December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: The Difference Between The Right And Left
by Benjamin Grosman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Sir, [snip generalised rambling] > The left wing is a rather motly collection including many > anarchists, communists and nazis, yet many of the same > types are decidedly right wing. > > A historical anecdote would be the Bucharin-Rykov wing of > the Bolshevik party in the late twenties. They were right > wing while Stalin was left wing. Yet, Bucharin would be > considered quite radical for today's bean counting > politics. Even easier, take the Nazi Party. There name points towards the left wing of the political spectrum, and yet their policies were left wing only for the higher echelon, which makes them right wing, as their policies weren't for the good of the people overall. Their decided tyranny of many spectrums of the population was also deliberately right wing. And yet the regime was not tyrannical according to the mould developed by Stalin. It was popular: it was voted in, and it was supported by the majority of the people throughout it's rule. I think you have some decent points. But they are off topic in this list, and also highly generalised. Such a dissentation is worthy of a thesis, not a mere hundred or so words. Yours Sincerely, Benjamin Grosman > This is, of course, confusing to y'all because your all a > bunch of stupid college kids. > >-- >Cheers! > > ------------------------------------------------------------- bgrosman(a)healey.com.au -- http://www.healey.com.au/~bgrosman/ PGP Encrypted Mail Preferred -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.3ia mQCNAzKNX9oAAAEEAOIx4HkRU4vckgguzERhVCxgy5psmngHUoW10Xl8kBkjnuc/ ACysH1K98UXlGfet9zjn/XN4RMnGq64EHXvJu56H7OHhwhoerTpVIW5MUYt+QExk KKnRNrdq8WVGoaMywSM4qKbaJr8aNMBWkldUKR4NElvAjIEEO9z0msNPp33RAAUR tClCZW5qYW1pbiBHcm9zbWFuIDxiZ3Jvc21hbkBoZWFsZXkuY29tLmF1PokAlQMF EDKNX9vc9JrDT6d90QEBxVYEAL5nw1NiyaPpG8R2x7lNcqOcavj/cCmDYT8swT02 Z0AO0C7PGpgp9V38Yyki0FB3yaiJhIQ3Kw6xCtuI8f1F4Vfql/nZebzQERl8kTa4 sI/4xSKRT/Riw/wSGupagU1F1wYIPlXOCdUilIfLzVf4IOsxKjJMdm7aKladSxkV N7Yg =Yapx -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

NYC area Cpunks Meeting?
by Marc J. Wohler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- NYC area Cpunk's, I have obtained a meeting place on the upper west side of Manhattan. It is available on Tuesday or Thursday 12/17 or 12/19. What would be your interest in a meeting (party?). Ideas & suggestions for agenda-speaker-entertainment? Season's Greetings to all, Marc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMpyrGGeikzgqLB7pAQE2xwQAyVipF2GeVLQCW2MYhfnWt0RSMb+jiSAX G9ufnekOv2Y54lpXX0rctpbjQ81bCZx4rpWfEzhnogteKhqx/DBYEH/2WCShmZW/ kk2ahsLcep30sBm3c6T3P0tN1qyi3hYHYZCOpK5ptkI1OGjX9FtGDrWSdY5lyWBT RGIxqzpZtBw= =fFNa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: wealth and property rights
by Clay Olbon II 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:46 PM 11/27/96 -0800, Dave Kinchlea <security(a)kinch.ark.com> wrote: >On Wed, 27 Nov 1996, Clay Olbon II wrote: >> >> The average welfare benefit (including food stamps, medicaid, and all the >> other myriad programs) is $10/hr. Compare to a minimum wage of $5/hr. >> Offer most welfare recipients a minimum wage job and they will laugh in your >> face. (In fact, here in Michigan most employers are already paying several >> $$ above minimum wage, and often these jobs are unfilled). > >I am not in a position to argue with you, I simply don't have the facts. >My question is, do You? can you cite where this figure came from, it >sounds like Republican rhetoric to me. Of course, I will point out, that >minimum wage is simply not enough to feed a family. It is (or at least >it should be) reserved for single folks just starting out. Can't give you the exact date, but it was an article in our local paper (The Detroit News). The $10 figure is not exact, as the actual number varies from state to state, I remember that number as being about average. >> >> More bullshit. You don't know what anyones motives are. To ascribe your >> >> motivations to Bill Gates is unrealistic. >> > >> >But you claim to know the motives of those on welfare: pot->kettle->black >> >> I don't claim to know the motives. I am examining empirical evidence. As > >Sure you do: "economic decision to do nothing and go on welfare vs. >going to work". It seems to me that you are claiming their motives are >econmic, is there some other way we should read that sentence? You got me there :-) >It takes an awful lot to prove a causal relationship, empirical evidence >notwithstanding. You haven't made your case, as far as I am concerned >(not that you need to convince me), there are a myriad of other factors >involved. I have no doubt that given two (or three) poor choices, most >will choose the lesser evil and that *may* mean choosing welfare over >working, but I seriously doubt that this is anything but a small >minority of the cases of people who are actually using the system. > >You suggest that what ought to be done is give less welfare. If your >thesis is correct, I suggest that better paying jobs is the real answer >(assuming you agree that minimum wage is too little for most to live >on). Shrinking welfare payouts may serve to get people off welfare but >it won't make it any easier to live on low wages. We DO have a duty to >help our neighbours, do we not? Or has greed taken over entirely? I don't mind helping my neighbors. Of course, they live next door and I know them! The problem is that the welfare creates a system where behaviour that is generally bad for society is subsidized. The incentives are all wrong. And no, I don't think the minimum wage should be increased either. Increasing the minimum wage at a time when you are pushing people off of welfare is the wrong action, because it decreases the number of jobs available. Clay ******************************************************* Clay Olbon olbon(a)ix.netcom.com engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. **********************************************tanstaafl

