December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

charity at the point of a gun (Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 00:27:50 GMT > From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> > Subject: charity at the point of a gun (Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone) > (fwd) > What people aren't willing to pay for shouldn't happen. Period. If > that means people starve well those complaining loudest had better > dig deeper into their pockets. This attitude is exactly why such system as anarchy won't ever work. > _Then_ Jim's "No state can govern those > who don't wish to be governed" starts to become true. It's true as much now as it was at the height of the American or French Revolution. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Grounding (last slice of spam?) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1998 16:19:48 -0800 > From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka(a)lsil.com> > Subject: Re: Grounding (last slice of spam?) > Sorry for prolonging the agony - I was hoping, in vain, for an admission > of guilt. Ok, your guilty. > > Now the electrons repel each other and therefor move in a > > circular motion with the spark gap as the center. > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > takes me on a trip with Mr. Peabody and Sherman to the place where the > Huskies go... Perhaps, but it doesn't change the fact that a cloud of like-charged particles expand in a cloud of equi-radius (which when looked at in side view is circular). ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

govt server architecture
by Anonymous lo14 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Greetings and salutations, Can anyone share experience with U.S. government server hardware, used for medium-load computing applications (not supercomputers)? I'm looking for information on brand names, flops, etc. and where to find more.

1 0

Advanced Nuclear-Hardened Encryption Technology
by Michael Motyka 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Uh, what in the hell is "advanced, nuclear hardened, encryption > technology"? advanced(1) - we fucked up so we have to classify it so nobody but us boobs will know what boobs we are advanced(2) - last year's obsolete model in a new suit to fit this year's corruption conspiracy advanced(3) - we wish we had this but we're going to hint that we do anyway to keep'em guessing nuclear-hardened(1) - bikini glass ( not applicable ) nuclear-hardened(2) - a pencil encryption technology - a copy of Gideon's and some stationary from the Beijing Hilton

1 0

RE: Advertising Creepiness
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My comments on this: Consider what advertising does: it notifies potential users/consumers about products and services which might be of use or pleasure to them. Consider who a potential audience/market is: people who might be interested in availing themselves of these products/services if they but knew of their existence. Advertising which is in keeping with the theme of the medium's message is not quite so obnoxious: for instance, when looking over a magazine like Cigar Afficionado, which is about smoking and enjoying "the good life", I see ads for cigar accessories and after-dinner liquors and places where a person can order a glass of Corvoisier (sp) and light up in good company. The ads are a logical extension of what one expects to find in those pages, they allow the reader to see where they might find and purchase the goods they are reading about and indulge in their pleasure, and so are not a nuisance - in particular as their presentation is aesthetically pleasing and in good taste. I don't expect to find there advertisements from Nature's Pantry Health Foods or an Orthopedic Hospital. I can't think right now just what advertising would be so pertinent to a news magazine in cyberspace, but I imagine the same principle applies and would make ads less a mere distraction, less jarring to the attention. Marketers aren't logical, though, are they. : : ) .. Blanc

