December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: info assembly line, "flits" (long)
by Josh Sled 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 23 Jun 96 17:27:25 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >>think about the the number of atoms that are necessary >>to hold the information for a single page, let alone an entire book... > >yep. not saying what I am talking about is feasible this moment. >"moore's law" But I don't think that it's feasible at ANY point in the near future... in fact, I think a better question is WHY? What would we use this newfound ability for? >>in a virtual reality "cyberspace", this would be an insurmountable data >>storage... on the small-scale. > >not insurmountable. quite practical and sensible in say 10 years. Ok... maybe practical to store the data... but I don't think sensible. Think: if we had this ability with atoms, what would we use it for? Maybe tracking crimes... or political prisoners (where have the atoms in this anonymous leaflet spelling out steps for rebellion come from?) or just curiousity... sure, there are justifable uses, but does the "savings outweigh the cost", so to speak? >to move a pencil I only pick it up and set it down. to move a >document through cyberspace, >the process is infinitely more complex, requiring an >immensity of thoughts and coordinated actions. when we create >a system that matches the real-world difficulty, then we will >be approaching the limit. we are very, very far from that limit >even though we have climbed the ladder a long ways as you note. I think we're too far from the limit to even begin to guess about how information would be stored in such a medium. But that's just my thought. For the sake of argument: why would we want to have this level of complexity in a simulated world. There is so much that can be assumed that is repetative and wasteful in the real world, why would we want a computer-generated system that must keep track of all this waste? >>I think the thing that's most important in this sentence is _"move"_ ... >>this is the main problem for computers... it's SO easy to DUPLICATE >>information... but near impossible to make sure that you've MOVED it... > >indeed, the concept of "moving" information implies TIME-- at one >time, it is at one place, at another time, it is in a new place. >but it is the SAME INFO. today, the disconnected idea of a "bit" >does not give you this *continuity*. I make a copy somewhere else >that is not tied to the original document. That's why it's so easy to make a copy... that's why we can have backups and the cypherpunks list and almost everything on the Net. If we had to keep track of flits and update them constantly, things would slow down a lot... but you're compensating for that by having arbritarbily advanced computer technology. >imagine the same thing on a totally universal cyberspatial level, >not merely within a single company or university. I agree, we have >rudiments of what I'm talking about in place. but my point is >mainly that they are rudiments compared to what is possible. the >web is a very good sample framework for the kind of seamlessness >I'm talking about. like I say, the future information assembly >line will be built on top of it. it has a long ways to go too. Ok... in a far advanced level of technology, this and more would be possible... but, the question is: do we need it? >in a sense, I think the flit concept is a magic bridge between bits >and atoms. bits are too abstract. atoms are too real. flits are >a nice compromise. we have to get our bits to behave more like >atoms: persistence, etc. there are a whole lot of very nice >"properties" of atoms that are staring us in the face that we >would benefit from immensely implementing in cyberspace. For some reason, distributed objects come to mind... though I'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to know why... >>It means that you'd have an INSANELY large ammount of storage for a >>single small document. > >early stages would not be much different than RCS systems already in >use in companies. But I think that this is the best system available for today's or the future's needs... if we extended this concept to document fragments (ie, if you use a quote from a document, that section of your document has the same revision history, changed as necessary), then we have a system that could be in use for a long time. >you could have mechanisms that don't keep the entire history of the >flit. I agree, a flit as a 0 or 1 is very unlikely in the near future. >but at a document level, i.e. a document as a flit, we already have >it in RCS systems that companies are struggling to implement well >as we speak. Again, I think a document system is the best suited for information storage... the flit concept seems to be a great overkill. >I'm saying that in the information assembly line of the future, >they *must* have context. they must be tied together. you only >have disconnected chaos otherwise. Hmm... the only problem is that the "context" would be completely machine enforced... you can't actually MOVE or COPY the bits off a computer onto another computer... each side just would have to intrepret the bits as being moved or copied... and unless you propose storing flits in something other than bits, the disconnected chaos you refer to is nothing other than software understanding bit patterns... same as ASCII or a word processor file or an OpenDoc document. >again, this requires the human to interpret the changes. what if >there was an actual "link" between the old and the new document >that is "stuck" to the new document? and furthermore, software >could traverse these links? that's more what I have in mind. And if the old document moved? How would the new document continue to know where the old document is? >data doesn't have to be disconnected. I told you this was a radical >paradigm shift that I was proposing. you obviously have the previous >concepts down quite well. I'm not arguing that what you are saying >is the conventional system. I pointed out exactly that. *nod* You're right... I don't understand your shift in thinking... it doesn't make sense to me. I think that conventional systems are very well suited to information creation, retrieval and transport, and that virtual reality, though still in development, wouldn't benefit from the flit concept. >>But cyberspace is NOT real space... > >it will evolve to become more and more like a real space, a point >of my essay. I sure hope not... why do you think so many people escape to muds... real space is bad... virtual space has the potential to become so much more. >>VERY VERY VERY far... > >10 years or so, I would say, before people implement things that >sound like they came right out of what I was talking about. Perhaps... I hope not, because I don't think that it's a reasonable concept for working with data in an on-line or even mostly digital environment, but perhaps... >right. I think it is much more realistic to speculate that we will >be virtually unlimited than limited, and to ask the question, >what would we implement if we truly were unlimited? to build something >limited when you are unlimited shows an impoverished imagination. well... I'll continue to think about the present, and you can continue to dream about the future.... Take care, Josh PS I wonder: do you envision flits being able to be created out of thin (virtual) air?

