December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: A Cyberspace Independence Refutation
by lunaslide＠loop.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

<rm> } A lot of people forget the basic truth that the net is based }almost entirely on physical communications facilities owned for the most }part by huge corperations that have deeply incestuous relationships with }the political power structure and very little interest in preserving the }self important dreams of a few members of a self selected net "elite". }If ordered to pull the plug they will, and cyberspace as we know it will }evaporate overnight. Why should businesses cooperate with and help protect a govt that it's needs would be better met without their existance? Eve in the near future during which busniesses will play by _most_ of the rules, those businesses that own most of the net will not shut it down because it conflicts with their business interests in a _major_ way. Shutting down the internet for even a day would loose these people so much money and time that if the govt were to ask them to shut it down, they would seriously believe that they are joking. They would laugh, and the govt wouldn't be able to do shit about it. The net is something that has grown like ivy in an ivy-league school; it can never be eradicated. Too many people rely on it, it is too big an income for big business and none of those businessed could shut it down completely. Routing errors, misplaced domains, sure, but the net would survive and it would heal it's own wounds. <rm> } } A defeated pessimist, } die(a)die.com I believe that most of us on this group are here because we have principles that compel us to fight for our freedom and privacy. For me, those principles are strong enough that if to die fighting for them is my fate, than that is how I will give my life. To lay down my arms, to give up before I'm dead or the war is over is to bring shame and dishonor upon myself that I could not bear to live with. I would never be able to look my unborn children in the eyes again because I would know that I did not do my part in the fight; I did not stand my ground. BTW, I just turned 22 years old in January and if I hear anyone , especially anyone on this list, call my generation a bunch of slackers again, I will seek you out, tie you to a chair and force you to watch every episode of Guiligan's Island and The Brady Bunch five times each. lunaslide "Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes... A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." - -- Abraham Lincoln On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion creating the illusion of truth and drama. Henry Miller ________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCPAzEX3QEAAAEEAOGQjhnqGH29pO1WDaXs5GFOVPhCBWyYEk9XEwRmscjveWzH AhA6DeOA480zWNqQURyqE2yPmR8WzT+OXYqmeiQiycKyFA41Vs/Ruf+gXXxe7uXS L5BK3K8oKbfoH0D5/TAkMT4r6BprXFQz4pFc3gY2SSaSPElpMjKHaKBsRsyRABEB AAG0HUplZmYgQ29ubiA8bHVuYXNsaWRlQGxvb3AuY29tiQCVAwUQMRffHzKHaKBs RsyRAQGNhwP9E9xEZ9/LCKnhgtnrqgD7pDoXG2pCy8FoyfFjoImGkG+jF1wELXmB Z0mf8F8CgYkys0mif1XeGDMelr1gzlZAm6LgQt4kcvztMW/aRLn18QP+iwltVT/L p8D37mitOjvuk46sWgAChIaPPPIeg/EaYQjQkmlpWKsEYIoTRy+E8mU= =4Gku -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

To find the clock speed of a sun workstation
by Ashfaq Rasheed 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Is there anyway of finding the clock speed of the CPU on a Sun workstation? As far as i know it can be found only by rebooting the machine and using module-info? And I believe that the module-info does a no-op loop for a a known number of times and calculates the time taken. I would like to know if there is anyother way to finding it. Thanks! Ashfaq

