December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Response to Anonymous re: Zero-Knowledge Freedom
by Alex de Joode 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous, [..] : >FREEDOM servers in their home country (example: if terrible laws are : >passed like in the Netherlands requiring logging and storage of all : >packet info., etc.). In this manner, a local user in a restrictive I'm not aware of any law that requires "logging and storage of all packet info". (I presume you mean 'Wet Computercriminaliteit II' ?) There is a part that makes ISP liable if they cannot point to a 'user' but the law explicitly states that you have to be in the business of being an ISP, running a remailer is not my business, it is a 'not for profit' hobby, so it will be fun to see how "they" will 'manouvre' to bring that also under the law ... Anyways could you please sent me the relevant parts of this law that lead you think this way ? bEST Regards, -- Alex de Joode | International CryptoRunners | http://www.replay.com 'A little paranoia can lengthen your life'

1 0

100S OF FREE PICS'N'LINKS EVERY DAY!
by STUFFED TUE NOV 10 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

+ 30 SUPERB, HI-RES, HOT PHOTOS + 5 SUPER SEXY STORIES + FAST LOADING XXX HARDCORE + WHITE CHOCOLATE + BLOW BABY BLOW + NYMPHO9 + ASIAN SLUTS + SAVING RYAN'S PRIVATES + PLAYSX + BLONDES WITH BIG TITS + BITCHES IN HEAT + MIDNIGHT PASSION + BONUS PIC 1 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/13204.htm + BONUS PIC 2 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/18769.htm + BONUS PIC 3 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/10668.htm + BONUS PIC 4 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/19144.htm + BONUS PIC 5 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/24117.htm + MUCH, MUCH MORE! ----> http://stuffed.net/home/ <---- This email is never sent unsolicited. Stuffed is the supplement for the Eureka newsletter you subscribed to. Full instructions on unsubscribing are in every issue of Eureka! ----> http://stuffed.net/home/ <----

1 0

100S OF FREE PICS'N'LINKS EVERY DAY!
by STUFFED MON NOV 9 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

+ 30 SUPERB, HI-RES, HOT PHOTOS + 5 SUPER SEXY STORIES + LESBIAN FRIENDS + TECHNOPORN + SOUTHERN BELLE BLOWJOBS + HOT PICS II + NAKED 4 U + ORGASM 4 ALL + JACK IN THE BOX PORNO + SAVING RYAN'S PRIVATES + STIFF ONE EYE + CHAPO'S SEX PAGES + BONUS PIC 1 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/20001.htm + BONUS PIC 2 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/3051.htm + BONUS PIC 3 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/15393.htm + BONUS PIC 4 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/16985.htm + BONUS PIC 5 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/24093.htm + MUCH, MUCH MORE! ----> http://stuffed.net/home/ <---- This email is never sent unsolicited. Stuffed is the supplement for the Eureka newsletter you subscribed to. Full instructions on unsubscribing are in every issue of Eureka! ----> http://stuffed.net/home/ <----

