December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

earthlink's image
by Allen Robinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 28 Sep 96 at 16:09, Back Draft wrote: > Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 16:09:20 -0800 > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > From: backdraft(a)earthlink.net (Back Draft) > desubscribe > <sigh> Please do not assume that all earthlink users are alike. I've just mailed instructions on how to unsubscribe to "Back Draft." AR #%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#% "In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free." - Edward Gibbon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Allen Robinson.........................sebago(a)earthlink.net PGP public key FE4A0A75 fingerprint 170FBC1F7609B76F 967F1CC8FCA7A41F

1 0

newsgoup gateways
by Lurker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I was wondering if anyone could point me to some servers that will allow me to post to newsgoupes. I have seen some aroud that use the format: newsgroup@domain and forward the mail to the chosen newsgroup. Thanks

1 0

British Censorship
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The actions they claim they will do will, of course, lead to no results whatsoever in many cases... as it should be. The hotline in question sounds like a number as opposed to an email address... pity, we could just bounce all spam to it and ask them to deal with it. > _________________________________________________________________ > Cisco-Job Fair > _________________________________________________________________ > BRITISH GOVERNMENT SETS UP NET PORN FILTER > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > LONDON (Sep 23, 1996 3:48 p.m. EDT) - The British government Monday > set up a watchdog to try to get pornography off the Internet. > Safety-Net, which is being financed by the industry, will have a > hotline to which callers can report suspected illegal material and > will contact police if necessary. Being financed by the industry = if you're going through a British ISP, you're paying for it whether you like it or not. > It will publish a "legality indicator" or rating for each public > access area on the Internet known as a Usenet news group. The rating > will indicate whether the group normally contains illegal or > pornographic material and what kind. > Internet users can contact the hotline to complain about material > received from anyone via an automatic telephone, mail, e-mail or > facsimile. > Safety-Net operators will try to see where the material came from, > contact the authors and ask them to remove it. They can ask the > relevant service provider to take action and pass details to the > British Police National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS). > "We at the Home Office (interior ministry) made it clear to the > Internet providers some time ago that action was needed to deal with > obscene material on the Internet," Home Office Minister Tom Sackville > said. [...] > Science and technology minister Ian Taylor said Safety-Net would act > as a warning system to alert the public. > "As this is an international network, we have to do something to try > to eliminate illegal use of it -- the abuse of the Internet by a few > perverts," he told BBC radio. As this is an international network, this is completely impossible. > "Government and the Internet industry have been working hard to come > up with proposals that can offer real protection to net users while > preserving free speech and recgonizing the value of the net for work, > education and leisure," Taylor added in a statement. Usual government doubletalk.... preserving free speech means no such actions. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Cancelbots in the news
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> _________________________________________________________________ > Centura > _________________________________________________________________ > HATE HACKERS: KILLING DIALOGUE ON THE INTERNET > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 San Francisco Examiner Note the usual misuse of the term "hacker." > (Sep 28, 1996 02:18 a.m. EDT) -- One or more hackers using racist and > other hate terms have erased tens of thousands of messages used by a > wide variety of political discussion groups on the Internet, exposing > new concerns about the security of the worldwide computer system. > At least one Internet customer -- in Oklahoma -- has been blamed for > some of the more than 30,000 killed messages and has been cut off by > his service provider. > "Obviously, the individual responsible is no longer around here," said > William Brunton, president of Internet Connection of Tulsa, one of > several service providers