December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive
by aga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An excellent Article here, pointing out why everybody should shun homosexuals to be safe and healthy. On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote: > When it comes to AIDS, unless there are facts to invalidate the following > information, it is evident that the homo/bi/sexual lifestyle is > overwhelmingly the most destructive among those listed: > > "Who Are The Patients? > "In the United States, homosexual and bisexual males make up > approximately 62 percent of the total patients. The other major group > afflicted with AIDS are intravenous drug abusers -- both men and women -- > who constitute 20 percent of the total. . . ." > > "ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH AIDS, 1981-87 > ================================== Males % Females % Both sexes % > Homosexual/bisexual males 50,325 68 0 50,325 62 > Intravenous (IV) drug abusers 12,529 17 3,622 52 16,151 20 > Homosexual male an IV drug abusers 5,874 8 5,874 7 > Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 751 1 22 0 773 1 > Heterosexuals 1,516 2 2,073 30 3,589 4 > Blood transfusion 1,297 2 747 11 2,044 3 > Undetermined (1) 2,143 3 519 7 2,662 3 > TOTAL 74,435 91 6,983 9 81,418 100 > ========================================================================= > "Note: Provisional data. Cases with more than one risk factor than the > combinations listed are tabulated only in the category listed first. > (1) Includes patients on whom risk information is incomplete, patients > still under investigation, men reported only to have had heterosexual > contact with a prostitute, and patients for whom no specific risk was > identified; also includes one health care worker who developed AIDS after > a documented needle-stick to blood. Source: Centers for Disease Control." > ========================================================================= > Cited in "The Universal Almanac 1990", Andrews and McMeel, 1989. > ========================================================================= > > Readers are invited to post data supporting or opposing the above. > > Jai Maharaj > jai(a)mantra.com > Om Shanti >

2 1

ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS
by John C. Randolph 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It figures. It's Fuehrer Clinton's home state, isn't it? Somedays, this shit just makes me want to give up on the USA, and emigrate to Anguila. -jcr begin forwarded message: Date: January 15, 1997 To: All RadioShack Stores From: RadioShack Communications Subject: URGENT PRODUCT NOTIFICATION Memo Id: 8216 IMMEDIATE ATTENTION The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's legal department is researching this and the product has been removed from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until this situation can be resolved. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - encryption 1775 Charles R. Smith SOFTWAR http://www.us.net/softwar Pcyphered signature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

1 0

Re: How to crack
by Yiango-George Yiangoullis [YiST] 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:37 AM 16/01/97 -0500, you wrote: >>X-Persona: <AquaDeath> >>Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 21:21:54 +0000 >>From: "Tim O'Brien" <tmo9d(a)virginia.edu> >>Organization: University of Virginia >>To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>Subject: How to crack >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >> > >Thanks for your wonderful insight, next time keep it to yourself. > >>Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined >>this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. >> >> >> >>Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may >>let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods >>nothing else..... >> >> > > Yiango-George Yiangoullis eleni(a)cytanet.com.cy http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2208/index.htm --====-- Student : I hear that fish is brain food. Roommate: Yeah, I eat it all the time. Student : Well, there goes another theory.

