December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: David Kahn advocates GAK
by wlkngowl＠unix.asb.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, you wrote: >This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >forceful opinions >- against certain aspects of export controls, >- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >demands on government revenues. I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. >However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >quarrel with such a position. >Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >coordinate their activities on the move is another. [..] The problem is the technology is merged. What if you're using cellular links to your ISP, and use SSL or ssh or PGP? Radio is being advocated as a possible solution to some of the net's bandwidth problems. Rob

1 0

Re: David Kahn advocates GAK
by Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, you wrote: >This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >forceful opinions >- against certain aspects of export controls, >- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >demands on government revenues. I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. >However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >quarrel with such a position. >Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >coordinate their activities on the move is another. [..] The problem is the technology is merged. What if you're using cellular links to your ISP, and use SSL or ssh or PGP? Radio is being advocated as a possible solution to some of the net's bandwidth problems. Rob

1 0

Re: Cellular location...
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:54 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Mark M. wrote: >I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and >have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There >would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to >triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly >"location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. It would only be marginally reliable. GPS signals are so weak (coming from satellites in 11,000 mile orbits) that reception outdoors is sometimes iffy if the signals have to go through foliage. Reception indoors is probably only rarely do-able. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

WinKrypt
by Frank Willoughby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? I picked up a copy & there is no mention in the documentation which encryption algorithm it uses & what the key lengths are. FWIW, my impression is that the documentation seems to deliberately avoid mentioning the algorithm/key lengths. Hmmmm. (food for thought) I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses 40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use & secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try anyway). 8^) Please send marketing info to me directly at: frankw(a)in.net and **NOT** to the entire mailing list. (BTW, I mentioned WinKrypt & PCcrypo because they are the only two which are available at many computer stores as COTS s/w). TIA for your help. Best Regards, Frank

1 0

(Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thought this might interest you guys. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: Audrie Krause <akrause(a)igc.apc.org> Subject: Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" To: iaj-futuremedia(a)igc.apc.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ACTION ALERT Please re-post where appropriate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dear Friends, On February 8, the first anniversary of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996, NetAction and the Center for Educational Priorities are launching a month-long Internet demonstration to call attention to the wide gap between the rhetoric and reality of this sweeping legislation. President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: MORE competition, MORE consumer choices, MORE widespread access to information technology. The Center for Educational Priorities and NetAction are spearheading this demonstration in an effort to pressure the Federal Communications Commission and other state and national regulatory agencies to ensure that the Act is implemented in a way that truly benefits the public. We invite you to join this effort by linking to the site at <http://www.cep.org/protest.html> for one month beginning on February 8. By linking to the protest site, you will be adding your voice to a united demand for true telecommunications reform. The site is currently under development. When completed, it will feature brief summaries of the impact the Act has had in its first year on telecommunications and technology policy, media ownership and content, and censorship, along with suggested actions to help ensure that implementation of the Act truly benefits the public. We are also creating extensive links to other organizations working on these issues, as well as to other sites with current information on censorship, mega-mergers, universal service, school hook-ups, and the v-chip. We welcome suggestions for additional links to add. Please let us know if you will participate in the demonstration by contacting NetAction, by email at akrause(a)igc.org, or by phone at 415-775-8674. Thanks! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

3 2

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:30 AM 1/26/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> writes: >> The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the >> vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as >> someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not >> be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes >> out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come >> from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. >> >> It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens >> of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or >> "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of >> us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those >> who would take it away". > >However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should >not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians >in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. "I have a solution to that problem." Seriously! Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. And, dare I say it, fair. I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

5 9

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nurdane Oksas wrote: > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; but remember, tanning will kill ya. - Igor.

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > they've just left things as is. > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. - Igor.

