December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Clickshare launches Internet's first multi-site micropaymentsservice
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 12:16:39 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: "mpay list (MIT)" <micropay(a)ai.mit.edu> From: felixk(a)panix.com (Felix Kramer) Subject: Clickshare launches Internet's first multi-site micropayments service Sender: owner-micropay(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: micropay(a)ai.mit.edu Here are the first paragraphs of a press release, the rest of which can be found at: http://www.clickshare.com/pubpack/releases.html Clickshare launches Internet's first multi-site micropayments service "Internet Information Utility" delivers commerce a la carte WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass., Sept. 16 -- Clickshare Corporation's pioneering multi-site, single-ID, Internet micropayment system went live on Friday as users began clicking on -- and paying for -- information online. Purchases from Friday to Sunday by over a dozen first registrants totaled $62.60. "We're the web's first working multi-site distributed user-management and micropayment service," said Bill Densmore, Clickshare's chairman. "Now publishers can charge for valuable information on the Internet, rather than giving it away." "Now that 'The Internet's Information Utility' (sm) is up and running," said Felix Kramer, Clickshare marketing director, "we'll finally see whether people will buy information by the click." -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Felix Kramer, Marketing Director CLICKSHARE CORP. felix(a)clickshare.com Direct: 212/866-4864 www.clickshare.com Corporate: 413/458-8001 www.nlightning.com (personal) fax: 212/866-5527 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

Re: DL in exchange for fingerprint
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> "We keep a memory bank that matches your fingerprints with your > license," [DoPS spokesman] said. "In other words, if you went to > get a new license with a false birth certificate and your > fingerprint didn't match the name, you wouldn't get a license. Totally bogus - _my_ birth certificate didn't have my fingerprints on it :-) Now, it may help stop people from getting duplicate licenses, assuming they use the same finger each time and don't have the sense to put rubber cement or ridge filler or something on their fingers first (and assuming, of course, that the system actually _checks_ the fingerprint in real time, rather than just recording it.) >Just what I would have called it: a great idea. Is it true that 31 >other states take your fingerprint as part of the license application? >I feel sick. Wouldn't be surprising; you didn't think you lived in America, did you? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> # You can get PGP software outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto

1 0

Re: Workers Paradise. /Political rant.
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jbugden(a)smtplink.alis.ca" 17-SEP-1996 01:09:37.71 Mind trying to do 72-column or so formatting, BTW? >Canada has a single payer system and we spend about two thirds as much as t= >he >U.S. on health care as a percentage of G.N.P. We manage to insure all Canad= >ians >while about 35% of people in the U.S. have *no* health insurance. Canada also has less smoking, teenage pregnancy, and various other factors which are known to raise health insurance costs. I've seen some studies in which these _entirely_ account for the differences... and keep in mind the rate of health care inflation of the two countries (depending on the study, either the same or higher for Canada.) -Allen

1 0

Re: Judge Kozinski Responds
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"liberty(a)gate.net" "Jim Ray" 17-SEP-1996 02:14:28.24 To: IN%"cypherpunks(a)toad.com" CC: Subj: Judge Kozinski Responds >The statement about anonymous remailers was largely >accurate. I'm not sure that the fact that you (or some of >your associates) are willing to block people from getting >anonymous mail is a sufficient safeguard. Some may not be, >and it only takes one or two who do not adhere to the code >to make life miserable for the rest of us. > >We agree about the need for privacy, but I'm not at all sure >why the right to send messages anonymously trumps the >recipient's right to know who's addressing him. Getting an >anonymous message--even one that is not harassing or >threatening--is an invasion of my privacy. As for The essential problem with this viewpoint is that the right the receiver has is to ignore the message. If he doesn't want to receive anonymous messages, he should set up a mail filtration program that will do a good enough job of filtering them out. Spammed messages can be countered with Internet charging (neccessary anyway for the long-term health of the Net), as can mailbombing. That leaves individual messages that may be offensive (including, apparantly in his case, offensive by virtue of being anonymous), but if offensiveness meant someone should have the right to stop the emission of speech, that would mean the Christian Coalition would have the right to stop speech on evolution, the PC types would have the right to stop speech on genetic differences in intelligence (see Stephen Jay Gould for them on this issue - even leaving aside racial questions which are separate from the individual ones), etcetera. -Allen

