December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: your mail
by John Norseen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

robert, good to hear from you again...what else is new and exciting on your front...norseen

2 1

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

Possible snake oil?
by Phil Fraering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I ran across this at the web site of a New Orleans area web authoring company. I checked with a friend of mine of long standing on this list, and he assured me that the information was probably false. (Here it is...) <begin included excerpt from web page) [deleted] has one of the fastest and most powerful web networks in the world, with servers effortlessly handling in excess of two million hits a day, and resources spanning four seperate backbone providers on two continents from North America to Europe. Entire networks at [deleted] are exclusively dedicated to web hosting, electronic commerce and other applications; separate servers are available with a plethora of advanced services including: SSL & SHTTP Encrypted Web Systems (using the maximum 1024-bit encryption keys) BSDI Unix 2.1 (our main net OS, proven to be superior to all), Windows NT, Windows 95, Macintosh, DOS, Linux and other platforms available. RealAudio, VDOLive, CuSeeMe servers RAID5 mirror networks in Europe Access to [deleted] Advanced Systems Products (IASP) servers and scripts exclusively available to [deleted] clients, which include shopping cart/automated ordering, web database systems, surveys & demographics, web page creation systems, ad & quote systems, and much more. ============= <end excerpt from corporate web page> Well? Do _any_ of you know of a 1024-bit encryption standard for the world wide web currently in use? According to these people, they're using it. ObLegalQuestion: Should I have been less coy about the corporation name? Phil Fraering The above is the opinion of neither my internet pgf(a)acadian.net service provider nor my employer. 318/261-9649

5 4

Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write!
by PhneCards＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did you know this company is using your email address as part of an unlawful email bomb? I would advise you to write to them at cypherpunks(a)toad.com and owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com and advise them to stop using your email address for this type of activity. It is illegal to use a invalid return email address. If this continues, I will be forced to prosecute the return email address - which they are making to look like you. Below is the letter that I received in my email box ================================================= In a message dated 96-09-25 14:05:23 EDT, you write: >Subj: Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write! >Date: 96-09-25 14:05:23 EDT >From: jimbell(a)pacifier.com (jim bell) >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >To: bdavis(a)thepoint.net (Brian Davis) >CC: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, jf_avon(a)citenet.net > >At 11:50 PM 9/24/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote: >>On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Rich Burroughs wrote: >> >>> <AP stuff> >>> Anyone who mistakes the lack of "repudiations" for AP on the list for some >>> kind of tacit approval is not getting the whole picture, IMHO. >>> >>> Is this how journalists do their research nowadays -- "give me some info >or >>> I'll write something really bad about you that you'll regret?" Cool. I >>> guess I thought there might still be some kind of pursuit of the truth >>> involved. >>> >>> I personally don't have the time or energy to contribute to the AP >threads. >>> That != approval for the idea. >>> >>> I hope you include your above quote in your piece. >>> >> >>Amen to that. Add that at least one lawyer (and former prosecutor) on >>the list is confident that successful prosecutions will ensue is AP ever >>gets off the ground. > >I don't doubt that there will be harassment. (you can't deny that charges >would be brought even if it is tacitly agreed that no crime has been >committed; "the harassment-value" of such a prosecution would be desired >even if there is ultimately an acquittal.) AP will resemble, more than >anything, gambling. While gambling is illegal in some areas, it is quite >legal in others and there is no reason to believe that locales can't be >found in which an AP system could operate legally. > >Make American laws apply everywhere? That'll be hard to justify, unless you >want to unleash a world where an all people can be subject simultaneously to >the laws of EVERY country, should they choose to enforce them! Would you >like to be arrested in Red China for something you said years earlier in >America about their leadership? > > And are you ignoring the fact that the intentional isolation of one >participant from the knowledge of the actions and even the identity of the >others makes opportunities for prosecution on "conspiracy" charges mighty >slim. And since AP can operate across traditional jurisdictional >boundaries, you're going to have to explain how you can prosecute Person A >in Country B for giving a donation to an organization in Country C, to be >paid to a person D in country E for correctly predicting the death of person >F in country G, particularly when none of the identities of these people or >countries can be easily known given a well-crafted cryptographic and >message-routing system. > > Further, as you probably know as well as any, in order (at least, >supposedly!) to get a conviction you need to prove "mens rea," or "guilty >mind," and I suggest that none of the more passive participants in the AP >system have that. (The ones who DON'T pick up a gun, knife, bomb, poison, >etc.) Sure, they are aware that somewhere, sometime, somebody _may_ commit >a crime in order to collect a lottery, but they don't know who, what, when, >where, or how this will occur, if at all. (either before or after the fact!) > In fact, since it is possible for a target to collect the reward himself >(to be directed toward his designee, obviously) by committing suicide and >"predicting" it, it isn't certain to the other participants that there has >even been any sort of crime committed! > >Based on the mens rea requirement, I propose that there is plenty of room >for most of the participants to reasonably claim that they are guilty of no >crime. They have carefully shielded themselves and others from any guilty >knowledge, and presumably they are entitled to protect themselves in this >way. Morally, you could argue that these people are countenancing something >nasty, in the same sense that somebody could equally well argue that if you >buy a cheap shirt in Walmart you're partly responsible for sweatshop labor >in El Salvador. True, I suppose, but moral guilt does not always translate >into legal guilt. > > >> And yes, I've read Jim Bell's manifesto. The fact >>that no lawyer has dissected it from a legal standpoint has been used by >>Mr. Bell as support for the propostion that it is legal. > >I suggest that there is a greater likelihood that the "powers that be" will >just abandon all pretense of legality, and attempt to strike at the >participants if they can find them without benefit of any sort of trial. >This is a more plausible conclusion, because it cuts through all of the >legal difficulties which would hinder prosecution. In effect, a low-level >undeclared war. > > >Jim Bell >jimbell(a)pacifier.com > > >----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Sep 25 11:04:24 1996 >Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com >Received: from mailhub.MyMail.Com (mailhub.mymail.com [206.247.118.1]) by >emin14.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA03061 for ><phnecards(a)aol.com>; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 11:04:18 -0400 >Received: from toad.com by mailhub.MyMail.Com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) > id AA26654; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 09:04:05 -0600 >Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA10103 for >cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:55:24 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from mail.pacifier.com (root(a)mail.pacifier.com [199.2.117.164]) by >toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA10098 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; >Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:55:16 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from ip20.van1.pacifier.com (ip20.van1.pacifier.com [206.163.4.20]) >by mail.pacifier.com (8.7.6-pac/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA14065; Wed, 25 Sep >1996 00:55:14 -0700 (PDT) >Message-Id: <199609250755.AAA14065(a)mail.pacifier.com> >X-Sender: jimbell(a)mail.pacifier.com >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:55:21 -0800 >To: Brian Davis <bdavis(a)thepoint.net> >From: jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> >Subject: Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write! >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, jf_avon(a)citenet.net >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Precedence: bulk

