December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Trying To Reach You !!
by cb_brown＠mail.jax.bellsouth.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

UNSECURED CREDIT CARD AT YOUR DOOR BEFORE CHRISTMAS!!!! Selective Marketing has joined hands with one of the Nations Largest Credit Institutions in an effort to issue 20 Million Unsecured Major Credit Cards. We have tried to make the process of getting your unsecured credit card very simple and painless. You will not be asked to sign up with some network nor will you be asked to pay a monthly fee for the credit card. You are guaranteed a credit card even if you have bad credit, bankruptcy, low income, charge offs, or short time at residency. The process is simple. Completely fill out the form below. You have two options. You can mail or fax your request for your credit card. Include your processing fee of $9.95 ( US Dollars Only). You can fax a check or send cashiers check or money order. The address is at the bottom of processing form. By the way, your application fee is 100% guaranteed. If you do not receive your credit card your application fee will be refunded. Here is what you can expect. All faxed processing forms with faxed checks will be given immediate attention. When we receive your order form we will send a credit card application form to you the very next day that will require your signature. We are currently receiving hundreds of applications per day. Act now and you could have your credit card by Christmas. PROCESSING FORM: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CREDIT CARD PROCESSING FORM Last Name_____________________ First Name___________________MI____ Address_________________________________________________________ State/Province______________________________ Country___________________________________ Country Code______________________________ E-mail____________________________________ Type of Card Desired ( ) Matercard ( ) Visa ( ) Both Amount of Credit Desired ( Max $5,000.00 )____________________ How do you rate your credit rating? ( ) Great ( ) Fair ( ) Poor Make all checks, money orders, and cashier checks payable to Selective Marketing. If faxing your processing form and processing fee, fax to the following fax number: ( 904 ) 778-4597. If mailing your processing form and processing fee, mail to following address: Selective Marketing 1291 A South Powerline Rd Suite #101 Pompano Beach, FL 33069

1 0

Re: Overcoming War with Information
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Nerthus wrote: >War is often used to justify the existence of government. If >politicians can convince the people that they have an enemy that must >be destroyed, the people willingly give their lives and livelihood to >the government to fight this assumed enemy. War feeds the expansion >of a government's power over its citizens. After the war has ended, >the government maintains this newfound power. Governmentally inclined organizations stir up violence and trouble all the time to strengthen their positions. I would make a more extreme statement and say that the source of most wars are governments. The counter example would be a war in which a government was dragged unwillingly to the battlefield by its people. Can anybody think of a single counter example? I cannot, but there might be one or two. >Interestingly, the 20th century, which has been the bloodiest in >recorded history, has also been the century of failed experiments in >large-scale government. The former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are >clear examples of what happens when different groups of people (who >would rather not be associated) are forced to live together at the >point of a gun. The disolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, >and the subsequent violence and unrest clearly illustrate the results >of forced association. How much of this violence arises spontaneously and how much of it is instigated by politicians? I haven't studied the dissolution of Yugoslavia, but it seems likely that the new governments which were formed strengthened their somewhat weak positions through the instigation of violence. The post-Yugoslav governments probably cooperated in creating hatreds and division to lock in their rule. This can be hard to study because usually we don't have access to the people doing this, their files, or their communications. There are instructive examples, however. On Christmas Day, 1914, the men in the trenches in France stopped fighting and left their trenches to celebrate the day together. Officers