1 0

More proposals for European censorship
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fortunately, the European Parliament really doesn't have much power. I'd point out to those squeamish about child pornography that - aside from that it's the production that's the problem, not the transmission & duplication - what can be used to censor it can be used to censor everything else. Incidentally, what nonsense is meant by "social rights"? -Allen > _________________________________________________________________ > webslingerZ > _________________________________________________________________ > EU PARLIAMENT DEMANDS ACTION ON CHILD SEX > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > STRASBOURG, France (Sep 19, 1996 11:24 a.m. EDT) - The European > Parliament pressed the European Union on Thursday to act to curb child > sex and trafficking rings, saying the fight against sexual abuse of > children must be an "absolute priority." [...] > Euro-MPs also called for action to stop criminals using the Internet > to disseminate pornography and to deal in women and children. They > urged the European Commission to look into technical and legal > measures, at European and global level, to combat the use of the > information superhighway for criminal purposes. > They said a strong regulatory framework for controlling the networks > was needed to ensure that people's personal and social rights were > enhanced by the advent of the new technology. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

2 1

Stego inside encryption
by Mullen Patrick 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My apologies if this shows up twice. I got an error message from my first posting. *************** I know a lot of times the idea behind steganography is to hide the fact that a secret message is in a seemingly normal file/mail/whatever. This is good for avoiding unwanted interest in your file. The benefit of not having people attempt to crack you code, added to the strength of the cryptosystem is wonderful. However, I propose this-- Don't hide that anything's encrypted! Rather than hide this fact, throw it in their face! I propose hiding an encrypted message inside another encrypted message. Set bits in specific places to data in the real message. The benefit is Oscar not only doesn't know what the crypto is, he attacks the wrong message. Hiding statistically random bits from the true message in statistically random bits from the masking message shouldn't be too hard. Granted, this scheme doesn't get you past measures designed to keep out all encrypted messages, and it surely wouldn't keep you message from generating interest, but it would be very hard to decrypt the message, especially when some algorithm is used which (seemingly) randomly selects which bits to use for the stego. Just a thought... My apologies if someone has already proposed this method. Patrick

1 0

CNET Digital Dispatch Vol. 2 No. 38
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This week's c|net digital dispatch had the following top ten list. For number 8, did they mean DES or is the EDS something I'm not aware of. I figure it has to be because what does DES have to do with chat rooms? >9. TOP TEN REASONS WHY THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES WON'T TAKE >PLACE ON THE WEB > >10. Kemp would fight with Dole over who gets to > "quarterback" the keyboard. >9. Oops: Gore plugged information superhighway cable > into White House central vacuum system. >8. Perot's crack team of EDS hackers would get him > in somehow. >7. Hotwired editors say presidential candidates not > hip enough. >6. Hillary doesn't let the President in ANY chat rooms. >5. Debate commission insists: event must be on Prodigy. >4. Bill Gates owns the rights to online debates. >3. Dole's Selectric won't connect to the Net. >2. Chelsea is using the White House PC to write a > book report. >1. In cyberspace, no one can feel your pain. ____________________________________________________________ Rick Osborne osborne(a)gateway.grumman.com "The universe doesn't give you any points for doing things that are easy."

2 1

Comments on Emoney regulation
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

