December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

blacknet international offers DOSSIERS for SALE
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <9310270231.AA02958(a)tamsun.tamu.edu> remail(a)tamsun.tamu.edu writes: > blacknet international is pleased to offer the following materials for sale: > > DOSSIERS: on the current participants in the Cypherpunks Mailing List Flame war > > PRICES: Prices and delivery terms upon request via encrypted anonymous return > address. > > SUBJECTS: > Perry Metzger <pmetzger(a)lehman.com> > Duncan Frissell <frissell(a)panix.com> > S. Boxx <an12070(a)anon.penet.fi> > L. Detweiler<ld231782(a)longs.lance.colostate.edu> > Timothy C. May <tcmay(a)netcom.com> > Ray Cromwell <rjc(a)gnu.ai.mit.edu> > David Sternlight <strnlght(a)netcom.com> > > These are available now via PGP encrypted return anonymous mail. Yes yes, very droll. What's not so funny is that the moderator of comp.dcom.telecom appears to have taken the BlackNet joke idea for his very own, and *is* selling dossiers on people for the purposes of doing nasty things to them (as he says himself in a footnote some way down this post) Of course, I'd like to discuss this in comp.dcom.telecom, but I'm persona non grata there nowadays...

2 1

My key
by an41418＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As Hal Finney suggests, a pseudonym is a key. Others have also inquired about my key, so I made one. However, posting it to the group makes no sense because if this message were a forgery, then someone could pose as me. Strange, the idea of someone posing as someone else's pseudonym. Anyway, send me e-mail if you want my public key, and I'll send it to you. Wonderer P.S. Silly pgp question: When I type pgp -sa file -u wonderer I produce an entire pgp message. How do I make a shorter signature that is a hash of my message? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

2 1

Re: My Views on the Detweiler Matter
by jamie＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypheroids and Cypherettes, The eventual recognition that names are symbol strings and not their referents is akin to the realization that the map not being the terrrtory. Yep, sometimes we just keep learning the same old lesson. The Detweiler/Boxx rants have the flavor of a reformed alcoholic distrupting the champagne toast at a wedding, selfishly driven by their world view and utterly unaware of the social dynamics around them. But aside from the rantings, pleas for TrueNameUtopia in CypherSociety, and threats, I sense something else. Take your pick of remark -- "thou doth protesteth too much," or "where there's smoke there's fire," or ... . Seems to me that the essential raison d'etre of L.Detweiler and S.Boxx (and even sometimes The SternLight himself) is purposive to distract c'punks from "writing code" or essays or having fun. This is basic motivated deception used in sports, business and the military ... get the opponent to do something else ... Here's one interpretation: if c'punks weren't pushing the envelope in creating both tools and understanding for things like cryptography, anonymous remailers and digital cash, nor pushing the social bounds through BlackNet, Nyms, Sam Hill, and May's CryptoAnarchy, the Detweiler nonsense wouldn't have emerged. A nerve has been struck; and this seems, in the big picture, to be A Good Thing. I've no doubt that to the true statists, fascists and communists, we are their vision of hell. On the other side of this, they will no longer be the only ones to hide behind anomynity, pull their secret strings, and pronounce agents of change as Evil Incarnate. We stand at the threshold of a new world, in large part to be enabled by cryptography. As "The Net" expands, dark fiber becomes illuminated, online markets flourish and the like, cryptography will be key for economic survival, and it will be in the hands (or machines) of The People, not The State. If such great progress wasn't being made toward providing for personal privacy, the L.Detweiler-Boxxs of the Net would be ranting about something else. So each rant underscores how significant the progress in cryptography is becoming; and it will become more so. In a nutshell, three cheers for c'punks. -- ................................ Jamie Dinkelacker Palo Alto CA Jamie(a)netcom.com 415.941.4782

1 0

Re: Net Regs.
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

K > Yes I realize it, and perhaps Perry's right we should move this K >to extropians. No one has complained to *me* yet. I thought this a cpherpunks issue because it deals with the *Physical* Layer which is just as important a part of the ISO reference model as any other. We have to deal with questions of the interface between some of our technology and the world. Duncan Frissell Free Reference Model mnemonic. Read from the bottom up: Anarchists Communists or Socialists <--- I know they've renamed this but that's the way Trust I first saw it. Never Departments Police Applications Communications System Transport Network Data Link Physical --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

2 2

subscribe
by jc138696＠longs.lance.colostate.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How do I subscribe? thank you.

