December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 5 Jan 97 at 22:38, Black Unicorn wrote: > Excellent until the flames list is eliminated. Yes I want to read this list, flames and all. I guess I'm just used to it by now. I don't filter it myself (except manually) so I don't want to trust someone I don't know to do it. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

3 2

RE: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan
by Robert Barnes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

</Exit lurker mode> Congratulations on your decision to moderate this list. My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals. As for the spammers who have run riot in recent months, moderation will remove the burden of re-transmitting this unwanted garbage from the list server and save us all the time and effort currently wasted dealing with it. </Enter lurker mode>

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous＠miron.vip.best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

excellent potential but don't you think some of (most of?) the noise is being generated deliberately in order to fuck up the usefulness of the list --- and the moderators can be easily swamped. well, good luck to us anyway.

1 0

Re: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>From The Orange County Register, Front Page, Sunday 1-5-97 > >Police across the country secretly tail hundres of people each year by >attaching high-tech >transmitters to suspects' cars and tracking them on squadroom computer screens. > [snip] > >The technology, marketed by a company called Teletrac, is simple: A >tramsmitter sends a >radio signal to a computer, which pinpoints the car's street location. >Police with the >proper software can follow a transimitter-equipped vehicle in real time as >it moves across a >street map on a computer screen. > I'm quite familiar with Teletrac's technology. It consist of a receiver, very similar to a pager, tuned to about 930 MHz and a transmitter (up to a 50 Watt peak power) operating in the unlicensed 902-928 MHz band using direct sequence spread spectrum coding. The service acts by sending out 'ping' messages to mobile devices on the pager channel and triangulating for the their return pulses via a rather dense chain of stations in each city/area covered. This is very similar to how aircraft transponders work. There are at least three straightforward countermeasures to Teletrac. First, look under your car. Teletrac requires a relatively good antenna placement. The box should be visible. Second, a sweep by any professional surveillance service will surely find it. Third, any competent RF person (e.g, an amateur radio operator) can retune any number of narrow band 900 MHz RF comsumer electronic devices (e.g, cordless phone) to jam the Teletrac paging receiver and disable all such devices in your proximity. Please note this is not legal, but your unlikely to get caught. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | Internet: azur(a)netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet and Wireless Development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler

1 0

RE: C'punks "moderation" experiment
by Robert Barnes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: >>Vin McLellan wrote: >>> Thank you. I look forward to more of the best of C'punks, without >>> having the hassle of continually weeding out the vapid bullshit. >>> Apparently because of your philosophical orientation, you have stayed open >>> -- and kept the List open -- to this pattern of eggregious harassment far >>> longer than I would have thought possible. I applaud your patience, but >>> for myself -- I have had more than enough! >> >>Well, Vin, without commenting on your plug for censorship, I can only >>say that I hope you are *very* fond of Sandy Sandfort, since he becomes >>YOUR LORD GOD for cypherpunks list purposes. >> >>How many other gods do you have, Vin (if that's your real name, Vin)? > My understanding was that there would probably be more than one moderator, also as Sandy's moderation decisions will be open to scrutiny by interested members of the list I cannot see the list membership accepting unsuitable moderation decisions, either by Sandy or anyone else. This list has a purpose, lets get back to it. > >-------------------------------------------------------------- >Robert Barnes Phone: +61 7 32529722 > 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: List Moderation
by SpyKing 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you... *************************************************************************** The Codex Surveillance & Privacy News - http://www.thecodex.com Moderator of "The Surveillance List"...http://www.thecodex.com/list.html The Nets FIRST & ONLY list dedicated to Surveillance Technology... "We don't spy on you... but we DO keep an eye on those that do..." ***************************************************************************