1 0

Re: IP: Crunch Time for Y2K Suppliers (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1998 00:35:04 -0500 > From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> > Subject: Re: IP: Crunch Time for Y2K Suppliers > Seems to me that it would have been just as easy for "believer" to send the > URL to the story as the whole thing. Same with ol'VZ. > > Not only is it in poor taste, but it means less people will read the > article on wired.com, which is what pays the rent. True, but since when is freedom of speech, association, and press related to wired (or you) making a profit? I feel zero social responsibility to tell people to go there and read it when I can send a snippet of it to them directly and save them the time, effort, and bandwidth. I personaly absolutely *HATE* to recieve a piece of email that contains nothing but a URL, it's worthless - lacks all context. Don't like folks sending partial or whole articles to foster discussion, learn to love it or live with it. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Forwarded mail...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ah, what the hell. It's a good day to practice the golden rule. Forwarded message: > Date: 8 Nov 1998 04:40:03 -0000 > From: lcs Mixmaster Remailer <mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu> > > It seems so pointless to correct Choate. The guy is almost totally > impervious to enlightenment. But a couple of whoppers have to be > pointed out... Speakin of pointless anonymous know-it-all bullshit .... > Electrons don't "carry" photons. Actualy they carry the probability wave for the photon (which technicaly could be anywhere in the universe at any given time because of space contraction caused by relativistic effects), but for this particular discussion which concerns ionized or non-correlated electrons carrying a unit charge and Joules of energy (which is where the photon comes in you anonymous fucking ignoramus) saying the electron is carrying a photon is sufficient. > An atom can absorb a photon, raising > an electron to a higher energy level, but the photon is then gone. Well actualy to be absolutely exact the photon is locked between the protons and the electron. It is *NEVER* gone or destroyed. You can't destroy energy, only transform it's form. The photon is *NEVER* absorbed by anything. Now exactly how is the 'higher energy' level expressed? By a *PHOTON* of shorter wavelength (E=hv) you know-nothing smart-ass anonymous dick-muncher. > a single moving electron certainly doesn't carry a photon. Photons move > at the speed of light, always. Only when they are not correlated to a particle such as a proton or an electron. When an electron or a proton carry a packet of energy (measured in Joules) it most certainly carries a photon. Let's look at the electrical characteristic called voltage (you probably haven't heard of this since the rest of your pseudo-science is as full of bullshit as your mouth) which is measured in Joules/Coulomb. Now a Coulomb of electrons moving past a given point in a unit second is an Amp of current. Want to explain how those electrons manage to carry those Joules of photons if their isn't a correlation? I didn't think you did you anonymous lying sack of horse sperm. Since photons *ARE* light (you fucking anonymous ninny) your last point is irrelevant and redundant. Of course they ALWAYS travel at the speed of light, it's how we define light in the first place. > Quarks are constituents only of baryons. There are no quarks in electrons > or photons. Quarks are constituents of hadrons you dumbass prick sucking gay boy. Protons and Neutrons are hadrons built from 3 quarks and some other bosons (some vector and some not) that glue the nucleus together. Electrons and photons are called Leptons (because they are their own vector boson). Electrons carry electrical unit negative charge and photons carry EM fields. A Baryon is a distinction based on the type of quarks that make up the hadron. If the paticle is made up of no anti-quarks it's a baryon, othwise it's a meson. God, what a load of quantum mechanical horse hockey you spout this fine Sunday morning. I can't hardly wait to see what other anonymous drivel you spew out of your syphilis infested mouth next. > The net charge within the sphere will not change. Then you need to go back to school and learn Gauss's Law all over again. It's ok, you'll probably get it in the first semester unless they recognize what a dumb-ass you are and put you in the remedial section. Then I believe you'll be scheduled to cover those topics your Junior year. > If the box in the > middle with the "spark gap" is spraying out electrons, this can only mean > that the box is itself becoming positively charged. The sphere sees a > constant charge within itself; at best, the charge can be redistributed. Which is the whole point to this exercise. The simple fact that I can put a battery powered radio in a metal sphere as described and *STILL* receive the signal proves the model works within the constraints of the original thesis. Don't believe me? Try it at home with a couple of collanders soldered together. The charge is re-distributed to the surface of the sphere, the total charge of the entire system does stay constant (at least until the insulation breaks down). > There are no net changes of charge within the sphere and so there will > be no changes in any charge appearing on the outside of the sphere. If that were so we wouldn't have a spark in the ball to begin with. > Choate's whole model of how a spark gap transmitter works, and why it > emits electromagnetic radiation, is so bizarre that it is hard to believe. > Someone else can bang their head against the brick wall of his ignorance > on that topic. Who said anything about a spark gap transmitter? We were talking about a battery powered spark gap. Not the same thing at all you anonymous weenie sucker. > Choate is, by far, the worst poster on the cypherpunks list today. He > posts off-topic material, he is argumentative, and 90% of the time, he > is simply wrong. Oh, your just jealous I want let you suck my dick junior. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Electric power generators ?
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You're talking about the wired.com article I wrote. I carefully did not say there is a "shortage" of generators, diesel or otherwise -- that's your own misreading of it. I did say that the largest U.S. distributor of diesel generators has half year delays on the most popular model. Same with bulk food suppliers like Walton's. Solar power companies also report vastly increased demand. You can buy cheaper gasoline generators at Home Depot, but there are reasons people want to pay three or four times as much for a diesel model. These differences and the other answers to your questions have been well-documented elsewhere; I'm not inclined to list them for you here, though others might be. -Declan At 05:52 PM 11-7-98 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >Hi there, > >I saw an article posted about "shortages" of electric power generators >and other Y2K "survival" goods, such as grains in airtight drums. My >reading of the article gave me a feel that those products are bullshit >products geared towards naive losers, and can be easily replaced with >much cheaper products that can be bought at discount stores. > >More careful reading of the article showed that only certain high power >diesel generators are scarce. > >A visit to my local discount retailer has shown that there are 10KW >gasoline generators available for as little as $500. 10KW is far more >than I would need in an emergency. (I will probably need about 2KW). > >Questions: > >1) Aside from probably lower power, are those cheaper generators somehow >worse? > >2) How reliable are those cheaper generators? > >3) What is their expected lifetime, in hours of operation? > >4) How hard is it to service them? > >5) How do you connect them to the electric system, to properly use >them as backup? (this may be a stupid question, but I am not very >familiar with American system of electric wiring). > >6) How much gasoline do they consume if you draw 2KW power from them? > >Thank you. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} > > \=/, _-===-_-====-_-===-_-==========-_-====-_ > | @___oo ( )_ > /\ /\ / (___,,,}_--= ) > ) /^\) ^\/ _) =__ Anything is good and useful if ) > ) /^\/ _) (_ ) > ) _ / / _) ( it's made of chocolate. ) > /\ )/\/ || | )_) (_ ) >< > |(,,) )__) ( http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov ) > || / \)___)\ (_ _) > | \____( )___) )___ -==-_____-=====-_____-=====-___== > \______(_______;;; __;;; >