1 0

Watch out for carl@com.malamud.t
by carugo o 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

He is a neg!!! e0004353(a)brookes.uk.ac ps i wrote the introductory piece on myself!!

1 0

New arrival.
by carugo o 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes, Ia m here weird, strong, and full willingness to learn. If you want to know what I am like think of a rhino with his turbo charged bulldozer flatening the field of complacent cows. Yes that his me captain spineless- people- crusher. Is there any recommended literature as regards the cypherpunks dark and dangerous world. I love high electronic finance. I have been looking at the takeover battle for paramount.. What these bloody harvard mba managers don't seem to realise is that if all internet factions got together we could outbid any takover offer.. Now that is corporate bucks!!! Does anybody write to vice president gore or cher clinton. BTW who is your local net.god? I am very serious on one hand buit sucha good sport on the other. I am also logged onto bras-net and I must say these Phd Brasilians are something else. It is a big fight on how corruption money should be distributed to them and god is there or not, I was thought he abandoned human king=d the day he saw how bloody ugly eve was and went on to better world with full of social security, plenty of computer wizz kids and other such lovely mechanical inventions. I would love to get onto angel(a)heaven.sky Wacky or what!! are there any invesment bankers on line ? I hope so, since I have become an old hand in Latin american investment. I get calls from investors at all times in my dreams. well, I am still here writing.... I am doing my personal research on the future of commerce on the internet?! Opinions. Would you want adverts being pourred down your screen all day?? I have to go for now. I will hate and love this club. Bye form the wacky man!!!

1 0

I'm leaving cypherpunks
by bill＠twwells.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A few things before I go. If you have any replies you want me to see, you'll have to send them via private mail, since I no longer get the list. This includes replies to my recent set of posts. I was asked how to participate in the sexual abuse newsgroup. That newsgroup is a standard Usenet-style newsgroup in the altnet. You may not have it at your server because it has the dreaded s-- infix. Explaining to your admin that the group is not a porno group might get the group. If you want the group but, for one reason or another don't care to ask your admin, you can write me and I'll ask (without mentioning your name). Alternately, I can send it to you via e-mail; it's fairly high volume, though, running perhaps 50-60 messages a day. You can post through one of the anonymous servers. Send to anon-help(a)twwells.com for info on how to use mine. Some of you may wonder why I'm leaving cypherpunks. Rjc seems like a minor provocation, in comparison to Detweiler and some of the lesser lights here. That's true and rjc is not why I'm leaving. I'm a firm believer in the right to privacy. And to the right to possess and appropriately use the tools needed to secure it. That much, I support the cypherpunks goal. However, I also believe that this Brave New World of ours can go in more than one way. It may become a dystopia in which people like rjc, and their more powerful brethren, set the terms and tone, or it may approach a utopia that enables its participants to make the most of what they have. We here at the beginning will make that choice. We'll do it *by* *our* *actions*. Either we will choose to form a true _society_ of privacy or we will permit cyberspace to descend into a war of all against all. *We* choose. We choose with each of our actions. Is this action based on a fundamental respect for others or is it based on a desire for self-aggrandizement? Does it further the end of healthy, human interaction or is it destructive in nature and intent? But as important as these individual contributions are, more important is the attitude that is taken towards them. Are acts such as rjc's considered acceptable behavior, to be tolerated with all other sorts of behavior, or are they to be censured and, where appropriate, censored? In an uncontrolled environment, there is little that can be done to further an appropriate attitude. One can reinforce the good and censure the bad. And hope. In a controlled environment, such as cypherpunks, those who control the list have the final say. The excess of noise on this can be *directly* traced to the list owner's choice to not control its content. Rjc's ability to abuse another *and to continue the abuse* is a direct consequence of the owner's policies. These facts are, by themselves, offensive but would be, barely, tolerable. However, their consequences are not. Their consequences are a furthering of the ends of people like rjc, a society in which might makes right, and in which the potentials of others are stifled by the hostility of those who prefer to rule rather than grow. And this I cannot support. Nor do I care to be associated with a group that, intentionally or not, supports this. *This* is why I'm leaving cypherpunks. Privacy is a *social* phenomenon, not a technical one. There is no sense in creating tools for privacy unless one also works for a society in which the deployment of these tools makes sense. One final thing before I go. I could set up a list on my machine (not on the Internet but I connect fairly frequently because of my server) with policies that address these issues, with the side effect of dramatically improving the signal-to-noise ratio. If this is of potential interest to you, let me know. If there is sufficient interest I'll draw up a formal policy. If enough people then say they'll sign up, I'll create the list.