3 2

Censorship and Snooping at Winthrop University
by Declan B. McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Following are portions of a message I sent to Winthrop University administrators. They're considering a heinous new policy that says: "No information should be exchanged through E-mail that is not official University business. No personal or confidential information should be exchanged and all communications are subject to periodic and/or random audit by the Office of Information Technology to ensure compliance with this policy." -Declan ---------- Forwarded message begins here ---------- From: Declan McCullagh To: feldern(a)winthrop.edu, broachg(a)winthrop.edu, rosenj(a)winthrop.edu, moressiw(a)winthrop.edu, jonesr(a)winthrop.edu, cormierp(a)winthrop.edu cc: wellsj(a)winthrop.edu, harrisoc(a)lurch.winthrop.edu, browne(a)winthrop.edu, duboisp(a)winthrop.edu, margare946(a)aol.com, fight-censorship+(a)andrew.cmu.edu Subject: Censorship at Winthrop University February 12, 1996 Dear Winthrop University Administrators: I was disturbed to read a recent Associated Press article reporting that Winthrop University has censored the web pages of two of your students and suspended the students from classes after one of them placed nude photographs online. I was even more dimayed to read that your school's proposed computing policy allows university officials to snoop through your students' electronic mailboxes at will. For shame! The American Library Association's draft policy recommendation on electronic services and networks says, on student computer accounts: No user should be restricted or denied access for expressing or receiving constitutionally protected speech. No user's access should be changed without due process, including, but not limited to, notice and a means of appeal. The American Association of University Professors endorsed this statement on academic freedom, published in the July-August 1992 _Academe_, which says in part: On a campus that is free and open, no idea can be banned or forbidden... Free speech is not simply an aspect of the educational enterprise to be weighed against other desirable ends. It is the very precondition of the academic enterprise itself. Regarding your plans to look at student email, more information is available at ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/faq/email.privacy, which says: According to Mike Godwin, legal services counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the U.S.'s Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) could be reasonably construed to protect university email. This is also the reported opinion of the U. of Michigan's lawyers. Also, the U.S.'s Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act gives students at all public and most private schools some privacy rights. According to the AAUP statement and according to the fundamental principles of academic freedom, universities must protect controversial speech on their campuses. If Winthrop University does not, it is violating its historic commitments to free speech and turning its pledges to uphold academic freedom and freedom of expression into broken promises. I've copied this message to the fight-censorship mailing list, which has among its subscribers roughly 50 journalists interested in online censorship issues, including writers from TIME, Newsweek, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Internet World, WIRED, and many others. I invite you to clarify your university's position and respond directly to the mailing list. Cyberspace is developing quickly, and I feel confident that Winthrop University would not want to be known as an online leader in repression, censorship, and Orwellian thought-policing. I trust that a school such as Winthrop University, with such a distinguished College of Education, will not neglect the fundamental principles upon which your university was founded. I hope that you understand that voiceless speech and inkless press must receive the same protections as voiced speech and inked press. I urge you to reconsider your policies. I look forward to your reply. Very truly yours, Declan McCullagh PS: I'm attaching a file from Carl Kadie's Computers and Academic Freedom archive, at http://www.eff.org/CAF/. More information is also available at the Justice on Campus project, at http://joc.mit.edu/. --------------------------------------------------------------------- February 11, 1996 ROCK HILL, S.C. (AP) -- Winthrop students Brian Walker and Josh Campbell have had their university Internet accounts pulled after officials said they violated school policy. Walker created a web page soliciting money and Campbell created one including a nude woman. While the two admitted they crossed the line, the Feb. 2 suspension has risen free speech debates and computer policy review through the school. Both students deleted their web pages, and their two-week suspension was reduced to one. Nathaniel Felder, Winthrop's associate vice president for information technology, said work on amending the computer policy has been ongoing. School officials planned to submit the proposals Friday to Winthrop's board of trustees. But Internet users, particularly professors and students, thought the new policy included language that infringed on their rights and violated their freedom of speech. So, the policy will be forwarded to a computer committee for further review. Professors and students opposed language in the policy that said e-mail be used only for official university business. The policy also allows officials to randomly audit e-mail for compliance. ``It could be a violation of the principles of the free change of ideas at the university,'' political science professor Glen Broach said. But Bob Thompson, Winthrop's board chairman, said Internet policy is to protect the users and Winthrop from liability. =============== ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/faq/computer-porn =============== q: Should universities create a rule banning "porn" on university computers? a: In my opinion, no. Such a rule would be unnecessary