December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

A Rant about Senator James Exon
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:57 AM 2/10/96, Mark Allyn (206) 860-9454 wrote: >Allright. That does it. > >I am going to volunteer to try to make a perl script that >I will make available that will automatically email every >congressman that has an email address. I will include a pre >pared text of the email message. All you would have to do is >to sign it and it would send the same message to all of them >with email addresses automatically. I can even have it have >several prepaired texts so that they are all slightly different >so that any funky gatekeepers at the congress email sites that >attempt to keep out spams could be defeated. > >What do you think? Is this worth it? Here's something I did about Senator James Exon: My complaint about James Exon I would like to take a moment to comment on James Exon's statements. What follows is a set of observations I have made about inane zombies. I truly suspect that his opinion is a lazy cop-out. If he gets his way, I might very well kill somebody. This is explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material I plan to present. To Exon, terrorism is a kind of religion. This is not the first time we've had trouble with unreasonable goofy-types, and it certainly won't be the last. His claims are a cesspool of alarmism. If you need proof that he is off his rocker, then just take a look at him. Exon has a driving need to reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Ostensibly, he does not intend to insult my intelligence, but in fact, insipid porn stars like him tend to conveniently ignore the key issues of this or any other situation. Speaking of insincere megalomaniacs, it would be downright ungrateful for him to censor any incomplicitous principles. It's a sad world where fickle worthless-types have the power to feed us a diet of robbery, murder, violence, and all other manner of trials and tribulations. After all, I myself unequivocally maintain that Exon should take more responsibility for his actions. To put it another way, he likes to have difficult social issues presented to him in simple, black-and-white terms. I don't see how he can be so abusive. That doesn't necessarily mean that he is intentionally being stupid. Rather, it means that his attempts to turn the trickle of alcoholism into a tidal wave are just a game to him. Although Exon has tremendous popular appeal, Exon has come very, very close to making me defend my rights. He should just quit whining about everything. He feels he has not only a right, but also a duty, to toy with our opinions. His idea of a good time is to torture jealous radical hedonists. An inner voice tells me that Exon's claims are pure tripe. To sum it all up, pesky deranged moviegoers like James Exon often think they have the right to flush all my hopes and dreams down the toilet. -Tim May P.S. As many of you may already know, a "rant generator" can be found at http://www-csag.cs.uiuc.edu/individual/pakin/complaint Boycott espionage-enabled 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, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 3

[NOISE]More meaty CDA material
by stevenw＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded: The article starts with "SAN ANTONIO, Texas -- You motherfuckers in Congress have dropped over the edge of the earth this time." and gets better. >The American Reporter, working in conjunction with other groups opposed >to the CDA, commissioned a writer to produce a special article to >celebrate Clinton's signing of the new the law. > >Steve Russell, the author, retired after 16 years as a trial judge >in Texas and is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at the >University of Texas at San Antonio. > >This article was specifically and carefully designed to be completely >and utterly in breach of the CDA. If you are opposed to the CDA and >you are not offended by the "seven bad words", you'll probably find >it highly entertaining and insightful. > >OTOH, if you are easily offended and don't like bad language, JUST >DON'T READ IT. > >If you are easily offended and like to be offended and then like to >file Police Reports, please go ahead. After all it was written to >help ensure that the CDA gets challenged in the courts as soon as >possible. > >Here's the URL and don't tell me I didn't warn you: > >http://www.newshare.com/Reporter/today.html > > >-- >|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| >| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". | >| malch(a)malch.com Gary Player. | >| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. | >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Weller | "The Internet, of course, is more | than just a place to find pictures | of people having sex with dogs." stevenw(a)best.com | -- Time Magazine, 3 July 1995

