December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Dr. Vulis
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As I put on my flame resistant suit... IMHO, most of the posts about John Gilmore's action re: Dr. Vulis are seriously miss-analyzing what has happened. As far as I can tell, John instructed his Majordomo to refuse subscription requests to cypherpunks from Dr. Vulis. That is all that John has done. What John has not done is: (1) John has not censored Dr. Vulis. He is still free to speak to cypherpunks by posting in the normal manner. (2) John as not turned to the courts as some others have suggested. Turning to the courts would certainly not be the way a cryptoanarchist would handle the situation. The best paradigm I can come up with to analyze John's action is my quite imperfect understanding of communitarian theory. In essence, communitarians say that there should be a level of social control between individual rights and the forceful coercion of the state. What John has done is step forward and excommunicate Dr. Vulis. He has said to Dr. Vulis, "You are no longer a member of the cypherpunks community." I would love to hear how people feel this action fits in to the cryptoanarchy, libertarian utopias we frequently discuss. E.g. Why is it not a perfectly reasonable action for some one to take in an anarchy? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Tired of Dole/Clinton? | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | Vote 3rd party. I'm | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | Voting for Harry Browne | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

4 4

Senator Goodlatte's warning (from IEEE Software article, Nov, 1996)
by Ernest Hua 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From IEEE Software, Nov, 1996, page 103, 2nd column: "Key Decisions Likely On Encryption Exports" by Stephen Barlas In fact, should he win, Clinton may go on the offensive. Goodlatte, whose bill is the House companion (HR 3011) to the Burns bill, said the Clinton administration told him that if the computer industry does not agree to a key management infrastructure, the President will seek legislation forcing Americans to use only encryption to which the government has access. Of course, this intention (to outlaw all non-GAK/KRAP) has been the desires of FBI/CIA/NSA all along, so no big surprise. I just would hate to see Congressional leaders cave in because of the "threat" of the administration's bozos attempting to introduce more restrictive legislation. The old "if we want 5, we demand 10, and we'll get 5 in the compromise" plan is really screwy and dishonest. Ern

1 0

Re: anonymous oddsman
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>What I do is the following: I go to the Ladbroke's and offer to pay the >gamblers not $6, but $6.01 if Dole wins. Being somewhat rational, these >traders gamblers see a better deal than Ladbroke's offers, and >give me their $1 bills. This is very simple. >I take their $1 bills and run to "William Hill", where I take another >side of the bet. > In particular, I buy $6.01 / $10.00 bets for each dollar that I receive. > The remaining money $1(1-6.01/10) I simply take to my bank. Ah. If you can exploit\\\\\\\ provide arbitrage services for these folks, go ahead. You'd probably need to offer them $7-8 to deal with the difference in reputation between you and Ladbroke's, but assuming you can get customers and nobody breaks your legs, you do win. One reason the market isn't more efficient is that it's only being played once, and the odds are pretty lopsided, since Dole really has no chance. What's more interesting is that Ladbroke's aren't doing this themselves - if they're not. In a repeated game, or a closer one, the odds would probably tend to be the same at both houses. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk Imagine if three million people voted for somebody they _knew_, and the politicians had to count them all.