1 0

my sad observations...
by jdblair＠nextsrv.cas.muohio.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have followed the cypherpunk list for about 9 months now, and I have learned A LOT directly from it. I have rarely posted, just read the material as it appeared, learning from what I was able to without getting lost in equations. There is always a certain amount of noise to useful signal from any information source, although over the past month the signal to noise ratio on Cypherpunks has become almost intolerable. I now read few of the messages, just sifting out what I hope will be useful to me from the subject headings. If any of you are able to read ALL of the posts, and keep up the rest of your work, I commend you. Perhaps the current state is a symptom of growing popularity. Since it has always appeared to me that the point of the list was to disseminate information on cryptography, and provide a discussion point for those interested in spreading the use of cryptography, growing popularity would seem to be a signal of success. However, I miss the state of the list last April, when every time I checked it I felt like I learned something new about cryptography. Perhaps those with little to say, that seem to be posting just to cause trouble or to be heard, would better serve the group if they faded out for a while now, and just watched until they were ready to say something useful. I do not wish to flame anyone in particular, or to start a flame war, just point out (probably for the nth time) what is a growing problem. If any new listeners are interested, I have an archive of the postings which I found interesting, or seemed like they would be useful. I do not pretend that it is the definitive cypherpunk archive, especially since there is a 2.5 month gap for the summer when I was living out of my pack in the Sangre De Christo Mtns. If you want a copy, e-mail me. Please put "archive request" in the subject header. For intro. information, the Cryptography FAQ, posted on sci.crypt was very helpful for me. This posting has now gotten too large, and is perhaps guilty of the problem I am addressing. For this, I apoligize. code on, -john. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Blair |Fertilize your garden with dirt, compost, jdblair(a)nextsrv.cas.muohio.edu |old magazines, Apple II logic boards, obsolete PGP Key available upon request |software, forgotten video images, rusty cans, |canceled stamps, love, hate, and desire. |Wait untill spring, and see what comes up.

1 0

Electronic fraud/and creditors abay.
by carugo o 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes Firstly hallo fellow punks. Yes you tell me about electronic fraud and Iw ould like to know are there any of you out there how are good at keeping creditors at bay, eg phone companies etc. Trump can you hear me? Bye Mephisto e0004353(a)brookes.uk.ac

2 1

Words, words, words
by an41418＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tyrone Slothrop (RocketMan), you say: > It's just words; they can't hurt you. I think many people, nations, reputations, organization, etc. have been destroyed by "just words." Somewhere I heard the phrase: "The pen is mightier than the sword." Words can and do hurt. I believe the practive of flaming has probably hindered many people's participation and contribution to discussions on the net. Some words that can hurt you: - death threats - "You're fired" - "I don't want to see you ever again." - "You're ideas are stupid; take them somewhere else." - "We see no option but to declare war!" you get the idea. Flaming is unproductive. Wonderer p.s. I am ashamed; messages will be signed soon. Here's a detached signature of this message. -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: 2.3 iQBVAgUALM/zPR1kTJuroDD9AQGpVAH/Y7rQ86YcC91Fi19UfyVv607NSwQu063K c++LRh5Y7D/CrZZNkPkmiE1melwNvXruoLx3dP8w38HacT090/Jx+w== =aJVa -----END PGP MESSAGE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

1 0

Privacy/pseudonyms/etc..
by Timothy Newsham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I have been on this list lately. I have seen all sorts of diversions from "normal" cypherpunk discussion. None has been as big as this discussion on psuedonyms and "pseudospoofing". I always thought that this list was made up of people who already believed that privacy was a good thing and that it should be persued by writing cryptographic software that enforced that privacy. There are newsgroups for debating various features of privacy, I think one of them is called alt.privacy or something equally obvious. I know the discussions are pretinent to the code that we write but I dont believe they belong on this list. If I wanted to discuss the ups and downs of giving everybody privacy I would read the appropriate lists. Tim N.

