December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: PBS show
by Brad Shantz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May Wrote: > I personally despise the term "nerd," but I won't get into that here. > (Except to say that "nerds," "geeks," and "dweebs" are terms of insult, and > anyone who accepts this labelling by the media and by "jerks" (a comparable > term, by the way) is proably just a dweeb anyone, so I guess the term is > accurate.) I just caught this show last night. And enjoyed it. I personally thought that Steve Jobs quoting Picasso with the "True artists steal" line in regards to copying others work for personal gain was interesting. Since I live 10 blocks away from the main MS Campus, I hear everything there is to hear about Bill Gates. So, it was really unnecessary for me to watch the hour and a hlaf devoted strictly to who Bill stole what from. **GRIN** > Those were exciting times. But, having worked at Intel during those heady > days, and being pretty active these days on the Net, I'd have to say the > Web, Net, Java, etc. are *just as exciting* (if not more so) than those > days. So, the best years are probably yet to come. Having started my "prefessional" Internet career at SPRY in 1993, I agree that the best of the Internet is yet to come. Bill Gates said in the show last night that it is almost impossible to judge where the market will be in a year because things are changing so fast. Right now everything is a buzzword. JAVA, etc...they are all infant technologies that if marketed correctly could lead to the next revolution. > (BTW, I also had an ARPANET account in 1973, when there were only several > sites as nodes.) I was 2 until August of 1973. **GRIN** I didn't even know that the pictures on the TV weren't real yet. > So, a pretty fair history of the industry. Probably the best such show I've > seen. I do wish they'd picked a better title though. Brad

1 0

Re: PBS show
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:31 AM 6/13/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: > >Compared to my SOL, the Apple II would've been more useful, in retrospect. >As to the 40-character display, that was the norm in those days. (My SOL, >and certainly the other machines available to home users at that time, had >only a 40-character-wide display...when in worked.) > >The comments about the floppies (" VERY SMALL capacity floppies (which were >very slow as well") is even more off-base. The original Apple II floppy held ONLY 90 kilobytes on a 5" floppy. How did they do such a bad job? >>BTW, Intel shares a substantial proportion of the blame for Apple's choice >>of the 6502. The decision was made, I've heard, because Intel was still >>trying to get $200 for a slow 8080, while Western Design Center (?) wanted >>only about $20 for a 6502. > >You need to check your claims more carefully. There are always many reasons >a chip is selected for a design. Yes, there are, but a 10-to-1 difference in price is a killer for most designs. > >>And by refusing to build Masatoshi (?) Shima's design for the Z-80, they >>totally lost the race for the 8-bit PC world. The Z-80 turned into the >>highest-volume 8-bit microprocessor by far, leaving both the 8080 and the >>8085 in the dust, and even the 6502. > >Again, your understanding of the history of Intel, Zilog, and the industry >in general is lacking. > >The design and process technology resources were instead committed to the >8086, The design for the Z-80 was completed and in Intel's hands. Intel didn't want to build the Z-80, they wanted to focus on peripheral chips, so they let Shima go and start Zilog. and history is rather clear about the wisdom of doing that. Intel is >now capitalized at something like $50-70 billion, and Zilog is no longer on >the radar screen. No! The 8086 wasn't "wise," it was a crock. (The _principle_ of building a 16-bit microprocessor was just fine, and in fact necessary. It's their product that sucked.) Brain-dead segmented architecture, 64k per segment limitation, 1-megabyte memory limitation. The only thing that made it appear like a wise move (and even then, only in hindsight) was the fact that IBM was even more idiotic, and selected it (actually, worse, the 8088!) for their PC. Even a bad standard can be hugely profitable, and that is what kept Intel alive. Furthermore, the only way Intel got the 8086 off the ground was to buy off AMD to support the 8086, as opposed to the Z-8000 as they had done in a long series of anti-8086 ads in about 1978 or so. (you do recall the series, don't you? You know, the two guys on the soapboxes?) They later stiffed AMD by refusing to deliver the design for the 386, and they got raked over the coals for that a few years ago in court. Pure fraud. Intel's misbehavior has probably kept the price of the leading-edge generation microprocessor at least a factor of 3 higher than it would have been had AMD been allowed to compete according to their 1978 agreement. Much of the capitalization you speak of, therefore, was the product of this fraud. The world would have been far better off if they'd chosen the 68000 for the IBM PC. I suspect the reason IBM didn't was that they thought it would be easier to push around tiny Intel rather than the electronics giant Motorola. They were probably right about this limited interpretation, but in exchange for a little temporary control they doomed the world to a built-in series of design crocks that only began with the innate limitations of the 8088. Every product for the PC you buy today is more expensive, less reliable, harder to install, less compatible, more complicated for less benefit, has less competition, and is in general less desirable because of the mistakes Intel made in the middle 1970's, and IBM made in 1980 or so. These mistakes weren't repaired in subsequent incarnations of the 286, 386 and others, or IBM's AT, etc, because they were _architecture_ problems and software-design problems that cannot be "repaired." Why is it that you can afford 32 megabytes of DRAM, yet you'd get insufficient-memory errors if you're not careful with you CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT? (Combination of Intel's dumb mistake of a 1-meg memory limitation, and IBM's filling of 1/3 of that space with crap.) Why is it that you can't put two color displays on the latest PC's? (IBM's dumb mistake: Memory-mapped video that can't be re-addressed.) Why can't you put a dozen peripheral devices into a PC, and you have trouble with even 3-4, and are forced to look up all the DMA's, Interrupts, and COM ports to ensure no overlap? (IBM's dumb mistake.) I could go on, but what's the point? The PC architecture is pure crap, and I'm saying that as a person who uses them daily, and will not own a Mac because of Apple's legal misbehavior. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

