December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: ANNOUNCE: New Remailer - palnu@juno.com
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Andy Dustman wrote: > > I've been pinging palnu for a day now, no response yet. Try looking at some dirty pictures while you do it... IPingMyOwnPalnuTooMonger

1 0

Re: Why porn must be stopped at all costs, by Jodi Hoffman (fwd)
by Brandon Crosby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > > Someone on this list, I forget who, has made numerous attempts at > > convincing us that pornography 'does no harm' to children. It is > > exactly at this point that I must draw a line. Studies have shown that > > an event which lasts even so much as three-tenths of a second, within > > five to ten minutes has produced a structural change in the brain. > > Exposure to porn causes actual brain damage, especially in a child. > > let me guess . . . scientology? it sounds to me as if you just despise > porn so much that you're seeing red, and hence . . . not seeing the > facts straight (or believing whatever you [want to] hear). > Take a young child to the mall. He or she sits on santa's lap. Does the brain change at this point? The simple fact that the brain has been altered in some way only proves that the child is concious. -Brandon Crosby

1 0

You Can Make $100 From Every FREE Phone Call !!!
by 94WD55P1211＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

THE WORLD'S GREATEST INCOME OPPORTUNITY!!! THIS PROGRAM WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER!!! Can you think of anything any easier than just promoting a TOLL FREE number, and then the professionals on the other end do all the work for you? If you can mail a postcard or send e-mail you can earn $1000's each week, just like I do. Just call the following *TOLL FREE* numbers from 8AM-10PM Mon-Sat CST. 1-800-811-2141 Code 46779 US 1-800-588-9786 Code 46779 CANADA -0r- 913-762-6715 (alt. for Canada) ** They are getting over 1,000 calls per day, so don't be surprised if you don't get through on the first try. TRY AGAIN, YOU WILL BE GLAD THAT YOU DID!!! THIS TRULY IS THE BEST PROGRAM YOU'VE EVER SEEN!!! AND, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS CALL THE TOLL FREE # TO FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF!!! THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY YOU'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!!! YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELF, CALL NOW!!!

