December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Paper withdraws story of Clinton sex 'witness' [fwd - infobeat]
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

*** Paper withdraws story of Clinton sex 'witness' The Dallas Morning News withdrew its Internet report Tuesday that a Secret Service agent was ready to testify seeing President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky in a compromising situation. The Dallas paper took the report off its online edition and posted a statement saying its source for the story had told them his information was wrong. The paper had carried a front page report on its electronic Web site saying the agent had spoken with independent counsel Kenneth Starr's staff and was ready to testify as a government witness in the sex scandal engulfing the White House. But within 4 hours the paper had pulled the report and replaced it with a statement which said "the source for the story, a longtime Washington lawyer familiar with the case, later said the information provided for that report was inaccurate. See http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=7164923-842 Maryland officials say Tripp may have broken law, See http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=7159919-bc9 -- #!/usr/bin/perl eval unpack u,'J)",](DIU<W0@06YO=&AE<B!097)L($AA8VME<EQN(CMP<FEN="!T:6UE'; ========================================================================== Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto mail(a)vipul.net | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Virtual Spaces

1 0

NetCenter Member Services - VeriSign Digital ID Request
by id-center＠verisign.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear NetCenter Member: Thank you for requesting information about VeriSign Digital IDs from Netscape's Netcenter. A VeriSign Digital ID provides a means of proving your identity in electronic transactions, much like a driver license or a passport does in face-to-face interactions. By using your Verisign Digital ID you can: *Sign your e-mail. Recipients are assured that the information they receive is from you, and hasn't been altered in any way by outside tampering. *Encrypt and decrypt e-mail. This assures no one except the intended recipient can view its contents. In addition: VeriSign's new public directory is your "white pages" for Digital IDs. Look up anyone's Digital ID. Then send and receive signed and encrypted e-mail -- all from within Netscape Messenger. (If you use another email package you can still easily access the directory from VeriSign's web site.) Your browser will automatically store your Digital ID and present it for you at participating sites. This means no longer remembering multiple passwords to gain access to these sites. You automatically receive the peace-of-mind of US $1,000 NetSure(sm) protection against economic loss caused by corruption, loss or misuse of your Digital ID (not available with free trial ID). For more information about Digital IDs and how they are used, please visit http://www.verisign.com/products/individual/index.html. To enroll for a VeriSign Class 1 Digital ID, please complete the form below, read our Subscriber Agreement, then click the Accept button. If you are not using Netscape Mail, you may not be able to view the form below. Please visit our Digital ID Center at http://digitalid.verisign.com/class1Netscape.htm to enroll for your free Class 1 Digital ID. Title: VeriSign Class 1 Digital ID STEP 1: Contents of Your Digital ID. This information is included in the Digital ID which is available to the public. NOTE: Please complete with no punctuation. Please use only the English alphabet with no accented characters. First name: Last name: Email address: Include email address in your Digital ID? Yes No Answer Yes to use your ID for sending and receiving secure email. STEP 2: Easy Web Site Registration You have the option of including this one-step registration information in your Digital ID (which is also available to the public), in order to use it for "one-step registration" at participating websites and customized information services. Personalize your Digital ID? YesNo Country: Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada China Denmark Finland France Germany India Israel Italy Japan Mexico Netherlands Norway Philippines Singapore South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan United Kingdom United States Other Countries Zip or postal code: Date of birth:(MMDDYYYY) (Example: 12251966) Male Female STEP 3: Choose a Challenge Phrase A challenge phrase enables you to cancel and replace your Digital ID (i.e., if you change computers, software, etc). The challenge phrase