on both sides worked very hard to make sure nothing so terrible would ever happen again! It's hard to understand what terrible thing would have occurred if World War I were simply called off. >We must remember that people are reluctant -- and for good reason -- >to go to war. Common sense prevails, though it may not be exercised >all that often. War can be avoided if the truth of the situation is >revealed to the populace: the spotlight shone on the puppetmasters. Preventing war entirely might be hard. But, we can certainly create tools and customs which make it possible for many people to evade participation in a war. For instance, widely available highly liquid assets means that it is possible to be somewhat independent of a particular nation. This means that spending a few years outside a warring nation is far more practical. If things settle down, you can go back home. If not, stay away! A good real life example is the Jewish people living in Germany. They were not allowed to take their assets with them. If you were worth, say, $500,000 and your choice was to lose it all or stay in the country, you might persuade yourself that things had already hit bottom and if you just stuck it out, you wouldn't lose your life or your fortune. This is a bad decision to have to make. If we think of human beings as points in a graph and their relationships as the edges we can create a nifty model of the world of the future. Right now, nations are sets of people whose relationships are almost entirely confined to the set. The elites of nations have some contact with each other, but for the most part nations are disjoint sets. What the Net and cypherpunkly tools create is a world in which there are not easily identified disjoint sets because any particular net of relationships that a person has tends to overlap the relationship nets of other people who have a dissimilar set of relationships. This is a more reliable and robust world to live in because there is a great deal of redundancy. That is, the elites of two countries cannot conspire to use their respective sets of serfs as cannon fodder in some ill advised adventure. It's hard to get excited about a war run by people who are not your friends against people who happen to live in another part of the world but with whom you have a relationship. You are entirely right in your observation that the governments of the world work hard at keeping the sets of people disjoint from each other without appearing to do so. My favorite example is the outrageous taxes imposed on cross border communications. >At the same time, clear solutions to the problems that have >accumulated due to blind faith in an unworkable system have to be >presented and implemented. The transition will not be easy. Personally, I like the approach of finding easy ways to do things. I don't think the nature of the situation requires an all or nothing approach. Let's say crypto is completely outlawed in the United States and the phones are all tapped. It still won't be possible to suppress an underground press since the reproduction costs are so low. In the past people have managed to publish underground newspapers under extremely harsh conditions. Nowadays it's as hard as copying a diskette. I believe that the things we do to move in a forward direction are additive, just like money. This goes for techniques we develop as well as people who are involved in our projects. We should design our systems so that they do not rely on the goodwill of the masses. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHEEyZaWtjSmRH/5AQGw9Qf+L2+VihS1c5PUYH0U/BTAU4URy/pXjWgp GhKUt8jF+RIu0zJnVqRTXErsaIa3Up/DDeSNJu7BFVAzBX/Ej5QqNT4JdZlrZ37P DN5JMjMzTyGhq92XkaXFc+VRbpGUGu0yKojhQeLXObjfb78ZTFcddtcMx+dudf/W M1YXtB5TwPWBRso9f+BGeKCMUYouX06/X/vpzxGE5fJ5NvO15rzdZNoQ06jNp1lw dOiuaxCghHQHcUXKAN4syMOGSNCeqGB0/D0JRsMf0/wu1jcEb5LJC4KGmc18phi+ ZjI4yjydL7nG1tIXNjHeBG8oGCDkLhLBi6jh3lysOjKWUJFJchaT0A== =dOvU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Violence and depravity
