December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Husband/Wife jailed for saying Clinton Sucks
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:12 AM 8/21/96 -0700, Rich Graves wrote: >On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Z.B. wrote: > >> Published in Washington, D.C. July 9, 1996 >> Insult to Clinton leads to 2 arrests >> By Ruth Larson >> THE WASHINGTON TIMES >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >I think you should try a more credible paper. Say, Scientology's Freedom >Magazine, rather than the Moonies'. You are of course free to believe >whatever you wish. At this point, I think the Washington Times has far more credibility than the Washington Post. While I'm, likewise, not particularly happy with the Times' ownership, I doubt whether stories like this ever appear in the Post. (You tell me: Did this story ever appear in the Post?) The Net public is getting less and less tolerant of obvious bias on the part of those who report the news. The Times has some potential (undisplayed) bias that we need to be on the lookout for, but the Post is actively engaging in bias in its news stories, NOW. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Cypherpunks Satelites?
by Brian D Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There was a review of a book called "Micro Space Craft" by Rick Fleeter in the Aug issue of WIRED. My copy arrived an hour ago...... Chapter one: Why are we here? Chapter two: Propulsion-or-how to get there? Chapter three: Orbit Mechanics-or-What keeps these things up anyway? Chapter four: Orbit Mechanics II: The Movie Chapter five: You Send Me: Orbit mechanics III Chapter six: Magnetic Attractions Chapter seven: Everything you always wanted to know about radio, Part one: Shatter the myth of the digital Miracle? Chapter eight: Everything you always wanted to know about radio Part two: Faster than a speeding bullet. Chapter nine: Everything you always wanted to know about radio Part three: What's up Doc? Chapter ten: Thermal Dynamics: Tough talk about temperature (A short virtually painless, and occasionally philosophical look at spacecraft thermostatics and thermodynamics. Chapter eleven: You got an attitude buddy?: (A primer on small satelite stability and control.) Chapter twelve: Memory systems for spacecraft-or-Memory-What is it good for? Chapter thirteen: Mechanisms: The nuts and bolts of small Satelites. Chapter fourteen: Batteries not included. Chapter fifteen: Bring'em up clean. Chapter sixteen: Satelite clusters Chapter seventeen: Where to look for historical underpinnings,term definitions, and revolutionary zeal turned up to 11. Chapter eighteen: Space history and a possible future. "Dr Rick Fleeter is a founder and President of the small Satelite and space transportation company AeroAstro, and the International Small Satelite Organization (ISSO). He has been responsible for development of over 20 miniature satelites ranging from 2.5 to 250 pounds and has been writing and publishing the "NEW SPACE" (previously ISSO) newsletter bimonthly since 1987." The Edge City Press 10912 Harpers Sq. Ct. Reston, VA 22091 703.620.6650 FAX 703.716.5752 9-5 EDT "I LIKE IT !!!"(****) YMMV Brian "Zazen? Well it beats sitting around on your ass all day doing nothing."