1 0

Re: Cellular location...
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:54 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Mark M. wrote: >I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and >have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There >would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to >triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly >"location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. It would only be marginally reliable. GPS signals are so weak (coming from satellites in 11,000 mile orbits) that reception outdoors is sometimes iffy if the signals have to go through foliage. Reception indoors is probably only rarely do-able. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

RE: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc.
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Jim Choate blanc has put forth an interesting assertion relating to nationalism and the Internet. If he is correct then we will have a one world government (ie technocracy) whether we like it or not. ................................................................... When your little company grows up to become a big World Leader in robotics, will you then be a member of this technocracy, participating in a one-world government, whether we like it or not? Will you sit on the Board of Honchos making important decisions about net access for all, perhaps active in the Chamber of Borgs? :>) .. Blanc p.s. I be femme

1 0

Text files
by satan_is_a_hacker＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ho was the one who wanted a list of my texts? I deleted the message accidentally

2 1

Re: David Kahn advocates GAK
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:03 AM 1/27/97 GMT, Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl wrote: >On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, John Savard <seward(a)netcom.ca> wrote: > >>This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >>forceful opinions > >>- against certain aspects of export controls, > >>- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >>demands on government revenues. > >I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. > >Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. > >>However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >>share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >>support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >>quarrel with such a position. > >>Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >>airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >>long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >>between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >>coordinate their activities on the move is another. It's odd that I can't seem to find the original message here. Contrary to the original claim, encryption over radio is generally legal. (One noted exception to this is ham radio...) Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: it aint successful until someone loses his temper <g>
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Paul Penrod <ppenrod(a)earthlink.net> writes: > Well, I see that you could'nt leave well enough alone... :-) > > Since Snow decided to jump into your face on this one, I might as well > throw my $0.02 on the table as well. Funny how my trashcan stays very empty > these days now that cypherpunks is in my bit bucket... I suggest you subscribe to cypherpunks-unedited. It may go away, but for now it's much more interesting than the censored version. > Frankly, it does not surprise me that homosexuality is yet another > pointless off-topic to be discussed on the list. Thanks to the moderation, only one side of the issue gets aired anyway. > >> +Thank God for AIDS. Amen. > >> when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as > >> God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); > >> i.e. -settlement by a just God. > > > > I almost threw a dumb ass redneck of a ship in the middle of the ocean > >for a comment like this. ... > This politically correct bullshit response is just symptomatic of someone > who is uncomfortable with the position taken for expediency's sake and is > trying to justify to himself the course taken. The "politically correct" homosexuals, like snow and gilmore and sandfart consider (violent) action to be a reasonable response to speech they don't like (e.g. "homophobic") - not "more speech". Someone says something you disagree with on a mailing list? Unsubscribe him! Ban him from the list! Institute moderation to auto-discard everything he says! Curiously, African-American children are taught that violence is a correct response to "racist" speech. ObEbonics: "Dot's right, judge, I shot da mothafucka cuz he call me a nigga!" > > I've read a lot of your rantings on this list, and I agree with some of > >them, but statements like this prove that you are a bigoted idiot. You may > >have some areas where you know what you are talking about, and I wouldn't > want > >to be on the sharp end of a gun you were holding, but your head is > definately > >stuck firmly up your ass. > > Ok, we throw down the gauntlet here in true USENET style, and in keeping > with that, have nothing of value to say (just name calling). When they run out of things to say, they start pulling plugs, unsubscribing people, and "moderating"... > > 1) If homosexuality is a "choice", why would anyone choose that > lifestyle > >where the averge life expectancy is in the 40's, that causes so much pain > >among ones family, and so much conflict with the rest of society. I can answer this one, having worked for Jesuits: having deviant sexual desires may not be a choice, but willingly committing unnatural acts to satisfy your deviant desires is a choice. > > The answer is you can't. You adopt a knee-jerk position that reinforces > >your deliberate isolationism. Anything that may cause you to question your > >worldview gets sorted to /dev/evil and you plow ahead like some pig ignorant > >dough boy killing as ordered for king and country. > > Who's the ignorant one here? The name caller or the recipient. My vote goes > to the name caller, as he assumes this to be a debate of fact, when in > essence he's expressed only his opinion on the matter and not bothered to > show teacher his homework (the dog ate it - so give me an "A" anyway 'cause > I deserve it). ;-> And when the namecalling doesn't work, they respond with violence. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > > > > > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > > > > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > > > > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > > > > mailing list. > > > > > > I don`t think I read the article (even though I subscribe to the > > > unmoderated list), can you forward me a copy. > > > As I understand it though, from other comentaries, it was junked > > > because it was in response to a message by Dimitri who, given that it > > > is Sandy that is moderating the list, is no doubt filtered by > > > different criteria than anyone else on the list, in my opinion a > > > censorous and fascist restraint as Dimitri has recently been posting > > > more crypto relevant material, besides which whatever the content of > > > his posts they should be open to review before a decision is made on > > > if they are to be junked or not. > > > > Has Paul reversed his previous pro-censorship stand and decided to > > learn something about crypto from people who actually know some? > > There is no change of stance needed, I happen to believe you are > knowledgable about cryptography and sometimes post worthwhile > commentary and information, however, you also post a lot of dreck and > flammable material which means I respond in kind. That does not mean > I believe you, or anyone else, should be censored. I distinctly recall how Paul used to call for censoring me. If he's changed his mind and really doesn't think that anyone should be censored, it's a welcome development - even if it was brought on by the sandfart censoring Paul. > > > > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > > > > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > > > > > > Yes Sandy, please enlighten us, what is the criterion you use to > > > moderate the list if not crypto-relevancy. I suspect an element of > > > self preservation and protection of the list fuhrer and diktat maker > > > John Gilmore (who, until the disgraceful incident with Dimitri > > > commanded some respect on this list). > > > > I used to respect Gilmore until this series of incidents (unsubscribing > > me, turning list moderated). Now I only have disdain for him. > > I agree entirely, Gilmore was a respected man (despite the EFF being > a corporate whore) who threw any respect and admiration others had > for him away. I wonder what he thinks he got in exchange... > > > > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > > > > the current readership. > > > > > > I don`t think this is the point, John Gilmore is free to appoint > > > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > > > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > > > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > > > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > > > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > > > of list members. > > > > Quite a few people have expressed interest in re-creating an unmoderated > > cypherpunks list at another site if Gilmore decided to stick to his > > "moderation experiment". > > I notice and appreciate the quotes around "moderation experiment", > this is, without doubt, a permenant measure to silence members of the > list who dare to offer criticism of anyone an element of {x: x a > friend or co-censor of John Gilmore} Yes - clearly the personality of the submitter is the most important factor in moderator's rejections, not even the content. > I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I > hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a > list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. I notice that the sandfart has been challenging his enemies to create an alternative mailing list. I wonder what their contingency plan is. Without a doubt, such a competing list would be mailbombed and flooded with garbage by Gilmore and his entourage. What else? > Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames > even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to > criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an > opportunity to prove me wrong). The sandfart has proven me right already. As I said, I think we're paying too much attention to him and his censorship, and he's just a front for Gilmore anyway. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Text files
by Lou Zer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ho was the one who wanted a list of my texts? I deleted the message accidentally

