December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: a desperate plea
by plaz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- You know Mr. Detweiler, I've been trying real hard to stay out of this one, for three reasons: A: I think you've made positive contributions to the list. B: Here on cypherpunks we try NOT to argue ideologies, (but this breaks down, unfortunately, when a person such as yourself tries to impose his own ideology on the rest of us). C: Your style often makes it difficult for me to think rationally for some time after reading them, and I hate writing irrational letters. But I absolutely must request that you clarify this quote: >most of all, do not pollute the Constitution with your lies: > >>The freedom to communicate in any way whatsoever, including >>"pseudospoofing", is a Constitutional guarantee and part of the >>foundation of this society. > >the Constitution specifically prohibits `high treason'. Or are we now >against the Constitution? It's hard to keep track lately. I see no other interpretation than, "Pseudospoofing is high treason against the government of the United States of America." Did you honestly mean this?!?!?!?!?!?! I mean the rest of the stuff (Ted Bundy similies and the like) is fairly standard "worst case scenario" justifying government abridgement ordinary peoples rights and privacies (which as you might suspect, I don't buy for a second). But pseudo-spoofing as high treason, in a constitutional sense? Come on now, you must have not typed what you meant. After all, being against the constitution ITSELF isn't even high-treason. PS - Sorry, to all the Detweiler weary cypherpunks, but I couldn't resist. I tried, but I couldn't. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLMxa7Nr1VGqG9otVAQHQSwQAxZSWo08/RGfOATyRPR6gucTRTaQS71Xn xxBehVsLJTPUreJ4pz1ScJZPmCBy473U0uogJWvWz8uGk9h8tV10u6mMcut1Gmao PTIIblRQNMmcbUaDRUoKcYhK2zGxhtcnuvdIKFS1m5imSQ9EVAp5/diXoual5HDb FVfwQhexZ14= =UjnU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.3 mQCPAix3/dIAAAEEAOEoi3n/Zfq4UtBHzCp+maxnBsLCf7ggxnwg567JQIHFv2wH 9M/VKKlUstWFuKdDcf3qlxP/B803U25ulFZ3G2Uvhe1E4kRkO0DgfHXUC0AdNHnO 1IH7mS8YpqzeDTChCUqCk2iz5GCt+EpOK5rUTDGkYRGyaOBhgtr1VGqG9otVABEB AAG0HEdlb2ZmIERhbGUgPHBsYXpAbmV0Y29tLmNvbT4= =VP4j -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- _______________________________________________________________________ Geoff Dale -- insert standard disclaimers here -- plaz(a)netcom.com "We are the shock troops of reality." - Voice of the Friends (Wild Palms)

1 0

a desperate plea
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

L.>the Constitution specifically prohibits `high treason'. Or are we now L.>against the Constitution? It's hard to keep track lately. Little hint for you traitors out there. Only citizens can be convicted of treason. If you renounce your citizenship prior to your treasonous acts, you're home free. L.>The cypherpunk `agenda' has become so closely indistinguishable with L.>raw criminality and evil it horrifies me. [Ted Bundy, etc.] People whose identities are known have murdered more people than people whose identities are unknown. Janet Reno murdered many more people than Ted. Lot of good arguments against democracy in this post. We can use the moral support. Duncan Frissell --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

1 0

CPSR NII Paper
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com B> COMPUTER SCIENTISTS RAISE SOCIAL AND DESIGN CONCERNS B> ABOUT THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY B>many dangers on the horizon B>small number of companies dominate the market B>companies control the programming B>pricing structures do not cover universal service B>privacy isn't protected B>not designed to allow everyone to communicate freely B>"To achieve that vision, however, the government must play a major role B>in the design, development, and regulation of the network." Commies -- Ya gotta love 'em. Are there any "designs" for the NII that don't include telephones, email, and internetworking connections? Given those, the rest is irrelevent. Anyone who wants to can build their own virtual networks no matter what the "service providers" do. Are these people stupid or just power mad? Networking is and will continue to be nearly free. Who has better network connections with "universal access" Europeans or Amricans? Duncan Frissell "Skim the Cream" "Skim the Cream" "Skim the Cream" -- the next commie that says that to me is sure going to get his cream skimmed. --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

1 0

Re: an open offer
by lefty＠apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"S. Boxx" tries to scare us by writing: > >(To the insiders: it will be quite awhile before we sort everything out >and file charges, so be patient.) Perhaps as long as several millenia, eh? -- Lefty (lefty(a)apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.