2 1

Re: Noise: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:49 PM 6/24/96 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >If you had heard the whole speech rather than only the portion reported on CNN I read the reporting and excerpts in the Saturday Times. >you would know that you have entirely distored the meaning. The point being >made was that cyberspace is being promoted as a panacea for all ills, many of >which it is creating rather than curing. I wasn't aware of any ills being created by cyberspace. For one thing, it hasn't been around (as a big thing) long enough. The only impact it has had so far is to reduce TV watching and improve writing ability (from a very low base level) among its heavy users. That's a good thing. Any effects of disintermediation or shrinking of institutions (governments and corporations) as we discuss on this list haven't really happened yet. >Cyberspace is not a replacement for an >ecconomic policy, Newts idea of giving laptops to homeless people is not a >solution for poverty. Actually I think that this is quite obvious from the >quote you give. I assume that Clinton's statement was aimed at the neo-Luddites in the AFSCME. There are probably quite a few. Actually freedom of communications or free exchange of bits (cyberspace) and by analogy the free exchange of goods and services *are* an economic policy though of course a controversial one. >Given the experience of derregulating Savings and Loans institutions I don't >think the country could survive another round of deregulation. As Reagan said >"Gentlemen we've hit the jackpot" - and of course they had, S&L was not a >fiasco for certain people, just for the poor taxpayers. Yes the great inventor of deposit insurance FDR has a lot to answer for. But for his intervention, we taxpayers wouldn't have owed a dime for the S&L collapse. I expect quite a bit more de facto dereg as people become harder to control. A mere desire to regulate others unaccompanied by the ability to do so is so much noise. >> In the same speech in which he talked about people hunting ducks with rifles. >Damned unsporting eh? Isn't the NRA weapon of choice a surface to air missile? The NRA suggests shotguns. A rifle is much more sporting than a shotgun for assassinating quackers. Hard to hit them with rifles (even harder with SAMs). DCF "If the Internet is so easy to control, how come my sysop can't even control his little piece of it?"

2 1

[Even More Noise]: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by nelson＠crynwr.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hallam-Baker writes: > Given the experience of deregulating Savings and Loans institutions > I don't think the country could survive another round of > deregulation. I get really tired of shallow critics of deregulation citing the S&L problem. The problem was partial deregulation -- the wolves were let go: into the sheep's pen. The S&L's were allowed to make risky investments, but the American taxpayers still guaranteed their asses. Phil, your reputation is sinking fast. I suggest silence on your part. -russ <nelson(a)crynwr.com> http://www.crynwr.com/~nelson Crynwr Software sells packet driver support | PGP ok 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Corporations persuade; Potsdam, NY 13676 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | governments coerce.

1 0

No Subject
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How do I use the Encrypt-Key: header to include a reply block in an anonymous posting? I've tried for a few days now, and I can't seem to make it work.

