December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: so, what did Toto *do*, exactly to get locked up? (Re: rules of en (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:40:02 +0200 (CEST) > From: DOOM Anonymous Untraceable User <nobody(a)seclab.com> > Subject: Re: so, what did Toto *do*, exactly to get locked up? (Re: rules of en > We also have people who *have* kept their noses clean being harassed. It's an > excuse to put some pressure on CDRs. It even had the effect of shaking loose > a lot of the Austin cypherpunks in a nice little divide and conquer action. That's not exactly correct. The Austin Cypherpunks have always had a problem with cohesion. There were issues that were leading me toward dropping my personal support because of lack of committment from other parties in the Austin Cypherpunks. This certainly hastened the event, it did not cause it. We were already divided in our goals and interest and unable to agree on agenda or purpose. We, as a group, couldn't even decide to spend the few dollars to put the 3-line RSA in the local paper. The last effective action we took was the speaking engagement at the last RoboFest here in Austin 3 years ago. That sort of "I want to participate, but won't do anything" attitude raises the hackles on my neck. Life is way too short to be wasting major effort on a lost cause. There wasn't much to divide and the spoils going to the conquerer are/were nil. > And it's likely they have subpoenaed more people than we've heard from. > I just hope they don't subpoena Bill Payne, or we'll receive a copy of it > every week for years to come. Yep, with those silly/strange capitalizations and sentence structures of his which look suspicously like some form of stego. You'd think somebody who claims to be that educated would have at least learned basic grammer (unless it was intentional). > The John Gilmore subpoena was focussed exclusively on cypherpunk email. > Jim Choate confirmed his is much the same. Other than dates and signatures it's identical. The focus was on any archives that I kept of cpunks or personal traffic (part c) that involved CJ in my interview. > So the focus is on what we've > all seen posted here. Personally, I found them a lot milder than Reeza!'s > projection of his suicide fantasies, for instance. I would also agree that the Cypherpunks have garnered a notoriety with LEA's such that it could/should be taken as a given that continous surviellance is occurring. Random dumpster diving in our trash, etc. should not be unexpected. This does raise an interesting point about freedom of speech and the duties of LEA's. In a democratic society what are the ethical implications of LEA's archiving publicly available documents as a matter of course, not for inclusion in ongoing investigations but rather as a base for future investigations. In addition, while the remailer operators do seem to be protected by ECPA (I was advised that I fell into this category via SSZ) what about the public archive operators? Are they covered under this umbrella? ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Child-Molesting Forger's Chilling Confession!!!1!
by bob＠derwentside.org.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

