December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Deloitte-Touche?
by Mark Voorhees 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 5 Feb 1997 10:45:30 -0800, Marshall Clow wrote: >It wasn't really what he said that amazed me, because >I had heard most of it (in bits and pieces) before. It >was presenting it all in a package, in an emotional >manner, by an elderly, conseratively dressed >accountant who was representing a large >corporation whose job it is to help people obey the >government. I'm almost certain that Murray is a consultant rather than or in addition to an accountant. He's been saying these things for years at conferences, in papers, on mailing lists, etc. Mark

3 3

Re: My Departure, Moderation, and "Ownership of the List"
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jer+(a)andrew.cmu.edu" "Jeremiah A Blatz" 5-FEB-1997 06:54:01.96 >On the choke points note, mailing lists are better than usenet because >legendary AOLers with there 5 free hours of fame and their ilk usually >don't figure out how to pester mailing lists. Being on a mailing list >usually requires a commitment, that is enough of a barrier for many of >the usenet underirables. Umm... try reading list-managers for a while on AOL cluelessness for mailing lists. The Usenet AOL undesirables also do things like reading AOL's ever-so-helpful directory of mailing lists (some list managers have asked to have their list taken _off_ of this directory). -Allen

1 0

Re: Moderation, Tim, Sandy, me, etc. * Strong crypto == DES?!
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"mclow(a)owl.csusm.edu" "Marshall Clow" 5-FEB-1997 04:04:13.13 >At 4:05 PM -0800 2/4/97, aaron(a)herringn.com wrote: >> >>If I might make a suggestion: >> >>Some people want moderation. That's fine, I've never been very big on >>letting other people choose what I read, but some people want it. >> >>For those who want it, let someone moderate the list for as long as >>they care to do it. Approved messages get a "X-sandy-approved" >>header. The responsibility for setting up a filter to toss everything >>that doesn't have the header is the responsibility of the end user. >>Toad will need to filter incoming posts to make sure they don't come >>"pre-approved", but that's the only hole I can think of. >> >>Everyone gets all of the Cypherpunks list. Those who want moderation >>filter the unapproved posts, those who want all of it get all of it. >> >>Hopefully, this will make (almost) everyone happy. >> >I like this idea. >However, I would suggest an additional refinement: > Implement a cypherpunks-moderated list which >is all the 'approved' messages. This way, people who wish >to have the benefits of a filtered list are happy, people who >wish to have posts rated for them (but be able to check on >the "rater") are happy, and people who wish to see every >message are happy. > >(I know that John has concerns about toad's mail capacity, >and this may be too big a load) Lance's offer for informix to host the unmoderated version of the list may be of assistance here. >ObCrypto policy: > Was anyone else besides me amazed by the guy >from Deloitte-Touche at the Internet Privacy Coalition luncheon >last week? I mean, he all but advocated violent overthrow of >the government. D-T is the most "establishment" of the big-6 >accounting firms, last time that I looked. What all did he have to say? -Allen

1 0

Edited Edupage, 4 February 1997
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"educom(a)educom.unc.edu" 5-FEB-1997 01:10:14.09 To: IN%"edupage(a)elanor.oit.unc.edu" "EDUCOM Edupage Mailing List" >************************************************************ >Edupage, 4 February 1997. Edupage, a summary of news about information >technology, is provided three times a week as a service by Educom, a >Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities >seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. >************************************************************ >GATES SAYS OLD LAWS ARE GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE NET >Microsoft's Bill Gates: "It's always surprising how old concepts carry over >into the new medium. It's overly idealistic to act like, Oh, the Internet >is the one place where people should be able to do whatever they wish: >present child pornography, do scams, libel people, steal copyrighted >material. Society's values have not changed fundamentally just because it's >an Internet page. Take copyright. Sure, there should be some >clarifications about copyright, but the old principles work surprisingly >well in the new medium. Anybody who says you have to start over -- I don't >agree with that." (George Feb 97) Looks like he hasn't thought about enforcement problems, which may fortunately prevent the application of unnecessary laws to the 'net. >CULTURE CLASHES ON THE INTERNET >At a session of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the issue of >censorship on the Internet was debated from East/West perspectives, with the >Eastern view represented by such countries as Singapore, Iran, and Egypt. >Denmark foreign minister Uffe Ellemann-Jensen said, "Whenever you want to >stop the free flow of information, you must ask yourself what is possible. >The usual answer from politicians is we need international rules. I say, >forget it. It won't happen." Iranian mathematics professor Mohammed >Lasijani countered: "In the west, the issue is sometimes how to globalise >liberalism: how to export an ideology. I am not a liberal, and I do not >believe liberalism is the only way to a decent life." (Financial Times 4 >Feb 97) Well, yes, neither did Adolf Hitler. Sorry, cultural differences won't wash; individual liberties are more important than culture or national sovreignty. >Edupage is written by John Gehl <gehl(a)educom.edu> & Suzanne Douglas ><douglas(a)educom.edu>. Voice: 404-371-1853, Fax: 404-371-8057. >Technical support is provided by Information Technology Services at the >University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. >********************************************************** >Edupage ... is what you've just finished reading. To subscribe to Edupage: >send mail to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu with the message: subscribe edupage >Edgar Allan Poe (if your name is Edgar Allan Poe; otherwise, substitute >your own name). To unsubscribe send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu >with the message: unsubscribe edupage. (If you have subscription problems, >send mail to manager(a)educom.unc.edu.)

