December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Cumman nA mBamm
by Genocide 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I heard of this person today, yes that is a name, she is supposed to be a terrorist or something, does anyone have any info on her? Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group Board Member of E.H.A.P ============================================================================ ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "Courage is not defined by those who *---===| 2600 |===---* fought and did not fall, but by those *---===|__________________|===---* who fought, fell, and rose again." Email: Genocide(a)Genocide2600.com Web: http://www.Genocide2600.com Check out the mud at: genocide2600.com 6666 UIN: 1449140 ============================================================================

1 0

as much business as you can handle
by emailprofits1＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, If You're Marketing a Product, Service, or Opportunity on the Internet, or Through an Online Service, or Have a Web Site, You Will *Definitely* Be Interested In What We Have To Offer. We'll send out Your General or *Targeted* E-mail Advertisement. Period. No qualifiers, no conditions, no nonsense. We'll do it quickly, and we'll do it at a *great price*. Give us a call, and we'll give you advice on how to write your material, and much more. and... Our Services Are Guaranteed! * Guaranteed Delivery And Minimum Response Rates! Call For Details. * Fresh, *Targeted* Names Compiled *Specifically* For Your Campaign * Response Rates From 1% to 33% Have Been Achieved! (This also depends on your product and offer) * Your EXCLUSIVE Ad! Up To A Full Page. No Co-ops! * Experience, Experience, Experience. Call Us Today! 352.315.6100 24 Hrs! EST (mention code#: 322a) DIRECT E-MAIL WORKS!! * YOUR MAILING IS ALWAYS SENT ON ITS OWN, NEVER WITH ANY OTHER ADS! If you receive 1% response for mailing 100,000 Email addresses you would receive 1,000 replies!!!! How much MONEY would YOU make? PRICING: Price with Random names. 100,000 names $399.00 (Current Promotion: $149 Limited Time Only!) 250,000 names $599.00 500,000 names $799.00 1,000,000 names $999.00 5,000,000 names $2,499.00 Prices With *Highly Targeted* Names by City, Hobbies, Job, Business Opportunity, MLM, Women in Colorado Who Ski, Etc.,. Response Rates From 1% to 33% (or Higher)! 10,000 names $399.00 (Current Promotion: $149 Limited Time Only!) 20,000 names $599.00 30,000 names $799.00 40,000 names $999.00 50,000 names $1199.00 100,000 names $1999.00 (Promo: $999) Start Generating As Many ORDERS and/or SIGNUPS as You Can Handle! Call Us Right Now To Discuss Increasing Your Business And Cash Flow! Call Now! 352.315.6100 24 Hrs! EST (promo code#: 322a) We Also Take All Major Credit Cards, and Checks By Fax/Phone! Thank You And Have A Profitable Day! 352.315.6100 24 Hrs 407.493.3861 (ask for Marc) (promo code#: 322a) (mention this code when you call to receive the promotion prices!)

1 0

You've won!
by John807601 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: John807601(a)aol.com Subject: You've won! From: John807601 <John807601(a)aol.com> Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 08:01:14 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) <a href="http://www.downset.net/index2.html">Click Here To Claim Your Prize</a> http://www.downset.net