4 3

Re: PBS show
by Blake Wehlage 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:35 AM 6/13/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: >At 10:26 PM 6/12/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: > >> >But the Apple II WAS a toy! Non-detached keyboard, poor placement of reset >key, upper-case only, 40-character wide display, odd microprocessor, VERY >SMALL capacity floppies (which were very slow as well), as well as a hostile >legal situation regarding the building of clones. Hell, they even objected >to other companies building boards which plugged into the bus! I was not a toy it was what started the PC revolution >I have other, even harsher word for the design of the IBM PC. Oh yes, the >Mac sucks bigtime as well, although primarily for legal reasons. > Mac rule they have an awesome GUI (graphical user interface), easy of use it way up there and they have bitchin' software. I know i will regret saying this but: The mac OS is 3 times better than Windows '95 (Eat that Bill!) >Jim Bell >jimbell(a)pacifier.com > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Blake "Pokey" Wehlage Age-13 Gaa- 3.69 (for ice hockey goalie) <jwilk(a)iglou.com> My page- http://www.iglou.com/members/jwilk.html Quote- Does whiskey count as beer? -Homer Simpson

1 0

microcurrency implementation
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

an interesting system that lets people bill for web pages using telephone 800 number technology. ------- Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 15:19:37 -0300 From: Rick McGinnis <rick(a)dragon.mediadial.com> Message-Id: <199606111819.PAA07849(a)dragon.mediadial.com> Via-Web Access now perfected! Instantly bill people over the web through long distance numbers. 1. Paid in US funds for all 90+ countries using the net! 2. Payouts are weekly! 3. Receive $0.25 US for every minute. 4. Easier than any web billing procedure currently used. 5. Everyone has a phone. If you would like to try Via-Web Access, please call... Can and US Dial 011-592-583-423 Other Countries ++592-583-423 The Via-Web Access home page can be found at: http://stsim.com/mdc/viaweb/

1 0

CDA & Clinton
by Daniel Salenger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It looks as though even after the temporary court injunction against major portions of the CDA, Clinton still wants to push it: http://www.yahoo.com/headlines/960612/news/stories/internet_4.html Very unfortunate. Please protect us from ourselves Bill. Dan Salenger dsalenger(a)dttus.com

1 0

Web Based Encrypted Backup
by foodie＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Connected Corporation announced DataSafe, a Mac/Windows web based backup service. $14.95/Month for 50MB, archival CD-ROM for $24.95 each. Offers passwords and DES encryption. Storage is on 2 mirrored sites. Phone # (508) 270-0035, http://www.connected.com/. >From thier site: ------- Security DataSafe uses the federally approved Data Encryption Standard (DES) with a 56-bit key to encrypt all of your data before it leaves your PC. This level of encryption is so powerful, it is not permitted to be exported outside of the United States (we use a different, but similarly powerful encryption scheme for our international customers). You have the option to choose your own encryption password, which is never transferred to us over the modem. In this way, no one but you can read your data - not when it is in transfer to us, nor when it is being stored in encrypted format at our secure operations centers. When this level of encryption is combined with the fact that we only transmit the portions of each file that change every day, not the entire file, the chances that anyone will be able to read or make use of your data as it travels over the network are practically eliminated. DataSafe uses the TCP/IP communications protocol for both its private dial-up network and Internet-based services. -------- I really like the idea of distributed, encrypted backups, but this strikes me as the kind of thing that has the potential to get a lot of gullible people in trouble. Hopefully someone offshore with proven security and a wider choice of algorithms will compete... (I don't know if Connected is good at security, so this shouldn't be construed as a swipe at them. Does anyone know anything about them?) -j -- The signal is the noise. ____________________________________________________________________ Jamie Lawrence mailto:jal@cyborganic.net mailto:foodie@netcom.com

