December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:11 PM 12/22/97 -0800, you wrote: >What is the best long gun for a Cypherpunk? > > You didn't say if you were interested in a trophy or just filling the freezer nor if you would be in open country or in the bush. A good all around choice would be one of the medium power thirty caliber cartridges. It would be prudent to use ammunition lo! aded with well constructed bullets because some Cypherpunks are thick skinned, particularly those with law degrees. LongPigMuncher

2 1

Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
by David Honig 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:55 PM 12/23/97 -0500, Colin Rafferty wrote: >William H Geiger writes: >> In <ocryb1c2i2u.fsf(a)ml.com>, on 12/23/97 at 10:30 AM, Colin Rafferty <craffert(a)ml.com> said: >>> Paul Bradley writes: > >>>> Should the government be able to take action against me because I fire >>>> someone for being jewish/black/homosexual??? > >>> Welcome to the 20th Century, moron. > >> Really amazing how many so-called "freedom fighters" become STATIST if the >> proper buttons are pushed. > >What are you talking about? > >Freedom of expression is not the same as freedom of oppression. You aren't being oppressed the other party doesn't want to interact with you, unless that party is government providing base services to all (e.g. police/courts/border protection). You *are* being oppressed if mutually consensual behavior is interfered with by others including the State. You *are* being oppressed if you are coerced into a relationship you don't want. An employer-employee relationship is like a marriage or any other arrangement between adults -mutually consensual. Colin, do you consider yourself oppressed when someone choses not to date you? What about a rejection by someone who takes out a public advertisement in the paper? Freedom is only tested when it hurts. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig(a)otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "Windows 95 is a technologically complex product that is best left alone by the government..." ---MSFT Atty B. Smith

1 0

Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
by Colin Rafferty 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

David Honig writes: > At 12:55 PM 12/23/97 -0500, Colin Rafferty wrote: >> William H Geiger writes: >>> In <ocryb1c2i2u.fsf(a)ml.com>, on 12/23/97 at 10:30 AM, Colin Rafferty <craffert(a)ml.com> said: >>>> Paul Bradley writes: >> >>>>> Should the government be able to take action against me because I fire >>>>> someone for being jewish/black/homosexual??? >> >>>> Welcome to the 20th Century, moron. >> >>> Really amazing how many so-called "freedom fighters" become STATIST if the >>> proper buttons are pushed. >> >> What are you talking about? >> >> Freedom of expression is not the same as freedom of oppression. > You aren't being oppressed the other party doesn't want to interact > with you, unless that party is government providing base services to all > (e.g. police/courts/border protection). Actually, you can be. > You *are* being oppressed if mutually consensual behavior is interfered > with by > others including the State. > You *are* being oppressed if you are coerced into a relationship you don't > want. You are not being coerced into anything. If you don't want to serve food to Blacks, don't open a restaurant. It's your choice. By the way, you are also not allowed to dump toxic waste in your own backyard. Are you being oppressed? > An employer-employee relationship is like a marriage or any other arrangement > between adults -mutually consensual. In a fantasy world, it is mutually consensual. It the real world, it is seldom mutual. > Colin, do you consider > yourself oppressed when someone choses not to date you? What about > a rejection by someone who takes out a public advertisement in the paper? Nope. Of course, this has nothing to do with anything. > Freedom is only tested when it hurts. With freedom comes responsibility. Decency is one of them. -- Colin

