December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Wee Beasties on Mars
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:34 AM 8/7/96 -0700, Mike Duvos wrote: >> schryver(a)radiks.net: > >> > NBC News at Sunrise has just announced the discovery of alien life on the >> > planet Mars. The lifeform that became extinct more than 2 billion years >> > ago was found as a fossil in a meteor that originated from mars and landed >> > on earth. The fossil found was a primitive germ life form. > >NASA is holding a news conference today to discuss the find. I must >admit I am curious as to how they determined the meteor's origin. >Most material in the solar system is similar in composition. I've only seen a few vague news items on TV about this. I believe they said that gases in pores in the rock matched the constituents of the Martian atmosphere. Also, they said that the rock was a bit less than the size of a football, and was found in Antarctica. It's fairly "clean" there, at least from the standpoint of organic contamination. Also, while I've heard nothing of its exact physical location, if it is in the middle of a large ice sheet that pretty much excludes terrestrial origin, because there is a limit to how far a volcano on Earth can blow a rock. In any case, the kind of rocks typically ejected from volcanoes are well known. Once it's agreed to be from "out there," the question is where. If it had been possible to bring back rock from the landers that have analyzed Mars, a direct comparison would have been possible. (of course, if that had been possible, we'd have heard about it already...) The moon is excludable, since it has no atmosphere and apparently never had one. (as well as the fact that we have samples of the moon to compare.) Venus is highly unlikely, because it has such a thick atmosphere that material would probably not escape were a meteor to hit. Mercury is even more unlikely, because it would probably take way too much energy to raise the sun-gravitational potential of a fragment of Mercury to that of the earth. Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are basically liquified gases, so there would be no rocky material to eject. Jupiter's moons are a different issue. Anyway, I've got to get back to reviewing some episodes of "My Favorite Martian", just in case... Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

RE: Internal Passports
by John Deters 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:39 AM 8/7/96 EST, jbugden(a)smtplink.alis.ca wrote: > >I've seen the same problem in a department store in Ottawa. They would not >accept a Canadian Passport as identification for payment by cheque but would >accept various credit cards and similar devices. > >My conclusion was that they wanted something that would show my friend's credit >worthiness, not prove his identity. Being employed by a department store, and working closely with our trainers and our loss prevention people, for the last ten years has given me a pretty good vantage point into seeing what actually happens on the sales floor as well as what goes into the policy manual. I'd suggest that it's probably an oversight by their training department. Their trainers are just humans that looked around one day and said, "we need to define what an ID is." They Xeroxed a couple of dummied-up driver's licenses and provincial ID cards, pasted them in a book, and said, "there, that looks like all the acceptable ID I've ever seen around here." Using passports as internal ID is not a common occurrance, and this usage probably simply didn't occur to the trainers. It almost certainly was not the "fault" of the person on the sales floor; they're usually trained to look at these pretty pictures in a procedures book, and deny anything else. That said, it certainly *could* be true that their loss prevention or credit or audit departments decided that only "credit-worthy" people should be able to write checks. On the whole, though, I have been finding that people ascribe all sorts of paranoid evils to all sorts of organizations, when the ultimate truth usually starts out more like a Dilbert cartoon. Internally, I can usually spot the truly evil corporate deception practices. Externally, though, people can only make guesses based on actions that they've become party to. And who can blame someone for that? John -- J. Deters "Captain's log, stardate 25970-point-5. I am nailed to the hull." +-------------------------------------------------------+ | NET: jad(a)dsddhc.com (work) jad(a)pclink.com (home) | | PSTN: 1 612 375 3116 (work) 1 612 894 8507 (home) | | ICBM: 44^58'33"N by 93^16'42"W Elev. ~=290m (work) | | PGP Key ID: 768 / 15FFA875 | +-------------------------------------------------------+