3 2

Winn Sings on NPR
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As I write this, Winn Schwartau and a guy from RAND are riffing (at great length) on NPR about InfoWar FUD. ChingChing! I love it when that cash register rings... Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

Your request to sign off the DISPATCH list
by L-Soft list server at CNET, THE COMPUTER NETWORK (1.8b) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Wed, 27 Nov 1996 13:49:02 Hi, If you're reading this message, then you must have tried to reply to the Digital Dispatch or to one of the Shareware Dispatches. These are all read-only mailing lists. If you are trying to subscribe or unsubscribe to a Shareware Dispatch, please follow the instructions given near the end of your most recent dispatch, the procedure for eash list is slightly different. If you're trying to subscribe or unsubscribe, to Digital Dispatch, or if you have changed email addresses and would like to receive mail at your new address, please follow these instructions exactly: 1. To unsubscribe, send a message to dispatch(a)cnet.com with the following in the body: unsubscribe me(a)somewhere.com For example unsubscribe janedoe(a)whatsup.com Your name will be automatically be dropped from our distribution list. 2. To subscribe a new email address in the case of a change, send a message from the account that you wish to subscribe to dispatch(a)cnet.com with the following in the body: subscribe me(a)somewhere.com For example subscribe janedoe(a)whatsup.com Your name will be automatically be added to our distribution list, and you'll start receiving Digital Dispatch the very next week. 3. If you have previously attempted to unsubscribe without success you may have several usernames or aliases, or perhaps you're having your mail forwarded from one machine to another. If this is the case, please follow the instructions in the email message you received from the "L-Soft list server at C|NET: the computer network (1.8b)". 4. If you any questions which are not answered here, please send a message to support(a)cnet.com Thanks for writing. c|net's support staff-

1 0

RE: Counterproductive Dorothy Denning Flames
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) wrote: >It is perhaps a point in Dr. Denning's favor that her most >vitriolic detractors can spell neither "Dorothy" nor "fascist". > >I must admit that I am at a loss to understand the heat which >Dorothy Denning generates on the Cypherpunks list It should not surprise you too much, as people have often vilified those they disagree with. The more you accept the other person as a human being, the more difficult it becomes to dismiss their view without first confronting the issues. It's easier to treat them as an idiot, and then their views becomes idiotic by association. I know all this, and still I do it. Ciao, James

2 1

Output of your job "cypherpunks"
by L-Soft list server at CNET, THE COMPUTER NETWORK (1.8b) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> signoff dispatch You are not subscribed to the DISPATCH list under the address your message came from (cypherpunks(a)TOAD.COM) You are being mailed some additional information with a few hints on getting your subscription cancelled. Please read these instructions before trying anything else. Summary of resource utilization ------------------------------- CPU time: 0.020 sec Overhead CPU: 0.020 sec CPU model: 2xPentium (192M)

1 0

List membership
by Robert Barnes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is cypherpunks subscribed to some CNET new service list by design or accident? I looks like SPAM to me. </enter confession mode> I must admit that in my frenzy to unsubscribe I attempted to unsubscribe cypherpunks. </exit confession mode> RAB -------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Barnes Phone: +61 7 32529722 Engineering Manager Fax: +61 7 32571403 Tritronics (Australia) Pty Ltd Email: robertb(a)tritro.com.au PGP Key fingerprint = 02 A6 22 5E 26 D3 7C 4D E2 91 9E 15 AC EA B1 58 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key