1 0

Re: Advertising Creepiness (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Information Security <guy(a)panix.com> > Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 12:59:09 -0500 (EST) > Subject: Re: Advertising Creepiness > Would you like to know whether it is "fair use" to repost entire articles? > > I would. When it is non-profit, and is equivalent to my neighbor bringing his morning paper over to show me a story (I don't subscribe to the paper so I haven't a license with the copyright holder in principle or practice) he wants to talk about. With the way the law is going that will soon be illegal for me to even look at the paper, though we can probably still talk about it. Though the probable next step is to make even that verbal recitation illegal. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

TEMPEST Laptop from Wang
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry to not post the article, but Wang just announced a TEMPEST compliant portable computer. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28483,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: IP: Discover Alien Life With Your PC And SETI (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1998 20:39:58 -0800 > From: Steve Schear <schear(a)lvcm.com> > Subject: Re: IP: Discover Alien Life With Your PC And SETI > Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems to me that if I were an alien > civilization and wanted to send out a beacon, in as wide an angle as > possible, across the vast reaches of space and overcome as much of the path > losses as possible using the least energy I certainly wouldn't use a narrow > band signal. Quite the contrary, I'd want to spread a low bandwidth > information signal across the widest practical spectrum. Its much easier to > increase process gain (the ratio of the baseband information signal to the > final carrier bandwidth) than transmit power. The problem becomes the 1/r^2 losses. The receivers on this end have fixed lower end to their sensitivity that sets a minimal effective energy output at the transmitter. If you do the math you find that the entire Earth doesn't generate enough energy to send a spread-spectrum wide-band signal more than a few light-years out, not worth the effort or the social costs (nobody'd know about it because radio and television and such wouldn't be available since we're using all *that* energy for sending the signal). This might work for a hive mentality society but not for people. > While a narrow band signal from Arecibo's powerful transmitter/antenna > combination can be detected at a distance of about 300 light years. Since it's only been transmitting intermittenly about 30 years that's more than a tad moot. > Switching to a spread spectrum approach could allow broadening the antenna > pattern, and thereby its chances of detection, significantly without > reducing its effective range. Spread spectrum won't effect the beam angle of the dish, that's set when the dish is designed - spread spectrum or not. Also you'll need to build a new set of LMB's since the old ones won't be able to handle the frequency range or the gross power input required to keep the new signal at a given frequency at a respectible power level with the other frequencies we're now operating on in parallel. That baby's gonna get hot. > Notice how 63 dB (or over 2,000,000 fold > effective increase in transmit power) of process gain enables handheld GPS > receivers to pull in signals from satellites, sent using only a few watts > of transmit power, without much of an antenna. It's amazing how much you can pull in when you increase the sensitivity of the front-end and use mechanisms to reduce noise. > If all this seems to make sense, then why are the SETI people apparently > seaching the skies with lots of narrow band receivers? They don't seem to > be employing any broadband correlator techniques, so spread signals will > probably be missed. Then you haven't been keeping up with the Million Channel Receiver system that has been operating at Aricebo for several years. You also haven't been keeping up with the folks out at White Sands either who also impliment receivers of the same spread-spectrum type. Just about all the current big money (there ain't any since the feds cut the budget several years ago) projects use this system and the small-money and individual projects also impliment it but at a lower range of bandwidth sampled. It isn't that these folks don't want to use the latest technology it's that they can't.....$$$. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

BOOST YOUR WEB SITE'S TRAFFIC--GET LISTED ON YAHOO!
by trgz941＠netscape.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