1 0

Join kotze1@batis.bis.und.ac.za
by Christopher Kotze 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, please Add me Chris

1 0

No subject
by an45548＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Any other cypherpunks going to the ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security next week? If so, is there any interest in getting a BOF together? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

1 0

Another Tussle with a Tentacle
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Robert J. Woodhead" <trebor(a)foretune.co.jp> >I agree with him that this is an area of great potential concern. While >I am not opposed to the principle of maintaining multiple identities on >the net, the rule of netiquette should be that "multiple identities should >_NEVER_ intersect." what, pray tell, do you define as *intersection*? the very existence of the two pseudonyms on the same Cyberspace can be considered an `intersection'. >So I support "L. Detweiler"s right to be "Jim," but they ought never to >support each other. His scenario is chillingly _possible_. the scenario is chillingly *true*. And I do not support it. I condemn it. >At the same time, I think such episodes will be rare. The amount of >effort needed to maintain multiple intersecting identities is quite high, >and in most cases would be "uneconomic." However, in some cases, for >some people, the effort might be worth it, so some thought ought to >be placed into ways to detect or discourage it. again, more Medusa-cypherpunk brainwashing. `don't worry about this. it's not a big deal. no one would be evil enough to do this. heaven forbid, don't do anything rash like invent robust identity mechanisms that would *prevent* me from continuing to exploit this weakness in the system and inherent trust of others.' >Which brings up the question: how can we, in the era of digital pseudonyms >determine that two pseudos are, or are not, the same person? One possible >method would be careful automated analysis of the language used by >the participants in a net discussion. hah, hah! society has already evolved many other mechanisms that have worked for centuries, and `you' promote obscure black magic. the problem is, all that stuff is just to damn mundane and oppressive. it's equivalent to Retinal Scans and a Camera on Every Corner. cypherpunks, you have no idea how much you are being brainwashed. a true Thought Crime if there ever was one. wipe wipe, slosh slosh, scrub scrub. look! sparkling white! now, to pour in the blackness...

2 1

Some possible projects/topics for CypherPunks
by remail＠tamsun.tamu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here's some topics that I've been wanting to bring up with the CypherPunks. I figured it'd be best to just drop one email/post rather than 4. 1. HARDWARE: What about building our own machines? This is the Vinge-ian crypto-anarchy theme ultimately. We should be able to produce our own technology, and not depend on the merchantile/government-mandated economic system/monopolies. I see this as being very important to the oceania/autopia/technomad ideas and projects of creating ocean-going free societies. Or is anyone interested in starting a parallel list of sorts for the hardware-punks? 'ware-punks? :-) or perhaps an even better name would be The Homebrew Computer Club^2. 2. STEGENOGRAPHY: Using the genome project data listings (bionet.molbio.genbank.updates) as a stegenographic source to hide encrypted info in. Similar to the alt.w.a.s.t.e NG, but more public. Of course, it'd be bad if your ecrypted data got credited with curing/causing a genetic disease.... => 3. PUNK-NET: (see HARDWARE above) 4. POLITICS/ANONYMITY: I may have missed this, but has anyone discussed Gibson's "The Republic of Desire" idea of having a network based guerilla organization? Not that we need to be guerilla's yet, but... I think the guerilla cell organization would probably lend itself to using the DC-net protocols, and developing webs-of-trust organizations. Thoughts, comments, etc? sweetly, Ducoyuh Gemugez Tokuzuham Neshotsu

1 0

Re: a desperate plea
by George A. Gleason 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ray, your little rant about Detweiler, with those "I'm going to kill you" things, is really getting on my nerves as well. "wimp" and so on are ad-hominems of the worst kind; in Berkeley we'd take that as a homophobic slur similar to saying, "typical Jewish attitude" or some such. Please stop clogging the mailing list with this bullshit, like NOW. If you have rational points to make in a spirit of good will, please do so. If all you have to say is along the lines of your last posting, then I'd urge you to get the hell off this list, and find somewhere else to play dumb games. -gg

1 0

Re: No subject
by smb＠research.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Any other cypherpunks going to the ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security next week? If so, is there any interest in getting a BOF together? I'll be there -- I'm presenting a paper. But I don't know about BOFs with a bunch of folks wearing masks... --Steve Bellovin

1 0