1 0

Re: Thought you'd like this alot (fwd)
by Romulo Moacyr Cholewa 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Begin of forwarded email message ------------------------------- From: bs@day.research.att.com[SMTP:bs@day.research.att.com] Sent: Thursday, March 26, 1998 10:58 AM To: albertoa(a)msconecta.com.br Sorry to send you a form letter, but I have now received dozens of copies of that "IEEE interview" hoax. Yes, it is (obviously) a hoax. No, it is not a hoax done by me or any of my friends; had it been, it would have been less crude and more funny. If you want information about C++, see my articles and books. You can find references, articles, book chapters, and even a couple of genuine interviews on my homepages. - Bjarne Bjarne Stroustrup, AT&T Labs, http://www.research.att.com/~bs End of forwarded email message -------------------------------- This is the answer, by himself. Romulo Moacyr Cholewa Home Page: http://rmcweb.home.ml.org Corporate: RomuloC(a)MSConecta.com.br Personal: RMCholewa(a)Bigfoot.com --------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Fyodor <fygrave(a)freenet.bishkek.su> To: Bad_B0yZ:; <Bad_B0yZ:;> Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> Date: Quinta-feira, 26 de Março de 1998 02:03 Subject: Thought you'd like this alot (fwd) >Heh... Wanna hear the C++ creator thoughts regarding the malevolent >creation, he made?:-) > >=========/qoute/=======================/quote/==================== >[snip snip] >Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 23:31:02 -0800 >Subject: Stroustrup's interview leaked... > >On the 1st of January, 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup gave an interview >to the IEEE's 'Computer' magazine. > >Naturally, the editors thought he would be giving a retrospective >view of seven years of object-oriented design, using the language >he created. > >By the end of the interview, the interviewer got more than he had >bargained for and, subsequently, the editor decided to suppress >its contents, 'for the good of the industry' but, as with many of >these things, there was a leak. > >Here is a complete transcript of what was said, unedited, and >unrehearsed, so it isn't as neat as planned interviews. >You will find it interesting... >__________________________________________________________________ >Interviewer: Well, it's been a few years since you changed the >world of software design, how does it feel, looking back? > >Stroustrup: Actually, I was thinking about those days, just >before you arrived. Do you remember? Everyone was writing 'C' >and, the trouble was, they were pretty damn good at it. >were turning out competent - I stress the word 'competent' >graduates at a phenomenal rate. That's what caused the problem. > >Interviewer: Problem? > >Stroustrup: Yes, problem. Remember when everyone wrote Cobol? > >Interviewer: Of course, I did too > >Stroustrup: Well, in the beginning, these guys were like >demi-gods. Their salaries were high, and they were treated like >royalty. > >Interviewer: Those were the days, eh? > >Stroustrup: Right. So what happened? IBM got sick of it, and >invested millions in training programmers, till they were a dime >a dozen. > >Interviewer: That's why I got out. Salaries dropped within a >year, to the point where being a journalist actually paid >better. > >Stroustrup: Exactly. Well, the same happened with 'C' programmers. > >Interviewer: I see, but what's the point? > >Stroustrup: Well, one day, when I was sitting in my office, I >thought of this little scheme, which would redress the >balance a little. I thought 'I wonder what would happen, if >there were a language so complicated, so difficult to learn, >that nobody would ever be able to swamp the market with >programmers? Actually, I got some of the ideas from X10, >you know, X windows. That was such a bitch of a graphics >system, that it only just ran on those Sun 3/60 things. >They had all the ingredients for what I wanted. A really >ridiculously complex syntax, obscure functions, and >pseudo-OO structure. Even now, nobody writes raw X-windows >code. Motif is the only way to go if you want to retain >your sanity. > >Interviewer: You're kidding...? > >Stroustrup: Not a bit of it. In fact, there was another problem. >Unix was written in 'C', which meant that any 'C' programmer >could very easily become a systems programmer. Remember >what a mainframe systems programmer used to earn? > >Interviewer: You bet I do, that's what I used to do. > >Stroustrup: OK, so this new language had to divorce itself from >Unix, by hiding all the system calls that bound the two >together so nicely. This would enable guys who only knew >about DOS to earn a decent living too. > >Interviewer: I don't believe you said that... > >Stroustrup: Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe most >people have figured out for themselves that C++ is a waste >of time but, I must say, it's taken them a lot longer than I >thought it would. > >Interviewer: So how exactly did you do it? > >Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought >people would take the book seriously. Anyone with half a >brain can see that object-oriented programming is >counter-intuitive, illogical and inefficient. > >Interviewer: What? > >Stroustrup: And as for 're-useable code' - when did you ever hear >of a company re-using its code? > >Interviewer: Well, never, actually, but... > >Stroustrup: There you are then. Mind you, a few tried, in the >early days. There was this Oregon company - Mentor >Graphics, I think they were called - really caught a cold >trying to rewrite everything in C++ in about '90 or '91. I >felt sorry for them really, but I thought people would >learn from their mistakes. > >Interviewer: Obviously, they didn't? > >Stroustrup: Not in the slightest. Trouble is, most companies >hush-up all their major blunders, and explaining a $30 >million loss to the shareholders would have been >difficult. Give them their due, though, they made it work in the end. > >Interviewer: They did? Well, there you are then, it proves O-O >works. > >Stroustrup: Well, almost. The executable was so huge, it took >five minutes to load, on an HP workstation, with 128MB of >RAM. Then it ran like treacle. Actually, I thought this >would be a major stumbling-block, and I'd get found out >within a week, but nobody cared. Sun and HP were only too >glad to sell enormously powerful boxes, with huge resources >just to run trivial programs. You know, when we had our >first C++ compiler, at AT&T, I compiled 'Hello World', and >couldn't believe the size of the executable. 