December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Regards
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Witty retort to the flames :) I like this one. ---Christopher Barkley <christopher.barkley(a)srcm.com> wrote: > > Apparently, I just spammed your list a couple of days ago; my > apologies. Some zithead listed your email address in the Six Degrees > networking service and starting asking people to be his contacts. One > can only hope his fate is neither swift nor pretty. (I bear some of the > blame; I should have recognized the email address since I have several > friends on the list.) > > At any rate, my thanks to Tom Perry for his polite explanation of the > situation. > > As for the REST of you who responded, you have my sympathies. With any > luck, they'll get that thorazine prescription refilled soon. > > Cheerio, > Christopher > == "The same thing we do every night Pinkey, try to take over the WORLD!" - The brain _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: Democracy...
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Separation of church and state was established by jefferson not as a quote from the constitution but as a summary of the religious parts of it. It was written in a letter to baptists in massachusets. He also sent a copy of it to his postmaster general and attorney general for proofreading to make sure it was a legal summary and correct. You can find this info on the internet. ---Jaeger <Jaeger(a)hempseed.com> wrote: > > hey, would you care to show us where "seperation of church and state" is > to be found in the constitution/bill of rights? absolute right and > wrong is not a religious belief (necessarily).. your religious beliefs > do not affect the nature of reality. there are absolute truths by > necessity... see, there is NO WAY that there could not be. Because if > there were no absolute truths, then that would mean that NOTHING is > absolute. That statement in itself is an absolute. now, as for > absolute truths regarding the president, there may or may not be any as > far as most people are concerned. people always seem to make an > exception for people who agree with them... in order to be an effective > president, however, one must uphold the very basis of this country, by > upholding the law. Clinton perjured himself, obstructed justice, and > tampered with witnesses in a grand jury investigation (which was > incidentally <sp?> being conducted by a man who was praised just months > earlier as unbiased and very qualified for the job). The man is > supposed to be the figurehead for our system of gov't. If he cannot > follow the law, then he is not fit for the office. > > Jaeger > > > Ever heard of seperation of church and state? Democracy? the rights of > > > > the individual? While you certainly have the right to practice your > > religion in what ever manner you so choose demanding that everyone > > else > > does, or that the president of the us of ais subject to you PERSONAL > > faith decisions is outragous > > > > Vivek Vaidya > > > > ______________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > == "The same thing we do every night Pinkey, try to take over the WORLD!" - The brain _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Titanic
by jeff206＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Titanic Enthusiast: Sometime over the last few months you had visited our Titanic site entitled "Enter The Titanic". Also, you signed our Guest Book, expressed an interest in purchasing Titanic merchandise and left us your email address. I hope you don't mind receiving this message. If you do not wish to receive these messages regarding Titanic or Titanic merchandise in the future, simply respond to this email with "NO MORE" written in the subject window. For those of you interested, the cost of two of our most popular items have been reduced by our suppliers due to large volumes sold from our site. Authentic reproduction buttons and the Titanic CD ROM. 1). Authentic Reproductions - The Waterbury Button Company produced the solid brass buttons which adorned the coats of both the officers and crew of the R.M.S. Titanic. They also reproduced the buttons to be used in the James Camron movie "TITANIC". They have once more produced these buttons for public collection. These buttons are pressed from the same molds used in 1912, solid brass and coated in 24K gold. At only $29.95 plus shipping and handling they make a great gift or collection piece. CLICK HERE for a detailed description or visit http://www.geocities.com/baja/8334/reproductions.htm 2). "TITANIC: A Voyage of Discovery" CD ROM - This CD ROM disk is loaded with the most information compiled on Titanic than any other source available. It's filled with photos, music, video, artifacts and stories taken from the actual account of survivors. It's a must have for any Titanic enthusiast. This fact filled CD ROM has been reduced for a short time to only $45.95 plus shipping and handling. CLICK HERE for more details or visit http://www.unidial.com/~bflowers/home.htm I hope you will visit these sites and add these great items to your Titanic collection. We pride ourselves in offering only the highest quality, authentic Titanic merchandise. Other products we offer are listed at our Titanic Merchandise page located at http://www.unidial.com/~bflowers/merchandise.htm Remember Titanic and those who lost their lives aboard her. May They Rest In Peace ! Bob Flowers, Jr. Webmaster Enter The Titanic