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Anonymous <nobody(a)replay.com> wrote: >> Every day that passes, I'm more convinced that McVeigh did the >> right thing. Some innocents died, but, hey, war is hell. Broken >> eggs and all that. > >This speaks for itself. Only an utterly depraved, sick, and vicious >individual could support the killings in Oklahoma City. This is the >man who many would say is the most respected on the list. I suppose it could be true that after consideration, only a morally bad or evil person would view positively the Oklahoma City bombing. However, the discussion is valuable and it is a productive one in which to engage. The morality of war is an exceptionally important question to resolve. What is interesting about Timothy McVeigh's world view is how astonishingly similar it is to the view of most people in the organizations he is attacking or, indeed, the view of most people in American society or even the world. In general, the massacre of innocents is considered "depraved" when the acts are committed by those far from the levers of power. The USG was exposed to some criticism in the Gulf War, but much less than would be proportional to the number of innocents who died. For the most part, the people who die in modern war are non-combatants. McVeigh apparently found it to be acceptable to kill, for the most part, a bunch of office workers to get at his actual target the ATF offices on the top floor of the building. (I have no idea whether he knew of the day care center and whether this would have affected his decisions.) Generally, when a military mind is confronted with a shield of innocents, the innocents won't last long. Once this reasoning is accepted, and it is widely, the real question is whether the war is justified. After seeing the horrifying picture of the body of an 8 year old girl who was gassed and then burned at Waco, it's difficult to dismiss war as a moral and just response. For those who have not seen this picture, the poor child's arms and legs were horribly twisted into unnatural positions as a consequence of cyanide poisoning which causes muscles to violently contract. The muscles in the back and on the back of the legs are stronger than the other muscles. In executions, the contractions can be so violent as to break bones. Gassing is particularly hard on children as they typically will not have closely fitting gas masks. (Children come in all sizes, but the available gas masks may often do not.) While some aspects of what happened at Waco are debatable, there is no question that representatives of the United States government consciously decided to gas the people in the house. This was not a mistake made in a time critical situation. It was carefully planned. It is my sense that we must not allow these sorts of acts to occur in the future. I feel quite strongly about this. "The System" failed to prevent the murders and it failed to prosecute even a single Federal official for the crimes committed. Crimes which can certainly be compared to "crimes against humanity". Little seems to be publicly known of the responsibility of the various levels of the chain of command. We do know that there was a great deal of communication with the highest levels of the United States government. William Jefferson Clinton and Janet Reno may not be guilty of premeditated murder. But, a series of fair trials would have cleared up this question. Instead, some of the surviving victims were tried. Given that the government itself committed the atrocities and the mechanisms to discourage future atrocities through public condemnation and punishment were not invoked, it is clear that the solution will not come from "within the system." McVeigh apparently decided that the proper response was a war on the United States government with the attendant loss of innocents. This decision expresses a moral code indistinguishable from that of most officials in the government itself. McVeigh even implied that his government is his "great teacher"! In my view, this is an error. Surely we can choose better moral teachers than the United States government! Returning to Tim May's comment that he was feeling sympathetic with Tim McVeigh's decisions, it seems to me that it is understandable why such a thought would cross the mind of a person who is not morally bad or evil. However, it may be that after thought and discussion that a person with sound morals and good intentions may also decide that McVeigh's actions should not be emulated. The important word here is "discussion". The interesting property of discussion is that one does not always know at the beginning what one will believe at the end. That's why they are worth having. That's why it is not "utterly depraved, sick, and vicious" for somebody to discuss an idea, even one with which we do not agree. Most people are not pacifists. Brian Riley related an experience he had in Vietnam in which somebody came running out of the bushes with a bayoneted SKS rifle. It would be hard to find anybody who wouldn't do the obvious thing in this situation. That said, I do not believe that McVeigh did the right thing. Few of his victims can be said to be responsible for the actions taken at Waco. And the problem with the use of violence is that it is hard to control and the consequences of the act are often hard to predict. Violence is often dangerous to the user. Those participating in the use of organized violence seldom have much choice in the targets, type, or quantity of the violence employed. Violence is, in nearly every case, a poor investment of time, money, and energy. