December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Multiple Digital Personnas
by remail＠tamsun.tamu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gee LD some of us participate in Multiple Digital Personnas by choice: ... some of these are composite consisting of several people ... some of theses are individual and multiple by one person ... what do you find so wrong with it... Sam Hill( An intentional Composite Personna )

1 0

Q
by thomas.hughes＠chrysalis.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--> Note: Forwarded (from: DFW) Originally from Bryny (1:124/4109.0) Original dated: Oct 23 '93, 18:36 The EPCA applies to Common Carriers. Thus it applies to Compuserve, MCI Mail, etc. It does not apply to bulletin boards unless they issue mail contracts. ----8<---- what are the actual legal requirements for claiming status as a Common Carrier?? (other than being in the USA ...) signed written agreements? (this is the best "place" i could think of to ask this question...) <thomas.hughes(a)chrysalis.org>

2 1

Re: ADMIN: proposed new policy on the mailing list
by pierre＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP UNSIGNED MESSAGE----- I'll vote yes to the amended policy proposal > "make something that looks like a signature, or else". While I tend to agree with the general argument presented in favor, I'll also agree that there are several problems with it: - Yes, it's too easy to circumvent the policy by cutting and pasting something that looks like a signature (more or less :-) - Even then, the 6 hour delay is not that much trouble when you are actually building a discussion, and not flaming... So it would be more like "if you want to flame, you better spoof"... hmmm :-( So, all in all, there is not that much incentive added to using signatures. I think any is better than even less, so I'll still vote "yes"... at least as an experiment... But here are some more ideas: 1) have the mailing list relay insert disclaimers according to what it recognized: > remailer: This message wholly un-authenticated. The identity info > presented in this message could have been faked by a 6 year old. > Use digital signatures. or, > remailer: This message digitally signed. The pseudonymous identity > used may have no relation with any Real Life Person. or, > remailer: This message digitally signed. Signature checked to match > previous uses on this list by this pseudonym. or, > remailer: This message's digital signature does not match previous > uses on this list by this pseudonym. This will be -version 2- of this > pseudonym. 2) Campaign so that users of this list include "security disclaimers" whenever they post or email on the net. That could be a sig or a header line, such as "The identity info in this post could have been forged by a six year old. Do not trust it. Use digital signatures." 3) To make it more obvious that the From: field can say just about anything, use the "National Enquirer" headline generator that was posted on the net to replace the incoming header: >From: Diform Flying Saucer Throws Giant Tomato on the Pope Maybe then, people will take that header less seriously... Pierre (who?) pierre(a)shell.portal.com -----BEGIN PGP UNSIGNATURE----- Version: 2.4 iQBFThIsMayHAVEBEEnarealsiGNatUre, IFi onlYHaDEvERYthiNginPlace toCheCKINcOmINGSigsTOO. :-) =Bof -----END PGP UNSIGNATURE-----

1 0

New Project: Lets ALL create Multiple Digital Personalities
by remail＠tamsun.tamu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In Honor of LD I/We propose we execute Operation MEDUSA. Since PseudoNyms bother LD so much, I/We propose that all begin to use them. Sam

2 1

Pseudonyms... and LD
by remailer＠dis.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous Digital Kiosks With all the talk of reputations, digital cash, anonymous remailers/posters/DC nets, Data havens Grey Markets one quickly comes to the the conclusion that the future is here now. Sufficient protective technology is currently available to create a "greymarket" anonymous digital kiosk. This ADK could be located literally anyplace with net-connections in real space, and using Public Key Encryption Technology and Cypherpunks Remailers as well as newly emergent Digital Cash systems with say a "friendly" Lichenstein Account be able to vend ANY kind of service and collect payments for same regardless of the prevailing laws in the real space location of the ADK. This indeed is what is most likely frightens the goverment, code from projects like DOD/SBIR A90-217 "Electronic Countermeasure: Computer Virus" and other more "black" projects could be spirited out of projects and sold to possible clients with relatively little fear of reprisal. Solicitation for grey market information and responses to same are relatively safe and untraceable making current civil intrusion by the state impossible in the case of net.citizens choosing to employ this technology. And composite entities and persona will become popular such as this one... Sam Hill is actually several people... :)(sorry about that LD) Sam

1 0

Re: A favor re Detweiler
by dmandl＠lehman.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: hfinney(a)shell.portal.com (Hal Finney) > > I'd like to expend some "reputation capital" here and ask people for a > favor. I am worried about Larry Detweiler's obvious mental anguish. We > tend to forget that we are dealing with real people on the net, flesh > and blood human beings. Larry is obviously going through genuine > difficulties here. As a member of our virtual community, I ask that we > show him some compassion and consideration. I agree. I was just about to post a message saying the same thing. At this point, some of the anti-L.D. posts are becoming downright cruel, and in my eyes amount to kicking a man when he's down. Why don't you give it (and him) a little rest? --Dave.