is only known by you and should be kept in a safe place - you must have it to cancel your Digital ID if it is compromised or stolen. Challenge phrase: No punctuation, please. STEP 4: Choose Full Service Class 1 Digital ID or 60 day Free Trial A full service Digital ID comes with these features: Send and receive secure e-mail (via S/MIME) Replaces passwords and enables one-step registration at participating websites VeriSign Customer Care, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week Automatic Enrollment in $1,000 NetSureSM Protection Plan Free replacement and revocation of your Digital ID should it be lost or corrupted I'd like a full service Digital ID for only US$9.95. (Please complete Step 5.) I'd like to test drive a 60-day trial Digital ID for free. (does not include revocation, replacement, the NetSure Protection Plan or premium customer care) STEP 5: Finalize Enrollment Your Digital ID is valid for a one year period. Your credit card will be charged US$9.95 when you click the Accept button below. All enrollment and credit card information is transmitted securely using the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocol. This information is kept confidential and is not included in your Digital ID. Card type: Visa MasterCard Discover American Express Card number: Expiration date: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 97 98 99 00 01 02 Name on card: Street number: Street name: Apt. #: City: State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: Country: Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada China Denmark Finland France Germany India Israel Italy Japan Mexico Netherlands Norway South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Other Countries PLEASE READ THIS SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT BEFORE APPLYING FOR, ACCEPTING, OR USING A DIGITAL ID/CERTIFICATE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT, PLEASE DO NOT APPLY FOR, ACCEPT, OR USE THE DIGITAL ID (CERTIFICATE). THIS SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT will become effective on the date you submit the certificate application to the designated issuing authority (IA). By submitting this Subscriber Agreement (and certificate application) you are requesting that the IA issue a Digital ID (certificate) to you and are expressing your agreement to the terms of this Subscriber Agreement. VeriSign's Public Certification Services are governed by VeriSign's Certification Practice Statement (the "CPS") as amended from time to time, which is incorporated by reference into this Subscriber Agreement. The CPS is published on the Internet in VeriSign's repository at https://www.verisign.com/repository and ftp://ftp.verisign.com/repository/CPS and is available via E-mail from: CPS-requests(a)verisign.com. Amendments to the CPS are also posted in VeriSign's repository at https://www.verisign.com/repository/updates. YOU AGREE TO USE THE DIGITAL ID (CERTIFICATE) AND ANY RELATED IA SERVICES ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CPS. NETSURE(SM) NOTICE: THE NETSURE(SM) CERTIFICATES ISSUED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT AND OTHER AGREEMENTS AND THEIR EFFECTIVE DATES UNDER THE NETSURE(SM) PROTECTION PLAN ("PLAN") ARE LISTED AT HTTPS://WWW.VERISIGN.COM/REPOSITORY/NSCERTS.HTML. EFFECTIVE MAY 30, 1997, IF YOU OBTAINED A NETSURE(SM) CERTIFICATE, THE PLAN PROVIDES YOU WITH CERTAIN LIMITED WARRANTIES, DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER WARANTIES, INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND LIMITS LIABILITY. FOR INFORMATION ON THE PLAN, SEE HTTPS://WWW.VERISIGN.COM/REPOSITORY/NETSURE. OTHERWISE, THE IA PROVIDES LIMITED WARRANTIES, DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER WARANTIES, INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, LIMITS LIABILITY, AND EXCLUDES ALL LIABILITY FOR INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES AS STATED IN THE CPS. SEE THE CPS FOR IMPORTANT DETAILS. YOU DEMONSTRATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE TERMS OF THIS SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT BY EITHER (I) SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR A DIGITAL ID (CERTIFICATE) TO VERISIGN, OR (II) USING THE DIGITAL ID (CERTIFICATE), WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. Read CPS or Download CPS If you agree to the terms of the Subscriber Agreement, please click Accept to continue. Optional Enhancement If you use the standard version of Netscape Navigator or Communicator, choose 512 from the list below. If you use the US-only version, you can choose 768 or 1024 for greater security. Copyright © 1997, VeriSign, Inc.