2.1MB > >Interviewer: What? Well, compilers have come a long way, since >then. > >Stroustrup: They have? Try it on the latest version of g++ - you >won't get much change out of half a megabyte. Also, there >are several quite recent examples for you, from all over the >world. British Telecom had a major disaster on their hands >but, luckily, managed to scrap the whole thing and start >again. They were luckier than Australian Telecom. Now I >hear that Siemens is building a dinosaur, and getting more >and more worried as the size of the hardware gets bigger, to >accommodate the executables. Isn't multiple inheritance a joy? > >Interviewer: Yes, but C++ is basically a sound language. > >Stroustrup: You really believe that, don't you? Have you ever sat >down and worked on a C++ project? Here's what happens: >First, I've put in enough pitfalls to make sure that only >the most trivial projects will work first time. Take >operator overloading. At the end of the project, almost >every module has it, usually, because guys feel they really >should do it, as it was in their training course. The same >operator then means something totally different in every >module. Try pulling that lot together, when you have a >hundred or so modules. And as for data hiding. God, I >sometimes can't help laughing when I hear about the problems >companies have making their modules talk to each other. I >think the word 'synergistic' was specially invented to twist >the knife in a project manager's ribs. > >Interviewer: I have to say, I'm beginning to be quite appalled at >all this. You say you did it to raise programmers' salaries? >That's obscene. > >Stroustrup: Not really. Everyone has a choice. I didn't expect >the thing to get so much out of hand. Anyway, I basically >succeeded. C++ is dying off now, but programmers still get >high salaries - especially those poor devils who have to >maintain all this crap. You do realize, it's impossible to >maintain a large C++ software module if you didn't actually >write it? > >Interviewer: How come? > >Stroustrup: You are out of touch, aren't you? Remember the >typedef? > >Interviewer: Yes, of course. > >Stroustrup: Remember how long it took to grope through the header >files only to find that 'RoofRaised' was a double precision >number? Well, imagine how long it takes to find all the >implicit typedefs in all the Classes in a major project. > >Interviewer: So how do you reckon you've succeeded? > >Stroustrup: Remember the length of the average-sized 'C' project? >About 6 months. Not nearly long enough for a guy with a >wife and kids to earn enough to have a decent standard of >living. Take the same project, design it in C++ and what do >you get? I'll tell you. One to two years. Isn't that >great? All that job security, just through one mistake of >judgement. And another thing. The universities haven't >been teaching 'C' for such a long time, there's now a >shortage of decent 'C' programmers. Especially those who >know anything about Unix systems programming. How many guys >would know what to do with 'malloc', when they've used 'new' >all these years - and never bothered to check the return >code. In fact, most C++ programmers throw away their return >codes. Whatever happened to good ol' '-1'? At least you >knew you had an error, without bogging the thing down in all >that 'throw' 'catch' 'try' stuff. > >Interviewer: But, surely, inheritance does save a lot of time? > >Stroustrup: Does it? Have you ever noticed the difference >between a 'C' project plan, and a C++ project plan? The planning >stage for a C++ project is three times as long. Precisely >to make sure that everything which should be inherited is, >and what shouldn't isn't. Then, they still get it wrong. >Whoever heard of memory leaks in a 'C' program? Now >finding them is a major industry. Most companies give up, and send >the product out, knowing it leaks like a sieve, simply to >avoid the expense of tracking them all down. > >Interviewer: There are tools... > >Stroustrup: Most of which were written in C++. > >Interviewer: If we publish this, you'll probably get lynched, you >do realize that? > >Stroustrup: I doubt it. As I said, C++ is way past its peak now, >and no company in its right mind would start a C++ project >without a pilot trial. That should convince them that it's >the road to disaster. If not, they deserve all they get. >You know, I tried to convince Dennis Ritchie to rewrite Unix in >C++. > >Interviewer: Oh my God. What did he say? > >Stroustrup: Well, luckily, he has a good sense of humor. I think >both he and Brian figured out what I was doing, in the early >days, but never let on. He said he'd help me write a C++ >version of DOS, if I was interested. > >Interviewer: Were you? > >Stroustrup: Actually, I did write DOS in C++, I'll give you a >demo when we're through. I have it running on a Sparc 20 in the >computer room. Goes like a rocket on 4 CPU's, and only >takes up 70 megs of disk. > >Interviewer: What's it like on a PC? > >Stroustrup: Now you're kidding. Haven't you ever seen Windows >'95? I think of that as my biggest success. Nearly blew the >game before I was ready, though. > >Interviewer: You know, that idea of a Unix++ has really got me >thinking. Somewhere out there, there's a guy going to try it. > >Stroustrup: Not after they read this interview.. > >Interviewer: I'm sorry, but I don't see us being able to publish >any of this. > >Stroustrup: But it's the story of the century. I only want to be >remembered by my fellow programmers, for what I've done >for them. You know how much a C++ guy can get these days? > >Interviewer: Last I heard, a really top guy is worth $70 - $80 an >hour. > >Stroustrup: See? And I bet he earns it. Keeping track of all the >gotchas I put into C++ is no easy job. And, as I said >before, every C++ programmer feels bound by some mystic >promise to use every damn element of the language on every >project. Actually, that really annoys me sometimes, even >though it serves my original purpose. I almost like the >language after all this time. > >Interviewer: You mean you didn't before? > >Stroustrup: Hated it. It even looks clumsy, don't you agree? But >when the book royalties started to come in... well, you get the picture. > >Interviewer: Just a minute. What about references? You must >admit, you improved on 'C' pointers. > >Stroustrup: Hmm. I've always wondered about that. Originally, I >thought I had. Then, one day I was discussing this with a >guy who'd written C++ from the beginning. He said he could >never remember whether his variables were referenced or >dereferenced, so he always used pointers. He said the >little asterisk always reminded him. > >Interviewer: Well, at this point, I usually say 'thank you very >much' but it hardly seems adequate. > >Stroustrup: Promise me you'll publish this. My conscience is >getting the better of me these days. > >Interviewer: I'll let you know, but I think I know what my editor >will say. > >Stroustrup: Who'd believe it anyway? Although, can you send me a >copy of that tape? > >Interviewer: I can do that. > > > > > >