1 0

Re: The Reno Text URL.....
by Censored Girls Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The URL for the Reno Address is: http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jwa/addres.txt Thanks to John Young for the KEWL website. Check out some of the other stuff in it too! Love Always, Carol Anne At 04:21 AM 6/24/96 -0700, you wrote: >I'd like to read it, but you didn't include the url, and the article >you followed up seems to have expired out of my news spool. > >Mind telling me where the text is? > >-jcr > > Member Internet Society - Certified BETSI Programmer - Webmistress *********************************************************************** Carol Anne Braddock (cab8) carolann(a)censored.org 206.42.112.96 My Homepage The Cyberdoc *********************************************************************** ------------------ PGP.ZIP Part [017/713] ------------------- M8H,),S$8G>&.WP(8IRA`-M['+`Q%&_C"">5-F%LX@<_Q$;*P'',Q$Z/AA[8M MF=O0H+*%(-S%&>S%+FS&<LS%3(Q&#W1"<]2%`H^;,]^1C$'HBN8PX$4SYAU^ MPGD<Q0ZLA0D+,`MCT!LA**4M[-JPAK9F?40!AJ,CW"'%DR#:'9?Q)3[%<DQ` ------------------------------------------------------------- for next chunk to export --> http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/export/

1 0

PhillNoise: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by nobody＠vegas.gateway.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Dr." Hallam-Baker <hallam(a)ai.mit.edu> ["but I don't think that I would ever let him cut on me." - sorry Jimmy] opined: ..... >Newts idea of giving laptops to homeless people is not a >solution for poverty. Agreed, any more than is Willie's subsidizing illegitimacy, despite his oft- proven love for sex-without-responsibility. > >Given the experience of derregulating Savings and Loans institutions I don't >think the country could survive another round of deregulation. This is so moronic it could only come from Hallam. For you, "deregulation" means doubling the government's liability, as happened when that space- cadet (really!) Garn and that crook Fernand St. Germain raised the payout from 50 to 100 thousand. Yeah, Phill, that really deregulated 'em... >As Reagan said >"Gentlemen we've hit the jackpot" - and of course they had, S&L was not a >fiasco for certain people, just for the poor taxpayers. Certainly not for that crook Cranston, either. There's a reason 4 of the Keating 5 were Democrats, Phill. They were and are even more for sale than the Republicans. Political history, even recent, isn't your strong suit, and your pity for taxpayers is touching, if a bit recent. anon.

1 0

I am looking to hire a crypto person....
by Bruce Schneier 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am looking to hire someone part-time (with potential to upgrade to full-time) to work for Counterpane Systems, doing cryptography consulting for a variety of clients. The work is in analysis and design, mostly of cryptographic and security systems. Think of SSL, SPKI, PGP... that sort of thing. There isn't a whole lot of math, just critical thinking, complete analysis, and good writing. If anyone is interested, please send me mail. (Depending on the number of responses received, I may have some kind of application test.) Bruce ************************************************************************ * Bruce Schneier 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,002,000, * Counterpane Systems 000,000,000,000,000,000,002,000,000,002,293 * schneier(a)counterpane.com The last prime number...alphabetically! * (612) 823-1098 Two vigintillion, two undecillion, two * 101 E Minnehaha Pkwy trillion, two thousand, two hundred and * Minneapolis, MN 55419 ninety three. ************************************************************************

2 1

Tales from the UK: Basel Part IV
by winn＠Infowar.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

