December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Medical Data
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:28 PM 9/25/96, Phil Fraering wrote: >Of course, one area where the doctor will continue to hold a patient's >records, instead of the patient, due to the nature of the current system: > >Prescription medication. > Digitally signed prescriptions from qualified doctors. (Not that I support this system...I rather like the "anarchy" of Mexico, where one walks into a pharmacy in Tijuana and can buy purt near anything). >Of course, with the really big problems with this stuff, drug >interactions, there's still no system for a doctor to find out what you're >on thanks to another doctor. Which is why it's very important to always >use the same pharmacist. The lesson of the last decade has been that _interested patients_ often do more research about their conditions and various drug effects than their doctors can. (This happened with a friend of mine, who ultimately died, and a similar case was recently detailed about Andy Grove, of Intel, who did exhaustive research on the Net about his condition...making him (finally) a real user of the Net. There was also a movie, "Lorenzo's Oil," about this exact situation.) In any case, the issue of which drugs one may be taking and maintenance of "drug interaction databases" is not a core issue. One can selectively release the list of drugs being considered to an "oracle" machine, and check for dangerous interactions. Or tell the physician, which is certainly no worse than the current situation. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Re: Insider Trading - What constitutes "Disclosure" ?
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Posted-Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:40:14 -0400 >Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:40:14 -0400 (EDT) >From: Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> >X-Sender: unicorn@polaris >To: Steve Schear <azur(a)netcom.com> >Subject: Re: Insider Trading - What constitutes "Disclosure" ? >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >On Wed, 25 Sep 1996, Steve Schear wrote: > >> >Often the choice faced by the investor who has material non-public >> >information is characterized as "disclose or abstain," meaning that the >> >investor may either trade after disclosing or abstain from trading on the >> >information. >> > >> >A few people have asked me what constitutes disclosure. >> > >> >I've not researched the latest cases, but the generally accepted "best >> >description" can be found in SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulpher Co., 401 F.2d 833 >> >(2d Cir.1968), cert. denied. >> > >> > The reading of a news release, which promoted Coates into >> >action, is merely the first step in the process of dissemination required >> >for compliance with the regulatory objective of providing all investors >> >with an equal opportuinity to make informed investment judgements. >> >Assuming that the contents of the official release could have been >> >instantaneously be acted upon, at the minimum Coates should have waited >> >until the news could reasonably have been expcted to appear over the media >> >of widest circulation, the Dow Jones broad tape, rather than hastening to >> >insure an advantage to himself and his broker son-in-law. >> > >> >> It would seem to me that if I operated an open listserver, upon which >> financial information regularly appeared and which any trader (serious or >> otherwise) might subscribe, my information should be held in the same legal >> regard as DJ. > >I disagree. If the information appears only on your listserver it will >not, in my view, be considered released. You'll note above that the >reading of a news release, which eventually propogated to Canada and New >York, still was not enough to limit liability for Coates. I hardly think >a small circulation electronic mailing list will be considered sufficent >either. > >> If not, the SEC has in effect created a monopoly for >> Dow-Jones and its ilk and effectively impede or excluded other news sources >> (e.g., Internet feeds) as legit means for generating market awareness, and >> therefore revenue. > >Correct. > >> I and many others occassionally trade on public >> information from narrower sources than DJ (e.g., market newsletters). > >But you and others are (I hope) not insiders or direct tipees. >You also note that you trade on "public information." So long as you keep >it that way you should be alright. > >You will be putting yourself in a interesting position if material >non-public information ever shows up on your newsletter and is later the >subject of investigation. > >> Sometimes DJ and others pick up info from these sources and sometimes they >> don't (or not immediately). Does that mean those trading on this data >> published not yet picked up by DJ may be trading illegally? If so, this is >> totally unjust and wrongheaded. > >The case mans what it says. Until the information reaches the sources of >largest distribution it is still "non-public." What is a source of >largest distrubution? Ask a judge. I would simply be careful and >prudent. You could easily be in trouble for trading on information which >you "knew or should have known was material, non-public information." > >There is, of course, a distinction between the trader who reads an article >and trades on it and a trader who hears over a mailing list from a >corporate insider that a major fraud in the company has been discovered. > >If your newsletter carries hints of the big merger before it happens and a >trader later points to it as the source of his tip, you could be in >serious trouble. God forbid they get it in your head that you are >distributing inside information. Of course you can imagine the headlines. > >"Internet crime network foiled. Hundreds of subscribers capitalize on >inside information." > >As for unjust and wrongheaded, welcome to the American concept of >securities regulation. > >> -- Steve > >-- >I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist >unicorn(a)schloss.li >