1 0

Mexican Bugs
by David Honig 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.foxnews.com/js_index.sml?content=/news/wires2/ Mexican wiretapping scandal places political reforms in doubt March 26, 1998 By Mark Stevenson, Associated Press MEXICO CITY (AP) When members of an opposition party burst into a secret government wiretapping station this month, they did more than reveal a political scandal: They exposed some of the deepest secrets of common citizens in the coastal city of Campeche. The wiretapping, apparently orchestrated by the state government to get information on opposition groups, has spawned a scandal that reaches into at least four other states. In most cases, opposition politicians were the targets. But nowhere has the damage been as great as in Campeche, where a powerful eavesdropping system set up in a private home had the capacity to tap virtually all phones in the southern city of 200,000 people and record some of their darkest lies and infidelities. "We stood there in shock, in rage, impotence, as we heard recordings and read transcripts of our telephone conversations,'' said Layda Sansores, a senator for the leftist opposition Democratic Revolution Party who discovered the surveillance center on a tip. "There are difficult moments over the course of seven years, things you don't want to remember.'' "We heard a tape of one telephone call in which a man said he was with another man's wife. The wife was there in the room with us, listening,'' Sansores said at a news conference Wednesday. A local journalist present during the March 3 raid on the surveillance center was quoted in one wiretap transcript as denying accusations of rape, noting he `just had fun with' an unidentified woman. "We haven't seen him in public since,'' Sansores said. The taping in the city on the Gulf of Mexico, which used sophisticated computer equipment supplied by an Israeli firm, apparently began in 1991. Three men caught operating the bank of computers and phone switches have been arrested and charged with espionage and criminal association. Two had worked at some point for state police. "We are a small family in Campeche, and this hurts our very fabric,'' Sansores said. Documents uncovered by Sansores in the tiny, computerized wiretapping center including dozens of tapes and transcripts of her own conversations "and those of everyone around me, nieces, sisters, my parents'' suggest the eavesdropping was paid for by the Campeche state government. The current government, which took office in late 1997, has blamed the wiretapping on a previous state governor and said the current governor didn't know about it. Experts and politicians disagree on whether Mexico is experiencing a surge in wiretappings and surveillance, at a time when opposition groups are threatening the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party's 69-year uninterrupted grip on power. Sansores claims that there are up to 22 of the eavesdropping stations around the country, and mentioned four other states where her supporters or party colleagues believe they have evidence of such surveillance. On March 18, authorities seized a network of phone-tapping equipment and secret cameras in Monterrey that reportedly had been rented by politicians and businessmen in the northern city. Several weeks earlier, a top official in the Mexico City government and also from the Democratic Revolution Party the first opposition party ever to govern the capital said she found two tiny surveillance cameras in her office. "There is a new way of doing things when a new group comes to power,'' said Joel Estudillo, an analyst at the Mexican Institute of Political Studies. "Politicians say, `We have to find out what these people have done''' in the past. In a closed political circle like that which has dominated Mexico for most of the century, secrets like past corruption are often known but seldom publicized until a grudge or a competition makes such information a valuable weapon, Estudillo said. "Those kinds of understandings and internal arrangements have so far prevented espionage from becoming a big problem.'' ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig(a)otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu Maybe them boys in Jonesboro were trying out for Lon Horiuchi's job.

1 0

Put your subject line here
by webmaster＠sexlink.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is a subscriber mailing and is intended for Adult Webmasters Only. If you have received this e-mail in error you need only reply and your e-mail address will be removed from this list. vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv EARN $20.00 PER NEW MEMBER ============================================= Join the fastest growing XXX webmaster program today! For every new member you will receive $20.00 on each new $24.95 membership. Click Here http://www.xxxmarketing.com/ac/index.htm GAY WEBSITE PARTNER PROGRAM PAYS $15.00 ================================================ Add an alternative to your straight site or add this excellent webmaster program to you Gay site today. This program pays out $15.00 per new membership of $19.95 Click Here http://www.xxxmarketing.com/americanstuds/index.htm XXX FUN 4 U AND SO IS THE $$$$MONEY$$$ ================================================ Hot New XXX Hardcore site offers excellent partnership program. For every new sign-up you will receive $15.00 per new member. Click Here http://www.xxxmarketing.com/xxxfun/index.htm OPEN YOUR OWN XXX ADULT STORE FOR FREE TODAY ============================================= Earn an average of $1,500.00 per month for adding a NEW Adult Store to your website. Our store looks just like your website! We do all the work! We ship, we process, we host, we do it all. Your only responsibility is marketing and promotion. We pay you a commission of 15% plus a 3% over-ride! Click Here http://www.xxxmarketing.com/store/index.htm INCREASE YOU TRAFFIC....INCREASE YOUR SALES =========================================== The SEX LINK NETWORK is giving you 2,500 FREE BANNER ADS just for joining one of the most successful adult banner exchange programs on the internet. Join right now and you will be credited with 2,500 FREE ad, but this offer won't last long act today if you want the FREE BANNER ADVERTISING. Click Here To Join http://www.xxxmarketing.com/sexlink/index.htm

