December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

New York Area CPUNKS meet
by Marc J. Wohler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The NewYork City area Cypherpunks will meet on the UpperWest Side of Manhattan. Date: Thursday 12/19/96 Time: 7:30 PM Place: The Club. Park Royal Hotel, 23 West 73rd Street. Between Columbus & Amsterdam Avenue. Subway stops: 72nd & Broadway #1 #9 #2 #3 (express stop) 72nd & Central Park West A or D trains Refreshments: BYOB & snacks. We can order out for dinner. All our welcome but please email me your intention to attend (if you have not already done so.) Marc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMqsDk2eikzgqLB7pAQHxFgP9FbdXYo4qiubH9zBFW+CdQb5LZVxKAhWB EwfV+2EquVT94dokYMN9P0n26ZIozJejpXf44QLLgNPvWHqHB8Wult/U7zyVeVid 1YVRftVFnxPlBjkabH5yGR8efP7L2i5Ynh5X8I0jFy9G8Wfilxsg8QT8r+eYtDWB g/b4Wpr0/0w= =CIyV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

[CRYPTO] PGP
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timothy C[retin] May's IQ is lower than the belly of a pregnant snake. . o c , `'#v-- --v#`' Timothy C[retin] May /'> <`\

1 0

Re: The Science Generations
by Bill Frantz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:10 AM -0800 12/8/96, Dale Thorn wrote: >The phrase "your beloved HPs" gives your hand away. What hand? You appeared by your statements to be a lover of HP stuff. I now find it was only from that era. My of my hand is only to say that people DID use them other things for real business uses. Your posts appeared to say that was impossible. However, as Bob Hettinger says, "Reality is not optional." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | I still read when I should | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | be doing something else. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | It's a vice. - R. Heinlein | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

info
by Scott Kimmel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: Please post Eudora PGP plugin URL
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:31 PM 12/7/96 -0500, Alec wrote: >At 04:57 PM 12/6/96 -0800, you wrote: >:Or Email it to me >: >: >:Thanks in advance >: >You're welcome > >----------------------------------------------------- >Eudora/PGP Plug-In [...] >If you want to be automatically notified of new versions, send e-mail to >gt6525c(a)prism.gatech.edu with the subject of "eppi news", and the following >message body: Just FYI, while the plugin is still available, email to this address has been bouncing for weeks. It is therefore impossible to submit bug reports or subscribe to the EPPI mailing list. If somebody on this list knows the current address of the EPPI author, please post it. Thanks, -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/justforfun/prime.htm

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:15 PM 12/7/96 -0800, Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: >I don't think that PICS will be mandated any more than those two standards >are mandated, perhaps I'm naive, but I think that the social conventions >will work in this case. Let's put the question if something like PICS will be mandated aside for the moment. Do you agree that sites that deliberately mislabel their content, will eventually face legal action? If so, then PICS should not be considered truly voluntary. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/justforfun/prime.htm

3 2

take me off the list
by Bryondp＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

take me off the list

1 0

Re: The Science Generations
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Frantz wrote: > At 10:10 AM -0800 12/8/96, Dale Thorn wrote: > >The phrase "your beloved HPs" gives your hand away. > What hand? You appeared by your statements to be a lover of HP stuff. > I now find it was only from that era. > My of my hand is only to say that people DID use them other things for > real business uses. Your posts appeared to say that was impossible. > However, as Bob Hettinger says, "Reality is not optional." First, let me apologize for something I try never to do. When someone sends private email, if I put it to the list I should remove the sender's name (if no permission given). I still use HP personal computers, since (despite their problems) they are still the most effective at running for a long time and processing a lot of data. As far as showing your hand, I find it interesting how many erstwhile serious users will nonetheless wave away any discussion of the specific problems computers have (particularly the early ones), which I can only relate to denial. In the words of Consumer Reports back in the early-mid 1980s, "These electronic items are the least reliable and most problematic things we've ever tested" (quote approximate). I never said it was impossible to use an Apple (or early IBM) for serious work of *some* kind, i.e., simple spreadsheet work. What I said and I hope it came through is this: If you were using an IBM mainframe in the period 1980-1982 or thereabouts, you would have what I call unreliable equipment, but, you would probably also have IBM person(s) on site to keep the stuff running. On the other hand, IBM PC users (outside of large corporate sites) didn't necessarily have that luxury, therefore, if they tried to do what I could easily do with HP personal computer equipment, their IBM PCs would die and have to be fixed "by the dealer", with more consequent unreliability added. How many people have you heard of who could run databases on an IBM or Apple II floppy system, entering data with fairly large files and several indexes, and searching and printing the data almost continuously? Those people who know what I'm talking about should have a good laugh on that one.

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:52 PM 12/8/96 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >Let's put the question if something like PICS will be mandated aside for >the moment. Do you agree that sites that deliberately mislabel their >content, will eventually face legal action? If so, then PICS should not be >considered truly voluntary. Self-labeling is useless without regulation and punishment - there's too much incentive to treat the label like a marketing tool. My hunch is that courts will never allow compulsory labeling at the level that most people would want - my bet is that labeling re visual depictions of nudity/sex can be mandated, but that labeling re editorial/political content can't be. (I'm not saying I think a fair reading of the Constitution says that, I'm saying I think that's the compromise that judges will come up with.) And labeling that keeps kids from seeing female breasts but lets them find out about where to get abortions, or how to do their own at home*, or that lets kids see home pages about how it's OK to be gay or a nazi or a nerd or a creationist or a Republican or whatever isn't going to serve the needs of the people who want to impose a strict content-control regime on their kids, or on the net. And while my faith in the judiciary is pretty weak, I just don't think they'll go so far as to say that the Constitution allows the government to force people to put subject labels on their web pages. *(circa 1991, there was a videotape circulating in keep-abortion-legal activist circles which described and showed how to perform an early-term abortion using relatively simple technology (e.g., suction) - I can't seem to remember the medical term for the procedure, but the tape was intended, a la PGP, to make the technology available while it was still legal to discuss it. Someone must have ported this video to Quicktime by now.) Third party labeling/rating is a much superior solution because it allows the labelers to examine data with a mindset compatible with the mindset of the customer, which source-labeling, nor automated filtering, will never do. Here's to hoping that regulators/legislators won't get around to imposing a source-labeling scheme before experience is able to show them that it's neither necessary nor sufficient to reach their goals. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

Mykotronx update
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Remember Mykotronx, makers of the Clipper Chip? Apparently, they were bought in 1995 by Rainbow Technologies, http://www.rnbo.com/, who make dongles and crypto accelerator boards. Some quotes from their web page: http://www.rnbo.com/mykoweb/geninfo.htm Headquarted in Torrance, California, Mykotronx employs approximately 110 people. The company was founded in 1979 as Myko Enterprises; it incorporated and became Mykotronx, Inc. in 1987. In 1995, Mykotronx became a part of Rainbow Technologies Inc. (NASDAQ: RNBO), a world leader for intellectual property protection. .... Anticipating higher production volumes, in October 1995, Mykotronx opened a new facility that has dramatically enhanced its capacity for testing and programming cryptographic microprocessors. The facility expands annual programming and test capability to more than 1.2 million devices, with potential expansion to 5 million units. # 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 # (If this is posted to cypherpunks, I'm currently lurking from fcpunx, # so please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

2 1