1 0

Re: Net Requlation
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

K >1. If you don't have US citizenship, how do you get a passport? (Buy K >it on sale from the Czech republic or what?) Actually, the Dominican Republic is better. You don't really need to change citizenship unless you are from a country that restricts foreign travel by citizens. Picking up a *second* passport is always a good idea, however, and the US has recently changed its regs to permit its nationals to seek naturalisation in other countries without renouncing US citizenship. K >2. Where do you live? I mean I love to travel but after 3 or 4 K >weeks of it I'm ready to settle down and hibernate for a long while. K >[Especially now with a wife and 2 sons, I'd last about 2 days traveling K > :-)] Somewhere As someone pointed out, you need not travel much just be in a country where you are not a citizen. K >3. Are the TELECOM connections there yet? Slowly but surely. Switzerland is good these days. Expense is the main problem. If the Anglo-Saxon conspiracy wins the battle of network non-design (as it seems sure to do) everyone in the OECD will soon have cheap telcoms. K >4. Customer interaction. This is a problem, if you work on computer K >systems that are unique or program custom software for these systems, K >customer interaction is very important If you have the customer in the first place, you can make visits without too much problem. Marketing is more difficult. Slow-scan video for everyone over the nets is close. Things to keep in mind... I don't expect that very many people will use cryptography, anonymous remailers, DC nets, etc to become PTs or virtual expatriates but these tools will have a marginal (meaning "edge" not "small") effect on the process of institutional transformation. The nets themselves are the critical device for weakening national controls. They will sweep aside labor regulations, financial regulations and a host of restraints that keep people poorer than they need be. Oops! Sorry about that. Too much time spent on alt.politics.economics... Duncan Frissell --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

1 0

Re: My Views on the Detweiler Matter
by owen＠autodesk.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: tcmay(a)netcom.netcom.com (Timothy C. May) > >It's sad. I told you so. By the way, my analysis of this turn of events is that this is a huge guerilla ontology experiment, that was spurred on by my original postings regarding the issue of psychopathic personalitys, and the parameters of pathological aspects of privacy. Good job guys. :-) LUX ./. owen ( A legend in his own mind)

1 0

Goodbye
by Alexander Reynolds 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm outta here. One last note, I learned a bit of crypt from this forum, and to those who posted crypt stuff: thanks a lot. Naturally I'm not so appreciative of the flames. Some people on this forum could use a maturity change from diapers to underwear, seriously. What is the attitude problem here? The members of this forum should look at the elitism which spews out only all too frequently. It could place the general ideal of anonymous crypt out of business with all the pointless bickering. Rjc: you wanted to debate, and called me a coward if I didn't. I am still waiting... Perry: dude, I'm speechless. Ok, see you all. Thanks for everything. Alex Reynolds