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHDrg5aWtjSmRH/5AQFCigf8CWGqSxP43jcNsrtYGgUWCyNjK4kcZHU/ EaaCx3BNlwpTStUxdqtAC+phhjvjXvJD+C/44RqJOMISzu2fD9+QpLXGY4PnD4vt hur8oFVLOcKgZLOaBx4QpAfrNeahhKE5AOhcaqgXvqxKUpTHb97tZsTGo/ob0Jfp aGBJ5MhUVvHEJAwo2PHsnSEiBxVzJKI6nfWYlMaNvVrkhrh7TakSEO9t4lp6Jo4q AW/SYblOY4jQiyNxtphCUQOWPx09gUaA6Ej/jwuDp2l49hngZ5AlaylkY9+Oqow1 s0kO+cQrFxtLEFO8PN8xX9Qbl9C0w9HdoyEiRxDfl9fQyMxDVRZOvg== =QhN7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Overcoming War with Information
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Nerthus wrote: >War is often used to justify the existence of government. If >politicians can convince the people that they have an enemy that must >be destroyed, the people willingly give their lives and livelihood to >the government to fight this assumed enemy. War feeds the expansion >of a government's power over its citizens. After the war has ended, >the government maintains this newfound power. Governmentally inclined organizations stir up violence and trouble all the time to strengthen their positions. I would make a more extreme statement and say that the source of most wars are governments. The counter example would be a war in which a government was dragged unwillingly to the battlefield by its people. Can anybody think of a single counter example? I cannot, but there might be one or two. >Interestingly, the 20th century, which has been the bloodiest in >recorded history, has also been the century of failed experiments in >large-scale government. The former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are >clear examples of what happens when different groups of people (who >would rather not be associated) are forced to live together at the >point of a gun. The disolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, >and the subsequent violence and unrest clearly illustrate the results >of forced association. How much of this violence arises spontaneously and how much of it is instigated by politicians? I haven't studied the dissolution of Yugoslavia, but it seems likely that the new governments which were formed strengthened their somewhat weak positions through the instigation of violence. The post-Yugoslav governments probably cooperated in creating hatreds and division to lock in their rule. This can be hard to study because usually we don't have access to the people doing this, their files, or their communications. There are instructive examples, however. On Christmas Day, 1914, the men in the trenches in France stopped fighting and left their trenches to celebrate the day together. Officers on both sides worked very hard to make sure nothing so terrible would ever happen again! It's hard to understand what terrible thing would have occurred if World War I were simply called off. >We must remember that people are reluctant -- and for good reason -- >to go to war. Common sense prevails, though it may not be exercised >all that often. War can be avoided if the truth of the situation is >revealed to the populace: the spotlight shone on the puppetmasters. Preventing war entirely might be hard. But, we can certainly create tools and customs which make it possible for many people to evade participation in a war. For instance, widely available highly liquid assets means that it is possible to be somewhat independent of a particular nation. This means that spending a few years outside a warring nation is far more practical. If things settle down, you can go back home. If not, stay away! A good real life example is the Jewish people living in Germany. They were not allowed to take their assets with them. If you were worth, say, $500,000 and your choice was to lose it all or stay in the country, you might persuade yourself that things had already hit bottom and if you just stuck it out, you wouldn't lose your life or your fortune. This is a bad decision to have to make. If we think of human beings as points in a graph and their relationships as the edges we can create a nifty model of the world of the future. Right now, nations are sets of people