December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

PGP mail netiquette
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've been thinking about the netiquette of sending PGP mail messages to people, especially "people you've never met." There are some people who publicize the existence of their PGP public key in their .sig or .plan or whatever, but do not like to actually receive PGP encrypted mail because it is such a hassle to decode. Others, like myself, have PGP integrated in their mail, so it's no problem. I would be quite pleased if every single piece of email I received was PGP-encrypted. How to tell us apart? I've placed the line "PGP encrypted mail is very welcome!" into my .plan. Others who have automated mail decryption, or who just like typing PGP command lines, might find it useful to do something similar. Just my $2E-2. Raph -- Raph Levien raph(a)cs.berkeley.edu PGP encrypted mail is very welcome! -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.3a mQA9Aitm+zMAAAEBfiyEycCjO+sar1wmxy2RkCBjyr5+4JH/u5DLOvfLHsguqKB5 TwdxjrRkbio+Q+cdiQAFEbQoUmFwaGFlbCBMLiBMZXZpZW4gPHJhcGhAY3MuQmVy a2VsZXkuRURVPg== =jc6E -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

2 1

Re: AIDS testing and privacy
by doug＠OpenMind.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May writes on the subject of racist hiring practices: >(It's also part of Libertarianism 101 that such a company would not >likely do well in this day and age. Before you cite America's racist >past, read up on who it was that enforced segregation. Hint: not the >corporations. Ditto for South Africa (the "other" RSA), where the >Apartheid Laws came into being because companies were looking to hire >blacks and coloreds to fill job position, and the whites didn't like >that much.) I'm not sure I buy this argument... who is it that "enforces" discrimination based on sexual orientation, today? If sexual orientation is a matter of status, rather than choice, then this form of discrimination is analogous to racism. Would you suggest that employers that refuse to hire homosexuals are simply bowing to the pressures of society at large? Unlike Apartheid, there are no laws that *enforce* discrimination based on sexual orientation (at least in the USA). In a fundamental situation of conflict between two entities, I agree that "anything goes", in the spirit of voluntary interactions between two entities. In the case of a conflict between a small number of large, powerful entities (corporate employers) and a vast number of small, powerless entities (the employment pool), I don't see how you can argue that this vast horde should not team up and utilize whatever means to achieve an advantage over the few in power. Today and in the future, "power" may reside increasingly in economic positioning. Thus, the power of the many individuals vs. the power of the few corporate entities may derive largely from their collective voice in the social conventions of society at large, which ultimately derives power from the tax base of the society at large. As long as these social conventions (and the tax base that empowers them) is in place, I see nothing wrong with the "voluntary interaction between individuals" which consists of banding together to pass, and enforce, laws in favor of the goals of these individuals. This is the basis of democracy. Along a similar vein, Blanc Weber writes: >... just remember in the real world no one is required >to be kind. If some hospital or company makes a decision to >deny service for whatever reason they justify to themselves, >it's their call as long as they are not owned by the State. In the real world, the voting public is not required to be kind to the hospital or the company, either. If a large political block can put into place structures (laws and enforcement) which effectively provide coercion against such denials of service, this is fair play as well. Doug ___________________________________________________________________ Doug Cutrell General Partner doug(a)OpenMind.com Open Mind, Santa Cruz ===================================================================

3 2

timestamps
by broadley＠turing.ucdavis.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I heard that timestamp(a)lorax.MV.COM was down and/or notworking. My recent ping worked, I received a PGP signed copy of my message back after about 24 hours. -- Bill Broadley Broadley(a)math.ucdavis.edu UCD Math Sys-Admin Linux is great. http://ucdmath.ucdavis.edu/~broadley PGP-ok

1 0

Re: AIDs testing and privacy
by Mike Markley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Duncan Frissell wrote: | | I suppose I shouldn't admit this as a privacy advocate but I wonder why | anyone is interested in all this health/credit data. Since they can't *do* | anything with it in the real world, seems like a waste of time. What about being denied a job because you have been treated for some disease? How about being denied a loan because your medical history has a profile that indicates that your life expectancy is shorter than the duration of the loan? It seems that the potential for abuse is so great that we should not allow such cross referencing. Mike. ===================================================== Mike Markley <mmarkley(a)microsoft.com> I'm not a Microsoft spokesperson. All opinions expressed here are mine. =====================================================