1 0

Re: Video & cryptography... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Adam Shostack <adam(a)homeport.org> > Subject: Re: Video & cryptography... (fwd) > Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 17:02:53 -0500 (EST) > | Doesn't this same sort of issue arise from any other digital signature > | process then? There should be nothing fundamentaly different between the > | characteristics of a video camera signing a frame than a person signing > | email. > > It arises in a different context; with a signature on paper, > you're generally indicating that you've read and consented to whats on > the paper, not that you created it. Isn't signing the document at least in theory a participatory creative act? If you don't sign it then it doesn't exist in the same context as if you do. Otherwise why have the signature? If I use a camera to sign a digital image am I not stating that I have viewed and consented to the image being a valid representation of what the lens saw? Seem quite similar to me. > The meaning of a camera signing a > video still is not obvious to me. Is it intended to be 'this is what > we saw through the lens?' or 'this is what really happened?' A mechanism to sign a digital image would provide some base protection against altering the image surreptitously, just as why you sign (and get a copy) of other documentary evidence. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Compaq / DEC buyout
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:46 PM -0800 1/26/98, David Miller wrote: >Jim, I'm forwarding this to the list: > >Jim Choate wrote: >I think so. Tim had mentioned that last he heard the Intel/DEC deal was dead. >Perhaps this is what he was talking about. The thing is, how much about the This grossly distorts what I have said. I don't have time to sift through my posts on Intel and DEC, but I can't believe I said anything so simplistic as "the Intel/DEC deal is dead." (Or even "was dead," if we want to get into Clintonesque semantics.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Fear, loathing, and Bill Gates (fwd)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 14:14:51 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: politech(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: FC: Fear, loathing, and Bill Gates ******** Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:42:08 -0500 From: Don Bx <dboudreaux(a)fee.org> To: declan(a)well.com Subject: Re: More on Don Boudreaux "Calm Down" letter on Microsoft Declan, I had a thought that I must share. In reflecting upon the genuine hatred and fear that people increasingly have for Bill Gates and Microsoft, it occurred to me that this hatred and fear have much in common with the hatred and fear stirred up a decade or so ago against Japan. In both cases, people proved their affection for Japanese goods by buying them, but they also grew leary of Japan after being barraged on the air-waves by idiot pundits who insinuated that Japan had some sort of recipe for taking over the American economy. Economic serfdom was near, avoidable only by trade restraints. And, of course, behind this fear-mongering were U.S. rent-seeking firms that sought to be relieved of having to compete as vigorously as otherwise. Needless to say, Japan was never a threat to "take over" the American economy, or to harm it in any way. The same is true of Microsoft (as long as it doesn't rely upon government favors). The fear and hatred in both cases -- against Japan in the 1980s and against MS today -- is illogical and uninformed. But it is, for MS, increasingly real. Don ********* Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 23:02:07 -0600 (CST) From: Mac Norton <mnorton(a)cavern.uark.edu> To: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> Cc: politech(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: FC: More on Don Boudreaux "Calm Down" letter on Microsoft Let me see if i get this right:DOJ got guns , MS don't got guns, therefore I'm for MS. Is that it? Gee thee's some heavy intellectual discourse going on here, you betcha. MacN ********* Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:23:25 -0500 (EST) From: Donald Weightman <dweightman(a)Radix.Net> To: declan(a)well.com Subject: Re: FC: More on Don Boudreaux "Calm Down" letter on Microsoft DB doesn't seem to know much about antitrust -- it *does* scrutinize strongarm tactics when wielded by someone with market power, as MSFT almost certainly has. The claim about harm to the economy is pretty far ranging for someone who seems to have no expertise in the field. As an example of where antitrust has done good, I'd point to the gov't-mandated restucturing of the electric utility industry in the '30's (actually administered by the SEC), which can be argued to have laid the groundwork for the huge productivity gains that industry made for the next three decades. Cheers Don ******** Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:59:05 EST From: JEisenach(a)aol.com To: declan(a)well.com Subject: Re: FC: "Calm down!" -- Don Boudreaux letter to NYT on Microsoft Now that Microsoft has given up its inexplicable defense of an indefensible licensing arrangement, it may be a lot easier for everyone involved to "calm down." Calming down should not, however, mean giving Microsoft carte blanche to use its undeniable market power to shape the future of the market for software. What it should mean is devising a workable policy for applying sound antitrust principles to the software business -- and that's a very big task. Many of Microsoft's arguments have merit. It is true, for example, that rapid innovation and low (physical) capital requirements for entry make its monopoly more vulnerable than it otherwise might be. However, other arguments Microsoft has offered -- for example, falling prices -- are pretty lame. Falling relative to WHAT? is the relevant question (look at industrial prices during the second industrial revolution -- which went through long periods of decline despite the emergence of the steel, oil, railroad, etc. trusts). As for Microsoft's "opponents," their case has a fair amount of appeal -- and it's not just visceral. Microsoft clearly has market power in the market for operating systems. Operating systems are required for personal computers to operate. Microsoft has exercised its market power pretty aggressively. And, it shows every intention of continuing to exercise its market power to delay innovations that threaten it and to extend its dominant position into future generations of technology. I don't think many people dispute anything in the previous paragraph. What people ARE concerned about, of course, is the potential for an overly intrusive and regulatory approach by government that could slow down innovation -- a policy built around the idea of protecting competitors rather than protecting competition. I frankly haven't seen Joel Klein say anything that suggests they are headed in this direction -- but I sure agree that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Now that we all have a chance to "calm down," my hope is that a rational debate can emerge on the question of how the goals of antitrust law (i.e. a market free of impediments to competition, regardless of their source) can best be pursued in the software/computing business. And, I'm not prepared to concede that letting Microsoft exercise its market power without any restraints at all is the best we can do, even in this very imperfect world. To close with a plug: on February 5, The Progress & Freedom Foundation will be hosting a conference at the Four Seasons Hotel in DC on this very topic. Participants include a virtual "who's who" of the market-based "Chicago school" of antitrust economists and lawyers -- Nick Economides, Benjamin Klein, James C. Miller, Tim Muris, Dan Oliver, Bob Tollison, Robert Willig, etc. It's open to the public and reasonably priced. For information, see WWW.pff.org. ******** Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 09:02:15 -0500 From: Don Bx <dboudreaux(a)fee.org> To: declan(a)well.com My comment about the DOJ having guns and Microsoft not has drawn fire. Fair enough. But I defend my point, which is this: Microsoft gets customers only by offering them deals that they are free to accept or reject. No coercion is involved. If you don't buy MS products, no one threatens you with imprisonment or violence. In contrast, when government regulates commerce (beyond the enforcement of contracts and traditional tort and criminal law) it dictates the terms of exchanges -- ultimately at the point of a gun -- that we cannot be certain are mutually advantageous. When A and B exchange voluntarily with each other, we can be sure that both A and B each believes himself to be better off as a consequence of the exchange. When a third party wielding the threat of coercive power prevents these voluntary exchanges -- or imposes contract terms that would not otherwise be part of these exchanges -- we cannot be certain that the exchanges yield as much mutual benefit as when these exchanges are voluntary. Government possesses the monopoly authority to initiate coercion. This is an awesome power that in a civil and free society should be used sparingly. It should not be used to prevent firms from engaging in peaceful and voluntary exchanges with adults. Don Boudreaux ******* -------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology To subscribe: send a message to majordomo(a)vorlon.mit.edu with this text: subscribe politech More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Reba Performs What If Tonight!
by Mail 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Reba will perform "What If" tonight on the 25th American Music Awards! Reba is nominated for Favorite Female Country Artist! American Music Awards ABC -TV 8:00-11:00pm EST (Please check your local listings for times) RebaNews Copyright 1998 Starstruck Entertainment, All rights reserved.