of Usenet news groups that were victimized > during the weekend. "You can be assured it's not going to happen again > from here." The author really doesn't understand USENET, does he (or she)? Evidently, one of the persons posting the cancels was doing so out of this company. > He said he had turned information over to federal authorities and > could not comment further. > In Washington, D.C., an FBI spokesman declined to confirm whether the > matter was being investigated although it was unclear what, if any, > laws may have been violated. > The messages were deleted from system discussion sites used by gays, > Jewish groups, Muslims, feminists and other politically oriented > groups. > The perpetrator or perpetrators used so-called "cancelbot" software > programs labeled with such phrases as "fagcancel" and "kikecancel." > Besides Brunton's small Oklahoma firm, Internet service providers > whose discussion groups were victimized included industry giants > Netcom Inc. of San Jose, and UU Net Technologies of Falls Church, Va. > Officials of those firms were not available for comment. And operating out of these? Or is it simply that the groups in question are carried by these firms? > While some believed such attacks pose a serious threat to the sanctity > of the Internet -- which is virtually unregulated save for a generally > adhered-to protocol known as "netiquette" -- others were less alarmed. Usual mixup between USENET and the Internet, of course. > "There actually are no laws against that sort of thing," said Jonah > Seiger, policy analyst for the Center for Democracy and Technology in > Washington, D.C. "Obviously, it's sort of annoying." > He said a cancelbot, or a forged cancel message, is "a malicious > vehicle and not good netiquette." [...] > Two years ago, when some immigration lawyers "spammed the net" -- > electronically plastering news groups throughout the Internet with a > single message, an advertisement telling how to get a green card -- > "it was the first time someone figured out you could cancel those > messages," Seiger said. > Since then, phony cancelbots have appeared with some frequency. In one > of the better-known cases, the Church of Scientology used cancelbots > to erase messages from news groups used by some of its members with > whom the church was engaged in a legal battle. > The security of the Internet has also been brought into question > recently after hackers altered home pages operated by the CIA and the > Justice Department. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

[SPAM] More fan mail from Timmy "peteur" May
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What has Timmy been smoking? ]From paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Sun Sep 29 19:03:40 1996 ]Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) ] via UUCP; Sun, 29 Sep 96 19:14:06 EDT ] for dlv ]Received: from disperse.demon.co.uk by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP; ] id AA25790 for dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com; Sun, 29 Sep 96 19:03:40 -0400 ]Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([(null)]) by relay-2.mail.demon.net id ac16129; ] 29 Sep 96 15:59 BST ]Received: from fatmans.demon.co.uk ([158.152.120.223]) by relay-3.mail.demon.net ] id aa09441; 29 Sep 96 15:54 BST ]Received: from fatmans.demon.co.uk by fatmans.demon.co.uk with SMTP ] id AA843903697 ; Sat, 28 Sep 96 09:41:37 +0000 ]Comments: Authenticated sender is <paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk> ]From: paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk ]To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> ]Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 09:21:37 +0000 ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ]Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ]Subject: Re: Possible subs attack???? ]Priority: normal ]X-Pm-Encryptor: JN-PGP-P, 4 ]X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.31) ]Message-Id: <844008901.9441.0(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk> ] ]-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ] ] ]> The lying sack of shit Timmy May <paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk> writes: ] ]> The lying sack of shit Timmy May lies again, as usual. ] ]Fuck you, ] ]I am not Tim May, Check out the return path if you don`t believe me, ]if you still don`t here`s my PGP public key signed by the EFF, they ]don`t sign keys here and there without checking ID`s... ] ]Type Bits/KeyID Date User ID ]pub 1024/5BBFAEB1 1996/07/30 Paul Bradley <paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk> ] ]- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ]Version: 2.6.3ia ] ]mQCNAjH9j+cAAAEEAMBvREiQR0ot9dFCO0TiSCSunAYLv2g1Bc6I3bz8FzKXNH53 ]6mieJf/W4rD+CxJpT0q9RQaaoRtkHJLwbjfK2il3D7mEahMAyqvF/xRJNqkXfhM3 ]sRJM0Jh43l+W0M5vwokbEbk25/bxWWGspTsLD3YHbzKnG6pOcL5OPIRbv66xAAUR ]tCdQYXVsIEJyYWRsZXkgPHBhdWxAZmF0bWFucy5kZW1vbi5jby51az6JAJUDBRAy ]NwfvNkCBjDT0xHEBATQPA/9TORmN/UjNecj03q4anpvdyCLiez5sKuNbnYK50RiP ]Jj4QpWWvST3smyQ0A86DrZY/re056MXwQmARESx0rFZxdnD0oORICl5r8dJLIy3b ]j8rbA5olXwZwKz73/X5s13v/pvHYX4cIsbVK8NHXqh5llSKt6TBAuGgkIGF29z5k ]C4kAlQMFEDI3B9mdtf/umVkv7QEBcRYD/1FBteLqsUmr81euxqqnnrpLlyHb58B/ ]9sdATuua4uSjX46hXDZ264YozspNrzSB4NEdrmXOWVX3fiE0ga6XkSSkIeF23V90 ]En37Z0BdbFzgF00FRYTFyTq8eezQrdg/+rBPUsZUmG5wpq3e12FKHQsX01i+1mB2 ]YmqqwCV5e95eiQCVAgUQMh8uSb5OPIRbv66xAQEqJwP/fxQyiCasjFcbDpsFfsYp ]put5cCC/9pOx6X3DlbKShPMpUOS+A9HsTEmJQN8Iawv1nSwPdtc2cR/GhW6ilVjW ]LSloGdMVLabm9pGpZZMkRaZlXFUkOv7VhfgsUiL+vIDryBCAwUZCzQiWycjt/cPi ]mUqFH41Z7NkyO8ZFdi5GGX0= ]=CMZA ]- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ] ] ] ]-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- ]Version: 2.6.3ia ]Charset: cp850 ] ]iQCVAwUBMkzuH75OPIRbv66xAQHSmQQAqw0F/lIsCcQwOpiSQDx4hMqOVVUVXbyR ]3RMWY20ECE0TpAtJ6hkAiqphsWUSBqiFj2kGHMh+jHSHXIMPF+m1qtwVbgutJC7B ]8VYWj0VP+bGu5dEUisLrVHDNj5ucEIDyK2GnqObiCiKARFUbOuZnMQOp9TDJqibh ]2Wqa5+h8R7g= ]=/M2U ]-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ] ] Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security ] Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk ] Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org ] Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ ] Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 ] "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

European Censorship Proposals
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> _________________________________________________________________ > Centura > _________________________________________________________________ > EURO-COMMISSION TO TACKLE PORN ON INTERNET > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > BRUSSELS (Sep 24, 1996 08:06 a.m. EDT) - The European Commission, > faced with calls to clamp down on use of the Internet to transmit > pornography following a Belgian paedophilia scandal, will take a first > step in October towards seeing how it can be done. > But Culture Commissioner Marcelino Oreja, who intends to unveil a > discussion paper on new media services on October 9, says that the > process will be a lengthy one in consultation with all concerned and > that at the end of the day a world solution could be needed. [...] > "We have to find mechanisms to see first how we can find the author > who includes this pornography in the Internet and second how we can > encrypt the content of these messages," he said. > The call for a European-wide solution to pornography and paedophilia > on the Internet is expected to be a central theme for EU justice > ministers in Dublin on Thursday and Friday when they discuss ways of > fighting the child sex trade. > EU culture ministers could also discuss it at their own meeting in the > Irish town of Galway on Wednesday. > The discovery of four murdered girls in Belgium and a child murder, > prostitution and pornography ring has focused the world's attention on > the child sex trade and fuelled calls for a clamp down on the > Internet, which at the moment is little policed and where anonymity is > assured. > Oreja said among the options raised in the discussion paper were the > possibility of encrypting access so that only those who pay could see > the material, or including a special computer chip -- commonly known > as a V-chip -- to screen against pornographic content. The obvious solution to this is someone in an unregulated country getting a couple chips or programs for the de-encryption, then making the images/text/whatever freely available. The major hurdles for this are A. digital watermarking to see which chip(s) are used then block their ability to be used (a reason to get more than one chip/program so as to compare to filter out the watermarking - some techniques for watermarking will survive this, but most won't) and B. copyright laws in the countries which do not enforce such provisions. [...] > Oreja, aware that Internet servers can simply move to a neighbouring > country to get round any restrictions agreed at European level, said > problems with satellite television had shown that national and > European regulations were not enough. > "We know that national regulation is not enough, that European > regulation is not enough...We may need to have a world regulation of > these matters, but let's go step by step. We do not have a European > regulation," he said. If they seriously think this will happen, they need to take another look at the international situation. > The idea of a professional code of ethics in which the media would > regulate themselves is acknowledgment that European regulation of the > Internet could face opposition on freedom of information grounds. > "I think everything can not be said. I think that violence can have > its limits, I think that pornography can have its limits. I am in > favour of that, but it can be that the sector itself prepares a code > of ethics," he said. That's funny, if I were in favor of any censorship it would be of government propaganda such as this.... they seem to be calling for violence on a rather frequent basis. > He said such a code could help get round wide differences between EU > member countries, who have widely differing laws on what can be > considered pornography and eroticism. > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Re: The Petaflops Boondoggle Computer (was PET_ard)
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:16 PM 9/29/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 11:50 AM -0800 9/29/96, jim bell wrote: >>At 10:00 AM 9/29/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >>>(Hoist by their own petards indeed! Don't tell our Russian what petard >>>means.) >> >>Uh, wasn't that the name of the bald captain on Star Trek Next Generation? >>You know, "Jean-Luc Petard"? > >Picard. I forgot the smiley B^) >> The succeeding >>factor-of-1000 improvement appears (if the item above is accurate) to have >>taken 24 years to accomplish, so it's hard to imagine that the next factor >>of 1000 will arrive appreciably sooner than year 2020. > >I agree. (Actually, it was a factor of 4000 since it was only 64 processors, but who's counting?) Anyway, this reminds me: What was Moore's law? Performance doubling every 18 months as I recall? How does this stack up? Well, 24 years is 16 times 18 months, so the increase in performance should have been 2**16, or 64K. Off by a factor of 16, which is fairly close, as exponential expansions go. If I were inclined to make the numbers fit the theory, I would argue that the design for the Illiac IV was probably based on SSI IC technology that was defined in 1966 or so, which would provide the extra 6 years (four doubling periods) which account for the "error." One of the advantages of modern CAD technology is that chips can go from foundry to a working computer far faster. A few months ago, there was an item about how IBM had demonstrated its ability to produce 0.08 um silicon chips, with a gate delay (don't recall how loaded this was...) of about 24 picoseconds. Such a process could probably be used to produce a single chip that can do about 1 giga operations per second, assuming it was pipelined adequately. But even that's "only" a teraflop with 1000 such chips...It makes me wonder what kind of a rabbit they're gonna pull out of the hat to produce a petaflop. >By the way, I knew some of the folks who worked on parts of the >Illiac-IV, which was still limping along as late as the late 70s (maybe >later). I think it was turned off in about 1982 or 1983. I did a web-search on its history a few months ago. >>Yet a look at Intel's pricing for Pentiums shows that they sell a 120-MHz >>chip for about $135, while they sell a 200-megahertz version for around $550 >>or so. Arithmetic suggests that a person would be far better off with a >>4-120-MHz-processor Pentium (cumulative clock rate 480 MHz) than a single, >>200-megahertz version. (admittedly, peripheral logic costs will adjust this >>a little.) Of course, this would also leave Intel flat on its ass >>attempting to compete with AMD, Cyrix, etc, because a somewhat higher speed >>per cpu is just about the only advantage they have. > >Intel is having no problem at all competing with AMD and Cyrix! Both of >them are struggling---AMD just announced a layoff, and Cyrix is facing >financial troubles. Neither are able to make competitive parts, for reasons >I won't go into here, and neither are making the money they'll need to >compete in the future with Intel. (Intel has half a dozen billion-dollar >wafer fabs, running with extraordinarily high yields--so my sources tell me >:-})--and the more money they make, the more factories they build, the more >they learn about how to make 0.35 and 0.25 micron chips, etc.) True, but the world would be FAR better off if the architecture for the commonly-used PC could be extended to allow multiple processors. Yes, I'm aware of the inefficiency issues associated with multiple processors, but I think the dramatic cost reductions associated with the use of larger numbers of cheaper CPU's would much more than compensate for them. As I see it, there are inefficiencies associated with both making a single CPU do multiple tasks, as well as making multiple CPU's do a single task. The former is one of the reasons that PC's have pretty much mopped the floor with mainframes, because the PC's were not "unfairly" hobbled with having to implement complicated time-sharing software. The latter is the classic problem which kept prople from going to massively parallel machines from scalars. However, I don't think that most of the problems a typical PC accomplishes are those "hard to divide" problems that resist parallel implementation. Rather, a multiprocessor PC would assign larger tasks (programs) to individual CPU's and not try to break up a program. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