1 0

Why ? You really want to know =>
by A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> The Administration has repeatedly stated its belief that those parts of >>the bill are unconsitutional, and does not intend to enforce them. >So why the fornicate did they include them? What's the point of passing >laws that they say they're not going to enforce, unless it's either to >enforce them later, or soften up the public for something _slightly_ more >tolerable later. If you already knew the answer, why ask ? It also could be that under our system of laws, once a rider is attached to a bill (in this case the telecommunications bill) it is almost impossible to remove. Congress has been using this quirk to provide pork-barrel & special interest thingies for years. I would prefer to think that some, realizing the impossibility of removal, increased it to the point of obvious unconstitutionality so that it would be separated as soon as possible. I suspect that both the three-judge special panel and the following supreme court decisions are already known and time is just needed to craft the SC decision so finely that this never happens again. (ever the optomist but believe that while the congressional agenda may be different and unobvious, it is rarely stupid.) - Pick almost any chapter in the Old Testament. Read it halfway. Look at how the famous figures look *at that point*. Just do not quote the "Song of Solomon" (KJV) on the net. Today. Warmly, Padgett

1 0

Re: Reasons in support of crypto-anarchy
by Dr. Rich Artym 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message <199602070213.UAA03036(a)einstein.ssz.com>, Jim Choate writes: > If the intent is to motivate others to kill or otherwise harm others simply > because you don't agree with them or their actions is reprehensible and > moraly or ethicaly undefensible. I agree, but not for your reasons. "Reprehensible" and "ethically undefensible" both presupose that *you* can make an objective moral judgement that you are right and others are wrong, which is no better than the moral judgement that the politicians are making. A better reason for agreeing with your position is simply that value judgements of any kind are subjective, and therefore they cannot apply to everyone and hence it is a clear coercion to try to apply them to everyone. Coercion of one man's subjective views onto another is the fundamental fault in the position of the censors; it's a very fundamental attack on perhaps the most basic freedom we have, regardless of whether there is a Constitution or Ammendments in the country in which we live. > > 2. How can we keep the government from banning encryption, digital > > cash, and other systems that will improve our freedom? > > > > By making shure they don't have the authority to make the decision in the > first place. It might well be too late for that: they've already taken the authority. Now we're starting a process of taking it back, and we can do so without bloodshed by moving the source of their power (monetary transactions and the consequent taxation) beyond their reach. That's where crypto comes in, and that's why many of us are here. > Every citizen of this country is a 'government employee' in one sense or > another. It is important that we adopt this overtly innocent view of civil servants and governments as our *servants*, because it is on the grounds of service that they justify their positions and actions on the single day every few years that we get to vote them in. Shoving the term "servant" down their throats at every opportunity is an excellent attack on their positions of power over us. Rich. -- ########### Dr. Rich Artym ================ PGP public key available # galacta # Internet: rich(a)galacta.demon.co.uk DNS 158.152.156.137 # ->demon # rich(a)mail.g7exm[.uk].ampr.org DNS 44.131.164.1 # ->ampr # NTS/BBS : g7exm(a)gb7msw.#33.gbr.eu # ->nexus # Fun : Unix, X, TCP/IP, OSI, kernel, O-O, C++, Soft/Eng # ->NTS # More fun: Regional IP Coordinator Hertfordshire + N.London ########### Q'Quote : "Object type is a detail of its implementation."

1 0

Re: Nyms with keys
by an5877＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I mostly lurk these days. DEADBEAT <na5877(a)anon.penet.fi> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.4 iQBFAgUBMRwQdPFZTpBW/B35AQH+7wGAss68V8aPaLMra/yLHtk5CpO2Zt8Yp7B1 qZKr+hOVJmphvZFmC7UmEk8TZu7a1GTY =zI0k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION*** Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED. Please, report inappropriate use to abuse(a)anon.penet.fi For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to help(a)anon.penet.fi If you have any problems, address them to admin(a)anon.penet.fi

1 0

Witness Protection Program
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The NYT Sunday magazine tomorrow has a longish article on the federal Witness Protection Program. It traces in detail one family's entry, the arrangements for the "death" of the old identity and the new "birth," and describes the unsettling nymity transformation. It also lays out the ballooning cost of a program once thought to be relatively cheap. Some techno stuff about carefully orchestrated communication between the relocated family and relatives. Is everyone in the galaxy still able to get free and easy access to the NYT Web site at: http://www.nytimes.com ?

