December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

FTC Privacy Initiative (fwd)
by Jyri Kaljundi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 09:22:11 -0800 From: Internet Marketing Discussion List <internet-marketing(a)popco.com> To: internet-marketing(a)popco.com Subject: FTC Privacy Initiative From: Lewis Rose <lewrose(a)arentfox.com> The US Federal Trade Commission has launched a "Privacy Initiative" to investigate whether the information collected at websites (either that affirmatively submitted by a visitor via a form or information collected based upon a visitor's selection of pages at a site to reflect personal interests) should be the subject of regulation by the FTC. To get background on this effort, you may want to read a speech by FTC Commissioner Varney on Electronic Commerce and Privacy which is available at the FTC's site under speeches (www.ftc.gov) or the Advertising Law Internet Site (www.webcom.com/~lewrose/home.html) under speeches. This week the staff of the FTC established a mailing list to allow interested parties to discuss the issues surrounding the privacy interests of consumers visiting web sites. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe" (without the quotes) to privacy-request(a)ftc.gov I suspect most of the participants will not represent the internet marketing community and urge interested members of this list to subscribe and participate. So far, there have been only two posts-- one by me yesterday wondering why marketers on the internet should be treated any differently than marketers using more traditional media, followed by one post simply asserting that internet marketing privacy issues are completely different from those raised by traditional media. Lew Lewis Rose 202-857-6012 (voice) Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn 202-857-6395 (fax) 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW lewrose(a)arentfox.com (email) Washington DC 20036 Advertising and Marketing Law Advertising Law Internet Site http://www.webcom.com/~lewrose/home.html Net-Lawyers Mailing List: net-lawyers(a)lawlib.wuacc.edu

2 1

Re: revised time quantization package (Unix & WIN32) available
by Karl A. Siil 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:14 AM 12/20/95 EST, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote: ... >> Matt, if you're getting paid to read this list, I want a new contract. > >Karl, are you an unpaid volunteer at AT&T, or do you quit your job every >time you read your e-mail? Actually, AT&T has us record our time down to 15 minute intervals, which I obey religiously*. In this case, I'm writing my CP activity off to "People who can't see a joke without a :-)." * Note there should be a :-) here, too. Not speaking for the company... Karl

1 0

Re: revised time quantization package (Unix & WIN32) available
by Dan Harmon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry, the only crypto code you seem to do is the unintelligble postings that you send to the list. .d On Wed, 20 Dec 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > > Dan Harmon writes: > > If this is what you consider contributing them you seem to have some > > deep problems that cannot be solved here. You may have to seek professional > > help. Your continued and at times seemingly uncontrollable use of vulgar > > language may indicate a neurobiological disorder such as Tourette's > > syndrome. You really should have it checked out before you harm yourself > > and possibily others. > > Thank you for the pseudopsychology, but really, all you've done is > further confirm my diagnosis of "non-contributing asshole". > > When was the last time you did anything to actually help spread > cryptography, eh? > > If you'll pardon me, I have crypto code to get back to. > > .pm >

3 2

Re: Motorola Secure Phone
by Mike Rose 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I saw a new cordless phone made by Motorola in a retail outlet today >that is supposedly "Secure from eavesdroppers." I asked the >salespeople for more technical info, but they weren't very helpful. >Does anyone have any information on this? I have one of these, it's a good phone. I think the security will stop only an off-the shelf scanner. My understanding is that the signal is not encrypted, but only phase-inverted or otherwise shifted. Mike

1 0

The Problem With Blaze And Weinstein
by cpunk＠remail.ecafe.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm not trying to start a flame war. I'm sure these people are very smart and have written lots of good code. I'm sure they're very nice and never kick their dogs. I'm just tired of people defending them as cypherpunks. They aren't cypherpunks. Neither has come out against GAK. They both carefully avoid commiting to any statement. They want us to think they're "one of us" but they don't want to be pinned down because they are double dipping on both sides of the fence. Blaze even does "research" on GAK. See his web page for evidence. Also the TIS report. The fact that he found a bug in clipper doesn't change this. It proves it. He works for the government, via att. Weinstein is actively promoting GAK by working at the company that the government has chosen to bring it to you now that att has failed. WHY IS EVERYONE SO QUICK TO DEFEND THESE PEOPLE? DO THEY HAVE YOU ALL SO IMPRESSED WITH THEIR MASTERS DEGREES THAT YOUR AFRAID TO LOOK CLOSELY? No, I did not post the RSA patch. I wouldn't touch any of that code with a 5 meter pole. To the guy who says write code: I've written plenty of code. Clue: your probably running some of it right now. I'm anonymous because I've seen FIRST HAND what the att lawyers do to people who tell the wrong kind of truth. Want me to be a 'nym. OK. s/ Bill Gates (he has good lawyers that can handle att and netscape)