1 0

Re: Net Requlation
by Dark 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-> kwaldman(a)bbn.con says: Say the best way to go is to become a perpetual tourist. That is you don't have US citzenship and thus are not subject to it's taxes and other nosy laws. [Not that other government's don't have nosier laws]. Anyway 1. If you don't have US citzenship, how do you get a passport? (Buy it on sale from the Czech republic or what?) Passports from many nations are available for real basic requirements. By your use of the language "Perpetual Traveler" I assume you're talking about the SCOPE international (i.e. Dr. W. G. Hill) materials. The concept is this: States like Liechtenstein (My home country) Thailand, Lebaon, Luxembourg, Italy (the list goes on) are fairly easy to obtain passports from. Many countries issue "passports" that are seperate from actual citizenship. If you thus hold several passports, and maintain residence for (say 6 months) a period of time, you are a perpetual traveller, and not subject to taxation, military service, prosecution, death .... All the usual. Snake oil, it cures what ails ya. The problem is that is doesn't quite work this way. What ole DOC Hill is saying isn't exactally unture, but it is misleading. -> kwaldman(a)bbn.com : 1. If you don't have US citzenship, how do you get a passport? (Buy it on sale from the Czech republic or what?) <- Well, in many countries, Liechtenstein a prime example, a sizeable investment employing a certain amount of citizens is enough to "buy" you a passport. Other channels (less up front) exist. A sizeable account in (the prince's bank) can get you a passport as well. -> kwaldman : 2. Where do you live? I mean I love to travel but after 3 or 4 weeks of it I'm ready to settle down and hibernate for a long while. [Especially now with a wife and 2 sons, I'd last about 2 days traveling :-)] Somewhere were I don't have to get thrown in jail for thinking the wrong thoughts. [Which given the nature of this list most of us do, except of course our NSA monitors :-)] <- The concept is that you maintain several residences and spend time in each. Expense is obviously a problem. -> kwaldmaan : 3. Are the TELECOM connections there yet? I saw this weeks Economist and it looks promising but last time I was in Europe some of my phone connections were less than perfect. [Even parts of the US leave something to be desired]. I personally need a good phone line (especially if I'm hundreds of miles from my customer), and a minimum of 56kbaud link for my computer. <- This is a case by case basis. Germany is pretty good, but on the whole things are worse than the U.S. -> kwaldman : 4. Customer interaction. This is a problem, if you work on computer systems that are unique or program custom software for these systems, customer interaction is very important ( and in other areas I'm sure). Yes email, video conferencing (expensive!) help but you either need to be there or have very good VR (which I have yet to see, this doesn't mean much as I haven't seen bad VR yet either). <- Expense is going to be the key problem in general in any kind of tax exile situation. You're going to need to have the kind of business that can\ be run from anywhere without much need for local. This is difficult in Europe in general, but obviously it depends on your exact location and the nature of your business. Some might argue that the proximity of nations makes for less travel expense in general and nullfies the cost of video conferencing etc.... Again, specifics and your mileage may vary. -> kwaldman : The one plus is that I believe there is still time (5-10) years before the costs outweigh the benifits of living in the US and thus there is time to plan things like what country to live in, which bank to use in the channel isles and let technological advance solve some of the bandwidth problems. Karl Waldman <- I tend to agree with your assesment here. If the current trend to centralized power continues, I'm going to head home myself. It's much nicer to be a powerholder in a partially socialized nation than a power seeker. The biggest problem is much as you put it. The international data concerns are much greater in Europe, and it is expensive to estlablish an alternative residence and citizenship. General comments: When you refer to not having U.S. citizenship, and being a perpetual tourist, are you refering to not holding ANY citizenship? or just one other than U.S.? There is a distinct difference between being stateless and a perpetual tourist. You might consider that the U.S. has a fairly low taxation rate compared to other nations, especially the European nations that provide extensive social programs. Many nations will not allow you to dissove your nationality without consent. See Generally, Convention on Certain Questions Relating to Conflict of Nationality Laws (1930). See Also, Esphahanian v. Bank Tejarat, AWD 31-157-2 (1983), 77 AJIL 646 (1983). Some nationalities are not often recognized when they are percieved to be for tax purposes (Liechtenstein has had this problem with the U.S. for years) Cypherpunk hitch: When indeed crypto is regulated, and if privacy degrades to the point in the U.S. where it's not worth staying here anymore, where will you go and how? Personally I love the fact that I hold two passports and money abroad. Privacy is a lot easier to maintain as such. -uni- (Dark)

1 0

Detweiler and his digital signature
by Sameer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone seen L. Detweiler post a *SIGNED* message, using a *TRUSTED* public key, on this psuedospoofing matter? While I don't know L. Detweiler, I feel that there's reason to believe that L. Detweiler might be undergoing an attack of a spoofer/account-breakin who wants to discredit him. I can't see how someone who wrote an anonymity/privacy FAQ (I haven't read that FAQ, so I can't say whether its a *good* FAQ or not) could turn so irrational and paranoid. It's possible, but until it's proven to me, with a trusted key, that *L. Detweiler* has been saying these things, I'm going to assume that he hasn't, and ignore further posts by an unsigned L. Detweiler.

1 0

Re: I'm leaving cypherpunks
by W. Kinney 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I know I'm just a silly lurker, but I couldn't help but comment on this one... T. William Wells writes: > Privacy is a *social* phenomenon, not a technical one. There is > no sense in creating tools for privacy unless one also works for > a society in which the deployment of these tools makes sense. I don't agree with everything that Bill said, but this here really hits the mark. And the place where the social agenda of the cypherpunks is most truly reflected is in how people interact with each other on the list. I find it incredibly ironic that Bill Wells, not too long ago, got roundly pasted by Detweiler over his practice of keeping track of True Names on ASAR, and wrote convincinly in defense of his policies to the 'punks. I dropped him some e-mail at the time to tell him that there were actually quite a few level heads around here, and that it seemed to me that the 'punks and ASAR were natural allies. Here is this guy running an anon service on the net that actually means something vital to a lot of people who don't have much in their lives that they feel they CAN count on, and running it well. Here's a place where all this lovely talk could be put to use where it counts. I don't have the expertise to do the kind of things this guy needs, but I've been reading ASAR frequently of late -- all of you should be too, and thinking about what anonymity is doing for the people who post there. He got absolutely zip out of his association with the cypherpunks. And we all passed up a terrific opportunity to be of real use to the world. Or hasn't that occurred to anyone but me? Good job, folks. And Bill, sorry to see you go. -- Will -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLM64fffv4TpIg2PxAQE8kwP7BnKx/CEHl3fjf4VuxcnElHJLmBcZVPuY ad3C7bDFmn2fyiao2FcklRD6uo3/NE7Gh1lvxQmKa8c5OtL2PJcUU/5J5IR+w+I2 o5xOhVdcK8RxqiTP0CZFJ0PeJLn7r7JyC40OgN//eBqidUU8mBWV2uA8A4EP91yB vO2Z0LSwpSE= =LGMg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: I'm leaving cypherpunks
by peter honeyman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