1 0

[NOISE] Censorship of Dr. Vulius
by Joe Robinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I regret that after lurking for so long my first post is related to this.... Sandy Sandfort <sandfort(a)crl.com> wrote: > > The short answer is, No. More specifically, we constantly have > a stream of new readers sampling Cypherpunks. Some are > technically sophisticated; some are not. In either case, new > readers do not have the historical perspective not to fall for > Dimitri's big lies. Nor do they have any way of know what an > abberation his sort of behavior is on this list. "So this is > what Cypherpunks are like," would be a sad, but understandable > misinterpretation of what we're all about. What John did was > appropriate. While it is true that Cypherpunks IS a much sampled list, it's my opinion that the distribution in the level of education among subscribers is rather skewed. I therefore believe that the "average" subscriber to this list would be intelligent and competent enough to form their own conclusions regarding the validity of the opinions expressed by anyone. I like to believe that the labels I assign to groups are based on a representative sampling of the given population, not by the sampling a select few. It's again my opinion that if others can't do that, and <cliche>judge books by their covers</cliche>, it's their loss. and Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> mentioned: > [relevant, well thought-out stuff snipped] > >Given that John Gilmore is the source of the oft-repeated "The net sees >censorship as damage and routes around it" quote, it strikes me as unlikely >that he took the steps he did without some reflection on their meaning, >consequences, and chances of success. I'm sure that the decision wasn't made hastily or lightly. It doesn't change anything though - the damage is done. If even one person doubts the credibility or integrity of either John or the list, then Dr. Vulius has won. and finally, Declan McGullagh <declan(a)eff.org> said: > >With the right to speak freely comes the right to decline to speak. John, >as the owner of the computer maintaining the cypherpunks list, has the >right to decline to speak and to kick off a user who violates the >covenant of the mailing list. > >The kicked-off user has the right to start his own mailing list with >different standards. If he likes, he can establish the rules as a type of >contract to which participants must agree. And observers can criticize >either or both of them. > >Is this censorship, double standards, and hypocrisy? I think not. The problem lies in determining who defines the protocols and punishments, especially on a list such as this. For someone who espouses freedom of speech to arbitrarily censor someone is indeed hypocritical. I'm not defending Dr. Vulius - for some time now, he and a number of others have been filtered into my Humour mailbox. I'm just spewing off about having the _choice_ to ignore him or not, as _I_ see fit, you know - "... and then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out." JR

3 3

Re: Censorship on cypherpunks
by Jim Ray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Mon Nov 04 17:04:13 1996 Mark wrote: > It's only authoritarianism if the government is involved. Clearly, the > government isn't involved in this matter. Indeed. IMNSHO, a self-governing property-owner (John) saw that the value of a piece of his property was being reduced by a person (Vulis, KOTM) camping there. He asked that person (many times, and no-doubt in a far more tolerant way than _any_ government has ever in history behaved with any rulebreaker) to "please use the latrine instead of the stream." The person not only refused, he said "you'll have to make me." The property owner made him. Most of the other campers, even those who (like me) choose to (and are able to) filter stream water before drinking it, breathed a sigh of relief. John's action had about as much to do with "censorship" as AFDC has to do with "charity" or "compassion." The growing misuse of the word "censorship," especially here, is another symptom of the annoying educational work that Libertarians need to do, constantly, to fight the ever-encroaching Newspeak of those who do not believe in individual property rights, like the one (exclusion) that John exercised, only after much provocation. If you don't like it, tough shit. Go "buy your own campground" and start your own list, just like Perry is. But please don't mislabel John's action "Libertarian censorship." JMR One of the "legitimate concerns of law enforcement" seems to be that I was born innocent until proven guilty and not the other way around. -- me Defeat the Duopoly! Vote Harry & Jo http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/ ___________________________________________________________________ PGP id.E9BD6D35 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE 53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8 I will generate a new (and bigger) PGP key-pair on election night. jmr(a)shopmiami.com ____________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMn5oYW1lp8bpvW01AQF6ewP/U8DZc3FXuKgRQXF+mwWhVkimauwEXQYm p/Rd2u2sYvPMuQD3QMaN+WQCgkpOu0mLlt6TU0n+VJpVYkg82rSHDFyoez71bwvv jPEXZoJ7dVNnBUpy8b0z+NPSyRzVCPlRaFmaJE1Yba6wV01PMkMHf5ouobUps4L0 7cFlrfBGQaw= =J5FK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