and too broad. [Disclaimers: I'm not a lawyer. This answer is based on the situation in the U.S.] A computer porn ban is too broad because "pornography" is not a well-defined term. For many people, "pornography" means any nude or sexually suggestive material. While you may intend only to stop computer-science students from looking at _Playboy_ centerfolds in your computer labs, your rule may also stop liberal-arts students from viewing the growing number of fine art collections on the Net. For example, 2,800 images are on-line at the Australian National University ANU. Among these images is a print of Manet's "Olympia" Olympia. When this now famous nude was unveiled in 1863, it caused an outrage because of its blatant sexuality. Hundreds of images are also available at the WebMuseum The WebMuseum. Among these images is Salvador Dali's shocking "Young Virgin Autosodomised by her own Chastity" <a href="http://www.emf.net/wm/paint/auth/dali/works/dali.virgin.jpg">Virgin </a>. Either of these images could be used to sexually harass someone, but so could many noncomputer images on your campus such as art on the University's walls and the _Playboy_ centerfolds that are likely in your university library. A rule banning computer porn is unnecessary because university computer facilities can (and should) be treated as ny other university facility. That means banning the act of harassment, not the materials that can be used to harass but that can also be used without harassing anyone. Similar reasoning was used by a federal district judge in June 1994. In the widely reported case, he said that "quiet reading" of a _Playboy_ magazine by a firefighter does not create a sexually harassing atmosphere. At least in the U.S., virtually every university has a sexual harassment policy that not only covers harassment via computers but that also dictates the exact procedure for handling sexual harassment complaints. (Having a procedure is important because the line between constitutionally protected expression and unprotected expression is dim and uncertain.) Computer sites should publicize the university's sexual harassment rules; they should not try to preempt them. See the referenced U. of Illinois report on the Status of Women for concrete suggestions on publicizing your existing sexual harassment rules. So what about material that may be illegal in your jurisdiction, for example libel, threats, obscenity-in-the-legal-sense, copyright violations, etc.? Many university computer policies include the "Law Law", that is, the rule that says that it is forbidden to violate the law. This is not quite as redundant as it may seem because it authorizes the University to handle infractions itself via its established due process procedure. - Carl Kadie ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) =================<a href="http://www.eff.org/CAF/faq/censorship-and-harassment.html"> faq/censorship-and-harassment =================</a> * Censorship And Harassment q: Must/should universities ban material that some find offensive (from Netnews facilities, email, libraries, and student publications, etc) in order to comply with antiharassment laws? a: No. U.S. federal courts have said that harassing speech is ... =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/quiet-reading"> law/quiet-reading =================</a> * Expression -- Harassment -- Quiet Reading of _Playboy_ Excerpts from a newspaper report that a federal district judge has said that "quiet reading" of a _Playboy_ magazine by a firefighter does not create a sexually harassing atmosphere. [Editorial comment: I think this supports the idea that rather banning "porn" from a general academic computer, it is more appropriate to ban harassment.] =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/women-in-eng.uiuc.txt"> academic/women-in-eng.uiuc.txt =================</a> ASCII (plain text version) of "Final Report of the Committee on the Status of Women Graduate Students and Faculty in the College of Engineering" at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (Also available in TeX and Postscript form.) =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/artistic.freedom.aaup"> academic/artistic.freedom.aaup =================</a> * Artistic Freedom (AAUP) Academic Freedom and Artistic Expression - An official statement of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) It says in part: "In our judgment academic freedom in the creation and presentation of works in the visual and performing arts, by ensuring greater opportunity for imaginative exploration and expression, best serves the public and the academy." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/library/challenged-materials.ala"> library/challenged-materials.ala =================</a> * Challenged Materials (ALA) An interpretation by the American Library Association of the "Library Bill of Rights". It says in part "The Constitution requires a procedure designed to focus searchingly on challenged expression before it can be suppressed. An adversary hearing is a part of this procedure." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/miller"> law/miller =================</a> * Expression -- Obscenity -- Law -- Miller The Supreme Court's definition of obscenity (the so-called _Miller_ test) ================= ================= If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command gopher gopher.eff.org These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org, and then: cd /pub/CAF/faq get censorship-and-harassment cd /pub/CAF/law get quiet-reading cd /pub/CAF/academic get women-in-eng.uiuc.txt cd /pub/CAF/academic get artistic.freedom.aaup cd /pub/CAF/library get challenged-materials.ala cd /pub/CAF/law get miller To get the file(s) by email, send email to ftpmail(a)decwrl.dec.com Include the line(s): connect ftp.eff.org cd /pub/CAF/faq get censorship-and-harassment cd /pub/CAF/law get quiet-reading cd /pub/CAF/academic get women-in-eng.uiuc.txt cd /pub/CAF/academic get artistic.freedom.aaup cd /pub/CAF/library get challenged-materials.ala cd /pub/CAF/law get miller