t.w., i guess you're unfamiliar with sturgeon's law. as for your new, improved cpunx list, count me out. i like cpunx the way it is: uncontrolled. peter

2 1

Re: blacknet international offers DOSSIERS for SALE
by msattler＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>...and *is* selling dossiers on people... I just don't get what the big deal is, he seems to be providing info that's publically available but not trivial to get. I'm a computer consultant; that's exactly what *I* do to pay the bills. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael S. Sattler msattler(a)netcom.com +1 (415) 621-2903 Digital Jungle Software Encrypt now; ask me how. (finger for PGP key) All that is required for evil to triumph is for {wo}men of good will to do nothing.

1 0

Codes, ciphers, and ham radio
by msattler＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

And now for something different regarding crypto: In studying for my FCC Technician's license I ran across FCC 97.113 (Sub-part 113 of Part 97 of Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations), which prohibits the use of codes or ciphers to obscure the meaning of a message. Besides preventing me from using Pig Latin in voice communications, this *seems* to prohibit the use of any deliberate encryption (as opposed to compression) of data transmitted via radio, such as the computer packet -> radio -> Internet gateways. The data highway may be encryption-tolerant today, but the off-ramps are murder. :-) M ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael S. Sattler msattler(a)netcom.com +1 (415) 621-2903 Digital Jungle Software Encrypt now; ask me how. (finger for PGP key) All that is required for evil to triumph is for {wo}men of good will to do nothing.

