December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vladerusky: Your original post brought up several separate aspects which can be considered separately and may not necessarily coexist in the same place at the same time: 1) secrecy 2) responsibility for publishing 3) working for the government at the expense of unwilling payors 4) the motivations of "true scientists" 5) the requirements for the advancement of science 6) the need of science for the works of great minds Initially your argument had to do with secrecy and the need for scientists to publish their work so that the scientific community may benefit from it. I can't disagree that if a scientist is working for the public, that they should make their work publically available to them, since, after all, they are supposedly working for the public benefit. But you also said that "a key aspect of SCIENCE is publishing". I was only pointing out that, in the context of those who are working for their own purposes and not under the employment of a government agency, some scientists are not overly concerned about contributing to this advancement, as can be observed by their reluctance to publish (even if they eventually do, "under the extreme pressure of friends", for instance). It may be your conclusion that the advancement of science depends upon scientists publishing their works, but the fact is that some great scientists, and many others as well, are not as motivated to contribute as you think is proper for a "true scientist". I think you should distinguish between those scientistis who have joined some kind of "scientific community" and have established an obligation to share the results of their work with that group, and those scientists who are what they are, and do what they do, from motivations unrelated to such communities. .. Blanc

3 2

DES 2 challenge: Are you going to help?
by Trei Family 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There's been remarkably little discussion about the DES II contest sponsored by RSA labs. On the 13th, RSA will post another DES challenge, again with a $10,000 prize. There's a new wrinkle: while the prize is still being given to the first person who reports the key, the size of the prize dwindles as time goes by. It's $10k for the first 540 hours (about 3 weeks), then drops to $5k for the next 540, then $1000, and after 1620 hours drops to 0. Next June RSA will release another challenge, with the same prize; however the time limits will ratchet down depending on how fast the key is discovered this time around. Details are at www.rsa.com I've heard of only one organized group which plans to attack it; the one based at www.distributed.net This is the same group which successfully brute forced 56 bit RC5 encryption. My educated guess, based on the speed with which they are currently searching RC5-64 (about 11 Gkey/sec) and the known speed differences between RC5 and DES searching, is that they have a good but not certain chance of finding the key within the $10,000 window. [Interesting factoid - at that speed they could crack 40 bit RC5 keys at better than one a minute.] If you have cycles to spare, you might consider joining for the DES attack. Their clients are quite good, and do not interfere with normal operations. If you don't want to trust d.n's organizers, consider running Svend Mikkelsen's Bryddes for x86 processors. It's quite a bit faster than my DESKR, and full source is available. Peter Trei trei(a)ziplink.net

2 1

Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:05:20 -0800 > From: Blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality > Your original post brought up several separate aspects which can be > considered separately and may not necessarily coexist in the same place at > the same time: I'm not shure who the 'Your' is but I'd like to add some comments on these issues and observations. > 1) secrecy If you don't know something you either can't take advantage of it or else you have to rediscover it on your own. It is clear that if everyone had to re-invent the wheel at every step then not much would get done. > 2) responsibility for publishing Nobody has a responsbility to publish. Science is a completely voluntary pursuit. I would contend personaly that if you don't publish you arent' doing science but rather mental masturbation (a rather selfish pursuit I suspect). > 3) working for the government at the expense of unwilling payors I don't think this is relevant to the issue at all. > 4) the motivations of "true scientists" Who spoke of true scientist? A 3 year old kid poking at a lightening bug on a warm summer eve is as much a true scientist as a Nobel prize winner working on cosmology, the reason is that *both* will share it with anyone they can get to hold still long enough to listen. We have been speaking of the impact of sharing data on the expansion of scienctific knowledge. The actual logic is remakably simple. If you don't let