1 0

Re: TrustBucks
by TrustBuckFella 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Robert A. Rosenberg" <hal9001(a)panix.com> writes: >I fail to see why/how the initial swap of TrustBucks(Alice) for >TrustBucks(Bob) followed by Alice returning the TrustBucks(Bob) [as >supposed payment] differs from her just paying with the TrustBucks(Alice) >in the first place [ie: He is willing to accept the TrustBucks(Alice) as >payment for the TrustBucks(Bob) that she will use to pay off her debt]. The >net result is the same - Bob has the same amount of TrustBucks(Bob) in > circulation and has an amount of TrustBucks(Alice) equal to Alice's payment > [the back and forth of the TrustBucks(Bob) is just playing "Right > Pocket/Left Pocket"]. I admit, my analysis is probably flawed and I appreciate you challenging me on it. But I think it's more complex than the net result of single transactions. The way I figure it, if Bob could accept / not accept any variety of TrustBucks, then he can manipulate what varieties he reports being able to give in order to escape debts or manipulate what varieties he reports being able to accept in order to keep debts unpaid (for interest, foreclosure, etc.) For instance, Alice is paying off her credit card, which pays Bob a big 17% interest. Bob would rather not let her off early. "Nope, we aren't accepting TrustBucks( Carol ) this week. TrustBucks( Dave )? Let me see.... hmm... nope, sorry ma'am." For instance, Alice has just eaten at Le Cafe Bob, and is about to leave. Presented with the cybercheck, she "discovers" that she hasn't got anything Bob is willing to accept. "Sorry 'bout that, Bob. Ooh, hafta run! Bye bye." So it seems to me that the simplest course is to allow payment in exactly one variety, the payee's own. Bob can't credibly claim to not trust himself. You might object that the same problem is incurred anyways in TrustBucks. If Bob refuses to trade TrustBucks( Bob ) for TrustBucks( Carol ), isn't it the same thing as refusing TrustBucks( Carol )? I think it's subtly different, though. If Bob can accept other people's currency, he need not issue any himself. He can credibly refuse early payment, since no TrustBucks( Bob ) even exist. If Bob can only accept TrustBucks( Bob ), then Alice, who reports having no TrustBucks( Bob ), can't "innocently" incur debts she finds she cannot pay. >If the value is obscured there is still no verification of how much they >have outstanding. So long as all of the TrustBucks are listed (with the >amounts listed correctly but obscured), there is no way to verify that the >claimed total is accurate unless you monitor their list before the swap and >after it and there is only one new TrustBuck listed (with the correct As I said, my mechanisms are probably suboptimal and possibly flawed. That's why initially I presented TrustBucks without extraneous mechanisms until that was objected to. However, in this case the information that is wanted is whether a certain note is outstanding or not. The sum of the list is not needed. Indeed, one could have multiple lists for multiple identities. Or so it seems to me. Come to think of it, including the value doesn't do much. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBMgkhuJi7GCxryNrZAQGD+wP/QuVPojsniRdqsiqSC/vnXqBp91cJIiEl p5cyd1dKfEvMcqW0BKB0sFq3dqFh7dEBsbDZeh17gfJnQ7oBvQgXRqhEHst0UOCd r3+tzE5jLr7OnW1fhxo1Q2529EcEJgDA23Rp/92j7WTjJEYkb1uu2v61Uo3x00j0 XpHdq2x9jhM= =6Onp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

CONCEALED GUN STUDY
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, A list member was kind enough to send me the URL for the Chicago University study. I was thoughtless enough to immediately forget who our benefactor is. Sorry, friend. Anyway, the URL is: http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/~llou/guncont.html Below, I have reproduced the abstract of the study. I will read it in detail when I can carve out some time. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Abstract Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravate assaults would have been avoided yearly. On the other hand, consistent with the notion of criminals responding to incentives, we find criminals substituting into property crimes involving stealth and where the probabilities of contact between the criminal and the victim are minimal. The largest population counties where the deterrence effect on violent crimes is greatest are where the substitution effect into property crimes is highest. Concealed handguns also have their greatest deterrent effect in the highest crime counties. Higher arrest and conviction rates consistently and dramatically reduce the crime rate. Consistent with other recent work (Lott, 1992b), the results imply that increasing the arrest rate, independent of the probability of eventual conviction, imposes a significant penalty on criminals. The estimated annual gain from allowing concealed handguns is at least $6.214 billion.

1 0

Re: Alien life
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"schryver(a)radiks.net" "Scott Schryvers" 7-AUG-1996 11:08:59.39 >NBC News at Sunrise has just announced the discovery of alien life on the >planet Mars. The lifeform that became extinct more than 2 billion years >ago was found as a fossil in a meteor that originated from mars and landed >on earth. The fossil found was a primitive germ life form. A: This is not cypherpunks material. I am replying to try to prevent urban legend formation (of the UFO suppression type). B: You are quite thoroughly misinformed, as is NBC News if it is claiming the same thing. What have been found are some molecules, of the type known as polycyclic hydrocarbons (same sort as makes up cholesterol, in essence), that _may_ have been produced by a lifeform. Other, unliving chemical processes, such as combustion under the proper conditions (see buckyballs & buckytubes), can produce the same thing. Yes, it _may_ be from life, but we aren't certain yet. It is most certainly not a fossil, and the type of life form that it _may_ have come from is as yet not possible to determine. -Allen, Ph.D. graduate student in microbiology and molecular genetics

1 0

Re: [Noise] Mars Needs Lifeforms
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:20 AM 8/7/96 -0500, Scott Schryvers wrote: >NBC News at Sunrise has just announced the discovery of alien life on the >planet Mars. The lifeform that became extinct more than 2 billion years >ago was found as a fossil in a meteor that originated from mars and landed >on earth. The fossil found was a primitive germ life form. But did it use encryption? --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."