6 10

Re: AIDS testing and privacy
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:41 AM 9/8/94 -0700, Doug Cutrell wrote: >In a fundamental situation of conflict between two entities, I agree that >"anything goes", in the spirit of voluntary interactions between two >entities. In the case of a conflict between a small number of large, >powerful entities (corporate employers) and a vast number of small, >powerless entities (the employment pool), I don't see how you can argue >that this vast horde should not team up and utilize whatever means to >achieve an advantage over the few in power. You mean mass executions of "corporate officers" for example if the 'peepul' felt like it. Last time I looked there were millions of employers (not a small number) and the average size of companies was declining. >Today and in the future, "power" may reside increasingly in economic >positioning. Thus, the power of the many individuals vs. the power of the >few corporate entities may derive largely from their collective voice in >the social conventions of society at large, which ultimately derives power >from the tax base of the society at large. You seem to think that the power of corporations -- which consists in the cases cited merely of refusing to hire or deal with certain people -- is the same as the power of a "democratically appointed" armed force. This armed force is to bash down doors to force these evil corporations into an association with people they would rather not associate with. In other words non-violent "refusal to deal" by corporations is *evil* while armed breaches of the peace by law enforcement (including shooting resisters) is *good*. Not a very "humanistic" perspective. Note too that anti-discrimination laws also punish small powerless entities (individuals) who discriminate not just massive corporations. And what law protects those who the "peepul/government" don't like from discrimination. As a member of a hated minority (crypto anarchists) I'd rather take my chances on an open market than risk official discrimination by the state. Mercifully, the technology we are developing will allow everyone who cares to to decline to participate in this coercive allocation of power. DCF

1 0

Re: AIDs testing and privacy
by jamiel＠sybase.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:28 AM 09/07/94, Mike Markley wrote: >What about being denied a job because you have been treated for some >disease? How about being denied a loan because your medical history has >a profile that indicates that your life expectancy is shorter than the >duration of the loan? It seems that the potential for abuse is so great >that we should not allow such cross referencing. Another example- A Lyndon LaRouche type could get elected. (I personally don't have enough faith in the Folk At Large not to hand someone like that power) "Starting tomorrow, all Hawiian Citizen Units will begin moving to the mainland. Some of the smaller islands have been cleared, and HIV+ units are being relocated as this address is being broadcast..." -j

4 4

Social punishment 1/3: law without enforcers
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by rishab: The system of social punishment can easily be adapted to educated, liberal inhabitants of cyberspace, much more easilty than can present law enforcement systems. My next post will examine the similarities between tribal and cyberspatial society. ........................................................ I don't know yet what you are going to say about the similarities between tribal & cyberspatial societies, but one thought which immediately struck me in your sentence is that you are putting two very different ideas of society into the same category. The associations which occur in cyberspace are not like the ones which occur in the physical plane. The expectations are different - you don't expect to live with these other people in close proximity, you don't expect to identify with them as a group in the same way, you are not going to get the same benefits on a daily basis or even an extended time period, as you might from those with whom you interact on more than one level or kind of contact. I personally don't see interactions in cyberspace as constituting a 'society', even if they are 'social'. Maybe a drive-by society. Maybe drive-by law enforcement. :>) Blanc

2 1

Title VII v. Liberty
by Matthew J Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Granted I deleted about 1000 messages before starting to follow the thread (tangental at best to crypto...) but... Title VII of the CRA covers the already illegal actions of Tim's hypothetical firm refusing to hire Blacks. Granted Tim firmly believes this kind of law is a bad idea, but nonetheless it is the law. To avoid the flame, yes I am wel versed in Libertarian ideals, save it, i already subscribe. As to sexual orientation, um no federal law protects the class. And yet magic- ally, massive discrimination exists. This is a natural result of the condition of falesly free markets. To those involved with Libertarian causes, a free market player in this example would openly admit that th basis of orientation, but they dont. They also hide their racist activities. I in no way suggest all corp's are involved in this activity but if you deny it exists Id like to live in your world. Sometimes intervention works. Granted, usually it does not. But removing the regs now would work to do one thing - perpetuate the past effects of discriminatory intent in today's world. Flame on! - Matt ______________________________________________________________________________ In defense of liberty, encrypt for all purposes, civil and professional. In defense of privacy, encrypt all correspondence, personal and professional. In defense of sanity, do not encrypt your dry cleaning invoice! ++++++++--------mjmiski(a)macc.wisc.edu (c)1993

3 2

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

2 1

Virtual assasins and lethal remailers
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

doug(a)OpenMind.com: > an openly conducted business. For example, an anonymous news post > announces a public key which is to be used to encode a contract kill order, > along with a digital cash payment. The person placing the contract need > only anonymously place the encrypted message in alt.test. Perhaps it is And then the evil assasin, using the Cypherpunk Assasination Remailer (tm) sends an encrypted e-mail to the victim's life-support system and alas! he dies. No? You mean the assasin will actually have to use a {gun/knife/CIA anti-beard poison} and be _physically_ near the victim? Ah well, then the police just got to find the fingerprints and all the usual things, right? What's cyberspace got to do with it? I believe that if you try to criminalize conspiracy, than you risk mass invasions of privacy. Conspiring is just exercising freedom of opinion and expression - the crime, as always even in the days of Caesar, is in the act, not the preparation. And the act is always quite physical, well out of the bounds of cyberspace and the Thought Police. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "Clean the air! clean the sky! wash the wind! rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in take stone from stone and wash them..." Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

1 0