December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Safe and fun environment?
by Matthew B. Landry 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Still, it might make sense for someone from this list to give them some >help on the crypto aspects. This could be a safe and fun environment >in which people could be introduced to crypto, and it could even expand Unless this list undergoes some VERY radical changes, it will never be a "safe and fun environment" to introduce new people to anything. At the moment, in order to get anything out of it, one has to devote large quantities of queue space and time to the subscription, and sift through the flames and other noise to locate the rare bit of truly valuable info. There are very few people on this list who routinely post things worth reading, and many who _never_ post things worth reading, and seem to be only around for the flame wars. And god forbid that a newcomer should ask a QUESTION! Dear lord no. That newcomer will be flamed so totally that no burn unit around will be able to save them. Most of those that are persistent or resiliant enough to survive what this list can often put people through may or may not decide to stay. I would imagine that such negative experiences would turn a lot of people off to the whole idea of crypto-privacy. If I hadn't already been committed to privacy when I joined the list, I would have immediately unsubscribed, called Fort Meade, and asked what I could do to help. The vast majority of people who post on this list and respond to other people's posts are obnoxious idiots who are willing to flame at the slightest provocation, and will do so until the person they attack backs down or simply gives up. No one on this list is entirely to blame, nor is anyone entirely blameless for this. Several of the top figures on the list (TC May and Eric Hughes to name two) have recently adopted an inappropriately elitist attitude toward the direction of the list, and the movement. No one can stop Eric from running the _list_ however he wants, but the _movement_ belongs to all of us, thank you. Even though I respect the crypto-political opinions that they express a great deal, I think that they and their supporters have taken this too far. And worse, they have not taken a firm stand against the kind of flame war that is continually erupting over individual posts on the list. For the leaders to sit back and watch this go on is simply not the appropriate way to handle things. Until we fix the serious problems in this list, it will never be an appropriate environment for newcomers to learn about crypto-privacy, just a training ground for flame-throwers. Dare I suggest (why not? I'm already burning to a crisp, how much worse could it get?) that we create a moderated newsgroup that would gateway the substantive traffic from this list into a more accessible forum (but NOT the other way around). In that manner, we could provide a place for newcomers to learn about cryptography and the movement, without forcing them to sift through mountains of flame wars. Questions could be referred to qualified personnel, instead of going to the list where they act like little flame magnets. This newsgroup would not replace the list, nor would it be more than marginally connected (because of the selected cross-postings), but it would provide the kind of environment that the list does not or cannot provide. Go ahead and dump flames in my mailbox. I've long since gotten used to it. I'm not going to back down until someone convinces me that a hospitable environment with informative traffic and a high s/n ratio is a bad idea. Or, you can save bandwidth and send the flames to /dev/null, because that's where anything that doesn't make sense will go. Rational comments are welcome, though. Oh, and for those of you that are tired of seeing me post, you can rest assured that you will never see it again. Contributing to this list has brought nothing but trouble to my life, and I have better things to do with my time than wade through piles of flamage in my personal mail box. -- Matthew B. Landry ml7694a(a)american.edu (Finally!) mbl(a)ml7694a.leonard.american.edu

