December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: ID card from hell
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:53 PM 7/17/94 -0400, David Mandl wrote: >How much do I get for identifying that quote? It's from the song "1984" >by the band Spirit, a single released in late 1969. > >I'm really impressed, Duncan. > > --Dave. Any libertarian "of a certain age" should know the song. Not much strictly libertarian rock out there. No extra points. DCF "Avoid possible future war crimes prosecutions -- disobey."

1 0

Re: Come On
by rjc＠gnu.ai.mit.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The fact that the original moron trivialized the women's roles in this film as "all they can do is talk on the phone, get into cat fights, give blow jobs, and kill people by accident" says more about his attitudes towards women than the response that followed. It would be like saying "all the men do is drive around in harrier jets, deliver stupid one liners, and kill people" The fact is, not a single "blow job" was delivered in this movie. "Cat fight" is a derogatory term for what happened (would you call what happened in Total Recall with Sharone Stone a "cat fight"? How many cat fights involve no hair pulling, and punches and kicks to the face?") And the "talk on the phone" bit takes up probably 5 minutes of screen time. He also trivialized Juno Skinner's role (she is a villainness), because she was greedy and did it all for profit. Well what villain doesn't? How many hundreds of movies have portrayed the evil Corporate CEO out to destroy the world for profit? Is it only when a woman is potrayed doing it that it becomes taboo? If I was a woman, I'd be more concerned about this attitude than guys lusting after Jamie Lee Curtis's body. What it says is this: Selfish Ambitious Man = Up and Coming Ruthless Businessman. Selfish Ambitious Woman = gold digging bitch. It is arguably more damaging to women's business success than "I like Hooters". Anyway, I'm surprised that there isn't a feminist witch-hunt investigating Samdy Sandfort, for his non-pc H.E.A.T. reports. As for the crypto-related aspects. The movie did more to show the *abuses* of wiretaps rather than how great they are at stopping nuclear terrorists.

2 1

Time goes mainstream w/ Internet hype
by paul＠hawksbill.sprintmrn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Greets, fellow tentacles. Just a quick note to alert you to the recent Time issue with the cover: "The Strange New World of the Internet," subtitled "Battles on the Frontiers of cyberspace." Actually, it's a decent article for the neophyte. It goes into detail on the Cantor & Seigle (boo, hiss) 'Green Card' spam and even mentions cypherpunks by name. - paul

1 0

Re: Schneier
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim Werner wrote: >Speaking of Schneier, I have an upbeat note. > >I ordered his book, when it first came out, from the local Borders book >store. When I went to pick it up, they told me that if I decided to buy it >I could not return it, since it was not a book that they would otherwise >stock. > >Today I was there checking out the computer books, and they had a copy on >the shelf, so I guess it was in enough demand that they decided to stock it. > >tw I have been trying to buy a copy at my local Barnes&Noble for about two months now, but everytime I go back to check, they "just sold the last one". They have sold out three shipments in two months! -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP public key by finger Please write to clipper.petition(a)cpsr.org and tell them you oppose Clipper.

1 0

Ghio "loses it"
by nobody＠ds1.wu-wien.ac.at 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Mathew Ghio. Ask, and you shall receive. You complain about my current campaign and report that you have shut down your remailer because of it. My sincere apologies. As I wrote, it is not my intention to sabotage any remailers. I was sending you messages at a gentle pace (not nearly as much as you claim for sympathy), but apparently it was too much! So I will take you off the current mailing list. I'm sorry to see you go. I may add you in the future at some unspecified time, however. This will help encourage your inspired and highminded attention to carefully filtering and screening every incoming message to your remailer which you have grandly demonstrated. I think I speak for all other members of the Reich in saying that we are proud of your extremely patriotic commitment to censorship and upholding our cause. Any user of your highly secure system will surely be flush with pride. I wish I had more men who are as dedicated as you are. I have grand plans for my brethen that will soon, very soon, be coming to fruition. The first few `triggers' are the drastic earth cataclysms (not the least of which will be Operation Shake-and-Bake in CA, commencing shortly) that will help plunge the world into an anarchy that is more receptive to our way of thinking. The paranoia and deadly cynicism against government will help too. But the most important brick of all, of course, is the deification of cyberspace. I would love to expound on these subjects more but I have to keep a `low profile' at the moment. The time has not come yet. Thanks again for your contributions. . . . . . . . ,,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ___ . .//~~~. . //. ./. . //. ./. . //~~\ . . //~~~ . .//~~\. . / / . .//===. . //. ./. . //===/. . //===/. . //=== . .//===/ . +===#===+ . .// . . . .\\__/. . //. ./. . //. \ . . //___ . .//. \. . / / . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~~~ ' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Re: Come On
by jamiel＠sybase.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:06 PM 07/19/94 +0000, Ray wrote: > Anyway, I'm surprised that there isn't a feminist witch-hunt >investigating Samdy Sandfort, for his non-pc H.E.A.T. reports. Sandy's honest, up front and cool about his HEAT Posts. Speaking only for me, don't think there is anything wrong with liking bodies. It's when someone can only see that body and not person in there that it becomes an issue. Hmmm, if I could only find a way to make this crypto related."" -j -- "Blah Blah Blah" ___________________________________________________________________ Jamie Lawrence <jamiel(a)sybase.com>

