December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: PGP
by cmca＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com] [Subject: Re: PGP] It was written (not on paper) by "Sentient1" <Shade(a)cdale1.midwest.net>: > Could you settle a dispute? Is it, or Is it not, legal to take >PGP source code and the like out of the country if it is written on >paper? Yes it is. MIT published a book consisting of nothing but PGP source in OCR type, and it has been exported. Chris McAuliffe <cmca(a)alpha.c2.org> (No, not that one.) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBMSQ2ZoHskC9sh/+lAQEd0gP/ZSj0lQYlWN9XxDEzSCRRSnt13TKG3DYU cqGLcbJb9hsp7Ye4+oW8Ei1+iXGOX/2u/TB7gNfQQ0MFR96bqSl0VzCq1R1Z4vqC vb6lv2pURpMwltTy7+k3gWx2p6Dsc6uTXC8ydTLKcWLg9o98JsR8ZtnxyOdzWtGM SoeaAP+T7Wk= =25iG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Subject lines?
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:27 AM 2/14/96 -0500, olbon(a)dynetics.com (Clay Olbon II) wrote: >Ok, has everyone forgotten to use a subject line today, or is there a >problem with toad.com? Every message I received today that was dated 14 >Feb (except one - from "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>) >had no subject and no from line (other than cypherpunks). I'd noticed the same thing, and am a little disgruntled, since it screws up my usual mail filtering. Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0

Re: A Cyberspace Independence Refutation
by lmccarth＠cs.umass.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

James Donald writes: [in reply to strata] > Your other arguments casually dismiss the very real power that large numbers > of able people with good communications can exercise, have just exercised > very recently. Large numbers of able people with good communications very recently exercised their putative "very real power" against the passage of the CDA. They had no substantial impact AFAICS. (I intend no slur against the effort.) Could you name some examples, and add some qualifications that made the difference in those cases ? > Nation states are a new creation. In the past many different > kings ruled many different bits of one nation, and one king often > ruled parts of more than one nation. > > Today nation states are almost universal, and people can no longer > imagine what a nation is, other than a nation state. Just in case I'm one of those who "can no longer imagine what a nation is, other than a nation state", you should perhaps define the term more concretely. I guess The Nation of Islam might fit, or the worldwide community of Palestinians. > But the net is a nation, and is not a state, and nationalism is a force that > governments usually cannot withstand. OK, first of all I'm not convinced that the net qualifies as a "nation", but it's hard to say until I better understand what you mean by "nation". _Strong_ nationalism is a powerful force that governments often exploit to their own considerable advantage, and indeed also brings down governments in some cases. Offhand, it looks to me as though the USSR did a decent job of withstanding various strong internal nationalistic forces for a long time, and was brought down mainly by other considerations. > What makes a government strong is its cohesion, but the state cannot > create its own cohesion. When states attempted to confront nationalism, > they often lost cohesion and vanished altogether, like a string of sand. > > The "Nation state" is in essence a tactic for avoiding this hazard. Perhaps "often" is the case; from previous experience, I suspect your grasp of the relevant history is clearly superior to mine. (You have some great stuff on your web pages.) I note that you did not claim "all". > Governments are acutely aware of this problem, and act very cautiously > in the face of such threats. Many people seem to imagine that a > government innately and naturally has cohesion, that it is naturally > one thing, naturaly capable of acting coherently and cohesively as > an individual can. On the contrary, governments maintain their > cohesion with difficulty, and continually act, or refrain from acting, > in fear that they might lose it. OK, but govts. do indeed manage to muster plenty of cohesion in various actions. > In an all out knock down battle between a particular government and the > internet, in a state where a substantial proportion of the middle class > was on the internet, the government would be in serious danger of > evaporating like a jellyfish in the sunshine. I disagree, but assertions will get us nowhere. > The government can get away with a substantial amount of harassment and > restraint, but has only limited power to act without itself being acted > on, to change the world without itself suffering change. Sure, but the govt. has been changed before and can change again. I'm honestly very happy to see all this optimism. But unless and until my pessimism fundamentally changes, I couldn't sleep at night if I were to lie down and accept the optimistic claims. -Lewis "You're always disappointed, nothing seems to keep you high -- drive your bargains, push your papers, win your medals, fuck your strangers; don't it leave you on the empty side ?" (Joni Mitchell, 1972)

1 0

Re: Cookie Crumbles
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by jsw(a)netscape.com (Jeff Weinstein) on Thu, 15 Feb 1:22 AM > You may choose not to believe me, but I have been >planning to add an option to disable cookies in the >next release for quite some time now. > > Just disabling cookies won't keep sites from tracking >your movements. Many sites require you to register and >log in when you access them. These sites will be able >to track your movements through them with or without >cookies. Jeff, You shoot electro-ammunition straight, so your credibility is solid. HQ should take target practice from you. Although explanations on this list may not be comprehensible to the public, or to NSCP's PR Dept. What are the chances that NSCP might add a feature that would allow customers to say yes or no at login to tracking their movements at any site visited, with a friendly notice that tracking analysis was being done? That might redeem the exchange value of cookies, and perhaps come closer to gving customers equality with the merchants, and merchants credibility with customers. As you are giving Netscape here, despite Wall Street's treachery. Thanks for your even-tempered and well-aimed potshots here. John

1 0

Text of personal use exemption
by Michael Froomkin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/personal-use.txt A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.

