December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Network of majordomos
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Paul Bradley <paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk> writes: > > Greg Broiles wrote: > > > I sent a proposal to alt.config last night and intend to newgroup > > > alt.cypherpunks in a week or so > > > Greg. > > Don`t bother, I have already drawn up a draft charter and newsgrouped > it. Wouldn`t have bothered if I knew you were already on it but I > didn`t see your post in alt.config... > > Seeya there... What was your chater? Could you Cc a copy to the list? Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Against Moderation" writes: > Your bigotry seriously undermines the effectiveness of any > anti-censorship arguments you make. Are you just trying to get > everyone to hate those who oppose censorship on cypherpunks. The relevance and applicability of an anti-censorship argument has nothing to do with the non-related personal positions of advocates or opponents of that argument. Arguments should not be won or lost by the reputation of the arguer or one risks one's own manipulation by irrelavent data. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet He who has made a door and a lock, has also made a key.

1 0

anonymity and e-cash
by Lee Tien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The NSA's research report on e-cash says: "The ideal situation (from the point of view of privacy advocates) is that neither payer nor payee should know the identity of the other. This makes remote transactions using electronic cash totally anonymous: no one knows where Alice spends her money and who pays her. "It turns out that this is too much to ask: there is no way in such a scenario for the consumer to obtain a signed receipt. Thus we are forced to settle for payer anonymity." Keeping in mind I am only a lawyer, my skim of Schneier (2d ed.) didn't illuminate. The discussion of digital cash seemed to assume no payee anonymity. But the immediate previous section of dining cryptographers involved (it seemed) recipient untraceability. Is payee anonymity technically possible? Under what conditions? If so, is the issue social, e.g., as NSA notes, the lack of a signed receipt? Thanks, Lee

2 1

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ISP_Ratings writes: > I hate censors Dr. Grubor. Dave says hate is a destructive > emotion but when properly channeled it can be quite valuable. I didn't exactly say that. Hate is merely an absence of harmony, and destruction is sometimes appropriate. What I did say was that the best way to strengthen an enemy is to hate them. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet The King decided to force his subjects to tell the truth. Nasrudin was first in line. They asked him, "Where are you going? Tell the truth or be hanged" "I am going," said Nasrudin, "to be hanged on that gallows." "I don't believe you." "Very well, if I have told a lie, then hang me!" "But that would make it the truth!" "Exactly," said Nasrudin, "your truth."