3 2

[Off topic]Discrimination
by Lizard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:25 PM 12/23/97 -0500, Colin Rafferty wrote: > >The logic is about patterns of discrimination of society and the State >acting as a social engineer to remove the patterns. In other words, rights belong to the collective, not to the individual. If I deny Joe Smith a job for an 'approved' reason (which still has nothing to do with his competence), then, too bad for Joe. But if I deny it for an 'unapproved' reason, equally unrelated to his competance, then I am denying the job to ALL people who share that trait, everywhere. That's a collectivist viewpoint. Either a person -- a single, unique, individual -- has a right to compel someone else to serve him, or he does not. The reasons for denying service are irrelevant TO THAT INDIVIDUAL. >It is about basic human decency, and giving a person a fighting chance. All of which is fine, but why should it be compelled? Didn't you once say that liberalism made the assumption that we were basically moral and should be free to act, rather than the conservative view that we were basically immoral and should be restrained? >If society, in general, discriminated against people with freckles, it >is likely that it would be made illegal. So what good does this do the person dicriminated against, if there is NOT a 'pattern' of it? He's still out of a job. This is the key point:It is the INDIVIDUAL that matters. >> (Yes, it is perfectly legal to not hire someone based on star sign, >> political affiliation, or having freckles.) > >> No human being has a right to compel service from another human being. > >No majority group has a right to discriminate against a minority. There are no groups. There are only individuals. A job, or an offer of goods or services, occurs between individuals -- not groups. If I am denied employment, YOUR bank account does not shrink. If you are granted a high paying job, I do not get rich. My hunger is not yours;yours is not mine. Further, every individual has a right to choose who they will and will not associate with, based on whatever criteria they wish. I don't date mundanes (non-fen). While the inability to have me as a boyfriend is no great loss, I am nonetheless 'discriminating' against a large %age of the female population (and 100% of the male population, FWIW). (Granted, a far larger %age of the female population discriminates against me, as they refuse to date overweight, unattractive, socially inept nerds. Whom do I sue?) > >Freedom of association is not the same as freedom of oppression. > Most people would claim not associating with me is liberating, not oppressing. How is person 'a' oppressed because person 'b' decides, for whatever reason, not to like them?

1 0

[fs] Contemporary Cryptology Book
by travish+cp-01＠dejanews.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I found this at a local half-price bookstore. I purchased a copy for myself and was wondering if any of you wanted one. I do not intend to make any money off of this, I am simply doing it as a favor for fellow crypto-enthusiasts. I believe it would make an excellent companion to "Applied Cryptography". The tone is what you would expect from IEEE Press; more theoretical than A.C., not shying away from the discrete mathematics but without losing sight of the subject, either. There is some mention of the uses of cryptography applications like tamperproofing nuclear monitoring equipment, and other relatively cool stuff. It is apparently a brand new, undamaged book, sold for half price, or about $45. I'll sell it for what I will pay, plus s/h (your choice of carriers), plus COD charge if not prepaid. It is on hold for me until Saturday, so email me soon if you're interested. Here is the original blurb: http://www.ieee.org/ieeestore/compbk.html#pc2717 > An all-in-one guide to the science of information integrity... > > Contemporary Cryptology: The Science of Information Integrity > > edited by Gustavus J. Simmons, Sandia National Labs Albuquerque, NM > > This original source book covers all aspects of the subject with > emphasis on the cryptographic elements. In addition to being an > introductory guide to the latest developments, this volume provides > the engineer and scientist with algorithms, protocols, and applications. > > Copyright 1992/Hardcover/656pp > List Price: $89.95 > Member Price: $77.00 > IEEE Order No. PC2717-QAJ > ISBN 0-87942-277-7 -- Travis Hassloch / travish(a)dejanews.com / http://www.dejanews.com Deja News System Defenestration Group / "When news breaks... we fix it" PGP key C7FDD3D5 fgpt 7A 48 DD 46 E6 7F 11 E7 8F 7E 53 9A DF 33 9E FA

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> (Many people here probably remember Fred Cherry - Panix pulled his >plug for >> "homophobia".) >> chris.com pulled the plug on TRRJC3 (Igor's pal) because of content. >I wish you could be a little more specific. >Harrashing email and excessive cross-posting in violation of each >UseNet >group charter is not >censorship. If ISP's censored flames (harrasments, whatever) then we might as well call every ISP AOL. >If someone sends a gay an email saying "I will kill you. Look out for >the >next gay pride parade" that's is legitimate ground for action. What if it was a joke, or a false threat? >> I also wouldn't trust Lance Cottrell. He's selling privacy for the >$$, not >> for the ideology; he'll bend over the moment he thinks there's more >$$ in >> bending over, which is usually the case. >What is wrong selling privacy for money? It usually involves making it shitty. >> Remember how Sameer Parekh's C2Net used to try to peddle a "privacy >ISP" >> because he failed miserable and diversified into peddiling shitty >software >> and making idiotic legal threats? He happily pulled plugs bases on >content, >> while at the same time stating in court papers that he doesn't >censor content. >> What a pathological liar. >I suppose you can back up your claim with documentation. >What court document are you referring as evidence that Sameer Parekh >is a >pathological liar? None is necessary. Parekh is a liar, and just a general tool of c2.net.