others know of your work then others must recreate it or it gets lost and the consequences of that is that whole areas of knowledge go unvisited potentialy forever. When *they* share it *they* get credit for it not you (which may or may not be a motive of the individual, it certainly has *nothing* to do with actualy doing science however; it's sorta like why some boy asked you out when you were a kid, they either wanted in your pants or had a genuine interest in your company, or perpaps even both. In any case this has nothing to do with the fact that a date is occurring, it's the mechanism and not the motive that is important). > 5) the requirements for the advancement of science To share ones knowledge with others in such a manner that they may indipendantly verify the results to demonstrate some general pattern in the mechanism(s) of the cosmos. Once this is done the next step is to explore the consequences of this new set of general patterns and what the new understanding leads to. > 6) the need of science for the works of great minds I don't think science needs great minds as much as it offers a set of opportunities to apply those talents in a challenging manner that is not present in many other human pursuits. The relationship is like a moth to a flame (hopefuly with less drastic consequences than for the moth). > Initially your argument had to do with secrecy and the need for scientists > to publish their work so that the scientific community may benefit from it. > I can't disagree that if a scientist is working for the public, that they > should make their work publically available to them, since, after all, they > are supposedly working for the public benefit. To jump from sharing your work with others in the scientific community and equating that community to the public is a bit of a leap. The vast majority of folks wouldn't have a clue what to do with any particular piece of work, let alone how to use it to get something else that wasn't known. Most scientist can't fully apply results from other fields unless they happen to be a polymath or possess some special insight or ability (such as a savante, a good example is Gauss' being able to instantly see how to sum the first 100 numbers by pairings). To do science requires a discipline that even many of those who are trying to do science aren't successful at aquiring. > But you also said that "a key aspect of SCIENCE is publishing". I was > only pointing out that, in the context of those who are working for their > own purposes and not under the employment of a government agency, some > scientists are not overly concerned about contributing to this advancement, > as can be observed by their reluctance to publish (even if they eventually > do, "under the extreme pressure of friends", for instance). Then perhaps they aren't doing science. One also has to look at the motivation of why they aren't publishing. It could be that they don't trust their results, feel that nobody will understand them because of the esoteric nature, simple bashfulness gone extreme, or open hostility or asocial tendencies. This last issue raises a whole range of questions and conclusions about 'great minds' and their 'quirkiness' and commen bahaviour. > It may be your conclusion that the advancement of science depends upon > scientists publishing their works, but the fact is that some great > scientists, and many others as well, are not as motivated to contribute as > you think is proper for a "true scientist". It isn't a question of what I think or some definition of 'true scientist'. It *is* a consequence of what is required to do science which requires that the work you do is shared with others so *they* don't have to recreate it and therefore waste time and effort. Science, by definition, is a collaborative effort. Consider the Fermat example from Tim May, had Fermat went ahead and written his proof down *and* it had been found all those people over the last 200 years would have been able to work on other problems. What kinds of changes in our technology and as a consequence our society would have resulted if *that* could have happened. Instead of 2 steps forward and 1 step back we might be 3 steps forward... > I think you should distinguish between those scientistis who have joined > some kind of "scientific community" and have established an obligation to > share the results of their work with that group, and those scientists who > are what they are, and do what they do, from motivations unrelated to such > communities. I think you should be more consistent in your definition in what science is, what it requires from its practitioners, and how that distinguishes them from others. Simply because I slop paint on a canvas doesn't make me a artist though it does make me a painter. And it is clear that, at least for this example, the artist *is* a painter. 'A implying B' does *not* imply 'B implying A'. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