1 0

Libertaria in Cyberspace
by Jenaer Mixmaster Anonserver 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 A lot has been written about Libertaria in Cyberspace both before and after Timothy May wrote the paper by the same name. I wonder how such a Libertaria will form. For a truly free communications medium we must have strong cryptography. This is a given. Anonymity cannot be insured without strong cryptography and the freedom of remailers or similar mechanisms to operate unobstructed. Speech is never truly free unless it can be anonymous if the author so chooses. Who wants to espouse an opinion which will get them flogged, either figuratively or literally, by their neighbors, their government, or in some cases even their family? In my opinion, Mr. May is correct when he says that physical space is too small and too exposed to outside intervention. A floating oil tanker can be torpedoed, and a small island simply invaded. Libertaria cannot easily build a standing army without inviting intervention by world powers and being dubbed as terrorists or an organized gang. Yes, cyberspace does look much more promising. The amount of "space" in cyberspace is unbelievably large. The amount of data I can store on one gigabyte of hard drive is incredible by conventional standards. Data on one computer can be made accessible through a network to any number of other computers and it can further be distributed. And space is very cheap in cyberspace. A three gigabyte hard drive runs around two hundred U.S. dollars and that price is dropping all the time. A truly free communications medium must allow its users to be anonymous. Speech is never truly free unless it can be anonymous if the author so chooses. Who wants to espouse an opinion which will get them flogged, either figuratively or literally, by their neighbors, their government, or their own family? Who wants to die "under mysterious circumstances" or in an automobile "accident" on an empty road? That an opinion is unpopular does not make that opinion wrong or invalid. That an author does not want his "true name" attached to an opinion does not diminish the value of that opinion. In some cases an author simply does not want to attract attention regardless of whether such attention be positive or negative. Strong cryptography is necessary for anonymity and the secure exchange of information. A remailer system such as we have built is simply not secure without the aid of cryptography. No network connection is secure when the connection is visible to anyone who has the capability and curiosity to listen in. A disturbing trend on the Internet today is the opinion that "good users are known users" and that "good users have nothing to hide." This kind of idea is offered by the government of the United States as well as many users and system administrators. Such an opinion is detrimental to the free flow of ideas and information. The arguments that a "good users are known users" policy is necessary to curb "computer crime" and network abuse are invalid in my opinion. A great percentage of "computer crime" is simply due to lax security protocols in the first place. When somebody can go into a university and run a sniffer program to get hundreds of passwords the problem is not so much that the user is running the program as it is that the data is available to the user in the first place. When somebody can get a throw-away account and post 30,000 ads to USENET the problem is not so much the abuser as it is abusing the network as it is a fault in the system. When people post mindless drivel to a network the problem isn't so much the poster as it is that such drivel is read and ranked at the same level with more legitimate postings. The first case of somebody running a packet sniffer can be avoided very easily by using encrypted protocols and secure machines. If root permissions can not be easily obtained on a machine and they are necessary to install trojans one major avenue for our cracker is blocked. If all network traffic is encrypted the cracker's job becomes all but impossible. Sadly most people seem to send passwords and vital information in the clear and most machines do not have encrypted communications tools installed. The majority of TCP/IP traffic is cleartext. The second and third cases of network abuse and drivel propagation are avoidable by various common sense means. First, news servers can be altered to not propagate massively crossposted articles or articles which are virtually identical and posted to many different groups over a short time period. Second, readers of news can use reputation capital systems to eliminate the remainder of off-topic postings and mindless drivel. If I trust Bob's opinion and Bob says that a particular posting is rubbish nobody has been censored unless Bob becomes very powerful and misuses that power to censor opinions he doesn't like without anybody knowing. However even that sort of abuse can be avoided by people being able to retrieve what they aren't normally seeing to occasionally check. And the argument that encryption must be outlawed or the government must have access to decryption keys is rediculous. The law abiding citizens will be monitored while the real terrorists, child pornographers, and tax evaders will hide their data in sounds or pictures and use encryption anyway. Put simply, for Libertaria to truly thrive in Cyberspace many things need to occur: First, encrypted network layers must become easily available. Nobody sitting on a network backbone should be able to see what I am saying or what anybody is saying to me. Authentication should be included here as well. Second, traffic analysis must be made considerably harder if not thwarted totally. When I