1 0

doubleclick monitoring web browsing habits
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A post on comp.risks described a web adverstising service called "doubleclick". As described in its web pages at <URL: http://ad.doubleclick.net >, this service provides targetted advertising on the web. Participating web sites include links to doubleclick to show graphic images. Advertisers sign up with doubleclick and specify profiles for where and when they want their ads to appear. Doubleclick then selects an ad for each user who visits a participating site. Participating sites get paid for each such hit, and advertisers pay based on how many hits are expected. Apparently this is being used quite a bit. But what I found disturbing was the scope of the information being collected by doubleclick. The various parameters that advertisers can use in setting up their profiles for where their ads should appear are described at <URL: http://ad.doubleclick.net/advertising/adreghelp.htm > and include: TARGET BY WEB PAGE/SITE CATEGORY TARGET BY SERVICE PROVIDER (SP) TARGET BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION We determine a person's geographic location through the physical location of their network or through user registration. We have created an extensive map of both organization and Internet Service Provider (ISP) networks. TARGET BY USER'S OPERATING SYSTEM TARGET BY USER'S BROWSER TYPE TARGET BY HIGH-LEVEL INTERNET DOMAIN TYPE TARGET BY ORGANIZATION TYPE (SIC CODE) TARGET BY ORGANIZATION SIZE OR REVENUE TARGET BY PERSONAL INTERESTS doubleclick.net continues to add to an extensive database of user interests from activity on doubleclick.net member web sites as well as from publicly available sources like netnews. User interests are kept strictly confidential and will not be released to advertisers. We do allow advertisers to target ad banners based on user's interests. The more your ad banner is targeted at specific user interests, the more likely you are to generate a response. Personal interest categories include: Arts and Literature Business, Finance, and Economy Computers, Software and Internet Culture, Religion, and Society Education and InstructionalEntertainment Government, Politics, and Military Health and Medicine News Recreation and LeisureScience and Technology Social Science Sports Travel This last category is the really worrisome one. doubleclick monitors the web browsing habits of users whenever they hit a doubleclick- participating site, and builds up databases about users from that, as well as from usenet posts. This is exactly what people have been talking about as an abuse of privacy on the net. One question is whether enough information to uniquely identify users is routinely provided by widely used browsers like Netscape. I have refrained from telling my Netscape browser my name and email address out of fear that it would reveal this information; as a result, I can't use mailto: links, which is annoying (and also suspicious; lynx allows me to do mailto: without permanently entering an email address). This points out the need for browser providers to be sensitive to the privacy needs of their users and to clearly explain when and under what circumstances private information is revealed. It also suggests that services like www.anonymizer.com will be increasingly important for people to protect their privacy while browsing. Hal

2 1

Re: PBS show
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:40 PM 6/13/96 -0400, Warren wrote: >I enjoyed the show as well...I was a bit young when the Altair was first >published in Radio Elec., Nope. Popular Electronics. January, 1975 issue. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: PBS show
by Joseph M. Reagle Jr. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:26 PM 6/12/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >I caught the show and thought it was pretty good, all in all. I thought so too? When is part II coming on? (I hope it didn't come right after that, I had to run.) Next week? >I personally despise the term "nerd," but I won't get into that here. Ahhh... it makes them happy. What I find most unnapealing is the unabashed, "I don't have a life, I live with a computer" mentality. I was rather taken with that mentality myself for a bit (and I'm sure it contributed to the RSI), but even then I would have found it painfully difficult to only associate with one "culture" and only do one thing all day long. Maybe "nerds" over do it, but they do do other things, like play magic, or assasin, D&D, or whatever. <grin> And the most interesting/brilliant computer people that I run into _have_ other interests beyond computers. >first employee hired by Jobs and Woz. Personally, my first personal >computer was a Processor Technology SOL, as I thought the Apple II looked >too much like a toy. Shows you what I knew.) The thing that startled me, was the contrary temporal perspective. Watching it I felt like, "Hey! I remeber that, I used an Apple II in kindergarden to write LOGO," or though I didn't have an Altair, I had a Bailey Arcade. No one here probably remembers, but it was a kick ass game playing (the best at the time) and programmable machine. I remember belonging to a mailing-list club and getting a thick envolope of type written code that I'd dutifully punch into a calculator like entry pad. (All ~20 keys for quadrupely overloaded!!) The cool thing was it had cool (c-64 like) peeks and pokes and you could call a plethora of the pregenerated graphical things from your own code. Then there was always saving it to the audio tape... <ack> Ok, so that is the nostalgia bit (hey I remember that), the other bit was a, wow that was a long time ago. Looking at PC-history always feels like a contradiction in time. _______________________ Regards, Laziness is no more than the habit of resting before you get tired. -Jules Renard Joseph Reagle http://farnsworth.mit.edu/~reagle/home.html reagle(a)mit.edu E0 D5 B2 05 B6 12 DA 65 BE 4D E3 C1 6A 66 25 4E

2 1

RSAREF down?
by Howard Melman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyone know anything about this? tmp> ftp ftp.rsa.com Connected to ftp.rsa.com. 220- 220-Welcome to the RSA Data Security, Inc. FTP Archive. [...] 220-***************** Special Announcement ******************* 220- 220- RSAREF has been taken down until further notice. 220- We will keep you informed for any new announcement. 220- 220-***********************************************************

3 2