1 0

Re: Democracy...
by Edwin E. Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 twit, v.t, twitted, twitting. address teasingly. I'm touched! You think I'm teasing you? Well, I'm NOT teasing you. You're an ASSHOLE! Yes I spelled it correctly so there wouldn't be any misunderstanding. You're a self-righteous prick who dumps on people just because they have a certain email address without any consideration for what they may be saying. Yes there are clueless people at AOL and there are clueless people at got.net and at intnet.net. So what? When you cut yourself off from people just because of their email address you do yourself a disservice but when you try to dissuade others because of your prejudice then you wrong us as well. I am quite able to evaluate the worthiness of someones words without your superior pronouncements. If you don't have anything of value to add to the discussion then shut-the-fuck-up! Edwin At 09:43 PM 9/15/98 -0700, you wrote: >At 9:31 PM -0700 9/15/98, Edwin E. Smith wrote: > >> >>Only a minute or two? How many minutes does it take to be able to >>correctly spell the name of somebody you are deprecating? >> > >The only _name_ mentioned in my post was "Assimov." This must be the >"correctly spell the name of...." example you are citing. > >This spelling was deliberate, based on the AOL guy citing his 5th grade >reading of it... > >As for you, you're still a twit. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNf9RzUmNf6b56PAtEQJUywCg/d+IFyZeUWGvytpdxR85CuHS05YAoLyB bkSyv+E6WRZXewM0LEIS2jcZ =OdGi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Larry Gilbert, AOLers, and the Hyper-real flamer
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 AIMSX(a)aol.com wrote: > > Obviously you have a very high opinion of yourself and a low opinion of people > who use AOL. Contrary to popular belief, there are a few intelligent people > on AOL, but it looks as if you are too egotistical to realize that. You're right. We have very high opinions of ourselves. We have low opinions of people who use AOL because they're typically scum, spammers, or idiots. You even admit this by saying "there are a FEW intelligent people on AOL." They're also paying $20/month for a shitty service with a bad reputation. If you don't like the stereotype, get your fellow AOLers to get a clue and reverse it which will probably take years if it's possible at all, or if you're actually an intelligent AOLer, go get an ISP which isn't synonymous with manure. Personally, I'm figuring very, very few AOL users who publish actively to the Internet have a clue. The traffic on this list just over the last month backs that up. The reputation AOL has is deserved, and there is a definate pattern of stupidity from AOL. In the future quote so we know what you're talking about, and don't use the "flick off the Internet" quoting style, either. > Have you ever thought to look at your own mistakes before you publicize > everyone else's to the world? I'm not sending requests for band stickers to cryptography lists. I'm not sending messages to cryptography lists which read "how u do that" with no punctuation. I'm not asking members of cryptography lists to sign me up to receive the news by email every morning. I'm not replying to things while not quoting, or by using some quoting system which was designed by AOL for the purpose of pissing off non-AOLers. I'm not publishing web pages which are unreadable without the latest shovelware from Microsoft or Netscape, and which shoots the finger otherwise. I'm not saying "AOL is the Internet," and I'm not signing up with a service because they send me a free mirror or coaster or because I'm too lazy to learn to do anything other than point and click. > Are you just suffering from some sort of > dillusion of grandeur - thinking you are better than everyone else. Not everyone else, but infinitely better than the average kool d00d, AOLer, or webber, and infinitely better than the president who the "average" American elected. By the way, the sentence I quoted above is what is known as a question. In English, you use a question mark for those. > Things > like this are what many wars were started over, I am so happy the internet > (hopefully) won't start a war in the real world. I won't have anything to do with it, but I'm fully expecting for some new Unabomber to appear within the next few years. Instead of targeting technology centers like the Unabomber did, this guy will mail bombs to spammers, people who send "how u do that" to lists, etc. I, thankfully, am morally constrained enough to never do anything like that, but I would bet that there is somebody out there who isn't. >From what AOL users send to the Internet from their service, one can easily conclude that AOL is a haven for wannabes, lamers, and k00l D00dz \/\/h0 tiPE l1|<E Th1s, but since AOL _is_ the Internet and is so filled with intelligent people, I suggest you go back there and leave all of us who are just deluded into thinking we're using the Internet and who only think we know about our professions and hobbies. Yet another AnonMonger. (How many are there now? Man.)