application/www-form-urlencoded

1 0

IP: [FP] Money withheld for national ID cards
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Delivered-To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com From: "ScanThisNews" <mcdonalds(a)airnet.net> To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com Subject: IP: [FP] Money withheld for national ID cards Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:34:02 -0500 Sender: owner-ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: list Reply-To: "ScanThisNews" <mcdonalds(a)airnet.net> SCAN THIS NEWS FRIDAY OCTOBER 23, 1998 Money withheld for national ID cards Spending bill provides moratorium on implementation http://www.worldnetdaily.com/exclusiv/981023_money_withheld_nat.shtml Copyright 1998, WorldNetDaily.com http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ By David M. Bresnahan david(a)talkusa.com The recently passed Omnibus Appropriations Bill included funding for $520 billion of spending, but it purposely excluded funds for the national ID card or the medical ID program. A review of the bill, which had over 4,000 pages and is 16 inches thick, revealed that the opponents of the effort to make state driver's licences into a national ID card succeeded in getting a moratorium on the implementation of the law enacted in 1996 by Congress. Both the national ID and the medical ID have already been made law. The moratorium delays implementation from occurring on schedule while repeal legislation is debated by Congress. The national ID became law in 1996 and will go in effect October 1, 2000, unless Congress repeals Section 656 (b) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. If the law is not changed, every state must meet certain unfunded federal mandates requiring the use of Social Security numbers, fingerprints, DNA, retina scans, and other "biometric" identifying information on all driver's licences. Another federal mandate is the medical ID, which will be a new unique number for every American intended to keep a detailed medical history in a government computer. It will be implemented unless Congress acts to repeal Section 1173 (b) of the Social Security Act. The moratorium was first included in a transportation appropriations bill, but Rep. Lamar Smith, R-TX, convinced Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-GA, to remove it before passage, according to House Transportation Committee sources. Rep. Frank Wolf, R-VA, chairman of the House Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee included the ban in the omnibus bill, according to a committee staff member. However, Smith was reported to be pushing to have that removed as well. Those efforts failed, largely because of thousands of calls placed to Gingrich's office by the public, according to congressional staffers who preferred not to be identified. Patrick Poole of the "Free Congress Foundation," a non-partisan group, sent thousands of e-mails to supporters who then called Gingrich to encourage him to keep the moratorium despite the efforts of Smith. WorldNetDaily.com reported Monday that Smith was trying to remove the ban. "Many of the callers either faxed copies of stories from WorldNetDaily, or they mentioned it when they called," the source said. "There was no way the speaker could support Smith's efforts with that kind of public awareness." The actual language found in the Omnibus Bill states: "National Identifiers: "None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be used to issue a final standard under docket No. NHTSA 98-3945 (relating to section 656(b) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act of 1996). "National Health Identifiers: None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to promulgate or adopt any final standard under section 1173(b) of the Social Security Act (42 USC 1320-d-2(b)) providing for, or providing for the assignment of, a unique health identifier for an individual (except in an individual's capacity as an employer or a health care provider), until legislation is enacted specifically approving the standard." The moratorium, now in place, will provide needed time for opponents to draft legislation to repeal both the National ID and the Medical ID. The process is expected to bring major debate over the issue. Smith and others have used illegal immigration problems as their primary justification for the need to give every American both identifying numbers. House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-TX, Rep. Ron Paul, R-TX, and Rep. Bob Barr, R-GA, are reported to be planning repeal legislation next year. None of their offices were able to be reached for comment on the success of the moratorium in the Omnibus Bill. It had been reported previously that all three had urged Gingrich to allow the moratorium to stand. Responsibility for the design and implementation of the cards has been given to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation. That agency has recently published the proposed "Driver's License/SSN/National Identification Document," which contains the guidelines which must be in force by Oct. 1, 2000. The "Notice of Proposed Rule Making" sets out the standards for each state to follow in the design of "identification documents." The DOT solicited public comments on their plans for implementation of Section 656 (b) of the act earlier this year. The public comment period has just closed and many thousands of letters in opposition were received, according to a spokesman. Five states also expressed opposition to the plan, and only a "small number" of letters supporting the plan were known to the spokesman, who spoke on condition that his name would not be published. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators also wrote to the DOT and recommended repeal of the law, even though they had once been in favor of such legislation. "Over the past 10 years, the AAMVA has vigorously pushed Congress and the various state motor vehicle directors to implement policies to require the submission of social security numbers as a condition for issuance of driver's licenses. This resounding defeat may spell the end of their ill-fated quest," said Scott McDonald, a grass-roots activist who operates the "Fight the Fingerprint" website. He is able to mobilize thousands of activists on a national basis using his e-mail notification system. "There is no satisfactory condition under which Social Security Numbers may be required as a condition for travel," said McDonald. "The victory's definitely not yet won. During these lull periods there's an opportunity for proponents of these issues to let opposition die down and all of a sudden, pop, it goes through without anyone even aware of it. "I don't see how the Department of Transportation could go forth with implementing the regulation with all that strong opposition to it. Even five states wrote letters of strong opposition to requiring Social Security numbers," said McDonald. Although he was in favor of the moratorium, McDonald expressed concerns about the difficulty in getting complete repeal of the law. He said many activists may now regard the issue as being resolved, when the toughest part of the battle is still ahead. "For a year we're safe," said Lisa Dean of the Coalition for Constitutional Liberties, another organization that has been actively campaigning against the provisions of Section 656 (b). She agreed that the toughest part of her organization's challenge is in front of her. Now that a moratorium is in place for a year, Dean expects repeal efforts will also include finding alternative ways to resolve the concerns about illegal immigrants, although no recommendations are in place as yet. ======================================================================= Don't believe anything you read on the Net unless: 1) you can confirm it with another source, and/or 2) it is consistent with what you already know to be true. ======================================================================= Reply to: <fingerprint(a)networkusa.org> ======================================================================= To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to <majordomo(a)efga.org> and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY. Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY. For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N. Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page: www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml ======================================================================= **************************************************** 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 **************************************************** --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

test4
by Igor Chudov 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

test4

1 0

RE: Postcard Debates
by Wilson, Jamie (J.R.) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If everyone just encrypted their messages then no suspicions would be raised regarding the use of encryption. Most people use envelopes, plain and simple -- and as a result no one questions what they are hiding. It's understood that mail is private and therefore people have a right to seal it in an envelope and not worry about people tampering with it. On the same note, there are federal regulations and penalties (in the U.S. anyway) for tampering with mail and interrupting the delivery of it. The same laws should apply to email. ____________________________________________________ Jamie R. Wilson -----Original Message----- From: Robert Wenzler [mailto:rwenzler@usachoice.com] Sent: Thursday, 10 December, 1998 13:56 To: Mbishop645(a)aol.com Cc: maven(a)weirdness.com; hab(a)gamegirlz.com; Cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Mbishop645(a)aol.com wrote: > > >HaB wrote: > ><snip> > >> That's a good place to begin, though. "Would you send a letter to > >> someone without an envelope?" "Then why not put your email in the > >> electronic equivalent of one?" > >> > >> balance. > > > >Would I send a letter to someone without an envelope? > >One word: postcard. > > Ahh, but would you tape a check for your phone bill to a postcard? Other > than writing a greeting to someone what else do you use a postcard for? No, I would not tape a phone bill check to a postcard. There is the chance for it to fall off. There is different methods of sending mail for different levels of security and functionality. Some people make it obvious what is inside an envelope. (who would not recognize a Christmas card from the envelope?) Others make it as bland and normal as possible to have it go by without much notice. It all depends on how secure you want it. Some things you can do with what amounts to postcard security. What amount of security do you want for your email? Would you be willing to do something extra for that security? This type of question is up to each person. How much risk is the person willing to take. Each person has the responsibility to understand what the risks are and to decide what risks they are willing to take.