2 1

Re: Safe and fun environment?
by tcmay 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Matthew, I think you're taking the stuff here too personally. Not all the feedback to you has been negative--I recall congratulating you on a nice political piece. But you have raised issues about elitism and unwillingness to teach newcomers that others have raised. And you ought to see some of the abusive e-mail I get! Whew! Whenever I disagree with some of the paranoids and ranters, I am called a traitor, a hypocrite, a lackey of Eric Hughes, a member of the "Clique," and on and on. Let me comment on a few of your points: > a "safe and fun environment" to introduce new people to anything. At the > moment, in order to get anything out of it, one has to devote large quantities > of queue space and time to the subscription, and sift through the flames and > other noise to locate the rare bit of truly valuable info. There are very few > people on this list who routinely post things worth reading, and many who > _never_ post things worth reading, and seem to be only around for the flame > wars. I'm sorry to hear you're getting so little new stuff here. Many of us have spent many hour typing in (or scanning and OCRing, in my case) papers and articles, from Chaum's "Dining Cryptographers" paper (every bloody word of it!) to Shamir's "How to Share a Secret" to scads of shorter articles and whatnot. And the debate ranges from random number generators to Perl scripts and TCL to digital money to ECPA to .... well, to about 20 major topics, by my estimate. > And god forbid that a newcomer should ask a QUESTION! Dear lord no. > That newcomer will be flamed so totally that no burn unit around will be able > to save them. This is simply not true. I have answered--when I could--the questions of many people over the past 12 months. And I've repeatedly posted reading lists, pointers to the Glossary at the soda site, and so on. It is true that I sometimes am exasperated by people who have clearly not been reading the list who ask "Can anyone tell me about digital money?" when the topic has just been discussed! (A FAQ would be nice. I was about to agree to do it a year ago, when ...comments on status of the FAQ elided to reduce flamage and angry feelings.... Fortunately, there are many other newsgroups that beginners can read ot learn crypto....Cypherpunks was not set up to compete with sci.crypt and all the other sources. > The vast majority of people who post on this list and respond to other > people's posts are obnoxious idiots who are willing to flame at the slightest > provocation, and will do so until the person they attack backs down or simply > gives up. I think this is uncalled for. I haven't seen this kind of flaming, except in the XXXXX case, and that has its own dynamic. (And please, Matthew, try to find a post where I have flamed XXXXX in public...I don't believe you can easily find one.) > No one on this list is entirely to blame, nor is anyone entirely > blameless for this. Several of the top figures on the list (TC May and Eric > Hughes to name two) have recently adopted an inappropriately elitist attitude The mailing list cannot be run by "democratic means." Nor can "teaching assigments" be handed out. The list is like a party at someone's home. The will of the herd is not the will of the organizers. Nor is the Cypherpunks agenda all that clear. I, for example, want to see strong crypto deployed in ways very different than what others favor. Are we to take a majority vote on an agenda, a charter? It's better to just leave the agenda loose and unwritten, so as not to have to grapple with this collision of goals. We can all pretend the agenda is what we favor. > running the _list_ however he wants, but the _movement_ belongs to all of us, > thank you. Even though I respect the crypto-political opinions that they The _movement_ belongs to what gets written and what gets responded to. In other words, if you want to be listened to, you have to get people's attention by the quality of your arguments. You can't rail against "leaders" (an ironic choice of words you used) like Hal Finney or Duncan Frissell just because their posts get reaction. You can't argue that the "herd" didn't have a chance to vote. In fact, people vote with their own posts. Market democracy. > express a great deal, I think that they and their supporters have taken this > too far. And worse, they have not taken a firm stand against the kind of flame > war that is continually erupting over individual posts on the list. For the > leaders to sit back and watch this go on is simply not the appropriate way to > handle things. The "leaders"? I have commented many times on issues of rancor and flames, even recently, and for this I am accused by some of being part of "the Clique" that "runs" Cypherpunks. Nonsense. > Until we fix the serious problems in this list, it will never be an > appropriate environment for newcomers to learn about crypto-privacy, just a > training ground for flame-throwers. About 70% of the flames would subside if XXXXX would cool his jets, and stop ranting and raving. As for "training newcomers," it's not easy. Lots of books exist, and many of the really solid contributors (Barrus, Honeyman, Collins, Stewart, etc.) learned their crypto in exactly this way. Many of us wrote _very long_ articles of a tutorial nature when the list was getting started. Newcomers who are unwilling to read some of the technical books on crypto should not expect us to write customized tutorials. > mountains of flame wars. Questions could be referred to qualified personnel, > instead of going to the list where they act like little flame magnets. May I ask which "qualified personnel" you have in mind? As per the earlier comment, not many of the crypto experts I know have any interest in hand-holding, not when at least a dozen good books on crypto are readily available. > This newsgroup would not replace the list, nor would it be more than > marginally connected (because of the selected cross-postings), but it would > provide the kind of environment that the list does not or cannot provide. How is this group you propose any different from sci.crypt, talk.politics.crypto, the various *.privacy groups, the *.clipper group, or the *.security groups? Seems to me sci.crypt is exactly what you're looking for. (But don't expect hand-holding for newcomers there, either!) > Oh, and for those of you that are tired of seeing me post, you can rest > assured that you will never see it again. Contributing to this list has brought > nothing but trouble to my life, and I have better things to do with my time > than wade through piles of flamage in my personal mail box. Matthew, threatening to leave is not going to have much effect. But if you have decided to leave, good luck in all your endeavours. -Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.

1 0

Agenda, Goals, Flames...Comments
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I wrote this reply to Matthew Landry, who raised some complaints about the direction of this list, the role of the "leaders," and so on. I sent it to him personally, so as not to add to the already heavy volume of stuff on this list, especially the complaints of the last few days. I think the term "leader" is inappropriate. Several of us got the group rolling a little over a year ago, but the anarchic nature of the mailing list (source of strengths as well as weaknesses). In Matthew's post he on the one hand blasts the elitist attitude of Eric Hughes and myself while in the next paragraph blasting the lack of action taken by the "leaders" to control flames and set up systems to help newcomers. Anyway, I enjoyed a political piece Matthew wrote a couple of weeks or so ago, and I told him this. So his piece tonight (2:30 a.m) merited a response. And though some of you are no doubt sick of seeing these issues debated, I've decided to forward my letter to him to all of you, as I think some points need to be made. I've removed one or two sentences from the version I mailed to Matthew. Forwarded message:

1 0

Re: Spread-spectrum net (vulnerability of)
by George A. Gleason 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Re. wireless networks that know where you are without making that info available to anyone incl. net operators: I think I might have something for this. Ericsson wireless PBX; essentially similar to a cellular system. However, calls within the network are considered "intercom" calls and so the system's "call detail recorder" won't keep track of them. Ericsson is way hot in wireless voice and data networks; and we're their local distributor for PBX products. I haven't got prices on hand since we haven't gotten a request for something like this yet. However, if anyone's seriously interested, drop a line via email or phone me at 510-644.8085. -george gleason, gg(a)well.sf.ca.us