1 0

Stock is up 275%!!
by culasd＠usa.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The stock is up 275% in less than 40 days. This Thursday, September 3, 1998 Omicron closed at $6.87 During this same time period the DOW has gone down over 1,700 points! Don't Miss This One! For more information: http://www.americanstockchannel.com/omicron The stock symbol is: OGPS _______________________

1 0

Re: Harald Fragner
by HyperReal-Anon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, John Scott Porterfield wrote: > > How do I get off this list!!! > > Bob > > You remove yourself from this list the same way you subscribed, but since that is such a stupid question and you are obviously a very intelligent man, I conclude that you meant something else. By running your badly punctuated sentence through the AOLhole-translator, we get either: "How do I get off?" or "How do I get off on this list?" To get off, you may consider seeing a sex therapist. They are more qualified to assist you in that area. To get off on this list is more difficult. We Cypherpunks aren't into that kind of thing. However, we understand that Christopher Barkley <christopher.barkley(a)srcm.com> is in the market for a friend, so you may want to see if you can pair up. You've both spammed the list, so you already have something in common! In the mean time, please refrain from shooting jizz all over the list like you and the Sixdegrees lamers have been doing. Someone may slip and hurt themselves and it always leaves a sticky mess that's just hell on the carpet. Regards, Voices, Harald, Woof, moans, and whatever.

1 0

SNET: (Fwd) Radio Show on CIA
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "Steve Wingate" <stevew(a)world.std.com> Subject: SNET: (Fwd) Radio Show on CIA Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 19:28:26 -0700 To: "CIA.DRUGS" <CIA.DRUGS(a)listbot.com>, SNETNEWS <snetnews(a)world.std.com>, CTRL(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM -> SNETNEWS Mailing List ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: Expert53(a)aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 14:44:04 EDT Subject: Radio Show on CIA THE EXPERT WITNESS RADIO SHOW WBAI New York City 99.5 FM Expert53(a)aol.co 212-209-2800 (voice mail #2970) Host: Michael Levine, 25 Year veteran federal agent and author of NY Times bestseller "DEEP COVER" - (just optioned for movie) "THE BIG WHITE LIE" -The fact-based thriller (now in paperback), THE TRIANGLE OF DEATH, based on actual, never-before-revealed events from CIA's hunt for mind control drugs WEB SITES: http://www.radio4all.org/expert - Past radio shows may be downloaded free of charge; includes books, photos and opinion articles. http://www.universalprosthesis.com/news/expert.html - includes the ability to order tapes of the old shows, at cost, $8 per show. FIGHT BACK ANTI-DRUG PROGRAM: http://idt.net/~dorisaw TUESDAY EVENING, 7-8pm, Septeber 15, 1998, on WBAI, 99.5 FM in NYC, the Expert Witness Radio Show will feature a discussion with journalists Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair about their recent book "WHITEOUT"-a powerful and well documented analysis of CIA's manipulation of mainstream media to cover up massive "Three Stooges" ineptitude and criminality. The show will be rebroadcast a week later on the Roy Tuckan Show, KPFK, Los Angeles, CA, and then archived on the above listed web sites. -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: "Steve Wingate" <stevew(a)world.std.com>