1 0

300 Money Making Reports
by EXPRESS 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please forgive me for this e-mail, but I felt I just had to let more people know about this and get in on the ground floor! 300 Money Making Reports AN OUTSTANDING MAIL ORDER OPPORTUNITY! Make 1000% Profit Sell 300 Popular Money Making Reports Do you have a sincere desire to succeed in your own mail order business ? If your answer is YES, then it will pay you to read on ... If you are like most people wanting to "HIT IT BIG" in the exciting mail order business, you are probably selling someone else's product - using their advertising material. Can money be made this way? The answer is yes - BUT - there are some vital ingredients necessary to make really BIG MONEY in mail order. FIRST: You must sell a product that many people want. SECOND: It must be a hard to find product. THIRD: Your profit per sale must be VERY LARGE. Well, we have found what is probably the most profitable line of products that can be sold by mail - and the public demand is virtually unlimited. This product is VALUABLE INFORMATION! You can prove it for yourself. Look through any magazine. Advertisements like "Wipe out debts Without bankruptcy","How to borrow thousands of dollars interest free", or "Get a free Cadillac, Mercedes, or any luxury car every year". These people are making a fortune selling this information because they have the know-how, plus the information. Having the INFORMATION to sell is the key. You can buy many books on how to sell information, but where to get the information to sell is always the problem in starting a profitable mail order business. NOW THAT PROBLEM HAS BEEN SOLVED FOR YOU ! We have put together a collection of 300 of the hottest money-making reports available. Our Offer A Complete Mail Order Business This is your opportunity to start your own profitable business selling information through the mail. Not only will you receive all 300 money making reports, YOU WILL RECEIVE COMPLETE RIGHTS TO REPRODUCE AND SELL THIS INFORMATION IN ANY MANNER YOU DESIRE. Think of it! You can now OWN OUTRIGHT this complete set of 300 money making reports and YOU become the PUBLISHER AND PRIME SOURCE for the unbelievably low price of $19.99. Nothing more to pay. You can sell these reports individually or you can sell the entire set. You can even sell the reprint rights to others, just as we do. You'll have your money back on the first order you sell and from that point on - watch your income skyrocket! Don't Wait To Get into This Incredible Business of Selling Information By Mail All reports are in text file format. You can email them and sell them for dollars. TO ORDER: Please send check or money order in the amount of $19.99 to: Express Marketing 10601-A Tierrasanta Blvd Suite 287 San Diego, CA 92124 TO ORDER ON-LINE: Visit Our Catalog at: http://www.express1.com NOTE: Reports will be emailed, so include your email address. Email: express(a)mail.liberty.com ************************************************** THE EXPRESS CYBERSTORE Home-Based Business Start-Up Guides & Reports Home of "Internet Madness" Visit us at: http://www.express1.com Email: express(a)mail.liberty.com **************************************************