1 0

Re: I'm leaving cypherpunks
by fnerd＠smds.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE------ Mr. Wells-- Goodbye, best wishes. I'm guessing, but I think you're making a mistake in leaving, both for yourself and about us. We are not being irresponsible. We have a different, serious, view of how the world should be made into a good place. We can only "set the tone," as you say, if what we are saying is founded in truth and competence. The personal part of this letter continues after the philosophy. - -----BEGIN PHILOSOPHY------ There are tools available to protect privacy, and protect ourselves, that don't require much cooperation of others. People should adopt these tools, and also methods, habits, knowledge and attitudes. One good attitude is a basic awareness and self-responsibility. One is that insults and taunts are only words. Yes, on a personal level, in a group of friends, in a society that is still basically functioning, there are many important issues of how people should treat each other, and how a good environment should be established. But cypherpunks is addressing, and experimenting with, a more basic, raw level of things. The technical and nasty issues are every bit as urgent as the personal and ideal ones, and we constantly need to (and try to) relate them. It's bad to ask social conventions of niceness to take over jobs that people should--have to--take care of consciously for themselves. It distributes responsibilities and burdons unfairly. It is unwise in that it won't work. It seems to give play to a kind of self-delusion. And to recommend it as a course to others is to send the sheep to feed the wolves. It's to hang on to a picture of society with a false happy-face front that's crumpling behind--for all of us. There's a basic level of self-protection that people have to take care of for themselves, or higher-level social goals don't have a chance. People not protecting themselves actually increase harmful activities--besides small criminals there are whole industries of parasitism--*because* people feed them in sheepish trust. We're not talking guns or martial arts here, just purely protective things like crypto and a little dose of reality. A realistic sense of what neighborhood one is walking in, for instance. Like the cypherpunks neighborhood. Here we're trying to experiment, get a sense of the worst of what could happen, imagine ways of dealing with it. And we've been openly like this since we started. Here is how I see the situation with Detweiler: I sympathize with his pain (to the extent I can follow it). I try to be friendly to him. There have been others offering support who he could have talked with instead of the people he picked fights with. Some people shouldn't have been so nasty to him. But he should have gotten a reality check a long time ago about how rough we play here--it's not very rough!! There's no way we could have been expected to know that he wouldn't, and it is not our responsibility to police each other into treating him supportively. That doesn't mean we are building an unsupportive, hostile world. We are playing worst-case-scenario with each other just so that we can have a world that is not like that. You construe the list owners' *allowing* rjc to continue posting to be *condoning* it. That's a bad thought path. To suggest that they step in, in the kind of matter we're talking about, is not a good model for how a world should be run, and it's egregious in terms of the atmosphere we want in our own group. > In an uncontrolled environment, there is little that can be done > to further an appropriate attitude. One can reinforce the good > and censure the bad. And hope. (And give people tools, knowledge, and ideas to protect themselves. And develop methods that actively shrink the opportunities for bad behavior.) Cypherpunks is purposely a model of an uncontrolled environment, including its worst aspects. > Privacy is a *social* phenomenon, not a technical one. The convention of respect for privacy is social. It's based on a more primitive and basic ability of people to *get* privacy if they need it. The latter is breaking down, making the former increasingly a charade behind which things can get worse. But in the process of fixing things, the ground rules--in terms of which new social conventions will have to grow--will change. Things will seem rude to people stuck in old ways of looking at them. > There is > no sense in creating tools for privacy unless one also works for > a society in which the deployment of these tools makes sense. Although I can't imagine a situation where deploying privacy tools doesn't make sense, I agree that we should keep our social goals and issues in mind. I'm surprised you imply that we aren't doing that. But society has to be built on good foundations. - -----END PHILOSOPHY------ I think some of the things you suggest we do, amount to hiding from the important problems. I hope (mostly for our sake) that you aren't doing that yourself. I guess this list can seem very rough without a sense that the people are ethical and serious, and that the roughness is there for a purpose. I hope you can come around to believe that of some of us and tolerate the rest. We need people who can help think about what we're aiming for, and what it will be like for humans in the worlds we propose. Once in a while it helps to have someone to protest a thoughtless post. bye, -fnerd(a)smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham) quote me ps i restrained myself from all the twelve step phrases i thot -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a aKxB8nktcBAeQHabQP/d7yhWgpGZBIoIqII8cY9nG55HYHgvtoxiQCVAgUBLMs3K ui6XaCZmKH68fOWYYySKAzPkXyfYKnOlzsIjp2toust1Q5A3/n54PBKrUDN9tHVz 3Ch466q9EKUuDulTU6OLsilzmRvQJn0EJhzd4pht6hanC0R3seYNhUYhoJViCcCG sRjLQs4iVVM= =9wqs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Off-shore banking and Steve Roberts' flotilla
by Sameer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Cool. Do you have an email address for more info? > Found it. technomads-request(a)ucsd.edu

1 0

Re: I'm leaving cypherpunks
by msattler＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 17:34 10/27/93 +0000, T. William Wells wrote: >In a controlled environment, such as cypherpunks, those who >control the list have the final say. The excess of noise on this >can be *directly* traced to the list owner's choice to not >control its content. Rjc's ability to abuse another *and to >continue the abuse* is a direct consequence of the owner's >policies. These facts are, by themselves, offensive but would be, >barely, tolerable. I'm very sorry to see you go. I certainly agree that the list has been annoying of late, but I disagree that cpunx is a controlled environment, nor should it be. I believe that leaving is no solution, but making heart-felt comments and contributions on one hand and ignoring and kill-filing obnoxious posters on the other hand is IMHO the most direct path to a future we are comfortable in. Again, I'm sorry to see you go. It feels like a victory for the dark side. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael S. Sattler msattler(a)netcom.com +1 (415) 621-2903 Digital Jungle Software Encrypt now; ask me how. (finger for PGP key) All that is required for evil to triumph is for {wo}men of good will to do nothing.

