December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
by Global Web Builders 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear One Nation supporter in NSW I would draw your attention to the following press release by Pauline Hanson today: Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum It is clear Pauline Hanson is often misrepresented by the press and the recent headlines headlines that suggest she questioned Aboriginal Australian's rights to vote is yet another example of selective reporting. Is this because of the search for what will be the most inflammatory or is it just that some members of the press pick out of context what they believe will do the most damage to Pauline Hanson? "I have not and would not question the right to vote of any Australian citizen. What I question is whether Australians would have thought twice about their vote in the 1967 referendum if they had known their attempt to bring about equality was going to cause the pendulum to go the other way. "The main point of the 1967 referendum was the change of section 51 of the constitution that allowed the government to make special laws with respect to Aborigines. It is from this that successive governments have created race based policies such as Abstudy and 1.5% loans for Aboriginals starting businesses. "Aboriginal Australians like all Australians should and do have the right to vote but no one should be treated differently on the basis of race - all Australians should be treated equally and the same. I am quite certain that if Australians had understood where the 1967 referendum would lead, many would have voted differently. "These special laws based on race have led to reverse discrimination and the rorting of taxpayers money without helping the Aborigines in most need. We must assist Aborigines, but as Australians in need, not on the basis of race. We must not make laws that set Australians apart and are open to abuse by those who pretend to look after the Aboriginal people. "It is often reported that I want to take benefits from Aboriginal people, that is not correct and never was correct. It is true many Aboriginal people are seriously disadvantaged but they do not have a monopoly on being disadvantaged and should not be singled out on the basis of race. Everyone should be assisted on the basis of need." Statement issued by Pauline Hanson MP, member for Oxley ----------- GWB Scott Balson

1 0

Hi
by HELMY Enterprises, Inc. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From HELMY Enterprises, Inc. Dear Webmaster, Offer daily updated 'Headline News' (and more) and look like one of the big boys! To learn more please visit us at: http://www.helmy.com/dc/index.html

1 0

CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM - July 15, 1998
by CTIA Daily News 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

<FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2>============================================= Welcome to today's edition of the CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM. Please click on the icon / attachment for the most important news in wireless communications today. WIRELESS IT '98, The Next Generation in Personal Computing & Communications October 12-14, Las Vegas, Nevada Call (202) 785-0081 for more information! <FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2>=============================================<FONT COLOR="#000000">

1 0

Re: GAK 4 -- For whom the Doorbell tolls
by Charlie_Kaufman＠iris.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

GAK4 is technically inaccurate but very good metaphor by which to consider this proposal. I believe this is a minor skirmish in the war between civil libertarians and Big Brother with industry playing the role of arms merchant. It is not Government Access to Keys, it is Government Access to Encrypted Data, which for everyones purposes is the same thing. In answer to the question: "Should Cisco and friends be allowed to export this technology?", of course they should. People should be allowed to export whatever they want. Even if you're Big Brother, this proposal enables all the same capabilities as GAK, so there is no reason to oppose it. In answer to the question: "Is this a 'compromise' that addresses the issues of civil libertarians?", not a bit. The devil is in the details, of course, in issues of whether the government can ask the encryption points for copies of the data in real time, in an unaudited fashion, and/or with what kind of "trusted third party" intermediaries. But these questions are exactly akin to the details to be worked out with GAK and self-escrow. In answer to the question: "Is there anything at all different between this proposal and GAK?", the answer is some, and the differences might be relevant to some. This proposal is a little better than GAK for law enforcement because it would be easier to use and they tend to be technically unsophisticated. It is a little worse than GAK for the NSA because the extra data flows mean that it is harder to conduct surveillance in a totally undetectable way. It favors some vendors over others because it favors those who want to encrypt at firewalls over those who want to encrypt end-to-end. It might slow overall progress in network security because end-to-end encryption is technically superior (though harder to deploy) and universal firewall to firewall encryption might reduce the demand for it. In answer to the question: "Would approval of this proposal be a good or a bad thing?", the answer is ambiguous for the civil libertarian side. Any time a new thing is allowed to be exported, it increases the flexibility of vendors in crafting solutions and is likely to increase overall security. On the other hand, anything which makes continuation of export controls less in-your-face-painful will decrease pressure to repeal them and therefore may in the long run decrease overall security. And anything which makes it easier to make systems secure against all attackers other than Big Brother brings closer the disasterous day when non-GAK crypto can be outlawed. If you're Big Brother, approval seems to be uniformly a good thing. It garners political points among the unsophisticated as being willing to make "technical compromises". It costs nothing in terms of access. And it may bring closer the glorious day when non-GAK crypto can be outlawed. --Charlie Kaufman

1 0

Could the world turn lesbian?/Men's privates enlarging
by STUFFED/EUREKA! 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

NYT Crypto OpEd
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The NYT has a fairly good OpEd on encryption today, written by a novelist, who makes a good case for the citizen's need for the privacy protection, now that there are a zillion ways computers pry into private affairs. http://www.nytimes.com For those outside the US: NYT today began its free worldwide online service, so the whole world can log on to its prying computers. (Non-USes heretofore had to pay for privacy loss.) It claims to have 4 million daily online consumers and is happy to run an advertiser drivern operation to suck in millions more around the planet. Take note, Slate.

2 1

Whitehouse Bastards want my name named.
by Cyberdog 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Blumenthal Discovery requests both the Email subscriber list to Drudge Report AND contributor list to Drudge Legal Defense Fund...

1 0

[humor]
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In Computer Heaven: The management is from Intel, The design and construction is done by Apple, The marketing is done by Microsoft, IBM provides the support, Gateway determines the pricing. In Computer Hell: The management is from Apple, Microsoft does design and construction, IBM handles the marketing, The support is from Gateway, Intel sets the price. Jean-Francois Avon, B.Sc. Physics, Montreal, Canada DePompadour, Société d'Importation Ltée Limoges fine porcelain and french crystal JFA Technologies, R&D physicists & engineers Instrumentation & control, LabView programming PGP keys: http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pks-toplev.html PGP ID:C58ADD0D:529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 PGP ID:5B51964D:152ACCBCD4A481B0 254011193237822C

2 1

your papers please
by Anton Sherwood 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Make $1000's Weekly ! --- First Check Next Week !
by 14633260＠msn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

***** All You Do Is Advertise OUR phone number !!! ***** **** WE DO THE REST !!! **** (800) 811-2141 ID# 55916 - GET PAID EVERY FRIDAY !!! - NO PHONE CONVERSATIONS !!! - NO SELLING !!! - NO EXPLANING !!! - NO CONVINCEING !!! - NO TALKING TO ANYONE !!! - NO ONGOING MEMBERSHIP FEES !!! - NO COMPLICATED BUSINESS TO RUN !!! - You do nothing but advertise Our Phone Number !!! - Send Bulk Email, Flyers, Little Classified Ads, Whatever You Like! - OUR Live Operators handle all your calls professionally & courteously, then WE Pay You ! A successful, honest, & proven Home Based Business Opportunity ! People are already making in excess of $1000 per week doing doing nothing more than advertising OUR Toll Free Number and your personal ID Number !!!! Need Additional Income? You owe it to yourself to just listen. Toll Free Testimonials: (888) 703-5389, (888)731-3457, (888)446-6951 For More Information, Call Us Today: (800) 811-2141 ID# 55916 --------- Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to you by use of the following link: <A HREF="http://209.84.246.162/remove.htm"> Click here to go to global remove site if you want your address removed from mailing </A>

1 0