December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: [NOISE]CIA Contra Crack and LA Gangs (fwd)
by Jim Ray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Wed Aug 21 08:35:15 1996 Rich Graves wrote: > On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Jim Ray wrote: ... > Oh, I don't think it's impossible or even unlikely that at least > some of the > groups lumped together as "contras" were involved in drug > smuggling, and I > think it's reasonable to have different views regarding how much > money was > involved and who knew what when (my view is very little, and > medium). Anyone who says "very little" money is involved in any aspect of the cocaine importation trade definitely doesn't live in Miami. >What I > object to are conspiracy theories along the lines of: > > 1. The Reagan Administration used the Contras to smuggle crack > to the US in > a deliberate attempt at genocide against Black people. (I > heard this a > lot, though seldom in so many words, on KPFK in the mid-80's; > the SJ Merc > series certainly has this as a subtext.) I never said that, and I object to calling something a "conspiracy theory" just because it's politically inconvenient. People in power conspire to get rich and stay in power. Sometimes they use laws they write and sometimes they break laws they wrote. This is a fact of life, not a conspiracy theory. > 2. Clinton was a CIA agent involved in the Contra drug-smuggling > CaBaL. He was governor of Arkansas when Reagan was President of the United States. Do the search I already gave you, and read the articles. mena /p cocaine ... > > It is a major, bipartisan, Watergate-style but bigger > > scandal, and the strange bedfellows in the media who were > doing a > > halfway decent job of covering it [The Wall Street Journal and > > "High Times" magazine(!)] have fallen strangely silent on the > > subject as the election approaches. Hmmmmm. > > 4. Anything where vague unsupported asserions are thrown out, > followed by > a Hmmmmm (sorry). OK, looks like I have to say it again, and remember this is NOT me, it's those conspiracy theorists at CBS News, printed in that radical purveyor of vague unsupported asserions...The Wall Street Journal: "The FAA, FBI, Customs, CIA, Justice, DEA and the IRS were all involved in Mena. They won't say how they were involved, but they will tell you there is nothing there." -- Bill Plante, CBS News Correspondent, & Michael Singer, Producer, CBS News, New York. [In Tuesday, May 3, 1994's Wall Street Journal letters to the editor section.] Look it up. I am not a journalist, but it sometimes seems I have a better institutional memory than they do. This story was covered poorly, even though there was/is plenty there, because of politics and power masquerading as "national security." The story is there for journalists who want to risk covering it, but the trail is getting cold, and yes, some loons have latched onto it, due in part to the vacuum in "legitimate" media coverage. [This will be my final word on this subject in this forum.] <sound of Perry cheering> JMR Regards, Jim Ray -- DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy "'Filegate' is starting to make _Ed_ _Meese_ look ethical." -- me Defeat the Duopoly! Vote "NOTA," not Slick/Dull in November. Harry Browne for President. Jo Jorgensen for Vice-president. http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/ ___________________________________________________________________ PGP id.E9BD6D35 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE 53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8 <mailto:liberty@gate.net> http://www.shopmiami.com/prs/jimray Coming soon, the "Pennies For Perot" page. Keep billionaires off welfare! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMhsCim1lp8bpvW01AQHsYQP+JeN4t0Cd/d+Woy0eyvvVtCHy//RoSWJI K3gWOAHTMB71xZDKu7qbuUMRBs1nsFv2dlvYlKMIJLxn9Bl2H+13IpOsYTtPntg+ r+YOPazgwVVm8wNICEekdKjki9MaiTj1AFIX2P2LbVp7EZkmQIwxJfkYZituWNIy LNFZyOGhVaQ= =b3jZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: PreRFD: comp.org.cypherpunks
by droelke＠rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

No and HELL no. I find that this list gets enough crap as it is, and gatewaying it to a generally available Usenet group would just add to the noise level. Now, if you want to gateway it to a local group because you like your newsreader better than your email reader, be my guest. Dan > Subject: PreRFD: comp.org.cypherpunks > > The Subject: line says it all. > > My suggestion number #1: > > No moderation. > > > -- > Skip, OBC > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dan Oelke Alcatel Network Systems droelke(a)aud.alcatel.com Richardson, TX

2 1

The grey lady puts on some boots and rides a horseman or two...
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm listening to the BBC's World Service at the moment, and they're doing a feature on pedophiles on the internet, complete with much knashing of teeth about encryption and anonymity, along with some lurid stuff about private holding cells, and sexual tourism, and slavery. And Lions. And Tigers. And Bears. Oh My. They even had a quote from someone at Wired (a Brit, didn't catch the name), who sounded like he was wringing his hands about unbreakable encryption. Probably spliced out of a larger quote which had more sense in it. Be afraid, be very afraid. They're coming for your daughters. The BBC says so. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- 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/

4 3

Re: CIA Contra Crack and LA Gangs (fwd)
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:33 AM 8/21/96 -0400, Chip Mefford wrote: > The DEA may not actually be the "Good" Guys, but there are some much worse >out there Whatever "worse guys" are out there, the vast majority of which would become de-fanged almost instantly on the legalization of currently-illegal drugs. Given a choice between wishing for the death of everyone in the DEA, or everyone the DEA claims to object to, I'd off the DEA is a second. It's an organization which guarantees the existence of its own opposition. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Anonymous password assignment failure (illegal password)
by daemon＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You have requested the assignment of a new password However, the password x-control is not legal. Passwords should only contain letters and numbers.

1 0

Re: Spamming
by James C. Sewell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:09 PM 8/20/96 -0700, Rich Graves wrote: >On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Vipul Ved Prakash wrote: > >> I don't know if there has been much discussion on the ethics of spamming >> here? Is spamming free speech? > >Yes. No. I think we can all (most) agree that spam-email is like junk-snailmail. In that case there are a few things to consider: 1. Junkmail requires the SENDER to pay for it, not the recipient. 2. Junkmail is under the full authority of the Postmaster. If they do anything illegal they have an authority to which they must answer and may face criminal charges for. 3. You can't legally stuff mailboxes by driving around the neighborhood. It is against the law for me to walk up to your mailbox and put something in it. Should the same be true of emailboxes? 4. Junkmail is usually at a lower priority than "real" mail and due to costs is usually easily identifiable. Email isn't. And one relating to only email: I don't want to have to spend 10 minutes letting Eudora sort through my mailbox because my filter rules are so numerous and complex due to me trying to block spam. We must remember that the First Amendment does not allow us to say any thing at any time via any medium we choose. There are limits to it, usually in the name of public safety and harassment. There should be similar limits in the Internet. I'm not saying we shouldn't let you tell others how get rich quick but that you should not be allowed to mail to *(a)*.* just to tell the world how great we are. Jim Jim Sewell - jims(a)tansoft.com Tantalus Incorporated - Key West, FL

3 2

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

RE: Canada Imprisons People For Human Rights Activity
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

qut(a)netcom.com (Skip) >... you support imprisoning and deporting people based purely on their political ideas, ... Re: Ernst Zndel and his years of imprisonment by a court for merely expressing his racist ideas, racist political ideas being strictly illegal in Canada... Actually, he was charged with inciting hatred against a recognizable group but was eventually freed on appeal. I think the problem was that the prosecution could not find anyone who listened to Zundel and didn't already hate the same groups. Hence, no incitement. He is currently fighting to get his Canadian citizenship, (he is a German citizen) while many other people are fighting to prevent this. Zundel believes that returning to Germany would result in imprisonment. It's nice to know that the people we imprison for their views are still willing to go to court to become a Canadian citizen. James 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.

5 4

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: 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