1 0

FW: U.S. Official Cites Key Escrow Flaws
by Trei, Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Found this in sci.crypt. I'm suprised it didn't hit the lists yet. Peter Trei trei(a)ziplink.net > -----Original Message----- > From: epic-news(a)epic.org [SMTP:epic-news@epic.org] > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 1998 11:37 PM > Subject: U.S. Official Cites Key Escrow Flaws > > > ================================================================== > > U.S. OFFICIAL CONCEDES THAT "KEY RECOVERY" ENCRYPTION > IS INFERIOR TO ALTERNATIVE PRIVACY TECHNIQUES > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: > Wednesday, March 25, 1998 David Sobel/Dave Banisar > (202) 544-9240 > > WASHINGTON, DC -- A top U.S. official acknowledged more than a > year ago that the Internet privacy technique championed by the > Clinton Administration is "more costly and less efficient" than > alternative methods that the government seeks to suppress. The > concession is contained in a newly-released high-level document on > encryption policy obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information > Center (EPIC). > > In a November 1996 memorandum to other government officials, > William A. Reinsch, the Commerce Department's Under Secretary for > Export Administration, discussed the Administration's efforts to > promote "escrowed" or "recoverable" encryption techniques in > overseas markets. Such techniques enable government agents to > unscramble encrypted information and they form the cornerstone of > current U.S. encryption policy. > > After noting that government regulations permit the export of non- > escrowed encryption products only to "safe end-users" such as > foreign police and security agencies, Reinsch recognized the > inferiority of the Administration's favored technology: > > Police forces are reluctant to use "escrowed" encryption > products (such as radios in patrol cars). They are more > costly and less efficient than non-escrowed products. > There can be long gaps in reception due to the escrow > features -- sometimes as long as a ten second pause. Our > own police do not use recoverable encryption products; > they buy the same non-escrowable products used by their > counterparts in Europe and Japan. > > Ironically, Reinsch's concession is contained in a memorandum that > discusses the Administration's strategy to "help the market > transition from non-recoverable products to recoverable products." > According to EPIC Legal Counsel David Sobel, the newly released > document "suggests that the Clinton Administration is trying to > sell key recovery technology while quietly recognizing its > inferiority. This approach will ultimately weaken the global > position of the American computer industry and hold back the > development of the privacy protections so badly needed on the > Internet." > > EPIC and other critics of current U.S. encryption policy have long > maintained that "key escrow" and "key recovery" approaches > compromise the security of private information by providing > "backdoor" access to encrypted data. > > The Reinsch memo was released in response to a Freedom of > Information Act request EPIC submitted to the Department of State > concerning the international activities of former U.S. "crypto > czar" David Aaron. That request is the subject of a pending > federal lawsuit initiated by EPIC last year. > > The memorandum is available at the EPIC website at: > > http://www.epic.org/crypto/key_escrow/reinsch_memo.html > > > - end - > > .