1 0

True democracy in America.
by Isaac Hopkins 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >}Is ok. I suspect that we are narrowing on a similar position. Would like >}to see a time when net communications make "representatives of the people" >}obsolete" since majority voting on any issue can be "anytime,anywhere". >}Doubt that it will happen soon. > ><rm> > >I too would like to see a purely democratic process rather than a >representative one. And I also agree that it won't happen soon. The >question is, what do we keep of govt? > A truly Democratic society is only feasible when you have an educated society that can act outside of their own self interest. Take a look at the ancient greeks, they voted to put socrates to death because he questioned their power and beliefs. In a democratic society you must be accepted by the majority in order to survive. Think about all of the greatest minds in history, most of them were very controversial. A democracy is just the tyranny of the majority. I think that Americans are typically smart enough to have more of a say in politics and believe that we should move to become more democratic, but not to go so far as to become a real democracy.

1 0

Re: Online Zakat Payment: Religious tithe.
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Why oh why am I getting the idea that "cypherpunks" would better be called "cryptoauthoritarians." From murder-as-political-liberation, to the universalization of the libertarians "feelings" onto everyone else in the world, to the mass nuclear bombings of civilians to the mass nuclear elimination of religions. My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! On Feb 15, 1996 20:03:56, 'Sean Gabb <cea01sig(a)gold.ac.uk>' wrote: >True, there are risks in generalising from the actions of one individual >to the group as a whole. Nevertheless, where Islam is concerned, there >are so many individuals behaving badly that we are justified in thinking >the whole religion a force for bad. > >Doubtless, I shall be told that "true Islam" is "true tolerance", "true >freedom", and even "true apple pie". I may be told that the horrors of >actually existing Islam - remember this phrase, or something like it? - >are all somehow the fault of the West. But the fact is that most Moslems >venerate old men in beards, who think that anyone who disagrees >with them about God should be put to death, that a woman with a >clitoris is a kind of devil, and that Western classical music is evil. > >By my standards, these people are disgusting. My only dispute with Tim >is in our manner of expressing our disgust. > >Sean Gabb >Editor >Free Life. > I was wondering if S. Gabb, as a self-declared expert on Islam, if he might explain the difference between the Sunni and Shi'ite sects, and the respective size of each? I am also curious if he could point us to a single written example where he or anyone else has ever been told the various things that he "doubtless" will be told? In short, is this important history posted on cypherpunks, more libertarian political demagogery, or another J. Bell-like reference to the universalization of the libertarian's feelings onto the rest of the world? --tallpaul "Gentle Jesus "Meek and mild "Bless me "While I nuke this child. "But reassure'em "As I wack'em "I love their rights; "I'll never tax'em."

2 1

Re: Science News - article on Quantum Crypto
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>The new Science News that showed up in today's mail >has a short but informative article on quantum >cryptography. It explains what quantum crypto is for >us newbies and gives the history of a recent success >in Lake Geneva (Switzerland, not Wisconsin) - an >encrypted message was sent 22.7 km over fiber-optic >cable successfully. It's a nice article. Does anyone know if the new in-line optical amplifiers (not switches!) have any effect on quantum crypto messages? Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- 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/

3 3

re True democracy in America.
by Michael Peponis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>}Is ok. I suspect that we are narrowing on a similar position. Would like >}to see a time when net communications make "representatives of the people" >}obsolete" since majority voting on any issue can be "anytime,anywhere". >}Doubt that it will happen soon. > ><rm> > >I too would like to see a purely democratic process rather than a >representative one. And I also agree that it won't happen soon. The >question is, what do we keep of govt? In my opinion, only the most basic of services, trash collection, road maintenance, education (decided upon experts, not just people with opinions. I don't claime to be an expert on history, so why should I have a say on how it is tought, I have no expertise in that area). In a true democracy, which is based on a very diverse general populace, will result in a system that will not be able to pass any legislation except those described above, it will be imporable for the majority to agree to anything except the most basic things. Why I hate this goverment is that it tries to decide what is right and wrong, that is my decision, not theirs. I am accountable to me and my God as to what I do with my life, I am not accountable to any society as long as I do not infrige on someone elses rights. Unfortunalty, I don't see such a goverment happening, I don't care about if anyone else likes the way I choose to conduct my life or not, but the majority of any country has this assine persistance to perpetuate their traditions and beliefs on others, it is their form of progegation. It's true what is being said sometimes you just gotta Nuke'em Regards, Michael Peponis PGP Key Avalible form MIT Key Server,or via finger

1 0

HRoller Anonymous Remailer Shut Down
by Wink Junior 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This bit of unverified news from alt.privacy: > From: hroller(a)infinity.c2.org (hroller) > Date: 13 Feb 1996 16:47:06 GMT > > This is to announce that hroller remailer is shutting down for good. Due > to the fact of the current issues and my ISP raising costs, I can no > longer support this remailer. I guess you could say THEY Won! What I mean > by this is not only Sen. Exxon, but the users also. The Abuse that goes > through the remailers is something you would not believe. And until the > people on the internet wake up and start acting like adults, this problem > is not going to change. > > It's been fun, up until lately. > > hroller Between irresponsible online behavior and media-spins, such as the example posted by Mr. Young, will probably make '96 the year of the remailer wars. If they're not out-and-out banned in the U.S. by '98 I'll be surprised (but damned happy.) Hats off to HRoller and Broiles who've fought the good fight. Wink

1 0