This message required an admin ok...so I gave it
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Not shure why this thing bounced but I'm going ahead and forwarding it to the list just in case it didn't percolate through on its own... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| Forwarded message: > From owner-cypherpunks(a)ssz.com Sat Jan 10 23:11:11 1998 > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:11:10 -0600 > Message-Id: <199801110511.XAA15988(a)einstein.ssz.com> > To: owner-cypherpunks(a)ssz.com > From: owner-cypherpunks(a)ssz.com > Subject: BOUNCE cypherpunks(a)ssz.com: Admin request > > >From cypherpunks-owner(a)ssz.com Sat Jan 10 23:11:07 1998 > Received: (from cpunks@localhost) by einstein.ssz.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id XAA15979 for cypherpunks(a)ssz.com; Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:11:05 -0600 > Received: from www.video-collage.com (www.video-collage.com [206.15.171.132]) by einstein.ssz.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id XAA15969 for <cpunks(a)ssz.com>; Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:11:00 -0600 > Received: (from cpunks@localhost) > by www.video-collage.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA11517; > Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:34:53 -0500 (EST) > Received: from sirius.infonex.com (sirius.infonex.com [206.170.114.2]) > by www.video-collage.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA11512 > for <cypherpunks(a)algebra.com>; Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:34:49 -0500 (EST) > Received: (from cpunks@localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.8/8.7.3) id UAA07691; Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:40:37 -0800 (PST) > Received: from rigel.cyberpass.net (root(a)rigel.infonex.com [206.170.114.3]) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.8/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA07673 for <cpunks(a)sirius.infonex.com>; Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:40:31 -0800 (PST) > Received: from netcom13.netcom.com (vznuri(a)netcom13.netcom.com [192.100.81.125]) by rigel.cyberpass.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA21838 for <cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net>; Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:35:54 -0800 (PST) > Received: from localhost (vznuri@localhost) > by netcom13.netcom.com (8.8.5-r-beta/8.8.5/(NETCOM v1.02)) with SMTP id UAA28539; > Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:40:26 -0800 (PST) > Message-Id: <199801110440.UAA28539(a)netcom13.netcom.com> > X-Authentication-Warning: netcom13.netcom.com: vznuri@localhost didn't use HELO protocol > To: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net > cc: vznuri(a)netcom13.netcom.com > Subject: cia manipulation > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 98 20:40:24 -0800 > From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri(a)netcom.com> > > there are different theories about why our government has gotten > so bad, but I subscribe to the following: > > 1. the public and media > has not done its duty to keep our government in check. in addition > to the 3 branches of govt as "checks and balances" built into our > system, the public and media are the other two crucial ingredients. > our forefathers didn't imagine either the public or media going bad, > but that's what's happened imho. > > 2. various special interests have hijacked the government. one of the > biggest parasites is the "military industrial complex". > > the following book speaks to these points, and some here might be > interested. I believe our government could be reformed if enough > people cared, particularly those in the media and the public. a > position I know will not be shared by any anarchists here. > > > > Amazon.com Home > Return to Graphics Mode > > Search / Browse Subjects / Bestsellers / Recommendation Center > Gift Center / Award Winning Books / Reviewed in the Media / Shopping Cart > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Secrets : The Cia's War at Home > by Angus MacKenzie > > List: $27.50 > Our Price: $19.25 > You Save: $8.25 (30%) > > Availability: This title usually ships within 2-3 days. > > Hardcover, 254 pages > Published by Univ California Press > Publication date: October 1, 1997 > Dimensions (in inches): 9.62 x 6.38 x 1 > ISBN: 0520200209 > > > (You can always remove it later...) > > Learn more about > 1-ClickSM ordering > > Check out these titles! Readers who bought Secrets : The Cia's War at Home > also bought: > > * The Cold War & the University : Toward an Intellectual History of the > Postwar Years; Noam Chomsky (Editor), et al > * Harvest of Rage : Why Oklahoma City Is Only the Beginning; Joel Dyer > * Firewall : The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-Up; Lawrence E. Walsh > > Browse other Politics & Current Events titles. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Reviews and Commentary for Secrets : The Cia's War at Home > > Have you read this book? Write an online review and share your thoughts > with other readers. > > The New York Times Book Review, Tim Weiner : > Left in draft form at his death from brain cancer three years ago, > completed by his friends and family, Secrets is Mackenzie's legacy: a book > obsessed. Like the man, it is an unruly piece of work, but it grabs you by > the lapels and holds on. > > Synopsis: > Drawing from government documents, scores of interviews, and numerous > stories of CIA malfeasance, the late journalist Angus Mackenzie lays bare > the behind-the-scenes evolution of a policy of suppression, repression, > spying, and harassment beginning before the Johnson administration and > continuing to the present. 11 illustrations. > > Card catalog description > This eye-opening expose, the result of fifteen years of investigative work, > uncovers the CIA's systematic efforts over several decades to suppress and > censor information. Angus Mackenzie, an award-winning yournalist, filed and > won a lawsuit against the CIA under the Freedom of Information Act, and in > the process became an expert on government censorship and domestic spying. > Mackenzie lays bare a complex narrative of intrigue among federal agencies > and their senior staff, including the Department of Defense, the executive > branch, and the CIA. From cover-ups and secrecy oaths, to scandals over > leaks and exposure, to the government's often insidious attempts to monitor > and control public access to information, Mackenzie tracks the evolution of > a policy of suppression, repression, spying, and harassment. > > The publisher, University of California Press, www.ucpress.edu , 08/20/97: > This Book is Now Available > "If anything is more corrupting than power, it is power exercised in > secret. Angus Mackenzie's magnificently researched, lucidly written study > of the CIA's outrageous threats to freedom in America over the years is a > summons to vigilance to protect our democratic institutions." > --Daniel Schorr > > "The late Angus Mackenzie has left an appropriate legacy in Secrets: The > CIA's War at Home, a fitting capstone to his long career of exposing > government secrecy and manipulation of public information. Secrets is a > detailed, fascinating and chilling account of the agency's program of > disinformation and concealment of public information against its own > citizens." > --Ben H. Bagdikian, author of THE MEDIA MONOPOLY > > "Scrupulously reported, fleshed out with a fascinating cast of characters, > skillfully illuminating a subject the news media seldom looked into and > never got straight, Angus Mackenzie's last and best work richly deserves a > posthumous Pulitzer -- for nonfiction, history, or both." > --Jon Swan, former senior editor, Columbia Journalism Review > > "This courageous, uncompromising book belongs on the bookshelf of every > serious student of journalism and the First Amendment." > --Tom Goldstein, Dean, Graduate School of Journalism, Columbia University > > "Even in 1997, the exposures of courageous, enterprising journalists like > Mackenzie are crucial for an open government." > --Publishers Weekly > > This eye-opening expose, the result of fifteen years of investigative work, > uncovers the CIA's systematic efforts to suppress and censor information > over several decades. An award-winning journalist, Angus Mackenzie waged > and won a lawsuit against the CIA under the Freedom of Information Act and > became a leading expert on questions government censorship and domestic > spying. In Secrets, he reveals how federal agencies--including the > Department of Defense, the executive branch, and the CIA--have monitored and > controlled public access to information. Mackenzie lays bare the > behind-the-scenes evolution of a policy of suppression, repression, spying, > and harassment. > > Secrecy operations originated during the Cold War as the CIA instituted > programs of domestic surveillance and agent provocateur activities. As > antiwar newspapers flourished, the CIA set up an "underground newspaper" > desk devoted, as Mackenzie reports, to various counterintelligence > activities--from infiltrating organizations to setting up CIA-front student > groups. Mackenzie also tracks the policy of requiring secrecy contracts for > all federal employees who have contact with sensitive information, insuring > governmental review of all their writings after leaving government employ. > > Drawing from government documents and scores of interviews, many of which > required intense persistence and investigative guesswork to obtain, and > amassing story after story of CIA malfeasance, Mackenzie gives us the best > account we have of the government's present security apparatus. This is a > must-read book for anyone interested in the inside secrets of government > spying, censorship, and