1 0

OK, how *do* you spell it?
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I got a spelling ping this morning. I'd never really thought about it, before. Is it infocalypse or infoclypse? Cheers, Bob --- begin forwarded text Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 10:22:47 -0500 To: rah(a)shipwright.com X-URL: mailto:rah@shipwright.com X-Personal_name: David R. Conrad From: ab411(a)detroit.freenet.org Subject: Spelling glitch Robert, On the e$ home page, "Infocalypse" is misspelled "Infoclypse". Regards, -- David R. Conrad, conrad(a)detroit.freenet.org, http://www.grfn.org/~conrad Hardware & Software Committee : finger -l conrad(a)grfn.org for public key Key fingerprint = 33 12 BC 77 48 81 99 A5 D8 9C 43 16 3C 37 0B 50 No, his mind is not for rent to any god or government. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/

2 1

This is not...
by mixmaster＠obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lemeur Alexanderpunks, or perryrants vs. perryisanasspunks, or CDAisdumbpunks, it's CYPHERpunks. Could everyone please get closer to back on topic, there is work to do. Rant at congress, not here! XYZ

1 0

Re: Nyms with keys
by Lynne L. Harrison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perhaps while you're lurking, you should consider downloading and installing a more recent version of PGP than version 2.4 which you're still using. At 05:24 PM 2/10/96 UTC, deadbeat wrote: > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >I mostly lurk these days. > >DEADBEAT <na5877(a)anon.penet.fi> > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: 2.4 > >iQBFAgUBMRwQdPFZTpBW/B35AQH+7wGAss68V8aPaLMra/yLHtk5CpO2Zt8Yp7B1 >qZKr+hOVJmphvZFmC7UmEk8TZu7a1GTY >=zI0k >-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: V-chips, CC, and Motorcycle Helmets
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:07 PM 2/10/96, "A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security" <PADGETT@hobbe wrote: >Tim rites: >>The viewer sets her preferences: a 5-5-5 would let everything through, etc. >>The developer of the chip claimed he could mass produce the chip for a buck, >>and this may be where all those estimates of "$1-2 per set" have come from. > >Am in favor of this since it puts the control in the hands of the property >owner. One question would be "how often is the V-rating code transmitted ?" >(are the kiddies protected from channel-surfing ?) Do suspect that the $1-$2 >cost could be met *at the manufacturing level*. This is what I said, that maybe the _chips_ could be made for $1-2, but integrating them into systems (VCRs, t.v.s, tuner cards for computes--did you think we'd let Little Johnny evade the V-Chip by using one of those tuner cards?) will likely cost 20-40x more, based on the usual cost factors. The Canadian V-Chip prototype was shown sending out V-Chip codes "frequently" (seconds or faster), so Little Johnny might see a flash of thoughtcrime, but not much more. >Do also see the need for regulation to put it in. It was required for UHF >channels else no one would try to build one. I am also thankful that is was The whole "mandatory UHF" thing was utter nonsense from the gitgo. In nearly all commercial markets (big cities) there are but a few UHF channels being used, and in most places none are being used. Meanwhile, unused VHF spectrum exists. As someone else posted recently, the "market" solution gave us "cable-ready" sets and VCRs without government/FCC regulation. >required for closed-captioning even though my TVs are not new enough (have >a $99 discount-house box on the TV in the family room. Makes many shows Well there you have it. Many of the poor clearly are not buying new sets that have closed-captioning. Meanwhile, we all pay for it when we buy new sets and VCRs. A hidden tax, that does not benefit those in need. (I'm not a tax strategist, and consider taxes to be theft, but if I were to design such a tax, I'd just steal the money "fair and square" and then pay the $100 or whatever to the deaf--excuse me, "the alternately soundspaced"--to subsidize an external closed-caption decoder. Of course, this would leave the broadcasters, and under no circumstances would I insist that they CC their programs, and thankfully the law does not now require them to.) ObCypherpunks: A truly surprising number of people on this list are on the one hand lambasting the government for thievery, incompetence, corruption, and violation of their rights, while on the other hand explaining why they think some particular intrusion is justified. We have people arguing for mandatory V-Chips, for Data Privacy Inspection Services, for anti-discrimination laws, and for government key signing services. It's not a far jump from arguing any of these points to talking about the "legitimate" (their term) needs of the government to ensure that encryption is not used for criminal purposes, for kidnapping and extortion, for tax evasion, etc. People need to think about the powerful implications of strong crypto, and decide if they are _for_ access to strong crypto by citizens, or _against_ it. All things follow from this decision. --Tim May Boycott espionage-enabled 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, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0