December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Take it to sci.math
by WinSock Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Will all those people who are talking about set theory and the countability of various number systems take their discussion to sci.math, please? 'Cuz 1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. 2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those threads is even remotely correct. 3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math and 4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. Hey Sandy, you gonna censor these creeps once you start censoring?

1 0

Re: Sandy and the Doc
by WinSock Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Frantz <frantz(a)netcom.com> writes: > I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that > email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to > toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small > fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. Failing something catastrophic like a disk failure or a host down for more than a week, this should not be the case. Almost every site running sendmail has the Os ("SuperSafe") option set. That means sendmail will not respond to a "." at the end of a DATA command with SMTP code 250 until it has written the incoming message (and queue info) to disk and called fsync. Thus, you may get 2 copies of a message, but mail messages should not just disappear regularly at all, even if the network goes down or a machine crashes. Non-sendmail MTA's tend to be even more strict about this, not even allowing this behavior to be disabled.

1 0

Re: Airport security [no such thing]
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:04 PM 1/17/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis wrote: >snow <snow(a)smoke.suba.com> writes: > >> > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). >> >> >>shudder<< >> >> No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > >Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... > Wouldn't work. A sworn member of the holy order of the restitution for the crimes of my enemies, has an explosive device buried within h[is/er] bowels. When (s)he goes up, alone, (s)he will take 100+ enemies with h[im/er]. Of course (s)he has to be willing to die, or be duped into thinking that (s)he really has appendicitis. So a courier would still be easy to find. Or, a cancer infected member of said religious cult, knowing that (s)he will soon die anyway, and probably atone for h[is/er] many sins, ((s)he hasn't really done anything rightous, like kill one of the enemy), chooses to have h[is/er] cancerous bowels, up to the stomache, removed, and replaced with a bomb. (s)he then heals up a little while, being fed intraveinously, until the time of h[is/er] atonement. A makeup artist erases the signs of disease that (s)he carries and a large dose of pain killer is given to h[im/er] to take right before entering the airport. (s)he dies knowing that (s)he is going straight past heaven to an even higher level.

2 1

Re: Take it to sci.math
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: > > Will all those people who are talking about set theory and > the countability of various number systems take their discussion > to sci.math, please? 'Cuz > ... > Hey Sandy, you gonna censor these creeps once you start censoring? I won't be censoring anyone. I will, however, be sorting posts into the three lists. As I work my way into moderation mode, I don't expect to sort math or other off-topic posts into the flam (flames & spam) list. In retrospect, the previous "creeps" comment should probably have gotten the post sorted to the flam list. Oh well, I'll get up to speed pretty soon, I hope. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Re: Take it to sci.math
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:01 AM 1/20/1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: >Will all those people who are talking about set theory and >the countability of various number systems take their discussion >to sci.math, please? 'Cuz What a joke! Of all the messages to whine about this guy picks the math thread. Somehow that wouldn't have been my first choice. >1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. No, but it's interesting to many readers of this list and it builds community. >2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those > threads is even remotely correct. >3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math > >and > >4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real > training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. I don't get this at all. You have particular knowledge in the field, but instead of sharing the information with the rest of us, you find our (apparently) pathetic attempts to gain understanding to be "extremely annoying" and imply we need to be chewed out. Commander Zero

2 1

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim C[reep] May likes to lick the semen-shit mixture that accumulates in the crack of his mother's ass. ,_ o / //\, Tim C[reep] May \>> | \\,

1 0

Re: Take it to sci.math
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:01 AM 1/20/1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: >Will all those people who are talking about set theory and >the countability of various number systems take their discussion >to sci.math, please? 'Cuz What a joke! Of all the messages to whine about this guy picks the math thread. Somehow that wouldn't have been my first choice. >1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. No, but it's interesting to many readers of this list and it builds community. >2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those > threads is even remotely correct. >3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math > >and > >4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real > training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. I don't get this at all. You have particular knowledge in the field, but instead of sharing the information with the rest of us, you find our (apparently) pathetic attempts to gain understanding to be "extremely annoying" and imply we need to be chewed out. Commander Zero

1 0

Re: Numbers we cannot talk about
by Paul Elliott 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For > example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program > that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is > very relevant and interesting. > > - Igor. Well, yes, but a scientist can only make a finite number of measurements. A computer used for crypto can only have a finite number of states. All this talk about transfinite numbers does not have any effect on arithemetic truths. What good is an axiom system which asserts (internally) that there are uncountably many reals if that same axiom system has a countable model? - -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott(a)hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMuMw8vBUQYbUhJh5AQFJYgP/a05CTNOG7zYJxcLBFU6JdzNItGUik7pi fbor6p9l6FDgCwSSRIB59ApRIwKFscGLHVT/mAIi5Ofbnbn/wsm9p35ZNlY0YeDd nPf171quOh7d91W6FXOUwhKSfehbAACbsapN5yaf2vtldpTb/LpdA+xvKTFgiRvg 4/8+yhyfp34= =npw2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Too much week at the end of your paycheck?
by remove＠structuremg.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Do you need to supplement your income? Are you paying out in bills more than you make? Have you thought about a second job but wondered when you would have time? What if you could supplement your income in only 5-6 hours a week and if you could do it in the privacy of your own home at your computer? Would you try it? Find out how you can supplement and eventually replace your current job. We are looking for 6 new people willing to take a new opportunity and make it their goldmine. If you are open-minded, have internet access at home, and are ready to change your life don't pass on this opportunity. Help us change families financial futures for the better. Get more info from our autoresponder - info(a)structuremg.com or from our website - http://www.structuremg.com (signup here too!) ************************************************************** If you wish to be removed from our future mailings simply reply with "REMOVE" in the subject and place your email address in the body. You must do this correctly to be removed. **************************************************************

1 0

RE: THIS IS THE FIRST MESSAGE TO THE MODERATED CYPHERPUNKS LIST
by Butler, Scott 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Gilmore wrote: > >>Welcome to (what I hope is) a more useful and less confrontative >>cypherpunks list. Now, can we get back to talking about cryptography? > > "can we get 'BACK' to talking about cryptography?" You seem to have misspelled START. >Scott

1 0