the abrogation of First Amendment rights. > > FROM THE BOOK: > "The major villains of the censorship story are a succession of > policymakers from the Johnson administration through the Bush > administration and on into the Clinton years, including several presidents > themselves. In a sense, theirs is a spy story--not an action-packed one like > in the movies but one about sleight-of-hand and subterfuge far truer to > reality." > > ANGUS MACKENZIE (1950-1994), an investigative reporter known for his > persistence and independence, was one of the nation's foremost experts on > freedom of information laws. Known for crusading journalism in defense of > the First Amendment, his work appeared in publications ranging from > alternative weeklies to the Washington Post and the Columbia Journalism > Review. Mackenzie was affiliated with the Center for Investigative > Reporting in San Francisco and taught at the School of Journalism at the > University of California, Berkeley. > > DAVID WEIR was a co-founder of the Center for Investigative Reporting, > where he managed contracts with "60 Minutes," "20/20," CNN, CBS News, ABC > News, and many other outlets. He served as editor and writer at a number of > publications, including Rolling Stone, Mother Jones, and the San Francisco > Examiner. He has won or shared over two dozen journalism awards, including > the National Magazine Award. > > The publisher, University of California Press, www.ucpress.edu , 08/20/97: > "If anything is more corrupting than power, it is power exercised in > secret. Angus Mackenzie's magnificently researched, lucidly written study > of the CIA's outrageous threats to freedom in America over the years is a > summons to vigilance to protect our democratic institutions." > --Daniel Schorr > > "The late Angus Mackenzie has left an appropriate legacy in Secrets: The > CIA's War at Home, a fitting capstone to his long career of exposing > government secrecy and manipulation of public information. Secrets is a > detailed, fascinating and chilling account of the agency's program of > disinformation and concealment of public information against its own > citizens." > --Ben H. Bagdikian, author of THE MEDIA MONOPOLY > > "Scrupulously reported, fleshed out with a fascinating cast of characters, > skillfully illuminating a subject the news media seldom looked into and > never got straight, Angus Mackenzie's last and best work richly deserves a > posthumous Pulitzer -- for nonfiction, history, or both." > --Jon Swan, former senior editor, Columbia Journalism Review > > "This courageous, uncompromising book belongs on the bookshelf of every > serious student of journalism and the First Amendment." > --Tom Goldstein, Dean, Graduate School of Journalism, Columbia University > > "Even in 1997, the exposures of courageous, enterprising journalists like > Mackenzie are crucial for an open government." > --Publishers Weekly > > This eye-opening expose, the result of fifteen years of investigative work, > uncovers the CIA's systematic efforts to suppress and censor information > over several decades. An award-winning journalist, Angus Mackenzie waged > and won a lawsuit against the CIA under the Freedom of Information Act and > became a leading expert on questions government censorship and domestic > spying. In Secrets, he reveals how federal agencies--including the > Department of Defense, the executive branch, and the CIA--have monitored and > controlled public access to information. Mackenzie lays bare the > behind-the-scenes evolution of a policy of suppression, repression, spying, > and harassment. > > Secrecy operations originated during the Cold War as the CIA instituted > programs of domestic surveillance and agent provocateur activities. As > antiwar newspapers flourished, the CIA set up an "underground newspaper" > desk devoted, as Mackenzie reports, to various counterintelligence > activities--from infiltrating organizations to setting up CIA-front student > groups. Mackenzie also tracks the policy of requiring secrecy contracts for > all federal employees who have contact with sensitive information, insuring > governmental review of all their writings after leaving government employ. > > Drawing from government documents and scores of interviews, many of which > required intense persistence and investigative guesswork to obtain, and > amassing story after story of CIA malfeasance, Mackenzie gives us the best > account we have of the government's present security apparatus. This is a > must-read book for anyone interested in the inside secrets of government > spying, censorship, and the abrogation of First Amendment rights. > > FROM THE BOOK: > "The major villains of the censorship story are a succession of > policymakers from the Johnson administration through the Bush > administration and on into the Clinton years, including several presidents > themselves. In a sense, theirs is a spy story--not an action-packed