1 0

Re: Compaq / DEC buyout (fwd)
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:44 PM -0800 1/26/98, BMM wrote: >The "Screamer 533" is currently shipping with a 533MHz Alpha. It is >reviewed in this month's "Linux Journal". > > >On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Jim Choate wrote: > >> Unless my info is seriously off DEC is already shipping 500MHz Alpha's and >> has 1GHz chips in test. DEC historicaly has been way ahead of Intel (say a This is simply untrue, that DEC historically has been way ahead of Intel. The Alpha is a different type of chip. Anyone who has analyzed the past few years, the past decade, and the past couple of decades would have a hard time making the case that DEC has been ahead of Intel in the overall combination of design and manufacturing. As you should know, Intel will be making the Alpha chip, as its manufacturing capabilities are _overall_ in advance of DEC's. (Beware of comparing R&D or prototype fab capabilities with high volume fab capabilities...Intel has its own R&D fabs, currently developing 0.13 micron capabilities...DEC will not be participating in this move to sub-0.20 micron areas.) Many things go into the "who's ahead" calculation, besides just clock speed. Had that been the only significant issue, some of the aerospace companies with their VHSIC chips in the early 80s would have won. Or the Silicon on Sapphire (SOS) and GaAs processor chips...very fast, but very low-yielding. I've written a couple of long posts on this, and won't here. Of course, if I am wrong, and Intel is behind the other chip or computer companies in this overall ability, there are some mightly good investment opportunities, either in selling Intel short or in buying the stock of AMD, Compaq, Sun, etc. We can each put our money where our mouth is. So far, I've done awfully well holding the Intel stock I acquired in the 1970s. "The past is no guarantee of future behavior," as the disclaimor goes, but I have seen no reason to sell the bulk of my holdings. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Compaq / DEC buyout (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 14:51:45 -0800 > From: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> > Subject: Re: Compaq / DEC buyout (fwd) > This is simply untrue, that DEC historically has been way ahead of Intel. I'm not going to get in a pissing contest with Tim, since he obviously has some connection to Intel... > The Alpha is a different type of chip. Anyone who has analyzed the past few > years, the past decade, and the past couple of decades would have a hard > time making the case that DEC has been ahead of Intel in the overall > combination of design and manufacturing. The bottem line is they are both Von Neumann architectures and can be reduced to a single bit Turing machine. As a result they *most* certainly can be compaired. I have owned Intel and DEC machines since the late 70's. I started out on a DEC PDP 8e in 1976 a friend game me when I was in high school and bought a S-100 Intel 8080 machine about a year later. Since that time I have owned 80186, 80286, 80836, 80486, and Pentium machines as well as PDP 11/03, PDP 11/23, PDP 11/34, & MicroVax II. Given a comparison by date the DEC machines have had a higher clock frequency and generaly been a generation or so ahead of Intel in the capabilities of the hardware. Further, the operating system architectures available on the hardware, until the last 6-8 years anyway, also went to DEC when it came to scalability and usability. The fact that NT was available on both the Intel and Alpha architectures pretty much at the same time makes any further comparison moot except for market share (which I alluded to the main forces in an earlier post). Unix was available on the DEC architectures LONG (what, 20 years?) before it every even thought about being put on a Intel cpu. > As you should know, Intel will be making the Alpha chip, as its > manufacturing capabilities are _overall_ in advance of DEC's. (Beware of Then why isn't the Intel cranking at 500MHz now like the Alpha? Why is every market comparison for the chips shows the DEC staying ahead of the Intel in base clock frequency (I won't even get into architecture efficiencies) for the next 5-8 years? > capabilities...Intel has its own R&D fabs, currently developing 0.13 micron > capabilities...DEC will not be participating in this move to sub-0.20 > micron areas.) I bet now that Compaq has given them the sorts of resources they had to go head to head with IBM from the late 60's to the early 80's that could change pretty quickly, even considering the multi-billion dollar start-up costs of modern fabs. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

feedME account
by members＠feedme.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----------------------------------------------------------- feedME - the world's easiest newsreader http://www.feedME.org ----------------------------------------------------------- Your Username is: cypherpunks Your Password is: kimkdqof If you have any problems, queries or suggestions please email: admin(a)feedme.org You should change your password as soon as possible (if you haven't already done so), the address for changing it is: http://www.feedme.org/changepass.html Remember that we don't allow anyone to SPAM through feedME, nor do we let people post any form of commerical or web-site advertisements - if you are unclear always mail admin. Regards, Michael Bennett Creator of feedME

2 1

"Privacy on the Line"
by Eric Blossom 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm about half way through Diffie and Landau's new book, Privacy on the Line: The Politics of Wiretapping and Encryption and have found it quite interesting and entertaining. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Cryptography 3. Cryptography and Public Policy 4. National Security 5. Law Enforcement 6. Privacy: Protections and Threats 7. Wiretapping 8. Communications: The Current Scene 9: Cryptography: The Current Scene 10: Conclusion It's 342 pages including a great section of notes. Computer Literacy has it for $22.50. ISBN 0-262-04167-7 mail order: 408-435-0744 ObWoMD: "8. (p. 82) Distinguishing nuclear explosions from other events, such as large lightning bolts or explosions of meteors in the atmosphere, is not easy. The satellite reacts less to the total energy of the blast than to the form of the flash. Nuclear explosions have a characteristic two-humped flash caused by gamma ray induced formation of nitrogen pentoxide (N2O5). The time between humps is called the "bhang metre" and is characteristic of the type of weapon." Eric

1 0