1 0

Re: Public Schools
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:40 PM 9/25/96, Jay Gairson wrote: >> A minor point: An 800 SAT or Achievement score does _not_ mean "no problems >> missed." There is some threshold for the percentage of right answers, which >> varies from year to year and from test to test, above which the score is >> marked "800." Don't ask me why they do this. (*) > >They did it because, the American students, where scoring worse than the >Japanese students. And the with the 1600 they got a copy of the >questiosn and answers, and the questions they missed, they didn't miss any. >So... Nonsense. Japanese students were not taking the CEEB and SAT tests in the 1950s, when the test methodologies were established. (As a point of fact, the Japanese have their own grueling exams, which bear no resemblance to the CEEB and SAT tests.) Nor were the number of Japanese-American students taking the test sufficiently plentiful in the 1950s and 60s to affect the methodology. So, this is your chance to present your evidence that the scoring methodology was changed in response to Japanese students doing better than American students. >ok >buh bye > >Erp On second thought.... --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

Re: Mitsubishi MISTY LSI
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Nikkei English News, 24 September 1996. > > [Mitsubishi] fabricated the chip as a gate array using a > 0.5 micron CMOS process and its own proprietary > encryption algorithm MISTY. Operating at a maximum > input/output speed of 40 megahertz, the chip can handle > 32 bits per clock cycle. Does anyone have a reason not to consider this algorithm snake oil? e.g.: Was it developed by a well known cryptographer? Has it been vetted by someone/some organization with reputation? I other words, why should we trust it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | "Cave softly, cave safely, | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | and cave with duct tape." | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | - Marianne Russo | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0