one like > in the movies but one about sleight-of-hand and subterfuge far truer to > reality." > > ANGUS MACKENZIE (1950-1994), an investigative reporter known for his > persistence and independence, was one of the nation's foremost experts on > freedom of information laws. Known for crusading journalism in defense of > the First Amendment, his work appeared in publications ranging from > alternative weeklies to the Washington Post and the Columbia Journalism > Review. Mackenzie was affiliated with the Center for Investigative > Reporting in San Francisco and taught at the School of Journalism at the > University of California, Berkeley. > > DAVID WEIR was a co-founder of the Center for Investigative Reporting, > where he managed contracts with "60 Minutes," "20/20," CNN, CBS News, ABC > News, and many other outlets. He served as editor and writer at a number of > publications, including Rolling Stone, Mother Jones, and the San Francisco > Examiner. He has won or shared over two dozen journalism awards, including > the National Magazine Award. > > >From Kirkus Reviews , 07/01/97: > A muckraking adventure in the violation of First Amendment rights. Although > it probably won't come as a surprise to most readers that the federal > government is capable of spying on its citizens, Mackenzie professes a > certain bewilderment at the lengths to which the CIA went to suppress > dissent in the days of Vietnam. The veteran left-wing journalist, who died > of brain cancer in 1994, began his career as the publisher of an antiwar > rag called the People's Dreadnaught; harassed by campus police, he was > forced to suspend publication, although he later won $2,500 in a lawsuit > against Beloit College over the matter. At a national level, he writes, > similar suppression was the order of the day. Although the CIA is > constrained by law from conducting investigations ``inside the continental > limits of the United States and its possessions,'' in fact, Mackenzie > charges, it concocted an elaborate counterintelligence program against > various home-grown protest groups in the 1960s and early '70s, reasoning > that it was taking antiterrorist measures and thus living up to the spirit, > if not the letter, of its charter. Among the targets, Mackenzie writes, was > Ramparts, a venerable leftist magazine that managed to earn the wrath of > the Feds by reporting on that very internal spying. Other targets were the > libertarian guru Karl Hess, renegade CIA whistleblowers Victor Marchetti > and Philip Agee, and a host of lesser-known dissidents. The CIA emerges as > the heavy, naturally, but the real villains in Mackenzie's account are > various policymakers from the Johnson administration to the present. > ``Incrementally over the years they expanded a policy of censorship to the > point that today it pervades every agency and every department of the > federal government,'' he writes. And, he continues, that change was so > gradual that few guardians of the First Amendment noticed. Mackenzie is > occasionally over the top, sometimes glib. But his charges ring true, and > civil-liberties advocates will find much of interest in his pages. (11 b&w > illustrations, not seen) -- Copyright (c)1997, Kirkus Associates, LP. All > rights reserved. > > Table of Contents > Foreword > By David Weir > Editors' Preface > Acknowledgments > Introduction > Prologue: The CIA and the Origins of the Freedom of Information Act > 1. Conservatives Worry and the Cover-Up Begins > 2. You Expose Us, We Spy on You > 3. The CIA tries to Censor Books > 4. Bush Perfects the Cover-Up > 5. Censor Others as You Would Have Them Censor You > 6. Did Congress Outlaw This Book? > 7. Trying to Hush the Fuss > 8. Overcoming the Opposition > 9. Censorship Confusion > 10. The Pentagon Resists Censorship > 11. Hiding Political Spying > 12. One Man Says No > 13. Control of Information > 14. The CIA Openness Task Force > Epilogue: The Cold War Ends and Secrecy Spreads > App. Targets of Domestic Spying > Notes > Index > > Look for similar books by subject: > > Government information > United States > Freedom of information > U.S. Government - Intelligence Agencies > POLITICS/CURRENT EVENTS > Civil Rights > > i.e., each book must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND ... > > * I read this book, and I want to review it. > * I am the Author and I want to comment on my book. > * I am the Publisher and I want to comment on this book. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Search Our 2.5-Million-Title Catalog > Enter Keywords: > Other ways to search our catalog > > or Browse by Subject > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Top of Page / Amazon.com Home / About Amazon.com / Need Help? / Your > Account > Your 1-Click Settings / Shopping Basket > > Copyright and disclaimer (c) 1996-1998, Amazon.com, Inc. >

1 0

