December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Legality of requiring credit cards? (fwd)
by gimonca＠skypoint.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:14:00 -0500 (EST) > From: Michael Gurski <mgursk1(a)umbc.edu> > Subject: Re: Legality of requiring credit cards? (fwd) > > Yes, and if I'd *ever* written a bad check, it would be a different > story. The weasel there basically said that because I'd made > purchases there in the past few days, they tried to contact my bank on > a Sunday afternoon.... (No, I don't get it either) > > But that still doesn't answer whether or not a credit card can be > requested when paying by check. > They can do whatever the hell they want. Whether it makes any difference to the store's bottom line is another question. What some places will do is call the card number down to the credit offices, who will run an authorization (*not a charge) for one dollar on that card number, figuring that if the Visa/MC system won't even authorize a dollar, they'd better not take the check. Personally, I don't think the process helps much. It's all a part of Corporate Cover-Your-Own-Ass Culture. "Yes, the check bounced, but we followed the procedures in the employee manual!" "We're committed to taking definite steps to fight shrinkage!" 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. Now, for the rest of you who are calling for the government, of all people, to protect your privacy, please......take that personal check, picture ID and MasterCard, go down to the after-Christmas sales, and buy a clue. --CG

1 0

MerryMerry, and All That
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

{} |||| *(X)* `'*(X)* `~'~*(X)* `'x'~'x'~*(X)* (X)'*x~`x`~`x`~x\ /x'~'*(X)'*x`~`x`~`x`~x\ ((O'^'^'^'^'^M*(X)e'R"r%y^^'^'^'^'^O)) *(((^^^^'~'C\h"r,i%s*(X)'T*m&aS'~'~'^^^^^)))* {((<^^^^^^^^="c*y^P+h'eR*(X)*Pu#n`K"s^^^^^^^^^^^>))} *(((^^^'&"T"i`m$m^Y_&_*(X)*L.D,+T'oo!^^^)))* ((O'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'*(X)*'~'~'~'O)) `'`'*(X)*"~"x"~"x"~"x*(X)*'`` `'`'*(X)*"x"~"x"~"x"~"`` ``*(X)*"x"~"x"~"`` ``*(X)*x"x~"`` `*(X)*x"`` *(X)* *|||* "^" V .. Blanc

1 0

Bubbaonics [Ebonics]
by camcc＠abraxis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

12/25/96 The Atlanta Journal/The Atlanta Constitution "The Vent--The Whine Line," page C2 "It's time for our schools to recognize redneck English. It's called Bubbaonics." with no attribution. Alec

1 0

[URGENT] Meet-in-the-middle attack
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here, Tim C. Maya descends into total inanity. He should have a cold shower and/or a Turkish coffee. _ / ' | /><oo><\ Tim C. Maya //[ `' ]\\

1 0

Thank You, CypherPunks
by Carl Johnson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I don't care if conference does contain the weirdest bunch of bozos it has ever been my misfortune to encounter. Thank you, each and every one, for not posting 58,287,489 messages saying "Merry Xmas", "Happy Holidays", and "Season's Greetings". All I want for 'Xmas' is for just 'one' of these 58,287,489 people to give me a 500 Gigabyte hard drive to store all these Xmas greeting messages on. Toto

1 0

Re: RE: Scalpers (SJPD does crack down)
by Tim Simmons 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A >for $60 (face = $69, and I would have taken anything over $50 without a >haggle), about 5 minutes before game time, on the far side of Guadalupe >Expressway (e.g. @ Almaden Blvd.), which the Arena-patrolling uniformed >officers have repeatedly said is "outside the no-vending zone"... >>> > >Correct me if I'm wrong. Did the Police arrest you because you were selling >em or because you were in a no vending zone? If they did arrest you for >selling them, why'd they areest you for selling them under face value? In >other parts of the country it's a crime to sell them above face value, but >not below. According to my contact in the ticket office it is NOT illegal to re-sell tickets, even if you are selling them ABOVE face value. San Jose Box office makes a legal business out of this practice. It is only illegal to sell them within a certain proximity of the venue. You must have been within the "no vending zone" if you were outside of the zone, you should be able to get the charges dismissed. Tim S. Manufacturing Engineering x 2162

1 0

Re: Reflections on the Bernstein ruling
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:01 PM 12/23/96 -0500, Marc Horowitz wrote: >Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> writes: >>> It's also unclear that Judge Patel's ruling is enough to make export of >>> crypto source legal by people/organizations located even in the Northern >>> District of CA. Venue is proper, in an ITAR case, in any jurisdiction which >>> the defense articles have moved through. (18 USC 3237(a); _US v. Durrani_ >>> 659 F.Supp 1177, 1182 (D. Conn, 1987); an easy analogy is to the _US v. >>> Thomas_ "Amateur Action" case, where Tennessee venue was proper for >>> prosecution of California defendants who sent porn into Tennessee.) So it's >>> at least arguable that the feds could simply bring an ITAR prosecution in >>> another district, if exported crypto flowed through that district. (But I >>> don't think they can do so against Dan Bernstein because of "res judicata", >>> a doctrine which says that once two parties have fully litigated an issue, >>> they cannot come back to the same court - or a different one - and ask to >>> relitigate the same issue.) > >It happens to be the case that the Northern District of California >borders on the Pacific Ocean, and includes (at least) two airports >with direct flights to more crypto-friendly jurisdictions to the west. >I do not know if there are any satellite or oceanic cables similarly >situated, but I wouldn't be surprised. In law, there's a concept known as "mens rea," or "guilty mind." (A Real Lawyer (tm) should be able to explain this to CP) Presumably, if the legal system followed its own rules, it would be impossible to have a "guilty mind" about exporting crypto subsequent to the Patel ruling, until such time as that ruling was specifically overturned. After all, the lay public is not expected to be experts here, and if a judge (!) says that crypto export regulations are a violation of the US Constitution, we should be entitled to believe her and to believe that we're entitled to disobey the (unconstitutional) law with a clear conscience. Further, IMO, It shouldn't even matter if contrary legal decisions exist, as long as they are not directly above that court so as to overrule Judge Patel. Our consciences can still be clear: If courts can't, themselves, agree, presumably we aren't obligated to second-guess which one is correct and which one is not. However, a REAL LAWYER would also have to tell you that the system doesn't obey its own rules! Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Canuckonics
by Carl Johnson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Gubmint-sponsored online gambling
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In about 2 weeks Off-track Betting Corporation (the quasi-state agency in NYS that's in charge of horse betting) is planning to open a Web site where gamblers will be able to place bets. One will have to fork over real $$ to OTB before being able to bet it on the Web site. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Internet Message
by BJORN2LUZE＠prodigy.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry I wasn't able obtain the original SUBJECT here. Through-out the moral existance of the internet I find no reason to stop the comunications. There are factors like no AT&T, MCI, or SPRINT (those dime-a-minute rates are baffling). GOOD. Then there are more ideas exchanged. This can be a PLUS for businesses that are RETAILERS (in the long run). The internet can be used to UNITE the world with a single language. The internet can be used to share ideas, learn, and a good place to visit when you are feeling down. Now if you believe anything I said, than the idea that the iternet brings is UNITY. Isn't it strange that within the last 3 years, (taken from a local news channel) people have agreed that the U.S. is moving in a positive direction? Not really, within these last three years is the exact time the internet had become most publicly available. With PRODIGY, AOL, and COMPUSERVE making it happen. Who is the original credit due to? Tell me. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- my favorite site: http://pages.prodigy.com/VT/hackersguide on the internet today. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- --Nathan

2 1