are replaced by the rule of the rich. While such developments are a commonplace in most "primitive" cultures, the Icelandic case has an unusual feature which explains the interest it provokes in "anarcho"-capitalist circles. This feature was that individuals could seek protection from any godi. As the Encyclopaedia Britannica puts it, "the extent of the godord [chieftancy] was not fixed by territorial boundaries. Those who were dissatisfied with their chief could attach themselves to another godi. . . As a result rivalry arose between the godar [chiefs]; as may be seen from the Icelandic Sagas." It is these Sagas on which David Friedman (in The Machinery of Freedom) bases his claim that Medieval Iceland is a working example of "anarcho" capitalism. Hence we can see that artisans and farmers would seek the "protection" of a godi, providing their labour in return. These godi would be subject to "market forces," as dissatisfied individuals could affiliate themselves to other godi. This system, however, had an obvious (and fatal) flaw. As the Encyclopaedia Britannica points out: "The position of the godi could be bought and sold, as well as inherited; consequently, with the passing of time, the godord for large areas of the country became concentrated in the hands of one man or a few men. This was the principal weakness of the old form of government: it led to a struggle of power and was the chief reason for the ending of the commonwealth and for the country's submission to the King of Norway." It was the existence of these hierarchical elements in Icelandic society that explain its fall from anarchistic to statist society. As Kropotkin argued "from chieftainship sprang on the one hand the State and on the other private property." [Act for Yourselves, p. 85] Kropotkin's insight that chieftainship is a transitional system has been confirmed by anthropologists studying "primitive" societies. They have come to the conclusion that societies made up of chieftainships or chiefdoms are not states: "Chiefdoms are neither stateless nor state societies in the fullest sense of either term: they are on the borderline between the two. Having emerged out of stateless systems, they give the impression of being on their way to centralised states and exhibit characteristics of both." [Y. Cohen quoted by Birgit T. Runolfsson Solvason, Op. Cit.] Since the Commonwealth was made up of chiefdoms, this explains the contradictory nature of the society - it was in the process of transition, from anarchy to statism, from a communal economy to one based on private property. The political transition within Icelandic society went hand in hand with an economic transition (both tendencies being mutually reinforcing). Initially, when Iceland was settled, large-scale farming based on extended households with kinsmen was the dominant economic mode. This semi-communal mode of production changed as the land was divided up (mostly through inheritance claims) between the 10th and 11th centuries. This new economic system based upon individual possession and artisan production was then slowly displaced by tenant farming, in which the farmer worked for a landlord, starting in the late 11th century. This economic system (based on a form of wage labour, i.e. capitalistic production) ensured that "great variants of property and power emerged." [Kirsten Hastrup, Culture and History in Medieval Iceland, pp. 172-173] During the 12th century wealth concentrated into fewer and fewer hands and by its end an elite of around 6 wealthy and powerful families had emerged. During this evolution in ownership patterns and the concentration of wealth and power into the hands of a few, we should note that the godi's and wealthy landowners' attitude to profit making also changed, with market values starting to replace those associated with honour, kin, and so on. Social relations became replaced by economic relations and the nexus of household, kin and Thing was replaced by the nexus of cash and profit. The rise of capitalistic social relationships in production and values within society was also reflected in exchange, with the local marketplace, with its pricing "subject to popular judgement" being "subsumed under central markets." [Ibid., p. 225] With a form of wage labour being dominant within society, it is not surprising that great differences in wealth started to appear. Also, as protection did not come free, it is not surprising that a godi tended to become rich also. This would enable him to enlist more warriors, which gave him even more social power (in Kropotkin's words, "the individual accumulation of wealth and power"). Powerful godi would be useful for wealthy landowners when disputes over land and rent appeared, and wealthy landowners would be useful for a godi when feeding his warriors. Production became the means of enriching the already wealthy, with concentrations of wealth producing concentrations of social and political power (and vice versa). Kropotkin's general summary of the collapse of "barbarian" society into statism seems applicable here - "after a hard fight with bad crops, inundations and pestilences, [farmers]. . . began to repay their debts, they fell into servile obligations towards the protector of the territory. Wealth undoubtedly did accumulate in this way, and power always follows wealth." [Mutual Aid, p. 131] The transformation of possession into property and the resulting rise of hired labour was a key element in the accumulation of wealth and power, and the corresponding decline in liberty among the farmers. Moreover, with hired labour springs dependency -- the worker is now dependent on good relations with their landlord in order to have access to the land they need. With such reductions in the independence of part of Icelandic society, the undermining of self-management in the various Things was also likely as labourers could not vote freely as they could be subject to sanctions from their landlord for voting the "wrong" way. Thus hierarchy within the economy would spread into the rest of society, and in particular its social institutions, reinforcing the effects of the accumulation of wealth and power. The resulting classification of Icelandic society played a key role in its move from relative equality and anarchy to a class society and statism. As Millar points out: "as long as the social organisation of the economy did not allow for people to maintain retinues, the basic egalitarian assumptions of the honour system. . . were reflected reasonably well in reality. . . the mentality of hierarchy never fully extricated itself from the egalitarian ethos of a frontier society created and recreated by juridically equal farmers. Much of the egalitarian ethic maintained itself even though it accorded less and less with economic realities. . . by the end of the commonwealth period certain assumptions about class privilege and expectations of deference were already well enough established to have become part of the lexicon of self-congratulation and self-justification." [Op. Cit., pp. 33-4] This process in turn accelerated the destruction of communal life and the emergence of statism, focused around the godord. In effect, the godi and wealthy farmers became rulers of the country and "the old form of government became modified in the course of time." This change from a communalistic, anarchistic society to a statist, propertarian one can also be seen from this quote from an article on Iceland by Hallberg