Re: Freedom, Starvation, and Uncoerced Relationships (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Freedom, Starvation, and Uncoerced Relationships > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 98 22:43:04 EST > Evidently some folks on this list do feel that it's possible for the gubmint > to curtail our liberties in some ways and not in others. Phooey. Exactly. And it is as it should be. Consider that speech is *not* equivalent to action (eg. swinging a fist). Running an enterprise or engaging in some activity *is* equivalent to the party swinging their fist. They have a *right* to swing it so long as it *doesn't* interfere in others right to swing their fist *and* the first parties swinging doesn't strike the second party. In short, a party has the right to make as much money as they like, however that right does not extend to the point of inhibiting others from similar opportunities. A free market monopolizes, that monopolization inhibits others from expressing their rights in the same manner that hitting some person in the face inhibits their fist swinging because they are out cold on the floor. As a consequence a free market is inherently inhibiting on free expression - something any self-respecting anarchist won't put up with. So we are left with the very simple conclusion that any anarchist worth the title won't put up with a free market because it creates an environment that creates a monarchy. It is logicaly inconsistent, and philosophicaly nonsensical, to talk about being an anarchist of any ilk *and* talking about supporting free markets. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

A further thought on free markets & anarchy...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Given that anarchist don't support a 'head' in regards to human activities *and* that a free market monopolizes thus creating a 'head' it is clear that if we apply the ideas of human society (ie political systems) to economics we derive a fundamental conflict, that a anarchist in the economic sphere is left with no choice but to agree that economic systems must be managed and creates a 'head' either by plan or monopolistic fiat. Therefore the original thesis that such political models are applicable to economic ones is flawed. It simply is not possible for an economic system to exhist without some sort of 'head' or guiding structure. This is fundamentaly at odds with the definition and spirit of anarchy. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 98 23:48:06 EST > Blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> writes: > > Initially your argument had to do with secrecy and the need for scientists > > to publish their work so that the scientific community may benefit from it. > > Not just the scientific community... everyone. If an art critic declines > to publish something, its a loss probably only to his fellow art critics, > but if a mathematician or a biologist or a physicist doesn't publish, it's > a loss for more than just his colleagues. I believe this view to be fundamentaly flawed. Consider that if a particular scientist doesn't publish (ala Fermat) then this does not inherently prohibit or inhibit others from deriving the result (lot's of examples so I won't pick a single one). However, when an artist or other practitioner of human expression fails to publish then an item of unique character is lost. Had T.S. Elliot not written 'Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats' it is *very* unlikely that *anyone* in the entire remaining history of the universe would have written those charming poems and we would be deprived among other things of knowing why a cat has three names. In addition, the fact that a given individual finds no worth in why a cat has three names does not change the worth of the insight provided by the author. So, while a given art critics views may not mean much to you this does not justify in any manner trivializing that worth for others. To do so would indicate a personality of extreme hubris and potentialy a severe sociopathy. Expect them to begin walking around with their hand in their vest at any moment. The distinction is that human expression doesn't assume homogeneity nor isotropy as science requires. Rather it assumes a priori that each activity and it's result is unique in the history of the universe and fundamentaly an expression of that *individual* view of experience. That is what art derives it worth from while science derives its worth from the result being the same irrespective of the practitioner. And before somebody brings it up, while reality *is* observer dependant, this is a recognition that the act of testing is fundamentaly a part of the sytsem being tested. The statistical results *are* homogenious and isotropic for observers - Fire in the Deep not withstanding. The end of our exploring will be to arrive at where we started, and to know the place for the first time. T.S. Eliot ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

3 3

RML : New Webmaster Newsletter!!