1 0

Re: Naughty, naughty...
by Aga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Follower of the Clawed Albino <afn23950(a)afn.org> wrote: In all of the years I have been on UseNet, this has to be the DUMBEST Cunt I have ever seen! : -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- : In article <qum4tgoil06.fsf(a)cyclone.stanford.edu>, : Russ Allbery <rra(a)cs.stanford.edu> carved on the cave wall: : > : > Wrong. You didn't look far enough (and please read the whole thread; I : > explicitly explained this). From <URL:http://www.dhp.com/helpus.html>: : > : > So you want an account? Send us cash/check/money order (in US funds : > please), whatever your preferred method of payment is (sorry, no : > credit cards, yours or others, please no netcom lists). Include with : > it what you want as a login name, what you want as an initial : > password, and optionally a way to contact you. If you would like us to : > contact you when the account has been created, tell us, if not expect : > it to take less than a week after you mail it if you are inside the : > US. We don't require any postive way to identify you, your privacy is : > important to us. : > : > In other words, you can send them cash in an unmarked envelope and they'll : > create an account. No paper trail. No billing address. It's anonymous. : *ack* : Hadn't gotten the entire thread on my system when I replied...thanks for : the correction. (Yes, I can admit when I fuck up. :) At least last time : I saw the page (June-ish?) I thought I remembered their stating they accepted : credit cards...ah well, yes, I can be wrong on occasion. :) You fuck up when you molest those little boys and get caught. And are you still fucking your Father for those pictures? : However, unless you sent them a twenty-dollar bill a month directly : placed in their postal box, wouldn't it at least have the postal office : address stamped on it? (At least it has the office stamped on the postmarks : in Louisville...) Not saying it does or doesn't, just wondering. Just shut up and go away, you perverted child-molesting lesbian. We are soon going to have you arrested for harassment by communication, and you will be off the net for good. Both IBM net and black-hole are helping to prosecute you. : Also, wouldn't this make it difficult to trace someone if someone was : delinquent in payment? Or, for that matter, if someone was forging someone : else's name on a money order, etc.? (I'm not saying they have trouble with : this, or even give a damn--just musing potential problems with not verifying : who is sending payment, etc. Understood they're trying to provide : pseudonymous accounts and all, but they could always state that stuff like : snail-addresses, etc. wouldn't be turned over save by court order. Hell, : even most freenets require at least some sort of verification anymore :) : (whether it be a valid mail address, something you have to mail in, or on : some occasions copies of photo ID and such).) : (Not that that part has any relation at all re net.abusers at dhp.com-- : they don't have to know EXACTLY who it is, they can just shut down the : account. Khijol.org, who offers pseudonymous accounts for the alt.support.* : groups, does have a rather strong AUP that states that misuse of the system : (for threats or net.abuse, among other things) can lead to nukage, can do : this fairly well.) There are NO net-abusers at DHP.com, and it is the most respectable ISP on the net. They are not going to get pushed around by dumb cunts like you, as you always try to do with postmasters. But after we tell them all about you, they just laugh it all off. Remember, I have ten Criminal Lawyers in my Organization, and you have none. Just what are you going to do in jail, cunt? -- when you have no more little boys and girls to molest? : In any case, this brings up a separate issue entirely on accounts and such. : (Namely, how exactly can one run a pay pseudonymous account service with the : maximum privacy protection, yet allow for closing accounts and, possibly, : proscecution if someone is committing flagrant net.abuse, especially to : the point of being illegal?) You are the illegal one, you stupid cunt. It is illegal to complain to any postmaster about any usenet posting, as that is "harassment by commmmunication," and we are going to have you prosecuted for that. Perverted dykes like you who molest children as a hobby are about to get kicked off this mans UseNet. : > -- : > Russ Allbery (rra(a)cs.stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> Well Russ, too bad you listen to this dumb cunt. You used to have potential, but you have lost it. it seems. : - -- : - -Windigo The Feral (NYAR!) This girl is a verified child-molester and she has been SEEN having sex with her Father and another man. I am not going to respond to filthy lesbian sluts like this any more. See you in Court, Cunt. I am keeping track of every postmaster that you complain to, and telling them all what a sleazy wacko lesbian trouble-maker that you are. One of these days, we will get your REAL name and plaster it all over this InterNet. In the meantime, we laugh at you on the telephone when we talk about you, and everybody knows by now that you know nothing about the law and are just full of shit. Bye, you slut-cunt lesbian child-molesting whore.

1 0

Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive
by Scottauge＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

God must look kindly on lesbians then, eh? Statistical evidence is there, hence that must be the truth.... In a message dated 97-01-16 08:33:21 EST, you write: > An excellent Article here, pointing out why everybody should > shun homosexuals to be safe and healthy. > > On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote: > > > When it comes to AIDS, unless there are facts to invalidate the following > > information, it is evident that the homo/bi/sexual lifestyle is > > overwhelmingly the most destructive among those listed: > > > > "Who Are The Patients? > > "In the United States, homosexual and bisexual males make up > > approximately 62 percent of the total patients. The other major group > > afflicted with AIDS are intravenous drug abusers -- both men and women -- > > who constitute 20 percent of the total. . . ." > > > > "ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH AIDS, 1981-87 > > ================================== Males % Females % Both sexes % > > Homosexual/bisexual males 50,325 68 0 50,325 62 > > Intravenous (IV) drug abusers 12,529 17 3,622 52 16,151 20 > > Homosexual male an IV drug abusers 5,874 8 5,874 7 > > Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 751 1 22 0 773 1 > > Heterosexuals 1,516 2 2,073 30 3,589 4 > > Blood transfusion 1,297 2 747 11 2,044 3 > > Undetermined (1) 2,143 3 519 7 2,662 3 > > TOTAL 74,435 91 6,983 9 81,418 100 > > ========================================================================= > > "Note: Provisional data. Cases with more than one risk factor than the > > combinations listed are tabulated only in the category listed first. > > (1) Includes patients on whom risk information is incomplete, patients > > still under investigation, men reported only to have had heterosexual > > contact with a prostitute, and patients for whom no specific risk was > > identified; also includes one health care worker who developed AIDS after > > a documented needle-stick to blood. Source: Centers for Disease Control." > > ========================================================================= > > Cited in "The Universal Almanac 1990", Andrews and McMeel, 1989. > > ========================================================================= > > > > Readers are invited to post data supporting or opposing the above. > > > > Jai Maharaj > > jai(a)mantra.com > > Om Shanti > > > >

