December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Error Condition Re: Invalid request
by listproc＠plaidworks.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

=============== Mail Daemon Command Error =============== The line that caused the error was: >UNSUBSCRIBE SHARKS CYPHERPUNKS(a)TOAD.COM: You are not subscribed to sharks(a)plaidworks.com ==================== For more help, send e-mail to <info(a)plaidworks.com> or browse <http://www.plaidworks.com/ListAdmin/> to use our new World Wide Web interface. ==================== Any list commands after the point of error are ignored. If you put a 'signature' on your email, that will cause an error. This can be ignored if you received confirmation of your other commands. ========== Mail Daemon Command Summary ========== The syntax for the most common commands is: (if you aren't sure, get help from the above help sources) SUBSCRIBE listname your name goes here UNSUBSCRIBE listname To turn on DIGEST mode, use: SET listname MAIL DIGEST To turn off DIGEST mode, use: SET listname MAIL ACK ========== If you need more help ========== If you can't make it work, send e-mail to <postmaster(a)plaidworks.com> and we'll help you out.

1 0

freedom is only relative
by Attila T. Hun 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- on 12/26/96 at 04:34 AM, Carl Johnson <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> said: ::Attila T. Hun wrote: ::> is MALLAMACE an abbreviated anagram for 'malicious mace?' :: Yes. Other abbreviated anagrams are: ::A :: C :: and :: F :: (I am thankful that I live in America, where I am free to use ::the above abbreviated anagrams without fear of censorship.) as to lack of fear of censorship; ask the woman in Chicago, approached by Clinton to shake her hand --she refused and said he was criminal murderer. Took 'em a week or so to get her and husband even out of jail the first time, and I think the charges are still going around in federal court. through all this: Bubba a) got obscene, and b) threw a tempter tantrum. think Hillary will protect your civil rights in her Global Village? Keep in mind, it's on record, Hillary's Bill of Rights is the same as the UN Bill of Rights, which just happens to be the same as the Bill of Rights in the current Chinese constitution: the UN's "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" (ICCR): Aricle 18 states that "everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" but specifies that "freedom to manifest one's religions or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and necessary..." sounds more like Bubba's attitude as expressed by Janet Reno and Jamie Gorlick. maybe the Chinese took their model from the UN? As Communist China prepares to digest Hong Kong in July, it is moving quickly to suppress dissenting voices in the media. Asian correspondent David Aikman reports that Red China's Foreign Minister, Qian Qichen, has forbidden future commemorations in Hong Kong of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. When Hong Kong residents protested this decree, foreign ministry spokesman Shen Guofang sought to placate them with the following assurance: "Hong Kong people will have full freedom of expression, but all freedoms must be within the limits allowed by law." George Orwell was not late, just not recognized. == Tyranny Insurance by Colt Manufacturing Co. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMsKpuL04kQrCC2kFAQGAbQP9FJmqIzipPGJ+fN/MuwQLqN6ZJODOkuP/ BDC8HjZ03BwOC91f1tR5TXGEstjwpGL9dxn+SrfpNDFrQNgnJNIbKSDNQasZtUCl 8OpkmFqrH/ALOrERxcTuc9VNLlCEL+IsKjK/pRsXWAIi7VV3uIrXTzorcQX/3d8I M9WNk0rBbvA= =WT+U -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Remember Canseco.....
by YukYukYo69＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 96-12-26 02:38:52 EST, you write: << >Raffik: > >Obviously you don't remember the days of the immaturity of Canseco. The only >reason why they traded him was becuase he was the only cancer to a clubhouse >that was overachieving and headed for the playoffs, not to mention they could >get a sutible replacment for him in the field as well as a couple more arms >for the stretch run. This is, of course, laughable. Canseco was dealt for 1.2 years of Witt, .2 years of Russell, and .2 years of Sierra. Sierra's collapse was completely predictable, and if you care to call me on that, check your local news archive. >> .2 years is called a stretch run! That's what the whole deal was done for. Yeah, maybe the trade wasn't the best ever, considering only a World Series title was going to be the mark on whether or not it was a good deal, but the bottom line is that he made the chance on the trade. Alderson regrets making the deal? Maybe so, but I was glad to see him take that chance on a team that for sure wasn't going to beat the Jays with Canseco. I'll admit, resigning Sierra was wrong. The only reason it happened is becuase it did come on the eve of the Bonds signing and Alderson felt the heat to be competitive in the Bay Area. And it doesn't sound like anything's gonna bring you back. I'm not here saying Canseco's presence is going to be an asset to the team. And I'm still trying to figure out, are you pro or anti Canseco? Gary YukYukYo69(a)aol.com