BOOST YOUR WEB SITE'S TRAFFIC--GET LISTED ON YAHOO! ---------------- THE MARKETING BENEFITS OF HAVING A YAHOO! LISTING FACT: Yahoo! is the most important search engine/directory on which your Web site can be listed. FACT: Independently conducted Internet studies show that 42% of all Internet traffic and 70% of all business-to- business Web site traffic is generated from Yahoo!. FACT: Getting your Web site listed on Yahoo! is without question the single most important marketing step you can take to promote your Web site. EXAMPLE: For some of our clients, a Yahoo! listing is the only Internet advertising they have--and the only advertising they need. EXAMPLE: Some of our clients now receive over 20,000 hits per *day* and do well over $100,000 in Internet sales per month--not from expensive advertising, but all from a single Yahoo listing. ---------------- YAHOO! REJECTS 90% OF ALL SUBMITTED WEB SITES--BE IN THE 10% PROBLEM: In case you didn't know, Yahoo!'s staff rejects over 90% of the submissions they receive. SOLUTION: Our R&D division has studied hundreds of sites-- both those that have been successfuly indexed and those that have been rejected. SOLUTION: Based on our findings, we've helped hundreds of clients not only get their site into the Yahoo! index, but into a very prominent place within that index. The Yahoo! Project Team can do the same for you. ---------------- MY SITE HAS ALREADY BEEN REJECTED BY YAHOO! WHAT CAN I DO? PROBLEM: "I submitted my site to Yahoo! but it was rejected. What can I do now?" SOLUTION: If your site has already been rejected--don't despair. We've helped many clients' sites get into Yahoo!'s index even after they've been rejected. ---------------- THE YAHOO! SITE SELECTION PROCESS--IN A NUTSHELL "I can just submit my URL and be considered for a listing, right? It's easy, isn't it?" No. It's not. Read on to learn why. PROBLEM: Every site that gets accepted into the Yahoo! directory is scrutinized by a Yahoo! "editor." The first step in the submission process is to get an already overworked editor to look at your site. SOLUTION: We have a carefully-researched technique to help your site's chances of being examined. PROBLEM: Before submitting, your site *must* be prepared for the Yahoo! editor's "10 minute lookover." In order to grab that editor's attention--and get listed--you need to understand what he or she will be examining to determine if your Web site gets a Yahoo! listing. SOLUTION: Our R&D division has studied hundreds of Yahoo! rejection letters and learned why Yahoo! editors commonly reject sites. In short, we can *tell* you ---------------- SOLUTION: THE "SECRETS TO GETTING A TOP YAHOO! LISTING" REPORT We offer an information-packed "Secrets to getting a top Yahoo! listing" report that will tell you exactly what Yahoo! editors will be looking for when they evaluate your site. You can learn from hundreds of other people's mistakes so that you won't make them when submitting--or resubmitting-- your site. Here's what's covered in the report: <> A general overview of Yahoo! and how it works <> The technical details of what they look for <> What *specific* types of content you *must* have <> What *never* to do before submitting to Yahoo! <> Why looking at your competitors is so important before submitting <> The specifics of how to submit properly to skyrocket your chances <> The best-kept secret on the net: this single submission technique alone has achieved top rankings for many of our clients! ---------------- FOR THE SERIOUS SITE OWNER--THE CUSTOMIZED YAHOO! EVALUATION We also offer a "Customized Evaluation" service where we'll examine your site like a Yahoo! editor will--and tell you, step-by-step, each of the changes you'll need to make before submitting to Yahoo!. The "Customized Evaluation" includes all of the information from the "Secrets to getting a top Yahoo! listing" report *plus*: <> A customized evaluation of your competitors' sites and why they are so important to consider before submitting <> An evaluation of your site's technical specs. and recommendations for improving them <> An evaluation of your site's content and recommendations for improving it ---------------- SUMMARY: WHY YOU NEED A GOOD LISTING ON YAHOO! (1) If you're thinking of submitting your site to Yahoo! --or have already tried and failed--put our research and the failure of others on your side. (2) Let us help you dramatically improve the effectiveness of your on-line marketing efforts. Preparing your site for Yahoo! is worth the extra effort. (3) Remember: Yahoo! is the only *free* Internet marketing resource that can help you to increase your long-term goals of widespread exposure and profitability. (4) Best of all, once your listed in Yahoo, you're there forever. This one-time effort will be rewarded with years of residual benefits. benefits ---------------- PRICING "Secrets to getting listed on Yahoo!" report -- $99 Customized Web site evaluation (incl. report) -- $249 ---------------- CONTACT US: Call us at: (314) 994-1286 <> Learn more about the Yahoo! project and us. We'll explain exactly how we can maximize your particular site's chances of a top Yahoo! listing <> We'd love to answer any questions you might have! <> It could be the single most important phone call you'll ever make when it comes to the on-line success of your website! (314) 994-1286 ---------------- If you've received this E-mail in error, or do not desire to receive any further mailings from the Yahoo! Project Team, please REPLY to this E-mail with the word "REMOVE" in the E-mail's subject line. Thank you.

1 0