Hallmundsson in the Encyclopaedia Americana, which identifies wealth concentration in fewer and fewer hands as having been responsible for undermining Icelandic society: "During the 12th century, wealth and power began to accumulate in the hands of a few chiefs, and by 1220, six prominent families ruled the entire country. It was the internecine power struggle among these families, shrewdly exploited by King Haakon IV of Norway, that finally brought the old republic to an end." This process, wherein the concentration of wealth leads to the destruction of communal life and so the anarchistic aspects of a given society, can be seen elsewhere, for example, in the history of the United States after the Revolution or in the degeneration of the free cities of Medieval Europe. Peter Kropotkin, in his classic work Mutual Aid, documents this process in some detail, in many cultures and time periods. However, that this process occurred in a society which is used by "anarcho"-capitalists as an example of their system in action reinforces the anarchist analysis of the statist nature of "anarcho"-capitalism and the deep flaws in its theory, as discussed in section F.6. As Miller argues, "[i]t is not the have-nots, after all, who invented the state. The first steps toward state formation in Iceland were made by churchmen. . . and by the big men content with imitating Norwegian royal style. Early state formation, I would guess, tended to involve redistributions, not from rich to poor, but from poor to rich, from weak to strong." [Op. Cit., p. 306] David Friedman is aware of how the Icelandic Republic degenerated and its causes. He states in a footnote in his 1979 essay "Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case" that the "question of why the system eventually broke down is both interesting and difficult. I believe that two of the proximate causes were increased concentration of wealth, and hence power, and the introduction into Iceland of a foreign ideology -- kingship. The former meant that in many areas all or most of the godord were held by one family and the latter that by the end of the Sturlung period the chieftains were no longer fighting over the traditional quarrels of who owed what to whom, but over who should eventually rule Iceland. The ultimate reasons for those changes are beyond the scope of this paper." However, from an anarchist point of view, the "foreign" ideology of kingship would be the product of changing socio-economic conditions that were expressed in the increasing concentration of wealth and not its cause. The settlers of Iceland were well aware of the "ideology" of kingship for the 300 years during which the Republic existed. However, only the concentration of wealth allowed would-be Kings the opportunity to develop and act and the creation of boss-worker social relationships on the land made the poor subject to, and familiar with, the concept of authority. Such familiarity would spread into all aspects of life and, combined with the existence of "prosperous" (and so powerful) godi to enforce the appropriate servile responses, ensured the end of the relative equality that fostered Iceland's anarchistic tendencies in the first place. In addition, as private property is a monopoly of rulership over a given area, the conflict between chieftains for power was, at its most basic, a conflict of who would own Iceland, and so rule it. The attempt to ignore the facts that private property creates rulership (i.e. a monopoly of government over a given area) and that monarchies are privately owned states does Friedman's case no good. In other words, the system of private property has a built in tendency to produce both the ideology and fact of Kingship - the power structures implied by Kingship are reflected in the social relations which are produced by private property. Friedman is also aware that an "objection [to his system] is that the rich (or powerful) could commit crimes with impunity, since nobody would be able to enforce judgement against them. Where power is sufficiently concentrated this might be true; this was one of the problems which led to the eventual breakdown of the Icelandic legal system in the thirteenth century. But so long as power was reasonably dispersed, as it seem to have been for the first two centuries after the system was established, this was a less serious problem." [Op. Cit.] Which is quite ironic. Firstly, because the first two centuries of Icelandic society was marked by non-capitalist economic relations (communal pricing and family/individual possession of land). Only when capitalistic social relationships developed (hired labour and property replacing possession and market values replacing social ones) in the 12th century did power become concentrated, leading to the breakdown of the system in the 13th century. Secondly, because Friedman is claiming that "anarcho"-capitalism will only work if there is an approximate equality within society! But this state of affairs is one most "anarcho"-capitalists claim is impossible and undesirable! They claim there will always be rich and poor. But inequality in wealth will also become inequality of power. When "actually existing" capitalism has become more free market the rich have got richer and the poor poorer. Apparently, according to the "anarcho"-capitalists, in an even "purer" capitalism this process will be reversed! It is ironic that an ideology that denounces egalitarianism as a revolt against nature implicitly requires an egalitarian society in order to work. In reality, wealth concentration is a fact of life in any system based upon hierarchy and private property. Friedman is aware of the reasons why "anarcho"-capitalism will become rule by the rich but prefers to believe that "pure" capitalism will produce an egalitarian society! In the case of the commonwealth of Iceland this did not happen - the rise in private property was accompanied by a rise in inequality and this lead to the breakdown of the Republic into statism. In short, Medieval Iceland nicely illustrates David Weick's comments (as quoted in section F.6.3) that "when private wealth is uncontrolled, then a police-judicial complex enjoying a clientele of wealthy corporations whose motto is self-interest is hardly an innocuous social force controllable by the possibility of forming or affiliating with competing 'companies.'" This is to say that "free market" justice soon results in rule by the rich, and being able to affiliate with "competing" "defence companies" is insufficient to stop or change that process. This is simply because any defence-judicial system does not exist in a social vacuum. The concentration of wealth -- a natural process under the "free market" (particularly one marked by private property and wage labour) -- has an impact on the surrounding society. Private property, i.e. monopolisation of the means of production, allows the monopolists to become a ruling elite by exploiting, and so accumulating vastly more wealth than, the workers. This elite then uses its wealth to control the coercive mechanisms of society (military, police, "private security forces," etc.), which it employs to protect its monopoly and thus its ability to accumulate ever more wealth and power. Thus, private property, far from increasing the freedom of the individual, has always been the necessary precondition for the rise of the state and rule by the rich. Medieval Iceland is a classic example of this process at work.