go to http://www.cypherpunks.to an outside observer should not be able to see that I was the one who filed this request by watching my TCP/IP traffic. A modification of CROWDS is perhaps appropriate here. Third, some form of true distributed and redundant data system must be created. Eternity servers as currently implemented accomplish this to a certain extent, but don't seem to quite reach the mark. Some form of truly redundant, distributed, and secure filesystem which spreads across many jurisdictions would be most appropriate, I think. There are many technical problems involved in this however. As with anything else, such a filesystem should be anonymous and should be very hard to shut down. Fourth, if indeed a programmer in the United States can use a crypto library available outside the United States without infringing on ITAR then programmers outside the United States should begin work on such a library. Such a library should include many different algorithms for authentication, encryption, and key exchange. This would allow programmers inside the United States to legally write software which employs these technologies. Fifth, existing news and mail readers on all major platforms need to be altered to support anonymous remailers, encryption, decryption, authentication, and key exchange. This should include, at minimum, Windows, the Macintosh, and UNIX variants. Perhaps a whole new set of network protocols is necessary even if a bit grandiose. Tim May is correct: Libertaria will thrive in cyberspace. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 5.0i Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNF+NoHXr/REbgWGuEQJbfgCfZ/j8KZIubDkBBFmiWmXCguZMCDgAn3/8 KrkCbQdmWDFXbv7KlXpETEOT =q4kv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: PGP 5.0i mQGiBDRfi98RBADnsCoIsCkfD6bgRKEubaP5qAyUmZRX4b7JXn9CIPUNMp+KWA7p QObKWOs+DQ4Rc4DISrCm3TSdtvBHIZ0PvXNd1Ry2mhtaZKA0T9JawWotmKJzP/q1 yFh+A0Cs7nUW09vbgg3r7p17hRtrLY2UicXT+trajZc62ZmbPO5uMw+cawCg/6g2 uRrNxBRtqy8rEYoJ+7o7mw8EANSHUM+mSmKwNoSHQR1NeCcs76TjHsHiXjGwXewg ECxg9aQrCRD4DrHMkoPOiEHuKbHZzMfIMrkjHn46s00Is64zEVXv1rPWO0iB4/fQ h5W9L/ncA+05ltBNSQSwGaUuHy7HSUPqgPxET6heSYUWakIPs7WRc/WFCmtVgp0P OUIMA/4oQs45VL1GZUv9Oh25DNY6ZHLYOsULj2d6IdyxM0H6sdC59x0nGk6Gx9bb 0+4xVy/P+ZHnsvR5I6P0fZeIfvv8uLiy/kR7xIm7atx/PQh65uoVrxIuBeqkrl+7 ece1uCQLJuhTTHqK2jEcu4FLkHIGBi3LKPp7pRosYQQm/c7Fk7QiVmlzaW9uYXJ5 IDxhbHQuYW5vbnltb3VzLm1lc3NhZ2VzPokASwQQEQIACwUCNF+L3wQLAwECAAoJ EHXr/REbgWGuxqkAn0gFBb+rkOXMJN7SaDQT/in9fmG9AKCBr078DSRLz0FQf/Ot lNu72aDtkrkCDQQ0X4vhEAgA9kJXtwh/CBdyorrWqULzBej5UxE5T7bxbrlLOCDa AadWoxTpj0BV89AHxstDqZSt90xkhkn4DIO9ZekX1KHTUPj1WV/cdlJPPT2N286Z 4VeSWc39uK50T8X8dryDxUcwYc58yWb/Ffm7/ZFexwGq01uejaClcjrUGvC/RgBY K+X0iP1YTknbzSC0neSRBzZrM2w4DUUdD3yIsxx8Wy2O9vPJI8BD8KVbGI2Ou1WM uF040zT9fBdXQ6MdGGzeMyEstSr/POGxKUAYEY18hKcKctaGxAMZyAcpesqVDNmW n6vQClCbAkbTCD1mpF1Bn5x8vYlLIhkmuquiXsNV6TILOwACAggAmKdYv7uXJ8Vf nqp57+feOEQJx0wfBr/dcDpMBy3FLarVlkZJd3J/HwjRY/Nz1fZpeZrH0Trp0IeV 5OL+HkZVBDbzOqcXZ/o8YrgfbwlMpnAPjzMncRdJ9txLZFrGg89YFCoSHbvvAZwU 0PT8KtgXPYkDhzfPqPHny9J7Wg0DpdUEJc7HR+0d5rxeQ0/9rAbBym4/Qc+jdk6T g54vlRDOucm9MeYui9VUyGo2bZmZCfC792eK3Vve8At2XFRPBCP3cGP8QagqkJR6 Tc/uFOPjV4OkUkMLMD6Svi5jZFn6k4bxpqbPfo8NCH9vkoOS10qLOIUeBZMyu6zK tE5RPuMe9okAPwMFGDRfi+F16/0RG4FhrhECJ6EAoKNzXAfSzHaMQby20kgWg8Pu pScWAKDJ/nas7KT03gs374nVb7nxwzgrkQ== =TMag -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Taxing Churches for their views? Bad idea. (fwd)
by Brandon Crosby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > >More telling, she doesn't seem to have a problem using a religious (and > >therefore tax-exempt) organization to push a political agenda. Apparently > >that whole 'separation of church and state' thing only applies when it's > >convenient. > > > >If religions want to play politics, the least we can do is get them to pay > >for the privilege. I'd feel a certain guilty pleasure seeing some of those > >bottom-feeders taxed into penury. > > Nonsense. And a dangerous course. Yes. > One can decide to "tax churches" or to "not tax churches." I have no > particularly strong opinion on either option. > > But one must definitely _not_ base the decision to tax or not to tax on the > opinions expressed by a church! Agian, yes. > One cannot decide to tax the Catholic Church "into penury" because its > anti-abortion views have become politically incorrect in the last 30 years. > Nor can one decide to tax the tempes and synagogues of Judaism "into > penury" because they are centers of support for the Zionist Entity. 'Political Agenda' and free speech are two seperate things. Nowadays, free speech is constantly being challanged by racism, bias and such. People sue each other because they say something that makes someone feel bad. Churches lie at the center of free speech, being awarded for their views by tax exemption. Should 3M have tax exemptions because it gives people jobs? While I do not want a debate over tax exemptions in churches, 'Free Speech' may very well involve supporting canidates for positions in a democracy. This is the very basis for elections. However, one begins to question this reasoning when a church leader attempts to get into the government, using the church's tax exemptions, for either support of the church, support of self, or some illegal (or, at least, unethical) mix. Should churches be tax exempt? Without their long history of helping people, I doubt they would have any benifits. However, even if their privillige was removed, they would simply be able to donate less money to community causes. Uncle Sam (and his son, IRS) really shouldn't be applied to this subject: What is free speech? Is tax exemption justifiable to all types of [free] speech? -Brandon Crosby [Can you see the ghosts making snowmen?]