1 0

WordSmith Crypto -- Fw: AWADmail Issue 8
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----Original Message----- From: Wordsmith <wsmith(a)wordsmith.org> To: linguaphile(a)wordsmith.org <linguaphile(a)wordsmith.org> Date: Thursday, March 26, 1998 1:35 PM Subject: AWADmail Issue 8 > AWADmail Issue 8, March 26, 1998 > A Compendium of Feedback on the Previous Week's Words in AWAD, > and Other Interesting Tidbits about Words and Languages > >------------------------------ > >From: Anu Garg (anu(a)wordsmith.org) >Subject: AWADmail is back! > >AWADmail is back after a long hiatus. Last week's theme, "Words whose >pronunciations differ a lot from their spellings" generated a huge response. >Some sent their favorite words in this category (colonel coming at the top >of the list), while others forwarded poems lamenting the intractability of >English orthoepy and orthography. Here are selected responses. > >------------------------------ > >From: E. Richard Cohen (ercohen(a)aol.com) >Subject: Phonetic Pronunciation > >In line with this week's critique of English pronunciation, dare I bring up >George Bernard Shaw's plea for spelling reform with the word 'GHOTI" > >GH as in "rough" >O as in "women" >TI as in "nation" > >GHOTI = "fish" > > Also noted by Marc J. Broering (dad(a)louisville.edu) Ted Schipper > (ted.schipper(a)utoronto.ca) (Tim Nelson) tsn(a)deakin.edu.au, Sheila > Crosby (sheila(a)ing.iac.es) Vimala Rodgers (vimala(a)iihs.com) and > martina(a)aol.com. -Anu > >------------------------------ > >From: Derek Winkler (derek(a)aim-systems.on.ca) >Subject: Ruminations & Ponderances > >It's funny that a couple of the words you're featuring for being pronounced >differently than they are spelled have French origins. Being from Canada and >therefore being exposed to French, I look at the word and think "What do you >mean pronounced differently then they are spelled, how else would you >pronounce oeuvre." > >------------------------------ > >From: David Isaacson (isaacson(a)wmich.edu) >Subject: Another Pronunciation for "chaos" > >One of the characters in Sean O'Casey's play, "Juno and the Paycock," (it's >either Captain Jack Boyle or his sidekick "Joxer" Daly) regularly >mispronounces this word as "chassis." > >------------------------------ > >From: Fred Bartlett (fredb(a)springer-ny.com) >Subject: Chaos > >When I traveled to the old Soviet Union to edit the proceedings of a >conference on nonlinear dynamics, I was baffled by the (English) speech >of my Russian colleagues. They kept talking about "House" -- that is, >"chaos". It was all perfectly reasonable (though wrong, of course): >transliteration to Cyrillic and then pronunciation as if it were Russian. > >------------------------------ > >From: Steve Royster (roysters(a)sec.gov) >Subject: Re: A.Word.A.Day--rendezvous > >I was willing to let oeuvre pass after I mistook it initially for the French >word for "egg." I learned something on that one. But isn't "rendezvous" a >direct French import? > > See next message. -Anu > >French, as the comedian Steve Martin has noted, is more torturous than >English: "It's like those French have a different word for everything!" On >the album "A Wild and Crazy Guy," from early in his oeuvre, Martin describes >a man who dies trying to speak French. > >------------------------------ > >From: Ken Maher (ken_maher(a)nhmbm1.dos.nortel.com) >Subject: Re: A.Word.A.Day--chaos > >Your note on the need for pronunciation guidance in English reminds me of >what I used to tell students when I taught English as a second language for >ten years, mostly to native speakers of Spanish, Arabic, or Swahili. All >languages are thieves, but most languages have the good sense to hide what >they've stolen by making it look like their own. English, however, is more >vain or, perhaps, careless, and often keeps the stolen goods in their >original forms. For example, when Spanish stole the word for driver from >French, it changed the spelling to "chofer," whereas English kept it as >"chauffeur." This linguistic practice makes English one of the most >difficult of the Latin-alphabet languages to learn to spell. > > In polite company it is called borrowing. Whether these > loanwords are ever returned is another matter. -Anu > >------------------------------ > >From: Bob Simmons (bsimmons(a)compassnet.com) >Subject: (Mis)pronunciation Guide > >While I applaud your intention to include pronunciation in AWAD, I think you >should look for another source. Specifically, I have a problem with each of >the last three days' pronunciations: > >oeuvre (oe-VRUH) -- since this one retains its French pronunciation, it is >just about impossible to render in English. When I say it, it sounds more >like e(r)-vra (with neither syllable accented). The way you've written it, I >would say e(r)-VREW. > >segue (SAG-way) -- I have never heard this pronounced other than SEG-way > >rendezvous (RAN-day-voo) -- I would argue that RON-day-voo is closer. > > > While reducing a spoken sound to its written form is tough enough > in any language, it is nearly impossible to accurately represent > pronunciation information using only the lowest common denominator > of characters -- those found on a standard English keyboard. Not > all systems have the capability to show phonetic characters. (Once > Unicode is more widely adopted, it would be possible to show all > IPA characters but for now we have to do with the seven bit ASCII > character set). It must also be noted that the pronunciation of > words varies a great deal from region to region and any single way > of pronouncing a word cannot be called the only correct one. In that > spirit, the pronunciation guide provided with the words here should > be taken as an approximation and not as a precise phonetic equivalent. > > If you disagree with a given pronunciation or anything else in AWAD, > please drop me a line at anu(a)wordsmith.org. Due to large volume of > messages, I can't always respond to you but I do read all messages. -Anu > >........................................................................... ... >Every other author may aspire to praise; the lexicographer can only hope to >escape reproach. -Samuel Johnson > >To see previous issues of AWADmail, visit www.wordsmith.org/awad/archives.html >You can get them by email too. Send a blank message to wsmith(a)wordsmith.org >with Subject line as: AWADmail nn, where nn is the issue number. For example, >to get the first issue, make the subject line as: AWADmail 01 . >