1 0

Re: your mail
by kickboxer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

this really is not my mail (hey, isnt this a GREAT example of a SPAM? keep this for reference, so you can tell what other spams look like!)

1 0

[STEGO] Your_Name in This Space
by Dave Del Torto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- fellow 'punks, An artist named Zoltán Szegedy-Maszák is doing some interesting work for an organiztion named "C3" (the "3" is a superscript and it's pronounced "see-cubed") in Budapest, Hungary. C3 is an arts/culture/net.communication organization funded by the Soros Foundation, SGI and Matav (the Hungarian telephone company). They have a nice little Silicon Lab with an Onyx and a few Indy's, PC and Macs, and Zoltan has a page up on one of the Indy that demonstrates his "Cryptogram" generator: <http://lucida.c3.hu/cryptogram/> This project takes ASCII text strings and converts them into 3D models by assigning vertex coordinate values based on the ASCII codes encrypted by what I'll call a "key model." Essentially, it's a simple 3D steganography engine. It's rather intriguiging from a cryptographic perspective (pun intended). Zoltan sees it as a way of transferring .wrl fies among VRML afficionados, but also as a way of embedding messages. Definitely worth a peek: try your own name in VRML, light sources and all. :) Also check out C3's main site at: <http://www.c3.hu/>. dave ___________________________________________________________________ Cryptography is the entertainment branch of the computing industry. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv Comment: Verbum sapienti satis est. iQCVAwUBMgkRo6HBOF9KrwDlAQEjygP9GnnyGNPO8pIjgEnQaU//VIUh/DUANB1L 67XcAZ2dzTZ4/fGrDrTjaj/9AGH2Hx7R6szqDX5CLhP1fP+wUevBkKKvAqVoP8vU kRWb55iX3vsHN43jS0e4npKhil+HsXD8m7+tIFXIrPBRGcE+V1nbPaQpTG7LkBbO tFWREzxX+U8= =P7oA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: FCPUNX:DoubleClick: Does is track browsing across multiple sites?
by It Is I Raksha Who Answer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Anne Eisenberg wrote: > *Does anyone know whether DoubleClick really is tracking browsing patterns > across multiple sites? They claim to be able to do this; is it just > advertising hype, or does anyone have knowledge of its actually doing so? > Many thanks. > > Anne Eisenberg > aeisenb(a)duke.poly.edu Hi Anne, nice to see you again. :-) I was involved in the setup of the DoubleClick system while contracting out to Poppe Tyson, who are partnered with them and located in the same building. Poppe Tyson hosts many web sites for their advertising accounts. When I was there, they were carrying T. Rowe Price; Chrysler; Pepsi; Siemens; Valvoline; LensCrafters; and the list goes on. Because the two networks are located in the same building and the two firms working together, it is very possible for DoubleClick to be able to scan the sites that poppe.com supports. -- ()()()()() "The ubiquitous cut, the Self possession is ]{ |BTCOMH|-| exotic join..." -- J. Valley -=======================]O\\\{O | (tm) | | "This life I LEAD! This job I 9/10 of the law ]{ |______|-| *DO*! This...ENGLAND!" -- Ray

1 0

Re: Washington Post -- "Block but Verify"
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"frissell(a)panix.com" "Duncan Frissell" 18-JUL-1996 06:17:23.58 > 57. The CyberNOT list contains approximately 7000 >sites in twelve categories. The software is designed to enable >parents to selectively block access to any or all of the twelve >CyberNOT categories simply by checking boxes in the Cyber Patrol >Headquarters (the Cyber Patrol program manager). These >categories are: > Racism/Ethnic Impropriety: Prejudice or discrimination > against any race or ethnic culture. Ethnic or racist > jokes and slurs. Any text that elevates one race over > another. In other words, if I say that there's something wrong with a culture that doesn't encourage education (e.g., the "acting white" name-calling in American lower-class black subcultures), the entire Cypherpunks list archives would be banned by their standards by any parents who didn't want their children seeing KKK literature? TCMay has also said things of that nature (and I agree). This definition is way overly PC. -Allen

1 0