1 0

Forwarded mail...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: 9 Nov 1998 20:40:03 -0000 > From: lcs Mixmaster Remailer <mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu> > Subject: Re: Grounding (fwd) > 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! No, I didn't. First off your assumption that the charge in the battery is neutral is faulty. No such point was ever made. I also mentioned this fact when I brought up the Van DeGraff. > 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. Actualy, no it doesn't. What Gauss' Law does state is that if there is a neutral ball and there is a point charge within it there will be a contrary but equal charge imposed on the inside surface of the globe. As a result of charge conservation there must be a equal and opposite (hence negative) charge that is equal to the point charge inside the globe on the outside of the globe. > 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. And the anonymous person has forgotten that we never defined the mechanism of how the battery worked. It might very well have started out with a net-negative charge. I didn't invent the model, just simply worked within it. I also, on two seperate occassions, mentioned that I was not going to deal with the net charge that gets deposited on the globe because of the complexity it adds to the model. > 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. No, Gauss Law says at all times the charge on the sphere must stay equal for point charges. Since the spark gap is by defintion emitting electrons it doesn't qualify as a point charge. I brought this up as well in reference to the Van DeGraff. Gauss's Law does say that any excess charge on the inside of the globe will propogate to the outside of the globe. Now each of those free electrons IS a point charge. You follow Gauss's Law through the same process and what do you get....a charge equal to the electron on the outside of the surface. > 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. No, it wouldn't. The charge inside the sphere is exactly canceled by the charge induced on the inside of the sphere (+ + - = 0) by Gauss's Law. Now since the sphere is neutral, and we've induced that positive charge there must be a balancing negative charge. That charge rests on the other (outside) surface of the sphere. All that's taken place is that the universe has created a situation where you can't steal charge and hide it where it can't be found. That WOULD violate conservation of charge. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "Blanc" <blancw(a)cnw.com> > Subject: RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd) > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 16:16:15 -0800 > You know, guys, it doesn't matter what sort of tax system is set up, if it > doesn't begin with one very fundamentally, essential, crucial, important point: > respect for the sovereignty of the individual. This means respect for their > individual agreement, their informed consent, to any arrangement to be taken up > by them. > > If, at any point in time - either before, during, or after a plan for obtaining > moneys from citizen-units is instigated - it loses sight of the purpose for > setting up the whole thing, then it's worthless anyway. If it doesn't support > the highest ideal of humanity - unit by unit, individual by individual, human > beings qua their separate existence - then it is not serving their purposes, > but only the purpose of those who identify themselves as the State: employees of > the State, leaders of the State, keepers of the State, goalies of the State, > wards of the State, etc. Jesus, it's a miracle. Blanc and I actualy agree....I think I'm gonna faint. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 13:23:20 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone > (fwd) > Usualy !=3D Correctly. > > Take tomatoes. Perfectly legal (AFAIK) everywhere, here in this > country a 5 year old child can buy a tomato from a farmer with a stand on > the side of the road. > > If you go back 10 years, and if "this country" was the soviet > union, a tomato purchased from the wrong person could get you in trouble. So what are saying...that because any government ever happened to abuse its citizens in a particular way is justification to do away with all government? This is a strawman. > This is true in this coutry. Licquor is legal if purchased thru the > approved store. > > Try selling the same thing out of the back of your truck. > > It is the product, or how the product is sold. Well actualy it's whether it has a tax stamp whether you sell it out of a storefront or a truckbed is irrelevent. Considering the number of people who died in the late 1800's and early 1900's because of moonshine liquor from contaminated stills that were unregulated (where were those fine upstanding ethical considerate eco-anarchists then?) it's probably a good thing that it's illegal to sell untaxed and therefore anonymous alcohol. > So take ampthetimines (well, don't take them, but take the case of > them), if I get them from Joe Random Drug Dealer, it's black Market, if I > get them from Paul the Doctor, it's "white" market. Not necessarily. The doctor has to have a medicaly supportable reason to dispence those drugs. Otherwise it's just as black market as Joe's. > In fact, if I get them from Paul the Doctor, and then sell them to > someone else, I am selling them on the black market, even if I recieved > them legally, so in this case, it isn't how the item was aquired, it's > whether the _sale_, the *exchange* is legal. So, we've already established this as a viable mechanism. Rehash old hash. > I didn't think of theft when I wrote the above, and I don't usually Didn't think of theft? Jesus H. Christ, you gotta be on Joe's drugs. The vast majority of material sold on *ANY* black market is stolen from its rightful owner. It is *the* example of black market trading that most folks think of first. > I still maintain that as one moves closer to a completely free > market, there is less and less of a black market, and to be the extrememe > case of a free market, there would be the potential to trade in both human > lives, and in stolen property. Well, at least you're an honest eco-anarchist. And how do you propose to stop this sort of behaviour (it's clear that there is a market whether the economy is free-market or not) without some sort of 3rd party arbiter (call it government or not is irrelevant to the point)? > In a free market, the selling of stolen > goods might not be a crime in and of itself, but the posession of those > things could be, How the hell do you sell something on the black market if you don't have possession of it? And exactly who is going to prosecute anyone for possession? Since we've done away with laws governing economics and trade there isn't even a court to try the perps in if we did apprehend them ourselves. and the aquireing would be, as well, the _hiring_ of an > assassin might be legal, as long as no killing took place. When it does, > you hang the assassin on murder, and the hirer on conspiracy, aiding and > abetting or whatever, and stick them in the same cell. Huh? Who is doing all this arresting and writing of laws, and building jails, and staffing prisons, or hiring hangmen? We're not in Kansas anymore toto.... ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

