December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

V-chips
by A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill rote: >One thing the V-Chip gives us is the argument: Now that parents have the >ability to control what their children watch, the government should turn >responsibility over to them and butt out. Hmmm, thought - network TV is declining badly (I like AMC & Discovery channel myself). FCC rules are somewhat limiting and 5-year-old mentalities rarely have much disposable income. Cable is taking off because FCC restrictions do not apply. Would the V-chip free the networks to allow *more* S&V^H^H^H"adult content" ? Where is the lobbying/money coming from ? Warmly, Padgett ps still suspect that both the V-chip and CC are simple chip design changes that do not need to add any cost.

1 0

COO_kie
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

2-12-96. FinTim: "This bug in your PC is a smart cookie." Netscape Navigator contains a little-known wrinkle that increases the power of companies to find out who their customers are and what they are up to. It allows companies to track which Web pages an individual looks at, when, for how long, and in what order. The information is stored on the customer's computer as "persistent client-state hypertext transfer protocol cookies". 2-12-96. WSJ: "Consumer Privacy on Internet Goes Public." The advertising industry's response to the volatile issue of consumer privacy is drawing howls of protest from consumer advocates. The battle is over what should marketers be allowed to do with personal information they gather from consumers visiting Web sites. Marketers "want to have dossiers on people with incredible detail so they can pick and choose what they send to you." "Invention Machine's Software Wins Orders for Picking Brains of Inventors." A software program is being snapped up by a growing number of America's biggest companies to provide inventing partners for their engineers. The program codifies the invention principles behind some two million international patents and the inventive techniques of some of the world's greatest inventors. Mr. Tsourikov said the product grew out of his early studies under Genrich Altshuller, who posited that invention isn't a random process but has a certain algorithm which drives it. COO_kie

2 1

Re: Unknown address
by Tim Cook 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >The user this message was addressed to does not exist at this > site. Please > >verify the name and domain in the original message that > follows. > >Message was addressed to: SAMUEL.KAPLIN(a)warehouse.mn.org > > > > Anybody besides me getting these things? > Seems he does exist. I got one too. Another "Logical Conclusion" by: Tim Cook <twcook(a)cts.com> Support THE US Constitution... Vote Alexander in '96 and '00!

1 0

Re: V-chips, CC, and Motorcycle Helmets
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:18 PM 2/11/96 -0800, Alan Olsen wrote: ... >You have to remember that most of the people arguing for TV filters are >looking for a way to make the "offensive" stuff go away for good. Absolutely! But the technology that lets individuals make the choice weakens their argument that the government must take a hand. >The v-chip will be less than useful as a real filter tool for those of us >who have a different worldview than the censors. Again, absolutely. Hell, I can't even devise a filter that will let me filter out Jim Bell's rants while letting me see his reasoned arguments on anonymous assassination. (I would love to have him address the Salman Rushdie issue, a man who is still alive despite a considerable announced price for his head. There appear to be limits to who can be subject to assassination for pay.) Bill

1 0

Re: Regulation of citizen-alien communications
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:21 AM 2/12/96 -0500, lmccarth(a)cs.umass.edu wrote: >Padgett writes: >> Gov does have the right (in fact the duty) to regulate communications >> between citizens and non-citizens/sites in other lands >[...and later...] >> "...provide for the common defense" >> "To regulate Commerce with foreign nations..." >> "...or in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." >> >> There are the bytes - try reading them in context. > >Familiar phrases indeed. Now, it seems to me that the Commerce Clause and >other Constitutional portions you cited could apply as well to >communications between two U.S. citizens inside the U.S. as they do to the >citizen-alien communications you mentioned. Yet if I read you correctly >earlier, you don't think the USG has the right to regulate those >communications. Why the distinction ? I suspect that Padgett's entire view of reality is built on quicksand.

1 0

Re: Attitudes toward the government...
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:43 PM 2/11/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >Jim Ray wrote: > >>"Americans hate the IRS, and if the only way they can get rid of it >> is to elect somebody who is communicating directly with the Planet >> Xorgon, then so be it." -- Dave Barry [on Steve Forbes]. 2/9/96 > >Not just this, but another data point about the current sentiment about >Washington: In a movie theater today there was a preview of the upcoming >movie "Independence Day," showing a flying saucer hovering over the White >House, then destroying it. The audience cheered and clapped. > >I'm not sure this would've happened in, say, the early 1950s. I have seen similar responses when watching Washington D.C. get partially destroyed in _Earth V.S. the Flying Saucers_. Watching Ray Harryhousen destroy the capitol and the washington monument is the best part of the movie. >(However, like the early 1950s, the producers of this upatriotic drivel may >have to answer to the House Un-American Activities Committee, to explain >their Indecent portrayal.) I expect it to be an "US V.S. Them" movie. Lots of patriotism and the like will be there. (The title says alot about the film.) It will hype the need to be prepared for a "menace". The message will be reinforced with a heavy dosage of special effects and jingoism. Standard hollywood fare. I doubt if we will see anything approching mild subversion form Hollywood anytime soon. >(P.S. "Broken Arrow" was a fun flick. Sort of like "Fail Safe " on "Speed.") Sounds like you spent your day doing the same thing i did... It was quite worthwhile. (But then, John Woo films usually are.) I also found _Hardboiled_ subtitled and letterboxed a few days ago. Another great Woo film. OBCypherpunks noise: I am amazed I have not yet seen a mention of the animated Spy V.S. Spy cartoons running on Mad TV. One of the best parts of the show. (Except for the Triple XXX files from the last episode.) --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "I, Caligula Clinton... In the name of the Senate and the people of Rome!" - Bill Clinton signing the CDA with the First Amendment bent over.

