December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

SR2201 Supercomputer
by Jan Dobrucki 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.hitachi.co.jp/Prod/comp/hpc/eng/sr1.html Is the link for more information, in english... And I can't find a stupid computer and a printer in one place that prints postscript so I still haven't been able to give in my application for the account on this super computer... JD

1 0

SR2201 Supercomputer
by Jan Dobrucki 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.hitachi.co.jp/Prod/comp/hpc/eng/sr1.html Is the link for more information, in english... And I can't find a stupid computer and a printer in one place that prints postscript so I still haven't been able to give in my application for the account on this super computer... JD

1 0

SR2201 Supercomputer
by Jan Dobrucki 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.hitachi.co.jp/Prod/comp/hpc/eng/sr1.html Is the link for more information, in english... And I can't find a stupid computer and a printer in one place that prints postscript so I still haven't been able to give in my application for the account on this super computer... JD

1 0

Re: Grounding (fwd)
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Dolt writes: > The spark gap generates sparks and that builds up free electrons in the > space inside the sphere (whether it is gas filled or a vacuum is > irrelevant). As that charge builds up it will be all of one type, electrons. > Now the electrons repel each other and therefor move in a circular motion > with the spark gap as the center. They strike the surface of the sphere and > tunnel through to the outside surface where they reside. The amount of > charge at any one point is related to the curvature of the surface at that > point. Since a sphere is constant curvature the charge will be evenly > distributed. It will continue to build up so long as you supply power to the > spark gap. In an ideal world it will get bigger and bigger. In the real > world at some point insulation breaks down and normal current flow takes > place. Listen to this. Jim Dolt thinks that a spark gap inside a conductive sphere will cause charge to build up on the surface of the sphere! The dunderhead has forgotten about conservation of charge! Gauss' law says that the charge on the outer surface of a closed conductive sphere will be equal to the net charge inside the sphere. The spark gap can't change the net charge inside the sphere, it can just move charge around. Jim Dolt has conveniently forgotten about the net positive charge which will build up on the spark gap as it (supposedly) emits electrons. His Doltish notion that electrons will hit the inside of the sphere and "tunnel through" to the outside is totally confused. Suppose this happened. We've removed negative charges from the interior of the sphere and put them on the outside, where they would give the sphere a negative charge. Now, what is the net charge on the interior of the sphere? We started neutral and removed negatives, hence it's positive! Gauss' law would imply that the sphere must have a positive charge. But Jim Dolt tried to give it a negative charge from all those electrons that "tunneled through." The whole idea is ludicrous. No charge can spontaneously appear on the outside of an ideal closed conductive sphere. This would be a violation of the law of conservation of charge. By Gauss' law, the charge on the outside is equal to the net charge on the inside. If a sphere, just sitting there in empty space, suddenly develops a charge, then that means that the interior has manufactured charge out of nothing. It is impossible. The fundamental misconception that started this whole sad comedy of Doltish errors was Jim Dolt's belief that a Faraday cage has to be grounded in order to suppress electromagnetic radiation. This has led us to his revelation of his further misunderstandings of how charge behaves inside a conductive surface, not to mention his numerous errors about the mechanism by which a spark gap transmitter generates EM radiation. (Hint: it has nothing to do with a cloud of electrons spreading out from the spark gap!) The fact is, Jim Choate knows nothing about this topic, and the same is true for most subjects that he writes about. He loves the attention he gets, but if more people told him they knew how worthless his contributions are, he just might go bother someone else.

1 0

Re: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd)
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

country have let it get out of control for many decades. the idea that "someone else handles that stuff" has infected our consciousness. govt is something WE handle if we want a good one. if you want something done right, do it yourself. cpunks actually contribute to this problem with their nihilistic philosophy in general. the msg is that it is a waste of time to engage in group activity or political discourse or lobbying against the govt or organization or *whatever*... it's actually just a variant on the sheeple passivity. sheeple are like, "that's not my job". cpunks are like, "it is a waste of time and energy to do that job". what's the difference in the end?? the govt can be turned around very, very quickly if the public stops sucking down sixpacks and being hypnotized by meaningless dribble of sporting events and sitcoms that parade endlessly across their nanosecond attention span. maybe they might read even more than a comic book or pornographic magazine some day. the political class *intentionally* created this bread and circus atmosphere and are hiding behind the scenes as we speak. no dorothy do not look at the man behind the curtain. some new books are encouraging signs. "secrecy" by moynihan. there is a new book on the "third party" or something like that which proposes a new political party, and is selling very well on amazon. a new book by gerry spence lawyer talks about how the u.s. population is enslaved. the material is there for those who seek it. "when the student is ready the teacher will appear"