1 0

Newt may be more receptive to encryption now
by Scottauge＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Given his troubles with this "hay seed" scanner recording democrats, ol' Newt may be more receptive to encryption. Our privacy certainly is getting trashed by this presidency and I am hoping an impeachment is coming down the line. Since the congress is who makes the laws, maybe we all can focus some snail mail to these guys. Perhaps EFF could even draft some laws for our protection (what a joke - just to keep busy body beaurocrats outta our business). What does it matter anyhow, these guys dont read their own 300 - 5000 page laws anyhow.... Hopeless....

3 2

Response to my post about Karn case and Judge Ginsberg
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:39:22 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Response to my post about Karn case and Judge Ginsberg [In a post earlier this week announcing that a partial Karn transcript was in Netly's Afterword section, I said that Ginsberg had libertarian leanings. Attached is a response. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:48:46 From: [Name deleted -DBM] To: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> Subject: Re: Karn case challenging crypto rules -- oral arguments online I don't know if you're aware of this case, but Judge Ginsberg wrote the most disturbing dissenting opinion on a national security issue that I can think of in recent years. It was a lawsuit involving old FBI COINTELPRO activity from the late 1950s. The widow of a prominent Communist sued the FBI for ruining her husband's career. It seems the FBI planted falsified documents implying that he was an FBI spy where his fellow communists would find them. To prove the case, the plaintiff needed FBI records requested under FOIA. The FBI refused, citing "national security". Two of the judges reviewing the case sensibly noted that dirty tricks on American citizens during the 1950s are hardly a national security issue today. Ginsberg, however, wrote a chilling dissent. He *censored* the key parts of his dissent, because they were based on classified information. The plaintiff was not permitted to see the heart of Ginsberg's justification. That's as close to a secret court as I've ever heard of in the US. The case was settled out of court after the FBI lost the suit, but to this day, I think Ginsberg is the worst judge in the Federal courts. I remember this story from the NY Times, but I'm sure you can find the details yourself if you're interested. At any rate, I would consider Ginsberg highly susceptable to "national security" arguments by the Federal govt.

1 0

Re: It's a great new year! telemarketers and solicitors
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 16 Jan 97 at 9:03, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "Ross Wright" <rwright(a)adnetsol.com> writes: > > > > Yeah, if everyone keeps crying and whining about "too much spam" > > "too much information freely available" Then that's just what > > will happen. Keep the Government out of the Internet!!!!!! > > Keep homosexual censorship out of the Internet! Yeah, That too! Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

1 0

Re: How to crack
by ed.falk＠Eng.Sun.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, ... This has *got* to be a troll. Nobody could be this clueless. Well, actually, they could.

3 2

Re: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997
by ed.falk＠Eng.Sun.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Robert Hettinga wrote: > > I fished this out of my killfile. Ironically, I had just plonked Toto > > yesterday because I saw no compelling merit in anything he has posted to > > cypherpunks since he got here, and given the quantity of his posts, he was > > starting to waste my attention. However, this morning, as my mail was > > coming down in Eudora, I saw that he had replied to this month's DCSB > > announcement, and, frankly, I knew that it had to be something like this. > > Why do people feel compelled to 'explain' how they 'chanced' > to read items in their 'killfile'? It always seems to me to be > for the purpose of insulting someone while keeping egg off of > their own face. Well, I can't speak for R.H., but in my own case, my KILLfile entries typically look like /toto/f:=:j which displays the subject lines as it junks the articles. Sometimes I'll see one go by which interests me, so I'll go back and read it anyway. Similarly, people who've been plonked are often quoted in somebody else's message, so I see it anyway.

6 7