1 0

Re: New group
by Lance Cottrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have alt.cypherpunks on my server (all 1 message). I would be happy to feed that group (and alt.anonymous.messages) to any news server that asks. -Lance At 6:38 AM -0800 2/12/97, Dale Thorn wrote: >Paul Bradley wrote: >> Well despite the obvious problems of propogation I thought it was time >> someone actually did something to get us a new home, even if it`s only >> temporary. So I have created alt.cypherpunks... See you all over on >> usenet!... > >I pressed the URL alt.cypherpunks and my Netscape server said >"no such thing" or words to that effect. ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki(a)obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. http://www.obscura.com/~loki/ "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "Timothy C. May" <tcmay(a)got.net> writes: > > At 1:20 PM -0600 2/11/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >If the people decide for creation of a new USENET newsgroup, > > >we need to think very hard about actually moving it to a different > > >hierarchy from alt.*. I would propose comp.org.cypherpunks, > > >comp.cypherpunks, sci.crypt.cypherpunks or something like that. > > > > > >A comp.* or sci.* newsgroup, if created, has the following advantages > > >over an alt.* newsgroup: > > > > > >1) There is usually less spam in sci.* or comp.* > > >2) There are virtually no completely irrelevant flamewars > > >3) The propagation will be a lot better > > >4) More people will be able to read it because of the issue of providers > > > not carrying alt.*. > > > > > >I see nothing that would make a sci.* or comp.* newsgroup worse than > > >alt.* newsgroup. > > > > Sure, and this has come up in every past discussion of creating > > "alt.cypherpunks." > > > > But the creation of alt.cypherpunks is _easy_, and needs little permission > > or support, whereas the creation of "soc.culture.cypherpunks" or whatever > > takes work, requires a vote, blah blah blah. And so it never gets off the > > ground. > > > > (Nor is it clear to me, and perhaps not to others, that it belongs in the > > the various places Igor mentioned. Comp.org.cypherpunks probably is the > > best fit, but then many would cite the "comp" part to try to insist that > > only _computer_ topics be discussed. Likewise, the "soc" domain would skew > > discussion...etc. "Alt" has the nice advantage of explicitly not be part of > > sci, or comp, or soc, or even talk.) > > > (I apologize to everyone whose e-mail has gone unanswered this week - I've > had a bunch of other stuff to do, but I'll get to it eventually. Also, > I posted > the Anshel+Goldfield zeta function paten number - do check it out.) > > Random thoughts: > > 1. A newsgroup like comp.privacy.cypherpunks will be carried on a lot of > corprate news servers that don't carry alt.* (or even soc.*). Note that > soc.org.cypherpunks is inappropriate since cp is *not* an organization. :-) > Another possibility is sci.crypto.cypherpunks. (True, people whose corporate > newsservers don't carry soc.* and talk.* can use dejanews - provided their > firewall lets them.) > 2. It takes more work to create a comp.* newsgroup than an alt newsgroup. > It takes a vote. I'm willing to be one of the proponents and generally help > with the process. (Both I and Igor have been co-proponents of major Usenet > newsgroups - don't know about other people onthis list. :-) Not only it takes a vote. What is more important is what a vote gives: a good discussion of the newsgroup and the formal RFD/RFD/CFV process ensures that, on average, a good balance is found between various groups of readers. I am not concerned as to what the name of the group will be, it is not important. What is important is that it should be in a more or less flame-free zone. It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage. > 3. An unmoderated Usenet newsgroup would have even ore crap than this mailing > list. I've been thinking of how to deal with crap, and with the obvious desire > by some people to delegate their decision what to read and what not to read > to other people. It is alt.* and soc.* that has most crap, sci and comp are way better. > Most people don't have nocem-enabled newareaders yet... Which is where the > network of cypherpunks majordomos Igor's been busy creating comes in very > handy. > It is a very good idea to let NoCeM issuers and filterers work independently from list nodes. - Igor.