1 0

Re: Husband/Wife jailed for saying Clinton Sucks
by Z.B. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Alan Olsen wrote: > At 08:23 PM 8/20/96 -0700, you wrote: > > >A more detailed version of this story was posted on talk.politics.guns > >last week. I could dig it up and post it if anyones interested. > > Post it. I would like to see it at least... > You got it... Published in Washington, D.C. July 9, 1996 Insult to Clinton leads to 2 arrests ------------------------------------------------------ By Ruth Larson THE WASHINGTON TIMES ------------------------------------------------------ [A] Chicago-area couple were arrested on charges of disorderly conduct and interrogated for more than 12 hours last week, simply because the woman told President Clinton exactly what she thought of him. Last Tuesday, Mr. Clinton made an impromptu stop at the "Taste of Chicago" festival in Grant Park at midafternoon. According to her husband, Patricia Mendoza, angered and upset by the recent deaths of 19 U.S. airmen in Saudi Arabia, told the president, "You suck, and those boys died!" Once the president left the area, Secret Service agents and Chicago police converged on Mrs. Mendoza and accused her of threatening the president, a charge her husband, Glenn, vehemently denies. "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if my wife had threatened the president -- which she did not -- I can guarantee we wouldn't have been locked up on charges of disorderly conduct," the Westchester, Ill., man told The Washington Times in a telephone interview last night. Mr. Mendoza served in the Navy for 4 1/2 years, and he was on a ship off the Lebanese coast when the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut killed 241 Marines and sailors. "I didn't sit on an aircraft carrier for four years to be railroaded by a bunch of Secret Service agents," he said. Secret Service spokesman Ar nette Heintze said: "People don't get locked up just for saying, 'You suck.' You could say that all day long and it's not a violation of law or local ordinances." Mr. Heintze insisted that Mrs. Mendoza "made a threatening statement" to the president, but he refused to elaborate, saying that the matter was under investigation. "It's a situation that happens from time to time, but it's something we take very seriously," he said. The incident sparked a media frenzy in Chicago but had yet to surface on the East Coast until radio talk-show host G. Gordon Liddy discussed it on his nationally syndicated program yesterday. Mr. Liddy told The Times: "I think it's outrageous. Everybody agrees that if there's a threat, the Secret Service clearly can detain the individuals and do an investigation. "But 'You suck, those boys died' is not a threat. It's an expression of anger, contempt or ridicule. It's wrong for the Secret Service to detain someone if there's no threat," he said. Mr. Mendoza, who owns a small electronics firm, and his wife were at the festival with their employees, unaware that the president was coming. Suddenly, he recalled, the Secret Service descended on the park, throwing up barriers and preventing anyone from leaving the area. A black car drove up, Mr. Clinton leaped out and began shaking hands with onlookers, and Mrs. Mendoza found herself face to face with the president, Mr. Mendoza said. Mr. Clinton shook her hand and she reacted by pulling it back and telling him, "You suck, those boys died," Mr. Mendoza said. He said the president looked at her, then motioned to an assistant as he moved along the rest of the line. "He wasn't pleased," Mr. Mendoza said. Soon afterward, Mr. Mendoza said, Secret Service agents began accusing his wife of threatening the president's life. At that point, he said, he began directing his wife: "Trish, don't say anything. We need a lawyer." An officer told him to shut up and he responded, "Screw you. I have a right to tell my wife to get a lawyer when she's getting interrogated by the Secret Service," Mr. Mendoza said. He concluded, "The fact is, I was arrested because I was swearing at my wife." Chicago police arrested the couple at the request of the Secret Service. The Mendozas were questioned until their release on personal-recognizance bond at 4 a.m. Mr. Mendoza denied any political ill will toward Mr. Clinton. "I'm apolitical. I was in the military, had a good record, have a wife and two kids, a small business," he said. But he fears the incident will be exaggerated because of election-year politics and the Democratic National Convention coming to Chicago next month. "They're making us look like Bonnie and Clyde, Republican poster children. And that's not who we are," Mr. Mendoza said. ------------ Published in Washington, D.C. July 10, 1996 By Ruth Larson THE WASHINGTON TIMES The U.S. Secret Service yesterday sought to distance itself from the arrest of a Chicago-area couple who "insulted" President Clinton during his visit to a festival there last week. Yet even as it was discounting its role in the arrests of Glenn and Patricia Mendoza, the Secret