1 0

SNET: National ID Cards- world wide phenomenon
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton) Subject: SNET: National ID Cards- world wide phenomenon Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 14:03:47 +1200 To: snetnews(a)world.std.com -> SNETNEWS Mailing List http://www.privacy.org/pi/activities/i dcard/" National ID Cards Many countries are actively considering adopting national id cards for a variety of functions. These include the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Over the past seven years, Privacy International has been at the forefront of opposing these proposals in a number of countries including Australia, New Zealand, the Phillippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom and the United States. These pages are an attempt to bring together materials based on PI members' experiences on opposing the proposals. While each jurisdictions may have local variations, the themes remain remarkably similar no matter where the proposals are heard. Our intention here is to discuss the evidence at an international level and to promote debate about the claims made about such card systems. Privacy International Materials Privacy International's ID Card FAQ. Frequently Asked Questions report on id cards. (7000 words) Campaigns of Opposition to ID Cards. A review and analysis of the successful campaign to kill the Australia Card in 1987. Personal views from around the world on ID cards. The UK Government ID Card Proposal The UK ID card proposal was quietly set aside in 1996. UK Home Office Green Paper "Identity Cards - A Consultation" Home Office press release on id cards, 24 January 1996. Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency report, Smart cards: Opportunities for public sector applications. Response of the Data Protection Registrar to the Government's proposals for Identity Cards. The Green Paper on Identity Cards: A response from the Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility by Simon Rogerson. "Identity Crisis: why ID cards are a solution looking for a problem" by Liz Parratt from Liberty. "IDENTITY CARDS: Data protection implications" by Chris Pounder, Data Protection News (UK). State of the Nation articles on national ID cards. Social, Legal and Professional Aspects of Computing ID Cards. "Britain Discussing National ID Card System", Newsbytes, 03/28/95. Other Reports and Materials "TOUCHING BIG BROTHER: How biometric technology will fuse flesh and machine" by Simon Davies. "Smart Cards: Big Brother's Little Helpers" by The Privacy Committee of New South Wales, Australia. Chip-Based ID: Promise and Peril by Rober Clarke, Australian National Univeristy. Human Identification in Information Systems: Management Challenges and Public Policy Issues by Roger Clarke. Identification, Anonymity and Pseudonymity in Consumer Transactions: A Vital Systems Design and Public Policy Issue by Roger Clarke. 1991 Hungarian Supreme Court decision stricking down use of ID numbers. Smart Card Magazine, The Birth of Smart Cards: 1980. Electronic Privacy Information Center's pages on current national ID card proposals in the United States. News Stories TORONTO STAR, February 9th, 1996; Lead Editorial: HARRIS SHOULD SCRAP UNIVERSAL ID CARD. `Smart cards' will soon be approved, says health policy committee by chairperson by TOM ARNOLD, The Edmonton Journal. Canadian Privacy boss raps ID cards, The Canadian Press, July 15, 1995. Privacy commissioner in the dark about ID cards: Wants controls put on access, The Vancouver Province, September 27, 1995. AsiaWeek, ID Cards Introduced in Philippines. Greece to Demand Religion on National ID Cards, 2 May 1993. Unisys press release on Spain national ID card project. Return to Privacy International's Home Page Last updated July 16, 1997. -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton)

1 0

IP: DNA-Powered Computers: Patent Received
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: DNA-Powered Computers: Patent Received Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:31:49 -0500 To: believer(a)telepath.com Source: New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/patents.html September 14, 1998 PATENTS Solve Computer Problems With DNA By TERESA RIORDAN Four years ago, Dr. Leonard Adleman raised the exciting possibility of DNA-powered supercomputers when he wrote in the journal Science that he had solved a computational problem essentially by stirring up some DNA in a test tube, using building blocks of DNA as computing symbols. The technique, in concept, involves the use of DNA -- strands of genetic code -- as a stand-in for computer software code. Adleman, a professor at the University of Southern California, set up his problem by synthesizing DNA in a certain sequence and then letting DNA molecules react in a test tube so they ultimately produce a molecule whose sequence is the answer to the problem. He used the chemical units of DNA rather than electronic 1s and 0s to solve a single, relatively simple problem: figuring out the shortest distance someone would have to travel to visit a number of different cities -- similar to a standard math problem referred to as the "traveling salesman tour problem." But last week Dr. Warren Smith and Dr. Allan Schweitzer, two scientists at the NEC Research Institute in Princeton, N.J., received what appears to be the first patent covering a DNA computing process that at least theoretically can solve not just a single problem but a broad array of problems, just as a conventional desktop computer might. The patent describes a way to concoct a vat of DNA molecules that have been manipulated by standard biotechnology techniques -- such as the cutting, splicing and growing of DNA strands -- to behave like miniature computers. All these molecular-size computers would operate in parallel, with each one exploring different possible computational paths to solve a problem, potentially speeding up computing time greatly. The patent details a way to use genetic material to construct a large number of what are called Turing machines, all running in parallel, with each exploring different possible computational paths. (A Turing machine is a theoretical construct, first proposed in 1937 by the British computer scientist Alan Turing, that provides the schematic outline upon which digital computers are based.) Despite the new patent, Smith does not sound optimistic these days about the patented technique. "Some of the DNA molecules do the right step," he said in an interview, describing the process. "But then some other fraction just dissolve and get flushed down the drain." This and other problems lead to an exponential buildup in errors during the calculations. In addition, the operations of this DNA computing so far are slow-going, taking hours. "This does appear to be the first patent to issue in this area," said David Waltz, an NEC vice president. "But will this be the basis of a new industry, and will everyone have to take out a license on it in the future? That's not so clear." Smith and Schweitzer received patent number 5,804,373. Patents are available by number for $3 from the Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, D.C. 20231. Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** www.telepath.com/believer **********************************************

1 0