whose relationships are almost entirely confined to the set. The elites of nations have some contact with each other, but for the most part nations are disjoint sets. What the Net and cypherpunkly tools create is a world in which there are not easily identified disjoint sets because any particular net of relationships that a person has tends to overlap the relationship nets of other people who have a dissimilar set of relationships. This is a more reliable and robust world to live in because there is a great deal of redundancy. That is, the elites of two countries cannot conspire to use their respective sets of serfs as cannon fodder in some ill advised adventure. It's hard to get excited about a war run by people who are not your friends against people who happen to live in another part of the world but with whom you have a relationship. You are entirely right in your observation that the governments of the world work hard at keeping the sets of people disjoint from each other without appearing to do so. My favorite example is the outrageous taxes imposed on cross border communications. >At the same time, clear solutions to the problems that have >accumulated due to blind faith in an unworkable system have to be >presented and implemented. The transition will not be easy. Personally, I like the approach of finding easy ways to do things. I don't think the nature of the situation requires an all or nothing approach. Let's say crypto is completely outlawed in the United States and the phones are all tapped. It still won't be possible to suppress an underground press since the reproduction costs are so low. In the past people have managed to publish underground newspapers under extremely harsh conditions. Nowadays it's as hard as copying a diskette. I believe that the things we do to move in a forward direction are additive, just like money. This goes for techniques we develop as well as people who are involved in our projects. We should design our systems so that they do not rely on the goodwill of the masses. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHEEyZaWtjSmRH/5AQGw9Qf+L2+VihS1c5PUYH0U/BTAU4URy/pXjWgp GhKUt8jF+RIu0zJnVqRTXErsaIa3Up/DDeSNJu7BFVAzBX/Ej5QqNT4JdZlrZ37P DN5JMjMzTyGhq92XkaXFc+VRbpGUGu0yKojhQeLXObjfb78ZTFcddtcMx+dudf/W M1YXtB5TwPWBRso9f+BGeKCMUYouX06/X/vpzxGE5fJ5NvO15rzdZNoQ06jNp1lw dOiuaxCghHQHcUXKAN4syMOGSNCeqGB0/D0JRsMf0/wu1jcEb5LJC4KGmc18phi+ ZjI4yjydL7nG1tIXNjHeBG8oGCDkLhLBi6jh3lysOjKWUJFJchaT0A== =dOvU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

For a Dignified and Effective Demonstration
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - From an anonymous leaflet, London, early 1980s. FOR A DIGNIFIED AND EFFECTIVE DEMONSTRATION Brought to you by the ALL-LONDON UNITED ALLIANCE OF SOCIALIST CAUCUSES to whom teh following are signatories: G.L.C., London Labour Party, T.U.C., S.W.P., W.R.P., I.M.G., C.N.D., Ecology Party, Y.C.L., and B.F. We welcome everyone to today's demonstration, which we hope will be amongst the biggest London has seen for many years. We are confident that the vast majority of you will keep intact your dignity. A disciplined rally is essential if we are to avoid discrediting ourselves in the eyes of the public and losing the approval of the police. We want to give the media no reason to condemn our campaign by pointing to any over-imaginative acts. To this end, we call on everyone to obey the dictates of the stewards who will be found alongside the police. They will be acting in your interests. They are sensible people - please be sensible with them. Beware of troublemakers - some may be in the crowd with you. If you see any do not hesitate to summon stewards or the police, who, we must remember, are our brothers in work. Comrades! Even in a socialist society we shall still need Specialists-In-Order to combat hooligans and deviants. While it's true that nowadays the police are occasionally over-zealous in their protection of privilege, property, and the violence of the world market, the best way of dealing with this is by demanding public accountability through elected local government or some other representation of submissive community. In the meantime we should recognize that they will only listen to our complaints if we conduct ourselves in the correct manner. RESPECT FOR THE DEAD Our tactics are those to which the greatest number can conform with the least difficulty. They require no more than your presence and a minimum of participation. All that we ask is that you recreate the conditions of your work. Remember! It's numbers that count; the boredom you feel is also imposed by the demo on everyone else. Each demonstrator must be equivalent to and replaceable by any other. Just like our old friend, the commodity. Please bear in mind that love and marriage go together like a horse and carriage, OK? We therefore ask you to comply with the following simple rules: 1. Exactly one hundred to a line, each rank to be one yard clear of the line in front. No lounging please. 