1 0

Re: distributed autonomous networks
by lazylion＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've thought about this a lot. Right now, there's an international (very low speed) sort-of internet based in Amateur Packet Radio. Everyone has a 2meter FM (range 5-10 miles over flat turrain; up to 300 to a tall mountain through a repeater) handi-talky on their belts and a 1200 (a little 2400) *half duplex* modem with which they check into whatever bbs is near by and get their mail from all over the world. There are 19.2 & I think 56kpbs backbones operating over satelittes & High Frequency. It works. It's intolerably slow. It's operating legally on ham frequencies which do not (legally) allow encryption. The main reason it's so slow is that the protocal was designed by these guys in Phoenix 10 years ago to use the radios popularly off the shelf then. Now, however, there are *FULL DUPLEX* radios available cheap ($400) off the shelf that use separate bands for tx & rx to make them cheap. (Most of these are 144 MHz <-> 440 MHz, Transmit on one, receive on the other, either way) I'm working on a new protocal which instead of using the current CSMA/CD, has local repeaters serving an area which do full duplex & pass a token around. Unfortunately, I'll probably only be able to increase bandwidth enough to bring the current 4-5 users per frequency up to 15 or 20. This is still nowhere near enough to do what you want, but it does still use off-the-shelf radios & modems you can build for $20 in parts & connect to your PC or Mac (Software will also be req'd- mods to current stuff will work) My roomate, tvr(a)cnmat.CNMAT.Berkeley.EDU (KD6PAG), is working on custome radios that raise that 2400 bps barrier to 19.2 or 38kpbs. I think that without my full duplex protocal, he'll still have to wait around dealing with transmit-receive turnover latency, but hey- if it works, wow! Anyone else with any cool ideas? +--------------------------- Ben Weiss ------------------------------+ ! Telephone: (510) 841-5709 voice Internet: LazyLion(a)Netcom.com ! ! (415) 325-9600 fax Ben_D._Weiss(a)bmug.org ! +-------------- Packet Radio: WB5QAL(a)N6EEG.#NOCAL.CA.US ---------------+

1 0

List Protocol
by VACCINIA＠UNCVX1.OIT.UNC.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have been on the list for only 2 months now and I must say I enjoy the communication. Yes, there is alot of noise that comes thru the list but alot of it could be eliminated by not CC: to the list and communicating privately with those who have posted information of interest to you. I find alot of the back and forth communication annoying. Perhaps, if one notes something of interest to them from the list, they should communicate more with those who write them and evince interest in that subject and less with the list. I have found that when I see something I like on the list (it is usually a first posting) and contact that person directly they are very gracious and glad to help me out. I'm not particularly technisavvy yet, but when I have asked people directly for some pointer to information so that I can then go out and learn about it myself (rather then expecting them to educate me), they respond very positively. Also, those who do not think that there is a crypto-movement should hope that there is, otherwise they may soon find themselves outlaws of a much higher level. This is just my two cents, and sorry for the noise but I've seen a bit too much negativism posted lately to allow myself to remain silent. Scott G. Morham ! The First, Vaccinia(a)uncvx1.oit.unc.edu ! Second ! and Third ! Levels of ! Information Storage and Retrieval ! DNA, ! Biological Neural Nets, ! Cyberspace

1 0

Re: distributed autonomous networks
by swc＠uc1.ucsu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Meteor bounce is real. Ask anyone in military communications. It is not easy and it is not cheap (in present equipment volumes). The antennas tend to be bulky as well. But it is an option. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc(a)uc1.ucsu.edu or cards(a)top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?"

1 0

Re: distributed autonomous networks
by swc＠uc1.ucsu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Don't try to forward messages to their destination. Instead, forward them to several sites distributed around the net, and folks can check their messages via the net from whatever site is closest to them. I would suggest using public keys in lieue of MAC addresses, and Shamir sharing really sensitive stuff. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc(a)uc1.ucsu.edu or cards(a)top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?"

1 0

Re: distributed autonomous networks
by swc＠uc1.ucsu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At present, nobody knows how to RDF (radio direction find) the sources of meteor burst transmissions. But I know for a fact (from R&D proposal solicitations) that the military is trying to figure out how. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc(a)uc1.ucsu.edu or cards(a)top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?"

1 0

Re: Who`s Most Receptive
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

S >Also, I'm sending a note to Mitch. He was interviewed by NPR a few S >months ago about the National Information Infrastructure. I'll see if S >he can suggest a reporter. S >Shari I uploaded a transcript of NPR's report on the Clipper announcement to the list last April if anyone would like a copy. Dan Charles was the reporter and Whit Diffy was interviewed. It was favorable. I don't know why right wingers aren't as sympathetic to strong crypto. I used to be one and I am. Strong crypto protects us against the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderbergers. They can't put the number of the beast on us if we use it and crypto is obviously handy for financial privacy. After all would you want the dope smoking lesbian communist dominated Justice Department reading *your* mail, financial records, and medical records. Duncan Frissell "Nuke 'em 'till they glow then shoot them in the dark." --- WinQwk 2.0b#0

1 0