1 0

Junger v. USA Notice
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: pr_list4(a)samsara.LAW.CWRU.Edu Subject: Press Release Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 15:37:38 -0500 From: "Peter D. Junger" <junger(a)samsara.LAW.CWRU.Edu> Press Release New Judge to Decide Whether Export Restrictions on Software Violate Constitutional Guarantees of Freedom of Speech and of the Press Reply Briefs in Junger v. Daley Available on World Wide Web Government Argues that Much Software is Harmful ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cleveland, Ohio, Tuesday, March 26, 1998 For Immediate Release For More Information Contact: Peter D. Junger (216) 368-2535 <junger(a)samsara.law.cwru.edu> Gino Scarselli (216) 291-8601 <gscarsel(a)mail.multiverse.com> Or see URL: http://samsara.law.cwru.edu/comp_law/jvc/ To be added to, or removed from, the list of those who were sent this press release, please send e-mail to <lawsuit(a)upaya.multiverse.com>. _________________________________________________________________ Cleveland, Ohio, March 26 -- A status conference in the case of Junger v. Daley, the suit in which a law professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio seeks to enjoin the enforcement by the United States Department of Commerce of the export regulations on encryption software, will be held Friday, March 27, at 10:00 a.m. in the chambers of Federal District Judge James S. Gwin in the federal courthouse in Akron, Ohio. The case turns on the issue of whether the publication in electronic form of encryption software---software that is used to preserve the privacy of electronic communications and data stored on a computer---is entitled to protection under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Judge Gwin, a recent appointee to the federal bench who previously served on the Ohio Court of Common Pleas, has replaced Judge Donald C. Nugent as the judge responsible for the litigation. The plaintiff, Professor Peter Junger, who teaches a course in Computing and the Law and who wishes to publish his class materials containing some encryption programs on his World Wide Web server, seeks an injunction against the enforcement by the defendant, Commerce Secretary Daley, of the export regulations promulgated the Department of Commerce that require anyone who wishes to publish encryption software of the Internet or on the World Wide Web to first obtain a license from the Bureau of Export Administration. Both sides have filed for summary judgment. Junger argues that the freedoms of speech and of the press that are secured by the First Amendment protect the writing and publication of computer programs. The government, on the other hand, argues that computer programs are not entitled to the protection of the First Amendment because they are ``functional''. Each side has filed a brief in support of its motion for summary judgment. These briefs and the complaint and motions for summary judgment are available at <http://www.jya.com/pdj.htm> and <http://samsara.law.cwru.edu/comp_law/jvd/>. In addition both sides have filed reply briefs that are now available at: <http://www.jya.com/pdj6.htm> <http://www.jya.com/pdj7.htm> In his reply brief the plaintiff's lawyers argue: ``Making software available on the Internet and the World Wide Web is publication of that software, and publication in that medium is entitled to the unqualified protection of the First Amendment.'' The government responds to this argument in its reply brief by claiming that software is a ``functional item'' and thus not entitled to protection as speech. In furtherance of this claim it points out, ``Much software ... is designed to cause substantial harm,'' and that ``software can be used to invade privacy, commit fraud, and substantially disrupt and endanger people's lives.'' ``That is rather a perverse argument,'' says Junger, ``considering that encryption software is used to protect against exactly the harms that the government lists and that there is no law against the use of encryption software, while, of course, there are laws against invading privacy, committing fraud, and substantially disrupting and endangering people's lives. It is clear that the government does not claim just the right to regulate the writing and publication of encryption software. It claims the right to forbid the writing and publication of any type of computer program whatsoever without being in any way restricted by the First Amendment. There are, of course, some types of speech, like obscenity, that the courts have held are not entitled to the protection of the First Amendment, but no court has ever subscribed to the government's remarkable theory that the First Amendment does not protect functional speech.'' ``My case,'' says Junger, ``is not just about the constitutionality of the regulations forbidding the export of encryption software, though that is an extremely important issue. The real issue is whether the First Amendment protects the writing and publication of any type of computer program.'' -30-