1 0

Re: V-chips, CC, and Motorcycle Helmets
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:20 AM 2/12/96 +0000, Deranged Mutant wrote: >> Parents had that ability before. Cable boxes have a "perental control key" >> on the side that enables them to lock out "offensive" channels. It works >> quite well and is fairly hard for the kidlets to defeat. (I used it to >> lockout the religious stations and home shopping channels.) > >When I was a kid some friends down the street knew how to unlock the >Channel 100 XXX movies with a paper clip. A V-chip would hopefully >be more sophisticated, but then again, so are today's kids... Sshhh! You are not supposed to tell them that! >> The "V-Chip" debate is a mirror of the one that occured when the cable >> channels were starting to become popular. There was a big hue and cry about >> kids getting to the "naughty" channels without parent concent. Seems most >> people do not even learn how the lockouts work. (And are too lazy to learn.) > >You should check out your nearest H/P BBS or ftp-site... Yeah, I know it can be hacked. I also know that if they are that interested in sex, NOTHING I do is going to stop them. (Which is as it should be. If they have no exposure to any sexual material as a youth, some rather nasty problems tend to crop up as adults. (Take a look at the studies of sexual predators.) But that is a point avoided by the moralists...) >> You have to remember that most of the people arguing for TV filters are >> looking for a way to make the "offensive" stuff go away for good. (Either >[..] > >A very good point. One that makes me wary of V-Chips... It makes me very wary of them. What gets me are all the people here who talk about them as if they will have useful features. They will be about as useful as the ratings on video games. ("Hey, theres a cool one! This one has flying mangled bodies! Its OK though. No sex!") --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "I, Caligula Clinton... In the name of the Senate and the people of Rome!" - Bill Clinton signing the CDA with the First Amendment bent over.

1 0

LI Newsday OpEd: Criminal Justice System
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Found a really good op-ed piece in LI Newsday, Thurs. Feb 8, pA53 by Robert Reno, "If Jails Are Full, How Much Tougher Can Judges Get?" Some highlights: American Jails are more packed with criminals than ever in history. We know this for sure because every time we count them, it keeps showing the percentage of the population that is in jail has quadrupled in 25 years, is higher than any other civilized nation... [...] It is something of a mystery how so many people got in jail because we have it on the testimony of some leading politicians that knavish judges are freeing criminals in record numbers. Pat Buchanan babbles to anybody who'll listen that federal judges are "an unelected elite," solititous of "criminals, atheists, homosexuals, flag burners, illegal aliens, convicts and pornographers." I don't know why he left out gun molls, blood suckers, snake charmers, pig rustlers, serial blackguards, pyromaniacs, and mailbox vandals... [...] ...There is something more to the point, though, than the disposition of politicians to bay moronically at the moon. If we want a more predictable system in which judicial descisions never surprise us, then we have perfectly good functioning models from which to choose from. Take your pick: China, Cuba, North Korea, Iraq. Any one will do. --- "Mutant" Rob <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a blank message with the subject "send pgp-key" (not in quotes) for a copy of my PGP key.

3 2

Re: The Emotional Killer (or out of the frying pan and into the electric chair?)
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is off-topic; anyone wanting to follow up on it, e-mail me on the side. At 11:59 PM 2/11/96 -0500, tallpaul(a)pipeline.com (tallpaul) wrote: >This and other posts by J. Bell and other lib'bers Jim Bell is pretty much exactly as relevant to libertarian thought as Lyndon LaRouche is to Democratic thought - that is, he's a crank, whom we prefer to ignore where possible. I, for one, filter his messages straight to Eudora's Trash mailbox. If you want to sample a different variety of libertarianism, check out the URL in my sig file and look at the Christlib list. Or, for that matter, simply leaf through REASON and LIBERTY magazine, and note the variety of folks actually _doing_ things that promote "human freedom for everyone" as well as talking about it. It's not as much fun as ad hominem, I admit, but in the long run I think it's more useful. Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0