4 3

How to make non-neutral charge batteries...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One way a person could generate a battery suitable for the spark gap experiment to address the conservation of charge issues related to the battery is to build a mechanism such as: 2N e- 1N p+ | | | | |-------------| |--------------| | | | | | | | | | | | | |------0 0------------------0 0--| \ \ spark gap switch The two vertical plates above are not a capacitor. They simply represent some mechanism to hold charge, Leyden Jars for example. Now when the switch is closed 1 N of e- will combine with 1 N of p+ to form a neutralization of charge. That will leave a net 1N of e- that will represent a point charge of that value. That charge will be exposed at the right contact of the spark gap above. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "X" <xasper8d(a)lobo.net> > Subject: RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd) > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 11:31:00 -0700 > Sorry, everyone, for this crap coming up, but JIM CHOATE wants you all to > see it... > > Jim, > > You keep reposting this to the cpunx list, and I keep trying to discuss it > with you in private. I have zero desire to discuss this in private. If you don't want to discuss it here then we won't discuss it. > Correct me if I'm wrong, but the gist of your system was a two-tiered > payment schedule where Group A could be called TaxPayers and Group B could > be called NON-Payers. Right? > > And basically, Group A would get all of the benefits that a fully paid > membership would entail, right? Secondly, Group B would "not pay taxes" and > would NOT be entitled to any benefits save for on a pay-as-you-go type > arrangement. Right? > > What USGov't services do you include in your proposal? Each and every one of them, except the criminal courts. I would include the state and local government as well. Perhaps you could think of it as a discount card....;) > (feel free to jump in with some more.) You're doin' fine. > U.S. Mail services If you don't show them your tax receipt before Jan. 1 of each year they will remove your address from their delivery list until you do so. If you don't either pick it up there in person within 10 days, every 10 days it goes back. The Constitution says they have to deliver your mail. It doesn't say they have to drop it on your front step. Personaly I think this would be a great position for those folks who have learning disabilities but still need a job. The irritation factor alone would be worth it...;) > Common defense Already covered that one. > Air traffic controlling When you buy your ticket from a commercial carrier and don't present a tax receipt your ticket price goes WAY! up. > roadways and interstates Already covered them too. > Food and Drug Administration approvals When you buy food or drugs if you don't present your tax receipt then you pay the full price for foods and drugs. > Federally mandated minimum wage I also covered this one already. > automobile safety standards See the one above. > Is your tax progressive or regressive? Depends on what *you* mean by progressive or regressive. Personaly I would go for a flat tax rate but a scaled mechanism would be ok. It isn't the particular scaling mechanism that I dislike about our current tax system. > If I'm right so far (which I may or may not be) then we have to talk about > your definition of "paying taxes." Taking a percentage of your monetary income each period (say a year) and sending it to an address. That address is the suitable tax agent who then distributes the monies into the appropriate account according to law. The suitable civic agencies can then draw funds according to law. > Does a single woman raising five kids > and paying a small mortgage making $14,200 per year pay taxes? No, > unfortunately for her, she doesn't. I guess that puts her smack into GROUP > B! Well, that's simple enough! Not at all, simply because she is unfortunate enough not to have the income necessary to participate without causing harm to herself and her family (perhaps) is no reason to deny her those rights. I'd give her a receipt that would look just like anybody elses. Now if she didn't want to apply for it by sending in the paperwork that's her decision. From a government perspective she is participating fully in the process, it isn't the amount of money (as foreign as that may be to eco-anarchists and free-market mavens) that is the issue but the willingness to participate. Nobody is forcing her to do anything, it's all of her own volition. > We'll deny her the creature comforts of the > list above until she chips in her proportionate cost, right? When that > libertarian bitch tries to send mail, we'll charge her more! WHen she gets > on the freeway, we'll toll her! When she buys a medicine for her snot-nosed > urchin, we'll give her the stuff that ain't been FDA approved, right? > RIGHT! And, if ever we should need to attack another country (or defend > ours, as you pointed out) SHE'LL happily volunteer to serve (as I remember > your post) in order to protect her TAX-FREE STATUS. No, that isn't right. As to participating in the military, no I didn't give anyone a choice. I said *draft*, you didn't give up your citizenship when you gave up your tax participation. Now if you want to give that up to then we won't draft you but you'll be one broke puppy trying to pay all the bills as a non-tax-participant and a non-citizen. > As you said to me, she's probably just looking for someone to shoulder her > part of the load, right? I said to you? > You said it would be easy to implement, right? I don't see that it would be > easy at all. As hard as this may be to take, your ability to see it doesn't effect it's viability. > Once again, I apologize for the OFF TOPIC nature of this, but MR. COHATE > (freudian slip, or merely coincidence? you be the judge!) insisted on > duking this out in public. Um, actualy YOU responded to my post. I didn't start this with you. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1