1 0

Put the Protest where your money is.
by Ray Arachelian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here's an idea that come up while I and a good friend were in a well intoxicated and creative mood... Every dollar you spend, be it a 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, or 100 denomination bill, write in a speech bubble to the president dude in the center, which says "I oppose the CDA. Exon sucks. Exon fornicates with male farm animals. CDA Is unconstitutional, I roll in my grave over the CDA, etc." Be creative; use the memo field in any checks you write to do the same. Money is the one element that travels from hand to hand to hand to hand. It is a network as extensitve as the internet itself, and even more so. Let your money speak for you! Put your url on the bill, or the url to the eff (http://mirrors.yahoo.com/eff/speech.html) or the Voter's Telecom Watch (http://www.vtw.org/) Leave your pages black until this damnable blemish on our rights is repealed! ========================================================================== + ^ + | Ray Arachelian |Emptiness is loneliness, and loneliness| _ |> \|/ |sunder(a)dorsai.org|is cleanliness and cleanliness is god-| \ | <--+-->| |liness and god is empty, just like me,| \| /|\ | Just Say |intoxicated with the maddness, I'm in| <|\ + v + | "No" to the NSA!|love with my sadness. (Pumpkins/Zero)| <| n ===================http://www.dorsai.org/~sunder/========================= [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the Communications Decency Act] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and do em right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said. "Dad's getting old. I say we should do him." So the two daughters got him drunk and did him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got em pregnant....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he whacked off first....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

1 0

Re: "Rights"
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:15 AM 2/10/96 -0600, Ed Carp wrote: >> Remedy exists. If you do not like the rules at one site, choose another. In > >What happens when there *is* no remedy, when there are no other sites to >go to, when there are no employers who would refrain from violating an >employee's privacy? What then? Ed, there are hardly likely to be much of a reduction in ISPs from the current 7K. Hard for an employer to track your use if you switch to a radio modem after booting your machine without the network drivers to cut off eavesdropping. DCF

1 0

Re: China
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:29 AM 2/11/96 -0500, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote: >Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> writes: > >> At 01:54 PM 2/10/96 EST, you wrote: >> >It's not difficult to imagine that governments will seek to regulate the >> >possession of modems again. Some may recall that in the U.S. it used to be >> >technically illegal to connect a modem to the phone jack without a permissio >> >from AT&T. >> >> Actually, permission from the local phone companies, who owned the system, >> I assume? (Though I don't actually remember which parts of The Phone Company >> were involved in the Carterphone decision.) > >Nope. I used modems back when the local phone company _was AT&T. :-) Back in the really dark ages, we used acoustic couplers (300 b/s max) which held a telephone handset, so there was no direct connection to the telephone lines. The phone company asserted that they were also illegal, but their argument was kind of weak!

2 1

Edupage Extract - Employees & Email
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Somehow, I can understand how sending it to a _supervisor_ would break privacy protections... Crypto relevance? Anonymous remailers can be used for complaints & whistle-blowing. The latter may be unfortunate, depending on the law being enforced. -Allen From: IN%"educom(a)elanor.oit.unc.edu" 11-FEB-1996 21:53:17.72 Subj: Edupage, 11 February 1996 ***************************************************************** Edupage, 11 February 1996. Edupage, a summary of news items on information technology, is provided three times each week as a service by Educom, a Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. ***************************************************************** JUDGE RULES AGAINST EMPLOYEE IN E-MAIL SNOOPING CASE A federal judge in Philadelphia has ruled against a former employee of the Pillsbury Co. who filed a suit claiming invasion of privacy after his e-mail messages threatening to "kill the backstabbing bastards" and referring to an upcoming party as the "Jim Jones Koolaid affair" were deemed to be inappropriate, unprofessional and offensive, leading to his firing in October 1994. The company had repeatedly assured its employees that all e-mail communications would be kept confidential, but the court found that, "Once plaintiff communicated the alleged unprofessional comments to a second person (his supervisor) over an e-mail system which was apparently utilized by the entire company, any reasonable expectation of privacy was lost." (BNA Daily Labor Report 6 Feb 96 AA1)

1 0