1 0

Re: Remember Canseco.....
by Lilian Bartholo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I only remember the days when Jose gave the A's 730 rbis in 7.5 years. Excitement and charisma at the plate and a slew of good deeds that the press never talked about. The only "cancer" in the clubhouse that I'm glad is now gone was TLR and his chosen few clan. If TLR thought Jose was so bad, then why did he call him during the offseason last year and asked him if he would play first base for him in St. Louis? Maybe he just wanted to have him around so he could use him as a distraction and as a scape-goat when things turned sour with the team. Lil

1 0

RE: Legality of requiring credit cards?
by Mike Topalovich 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>True. But when I was a wetback bank teller making $6.50 an hour, I didn't >fill out any forms I didn't have to. Come to think of it, you have to fill >out a CTR when you purchase a bank check or money order for only $3,000 or >more in cash. I forgot about that. > >Just a side note to show how effective these CTRs have to be...when I worked >at a bank many moons ago, we would receive calls from the IRS pertaining to >CTRs that we had filled out 8 or 9 months before...I would find that very >encouraging if I were laundering money on a temporary basis. You get the >money moved, skip town, and you still have a good 6 month head start before >the IRS even has a notion to catch on. > >Mike > >---------- >From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com[SMTP:dlv@bwalk.dm.com] >Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 1996 12:41 PM >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: RE: Legality of requiring credit cards? > >Mike Topalovich <TOPALOVICH(a)terraglyph.com> writes: >> It's not necessarily because you are paying with $100 bills. The IRS >> requires banks and other businesses to report all cash transactions >> exceeding $10,000 by means of a Currency Transaction Report (CTR). This >> is a way for the IRS to track money laundering. There happens to be two >> lines on the form asking for the number of $50 and $100 bills, but those >> lines are optional. > >They're supposed to report "suspicious" cash transactions under 10K too. > >--- > >Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM >Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > >

1 0

RE: Legality of requiring credit cards?
by Mike Topalovich 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >This isn't to start any arguments, it's just an FYI...I noticed that when I >worked for a bank, many banks would only allow other banks to call to verify >funds. What this meant was, I'd have customers calling me who in turn had >customers who were growing *very* impatient because they had written a >personal check, who had to wait for the clerk to call to verify funds, spend >10 minutes on hold for bookkeeping only to find that the bank they were >calling only allows other banks to verify funds, who then had to wait for the >clerk to call the company's bank to call the other bank to sit on hold >another 10 minutes for bookkeeping only to have the bookkeeper try to weasel >his/her way out of doing any work by disputing the fact that you worked for a >bank, blah, blah, blah. > >What's the point? Maybe some of us don't want to have to go into debt just >to buy groceries, and don't want to carry buttloads of cash on us all of the >time. With banks charging ridiculous fees to keep *your* money in a checking >account, where's the big incentive? > >I say we go back to a barter system > >Mike > > >---------- >From: gimonca@skypoint.com[SMTP:gimonca@skypoint.com] >Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 1996 12:57 AM >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: Re: Legality of requiring credit cards? (fwd) > >People on the list could probably come up with much better ways to >authenticate a reputation. Until then, for personal checks, you can >call any bank in the U.S., ask for bookkeeping, and ask them if there >are funds in the bank to cover the check you're holding. Any bank >should give you a yes or no on this. Some banks, like the First Banks >here in Minnesota, will do this through their automated telephone >banking services, 24 hours. > > >

1 0

Re: Diffie-Hellman
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The only `culture' Timmy May possesses is that cultivated from his foreskin scrapings. )))) )) OO Timmy May 6 (_) `____c

1 0

FS- Sharks Tkts- Front Row (2nd Deck) Jan 13
by Howard Strachman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've got two seats in section 226, row 1 available for sale for Jan 13. Face value=$43 each. Howard Strachman Tel: 408-863-0801 Ultracom Communications, Inc. Fax: 408-863-0363 21580 Stevens Creek Blvd Email:howard@ultracominc.com Cupertino, CA 95014 Web: http://www.ultracominc.com

1 0

FS-Jan 7 Row 1 Sec 211
by Anne Greene 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Time: 10:34 AM OFFICE MEMO FS:Jan 7 Row 1 Sec 211 Date: 12/26/96 I have two seats, on the rim, end that sharks shoot on twice for the Jan. 7th Buffalo game. Sec 211, Row 1, seats 1 & 2 $86 for the pair (face value) Email me at: anne.greene(a)xilinx.com or call 408-879-6716 Happy Boxing day, Anne

1 0

re: Papers Galore
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks to Harry and Kenneth for correcting the URL for the NISSC96 papers. We've converted the toc.pdf to HTML for easy scanning of the impressive list of papers and panels: http://jya.com/nissc96.htm Now who's going hyper-link the TOC to the files? Ease the scrooge download torture?

1 0