Service was consulting with the U.S. attorney in Chicago about criminal charges against the couple. And Secret Service and Chicago police spokesmen differed on several details of the incident, which is triggering growing outrage on talk radio and even from a prominent Republican member of Congress. The Mendozas were at the Taste of Chicago festival in Grant Park on July 2 when Mr. Clinton dropped by to shake hands in the crowd. Mrs. Mendoza, upset over last month's bombing deaths of 19 U.S. airmen in Saudi Arabia, told the president as he took her hand: "You suck, and those boys died." Mr. Mendoza said the president looked at her, then motioned to an assistant as he moved along shaking hands. After the president left, Secret Service agents accused Mrs. Mendoza of threatening the president. Her husband stepped in and ordered her not to say anything until they called a lawyer. "That is not accurate," Secret Service spokesman Arnette Heintze said yesterday of the Men dozas' version. "A direct threat was made, but I'm not going to elaborate. Mrs. Mendoza has a right to fair representation of her case, as does the prosecution, and the newspaper is not the proper place to air this case. "We were there because a verbal threat was made to the president, and the Secret Service is responsible for the physical safety of the president." Rep. Robert Livingston, Louisiana Republican, is among those angered by what he called Secret Service overreaction. "Is this going to be the norm? If you criticize the president, are you going to be arrested by a bunch of federal agents and thrown in jail overnight? That's a frightening thought." "I think on the heels of this FBI investigation, with these FBI files in the White House, this kind of symbolizes an appalling lack of respect for human rights and for the rights of people to speak out in this country," Mr. Livingston said in a C-SPAN interview. Mr. Heintze, who complained about continuing media interest in the Mendoza matter, said the Secret Service thought there was no need to arrest the couple at the festival because Mr. Clinton had moved on. He said Chicago police arrested the Mendozas because of their conduct after the president left. "The Mendozas refused to follow police directions, and so they opted to arrest them. We supported them in their action, but it was an independent act by the police. "The arrest was separate and incidental to our questioning of the Mendozas," Mr. Heintze said. The Mendozas were charged with disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor, and were interrogated for 12 hours before they were released. No federal charges have been filed. The case has been complicated by conflicting details from the principals: The Chicago Police Department says it is handling the matter. Department spokesman Patrick Camden said yesterday, "There's no Secret Service involvement, to my knowledge." The couple are scheduled to appear in misdemeanor court Aug. 27. But Ralph Grayson, special agent in charge of the Secret Service's Chicago office, said his agency has an "ongoing investigation" into the matter. The Secret Service said Mrs. Mendoza made a "threatening statement" to the president that was far more serious than the one Mrs. Mendoza says she made, but it declined to say what the threat was. Mr. Camden said Mrs. Mendoza had hinted at "blowing up the president." "She said something to the effect that 'He [Mr. Clinton] should have been blown up instead of the 19 servicemen.'" Mr. Heintze said emphatically, "That is not accurate, and don't try to find out what the threat was." A Chicago police spokesman said yesterday that the Secret Service had not asked them to arrest the Mendozas, as was previously reported, but that the couple were arrested for creating a disturbance. The extent to which alcohol contributed to the incident is also in question. Mr. Camden said: "Sure, there was alcohol. They both had been drinking. A rational person doesn't act that way. This was a family event, there were kids around, and these people were saying a lot more than 'You suck.' In fact, it rhymed with 'suck.'" Mr. Mendoza acknowledged that when Secret Service agents accused his wife of threatening the president's life, "I was screaming at the top of my lungs. Granted, I was angry, scared, upset, and if that's disorderly, I guess so." He said he was not drunk. Mr. Mendoza said he repeatedly demanded that he be given a blood breath test, but the police refused. "We wouldn't do a Breathalyzer test, even if he asked," the police spokesman said. "We are so sensitive about First Amendment rights," said the Secret Service spokesman. "I can assure you that if the Secret Service was doing anything contrary to the Constitution, the president would not tolerate it, and he would make big changes," he said. * Joyce Price contributed to this report. --- þ KWQ/2 1.2i NR þ Friends don't let friends run Windows. --- Zach Babayco zachb(a)netcom.com <----- finger for PGP public key http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/4127