3 2

Re: Sympatico Petition
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

john smith wrote: > > Please tell me everything Sympatico has done to make you think they > moniter your email. Everything please and i can make something of it. When I first saw your email re: Sympatico petition, I assumed that Sympatico would be monitoring activity surrounding the petition. I visted your web site on Oct 28 and surfed around. When I got to the petition-signing page, I decided not to sign, in order to see if those merely visiting the page were being monitored. I pretty much forgot about it until I got an email from Sympatico Admin which dealt with what appeared to be bogus concerns, and containing vague threats of loss of access. I checked out the headers on my past incoming and outgoing email and found changes in the way it was routed and dealt with--changes which started shortly after I visited your website. I confirmed the results of my traffic analysis on my own account by checking them against those of another Sympatico account whose records I have access to, and which is used as a 'control' because it is used only for very normal and boring communications by a very regular jane/joe. (The changes started late on Oct 28th, and I got the threat from Sympatico on Nov. 4th.) As well, my follow up communications with Sympatico Admin resulted in replies which contained further evidence that the claims they were making in regard for the reasons for their actions were askew. Sympatico is little more than a company that acts as a front for the Canadian Telecos, so that they can continue to operate what are basically monopolies, without appearing to do so. SaskTel charged outrageous connect charges of ~$5.00 an hour out in the boonies, as long as they could. When it became apparent that they couldn't get away with it for much longer, Sympatico appeared on the scene, as SaskTel's 'competition'. The two entered into a sweetheart deal which effectively allows Sympatico and SaskTel to operate a dual monopoly, by making it difficult for small operators in the boonies to get a cut of the action. You may have noticed that 'Sympatico Admin' is pretty much synonymous with the SaskNet Admin. Their bum-buddy relationship is covered by only a thin veil of pretension. SaskTel still manages to maintain a semi-monopoly in the big cities, but their real power comes in the boondocks, where the Sympatico deal allowing no toll-charges effectively cuts out the smaller providers who can only offer services to a handful of in-area customers. The bottom line is that there are advantages to the basic infrastrucure of the system being developed by a single entity, such as SaskTel, but if that entity is allowed to pick and choose who receives preferred treatment, then they tend to do so in their own interests, and not in the interests of the end users. SaskTel charged $5.00/hr connect time in the boonies until there were enough complaints that they made a deal with Sympatico to control the market at slightly less monopolistic rates. People tend not to figure out that the change from $5.00/hr to around $1.50/hr, practically overnight, merely reflects that SaskTel charged over twice what was reasonable, for as long as they could get away with it. I checked the numbers, in regard to bandwidth costs, etc., to hook up and provide an InterNet service, and found that the types of rates you quote on your website are not out of line, but are not possible if one cannot get the type of deal Sympatico gets. e.g. - I charge you $20/month for total access, but you pay $6.00/hr to SaskTel for long-distance charges, to connect. SaskTel/Sympatico will continue to maintain a monopoly whose prices will reflect how much they can charge before complaints force them to move toward more truly competitive rates. I applaud your efforts to make some noise in this regard, and hope that they have the effect of forcing SaskTel/Sympatico to maintain their monopoly at more reasonable rates than at present. I am somewhat notorious in certain areas of the underground computer movement, having been involved in the dissemination of a number of subversive on-line manuscripts, so I often get hackers and phreaks sending me confidential information from my ISP's. I found it rather humorous that the original email from the Sympatico Admin: > Please note: this note is being sent to our security dept. as we > deem this type of activity to be mis-use of the mail system and > as such you could loose your access privileges. ...contained an 'additional' note from a hacker named the Evil-1, who added: > [And I'll make sure you get a copy! (;>} ~~ Evil-1] Toto ~~~~ "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix "WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs" http://bureau42.base.org/public/webworld "InfoWar" http://bureau42.base.org/public/infowar3 "The Final Frontier" http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn

1 0

[news] TV station sets cybersex sting
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

*** TV station sets cybersex sting With cyperporn and cybersex ranking as sensational news items on local TV stations, Fox's Los Angeles outlet has taken the trend a step further by ensnaring adult sexual predators. KTTV's Fox 11 News at 10 worked with a 21-year-old woman posing as a 14-year-old to conduct cybersting operations that led to the arrests of five men. KTTV used the unnamed woman as bait, having her enter online chat rooms where she was immediately targeted. The station filmed the online seductions as well as the arrests of the men, who included an attorney, a doctor, a retired Army officer and an investigator for the Dept. of Labor. See story at http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=5777644-464

1 0

Re: Taxing Churches for their views? Bad idea. (fwd)
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Brandon Crosby wrote: > While I do not want a debate over tax exemptions in churches, 'Free Speech' > may very well involve supporting canidates for positions in a democracy. > This is the very basis for elections. However, one begins to question this > reasoning when a church leader attempts to get into the government, using > the church's tax exemptions, for either support of the church, support of > self, or some illegal (or, at least, unethical) mix. The problem, as I see it, is that the laws regarding political donations and resulting political activity are different from the laws regarding church donations, thus leading to the Christian Right using the differences to bypassing the restrictions that are placed on organizations registered as political groups. If 'Joe's Whorehouse and Illegal Drug Emporium' were to engage in the same types of political activities that the 'We Wear Halos Church' did, they would be subject to arrest and imprisonment for a wide variety of violations of electoral law. Vote-Reality is that most politicians would no sooner oppose a totally unconstitutional law that promises to 'save the life of a single child', than they would promote the prosecution of the 'good guys' for doing 'bad things'. Churches hold the same favored 'good guy' status as policemen who violate the civil rights of 'bad' citizens. > Should churches be tax exempt? Without their long history of helping people, > I doubt they would have any benifits. However, even if their privillige was > removed, they would simply be able to donate less money to community causes. Churches, like governments, corporations, or any other organized entity, have some wonderful people in them, doing wonderful things. The problem, as always, is what our founding fathers realized--these types of organizations/structures tend to grow and attain power which is then used for the purpose of self-sustained growth (survival). Humanity tends to evolve, while organized humanity tends to de-volve. Biped humans, walking upright, form organizations which move toward becoming quadrapeds dragging large clubs. Most of the issues/problems discussed on the Cypherpunks list are often dealt with in terms of a combination of 'the way things are' vs. 'the way things should be' vs. 'the way things are becoming'. My view is that things have become so askew that any one of the above, or any of them in combination, are not adequate for dealing with what is to come in the near future. The statement of one of the founding fathers, in regard to needing a revolution every twenty years, or so, should be considered in the light of the history of 'forest fires.' Forest fires know that there should be a 'revolution every twenty years' but humans do not. In our foolish wisdom, we decide to intervene in the natural course of things, to 'make things better'. We then proceed to put the natural balance so far out of askew that, once we have 'saved' the forests by not allowing forest kindling to burn for a hundred years, the Forest Stock Market undergoes a major 'correction'. The structure of American government, electoral laws, charitable tax deductions, etc., are not inherently evil in themselves. The problem is that they have all been subject to interference with the basic underlying concepts, in efforts to improve them with a 'more is better' mentality, that they are all ripe for burning. ["Welfare (charity) has resulted in many positive benefits. Hey! I have a good idea! Let's put _everyone_ on welfare!] The structure of government/laws/society is very similar to that of the Internet, with everything being linked in ways that become increasingly complex once individual entities decide that things need to be done a 'certain way' in their own self-interest, instead of in the needs of the underlying infrastructure. The problems multiply as the number of entities deciding which 'certain' way is the 'right' way becomes smaller. "Spam is bad. _I_ am going to _save_ everyone from spam. Flames aren't so good, either. I'd better save you from 'flames' as well. What constitutes a flame? Well, it all begins with disagreement and, since I decide what is and is not a flame, I guess that a flame could be defined as disagreement with _me_!" ("In order to save the list from spam, we had to destroy the list.") Now that we are all aware of the disruptive manipulations of the Evil Dr. Vulis, perhaps he has changed his online persona to that of 'Jodi Hoffman'. (:>} NukeReality! ~~~~~~~~~~~~