More on European Censorship
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> _________________________________________________________________ > webslingerZ > _________________________________________________________________ > EU TO ACT AGAINST INTERNET CHILD EXPLOITATION > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > BRUSSELS (Sep 29, 1996 00:12 a.m. EDT) - European Union > telecommunications ministers, reacting to a child-sex scandal in > Belgium, pledged Friday to consider ways to keep illegal material that > could harm children off the Internet. > Belgian Telecommunications Minister Elio Di Rupo announced that his > government planned to implement new measures requiring Internet access > providers to monitor and report material featuring sexual abuse or > exploitation of children. > He asked his colleagues to join forces with him. > "Today a big legal vacuum exists, for legislation is falling behind > technological evolution," he said, according to a speaking note that > was distributed to reporters. > "There is a big risk that it will create an enormous market of > children fed on by criminals." Market? Wider distribution of such pictures will lead to _decreased_ production, for the simple reason that the producers won't be able to go to courts for stopping copyright violations, so they can't make any money. > The ministers agreed to expand a working party that has already been > set up to look at the question of illegal material on the Internet and > asked it to come up with concrete proposals before they meet again in > November. > The group will include representatives of the 15 EU telecoms > ministries and of companies that provide access to online services or > prepare the content, a statement adopted by the ministers said. [...] > But some of the telecoms ministers, including those from Britain and > Sweden, warned that the EU could not wander into censorship and had to > focus on fighting truly illegal material. > British Science and Technology Minister Ian Taylor advocated a > self-regulatory system that was announced in his country earlier this > week. > Two British trade associations announced that an independent body, the > Safety Net Foundation, would be established to rate material carried > on the Internet and to set up a "hotline" service to receive > complaints about illegal material. > They said Internet service providers would also adopt policies for > removing illegal material and reducing the scope for subscribers to > act with untraceable anonymity. I suspect that any anonymous remailers operating in Britain may want to look out for ISP interruptions... > Swedish Communications Minister Ines Uusmann told reporters that EU > countries needed to exchange ideas and to speak with one voice in > tackling a global problem. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Re: Utah as a Religious Police State
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hmm...never heard that one before. Care to produce a reference? (Or am I supposed to be ignoring this guy when he makes ridiculous claims?) Ryan ---------- Previous Message ---------- To: cypherpunks cc: From: dlv @ bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) @ smtp Date: 09/29/96 05:54:09 PM Subject: Re: Utah as a Religious Police State Ryan Russell/SYBASE writes: > I guess that depends on your definition of liberty. The Mormons > originally moved there to have a place to practice their religion, > and have freedom from persecution. I suppose one could extend that > to wanting a place to have the freedom to have a set of rules consistant > with their beliefs. Should that include freedom from interferance from > folks such as yourself who want to change their rules, even though > you're not presently effected? It's worth noting that one of Utah mormons favorite pastimes was to ambush the settlers heading for California, kill them all, and take their property. However the mormons were dealt with much less severely than the local Indians who tried the same tricks. Pity. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Utah as a Religious Police State