1 0

Thanks for the exposure
by jamie＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Still posting my phone number, asshole? Are you really trying to pick a fight? Do you truly want to see how I can squash a bug like thee? Better start looking over your shoulder. Don't forget, gutless wonder, I CONTROL YOU. You will never forget me. You can't touch a keyboard without thinking of me. I control you. And always will. You no longer have any independent thought. I lead my life of wonder; filled with friends and play. You are insignificant, and don't cross my mind until someone tells me of your posts. But you have no choice but to sit and think of me. I control you. Everytime you see the word "cypherpunks" you'll know I control you. And I always will. Everytime you hear a modem or see an ethernet cable, you'll know I control you. Soon, you'll be able to think of nothing but me, and then the control will be complete. Get a life, asshole. ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Re: Subliminal Channels
by George A. Gleason 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One last point on subliminal advertising... (yeah this is a digress but anyway)... Subliminal stimuli can be considered an induction procedure for an individual behavior change. Nondrug inductions of every kind (i.e. meditation, hypnosis, lucid dream techniques, concentration and memory techniques, progressive relaxation, biofeedback training, etc....) produce variable results on a population sample; typically the results fall along a normal curve wherein some people are strongly affected, some are moderately affected, and some are affected very little if at all. The relevance to advertising is, if a technique can reach perhaps 5% of your readership and then cause 5% of those to alter their behavior favorably toward your product, you've got a quarter of a percent of the market who at least try your product once. In the world of mass marketing, that small number adds up. If you were an ad executive, would you voluntarily give up a tool that can add market share...? Also, the heaviest users of certain categories of products, notably alcohol, are also people who are notoriously suggestible, in the sense that they are already over-reacting to their environment and are using large amounts of alcohol in part to self-medicate against that. Heavy users of any product are usually seeking to fulfill some psychological need, a secondary need which can be manipulated far more easily than can the simpler needs of the average consumers. This increases the effectiveness of any psychologically-loaded selling technique. I believe Key goes overboard in his own writings, but on the other hand I've discovered so many examples of this kind of thing that there's no denying it's going on. Some of these are so blatant I can show the picture to an untrained observer and say "what do you think of this?" and s/he immediately spots the embedded item. On the other hand, these days there are other techniques, some far less subtle; for instance, the ads (particularly billboards) for beverages which show them spurting ejaculatorily from very phallic bottles... advertisers use anything which works, and that leaves a whole lot to choose from. anyway, back to our regular channel... -gg

1 0

Re: Subliminal Channels
by George A. Gleason 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Okay, one last post from me on this subject.... An academic text was published in the late 70s or early 80s on this, the title was _Subliminal Stimulation_ if I remember correctly. Most decent university psych libraries should have a copy. I don't recall the author or editor's name, though I did read it while an undergrad. The gist of it was that there *is* an effect but it's *fairly small* in terms of the subject population. As I said before, any induction procedure will work for some segment of the population, so it's not surprising. I have to put myself in the middle on this arguement. On one hand I think Key went overboard; it would seem that what happened was he spent his professional life doing advertising and then someone pointed out something that was going on, and he over-reacted in the manner of anyone who suddenly finds he's unwittingly been violating his own morals. I would suggest that some of the stuff he's trying to point to is valid, but a lot of it is improbable to the point where I think a clinically trained observer might see signs of paranoia. Now on the other hand, I've found too many really blatant examples of psychologically devious advertising techniques to write this stuff off entirely. The point isn't whether Key is a great whistle-blower or a raving loonie; it isn't even whether there are forests of hidden genitals growing in ad illustrations... the point is whether the effect of saturation in psychologically-loaded high-production media aimed toward promoting passive consumerism is healthy for a culture or for the free will and dignity of its members. And I would say it certainly is not. -gg

1 0

TRAITORS to the CAUSE
by dinkelacker＠cypherpunks.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The latest LD rant talks about the great cypherpunk cause, to which he has lent his time, and how it has been "contaminated", "tainted", and "poisoned" by EVIL TREACHEROUS individuals on this group. These individuals have misrepresented "basic cypherpunk goals" Finally, he demands reparation for his "mental anguish" from Tim May to be posted to talk.politics.crypto. I have a sudden urge to say "Get a Life" for some reason. I think Detweiler was operating under some kind of delusion when he joined this list which is responsible for his anguish. From my analysis, it seems LD was under the impression that he was joining some great social activist movement similar to all the other fringe groups out there, and that the cypherpunks had some noble cause of liberation/crypto-ethics. However, when I first subscribed to the list (roughly a few weeks after it was set up), I was told the purpose of this group was to simply discuss crypto, implications of it, and coordination of crypto-projects like remailers, digicash systems, pgp, etc. Could it be that Lance is looking for ethics on a mailing list whose motto is "cypherpunks write code" (with no limitations on what kind of code that will be, including even pseudospoofing software) [ All of LD's points are technically incorrect anyway because crypto can be used for both authenication and privacy. (e.g. digital signatures being "accoutable" legally to the authority which certified/signed them. Contrary to his rants, digi-sig nyms can be as tracable as real signatures, even more so depending on how strict you are on your trust model)] We've been accused of being conspirators, evil traitors, exploiters, abusers, and who knows what else, and I'm getting annoyed by it. So I'm making a proposal. Let's implement Detweiler's philosophy of having everyone accountable. Using the Extropian's list software, this list could prevent anyone who isn't voice validated from posting to the list. And as a first step to improving S/N ratio, I recommend we use the list software's filtering features to outright censor Detweiler, and any other idiot ranters (plus all anonymous posters) from the list. I also recommend a list justice code similar to the Extropian's list where anyone can be PUNISHED for not obeying the Great and Holy Cypherpunk's cause. As a requirement of the NEW ORDER (under the new software), all new subscribers will be required to take a pledge of denouncing pseudospoofing in talk.politics.crypto before their posting priveleges are turned on. Sam Will The Cypherpunks Pledge: "I hereby proclaim that pseudospoofers are the most vile and disgusting criminals on the face of the earth. As a cypherpunk, I pledge to fight for a world where children go to sleep at night secure in the knowledge that anyone they meet will be who they claim they are."

1 0