1 0

RE: US Info Supremacy
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> writes: > From: John Young > > Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. > ........................................ > > He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. Other conjectures: * dead from AIDS * abducted by aliens, held captive in a flying saucer * moderated so heavily, his rants don't even make it to cypherpunks-unedited --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

RE: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc.
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Jim Choate blanc has put forth an interesting assertion relating to nationalism and the Internet. If he is correct then we will have a one world government (ie technocracy) whether we like it or not. ................................................................... When your little company grows up to become a big World Leader in robotics, will you then be a member of this technocracy, participating in a one-world government, whether we like it or not? Will you sit on the Board of Honchos making important decisions about net access for all, perhaps active in the Chamber of Borgs? :>) .. Blanc p.s. I be femme

2 1

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; love, oksas!

1 0

WinKrypt
by Frank Willoughby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? I picked up a copy & there is no mention in the documentation which encryption algorithm it uses & what the key lengths are. FWIW, my impression is that the documentation seems to deliberately avoid mentioning the algorithm/key lengths. Hmmmm. (food for thought) I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses 40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use & secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try anyway). 8^) Please send marketing info to me directly at: frankw(a)in.net and **NOT** to the entire mailing list. (BTW, I mentioned WinKrypt & PCcrypo because they are the only two which are available at many computer stores as COTS s/w). TIA for your help. Best Regards, Frank

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

blanc wrote: > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > civilians > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > their chances and retaliate, etc. I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" (quote approximate). People who read this might argue that the "true power" is international now, and not confined to the USA. I say it doesn't matter which end you look at it from, the "true power" has been concentrating and centralizing itself for some years now, and you can use any nation-label you like.

1 0

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:30 AM 1/26/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> writes: >> The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the >> vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as >> someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not >> be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes >> out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come >> from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. >> >> It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens >> of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or >> "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of >> us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those >> who would take it away". > >However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should >not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians >in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. "I have a solution to that problem." Seriously! Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. And, dare I say it, fair. I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program
by bernard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Newsgroups: comp.security.misc > > * DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program > > * at; http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard > > Bernard, thanks for an interesting post. I am Cc-ing your message to > > Cypherpunks mailing list which is ostensibly dedicated to discussions > > of cryptography. > > > > As follows from info on your home page, you do use simple XOR to > > encrypt your data. It was not clear to me though, how do you generate > > the keys to encrypt the data. I am sure that many readers of cypherpunks > > mailing list will be interested, so please send a copy of your reply > > to cypherpunks(a)toad.com. You can enter a short key or import one with command [Get Key]. This is, you point any file, and the key will become the 30000 first characters of this file. You can get this file any where on your machine, the network, the internet, foppy,,,,, If you add (paste or type) or delete characters at the begining of the imported key, the reste will shift right, and this imported key become a new key. You can't remember a key of 30000 chr (so you have to store it) but you can remenber the the change you made (10 to 100 or more chr) and of course, don't store it. Thank you for your interest. DPT dos / DPT16 / DPT32 http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard

1 0

Re: David Kahn advocates GAK
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:03 AM 1/27/97 GMT, Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl wrote: >On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, John Savard <seward(a)netcom.ca> wrote: > >>This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >>forceful opinions > >>- against certain aspects of export controls, > >>- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >>demands on government revenues. > >I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. > >Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. > >>However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >>share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >>support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >>quarrel with such a position. > >>Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >>airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >>long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >>between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >>coordinate their activities on the move is another. It's odd that I can't seem to find the original message here. Contrary to the original claim, encryption over radio is generally legal. (One noted exception to this is ham radio...) Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution > to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in > the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any > leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public > that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. > And, dare I say it, fair. I have much respect for Saddam Hussein. I understand he's more admired by Iraqi people than, say, the kkklintons are by American people. Saddam even commands the respect of his Iranian enemies. > I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, > and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the > task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would > have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money > would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) I doubt that they would collect much among the Iraqis: both because Saddam is pretty popular, and because they don't have much cash, thanks to the sanctions. I doubt they'd collect billions or even millions in the Western countries. These were involuntary taxes. Do people really hate Saddam so much as to bet that he'll live and hope to lose their bets to an assassin? I doubt it. And you can't do the standard fundraising trick of collecting some funds, then using them to run media ads soliciting more funds. I suppose Kiwaiti and Saudi sheikhs might bet a few million. (I hate these guys - I'd like to bet on the continuing existence of a basket of sheikhs :-) > There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused > among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, > except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. > > Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. > > "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Was it really Bush's goal to topple Saddam's government and bring in a U.S.-friendly one that would need billions of dollars of aid? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > > they've just left things as is. > > > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). > > In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. I wholeheartedly agree. By now everyone's painfully aware that there are 3 mailing lists. It's not my responsibily (or Dale's) to encourage cypherpunks subscribers to do what I think is best for them - resubscribe to cypherpunks-unedited. Folks who choose to let Sandy choose what they read and don't read should be free to do that. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

(Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thought this might interest you guys. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: Audrie Krause <akrause(a)igc.apc.org> Subject: Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" To: iaj-futuremedia(a)igc.apc.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ACTION ALERT Please re-post where appropriate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dear Friends, On February 8, the first anniversary of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996, NetAction and the Center for Educational Priorities are launching a month-long Internet demonstration to call attention to the wide gap between the rhetoric and reality of this sweeping legislation. President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: MORE competition, MORE consumer choices, MORE widespread access to information technology. The Center for Educational Priorities and NetAction are spearheading this demonstration in an effort to pressure the Federal Communications Commission and other state and national regulatory agencies to ensure that the Act is implemented in a way that truly benefits the public. We invite you to join this effort by linking to the site at <http://www.cep.org/protest.html> for one month beginning on February 8. By linking to the protest site, you will be adding your voice to a united demand for true telecommunications reform. The site is currently under development. When completed, it will feature brief summaries of the impact the Act has had in its first year on telecommunications and technology policy, media ownership and content, and censorship, along with suggested actions to help ensure that implementation of the Act truly benefits the public. We are also creating extensive links to other organizations working on these issues, as well as to other sites with current information on censorship, mega-mergers, universal service, school hook-ups, and the v-chip. We welcome suggestions for additional links to add. Please let us know if you will participate in the demonstration by contacting NetAction, by email at akrause(a)igc.org, or by phone at 415-775-8674. Thanks! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

1 0

RE: overview.htm (fwd)
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >>>>>>>irrelevant(a)nowhere.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY OBJECT TO. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

2 1

Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > > From: Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> > > > > Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - > > The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of > 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. > I have the right to do whatever I want to anything that comes through my part > of the net, including censoring or editing any mail that comes through it, so > that it reflects a point of view consistent with mine, since I am the one > paying for it. > The net is a bunch of computers, > running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and > EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility > support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody > else is along for the ride. > Those who pay the money, like myself and others who have bought the right > to control the net, are justified in acting without outside interference > on anything that passes through our part of the net. > If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on > the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. > The net belongs to those with the money to control it, and people who do > not have money have no rights on the net. > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > understand what is going on. > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > anything that passes through his part of the net. > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage(a)ssz.com Jim, Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over the part of the net that I have paid for. I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose they choose. As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was set up to espouse. Toto