1 0

Re: AP
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Derek Bell <dbell(a)maths.tcd.ie> writes: > In message <si4RuD1w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com>, "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" writes: > >Yes, I do. > > I'm not sure what you mean here. Is it: > 1. You hold people respobsible for what they did, not what their government > did. (Assuming said people didn't take part in what the government did.) > > 2. You agree that the IRA could justify killing any British citizen, even if > said citizen supported the IRA or agreed with its aims. > > 3. Something else. (Please specify.) (Redirected to the list.) Any British citizen, irrespective of s/he thinks about the IRA, has benefited economically from the 800 years of pillaging and genocide in Ireland. I see no problem if they pay with their lives for these crimes. Likewise I see no problem if U.S. civilians pay with their lives for their government's crimes in Iraq, even if they happen to disapprove of these crimes. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

2 1

Re: Medical Data
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:27 PM 9/25/96, Asgaard wrote: >On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Timothy C. May wrote: > >> Why can't patients carry their _own_ medical records, and disclose what >> they wish to disclose to doctors and hospitals, as they see fit? Whether >> implemented in a high-tech version, as a "smart card," or a low-tech >> version, as a "dossier" (a file folder), the principle's the same. > >One problem is when a patient is suing his doctor, but claiming that his >'dossier' was lost in a fire. The doctor then has to defend himself >with only 'your word against mine' instead of having his own account >of what was happening on file, including test results etc that could >be very interesting for the defence. Well, this is a potentially confusing hypothetical, and a short paragraph description doesn't do it justice. - did not the patient have backups? if not, why not? - the doctor will have records of what _he_ did, and records of _what was disclosed to him_ by the patient. This should be enough, as his "end" has done exactly what was agreed to. (Indeed, the unrevealed parts of the dossier are not known to him, but then they were "unrevealed," which is the whole point. That the "unrevealed" parts were lost or destroyed in a head crash, or whatever, is not germane at all.) --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Edited Edupage, 19 Sept 1996
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"educom(a)educom.unc.edu" 20-SEP-1996 01:52:41.56 >***************************************************************** >Edupage, 19 September 1996. Edupage, a summary of news about information >technology, is provided three times a week as a service by Educom, >a Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities >seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. >***************************************************************** >LUCENT'S NET SOFTWARE MAKES INTERNET PHONE CALLS EASY >New software developed by Lucent Technologies is designed to give Internet >callers quicker access to one another and allows them to converse via their >computers as if they were on a regular speaker-phone. Previous software has >been half-duplex -- one party must stop speaking before the other can >"capture" the line. Lucent plans to market the software to AT&T, the Bell >companies and Internet service providers for distribution to their >customers. By the end of the year, Lucent plans to enhance the software so >that users can videoconference over the Internet. (Wall Street Journal 18 >Sep 96 B8) I'd wonder if a patch can be built to encrypt each packet as it goes out? I'm guessing that what they've done is improve the voice compression, so there will be a relatively small amount of data to encrypt. >PROGRAMMABLE COMPUTER CHIPS >Next month, Metalithic Systems Inc. will release a $1500 sound board called >Digital Wings that uses field-programmable gate array computer chips that >can be personalized, allowing the user to create and edit up to 128 >soundtracks. When used in combination with Windows 95, Digital Wings will >give users access to audio synthesis and editing tools comparable to those >of a professional sound studio. (Business Week 23 Sep 96 p86) I wonder exactly how reprogrammable this system is... >Edupage is written by John Gehl <gehl(a)educom.edu> & Suzanne Douglas ><douglas(a)educom.edu>. Voice: 404-371-1853, Fax: 404-371-8057. >Technical support is provided by Information Technology Services at the >University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. >*************************************************************** >Edupage ... is what you've just finished reading. To subscribe to Edupage: >send mail to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu with the message: subscribe edupage >Alfred Adler (if your name is Alfred Adler; otherwise, substitute your own >name). ... To cancel, send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu with the >message: unsubscribe edupage. (If you have subscription problems, send >mail to manager(a)educom.unc.edu.)