1 0

Re: ANNOUNCEMNT: February 1997 Cypherpunks Bay Area Meeting
by Ed Falk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi all; if anybody's interested in having a PGP key-signing party at this event, I'd be willing to organize one. If interested, send me your key (or a pointer to where I can download it), and let me know what times are good for you for the party. -ed falk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMvkGtzLd6HIbO1jdAQGZFQH9GNbQCwSS09YuPrC9jg43A9NiusV18sdM 66MKMVxIYYi2EstThJVWN8NLYCIGCgOiJnnIJ4ZgkbnAwY9zmZviVw== =4etp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: "alt.cypherpunks" people?
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anil Das <das(a)sgi.com> writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Learn to use an anonymous remailer. > > Thanks for the hint, Dr. Vulis. I have registered for a course, but > seats are available only in fall. Toilet seats in the state of free fall? The stego on Sandy's moderated list blows my mind... --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

2 1

Re: "alt.cypherpunks" people?
by Rabid Wombat 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 5 Feb 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Anil Das <das(a)sgi.com> writes: > > > Adam Back wrote: > > > > > > What do people think of starting an alt.cypherpunks USENET newsgroup? > > > > > > > I have only one objection. I will never post to an Usenet group > > under my real email address for fear of ending up in spammer > > databases. > > > > -- > > Anil Das > > > > Learn to use an anonymous remailer. > Unfortunately, if everyone is posting from "nobody@thevoid" or such, we'd lose the "personalities" that make up the community. Why not use a "nym" account to post - one that is configured to discard all incoming email? -r.w.

1 0

Re: "alt.cypherpunks" people?
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In soc.culture.russian.moderated, the moderation bot has a special feature that allows anonymous posters to establish and maintain their "identities" and reputations. igor Rabid Wombat wrote: > > > > On Wed, 5 Feb 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Anil Das <das(a)sgi.com> writes: > > > > > Adam Back wrote: > > > > > > > > What do people think of starting an alt.cypherpunks USENET newsgroup? > > > > > > > > > > I have only one objection. I will never post to an Usenet group > > > under my real email address for fear of ending up in spammer > > > databases. > > > > > > -- > > > Anil Das > > > > > > > Learn to use an anonymous remailer. > > > > Unfortunately, if everyone is posting from "nobody@thevoid" or such, we'd > lose the "personalities" that make up the community. Why not use a "nym" > account to post - one that is configured to discard all incoming email? > > -r.w. > - Igor.