1 0

Bad Ascii armour?
by J. Michael Diehl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Why is it that when I send this message to pgp, i get an error? This was posted recently. Is it a fraud? I donno and don't want to start another flamefest. ------BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE------ Mr. Wells-- Goodbye, best wishes. I'm guessing, but I think you're making a mistake in leaving, both for yourself and about us. We are not being irresponsible. We have a different, serious, view of how the world should be made into a good place. We can only "set the tone," as you say, if what we are saying is founded in truth and competence. The personal part of this letter continues after the philosophy. - -----BEGIN PHILOSOPHY------ There are tools available to protect privacy, and protect ourselves, that don't require much cooperation of others. People should adopt these tools, and also methods, habits, knowledge and attitudes. One good attitude is a basic awareness and self-responsibility. One is that insults and taunts are only words. Yes, on a personal level, in a group of friends, in a society that is still basically functioning, there are many important issues of how people should treat each other, and how a good environment should be established. But cypherpunks is addressing, and experimenting with, a more basic, raw level of things. The technical and nasty issues are every bit as urgent as the personal and ideal ones, and we constantly need to (and try to) relate them. It's bad to ask social conventions of niceness to take over jobs that people should--have to--take care of consciously for themselves. It distributes responsibilities and burdons unfairly. It is unwise in that it won't work. It seems to give play to a kind of self-delusion. And to recommend it as a course to others is to send the sheep to feed the wolves. It's to hang on to a picture of society with a false happy-face front that's crumpling behind--for all of us. There's a basic level of self-protection that people have to take care of for themselves, or higher-level social goals don't have a chance. People not protecting themselves actually increase harmful activities--besides small criminals there are whole industries of parasitism--*because* people feed them in sheepish trust. We're not talking guns or martial arts here, just purely protective things like crypto and a little dose of reality. A realistic sense of what neighborhood one is walking in, for instance. Like the cypherpunks neighborhood. Here we're trying to experiment, get a sense of the worst of what could happen, imagine ways of dealing with it. And we've been openly like this since we started. Here is how I see the situation with Detweiler: I sympathize with his pain (to the extent I can follow it). I try to be friendly to him. There have been others offering support who he could have talked with instead of the people he picked fights with. Some people shouldn't have been so nasty to him. But he should have gotten a reality check a long time ago about how rough we play here--it's not very rough!! There's no way we could have been expected to know that he wouldn't, and it is not our responsibility to police each other into treating him supportively. That doesn't mean we are building an unsupportive, hostile world. We are playing worst-case-scenario with each other just so that we can have a world that is not like that. You construe the list owners' *allowing* rjc to continue posting to be *condoning* it. That's a bad thought path. To suggest that they step in, in the kind of matter we're talking about, is not a good model for how a world should be run, and it's egregious in terms of the atmosphere we want in our own group. > In an uncontrolled environment, there is little that can be done > to further an appropriate attitude. One can reinforce the good > and censure the bad. And hope. (And give people tools, knowledge, and ideas to protect themselves. And develop methods that actively shrink the opportunities for bad behavior.) Cypherpunks is purposely a model of an uncontrolled environment, including its worst aspects. > Privacy is a *social* phenomenon, not a technical one. The convention of respect for privacy is social. It's based on a more primitive and basic ability of people to *get* privacy if they need it. The latter is breaking down, making the former increasingly a charade behind which things can get worse. But in the process of fixing things, the ground rules--in terms of which new social conventions will have to grow--will change. Things will seem rude to people stuck in old ways of looking at them. > There is > no sense in creating tools for privacy unless one also works for > a society in which the deployment of these tools makes sense. Although I can't imagine a situation where deploying privacy tools doesn't make sense, I agree that we should keep our social goals and issues in mind. I'm surprised you imply that we aren't doing that. But society has to be built on good foundations. - -----END PHILOSOPHY------ I think some of the things you suggest we do, amount to hiding from the important problems. I hope (mostly for our sake) that you aren't doing that yourself. I guess this list can seem very rough without a sense that the people are ethical and serious, and that the roughness is there for a purpose. I hope you can come around to believe that of some of us and tolerate the rest. We need people who can help think about what we're aiming for, and what it will be like for humans in the worlds we propose. Once in a while it helps to have someone to protest a thoughtless post. bye, -fnerd(a)smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham) quote me ps i restrained myself from all the twelve step phrases i thot -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a aKxB8nktcBAeQHabQP/d7yhWgpGZBIoIqII8cY9nG55HYHgvtoxiQCVAgUBLMs3K ui6XaCZmKH68fOWYYySKAzPkXyfYKnOlzsIjp2toust1Q5A3/n54PBKrUDN9tHVz 3Ch466q9EKUuDulTU6OLsilzmRvQJn0EJhzd4pht6hanC0R3seYNhUYhoJViCcCG sRjLQs4iVVM= =9wqs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0