December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: info assembly line, "flits" (long)
by williams＠va.arca.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vladimir Z. Nuri,vznuri(a)netcom.com writes: > what the flit concept does is introduce a *context* to a bit. > a bit has no "context". where did a bit come from? the situation > with information is that it always has a *context* and is tied > with other information. (so in addition, I might like to suggest > that "flits" can be "tied together" with each other). To me, bits don't need context any more than atoms do. Their whole beauty (like atoms) is their simplicity. You can build incredibly complex structures (like jaguars) from the simplest of particles (or bits). Negroponte's analogy begs the question of the physics of cyberspace. They are clearly different from the physics of the real world. Imagine if you lived in a world where objects could be duplicated extremely quickly, cheaply, and perfectly. You could send things around at the speed of light. Nothing ever happens except by the action of a program. What would be valuable to you in this world (crypto-relevance)? Why would you care about "where" anything is? Why would you bother to "move" something? Putting aside the implementation problems with "flits", I don't think there is any need to make cyberspace behave like the real world. The best things about cyberspace are the differences with the real world. I agree we need to work on the interfaces between worlds, but that doesn't equate to making them the same. A major problem with your note is that it confuses the bit-atom level view of the world with the document-jaguar level. People don't have to interact with bits any more than they have to deal with atoms. The properties you are seeking are at a higher level than bits and are already in early development (OpenDoc and others). The "information assembly line" is at this higher level and does not require "flits". Thanks for a provocative note. --Jeff

1 0

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"portal"} = "<hfinney(a)shell.portal.com> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"alumni"} = "<hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"c2"} = "<remail(a)c2.org> eric pgp hash reord"; $remailer{"penet"} = "<anon(a)anon.penet.fi> penet post"; $remailer{"flame"} = "<remailer(a)flame.alias.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut post reord"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"ecafe"} = "<cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org> cpunk mix"; $remailer{"amnesia"} = "<amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ksub"; $remailer{'alpha'} = '<alias(a)alpha.c2.org> alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = '<nymrod(a)nym.jpunix.com> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = "<mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"treehole"} = "<remailer(a)mockingbird.alias.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer(a)remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"vegas"} = "<remailer(a)vegas.gateway.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack(a)holy.cow.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"ncognito"} = "<ncognito(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> mix cpunk pgp hash latent"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (c2 alpha) (flame replay) (alumni portal) Use "premail -getkeys pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu" to get PGP keys for the remailers. Fingering this address works too. Note: The remailer list now includes information for the alpha nymserver. Last update: Mon 24 Jun 96 6:48:39 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- flame remailer(a)flame.alias.net ++++-+++++++ 59:15 100.00% replay remailer(a)replay.com ***+******** 4:33 99.98% alumni hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu **#+##*##### :58 99.98% ecafe cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org --#+*#+####* 12:20 99.98% vegas remailer(a)vegas.gateway.com *#*+#**#**-# 37:05 99.96% c2 remail(a)c2.org +-+++-++++++ 54:42 99.96% portal hfinney(a)shell.portal.com ##+###+#### :58 99.86% lead mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu ++++++++++++ 40:58 99.82% exon remailer(a)remailer.nl.com ***+*+-++*** 7:09 99.81% haystack haystack(a)holy.cow.net #*-*+-+*-+#+ 21:26 99.80% nymrod nymrod(a)nym.jpunix.com *+* ***** ** 8:10 99.57% penet anon(a)anon.penet.fi .___ ____ 57:56:47 99.49% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com ++-+_.-__.- 18:28:27 99.47% amnesia amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com ---------- 3:37:36 98.99% treehole remailer(a)mockingbird.alias.net +___-+.+++ 7:26:03 97.84% extropia remail(a)miron.vip.best.com ---- --.- 7:35:07 95.20% ncognito ncognito(a)rigel.cyberpass.net ..._.--. 15:50:51 93.26% alpha alias(a)alpha.c2.org ++***** 35:02 87.27% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

[Even More Noise]: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by nelson＠crynwr.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hallam-Baker writes: > Given the experience of deregulating Savings and Loans institutions > I don't think the country could survive another round of > deregulation. I get really tired of shallow critics of deregulation citing the S&L problem. The problem was partial deregulation -- the wolves were let go: into the sheep's pen. The S&L's were allowed to make risky investments, but the American taxpayers still guaranteed their asses. Phil, your reputation is sinking fast. I suggest silence on your part. -russ <nelson(a)crynwr.com> http://www.crynwr.com/~nelson Crynwr Software sells packet driver support | PGP ok 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Corporations persuade; Potsdam, NY 13676 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | governments coerce.

1 0

No Subject
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How do I use the Encrypt-Key: header to include a reply block in an anonymous posting? I've tried for a few days now, and I can't seem to make it work.