6 6

Re: revised time quantization package (Unix & WIN32) available
by Perry E. Metzger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dan Harmon writes: > Perry, If my memory is correct, you are the one who has a history of being > a jerk. You know, Mr. Harmon, you can just keep posting my private mail to you all day, but you WILL start to annoy others after a while. [Just to be clear to others, this is the first of the several messages on the topic I've posted -- Mr. Harmon has been forwarding my private replies to the list. I think it all makes him look bad, but some people have no sense.] Perry

1 0

QCF_dec
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Science, 8 December 1995 Quantum Computers, Factoring, and Decoherence I. L. Chuang, R. Laflamme, P. W. Shor, W. H. Zurek [First paragraph] The uniqueness of the prime factorization of a positive integer is the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic. In practice, the determination of the prime factors of a given number can be an exceedingly difficult problem, even though verification is trivial. This asymmetry is the basis for modern cryptography and provides secret codes used not only on your own bank card but also to transfer diplomatic messages between embassies. [Precis] It is known that quantum computers can dramatically speed up the task of finding factors of large numbers, a problem of practical significance for cryptographic applications. Factors of an L-digit number can be found in ~L^2 time [compared to ~exp(L^1/3) time] by a quantum computer, which simultaneously follows all paths corresponding to distinct classical inputs, obtaining the solution from the coherent quantum interference of the alternatives. Here it is shown how the decoherence process degrades the interference pattern that emerges from the quantum factoring algorithm. For a quantum computer performing logical operations, an exponential decay of quantum coherence is inevitable. However, even in the presence of exponential decoherence, quantum computation can be useful as long as a sufficiently low decoherence rate can be achieved to allow meaningful results to be extracted from the calculation. I. L. Chuang, Stanford University. R. Laflamme and W. H. Zurek, Los Alamos National Laboratory. P. W. Shor, AT&T Bell Labs. ---------- QCF_dec (18 kb) Sent with compressed qcf1.jpg of 14 equations and 2 figures (31 kb)

1 0

Text version of Cyphernomicon
by Jeff Simmons 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ftp.goblin.punk.net/pub/docs/cypherfq.zip or cypherpunk.faq.gz - -- Jeff Simmons jsimmons(a)goblin.punk.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMNiECeL8IP70uJJBAQGiRQQAlIXYZkpMy4OSD+2DNgSEdGRsFaPgEk6/ vckQsT8Wa3Kl1uhIvFo/c/FDnbH/1W+LtzfV28zve6UkauSdhe6kD4S6QI7itbRa PgbOgLEsFh9WxFOgTANozPQdumj1gnj/qoKxGKb5hBTT4O0jaPvA5bZY9LtPtl2E UjGdr5ap0Mo= =Kd54 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program [NOISE]
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Phill <hallam(a)w3.org> wrote: >>It is not simply an issue of money, it is an issue of national security. If a >>foreigner were to control the majority of the media there would be a significant >>threat to the national interest. This threat has been realised in the UK with >>the comming to power of Rupert Murdoch. Fortunately his influence on the US >>political scene has thus far been minor. In his own country he has brought down >>the government more than once. At 01:37 AM 12/20/95 -0500, Jim Ray wrote: >So what??? He gives us "The Simpsons" and "Married, With Children!" >[IMO] Rupert has done more for humor than any humor-impaired liberal >has ever done! Murdoch is bitterly hated by our elites, because things are speakable on his networks that are unspeakable on other networks. Hence their perfectly true claim that he has overthrown several governments. I hope he overthrows some more. I especially love the political humor on "married with children" Cypherpunk relevance: Murdoch got in deep shit because of his famous speech that the communication revolution would profoundly undermine the power of oppressive governments. Murdoch sometimes calls himself a libertarian, but he is more a conservative with bombs. Still, I am strongly in favor of bombs. It seems clear to me that Murdoch, whatever his political beliefs may be, has done much for liberty. He has been a powerful disruptive influence. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

mailing list
by JerelRobertson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hey I want to get on this list. How do I do it?

1 0