2 1

Re: [news] TV station sets cybersex sting
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vipul Ved Prakash wrote: > > *** TV station sets cybersex sting > > With cyperporn and cybersex ranking as sensational news items on > local TV stations, Fox's Los Angeles outlet has taken the trend a > step further by ensnaring adult sexual predators. KTTV's Fox 11 News > at 10 worked with a 21-year-old woman posing as a 14-year-old to > conduct cybersting operations that led to the arrests of five men. > http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=5777644-464 And Fox is going to do a similar entrapment sting on Catholic priests, right?

1 0

Springer/Gates Merger
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CANADIAN NUTLY NEWS: [CNN, Bienfait, Saskatchewan] BAR OWNERS at the Coaldust Saloon, in violation of Canadian bartender/customer confidentiality laws, revealed details of a planned merger between Micro$oft and the Jerry Springer Show. Computer magnate Bill Gates has signed a secret deal with Jerry Springer to host a variety of WebTV productions which will be InterActive variations on the 'Terminal Man' theme. Springer, upset over the news media outcry over his proposed move toward bringing his Barnum & Baily act into the mainstream news forum, plans to take his revenge by using Micro$oft's domination in the lowest-common-denominator market to parlay his lack of good taste and journalistic ethics into a full-scale assasult on the elitest mainstream news media which continues to ignore the real desires of the general public. Philip R. Zimmerman, former head of PGP, Inc., announced his new position as Publicity Representative for 'New Reality Productions' by saying, "Daddy always told me, 'If you're going to sell out a little, you might as well sell out a lot--and make the BIG bucks.'" PRZ told gathered reporters that the increasing interest shown by television viewers in shows such as 'The World's Scariest Police Chases' threatened the growing popularity of the InterNet as the medium of the future. Zimmerman said, "The virtual reality of TV and the movies has always been a harbringer of the virtual future. The success of Terminal Man showed that the future was in snuff-flicks, and Police Chases was the natural movement of that theme into the trend toward Real TV." PRZ added, "The InterActive capabilities of the InterNet will allow the Gates/Springer merger to give the viewers the ability to get personally involved in the decisions as to who lives and who dies." New technologies which enable law enforcement agencies to activate kill-switches in fleeing automobiles have been abandoned in favor of technologies which allow the home viewer to use joysticks to control the movement of the criminal's vehicle and those of their police pursuers. Zimmerman defended the use of the new technology by saying, "Sure, snuff-flicks used to be illegal, but so did gambling and drinking. 'New Reality Productions' is just following the money." The beta-testing of the new technology took place on the CypherPunks mailing list, where list subscribers were given the opportunity to actively participate in the second 'moderation experiment' on the list by using their accumulated Moral Majority Reputation Credits to kill undesirable posts to the list. Chief CypherPunks Spokesperson, Jodi Hoffman, said that putting control of the list in the hands of the lowest common denominator had stemmed the "downward spiral" of the mailing list and that the Christian CypherPunks mailing list was a definite improvement over the original non-Christian-Jew infested CDR list. "Once we got rid of the Christkillers and the Commies," Hoffman proclaimed, "the list postings trickled down to two or three a day, but if it saves the life of just one child..."

1 0