4 5

Cypherpunks@Cyberpass.net New List
by Lance Cottrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I am gratified to see that several people have stepped forward to offer their services to host this list. I have been contacted by various list members to host the list here at Infonex. I think there are several reasons I was approached to do this. As a long time remailer operator I am used to taking heat for the services I offer, and dealing with attacks on the services I run. As the owner and President of Infonex, the list is in no danger of being pulled by the administration of this site. As the author of Mixmaster I am reasonably well known (and I hope respected) member of the list. I have been completely uninvolved in the politics which have plagued the list of late. I personally favor the multi-node list model, where no one site can censor the list, the loss of any one node is not catastrophic, and the load on any one machine is not excessive. Unfortunately I don't think it will be up and functional in time for the transition. I have already set up the list on my majordomo server and subscribers are welcome now. The list address is cypherpunks(a)Cyberpass.net and the subscription address is majordomo(a)Cyberpass.net. The list on my server is subscribed to the unedited version of the current cypherpunks list. Once the multi-node list system is perfected I will integrate this list with the other nodes. Having dealt with the abuse heaped on remailer operators, I think I have an inkling of what John Gilmore has withstood for years. He has agreed to forward his list to mine (and possibly others) for a while after the 20th. It is my opinion that the primary Cypherpunks list should be completely uncensored and unfiltered. An ecology of filtered lists has developed in exactly the way many predicted they should. For the record I regularly read only a filtered version of the list, and subscribe to the full list only to be able to read referenced articles which were filtered. -Lance Cottrell -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMwIyFMogYxMMzklZAQFTzAf+Jya8WIdWpZhyialw6GtGbj3D4mQp0PRJ +J4cBn3qCXX4sLkPcO9Cn0+3Sea20yclvZh9KXXlVM8RxGwzOhVeDDzuQ8dX+LwG QQDdjYfzUAyoSk3OJjWj92DXEZmyEGerahYdoIB7HkIkFw+OY6lJ56cTYUZvKlHe XkJakJ7F5zKdZitvx3wl7Qj6j2lMUh3SegDKz4Ig+WoOe7odbN2F6FDbp1t8WlvI b5YjhwsaOXJ56/ZuWDUuK/yjgq7obPHCtdR3jANIq+Ch01HD+idsU/CH4GCwgiNU 7/GLO+FWlrjL3QIVrl13GiixJFu70Ng37KMAbkoaPqL1Cnip1A4g/g== =fcW6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki(a)obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. http://www.obscura.com/~loki/ "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Is "alt.cypherpunks" the best choice?
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups: alt.cypherpunks) At 2:49 PM -0600 2/12/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a >prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help >them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage. Perhaps some will, but I've been a reader of many alt groups for many years, and have not found them to be unusable. Alt.religion.scientology, for example, has been a robust forum for discussion (and argument, of course!) about Scientology. My fear about using a "well respected" name is that the usual calls for moderation may end up with it being moderated! And the well respected domains are often plagued with threats by various participants that _others_ are being "off topic," with threats to send letters to sysadmins advising them that one of their users is debating an off-topic subject. I have a fair amount of respect for Igor, so my comments here should not be taken the wrong way. To wit, I recall that shortly after the "moderation" thing began on Cypherpunks(a)toad.com, Igor called for Sandy to start blocking "libertarian rants" and "crypto anarchy" discussions, apparently feeling these are not proper Cypherpunks topics. It could be that a "sci.crypt.cypherpunks" group, for example, would result in pressures on sysadmins to discipline those who post "off topic" things. (Again, I'm not saying Igor himself would do this. But there would be a temptation for some to do so.) For me, I can easily scan even a high volume group like alt.religion.scientology for threads of interest (I use "NewsWatcher YA," a good Mac-based threaded newsreader, with even support for anonymous remailers built in). If I can read a.r.s., I can read a.cp without any trouble. It works for me. --Tim May -- Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: New group
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Paul Bradley wrote: > > Well despite the obvious problems of propogation I thought it was time > > someone actually did something to get us a new home, even if it`s only > > temporary. So I have created alt.cypherpunks... See you all over on > > usenet!... > I pressed the URL alt.cypherpunks and my Netscape server said > "no such thing" or words to that effect. The control message may take a few more hours to propogate, either that or your newsadmin has rmgrouped it. The charter was clear and concise and explained the issues so I don`t see why it should have been rmgrouped. Can you mail me if it hasn`t been created by the time you get this email and I`ll re-issue the cmsg. However, I`m sure it was OK as Robert Hettinga (sp?) found it on his news server today... Seeya Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

Re: List for discussing many majordomos
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:46 PM -0800 2/11/97, Greg Broiles wrote: >At 06:59 PM 2/11/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>We can coordinate our efforts. Actually, we can even have a mini >>mailing list for people who want to participate in the distributed >>cypherpunks experiment. If there is any interest, I can create such >>a list. > >Yes, this is a good idea. One of the proponents of the "many majordomos" >project apparently has plans to impose his own ideas about intellectual >property on the project, and this seems like a pretty serious thing for a >setup that's allegedly going to prevent censorship. We need a place to >discuss this. I've noticed the same thing, and this is part of why I'm so skeptical of the "many majordomos" notion. Some of the proponents have their own notions of who is fit to be in their system, and which topics are appropriate. If alt.cypherpunks gets wide propagation, I expect that'll be where I post the bulk of my stuff. By the way, several people have stepped forward to offer to host "the list" (?) on their Linux boxes, or spare CPU cycles they have somewhere. It's important that such offers be weighed carefully in terms of how serious the commitment is, and how long the service might last. (For you old-timers, we wouldn't want to have a repeat of the situation where a remailer went down because "I took my laptop with me on vacation to Spain.") --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0