by ryan＠ntslink.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This List has been purchased by "RML" This is the first webmaster mailing we have done so if you are not a Adult Webmaster, wish to be removed from this list, or have more than one E-mail from us please let us know and we will take care of it! Webmasters contact us at ryan(a)ntslink.net for the price to mail out this newsletter with your Company's information! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ranked # 32 on Web Side Story Tight Teenage Nymphos new *Cheater Proof* Top 50 is kicking some serious ass ;-) The site is at http://www.teennympho.com and the webmaster's area is at http://www.teennympho.com/webmasters.html * We were one of the first 10 Top 50's on the net to have the automatically updated script * * We have double CGI to prevent cheaters from getting listed * * You can send hits to our site by opening a console wth our link in it ANY way you want !! Some ideas are 1)Opening it every time someone leaves/enters your site 2) Opening it every time someone clicks on a link to one of your pics 3) Any other way you can think of! * * We average 30-40,000 Uniques a day by Webside Story's Count * * NO Main page BANNERS * * TONS OF BOOKMARK HITS * Click here http://www.teennympho.com to find out more information ;-) We'll see you at the TOP!!!! Sincerely, Ryan Lanane

1 0

Re: Zippo censors are losing customers
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <jai(a)mantra.com> writes: > > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> > > > >Zippo is now censoring more people besides Colin. It may sound cheap > >but it's not worth $19/year. > > Now many discussion threads (not spam) are missing from DejaNews also. > They claim to be using "technology" developed by Zippo -- the following > press release is located at: It sounds like dejanews is applying nocem on spool, and also applying old nocems to their historical databases. (Does that include chris lewis's "trollcancels"?) Zippo refuses to accept articles where the From: is one of the many people they've blacklisted for content. See the recent article by Russ Allbery on net.config where he promotes panix's patches to nntp for something similar. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Hello, enjoy it..
by hethr＠ntr.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CHECKS PAID TO YOU UP-FRONT 6 DAYS A WEEK! LEARN THE SECRET TO MAKING $1750.00 - $2175.00 A WEEK SITTING AT YOUR HOME COMPUTER FOR JUST A COUPLE HOURS A DAY! PART-TIME! IN JUST 10 MINUTES WE'LL SHOW YOU AN EASY WAY TO MAKE MONEY WITH YOUR COMPUTER. It's fun, it's rewarding, and it's easy. This is so simple most children could do it! All you need is a computer and E-Mail address to begin making excellent money while relaxing in the comfort of your own home. All it takes is a couple hours a day and you can make $1750.00 a week, or even $2175.00 (TWO THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE DOLLARS) There are people doing this every week. Right now there are only a few people around the country who know how to do this. And these few people are having the best time of their lives while their computers make them a high level of income. Even if you are happy with your current job, you can use this easy system in your spare time to create a nice extra income. And let us assure you this system is completely legal. We are so sure anyone can make a great extra income with this unique system, we will even let you try it out for 30 days! And if you're not 100% satisfied, just send it back within 30 days and we will be more than happy to give you a full refund. Once you begin to see how easy it is to make money with your computer, you will wish you had received this letter a long time ago. Anyone can do this, and since very little of your time is required, you will have more free time to spend doing the things you have always wanted to do. So take the first step toward financial freedom and order this powerful money making system today! You'll be glad you did! This system has sold nationwide for as much as $29.95 And in 2 weeks we may be raising the price of our money making system. Send in your order before then to be sure you receive it for only $14.95 To receive your copy of our SIMPLE COMPUTER MONEY MAKING SYSTEM, along with a full 30 day money back guarantee, send a check or money order for $14.95 payable to: Crown Industries 1630 North Main St. Suite# 310 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Allow 4-6 days for delivery (We do not accept orders from the state of Florida) P.S. We guarantee our "Computer Money Making System" is the most complete and incredible money making system for quick success you will ever use. If you are not totally convinced that it's the greatest work at home program anywhere, simply send it back for a fast hassle free refund. Due to the high response rate, we are not able to answer questions or take orders by e-mail. Please direct all business to our postal address listed above. Thank you, Crown Industries

1 0