December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Dale Thorn 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Daniel Harter wrote: > ichudov(a)algebra.com wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. > To treat various Venerial Diseases whose standard treatments are > antibiotics. > > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > > has that been proven? > What does seem to have credence is that the use of antibiotics breeds > resistant strains of bacteria, which may or may not be contagious. > A book that poses an opposing viewpoint to the current AIDS epidemic > is _The AIDS War_ by John Lauritsen (1993, Asklepios, New York, ISBN > 0-943742-08-0). It is written from a Gay man's perspective dissenting > from the current HIV-AIDS theory. Another book he wrote is _Poison by > Prescription: The AZT Story_. Also search on Peter H. Duesberg for > primary sources in various Journals. According to my AIDS database, a possible reason for the "hotly debated" theories of Duesberg is that because of the suspicion falling on the govt. and the WHO in regard to creating the HIV virus, the govt. was happy to have Duesberg and ilk deflecting a lot of that criticism. This doesn't make Duesberg wrong by implication, but there were suggestions of disinformation....

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

> It is obvious to me that those who are waving the bloody flag of > "censorship" are doing so for either of two reasons. The ones to > whom I am the most sympathetic are those who simply do not have > a clear and coherent understanding of rights in an anarchistic, > volunteeristic society. You need have no sympathy. Those members of this list see it as it is, a list that was supposed to be, in some small way, a "model" of an anarchistic discussion forum for the subject of cryptography, either technically (later split into coderpunks) or at a sociopolitical level. That was the intended direction of the list, it has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. > The ones for whom I have no sympathy are those whose obvious > goal is disruption of the Cypherpunks list and who are hiding > behind a phoney interpretation of "free speech." You may make as many excuses as you like, the bottom line is you have become what you profess to hate most, a censor. If having the right to post freely on a list that was supposed to operate as a free and open anarchic forum is not a valid interpretation of free speech I cannot envisage any more elegant example. > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > maintain. If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to the list" message: We do not seek to prevent other people from speaking about their experiences or their opinions. Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. For "Reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will" read "content based censorship". > If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves into their own little world. "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" 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"

7 14

Moderated list is missing headers
by Lou Poppler 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this basic tool for evaluating a message's source. <preemptive remarks> I know I could get these from the unmoderated list -- but I prefer the moderated version so far, and think they should be here also. I know PGP signatures are a better way of authenticating a message. </preemptive remarks> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by mail.msen.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA02344 for <lwp(a)mail.msen.com>; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:58:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA24082; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199701271441.GAA24082(a)toad.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 04:33:05 -0800 From: Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> To: Jim Choate <ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com> Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Fantasy quotes & libel Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk [ message body irrelevant ]

2 1

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Brian D Williams 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> writes: > There has been great concern raised among those in the medical >profession regarding the end-effects of their wholesale >prescribing of anitbiotics for colds, aches and pains, etc., >leading to the development of new strains of virus which are >immune to the older antibiotics. This leads to development of >stronger (misused) antibiotics, which then leads to stronger >strains of virus. > There have been a number of studies which point to the fact that >the human immune system is now caught in a battle between >increasingly potent virus and antibiotics and is losing its >capacity to fightits 'natural' enemies. Antibiotics are for fighting bacterial infections. Antibiotics have no effect on viruses at all. However you are accurate in that the abuse of antibiotics for things like colds (a virus, no effect) has led us to a very dangerous situation. (antibiotic resistant bacteria) I suggest the book "The Coming Plague" who's authors name escapes me at the moment, if you, or anyone else is interested. Brian Cypherpunk Extropian " You can lead a horse to water, but you can't faucet."

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

> From: paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk > To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:12:05 +0000 > Subject: Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Priority: normal Can anyone tell me if my previous message with the above headers (end of message quoted in below) was sent to the censored list or to cypherpunks-flames? - I subscribe to the unmoderated version of the list so do not get to see what goes where.... > 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. > > 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). 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

Privacy/info site
by camcc＠abraxis.com 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

I stumbled upon this site and have not had an opportunity to visit it in toto (certainly no pun intended, Mr. Toto). Seems to have a wealth of info and links for the military/security oriented. http://hrvati.cronet.com/mprofaca/mcsusa2.html Alec

1 0

Posting percentages
by Peterson 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Dr. Dimitri Vulus KOTM wrote: 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. Just because us "lurkers" don't post, doesn't mean that we aren't taking sides, agreeing, disagreeing, or otherwise. Small portions of the population doesn't mean that the rest of us have no comment, just not the will to make the post.

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Brian D Williams 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> writes: > There has been great concern raised among those in the medical >profession regarding the end-effects of their wholesale >prescribing of anitbiotics for colds, aches and pains, etc., >leading to the development of new strains of virus which are >immune to the older antibiotics. This leads to development of >stronger (misused) antibiotics, which then leads to stronger >strains of virus. > There have been a number of studies which point to the fact that >the human immune system is now caught in a battle between >increasingly potent virus and antibiotics and is losing its >capacity to fightits 'natural' enemies. Antibiotics are for fighting bacterial infections. Antibiotics have no effect on viruses at all. However you are accurate in that the abuse of antibiotics for things like colds (a virus, no effect) has led us to a very dangerous situation. (antibiotic resistant bacteria) I suggest the book "The Coming Plague" who's authors name escapes me at the moment, if you, or anyone else is interested. Brian Cypherpunk Extropian " You can lead a horse to water, but you can't faucet."

1 0

Moderated list is missing headers
by Lou Poppler 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this basic tool for evaluating a message's source. <preemptive remarks> I know I could get these from the unmoderated list -- but I prefer the moderated version so far, and think they should be here also. I know PGP signatures are a better way of authenticating a message. </preemptive remarks> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by mail.msen.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA02344 for <lwp(a)mail.msen.com>; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:58:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA24082; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199701271441.GAA24082(a)toad.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 04:33:05 -0800 From: Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> To: Jim Choate <ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com> Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Fantasy quotes & libel Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk [ message body irrelevant ]

2 1

Re: Censorship
by Ross Wright 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

On or About 26 Jan 97 at 22:28, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "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. Who could be that stupid? Why would they even want to give up an inch of their freedoms? >They > hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". A weak hope at best. Once you start censoring it becomes a "Slippery Slope". > But a forum > can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a > little bit pregnant". You got that right! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

1 0