June, 1996: Basel, Switzerland More on the London Attacks: Part IV The International Banking Information Technology Forum seemed like an ideal location to get a reading on whether the Times' articles held any water or not. I sent the family to Germany for two days while I spoke and schmoozed and asked some of Europe's and America's top bankers about the articles. (See my last three reports [June 1 - 23, 1996] on the alleged attacks as reported in the (London) Sunday Times I browsed and wove in and out of this esteemed financial community and asked anyone and everyone in the banking field: "Do you know anything?" "Is any of it true?" "Do you know any victims?" "Was your bank attacked?" "Please, tell me!" Of course I didn't scream this out to all four hundred of the world's top bankers in the public forum of my keynote speech; rather I asked quietly and discreetly, hoping for a discreet and honest answer. I got lucky and received two. Both people who did agree to speak about the events in question do *not* want to be identified. They are both in the very senior ranks of European banking and only asked that I do not divulge their companies, their positions, backgrounds or names. They both feel that the *real* story should get out - at least as much as they know - and that the leaks are inherently good for the banking industry. [They do not agree with security by obscurity.] Further, they both told me, at separate times during the two day conference, stories that were nigh on identical (and I never told either one that I spoke to the other). The bottom line is they both know about _four_ 'attacks' against financial institutions, although it was unclear as to whether they were all in the UK or not. I am left with the distinct impression at least three of them were. [Not the 40 or more that the Times suggested or that I have heard about since April of 1994.] However, unlike the Times article, there was no question as to the method of attack, and both sources were very clear in the use and the meaning of the word attack. Here is what they said as to how the technical extortion was accomplished. The perpetrator(s) would first place a call to the upper management of the intended victim announcing his/her intention. "We will take down your bank (or financial organization) unless you pay us a lot of money not to." The intended victims each sluffed off the threats. Shortly thereafter (within a day or two) their financial systems would seemingly collapse for no reason at the prescribed time and as promised by the caller. Banking services and/or trading would come to a halt, for about an hour or so, and then the affected systems would come back on line. Backups were ineffective; typical disaster recovery methods, I was told, just didn't work. Thereafter, a second call would be made to senior executives of the victim firms, and the extortion demands for payment made again. In these cases, electronic payments to Switzerland were made, and the monies were then secreted from their temporary Swiss home within seconds - destined for places unknown or unannounced. No repeat attacks to paying institutions has occurred according to my sources. I was told unequivocally that all of the four attacks used the same methodology: malicious software was somehow injected into the systems but neither was either forthcoming or knowledgeable about the specifics. They specifically denied that HERF techniques were used. But many questions remained, and I was unsuccessful at getting what I would call good answers to these and more queries: - Which systems were affected exactly? - How were the backup/redundancies disconnected? - Exactly what do you mean by remote control? - Did you ever find the offending software? - Was it an insider job? - Was it pure hacking? - Was is mission critical application software gone awry? - And so on . . . . My questions flowed but both people either didn't know the answers or wouldn't talk. With both of them, there was a clear discomfort as I pushed and prodded for more details. Despite having so many questions still unanswered, I do feel fortunate to have found at least two people who were willing to support at least aspects of the Times' story. One of the two banking people in Basel went even further with detail. He/she says the actual dollar figure extorted in these four cases using the software techniques, was L63 Million (UK), which is just about US$100 Million. According to him/her, a lot of meetings have been taking place amongst the banks and financial institutions to deal with the situation but they have agreed and thus made a conscious effort to avoid government and law enforcement. So, no, none of this fully supports the Times' story, but it does support aspects of it, and aspects of the rumors and stories I've been hearing since April of 1994. No HERF Guns, although another of my contacts who will not let me use much of his/her information yet, swears that the software attack stories are merely obfuscating the higher technology methods. I certainly don't know all of the facts, but as more people come forward with bits and pieces we may be able to siphon through the maelstrom of noise and rumor and find out what's really been going on. Back at you as soon as I have something more. Winn Peace Winn Winn Schwartau - Interpact, Inc. Information Warfare and InfoSec V: 813.393.6600 / F: 813.393.6361 Winn(a)InfoWar.Com

1 0

RE: AT&T bans anonymous messages
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

fortunately there's still such a ting as freedom of choice: use another ISP. There's no reason why ATT can't forbid anything they want on their service. The problem is: what happens if there is no longer freedom of choice of ISP ... and: how is ATT going to KNOW WHO SENT WHAT anonymously ... aye, there's the insidious part of it .... ---------- From: WorldNet User[SMTP:anonymous-user@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Monday, June 24, 1996 9:43 AM To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: AT&T bans anonymous messages AT&T WorldNet service has banned the sending of anonymous email or posting anonymously. >From the "AT&T WorldNet Service Operating Policies": (i) Members may not post or transmit any message anonymously or under a false name. Members may not permit any other person (other than an agent acting on Member's behalf and subject to Member's supervision) to access the Service Member's account for any purpose. The no anon rule even beat the no indecency rule, which is second: (ii) Members may not post or transmit any message which is libelous, defamatory or which discloses private or personal matters concerning any person. Members may not post or transmit any message, data, image or program which is indecent, obscene or pornographic. http://www.worldnet.att.net/care/terms/#oppol

1 0

Re: Noise: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:58 PM 6/24/96 -0400, hallam(a)Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote: > Remember why FDR invented deposit insurance? The worst depression in modern > history was caused by the lack of deposit insurance. By an interesting coincidence the the worst depression in modern history happened shortly after governments around the world took control of currency issue, so that banknotes became government notes. Just as the worst famine in modern Russian history happened shortly after the government collectivized the peasants. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

4 6