JYA has the complete version of this, but I wanted to make a comment that this allegedly pro-consumer group is wanting mandatory receipts - decidedly anti-privacy. Typical; Consumer Reports keeps calling for limits on what can be made available instead of making the information available and letting people decide on their own. There is also the problems associated with welfare-on-a-card - namely limits on what can be purchased, a requirement for full identity disclosures, etcetera. I'd call this effort by government also a form of the pressure-by-economics we saw with the initial Clipper proposal (leaving aside the actual agenda), namely using government purchasing to distort the market (away from anonymous digital cash, in this case). The last statement also brings up the question of why shouldn't banks move out of high-crime areas? I'd appreciate lower bank fees, and so would most people. -Allen > _________________________________________________________________ > Centura > _________________________________________________________________ > REGULATORS TURN SPOTLIGHT ON CYBERMONEY > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 N.Y. Times News Service > (Sep 19, 1996 00:41 a.m. EDT) -- As concerns grow about electronic > money-laundering, cybercounterfeiting and bank runs on the Internet, > regulators in the United States and around the world are scurrying to > catch up with the rapid development of electronic money. [...] > Moreover, there is now no requirement that a company that issues > stored-value cards must be a bank or be regulated in any other way. > That raises the question whether these cards, if they become popular, > will become as unruly as the market for prepaid telephone cards, in > which a number of card vendors have failed to deliver the calls that > were promised. [...] > To prevent such problems, a number of other countries have decided to > require that stored-value cards be issued only by banks. > The Federal Reserve has issued proposals on whether the consumer > protections guaranteed for other electronic-funds transfers -- like > direct deposits and debit cards -- will apply to stored-value card > purchases. These protections include the requirement of receipts with > every purchase and a limit on liability if a card is lost or stolen. > The Fed has proposed that card systems that cannot hold more than $100 > and those that have no central records of how much money is on each > card be exempt from the strict consumer-protection rules. > "The Fed proposal is destroying consumer protection," said Janice > Shields, the consumer-research director for the U.S. Public Interest > Research Group in Washington. "They don't want to disclose > error-resolution procedures, and they want unlimited consumer losses." [...] > One force pushing the development of the technology, however, is the > government itself, which has mandated that by 1999 all payments to or > from government accounts must be made electronically. This may have > the most significant effect on the recipients of various welfare > programs, many of whom now do not have bank accounts that could > receive an electronic money transfer. > To deal with this, various groups of state governments are developing > special cards on which benefits payments will be stored. Recipients > will be able to use the cards to withdraw cash at automated teller > machines and to make purchases. > One of the thorniest issues is whether holders of these welfare cards > get the same protections as holders of credit and debit cards issued > by banks. State and local governments do not want to absorb the cost > of issuing refunds, for example, though some readings of the > electronic funds transfer act would require that they do. > Some are also concerned that as banks move more toward offering their > services electronically, they will have more reason to close branches > in inner-city areas. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Insider Trading - news report
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'd be curious as to the comments of Black Unicorn and others on that legal finding - it does appear to make things at least a bit better in this area... including making it difficult to claim that insider information shouldn't be transmitted on the Net. Incidentally, I find AP's calling insider trading "fraud" rather biased. -Allen > _________________________________________________________________ > Direct Media > _________________________________________________________________ > INSIDER TRADING NEVER WENT AWAY > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 The Associated Press > WASHINGTON (Sep 18, 1996 10:35 a.m. EDT) -- One of the most infamous > acts in the financial fraudster's playbook, insider trading, remains > at record levels, despite a decade of steady crackdowns by regulators. [...] > The SEC brought one of its more unusual insider trading cases on > Monday, when it sued the unnamed account holders in a Swiss and > Bahamian accounts with insider trading ahead of The Gillette Co.'s > merger proposal for Duracell International. [...] > One disturbing development for regulators is a recent decision by the > 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that struck down one of the SEC's > main enforcement tools in insider trading cases. > The court, which covers several Midwestern states, rejected the > so-called "misappropriation theory" in insider trading cases, which is > used to nab people trading on inside information who don't owe a > fiduciary duty to the company's shareholders. The court also rejected > an SEC rule used to snare insider trading in tender offers. > The 8th Circuit decision came in August in a Justice Department case > against Minneapolis attorney James H. O'Hagan, who was charged with > insider trading during the 1988 takeover bid of Pillsbury Co. by Grand > Metropolitan PLC. SEC General Counsel Richard Walker has asked the > appeals court for a rehearing on the matter. > While the 8th Circuit decision represents a setback for the SEC, the > agency usually brings its cases in the New York and Chicago areas, > where the federal courts acknowledge these insider trading rules. > Regulators say these enforcement tools are important because insider > trading follows few patterns. In an analysis of 35 cases brought in > 1995 that solely dealt with insider trading, Gerlach said 20 involved > trading ahead of mergers, three ahead of other positive corporate > announcements and six ahead of bad corporate news. > He described 16 of the cases as "classic insider trading" involving an > executive, company director or employee who traded on confidential, > market sensitive information or tipped friends about it. Among the > remaining cases, four involved trading by securities brokers or other > industry officials, four involved law firm employees and one, an > employee at an outside accounting firm. > Investigators at the Nasdaq Stock Market's market surveillance unit > refer a significant number of insider trading cases to the SEC. Halley > Milligan, who heads a team of nine insider trading investigators at > Nasdaq, said the market has made 73 referrals on suspected insider > trading to the SEC so far in 1996, which is on par with last year, > when 107 cases were referred to the agency. > Nasdaq, like major stock markets, uses sophisticated computer > technology to sniff out illegal trading. The Nasdaq system is called > SWAT, or Stock Watch Automatic Tracking, which scans news databases > after detecting any unusual trading. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

2 1

Re: CIA hacked
by Lord of Entropy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:11 AM 9/20/96 +1000, you wrote: >+http://www.odci.gov/cia >+Seems the DOJ hack was a good inspiration. Heh! Life's good when you're >+willing to work at it. >Did you or anyone get a mirror of the site?! I wanna set one up! ;) http://www.ilf.net/hacked.websites/cia/ -- T 37 5F 68 3F 0F 1B A3 6B 7F 90 EA 40 73 49 2F B0 R Information Liberation Front U NO http://www.ilf.net/ chaoS(a)ilf.Net T E

1 0