1 0

Re: Oil Change software snoops through hard drive
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:31 PM 6/23/96, Alan Lewine wrote: ><<I wrote: >>But this isn't MS's RegWiz. It's capabilities sound much greater, and >>it's not clear how to opt out, etc. >>Tim May replied: ><<Not buying it and not installing it would appear to be an easy way to >"opt out.">> >Maybe i'm confused, but oil change sounds like a mole that can burrow >unbidden into user's disks. I don't think user installation is required, >or else it will auto install the user code on installation of whatever >software has licensed it. If I understand your comments (the strange wrapping doesn't make it easy), you are confusing Oil Change with a virus or worm. It's a commercial product, offering a (putative) service to those who buy it. One "opts out" by not buying and installing it. There may be privacy implications, but then there are privacy implications in all sorts of other areas. Such as filling out a loan request, applying for a credit card, visiting a doctor, etc. I'm of course not saying that these privacy implications are not worth discussing, and do not vary from example to example in seriousness, only that Oil Change hardly appears to be a significant threat. To repeat, no one is forced to buy and install Oil Change, and it certainly doesn't copy itself onto the machines of unsuspecting users. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Noise: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Duncan Frissell wrote: > "They believe that the Government is the problem and that what everyone > needs is to be told, 'You're on your own; go out there into the tender > mercies of the global economy; have a great time in cyberspace, and we'll > get out of your way.'" -- William Jefferson Blythe Clinton in a speech to > the AFSCME in Chicago on Friday. > I guess he doesn't want us to have fun in cyberspace -- though he didn't say > so directly. If you had heard the whole speech rather than only the portion reported on CNN you would know that you have entirely distored the meaning. The point being made was that cyberspace is being promoted as a panacea for all ills, many of which it is creating rather than curing. Cyberspace is not a replacement for an ecconomic policy, Newts idea of giving laptops to homeless people is not a solution for poverty. Actually I think that this is quite obvious from the quote you give. Given the experience of derregulating Savings and Loans institutions I don't think the country could survive another round of deregulation. As Reagan said "Gentlemen we've hit the jackpot" - and of course they had, S&L was not a fiasco for certain people, just for the poor taxpayers. > In the same speech in which he talked about people hunting ducks with rifles. Damned unsporting eh? Isn't the NRA weapon of choice a surface to air missile? Phill

2 1

AT&T bans anonymous messages
by WorldNet User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

AT&T WorldNet service has banned the sending of anonymous email or posting anonymously. >From the "AT&T WorldNet Service Operating Policies": (i) Members may not post or transmit any message anonymously or under a false name. Members may not permit any other person (other than an agent acting on Member's behalf and subject to Member's supervision) to access the Service Member's account for any purpose. The no anon rule even beat the no indecency rule, which is second: (ii) Members may not post or transmit any message which is libelous, defamatory or which discloses private or personal matters concerning any person. Members may not post or transmit any message, data, image or program which is indecent, obscene or pornographic. http://www.worldnet.att.net/care/terms/#oppol

5 5

domain name zapping threat by Internic
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

surprising not to see any discussion on this here.. this is a very intersting development. all kinds of news reports are talking about the internic zapping 25,000 DNS addresses. I wonder how this will turn out. I saw in an article a claim, I think, that the internic now charges $100 "rent" per year for a domain. this is really amazing to me, because this has totally changed from a one-time only fee, if correct. is that correct? I wonder if people are going to try to find a way to "route around" this action by the internic... one wonders if this is just the first in a series of actions by the new spook owners. (SAIC) essentially, if someone wanted to implement a tax or a way to control the internet, the NIC would be an excellent place to start. I wonder if the NIC has legal authority to yank DNS address like they are doing. it seems one could take them to court and have a pretty good argument that people who run DNS servers are free to run them however they want, and that ultimately this is what determines how routing on the internet is supported, not some overseeing agency like the NIC. it seems to me that now would be a brilliant time for someone to introduce a "non NIC registration service" that sets up an alternate DNS that guarantees that members will never be charged money. of course that's what the DNS "sort of" started out as... sigh. Subject: Internic removing Domain names The news media is anouncing that the Internic will delete 25,000 domain names that have not paid their registration fees Monday. How will this work? If someone is using one of these Domains and has DNS entries to find them what can the Internic do to disable the Domain? Won't the existing DNS services keep them working? Glenn York