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jim bell wrote: > > "I have a solution to that problem." > > Seriously! > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: 1) Accept bets as combinations of a) Some amount of cybercash b) A string that identifies an event that should happen such as "domain X is mailbombed" c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always lose) d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in question. e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that string. 2) Store these bets in a database. 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, are "true". 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, cjames(a)cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be a nym. The fact of mailbombing would become apparent when CEC-SERVICES's MX DNS record is pulled off. The trusted party will send a phrase (standardized) "domain cec-services.com disabled" to the bot. The bot sends my money to the mailbomber through his nym address. I estimate that this bot would take about 2000 lines of perl. You may need to use some real database, like postgres or sybase. Use a nym for it. It will take a while for this bot to develop a reputation (remember, there is real money involved!). - Igor.

1 0

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The only `culture' Timothy `C' May possesses is that cultivated from his foreskin scrapings. o o o o o /~> <><><> <> Timothy `C' May o...(\ |||||| ||

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nurdane Oksas wrote: > California is know for very beautiful girls ... wrong. - Igor.

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. > would appreciate - Igor.

1 0

RE: overview.htm (fwd)
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >>>>>>>irrelevant(a)nowhere.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY OBJECT TO. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, approx. 3 years old.

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: [...] > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames(a)cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. > > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. That's my birthday... have a great week ahead everyone!

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination > bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: I think this would be a very good demo project, but mailbombing may not be the best choice... > 1) Accept bets as combinations of > a) Some amount of cybercash Be careful about violating Chaumian patents... How about using funny money in the prototype? Or, look at some of the micropayment schemes. > b) A string that identifies an event that should happen > such as "domain X is mailbombed" Not a good idea (see below). > c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always > lose) I think the date must always be specified, and the event must occur (or not occur) on or before that date. > d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send > all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in > question. > e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. > > Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as > a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that > string. I think we should think about the kinds of events that a 'bot can verify. > 2) Store these bets in a database. > > 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to > the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, > are "true". Why not start with a less destructive event... For example, "on or before <date> a Usenet article will appear in newsgroup X saying Y". That's something the 'bot can verify and anyone with access to dejanews and the like can confirm. Eliminating the need for a trusted human is always desirable. > 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets > and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. > If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between > them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Have you ever dealt with a bookie? I think there need to be two distinct operations: 1. A user can create a new kind of event. For a fixed fee F, one can enter a new event into the table of events that can be bet on. (In a more generalized system, the creator might also specify the third party that determines whether or not the event took place.) A human bookie decides which events can be bet on (based mostly on the tradition and supply/demand). Here we let users bet on anything they want as long as they're willing to may be bookiebot for keeping track of who bet how much $ that the event will or will not happen. In fact, when creating an event, the user must immediately bet an amount >$F and the house enters an opposing bet for $F (or slightly less). 2. A user can bet $B that an existing event will/will not happen. Bookiebot accepts the $B and promises to pay back an amount that's a function of $B and the current amounts bet so far on yes and no (or escrows the winning with a 3rd party). I'll let Jim et al figure out how to compute the odds when there are offsetting bets for the same event at two different times. E.g. E1:"Saddam Hussen will die before April 1" and E2:"ditto June 1"; if the first one occurs, then the second one occurs too. If a lot of money is bet on E1, it should somehow affect E2 odds too. Also the bookiebot should never lose money no matter what the outcome; all the winnings should come from the losers' bets. > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames(a)cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Here's an improved scenario. Say I pay the bot $10 to create the event "a homophobic article will appear in soc.motss by April 1". Then I bet $1000 that the event will NOT occur to skew the odds. > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. Someone looking to make a quick buck browses through the list of events and odds in the bookiebot and sees the very skewed odds for a homophobic article on soc.motss. He bets a small amount that the article will appear, so he gets really good odds. Then he posts an article that's recognized as the event, and collects a winning much larger than his bet. But if this doesn't happen, I get almost all of my $1000 investment back. In either event the bookiebot made a small profit for its owner. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > any recognition of this fact. > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors).