2 2

Ruritania
by Censored Girls Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Legend of Ruritania There was once a far away land called Ruritania, and in this land there was a strange phenomenon -- all the trees that grew there were transparent. In the old days, the people had lived in mud huts. But now, high-tech wood technology had been developed, and in this new age of wood, everyone in Ruritania found that their homes were all 100% see through. Now, until this point, no one ever thought of allowing the police to spy on someone's home. But the new technology made this tempting. This being a civilized country, however, warrants were required to use binoculars and watch someone in their home. The police, taking advantage of this, would get warrants to use binoculars and peer in to see what was going on. Occasionally, they would use binoculars without a warrant, but everyone pretended that this didn't happen. One day, a smart man invented paint -- and the people found that if they painted their houses, suddenly the police couldn't watch all their actions at will. Things would go back to the way they were in the old age -- completely private. Indignant, the state decided to try to require that all homes have video cameras installed into every nook and cranny. "After all", they said, "with this new 'paint' development, crime could run rampant. Installing video cameras doesn't mean that the police get any new capability -- they are just keeping the old one." A wise man pointed out that citizens were not obligated to make the lives of the police easy, that the police had survived all through the mud hut age without being able to watch the citizens at will, and that Ruritania was a civilized country where not everything that was expedient was permitted. For instance, in a neighboring country, it had been discovered that torture was an extremely effective way to solve crimes. Ruritania had banned this practice long ago, in spite of its expedience. Indeed, "why have warrants at all", he asked, "if we are interested only in expedience?" A famous paint technologist, Dorothy Quisling, intervened however. She noted that people might take photographs of children masturbating should this new paint technology be widely deployed without safeguards, and the law was passed. Soon it was discovered that some citizens were covering their mouths while speaking to each other, thus preventing the police from reading their lips through the video cameras. This had to be prevented, the police said. After all, it was preventing them from conducting their lawful surveillance. The wise man pointed out that the police had never before been allowed to listen in on people's homes, but Dorothy Quisling pointed out that people might use this new invention of covering their mouths with veils to discuss the kidnapping and mutilation of children. Now, no one in the legislature wanted to be accused of being in favor of mutilating children, but then again, no one wanted to interfere in people's rights to wear what they liked, so a compromise was reached whereby all homes had to have microphones installed in each room to accompany the video cameras. The wise man lamented few if any child mutilations had ever been solved by the old lip reading technology, but it was too late -- the new law was passed and microphones were installed everywhere. However, soon it was discovered that this was insufficient to prevent citizens from hiding information from the authorities, because some of them would cleverly speak in languages that the police could not understand. So, another new law was proposed to force all citizens to speak at all times only in Ruritanian, and, for good measure, to require that they speak clearly and distinctly near the microphones. "After all", Dorothy Quisling pointed out, "they might be using the opportunity to speak in private to mask terrorist activities!" Terrorism struck terror into everyone's hearts, and they rejoiced at the brilliance of this new law. Meanwhile, the wise man talked one evening to his friends on how all of this was making a sham of the constitution of Ruritania, of which all Ruritanians were proud. "Why", he asked, "are we obligated to sacrifice all our freedom and privacy to make the lives of the police easier? There isn't any real evidence that this makes any big dent in crime, anyway! All it does is make our privacy forfeit to the state!" However, the wise man made the mistake of saying this, as the new law required, in Ruritanian, clearly and distinctly, and near a microphone. Soon, the newly formed Ruritanian Secret Police arrived and took him off, and got him to confess to crimes by torturing him. Torture was, after all, far more efficient than the old methods, and had been recently instituted to stop the recent wave of people thinking obscene thoughts about tomatoes, which Dorothy Quisling noted was one of the major problems of the new age of plenty and joy. 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/

2 1

Re: telco's vs x-phones
by Brian D Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a reply to Vipul Ved Prakash, Jim Bell wrote: >Assume 30 cents per meter per fiber for cabled fiber, or about $10 (US) per meter for 36-fiber cable. Siecore plain vanilla 36 fiber singlemode list $ 1.82 a foot, $5.46 a yard >Each fiber pair should be able to handle approximately 1 million >conversations at current data rates, or a total of 18 million >conversations for that 18-pair cable, or 9.5 trillion >conversation-minutes. At current data rates (OC-48 Sonet) 32,256 voice channels per fiber, 580,608 total for the fiber. Off by a factor of roughly 36 at this point. >Multiply this cost by 10 for right of way, trenching, repeaters, >and other auxiliary hardware, or $100 per meter. This is probably >just a ballpark estimate, but... Off by a factor of at least 10 not counting switching equipment. >I've read that estimates show that it would probably be cheaper to >provide cellular-telephone service in China to everyone than to >wire the country up with copper lines. This isn't particularly >surprising. Cell-phones solve the "last few hundred yards/mile or >two" problem quite well. Since nearly all of the actual >connections in a copperline telephone system are >switch-to-individual-phone lines, going cellular saves a bundle of >installation costs. A good point, in Sri Lanka they were having problems with copper bandits cutting down all the cable, till they switched to fiber. The question is can the average citizen of china afford a cell phone and service for what it can be installed. In a reply to me Jim bell wrote: >The long distance companies are not "using local networks," your >customers are...to connect to those long distance companies. And >any payments LD companies make to you are, indeed, a subsidy. >Tell me, how much is this _subsidy_, exactly? Who's using who is a matter of perspective. Q) if you call a dog's tail a "leg" how many legs does a dog have? A) four, calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one. Point? The LD companies pay to use the RBOC's networks, calling it a subsidy doesn't make it one, except maybe to you. If they don't like it, they are free (or soon will be) to build their own, or use someone elses. >As an alternative, the phone company would presumably be entitled >to be served by phone lines, at say $30 per month or so, through >which their customers reach them. $30 per month is $1 per day or >4 cents per hour or about 0.07 cents per minute. 3 cents doesn't >equal 0.07 cents, now does it?!? "Presumably be entitled?" The RBOC's currently charge what regulations allow, if the regs go away, they will charge what the market will pay. >Tell me again how "the local/long distance subsidy was eliminated >at breakup." Tell me another one, daddy... Enhance your calm Jim...... >How has this remaining SUBSIDY dropped over time, assuming it has? >When is it scheduled to drop to zero? The rate has gone down since the regs are changing and competition is increasing. I would be interested in hearing why you think it will ever drop to zero. >First, you need to figure out how to supply ISDN for a REASONABLE >charge, like "no extra charge!" to customers. It's been over 16 >years after I first heard of ISDN. At the time, it seemed like a >wonderful idea...against the 300 baud modems then in use. Against >modern 31K modems that you only have to pay for...ONCE...ISDN >seems mighty lame. >Face it, ISDN used to be a good idea. But it's just barely shown >up the moment it's hit the end of its marketing window. ISDN will >have a marketing lifetime for maybe a couple of more years, and >only then because you can't put more bits through a 3.4 khz >passband. >Not to mention all the bullshit propaganda that claimed that with >ISDN, you wouldn't have to buy any modems. Well, maybe that's >just because they didn't CALL them modems, but they charged way >more for an essentially indistinguishable function. Can you say, >"Fraud"? I knew you could! <sigh> Jim, first you set up the ISDN "Strawman" and then you knock it down. I no more believe that ISDN is the future than you do. Be well! Brian "Zazen? Well it beats sitting around on your ass all day doing nothing."