1 0

Re: IP: Clinton Wants Loophole In U.S. Free Speech Closed (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 19:25:40 -0800 (PST) > From: b!X <bix(a)geekforce.org> > Subject: Re: IP: Clinton Wants Loophole In U.S. Free Speech Closed > Yeah yeah all very well and good parody except that the 2nd amendment > contains the word "well-regulated" and the 1st doesn't. > > (And yes I know I'm asking for a shitstorm of trouble saying that on THIS > list of all places). ARTICLE I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. ARTICLE II. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. I'd say that 'shall make no law' is a clear as 'shall not be infringed' and pretty equivalent in meaning. See, no shit-storm (they reserve that for me...;). ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

More on blind signal demodulation
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There's at least one firm which makes this stuff commercially, their products are available via http://www.appsig.com/prods/index.html. This looks like a one-stop ECHELON shop: you take one or more of their products (pick your type, intended target, and budget), plug as many E1's or E3's or whatever into one side as you can handle (the most impressive one does 16 E3's or 7680 voice/ data channels) and all modem, fax, and voice comms going through the circuit are available on the other side. They have products to do automatic channel/ signal scanning, demuxing, decoding of various data formats, processing of satellite and radio signals ("combines tuning, demodulation, descrambling, decoding, demultiplexing, and output formatting in one chassis"), every kind of mobile phone signal you've ever heard of, digital microwave links, decoding of higher-level protocols like V.42/V.42bis, X.25, HDLC, PPP, every Internet protocol worth doing, etc etc (their terminology is pretty neat, they have for example a 1.5-44.7Mbps "modem for on-the-move applications" :-). Much of the hardware claims to be built to TEMPEST specs. One interesting point is that most of their stuff is for E1's and E3's even though they're a US company. Hmmm.... Peter.

1 0

Elder Kennedy ordered to tesify to Grand Jury (if you can call it that) [CNN]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > X-within-URL: http://www.cnn.com/US/9811/10/kennedy.testimony.ap/ > STAMFORD, Connecticut (AP) -- A Florida judge on Tuesday ordered the > elderly brother of Ethel Kennedy to testify before a Connecticut grand > jury investigating a 1975 slaying in which his two sons are suspects. > > Rushton Skakel, 74, of Hobe Sound, Florida, was ordered to testify > about what he knows about the slaying of Martha Moxley, a 15-year-old > Greenwich girl who was bludgeoned to death with a golf club. ... > The case stalled for years but was revived this spring by the > appointment of a grand jury consisting of a single judge. [remainder deleted] Now if that isn't unconstitutional I don't know what is. He and his lawyer should be screaming bloody murder (figuratively). ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Important news from DAVOC (-flash3 site-)
by jake 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Greetings from the Underground...... this message is presented to you by the U.S. http://www.DAVOC.com

1 0

GOST still used?
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can anyone report whether GOST is still used anywhere?

2 1