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes, my mail gateway sometimes does rude things to the mail headers...Just ignore it :) Anyway, you mave have a clear cut line between who gets to control kids, but I think it may not be so clear as you make it out to be. Why should you be able to say what times you kids have to come in? Why should you be able to limit their civil liberties? Because you are the parent? Why should that be any better reason than because they're the government? Is it your God-given right as a parent? (Don't answer that, I don't even want to start on religion with this crowd..) Conversly, if you think a parent has the right, why shouldn't a group of parents (who agree) be able to set some rules? Why not a town? These were originally nearly all-Mormon areas...Why shouldn't they be allowed their rules just because a non-Mormon chooses to move in? One might argue "if you don't like the rules, don't live there." I suppose you aren't familiar with the rules for participating in church activities, or attending BYU. The rules are generally very simple, live by the Mormon standards, or don't participate. So, that means that students at BYU can't smoke, drink, etc... So is the line between "public" and "private"? i.e. if BYU were an even partially publically funded school, they shouldn't be allowed to have any but the lowest-common-denominator rules? That sounds overly arbitrary to me, and doesn't appeal to the spark on libertarian I have :) Seriously, since laws are all based on a publically held set of morals, why shouldn't some places be able to have a higher set of standards than others. I think that's part of the arguement for state's rights. After all, we allow a lower than normal set of standards (Nevada.) Ryan ---------- Previous Message ---------- To: cypherpunks cc: cypherpunks From: tcmay @ got.net ("Timothy C. May") @ smtp Date: 09/29/96 01:17:46 PM Subject: Re: Utah as a Religious Police State (I received this message, with "cypherpunks(a)sybase.com" as well as "tcmay(a)sybase.com" (???) cc:ed, so I assume this message was intended for the Cypherpunks list, with some sybase domain name weirdness, or reflector, going on.) At 12:30 PM -0400 9/29/96, Ryan Russell/SYBASE wrote: >I guess that depends on your definition of liberty. The Mormons >originally moved there to have a place to practice their religion, >and have freedom from persecution. I suppose one could extend that >to wanting a place to have the freedom to have a set of rules consistant >with their beliefs. Should that include freedom from interferance from >folks such as yourself who want to change their rules, even though >you're not presently effected? Well, if Utah can rig a way to _secede_ from the Union, your arguments would make more sense. But so long as they are part of these United States, their religious beliefs about when children should be at home cannot supersede basic liberties. (There are some thorny issues about whether _minors_ have full civil rights. But I certainly know that _my_ civil rights are being affected when my children are not allowed on the streets after some hour. If my child is out, this is my problem. I neither want cops to stop-and-detain my children, nor do I want my tax monies to be used to control the behavior of other people's children. Providing no crimes are being committed, curfews for the sake of controlling the behavior of children are no more just than would be a bunch of related behavior control laws, e.g., a ban on comic books, a mandate that all children join after-school youth leagues, etc.) As for "changing their rules," you're missing the point. There are presumably many in Utah who believe as I do (maybe even some Mormons). Those who are living in Utah, as renters, owners, whatever, should not be bound by unconstitutional rules, no matter how many Mormon Elders favor them. Unless the Mormons own _all_ of the property (and maybe not even then, as renters have civil rights), they cannot impose their own notions of morality on the rest of the population, except in compelling cases (e.g., involving the well-known actual _crimes_). I don't mean to pick on Mormons, as other communities have also attempted to impose curfews and other restricitions on the children of others. My ire was raised by Attila's enthusiastic support for laws which no freedom-loving person should be enthusiastic about. Again, I have no problem with Attila restricting his own children's movements, or joining with other parents to control the behavior of their _own_ children, via religious camps, religious schools, youth leagues, etc. He can even make his own kids wear funny uniforms, funny religious hats, whatever. But, for example, tellling _me_ when _my_ children may be out on public streets (doing nothing illegal, neither robbing nor spray-painting nor committing any other real crimes) is unacceptable. I urge Attila (and others) to rethink enthusiastic support for curfews. --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