1 0

Re[2]: your mail
by saunders＠mcgraw-hill.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

whose list is this, and why am I on it? Please delete my name now. ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: your mail Author: Robert Steele <ceo(a)oss.net> at CCNODE Date: 9/25/96 11:55 AM Requiring people to call Betty to tell her they sent email is very low rent and will discredit the site. Recommend you delete that element. Like putting roller skates on a horse!

1 0

Re: [RANT] Public schools
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jay Gairson <erp(a)digiforest.com> writes: > First off, what does this have to do with cryptography? or anything > cypher for that matter? Nothing. Neither does most other stuff posted to this list. > On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > U.S. public school system is darwinian evolution in action. Parents who > > > > afford to send their kids to private schools, do so. Parents who send t > > > > kids to public schools deserve to have their offsprings fucked up, ment > > > > and phsyically, to improve the species' gene pool. > > So, basically your saying, since my parents cannot afford to pay for a > private school for me, we are genetically inferior to those who can? In general, on the average, yes. > Because hate tell ya, but I've ran into some major idiots that go to > private schools. Also to consider that from the school I go to, last > year we had two perfect sat scores (no problems missed). Oh yes - I've seen idiots at private schools and I've seen smart kids at public schools. They're exceptions. Judging from your abuse of the English language, you're not. The cirricula at public schools and the SAT requirements are pretty lame, so any kid willing to spend enough time on them can become a straight A student and feel good about himself/herself. I'm not impressed. > > > But the cutoff is often whether the parents can afford to send their kids > > > to private school, not whether or not they're genetically superior. > > > > You must have attended a public school if you don't understand that geentic > > superiority leads to economic success. My older kid goes to a private scho > > The parents are obviously genetically superior to public school parents. > > I am assuming from what you have said in that statement, that you believe > since he may have gone to a public school, it has made him have the > opinion he does? Opinions change. His snotty attitude toward learning, his propensity to wallow in his stupidity and ignorance the way a pig wallows in its own excrement is a trait commonly acquired in the U.S. public school system. > Also, in your statement that your older kid goes to a private school, and > that the parents are obviously genetically superior to public school > parents. You seem to be saying that YOU are genetically superior to my > parents? I believe myself to be genetically superior to the vast majority of the population. Not knowing much about your parents, other than they can't afford to send you to a better school, I assume that they're part of this vast majority. (Make it both intellectually and physically superior. :-) > Another thing to consider here is, from this line of statements, you are > saying that children who have parents who made it well in, let us say the > movie buisness (or even drug buisness), and then send there children to > public schools, are genetically superior because they can act (lie) > better than my parents. For if this is so, that must mean that my aunt > is genetically superior to my mother (who is a teacher at a private > school, but she did not go to a private school) and to her parents, for > she is making more money, and if she ever has children they will be > genetically superior to me, because they will have more money? In general, on the average, yes. I believe that being able to afford a good private school for one's kids is a trait correlated to desirable traits, some of which are inherited by the kids who benefit from the better education. That's eugenics in action. > > Push vouchers. What's the cryptorelevance of your comments, anyway? > > > > Umm, where you not the one that started this conversation? Nope. > > No, on the contrary, sending poor kids to good schools on scholarships > > does not improve their genes. They tend to become drug dealers. > > Hate to inform you on this but, it is more often than not the children > sent by there rich mama and papa to school, that end up on drugs or as > drug dealers, than the ones that start out with scholarships (For the > ones with scholarships have more to loose, than the ones with the rich > mama and papa, for the rich mama and papa can afford the big expensive > lawyer.). Just look at the studies and such done on this type of area. Can you site any such studies? They certainly contradict what I know about this area, and I consider myself pretty well-informed. > Also you have to consider that generally the ones that end up as drug > dealers, are the children who have parents that where drug dealers and > such or had experience in such, or just had parents who didn't care what That's pretty much what I said. Other disciplinary problems (poor attendance, talking back to teachers, weird dress, sex, etc) also tend to be associated with the poor kids admitted on scholarships. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Insider Trading - What constitutes "Disclosure" ?