2 2

IP: NSA Threatens To "OUT" Republicans Over Hubbell Investigation
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: softwar(a)us.net (CharlesSmith) Subject: IP: NSA Threatens To "OUT" Republicans Over Hubbell Investigation Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 16:53:35 -0500 (EST) To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com President Clinton has tried to avoid the subject of encryption exports to China while considering the release of Israeli crypto-spy Jonathan Pollard. Yet, encryption has played a large role in a foreign donation scandal with one of Clinton's closest associates, Webster Hubbell. After losing at the polls, Republican insiders are grumbling that they could not investigate Hubbell because the secret National Security Agency (NSA) is threatening to retaliate against hill members. Webster Hubbell took money from Lippo in 1994. Mr. Hubbell served time in Federal prison because of his Whitewater uncovered during Ken Starr's investigation. In 1993, Attorney General Janet Reno tasked Mr. Hubbell to encryption under the CLIPPER encryption chip project. Hubbell had access to highly classified materials on encryption chip design, including algorithms and software. Hubbell met often in the White House with now CIA Director George Tenet on the CLIPPER project. According to a Republican Capitol Hill staff member the "NSA does not want Hubbell investigated." The NSA has quietly threatened to "out any congressional member like (Congressman) Burton" who mentions Hubbell with encryption and China. The NSA threat is not a hollow one because the agency is certainly equipped with incriminating and/or embarrassing personal information gathered from years of phone intercepts. The NSA is the prime listening agency for national intelligence. The NSA is equipped with satellites, super computers, employs an estimated 25,000 and has a budget estimated to be one third of the $26 billion U.S. intelligence budget each year. John Huang, Ron Brown and Web Hubbell were deeply involved in classified NSA encryption systems. Specifically, John Huang, Lippo banker, DNC fundraiser and secret-cleared Commerce employee was briefed 37 times by the CIA on satellite encryption technology. According to the Commerce Department, Mr. Huang had no encryption materials. CLIPPER, according to secret Clinton documents, was to be implemented by law whether it by "mandatory" legislation or a "voluntary" system of taxpayer backed payments. The CLIPPER chip, according to a secret FBI document, also had an "exploitable" feature allowing the U.S. government to monitor communications. The NSA CLIPPER chip was intended to provide all the banking and financial security for the entire United States. It was to be required in every computer, fax and phone manufactured. According to more secret FBI documents, CLIPPER also had one big flaw. A single penetration of the master key list would compromise the entire system. Ron Brown insisted that the Commerce Department be one of the master CLIPPER key holders. President Clinton tasked Brown to the project in 1993 in a top-secret executive order. According to Nolinda Hill, Brown was aware that the encryption transfers to China were bordering on treason. NASA administrator Benita Cooper wrote in 1993 that "compromise of the NSA keys, such as in the Walker case, could compromise the entire EES (CLIPPER) system." Ms. Cooper at NASA knew convicted spy John Walker sent tons of materials on U.S. secret code systems to Russia for years during the Cold War. One breach of CLIPPER in a NASA computer could kill many and ruin the agency. In 1994 President Clinton began personally authorizing the export of advanced, nuclear hardened, encryption technology directly to communist China. The exports took place with presidential waivers that included the signature of Bill Clinton. They also took place using loopholes and bureaucratic gray areas of U.S. export law. The Clinton exports included such military items as advanced fiber optic communications; radiation hardened encrypted satellite control systems, encrypted radios and cellular phones, and encrypted navigation systems. According to the GAO, President Clinton even approved the sale of a fully operational, secure air traffic control system for the Chinese Air Force. The failure of the NSA CLIPPER project is already a blot on the secret agency based at Ft. Meade. The possibility that Chinese agents penetrated the NSA project would bring encryption to the forefront of public debate and shine intense light on an inept intelligence agency. The seemingly crazy Clinton policy shows our President to be crazy like a fox. Clinton did what Pollard and Walker could not do. President Clinton sold national security secrets for cash by writing his own legal waivers. Clinton's secret crypto policy served to line the pockets of politicians and greedy corporate executives with red money. The Clinton export policy has significantly upgraded the nuclear strategic and tactical firepower of the Chinese Army. Clinton, like Walker and Pollard, sold military code secrets for cash. America knows more about AREA-51 and UFOs than Ft. Meade and Webster Hubbell. Bill Clinton and his China crypto-tale will never be declassified for the American people. The Clinton scandal cover-up is backed by the NSA library of greatest intercepts against Republicans. ================================================================ Information on CLIPPER, Ron Brown and Vince Foster - http://www.softwar.net/clip.html ================================================================ 1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - encryption 1775 Charles R. Smith SOFTWAR http://www.softwar.net softwar(a)softwar.net Pcyphered SIGNATURE: 93513049E31CC7BD371748D388E8EED0A73B5D3D90AF3349F8A40E5DE61B4ABD 3CAC50EF4BFE2CF287C9843E6E4676B2D9D710EB301CB0E05B5F52B2D1448A04 90B9E2F4C67594DF =============================================================== SOFTWAR EMAIL NEWSLETTER 11/08/1998 *** to unsubscribe reply with "unsubscribe" as subject *** ================================================================ **************************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address or (un)subscribe ignition-point-digest email@address **************************************************** www.telepath.com/believer ****************************************************