1 0

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:09 PM 2/4/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >>>The poor can not hope to match the tyrants bid as they only have 10% of the >>>wealth, the household knows that thier participation in an attempt on the >>>tyrant will get them killed. Even if the attempt was successful. >>>The people from the outside who would benefit from the bounty benefit more >>>by taking the tyrants offer and then trying again, i.e. tiger teams. >> >>I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no >>motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that >>have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the >>wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks >>acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the >>rich/powerful ... > >However, fortunately I don't think it would make any difference in the >overall effects. While AP would eliminate the taxation which is commonly >thought of as the main way a "rich person" loses assets, in practice it >would also shut down the well-hidden systems that allow some people to get >rich (or, merely live off somebody else) "unfairly." Government agents >come to mind, of course. > The money doesn't necessarily come from taxation, the owner of a business takes a cut of whatever money is made even if that person is unproductive. The tyrant would be the owner of the industry. If you are right then governments would effectively lose the ability to tax, with or without representation, as most people do not agree on everything, like how their money is spent. However, even now, as pointed out in some recent posts, our tax money is used to foreward the goals of a few, these few want to eliminate guns, crypto, free speech, ect. Although we are in oppostition, our money is still used to foreward the goals. Not unlike what I heard about the U.S.S.R. in vietnam. The following is according to my source. When the Soviet Ambassitor to the U.N. was sick, thats when the aid to vietnam could begin, as the U.S.S.R was not there to veto it. Now the U.S.S.R. was forced to aid both sides, those that were in agreement with them politically, and the U.N., of which they were a member. End of source data. Even those who oppose the taxes would be forced to pay as it would be the army that would be collecting. Then they could take the remaining monies that they had to target the leaders, who would use the tax revinues to protect themselves. If more money was needed, nore taxes would be collected. If it were a private corporation, the wages of the workers would be reduced on occassion to pay for the different security systems of the owner. Additionally, under our current system, the assassin would have his day in court, perhaps he could escape the government, making the cost-benefit analysis skewed in favor of crime. Under a system as proposed, the assassin would be forced do deal with a more powerful curse. Insurance companies would be reconfigured to anonymously see to the death of whatever caused the death of thier clients. They would make money because if the death could be ruled accidental, they would not have to pay. If the person died of a heart attack, and the food taster didn't, (the food taster would probably be the cooks son by the way), then the bond that the tyrant had with the company would be void. The company would cash the check. If the tyrant wanted to insure h[is/er] survival, (s)he would take out several of these bonds, with different companies, each with a signature amount to give to the executors to check their loyalty. If the company paying 1295065 dollars didn't pay up, the executors would tell the world. The idea is, where a layer can be subverted, duplicate the layer so that at least one element is bound to work.

1 0

Re: mail-to-news fun
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> Well, I'd really rather not do that. I already have to deal with >> abuse from nym.alias.net and mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu users. >All that being said, it might not be worth the effort to allow posting, >since you're not actually doing the posting anyway. I've thought about >allowing posting again with a very restrictive newsgroup list >(only alt.anonymous.messages). If I were going to restart a remailer, and to offer news posting, I'd probably limit it to posting to moderated newsgroups only, so a human can trash things that look like SPAM or abuse; the abuse that caused me to kill my remailer wasn't something a simple filter would catch. (I'd also prefix each posting with a header about this message having been received from an anonymous source, not verified, not guaranteed to be worth the electrons it's printed on, probably not written by anybody whose name's at the bottom, etc.... People don't read mail headers or disclaimers at the bottom, and putting disclaimers like that into message text for email exposes the message to traffic analysis.) Alt.anonymous.messages is an interesting alternative, but one of the ideals of posting news from a remailer is to allow people to broadcast politically incorrect speech anonymously, avoiding censorship and retribution as much as possible. This means letting people call Lee Kwan Yew a fascist, complain that OJ's a space alien, identify the person Hillary paid to off Vince Foster, or proclaim that Hubbard's Ahmaddiyya Witnesses are the One True Religion -- Or post the One Page RSA+RC4 to the China newsgroups. On the other hand, I don't want to support postings titled "ALL FAGS MUST DIE" with a forged signature and email at the bottom, and I especially don't want to post that from my remailer without indicating that anything posted by a remailer might be forged. That's why I shut down my previous remailer - the forger only posted one forged message; the person whose name got forged got flamed severely by dozens of people who objected to "her" posts. Blocking the gay newsgroups cuts down on that kind of trolling, but also cuts out the "Help, I might be gay and my parents will kill me" traffic that remailers are supposed to help with. On several other hands, though, even if you limit news posting, trolls can abuse a remailer by sending email to large mailing lists. It'd certainly never happen to Cypherpunks :-), but some other mailing lists might attract trolls, and it's not easy to identify them in advance (though I suppose adding a disclaimer and cutmarks any time you post to something other than a known remailer is a partial solution.) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

2 1