4 3

Re: alternative b-money creation
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have to agree with Bill here. It's kind of hard to call something "money" if you can't exchange it for other things which also call themselves "money". ;-). Cheers, Robert Hettinga ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Test
by Mok-Kong Shen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

please ignore this.

1 0

SSZ had ISDN problems this AM...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Because of the weather change here there was an outage of ISDN connectivity at my ISP. It seems to be back now. No idea if it will return in the next day or so. ____________________________________________________________________ What raises the standard of living may well diminish the quality of life. The Club of Rome The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: alternative b-money creation
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Stewart writes, regarding Wei Dai's b-money protocol: > It still doesn't solve the fundamental problem with the b-money idea, > which is that there's no reason anybody should want to accept it, > any more than they should want to accept dead-president fiat paper money. > It fixes some symptoms of fiat money, but not the fundamental problem, > because it's still fiat money, just with mathematically interesting > artwork printed on the front. B-money is not fiat money. It is better to think of it as commodity money. Unlike most commodity money, in this case the commodity is not intrinsically valuable. However it is scarce, and more can be created only at a considerable cost. An analogy might be money based on a rare earth element like Terbium (which, let's suppose, has no industrial uses). Terbium based money would be immune to inflation, like gold backed money, but the element is not valuable in itself; it is only valuable for its role as money. This leads to an important difference between b-money and fiat money. The value of b-money is not set by fiat. The value is determined automatically by the workings of the market and the workings of the protocol. There is no centralized agency to make b-money legal tender, or to set its value in terms of other currencies. Most importantly, there is no agency which can issue new b-money, inflating and devaluing the currency. Money is a store of value and a medium of exchange. B-money is admirably suited for these purposes, much better than fiat money. The quantity of b-money in a mature system is, roughly speaking, constant. (The quantity may grow, but it will do so slowly, based on the increased demand for b-money.) B-money is an investment which will hold its value. Because it can be exchanged electronically, it is much more flexible as a medium of exchange than existing forms of money. > One of the big problems with fiat money is that someone who > can get other people to trade it for real goods has an > incentive to print lots of it and acquire a very large share > of the real goods in the economy, leaving the rest of the people > with unredeemable artwork and only able to get their share > of goods by giving the fiatmeister labor or other real goods. > > Wei Dai's b-money proposals reduce the incentive to create > lots of b-money by requiring the creator to burn lots of > valuable CPU time to create the mathematical artwork on the notes, Think of this CPU-burning as the effort to mint or mine new b-money. Like other commodity based money, and unlike fiat money, b-money cannot be printed. New b-money can only be added to the money supply by virtue of expending work. This is what insures that there is no inflation. > In some ways, it's even _worse_ than traditional fiat money, > because creating it uses up CPU time that could otherwise be > calculating things that have value for the rest of the economy, > like optimizing airline routes or circuit-board designs, > or less valuable cool things like rendering bug pictures for movies > or calculating the next Mersenne prime or cracking MongoBank's keys, > or, well, drawing space-war pictures real fast on your Nintendo. You could say the same thing about gold mining, in the days when gold was money. Most gold went into circulation as coins, not adding beauty or value to the economy. Its only utility was as an increase in the money supply. But, of course, adding to the money supply is an important contribution. To have a stable commodity money, it must be costly to create more, and the cost must be "wasteful" in the sense that it is not compensated other than by the monetary value of the newly produced money. Otherwise you will get excessive inflation. It's ironic for people to complain that b-money is inferior, in a world in which fiat money is universal. Once the mathematics of b-money are better established and understood, and once the technical issues are clarified and problems solved, this appears to be a very attractive alternative to fiat money. Unlike commodities such as gold, it can be easily exchanged electronically. And unlike fiat money, it is immune to attempts to manipulate the money supply. B-money could easily attract investment as an inflation-proof store of value. This may be enough to initiate the bootstrapping process. People can buy b-money as a store of value, and once they hold it they will want to be able to spend it. This will lead to a demand for merchants to accept it, and the process has begun.

1 0

Bruce Taylor ed -Reply
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:44:05 -0500 Reply-To: Law & Policy of Computer Communications <CYBERIA-L(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM> Sender: Law & Policy of Computer Communications <CYBERIA-L(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM> From: Dan L Burk <BURKDANL(a)SHU.EDU> Subject: Bruce Taylor ed -Reply To: CYBERIA-L(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM >>> Filtering Facts <burt(a)NORTHWEST.COM> 12/10/98 07:58pm >>> >How is it that you guys all missed the ed. by Bruce Taylor in USA Today >last week? Especially since it contained a plug for me. ;-> Sorry, I probably filtered it out. I've had "Bruce Taylor" in my mental bozofilter ever since he used to work for Charles Keating. The only thing that's changed since then is that (so far as I know) Bruce no longer relies on pilfered S&L funds for his crusades. Now how's that for a filtering fact? ---------------------------- Dan L. Burk Seton Hall University burkdanl(a)shu.edu ---------------------------- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0