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is not legal advice. You got it for free. Often the choice faced by the investor who has material non-public information is characterized as "disclose or abstain," meaning that the investor may either trade after disclosing or abstain from trading on the information. A few people have asked me what constitutes disclosure. I've not researched the latest cases, but the generally accepted "best description" can be found in SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulpher Co., 401 F.2d 833 (2d Cir.1968), cert. denied. As to the defense's claim that their purchases of stock were not proscribed because the news had effectively been disclosed, the court offered: (errors mine) Crawford (defendant) telephoned his orders to his Chicago broker about midnight on April 15 and again at 8:30 in the morning of the 16th, with instructions to buy at the opening of the Midwest Stock Exchange. The trial court's finding that "he sought to, and did, 'beat the news,' 258 F.Supp. at 287, is well documented by the record.. The rumors of a major ore strike which had been circulated in Canada and , to a lesser extent, in New York, had been disclaimed by the TGS press release of April 12, which significantly promised the public an official detailed announcement when possibilities had ripened into actualities. The abbreviated announcement to the Canadian press at 9:40 A.M. on the 16th by the Ontario Minister of Mines and the report carried by the Northern Miner, parts of which had sporadically reached New York on the morning of the 16th through reports from Canadian affiliates to a few New York investment firms, are assuredly not the equivalent of the official 10-15 minute announcement which was not released to teh American financial press until after 10:00 AM. Crawford's orders had been placed before that. **Before insiders may act upon material information, such information must have been effectively disclosed in a manner sufficient to insure its availability to the investing public.** Particularly here, whre a formal announcement to the entire financial news media had been promised in a prior official release known to the media, all insider activity must await dissemination of the promised official announcement. Coates was absolved by the court below because his telephone order was placed shortly before 10:20 AM on April 16, which was after the announcement had been made public even though the news could not be considered already a matter of public information. 258 F.Supp at 288. This result seems to have been predicated upon a misinterpretation of dicta in Cady, Roberts, where the SEC instructed insiders to "keep out of the market until the estlablished procedures for public release of the information are carried out instead of hastening to execute transactions in advance of, and in frustration of, the objectives of the release," 40 S.E.C. at 915. The reading of a news release, which promoted Coates into action, is merely the first step in the process of dissemination required for compliance with the regulatory objective of providing all investors with an equal opportuinity to make informed investment judgements. Assuming that the contents of the official release could have been instantaneously be acted upon, at the minimum Coates should have waited until the news could reasonably have been expcted to appear over the media of widest circulation, the Dow Jones broad tape, rather than hastening to insure an advantage to himself and his broker son-in-law. -- I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist unicorn(a)schloss.li

1 0

PGP plugin for Netscape?
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I could swear I read something about a PGP plugin called livepgp, and Altavista can't find it, and I can't glimpse it in my archives of the list. Anyone got a pointer? Please post to the list; making it more likely that a search engine will find this in the future, and we won't get a rash of 'me toos.' Thanks, Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: AP [was: Re: Kiddie porn on the Internet] [NOISE]
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:24 AM 9/24/96 -0700, Dale Thorn wrote: >Lessee if I have this right, now. We have basically three scenarios: > >1. Allow the status quo to continue (the justice system scam now run by > Janet Reno/Louis Freeh types et al. >2. Allow the people some democracy in applying justice through AP. >3. Sometime in the future, build the Gort(?) robots, as in The Day The > Earth Stood Still, and let them do the job. > >Whatcha think? That's about it. I long ago noticed the similarity between AP and the fictional Gort. Problem is, Gort would have to be programmed. How would you write such a program? Governments would want their hand in it. They'd insist on "government exceptions" to rules, like: "All violence is forbiddden! (except for violence by duly authorized government employees!)" Not very practical. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1