December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: [...] > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames(a)cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. > > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. That's my birthday... have a great week ahead everyone!

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination > bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: I think this would be a very good demo project, but mailbombing may not be the best choice... > 1) Accept bets as combinations of > a) Some amount of cybercash Be careful about violating Chaumian patents... How about using funny money in the prototype? Or, look at some of the micropayment schemes. > b) A string that identifies an event that should happen > such as "domain X is mailbombed" Not a good idea (see below). > c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always > lose) I think the date must always be specified, and the event must occur (or not occur) on or before that date. > d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send > all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in > question. > e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. > > Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as > a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that > string. I think we should think about the kinds of events that a 'bot can verify. > 2) Store these bets in a database. > > 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to > the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, > are "true". Why not start with a less destructive event... For example, "on or before <date> a Usenet article will appear in newsgroup X saying Y". That's something the 'bot can verify and anyone with access to dejanews and the like can confirm. Eliminating the need for a trusted human is always desirable. > 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets > and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. > If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between > them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Have you ever dealt with a bookie? I think there need to be two distinct operations: 1. A user can create a new kind of event. For a fixed fee F, one can enter a new event into the table of events that can be bet on. (In a more generalized system, the creator might also specify the third party that determines whether or not the event took place.) A human bookie decides which events can be bet on (based mostly on the tradition and supply/demand). Here we let users bet on anything they want as long as they're willing to may be bookiebot for keeping track of who bet how much $ that the event will or will not happen. In fact, when creating an event, the user must immediately bet an amount >$F and the house enters an opposing bet for $F (or slightly less). 2. A user can bet $B that an existing event will/will not happen. Bookiebot accepts the $B and promises to pay back an amount that's a function of $B and the current amounts bet so far on yes and no (or escrows the winning with a 3rd party). I'll let Jim et al figure out how to compute the odds when there are offsetting bets for the same event at two different times. E.g. E1:"Saddam Hussen will die before April 1" and E2:"ditto June 1"; if the first one occurs, then the second one occurs too. If a lot of money is bet on E1, it should somehow affect E2 odds too. Also the bookiebot should never lose money no matter what the outcome; all the winnings should come from the losers' bets. > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames(a)cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Here's an improved scenario. Say I pay the bot $10 to create the event "a homophobic article will appear in soc.motss by April 1". Then I bet $1000 that the event will NOT occur to skew the odds. > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. Someone looking to make a quick buck browses through the list of events and odds in the bookiebot and sees the very skewed odds for a homophobic article on soc.motss. He bets a small amount that the article will appear, so he gets really good odds. Then he posts an article that's recognized as the event, and collects a winning much larger than his bet. But if this doesn't happen, I get almost all of my $1000 investment back. In either event the bookiebot made a small profit for its owner. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > any recognition of this fact. > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors).

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ross Wright forwarded: > President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that > enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a > cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's > cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform > our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to > TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a > truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by > mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. Surprise, surprise! > This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision > makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: Yes it is. Nobody in politics gives up the ground they've gained. The fact that they were able to hose the citizens the first time around only reinforces their certainty that they can continue to do so. While people are still fighting the earlier, lost battles, they are preparing for the next one. I fully support anyone who wants to continue to fight past battles, present battles, and future battles, on the level of surface politics. But I think that their efforts are most effective if they add the tools and weapons developed by the underground to their battles. Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to have one tucked in your boot, as well. Toto

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. She just goes to show off right??? California is know for very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. only if you join us .. ;)

1 0

Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:57 -0800 > From: Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> > Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net > > Jim Choate wrote: > > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > > understand what is going on. > > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > > anything that passes through his part of the net. > > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > > > Jim Choate > > CyberTects > > ravage(a)ssz.com > > Jim, > Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over > the part of the net that I have paid for. > I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and > the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose > they choose. > As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more > closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was > set up to espouse. Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that party did not write them is a crime? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

2 1

Happy birthday to Oksas
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nurdane Oksas <oksas(a)asimov.montclair.edu> writes: > That's my birthday... Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday dear Oksas, Happy birthday to you! > have a great week ahead everyone! Have a good year. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Toto <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Censorship
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Ross Wright" <rwright(a)adnetsol.com> writes: > On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > >>>>>>>irrelevant(a)nowhere.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". > > THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY > OBJECT TO. Comversely, some people are willing to give up their own freedom of speech so as to silence others whose views they don't like. They hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". But a forum can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a little bit pregnant". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0