Online Zakat Payment: Religious tithe.
by Steven C. Perkins 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cyber-Anarchists aren't the only ones who can use the Net. >--- Forwarded message follows --- >From: zakat(a)dircon.co.uk (Sohail Mohammed) >Subject: Online Zakat Payment >Date: 1 Feb 1996 11:15:34 GMT > >Welcome to the Zakat homepage at http://www.ummah.org.uk/zakat/ >which has been setup by the Bait al-Mal al-Islami (BMI). > >Bait al-Mal is the public treasury of the Islamic political system (state >or nonstate). BMI acts as the finance department function of an Islamic >political authority (IPA). This BMI in the UK operates under the >authority of the Muslim Parliament (the IPA in this case). > >An IPA may or may not be directly responsible for the management of >Mosque(s). The IPA may or may not be directly responsible for relief >work. These activities may be carried out indirectly by other agencies >operating under the authority of the IPA or supported by it. >BMI does welfare work in UK and externally. > >Zakat collection and distribution is the responsibility of the IPA (which >may be a Khalifate or in its absence a regional entity in your part of >the world). > >Zakat collection and distribution is not a free-enterprise do-it-yourself >project. Khalifa AbuBakr (RA) went to war against those people who did >not want to pay Zakat to the central authority and who instead wanted to >do it 'their-way'. > >Any one can setup a registered charitable organization; anyone can't >setup a religion or Deen and do it 'their-way'. > >The Zakat page is at http://www.ummah.org.uk/zakat/ > >The online Zakat payment facility is at: >http://www.ummah.org.uk/zakat/pay.htm > >The long term strategy is that we Muslims need a major presence in >cyberspace. This would include intelligent agents (robots, sheriffs,) >roaming cyberspace collecting Zakat funds and Jihad funds and doing other >things we can't yet imagaine. Islamic Gateway http://www.ummah.org.uk >(and affiliated net entities) is only a primitive foundation for future >workers to take further. If you want to help realise the dream or want >free webspace for public service projects contact info(a)zakat.org.uk > >If you are running a BMI function in your part of the world and you wish >to co-operate or obtain further information on the UK BMI then contact: > >Dr Muhammad Ghayasuddin MMP (*), >Secretary/Trustee, >Bait al-Mal al-Islami, >109 Fulham Palace Road, >London W6 8JA, UK >Tel +44 181 563 1995 or 1994 (fax 1993) > >WHY is BMI/MP doing this: policy questions to Mohtashim Shaikh MMP, BMI >trustee responsible for the online Zakat service at: >mohtash(a)ummah.org.uk > >Technical questions to the IG chief designer, Brother Ibrahim at: >query(a)eurolink.co.uk > >(*) MMP = Member of Muslim Parliament > >Flames to Mohtashim before Feb 9, afterwards to info(a)zakat.org.uk > >MP as an IPA raises both Zakat funds (using BMI's charitable status in >the UK) and also Jihad Funds (NOT using BMI - Jihad is NOT covered as a >charitable activity in western law!). Only an IPA can do BOTH Zakat and >Jihad fund raising. Let any 'Charity' org try and do that. > >Just as a personal aside: a major UK Muslim charity is a part of the >Saudi lobby (accountability to Mr Fahd?) whilst another Islamic charity >is about to get U.N. affiliation (accountability to Boutrous Boutrous >Ghali?). BMI on the other hand is accountable to the Muslim Community and >its leadership. > > > > ***************************************************************************** Steven C. Perkins sperkins(a)andromeda.rutgers.edu User Services Coordinator, Rutgers School of Law at Newark 15 Washington Street Newark, NJ 07102 VOX: 201-648-5965 FAX: 201-648-1356 http://www.rutgers.edu/RUSLN/rulnindx.html http://www.rutgers.edu/lawschool.html "Raise your voices to the Sky. It is a Good Day to die." Chief Crazy Horse *****************************************************************************