1 0

RE: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:56 PM 1/6/97 +1000, Robert Barnes <rbarnes(a)gil.com.au> wrote: [snip] >My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot >expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. >It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of >speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse >the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals. Hmmm. There has been some of that, but some of use who have spoken about freedom of speech have done so because of legitimate concerns, not just to gain advantage in an ongoing, juvenile campaign. >As for the spammers who have run riot in recent months, >moderation will remove the burden of re-transmitting this unwanted >garbage from the list server and save us all the time and effort >currently wasted dealing with it. Not completely. The plan John mentioned didn't elimainate the full version of the list -- it just added a modertated version. There will still be some garbage floating through Toad Hall, but not as much :) I think the idea of two versions of the list is an excellent one, and it avoids the issues raised by presenting the list in only a moderated form. If people want the spam they can have it, and if they don't they can take advantage of John and Sandy's work, and read a more coherent version of the list. I will certainly choose the latter, but it is nice to know that the choice is mine. John and Sandy -- thanks for getting this rolling. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0

Re: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> writes: > Rich Graves wrote: > > Bill Frantz wrote: > > > At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: > > > >Our focus is more radical. We are effectively a cyber-militia, > > > >fulfilling Jefferson's recommendation that a revolution happen > > > >every 20 years. (Funny, there hasn't been one in more than 200 years.[snip] > > >I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated legally > > >mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as a revolution.[snip] > > Cryptoanarchy, as envisioned here, is not about people mobbing in the > > streets. It's fundamentally about insulating oneself from the mobs in > > the streets. However, revolutions tend to have unintended consequences.[snip] > Looks like we're coming to the old "irresistable force meets immovable > object" consensus, yes? Interesting. I suspect that all of you have forgotton that in order for there to be a revolution, there has to be something to revolt against. It works the other way too: in order to have elitist rulers, there have to be sheep. If you desire neither, then you have to renounce BOTH positions. It's not easy, but it -always- works. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.

1 0

Moderation
by Robert A. Hayden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Welp, I've been on this list for a long, long time, since its inception way back when. I haven't posted much, lately; mostly lurking and watching and, occasionally giggling at the foolishness that has gone on in recent months (i'm a sociologist by education, so watch this list as a "culture in motion" may someday make for an interesting paper :-). Ever since the internet was shot in the foot by a pair of lawyers selling green cards, I was waiting for the chaos to reach this list. It's here now. I have no problems with the idea of moderating this list. If people wanna waste my time with SPAM and petty flamewars, they shoudl do it in an appropriate forum. I've been here since the beginning, and continue to be here, because I have an interest in crypto, crypto policy, and the politics surrounding it. Not to irk my system administrator with a daily dose of CypherSPAM coming through her system. And if a don't like the moderation decisions, by golly I can go somewhere else. Nice thing is that anybody else can as well. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: PGP Signed with PineSign 2.2 iQCVAwUBMtClTjokqlyVGmCFAQEZYQP/XUynVmGT0eFCwEAthGO8FcB1Zi76h/Er qG00Q9363cl88yTxj50Jlzmjb4SpIoobtrhCi6fL8s1AabtprALgiTe7KlWQnPva TOLwyTCVtkE7eeY0XtS+eZ18JEV3Z4cHVDIHtIIqIYygBwLyCC5qCmsV9z1Anz8t KU88GDEaeM8= =NDGz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Robert A. Hayden hayden(a)krypton.mankato.msus.edu -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=- http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GED/J d-- s:++>: a- C++(++++)$ ULUO++ P+>+++ L++ !E---- W+(---) N+++ o+ K+++ w+(---) O- M+$>++ V-- PS++(+++)>$ PE++(+)>$ Y++ PGP++ t- 5+++ X++ R+++>$ tv+ b+ DI+++ D+++ G+++++>$ e++$>++++ h r-- y+** ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

4 4

Re: Modified Token Posting Scheme
by ed.falk＠Eng.Sun.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How about this simple policy scheme: 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, whose charter only permits spam filtering. People who don't want to use their own name in a post, and also don't want to be bothered with creating a cookie are the only ones whose posts are delayed.

4 4