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Airport legal question
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:50 PM 8/21/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>7/23: "I don't have a bomb in the bag." >>7/24: "Well no, I left my pipe bomb at home." >>8/1: "It's not as if we were Swedish and here to blow up the airport." > > >I wonder how they determined that the lines above were "bomb threats." They contain the word "bomb". Bombs are "threatening". Therefore they are "bomb threats". Isn't authoritarian logic fun? --- | "Remember: You can't have BSDM without BSD. - alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com "| |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

RE: Canada Imprisons People For Human Rights Activity
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:02 PM 8/21/96 EST, jbugden(a)smtplink.alis.ca wrote: >Nota: Quebec recently held a referendum on seperation from Canada. >Just talk about secession of a state in the U.S., and you'll quickly see which >country makes political ideas illegal. It did not seem to stop the secessionist movement in Alaska (at least when I was there). But then that was before the Feds started taking a more active role in Alaskan politics... (Especially with their involvement to get pot recriminalized back during the Reagan administration.) You expect the state to allow challenges to its authority? And lose its omnipotent status? "It takes a Village to raise a child." - Number 2 --- | "Remember: You can't have BSDM without BSD. - alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com "| |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Airport legal question
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:37 PM 8/20/96 -0700, William Knowles wrote: >Lucky, > >>I know that it is a violation of federal law to joke about explosives at >>the X-ray machine. Would an "I love Explosives" sticker on carry-on >>luggage violate any laws? > >Dunno, But you might get a kick out this from The Chicago Reader that >published a list of the "bomb threats" made at O'Hare International >airport a few weeks back. >7/23: "I don't have a bomb in the bag." >7/24: "Well no, I left my pipe bomb at home." >8/1: "It's not as if we were Swedish and here to blow up the airport." I wonder how they determined that the lines above were "bomb threats." Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

[Noise] RE: Husband/Wife jailed for saying Clinton Sucks
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> wrote: >The Net public is getting less and less tolerant of obvious bias on the part >of those who report the news. The Times has some potential >(undisplayed) bias that we need to be on the lookout for, but the Post is >actively engaging in bias in its news stories, NOW. My God! Could Chomsky be right after all? James A favorite story on Bosnia was an interview I saw with Noam Chomsky and Canadian Major General Lewis Mackenzie who had led the Canadian forces in Bosnia. The interviewer asked Chomsky some question about the real goals of the West in this crisis and he gave some biting response about them having no motivation to resolve the conflict but simply appear to be acting while continuing to follow various policies that were cynical, amoral and contradictory to their stated public goals. Lewis Mackenzie is then asked to rebut this view but instead he agrees with Chomsky's analysis and goes on to give specific examples that he faced first hand. More Canadiana: The man who recently snuck into the Canadian Prime Minister's residence and tried to assassinate him was released from jail last week after serving three months. Fortunately, he did not call him names.

1 0

RC4 RC2 & MD5???
by Jeff Davis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I assume then that the Netscape encryption is Symetric Key, so how do RC4 RC2 and MD5 compare and contast? TIA -- According to John Perry Barlow: *What is EFF?* "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker." *email <info(a)eff.org>* *** O U T L A W S On The E L E C T R O N I C F R O N T I E R **** US Out Of Cyberspace!!! Join EFF Today! *email <membership(a)eff.org>*

1 0