1 0

Re: PO-2 Brain wave meters.
by Matthew J. Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Subject: PO-2 Brain wave meters. Have not heard of them. Doubt they exist in any end-user, commercial product. Take it from someone who has gone through fun Electro-encephelagrams (EEG) before. You don't want to. > Has NE1 heard of these things? Supposedly you plug it into your printer > port and it shows you your brain waves so you can try to reach "alpha" > waves or something. I think they cost around $500. > If it`s for real you could do some neat things with it; how bout your > computer waking up when you wake up... > that terminator 2 plot comes closer every day.... > NEway if anybody knows anything about it let`s have it. > L8R -Napalm SFNF9UY(a)SCFN.THPL.LIB.FL.US Matt _________________________________________________________________________ Matthew J. Miszewski | <mjmiski(a)execpc.com> Practice Crypto Civil Disobedience | Export your favorite Cryptosystem ------------------------------------------------------------------------- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

God described
by Sven 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF GOD AND JESUS > >Sexual Sin and Christians > > 19940404 > > Charles Magee (Not available via Internet), > See also: > * Classification of Religions > * Life After Death > >This article's surreality index is 'U' (unreal). > >To solve the question of if sex is a sin in Christianity, the following >model has been constructed. In this model God is a point mass, centered >at the origin of our XYZ space. Christ, we assume, is at the right hand >of God, about 100 centimeters away. His mass is probably around 75 >kilograms. > >Since God has a very large mass (a bit less than infinity), Christ, who >we assume is in a circular orbit around God, has a very large momentum, >and hence has a very small wavelength. This means that Christ's >uncertainty is quite small, so we can therefore conclude that he is >fairly certain in all that he does. > >Now let us consider a sinner. We shall place him at a large distance from >God, say one inch and 45 million light-years. He, being at a constant >distance from God and thus in a circular orbit, and having approximately >the same mass as Christ, will be travelling significantly slower than >Christ, and will therefore be more uncertain. One should also consider, >however, that since Christ's orbit could fit in a kiddie pool, while the >sinner's would encompass not only our galaxy, but a few of the nearby ones >as well, that the sinner gets around more, sees more, and is generally a >more knowledgeable guy than the Savior. This fits in with traditional >wisdom. > >Mary, the Mother of Jesus, being a fairly pure person, is close to God. >This means that she must be a fast woman. From this situation we can draw >the conclusion that sinners have a lot more potential than saints, since >less of their energy is stored as kinetic energy. Further insights can be >gained when we look at the situation of the heathen. > >A heathen is someone who, in general, is not affected by God. This means >that they are at least an infinite distance from him. Now, assuming that >one of these folk starts, by random causes, to travel towards God, he will >convert his potential energy to kinetic energy during the approach, or >descent. Since he started out an infinite distance away, but with some >kinetic energy of his own, he will approach God on a hyperbolic trajectory >and then disappear into space again, never to be seen again. If his >approach is such that it brings him inside the orbit of The Son of God, >then right after his closest approach, the heathen's velocity will be >greater than Jesus', which means that he will be more sure of himself in >his escape than Christ who is in orbit. This is an interesting notion, >but some of the side ramifications are even more intriguing. > >Without any orbiters, therefore, God would not be able to attract anyone; >all approaching bodies would have either parabolic or hyperbolic >trajectories. However, once God has an orbiter, the two of them could >collaborate to capture other bodies. This means that heathens that get >too close to believers in their approaches might get trapped, and by the >same token, believers who are buzzed by heathens could be ejected. > >And what, the reader asks at this point, does any of this have to do with >sex? Well, the answer is this: Sex, as we all know, is the union of two >or more people. This, in our analogy, would be represented as a collision. >Now, in Christianity, almost all of the holy figures are male. For God, a >collision between any of these close in folk would be disastrous, because, >even if we assume they are indestructible, such a high energy collision >would either: > > A) Eject one of the men out of orbit (becoming a heathen) > B) Cause one of them to fall into God (to die) > C) Give them highly irregular elliptical orbits (becoming a > doubter) > >All of these would be bad for God, because in the first two he would lose >orbiters, making His chance at capturing new ones less, and in the third >case He would have a much greater chance of more collisions, as the >elliptical orbiters would cross many of the unaffected circular orbits. >Therefore, God probably disapproves of these collisions. |__ |--> SVEN: a.k.a. Chris Blanc Internet consulting/Web design [ http://www.loop.com/~sven/ ] Some only sample the dark wine of life's blood...

1 0