4 4

Best Cypherpunk long gun
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What is the best long gun for a Cypherpunk?

10 12

Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
by Lizard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:55 PM 12/23/97 -0500, Colin Rafferty wrote: >Freedom of expression is not the same as freedom of oppression. How is someone 'oppressed' by my choosing not to deal with him for some reasons, but not for other reasons? Either way, he does not get my services. I refuse to hire you because you are black -- you are oppressed. I refuse to hire you because you're an Aquarius and my astrologer told me not to hire Aquarians -- you are not oppressed. I refuse to hire you because you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat, and I don't think we'll work well together -- you are not oppressed. But in all cases, you are not hired. Explain the logic of this to me. (Yes, it is perfectly legal to not hire someone based on star sign, political affiliation, or having freckles.) No human being has a right to compel service from another human being. If I do not wish to engage in trade with you, that's my right. Would you be less oppressed if I just closed up shop and refused to trade with ANYONE? The issue here is not expression, but association. (Obviously, this does not apply in any area where there is government involvement, such as civil service, access to public places, receipt of government benefits, voting rights, public education, and the like.)

2 1

Gilmore Publishes Strong Crypto Code Online for Authentication
by John Gilmore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[This announcement does not relate directly to the Bernstein case, but I felt the overlap of interest would be very strong. -- John] Strong Crypto Code Published Online for Authentication San Francisco, December 23, 1997 - Civil libertarian John Gilmore today published strong authentication source code on the Internet, making it available for worldwide access, despite U.S. National Security Agency attempts to restrict such software. He is publishing Domain Name System Security software that contains a complete copy of RSAREF, well-known cryptography software that is a predecessor to the DNSsafe software released in October by RSA Data Security, Inc. Mr Gilmore explains, "Internet publication of cryptography software is considered an export by the US Government, and often requires government permission under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). But those regulations specifically exempt programs which merely prove that information is authentic (authentication), rather than hiding the information (privacy)." The export regulations were amended in 1989 to exclude authentication software. Since that time, however, the National Security Agency has been telling people privately that the exclusion only applies to ready-to-run "binary" programs. They have reportedly claimed that the regulations still require government permission to export the human-readable "source code" of authentication programs. The plain text of the regulations makes no such distinction, though; all authentication programs are exempt. Readers can obtain the software from Mr. Gilmore's web site for Domain Name System Security, at http://www.toad.com/~dnssec or at http://www.flash.net/~dnssec. Future releases will be available from the Internet Software Consortium, http://www.isc.org/bind.html. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which Mr. Gilmore co-founded, is sponsoring a lawsuit to have the entire cryptography software export control regime overturned. In the three-year suit, Bernstein v. State, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel has invalidated export controls administered by both the State Department and the Commerce Department. She ruled they are an unconstitutional prior restraint against our First Amendment right to speak and publish about cryptography. The case is now in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Domain Name System Security: http://www.toad.com/~dnssec or http://www.flash.net/~dnssec Internet Software Consortium: http://www.isc.org RSA Data Security: http://www.rsa.com Electronic Frontier Foundation: http://www.eff.org Press Contacts: John Gilmore, Founding Board Member, EFF +1 415 221 6524, gnu(a)toad.com Shari Steele, Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation +1 301 375 8856, ssteele(a)eff.org More press background is available at: http://www.toad.com/~dnssec/pressrel1.background.txt

2 1

Re: HIP97 photos
by Antonomasia 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Alex de Joode : > Hmm, I think she only got 3 photos .. End of one film. The rest are in the post now. -- ############################################################## # Antonomasia ant(a)notatla.demon.co.uk # # See http://www.notatla.demon.co.uk/ # ##############################################################

1 0