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ross Wright forwarded: > President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that > enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a > cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's > cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform > our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to > TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a > truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by > mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. Surprise, surprise! > This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision > makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: Yes it is. Nobody in politics gives up the ground they've gained. The fact that they were able to hose the citizens the first time around only reinforces their certainty that they can continue to do so. While people are still fighting the earlier, lost battles, they are preparing for the next one. I fully support anyone who wants to continue to fight past battles, present battles, and future battles, on the level of surface politics. But I think that their efforts are most effective if they add the tools and weapons developed by the underground to their battles. Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to have one tucked in your boot, as well. Toto

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. She just goes to show off right??? California is know for very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. only if you join us .. ;)

1 0

Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:57 -0800 > From: Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> > Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net > > Jim Choate wrote: > > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > > understand what is going on. > > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > > anything that passes through his part of the net. > > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > > > Jim Choate > > CyberTects > > ravage(a)ssz.com > > Jim, > Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over > the part of the net that I have paid for. > I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and > the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose > they choose. > As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more > closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was > set up to espouse. Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that party did not write them is a crime? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

2 1

Happy birthday to Oksas
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nurdane Oksas <oksas(a)asimov.montclair.edu> writes: > That's my birthday... Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday dear Oksas, Happy birthday to you! > have a great week ahead everyone! Have a good year. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Censorship
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Ross Wright" <rwright(a)adnetsol.com> writes: > On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > >>>>>>>irrelevant(a)nowhere.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". > > THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY > OBJECT TO. Comversely, some people are willing to give up their own freedom of speech so as to silence others whose views they don't like. They hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". But a forum can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a little bit pregnant". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> writes: > > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method > > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > > any recognition of this fact. > > > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study > > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > > If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, > that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* > in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). But they can't; and their efforts (ITAR, EAR, et al) are totally irrelevant and ineffective and not worth the time people spend fighting them. A prototype AP betting server, first limited to very innocent events (like usenet postings containing certain regexps) and using "funny money" for bets, would be a good demo. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > (quote approximate). Dale, When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no place in the discussion of crypto. It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they see one. While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order to control the citizens for their own personal profit. i.e. 'Pirates' Toto

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Rabid Wombat <wombat(a)mcfeely.bsfs.org> writes: > Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue > was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list > "population." The list "population" (readers) is a couple of thousand people, almost all of whom are lurkers. All posters are an extremely small segment of the readership. It's true on most Internet forums. > The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" > passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, > and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour > it however you chose) on the entire "population." > > "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the > "law of the jungle." V.I.Lenin said: "liberty is a recognized necessity". (I'll let Igor correct my translation is it's wrong.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Xerox is watching you
by Martin Minow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You'll find an article worth a visit to the dentist in the January 1997 issue of Popular Science. It tells a story from the 1960's cold war era. It seems that the only American who could get into the Soviet Embassy was the Xerox repairman. So the CIA and Xerox built a camera that took a picture of every copy that could be installed inside the 914 cabinet (where it would be invisble). Once a month, the repairman came by to do the ordinary cleaning and repair (those things broke down a lot). Part of the repair process exchanged the camera for a fresh load. The CIA could then read everything that was copied. The article suggests that other Xerox models had their own cameras. My back of the envelope (literally) computation suggests that one roll of 8-millimeter film would hold about 30,000 images. Martin Minow minow(a)apple.com

1 0

Assination
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> writes: > > > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > > > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > > > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > > > > If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, > > that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* > > in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). > > But they can't; and their efforts (ITAR, EAR, et al) are totally irrelevant > and ineffective and not worth the time people spend fighting them. > > A prototype AP betting server, first limited to very innocent events (like > usenet postings containing certain regexps) and using "funny money" for bets, > would be a good demo. I have a feeling that you are missing the point. The point of AP is not to bet on whether a certain event will occur or not. The point is that only a person who really makes it happen (assassinates someone) will know enough to get the money. All other betters who do NOT intend to bring the event about will expect to lose money, because they will not be able to make a sufficiently good prediction. It is not a bookie system, it is a collective anonymous hire-a-hitman scheme. Yuor suggestion about trying a demo about homophobic posts is good, BUT what needs to be added to make it a good demo is a danger for the poster to lose an account. I.e., the requirement to such a homophobic post should be that 1) it should be PGP signed by a real person and 2) it should have a correct return address. Any fool can send an anonymous message, and that would have no educational value and no value for the AP demo. - Igor.

1 0