MCI/BT, who gets the taps?
by Brad Dolan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Long-distance telecommunications carriers have been in bed with governments since Samuel F. B. Morse strung a line into DC. Only a modest amount of cynicism is required to think that there are "wiretap" hooks in the carriers' systems. When an MCI merges with a Britsh Telecom, who gets the benefit of the hooks? bd -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMmT3y680j2q8tTgtAQGC7wQA2ris5C3KAD6qLy3AmtglJRoZrei72CIH MEm7DGasD4AXqfwkjdmvZScAVXRD+KHHgVZQKQp+H0+D/TWHZCN9nrwE1z5/j73R o8qXDCC0owwJabZHknOMwpBm4Sf6JUGs7Wm1K9JmpVlF01GP+z7rxOMXfvZrlxvy mwcK3wjIPCU= =PTmz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

British Telecom merger with MCI
by Peter D. Junger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone figured out how this merger can work, particularly when British Telecom will be the surviving party, when those MCI employees concerned with the security of communications will not be able to disclose any cryptographic software or technical data to their employer, or to their ``foreign'' bosses and colleagues, without first getting permission from the Office of Defense Trade Controls under the ITAR? -- Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH Internet: junger(a)pdj2-ra.f-remote.cwru.edu junger(a)samsara.law.cwru.edu URL: http://samsara.law.cwru.edu

7 9

black high heal shoes?
by Lile Elam 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, I had the strangest dream this morning. I drempt that I had forgotton to vote! As I was heading for the poles, I saw Dole heading into the poles wearing a man's coal grey/black suit and womens' black high heal shoes. It was pretty bazzar.... I wonder what it means? It was pretty scary... Turns out I was too late getting to the poles to vote and I awoke in a panic thinking I had missed it all. I turned to my sleeping babe and after I awoke him, he assured me that voting happens tomorrow. Whew! -lile

2 1

[NONCRYPTO] censorship on cypherpunks
by Brian D Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I agree with John's decision. As others have already pointed out, this list (T.A.Z.) exists because of the generous nature of our host. It quite literally exists in his home as I recall. (Toad Hall) John made numerous requests for Dimitri to be polite to his other guests and was scorned for his attempt. John then removed him from his residence. Dimitri is now standing on the virtual sidewalk outside where he can continue to shout his insults, since as John knows well, his actions are no more than a "speedbump". Dimitri can get a list feed from a number of other sources, and can in fact continue to post. But John has made his point, and his actions hardly constitute censorship. Brian "A government supported artist is an incompetent fool - Lazarus Long"

1 0

Re: MCI/BT, who gets the taps?
by L. Patrick Elam 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Maybe the "wiretap" hooks in the carriers' systems are accessable more globally than they would wish us to believe. Pat. At 06:40 AM 11/4/96 -0500, you wrote: > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Long-distance telecommunications carriers have been in bed with >governments since Samuel F. B. Morse strung a line into DC. Only >a modest amount of cynicism is required to think that there are >"wiretap" hooks in the carriers' systems. When an MCI merges >with a Britsh Telecom, who gets the benefit of the hooks? > >bd > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: 2.6.2 > >iQCVAwUBMmT3y680j2q8tTgtAQGC7wQA2ris5C3KAD6qLy3AmtglJRoZrei72CIH >MEm7DGasD4AXqfwkjdmvZScAVXRD+KHHgVZQKQp+H0+D/TWHZCN9nrwE1z5/j73R >o8qXDCC0owwJabZHknOMwpBm4Sf6JUGs7Wm1K9JmpVlF01GP+z7rxOMXfvZrlxvy >mwcK3wjIPCU= >=PTmz >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ------------------------------------------------------- L. Patrick Elam, III 404-639-4538 Systems Administrator 404-608-3587[Pager] Senior Systems Engineer Information System Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention http://www.cdc.gov 1600 Clifton Road, MS E-24 lpe0(a)oddhiv1.em.cdc.gov Atlanta, GA 30333, USA patelam3(a)atl.mindspring.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMkxKTclE1gRAhbnhAQFZ7AL/Y5cw/jNSgVJdqPdd0i8f5T9Xp7LMkFUG iHuTftepC0UzghtI1JhCmBWehg+PfWx6wxt3gQZou/+KOLCGX8eWgnMstDX7KK2X QK/V/rerRrIn8/so8K3GtLb/gj+pCUup =F5EN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0