1 0

RE: Ghio "loses it"
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Another article reference: I think I just saw an image of the new Fuhrer on page 23 of the August edition of PCWorld. Blanc

1 0

*comeon
by Gary Jeffers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Connie Sadler is quite displeased at what Berzerk finds delightful. I would not call this list a boys' club but the vast majority is male. People talk to please themselves. This list is statistically unusual. We have lots of guys, minarchists, anarchists, eccentrics, & tech- heads. We kinds of people are amused at what berzerk finds amusing. I doubt that Sadler's principles are offended, but rather her interests. If fun had been poked at guys then she would have been amused. In the US women are accorded special rights at being a "victimized group". There are many places that your interests will be specially catered to. The Cypherpunks' list is just about as "politically incorrect" as you can get & we like it this way. We are sick of being censored & vilified by society at large. We also do not like our rights of freedom of association being trampled. Your demands that your sensibilities be respected is a demand that our speech be censored. We would be quite pleased by any contributions to the Cypherpunks' cause that you have to offer. But you will not get a good reception here by demanding rights that you believe are awarded to state certified "victims" groups. Of course, I'm not really familiar with you. Possibly you think of yourself more as an individual than as a member of a particular group & possibly you will be an asset to Cypherpunks & your first post was not representative of yourself. In that case, we would be pleased to have your company. Wishing for the best, Gary Jeffers

3 2

Re: *comeon
by sidney＠taurus.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Gary Jeffers" <CCGARY(a)MIZZOU1.missouri.edu> wrote: >We [...] are amused [...] >The Cypherpunks' list is [...] "politically incorrect" [...] > & we like it this way. > We are sick of [...] > We also do not like [...] > We would be quite pleased by [...] Thank you for speaking up for us. Unfortunately you got it wrong. Unless you were using the archaic royal "we". Or unless you just forgot to say what "we" you were talking about. > Of course, I'm not really familiar with you. Now you got it right. -- sidney markowitz <sidney(a)apple.com> One of the 500+ subscribers to the cypherpunk mailing list. Not one of the n who let Gary Jeffers know their personal political and social philosophies so that he could speak authoritatively for their collective.

1 0

Re: Leaving the Country
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From Duncan: It is not a matter of tax planning but a matter of psychology. They have convinced you to manage your own oppression because it is cheaper and easier if you do it than if they do it.. . . . . It is possible to reprogram yourself to disobedience. . . . .................................................. For those who have seen the light of reason, there is still the problem of living with the methods used to enforce complicity to the prevalent political policy. Disobedience by itself may psychologically help the individual who imagines themselves to be free, but the disadvantage of a government administrative clerk's preemption over your own decisions remains. There is still the need to keep what is one's own, even when there is no recognition for the sanctity of the self or of personal property. This problem of efficacy in the face of human forces which are moved by values contrary to one's own, is what I think of when I imagine what it takes to "live among them", considering that there is no longer a place to form a new, improved country. There are some circumstances at a company I know of (!) where they have found ways of establishing a "win-win" situation with clients. It is a controversial way of arriving at arrangements which are acceptable to all parties - I wonder what sort of compromises go on at meetings where eventually everyone comes out smiling. But it is the sort of calculating in interpersonal, entrepreneural, and political juxtapositions which sometimes appear to be the only way to make headway in difficult butt-heading circumstances. I'm not an advocate of compromising, but I do think that there is much material for personal advantage in the study of psychology & cognition, as it relates to understanding what one is up against. The question remains, how to navigate in spite of some of these things. The more that one can live openly in correspondence with the way things really, really work, the better it is for the minds which must live with the actual. I do think an anarcho-capitalist would rather live/work with the actual, rather than shrink from it or excuse themselves from the fray (even while trying to avoid the obstacles). Judiciously. Blanc

1 0