December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Dale: What a laff!
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 18:42:11 -0800 From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> Dale sagely wrote: :Wine and cheese are the key. You hit that one on the head. I tried :those Mensa parties in Beverly Hills a few times. Oh what a kidder this Dale is. At Mensa party no less!! Whatta farce! Still love you fella.

1 0

(no subject)
by zac 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

UNSUBCRIBE CYPHERPUNKS lspeiel(a)lightspeed.net

1 0

Spam, Spam, Digital Postage, and Spam
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

MagicMoney
by hjk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I finally got a copy of MagicMoney (from ftp://utopia.hacktic.nl). It is just the code (compiling without error), but there is no README or documentation at all.Can someone give me a hint,what to do with this package? Is there a documentation somesite? BTW utopia is the site,you can get all the export restricted stuff outside the US. Heinz-Juergen Keller email: hjk(a)ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de

1 0

alt.cypherpunks.* groups make primenet.com
by Carol Anne Cypherpunk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Primenet.com has picked up the alt.cypherpunk feed. And, there was spam (yum, yum) on it already. Carol Anne Cypherpunk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Uncensored from heavily.censored.org iQCVAwUBMwbyForpjEWs1wBlAQEOYQP/bU7uRm5YIMgSkH9QoRLm1UzUCcJ8kxoY okFp6cshYvn5zZf4Kp8z9eWh67ox8yN/Lsp8DzFRkS9xrmobX/5givMut304rN5+ p213AzjaEOhfaat5w4AWUPU1xAIkTnI0jqN4vslKQ0Y77fyrzRgwtCCvsw2VzCfv hPSSApmGuys= =mlts -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Member Internet Society - Certified BETSI Programmer - Webmistress *********************************************************************** Carol Anne Braddock (cab8) carolann(a)censored.org 206.42.112.96 My Homepage The Cyberdoc ***********************************************************************

1 0

Re:
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > PS. His sexist comments are rubbish too. I usually like his crypto posts, > > however, as long as they are technical rather than legal... > > Paul's sexist comments are very interesting - I hope to find more time to > comment on them too. I don't know if they have the same kind of "affirmative > action" in the U.K. that they have in the U.S. - here if you find a woman > in the position of authority, there's a good chance that she was promoted > ahead of more qualified men to meet some quota, and is therefore incompetent. We do not have such laws as far as I`m aware (I try to know as little as possible about law and finance/econimics as I find them intensely boring, even if they are necessary knowledge as a proponent of freedom of action and speech) but in my experience a number of employers promote women ahead of men in order to avoid costly industrial tribunals brought for discrimination. I also believe for the same reasons a lot of known homosexuals, blacks, <insert minority group of choice here> are promoted ahead of more qualified white, straight males. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

(no subject)
by zac 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

UNSUBCRIBE CYPHERPUNKS lspeiel(a)lightspeed.net

1 0

Spam, Spam, Digital Postage, and Spam
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: More on digital postage
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:09 AM -0500 2/16/97, Cynthia H. Brown wrote: >Here in Canada, the CRTC (Canadian Radio & Telecomms Commission) put >out rules limiting the time of day, etc. for phone spam (voice or >fax). Does anyone out there have the specifics of the CRTC regs? "Spam" has rapidly become one of those overused, overloaded, meaningless words. Everything bad on the Net these days is labelled "spam." For the phone example in Canada, just what is "spam"? -- Is it the semi-traditional definition of "spam," i.e., a phone call made to thousands of sites? (At the same time? Sequentially? How?) -- Is it a robo-dialer, with no human at the other end? -- Or is it merely an "unwanted phone call"? As I see it, the danger of criminalizing "unwanted phone calls" is obvious. (Though obviously the courts and prisons are not about to be filled up with people who committed the heinous crime of making an unrequested phone call.) The danger of all "junk mail" and "junk phone call" laws is that they give power to the government to decide on what is junk and what is not. Not something we should support. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: More on digital postage
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timothy C. May writes: > "Spam" has rapidly become one of those overused, overloaded, > meaningless words. Everything bad on the Net these days is labelled > "spam." The term "spam" has its origins in the well-known Monty Python Viking sketch, where a diner has breakfast menu offerings such as Spam, spam, spam, spam, eggs, and spam. This sequence of one repeated thing, with an occasional something else, reminds us of how our news spool looks after spam has happened. > For the phone example in Canada, just what is "spam"? > -- Is it the semi-traditional definition of "spam," i.e., a phone call made > to thousands of sites? (At the same time? Sequentially? How?) > -- Is it a robo-dialer, with no human at the other end? Calling one person a thousand times is certainly spam. Calling a thousand different people is probably "Excessive Multiple Calling", or some such acronym. > -- Or is it merely an "unwanted phone call"? This is definitely not spam. > As I see it, the danger of criminalizing "unwanted phone calls" is obvious. > (Though obviously the courts and prisons are not about to be filled up with > people who committed the heinous crime of making an unrequested phone call.) If someone is calling me every day, and I ask them nicely to stop, continued calling should be illegal harrassment. If I've never heard from them before, then a couple unwanted calls aren't a big deal. The same principle should apply if someone decides they have a Constitutional right to bang on my front door at 6 am each and every morning. > The danger of all "junk mail" and "junk phone call" laws is that they give > power to the government to decide on what is junk and what is not. > Not something we should support. I wouldn't mind laws against "repeated unwanted communication." That way I decide what is and is not junk, and the perpetrator is on notice that further waste of my time, fax paper, phone line, or mailbox space will not be viewed benevolently. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0