1 0

Re: V-chips, CC, and Motorcycle Helmets
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:55 AM 2/13/96 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote: >>You mention the issue of Rushdie, as if it is some sort of refutation of my >>idea. Quite the contrary; I think it actually supports me. >> >>How so?, you ask? Well, let's consider any potential assassin who might be >>interested in this "contract." Aside from the obvious moral issues involved >>here (Rushdie has, presumably, done nothing to warrant his death), the truth >>is that such a potential assassin would see a number of problems that would >>strongly dissuade him from attempting to kill Rushdie. >> >>1. There is no way he could be assured that he could collect the award >>anonymously. His name would certainly "get out," and then he would be >>subject not merely to "the law," but also anybody who wanted revenge for >>Rushdie's death. >> >>2. There is no way he could be assured that he would actually receive the >>award. (How would he prove HE did it?) >> >>3. That's because there is no way he would enforce this "contract" should >>the offerer refuse to pay. > >These points would not affect a devout Iranian Muslem. To him the death >warent has already been issued by legitimate authority. It is not even >clear that money would be his princple motivator. Which simply proves my point; money is not the limiting factor, here. >I must respectifully disagree with Jim in this case. I believe that >Rushdie has not been hit because the protection he enjoys is sufficent to >repel the potential assassins. Note that he has an advantage over the US >president (who probably has as many potential assassins) in that he does >not need to make public appearences. But remember, Rushdie is merely ONE PERSON. And keeping him safe has consumed a lot of resources. You don't think the government could protect each of their most publically hated employees to a similar level if a reward of, say, $20,000 were put on each of their heads. How much could we collect to "get" Lon Horiuchi, for example? Or the hundred or so agents immediately participating in the initial Waco incident, or the dozen or so decision makers immediately above them? Etc. The Rushdie incident is simply so far removed from "Assassination Politics" that it can't possibly be used to refute it; I still believe it actually demonstrates how much effort somebody has to go to, to protect a targeted person. One targeted person is easy to protect. 10,000 would be FAR harder. And the moment a few of those guys got "whacked," the rest would want to resign their jobs and hope they would be allowed to retire in peace. >Adding money to the pot will attract rational (and amoral) people who will >then make a determination based on (1) profit, and (2) risk, which includes >getting caught or killed. It seems to me that Secret Service levels of >protection can protect a public figure against even Assassination Politics. In a sense, qualitatively you absolutely correct, but (quantitatively) you're wrong. I think the problem is that when most people hear the term "Assassination", they think of only the highest-level targets. Quite the contrary; I think this system will get the medium and even the lower-level people FIRST, de-populating the government primarily by hurried resignations of worried people. The remaining people would be terrified to actually make anybody angry, and they wouldn't have a paycheck because they couldn't collect any taxes. The whole system would collapse in a heap. Jim Bell Klaatu Burada Nikto Something is going to happen. Something...Wonderful! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMSDmO/qHVDBboB2dAQFeOgP/bpXFbTfw1R/iTRsWOrEZJI22N4nFPWX3 XBN2dx106jTdx/eoYz1rhjiaeZt/FzB83DABj34HuVPkws1OPEQ2e6Dneva5RjHK QJFN4Po9SN03fb+7l3yp5Axr/1P4j4eiao4t0oAF+NPNk2FzU2LvHEMpbIawme0B AC6Uv4nR8hc= =9lr1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

RE: LI Newsday OpEd: Criminal Justice System
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: Perry E. Metzger > >Tim, you don't work for a living. Some of us do. You might try to >think back and remember what it was like in the days when you still >did something every once in a while and had a limited amount of time >available in which to do it. ....................................................................... That's right: crytpo-anarchy is a time-consuming business, and there isn't much time in which to prepare for the New Cyberspatial Millenium. Everybody get Back To WORK !! :>) .. >Blanc >

1 0

Firewall USA to Firewall China
by sophi＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At the meeting on saturday the idea of a Firewall USA was discussed. Here's a quote from Jim Clark CEO of Netscape on the idea of a Firewall China, just for comparison. Q: The Chinese government has declared its intention to filter out what it considers to be objectionable material from the Internet. If you were a consultant for the Chinese government, what technology would you recommend that they use to do that? A: A lot of people think that's not possible. It's difficult to enforce, but it's certainly possible. A corporation has a so-called fire wall -- a single point of entry into the corporate net. You can have a country that has a single point of entry into its "country net." It's doable. All you need, though, is one breach of security, and there's a leak. A fire wall is a filter -- it filters and doesn't let certain people come in. You can only come in if you have the right permission. So you could easily set that up so that it would filter out your objectionable material. this is a temp .sig

2 1