1 0

Try It Before You Buy It Special ! 45 Million Email Leads + Next Generation Mailers !!!
by 32685944＠28723.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Prices are skyrocketing as Non Democratic forces and Mail Censors take Control of the internet,deciding Who gets to advertise and to Whom ! Look for those little aol notices when You try to access certain mail, You can't ! They have already looked at Your mail and decided You CAN'T have it, period ! But be aware, a little knowledge makes You dangerous, So let Your Congressional Representative know that You are getting Wise to what's going on with the big three power play. More info maybe available in later dispatchs. ( If the empire doesn't strike first ) But if You still wish to advertise that product or service, better do it now, establish Yourself ! While You still have that freedom to do so. ADVERTISE TO MILLIONS! PLUS ( Secret new technology offer) Do you have a product or service that you want to market? Direct emailing is the most cost-effective way to advertise not only on the Internet, but out of any marketing media. Where else can you get your ad to millions for so little? We have helped thousands get their ad out in mass numbers. We offer the following: 7 Million email addresses - $99 + a full feature 10 day Stealth Pro Emailer demo 15 Million email addresses - $199 + a full feature 10 day Stealth Pro Emailer demo 25 Million email addresses -$249 + a full feature 10 day Stealth Pro Emailer demo 45 Million email addresses - $299 + a full feature 10 day Stealth Pro Emailer demo Stealth Mass Mailer the worlds most powerful bulk email program. Stealth allows you to send between up to 400,000 emails per hour. But, please be responsible and keep Your numbers in the 5-10k range, if Your well thought out ad for a good product or service is delivered to that number of recipients, ( a Good list with as many of the Flammers and Cyber Stormtroopers squeezed out as possible ) and You Will get responses ! Windows 95 only. Also included is step by step instructions. PLUS Rapid Fire Emailer ! Its Un-Stopable Our Next Generation Mailer does not use your ISP's Server. It acts as its own Mail Server! This Mailer sends email messages directly to your recipients Mail Server ! The software Delivers each and every message right before your eyes direct to the receipient, with no ques, and no deleting. One reason bulk email is so frowned upon with numerous ISP's is people try to send as much mail as they can, as quick as they can and crash the mail server of the ISP. This won't happen with Our Server software since you don't use the mail server of the ISP to send your mail. The program actually sends the mail directly from your computer which is now a bona fide mail server, to the recipients mail server avoiding any potential blocks that would prevent you from reaching those on your mailing list. You do not have to "forge" headers or randomize anything to have 100% of your mail delivered, although the program does allow for randomization and customizing of headers. You can send mail omitting the "to" "from" and "reply to" portions of your headers. Want to send out your messages in color. Not a problem ! Just select a font color with your mouse, and then click on a background color as well. Want to make your font bold or put it into italics, just point and click. Want your message centered or shifted left or right, once again just point and click. Rapid Fire Mail Server works with any Windows 95 or NT computer. It requires no additional hardware or software. The Rapid Fire Mail Server sends at speeds up to 80,000 messages per hour DELIVERED using a modest pentium and a 28.8 modem. Rates will dramatically increase with an ISDN or cable modem and of course with a T-1 they will be even faster. Call for a Free Three day fully functional demo ! This is the wave of the Future ! OR We Can Mail For You now, while these prices last !!! Advertise to 2 Million people for $995. Advertise to 5 Million people for $1995 Advertise to 10 Million people for $2995 Advertise to 25 Million people for $4995 Start earning mega money and get started now! > > > If you have any further questions call our Marketing Department at: (504) 649-6248 Try It Before You Buy It Special !!! For the next 10 days, We will give You a Free Next Generation Mailer ( 3 day Demo), Plus 30 Thousand Email addresses (Your Choice) for only $19.95, 50 thousand for $29.95. Try three versions of Your own ad for selling goods, services, or whatever to aol,mci,compuserve,prodigy,etc, prospects before investing a few hundred dollars into millions of addresses and a fast effective Next Generation Mailer. Remember, just one order from a 10k list equals out to 4,500 orders if mailed to all 45 million available. Don't miss out on this opportunity to test market Your product, Cheap !!! > We accept Visa, Mastercard, AMEX,Discover Card, Checks by Mail. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > DATE_____________________________________________________ > > NAME____________________________________________________ > > COMPANY NAME___________________________________________ > > ADDRESS_________________________________________________ > > CITY, STATE, ZIP___________________________________________ > > PHONE NUMBERS__________________________________________ > > FAX NUMBERS_____________________________________________ > > EMAIL ADDRESS___________________________________________ > > > > TYPE OF CREDIT CARD: > > ______VISA _____MASTERCARD _____AMEX > > CREDIT CARD# __________________________________________ > > EXPIRATION DATE________________________________________ > > NAME ON CARD___________________________________________ > > AMOUNT $____________________ > ADDRESS ____________________ CITY - STATE - ZIP __________________________ > If different from Above. > DATE:x__________________ OR fax Your order to [504]-781-6615 > *Please select one of the following for shipping.. > ____I would like to receive my package OVERNIGHT. I'm including > $19 for shipping. (outside US add an additional $15 for shipping) > ____I would like to receive my package 2 DAY delivery. I'm including > $10 for shipping. (outside US add an additional $15 for shipping) Send check or money order to: Over Nite Letter Type > 230 West Hall Ave. > P.O.Box 202 > Slidell,La.70460 Member of National Organization of Internet Commerce. To have your name added to our universal remove list please go to remove(a)noic.org and your name will be added and distributed to all of our members This advertisement is brought to You by the Rebel News Agency. 45rv2d z-u 38as 296 s

1 0