1 0

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Matthew James Gering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > What happens when you have somebody on a fixed or small income. > Is your position that the paultry sum they can raise will be > taken seriously in regards compensating either the insurance > company or the fire dept.? What if they are on a fixed or small income and need food? Medical care? Etc. Should be make food retail and medical services both tax-supported government-mandated monopolies to accommodate those people who do not produce enough that they need a free lunch provided by someone more productive? It is the same argument used to continue our massive failure of a public educational system. There is no valid reason to intertwine "welfare" with the service, and there are many reasons not to -- e.g. it treats items as commodity services that should not be (esp. education), it creates false "rights" (e.g. right to education), it creates a coercive monopoly immune to market competition, and since people don't have to *evaluate* the service for spending decisions, they tend to *value* it less if at all. With welfare completely divorced from services, you can get a clear sight of the real cost (negative value) of the socialistic support system, and also of the productive output (positive value) of the service produced and those willing and able to consume it. > > willing to pay the local fire department a fee to stand > > ready to come and put out fires for me. > > You do it already, it's called taxes. No, he said *willing*. > No, without taxes funding a civic police department with If you claim that a service won't exist without public tax funding, then you are essentially claiming that people do not value that service enough to privately pay for it. So we should instead force them to pay for it? > connections to other police agencies around the country > you're hope of finding the perp is nil. And these connections won't exist if they are private entities? Perhaps they will have less chance if the agencies are bound to the same limitations as individuals in regards to privacy and liberty, but that is a good thing. > Oh, yeah. You and a couple of your beer buddies have like a > real hope in hell of matching the capabilities of a real > police homicide or rape investigation. Get fucking real. But that is not to say a private organization would not have matching capabilities. You cannot look at current PI's for the same reason as you cannot look at private education as what would exist in absence of the publicly mandated one. Lack of suitable competition is due to government-created monopolistic conditions. Matt

1 0

RE: NSA Threatens To "OUT" Republicans Over Hubbell Investigation
by Matthew James Gering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Uh, what in the hell is "advanced, nuclear hardened, encryption technology" ? Matt

1 0

fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness)
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh writes: > Whether you love or hate current copyright laws, it's a stretch to argue > that it's legal to republish (by forwarding) articles in full. Who cares if it's legal or not. Copyright only "works" to the extent of readers good-will (beggarware/shareware approach "please don't copy") and to the extent that thugs from your local force monopoly can enforce it at gun-point. I think the conclusion of crypto-anarchy is that copyright seems unlikely to survive as a schelling point for making money from publications. You can make money from information provision by charging extra for up-to-date news, or by charging so little that the cost from the original provider is so low that it's not worth anyones time to redistribute it, or by providing higher bandwidth connection to the net than the mirrors, or by making do with click throughs from the percentage of people who use the original rather than the cheaper mirror. Recursive auction market is a statement of reality if you make things too expensive to the reader. Overdoing the banners may be overdoing it already, viz the banner stripping attempts. The problem from wireds point of view is that they want their 1% click through rate to derive their funds. But that is their problem, and for them to develop strategies for obtaining funds in this landscape. To say it's "not legal to republish" is saying what? that you think thugs with guns should enforce bit flow controls? That wired plans to make use of these force monopoly services? I agree with Jim and Vladimir, I find it annoying to see URLs only, and the teasers (5 lines telling cut off just where it may or may not get interesting) are irritating too, as they tell you almost nothing. I'd rather see nothing or someone summarise or post the whole thing, or at least the interesting bits if it is highly relevant. Mostly it is just background clutter, most "news" isn't interesting at all. Adam

1 0

Re: IP: Crunch Time for Y2K Suppliers (fwd)
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh writes: > I'm not sure I like intellectual property laws in general -- like some > libertarians, I might prefer a contract-based system. But for now I support > civil laws to punish copyright infringements, and it seems to me it's > difficult to argue that redistributing entire articles isn't one. Ah good -- I thought you'd taken leave of your cypherpunkly senses for a moment there! (re my `fuck copyright' post). > Besides, and more importantly, it's also rude. That it might be, if it is a social says that it is polite to honor peoples requests about bit flow. But hey, if more and more people find ignoring the supposed social convention convenient, then perhaps this social convention isn't as widely adhered to as people making money off subsidized copyright enforcement thugs might like to claim it is. ie. IMO social conventions on copyright are moving, and quite fast. And copyright has a hidden cost which we are all paying for. Adam

1 0