8 8

Re: info assembly line, "flits" (long)
by Josh Sled 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 23 Jun 96 17:27:25 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >>think about the the number of atoms that are necessary >>to hold the information for a single page, let alone an entire book... > >yep. not saying what I am talking about is feasible this moment. >"moore's law" But I don't think that it's feasible at ANY point in the near future... in fact, I think a better question is WHY? What would we use this newfound ability for? >>in a virtual reality "cyberspace", this would be an insurmountable data >>storage... on the small-scale. > >not insurmountable. quite practical and sensible in say 10 years. Ok... maybe practical to store the data... but I don't think sensible. Think: if we had this ability with atoms, what would we use it for? Maybe tracking crimes... or political prisoners (where have the atoms in this anonymous leaflet spelling out steps for rebellion come from?) or just curiousity... sure, there are justifable uses, but does the "savings outweigh the cost", so to speak? >to move a pencil I only pick it up and set it down. to move a >document through cyberspace, >the process is infinitely more complex, requiring an >immensity of thoughts and coordinated actions. when we create >a system that matches the real-world difficulty, then we will >be approaching the limit. we are very, very far from that limit >even though we have climbed the ladder a long ways as you note. I think we're too far from the limit to even begin to guess about how information would be stored in such a medium. But that's just my thought. For the sake of argument: why would we want to have this level of complexity in a simulated world. There is so much that can be assumed that is repetative and wasteful in the real world, why would we want a computer-generated system that must keep track of all this waste? >>I think the thing that's most important in this sentence is _"move"_ ... >>this is the main problem for computers... it's SO easy to DUPLICATE >>information... but near impossible to make sure that you've MOVED it... > >indeed, the concept of "moving" information implies TIME-- at one >time, it is at one place, at another time, it is in a new place. >but it is the SAME INFO. today, the disconnected idea of a "bit" >does not give you this *continuity*. I make a copy somewhere else >that is not tied to the original document. That's why it's so easy to make a copy... that's why we can have backups and the cypherpunks list and almost everything on the Net. If we had to keep track of flits and update them constantly, things would slow down a lot... but you're compensating for that by having arbritarbily advanced computer technology. >imagine the same thing on a totally universal cyberspatial level, >not merely within a single company or university. I agree, we have >rudiments of what I'm talking about in place. but my point is >mainly that they are rudiments compared to what is possible. the >web is a very good sample framework for the kind of seamlessness >I'm talking about. like I say, the future information assembly >line will be built on top of it. it has a long ways to go too. Ok... in a far advanced level of technology, this and more would be possible... but, the question is: do we need it? >in a sense, I think the flit concept is a magic bridge between bits >and atoms. bits are too abstract. atoms are too real. flits are >a nice compromise. we have to get our bits to behave more like >atoms: persistence, etc. there are a whole lot of very nice >"properties" of atoms that are staring us in the face that we >would benefit from immensely implementing in cyberspace. For some reason, distributed objects come to mind... though I'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to know why... >>It means that you'd have an INSANELY large ammount of storage for a >>single small document. > >early stages would not be much different than RCS systems already in >use in companies. But I think that this is the best system available for today's or the future's needs... if we extended this concept to document fragments (ie, if you use a quote from a document, that section of your document has the same revision history, changed as necessary), then we have a system that could be in use for a long time. >you could have mechanisms that don't keep the entire history of the >flit. I agree, a flit as a 0 or 1 is very unlikely in the near future. >but at a document level, i.e. a document as a flit, we already have >it in RCS systems that companies are struggling to implement well >as we speak. Again, I think a document system is the best suited for information storage... the flit concept seems to be a great overkill. >I'm saying that in the information assembly line of the future, >they *must* have context. they must be tied together. you only >have disconnected chaos otherwise. Hmm... the only problem is that the "context" would be completely machine enforced... you can't actually MOVE or COPY the bits off a computer onto another computer... each side just would have to intrepret the bits as being moved or copied... and unless you propose storing flits in something other than bits, the disconnected chaos you refer to is nothing other than software understanding bit patterns... same as ASCII or a word processor file or an OpenDoc document. >again, this requires the human to interpret the changes. what if >there was an actual "link" between the old and the new document >that is "stuck" to the new document? and furthermore, software >could traverse these links? that's more what I have in mind. And if the old document moved? How would the new document continue to know where the old document is? >data doesn't have to be disconnected. I told you this was a radical >paradigm shift that I was proposing. you obviously have the previous >concepts down quite well. I'm not arguing that what you are saying >is the conventional system. I pointed out exactly that. *nod* You're right... I don't understand your shift in thinking... it doesn't make sense to me. I think that conventional systems are very well suited to information creation, retrieval and transport, and that virtual reality, though still in development, wouldn't benefit from the flit concept. >>But cyberspace is NOT real space... > >it will evolve to become more and more like a real space, a point >of my essay. I sure hope not... why do you think so many people escape to muds... real space is bad... virtual space has the potential to become so much more. >>VERY VERY VERY far... > >10 years or so, I would say, before people implement things that >sound like they came right out of what I was talking about. Perhaps... I hope not, because I don't think that it's a reasonable concept for working with data in an on-line or even mostly digital environment, but perhaps... >right. I think it is much more realistic to speculate that we will >be virtually unlimited than limited, and to ask the question, >what would we implement if we truly were unlimited? to build something >limited when you are unlimited shows an impoverished imagination. well... I'll continue to think about the present, and you can continue to dream about the future.... Take care, Josh PS I wonder: do you envision flits being able to be created out of thin (virtual) air?

2 1

unsuscribe
by Brian Andrew 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe

2 1