2. Wait for the initiative of the official loud-speakers before repeating the correct slogans, always recognisable by their format. For example: "X - IN! . . . Y - OUT!" or "WHAT DO WE WANT? - SOMETHING! . . . WHEN DO WE WANT IT? - WHENEVER YOU GET AROUND TO GIVING IT TO US!". Kindly check that all Extra-Parliamentary slogans recognize the ultimate sovereignty of Parliament. If you have any doubts, consult our easy-to-read list of DEMONSTRATION SLOGANS DO'S & DON'TS: - CHANT DO NOT CHANT Cheap Fares Now! NOT Helicopters on Demand! Victory to Fares Fight! NOT Total Contestation! No Return to the 30's! NOT No Adventure for the '80s! Slogans are jolly good fun! NOT Bollocks to Demands of our Enemies! Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa! NOT Riot for Romance! 3. The left-hand side of the rally has been designated a 'No Smoking' area. Demonstrators are respectfully asked to comply with this request. 4. If you see any impatient extremists please inform us immediately. They are easily distinguishable by the following kinds of sectarian individualism: a) Inventing unofficial slogans such as "Kenny is a Cop!", "Neither Left, Right, nor Centre!" or "Revolution is the Festival of the Depressed!" or some other aggressive utopian rubbish. b) Departing from the prescribed site of the demo for the purpose of indulging in manual waltzes through shop windows and the wilful destruction of saleable goods. Take care to note that Piccadilly, offering gold-drenched shops and fine vistas of the commodity, is a holiday of sheer temptation you should avoid. c) Making unauthorised alterations to luxury cars. d) Using banner poles in an extravagantly exhuberant manner. e) Smoking excessively long cigarettes or 'joints'. f) Drinking looted alcohol. COORDINATED FEROCITY g) Suggesting that demonstrators should band together in groups of fifty or more in order to spread disruption of traffic as widely as possible. For example, by the continuous use of zebra crossings, standing around chatting in the middle of the road or arranging obstacles to prevent the free flow of carbon monoxide, lead, cop cars, and tension-producing noises through our streets. h) Any clever, erotic, or playful expression of individual or group initiative. CLOCKWORK FUTILITY 5. During the rally you are urged to clap your favourite speakers. Please confine your enthusiasm to 15 secs per point made in the middle of a pseech and a maximum of 30 secs at the end of one. Please do not interrupt with shouts of "BORING"! 6. Always remember to smile at the press cameras and adopt a suitably militant stance even when you feel pissed off with the whole business. 7. If you are uncertain whether a particular mode of behaviour is orderly or not, just do what everybody else is doing. Should any unconventional urges remain do not hesitate to discuss them with one of our stewards. They will be only too pleased to refer you to the appropriate specialist, whether G.P. or S.W.P. 8. At the end of the demo please do not dawdle. Failure to make your way home quickly could result in you missing the sight of yourself on TV. This leaflet is brought to you courtesy of the ALL-LONDON UNITED ALLIANCE OF SOCIALIST CAUCUSES. The following have refused to sign this leaflet: The vandals of St. Saviours Primary School who refused to accept their discipline quietly and who wrecked their compuslory prison, causing a sobbing teacher to lament "These youngsters have hardly left their cradles, but they are threatening to take over the school." The rioters at Bydgoszcz Prison in Poland who fought Communist Party hacks, State Police, and Solidarity union officials, all allied in defence of the walls of the prison against the townspeople who were helping prisoners escape. The ASLEF traindrivers who avoid wage slavery as much as possible, preferring dancing and drinking to sacrificing themslves to a job which mainly involves transporting other slaves so that they may perpetuate the futility of it all. The black and white joyriding youth of Clapham who used CB radios for the fun of organising efficient looting. The Deptford New Cross Marchers of a year ago who in anger and audacity broke away from the march in order to re-distribute weatlh in the Bond Street area. The Toxteth and Southall youths who shouted down Left Labour activists patronising enough to characterize the riots as "understandable but inexcusable". The truckdrivers of Cleveland, USA, who took over the local distribution of food, medicine, and other necessities, by themselves and without mediation, for over 3 weeks. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHFJYj7jyGKQlFZpAQF45gf/cLPQudDnrnKEHSldLB8WO+twoJ3G4QnC pGZa2T13APLzDCB9Sh+F5DEL85D7mVzk8w4kuQSdrgGqZ14rAc95wpPX6KkCNo2o E5JqrBc6dxGXxJT+rSJvS/vri8k8g06HDbhB1QBIYm4OjXkoKw8XZYJAmYYTgfLD 6QY1pnjDzQ0JMMsteUKsK+TWEpMO566mzIP2Lkf8EC9Y3kWn7S+xVsj7mtv3e7Nm MDVQr/ztJm7AQiecHYmZQ88lFU/9b0VtWJNS23kRP7wdkpuqq99BG46gUIHAwDk1 Rtlirhli0Qt8OSHjVZ2BAVn1jjd2qjdIemok7Npt5Uq4smiMvEZCug== =ERUa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Robust Debate
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Joichi Ito wrote: >> This discussion is hardly going down in flames. You're apparently >> too sensitive to engage in robust debate. > >This is true. I am not going engage in what you probably call a >robust debate. A lot of people read this list and any robust debate >will probably lower my reputation capital in some important area for >me no matter what the outcome. I am not currently willing to take >this risk. 1. IMO, robust debate is the source of new ideas. New and worthwhile ideas are often shocking. For example, the music by Bach, Beethoven, the Beatles, and even the Sex Pistols were all shocking in their time. 2. Attacks on your posts only lower your reputation if the attacks have substance. Tim May has been attacked more than anybody else on the list for years. His reputation capital is doing just fine. 3. Use of remailers simplifies True Name reputation management. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHD7NZaWtjSmRH/5AQHbYAf9FeWz6D12NjT0hm9/IA4SVzr6+97RvB+/ VW50fLVRLe1gnW5BDzsWSiWWJB0jXDif8adqLZfm45RAQX4b9t60y+ShSfaxt+9d weqKM6n0p7vl4aHz73nyTcdzsi7ysR+vEarYiTqQMXRnI+EJdewCEuctCmRCWZE3 2liBy3HqZLCuLsUKxAL6IOlmnu73g1uw4zJeADiFFU1l26qmuE0xbMt4tgnLFnW7 vgOHGgkK4dZ2rboSsZcgBZ3acV19Z+TDHfDN7jaF7pRY6wEzryuyH5rmVPO+RuDr buDDG+9sgeE336SRcArl+7tWMMnf1fKgKnZG7r7+3GC+sTNjbbjehA== =0XHn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

The Judge On War
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Blood Meridian: Or the Evening Redness in the West" by Cormac McCarthy On a rise at the western edge of the playa they passed a crude wooden cross where Maricopas had crucified an Apache. The mummied corpse hung from the crosstree with its mouth gaped in a raw hole, a thing of leather and bone scoured by the pumice winds off the lake and the pale tree of the ribs showing through the scraps of hide that hung from the breast. They rode on. The horses trudged sullenly the alien ground and the round earth rolled beneath them silently milling the greater void wherein they were contained. In the neuter austerity of that terrain all phenomena were bequeathed a strange equality and no one thing nor spider nor stone nor blade of grass could put forth claim to precedence. The very clarity of these articles belied their familiarity, for the eye predicates the whole on some feature or part and here was nothing more luminous than another and nothing more enshadowed and in the optical democracy of such landscapes all preference is made whimsical and a man and a rock become endowed with unguessed kinships. They grew gaunted and lank under the white suns of those days and their hollow burnedout eyes were like those of noctambulants surprised by day. Crouched under their hats they seemed fugitives on some grander scale, like beings for whom the sun hungered. Even the judge grew silent and speculative. He'd spoke of purging oneself of those things that lay claim to a man but that body receiving his remarks counted themselves well done with any claims at all. They rode on and the wind drove the fine gray dust before them and they rode an army of graybeards, gray men, gray horses. The mountains to the north lay sunwise in corrugated folds and the days were cool and the nights were cold and they sat about the fire each in his round of darkness in that round of dark while the idiot watched from his cage at the edge of the light. The judge cracked with the back of an axe the shinbone of an antelope and the hot marrow dripped smoking on the stones. They watched him. The subject was war. The good book says that he that lives by the sword shall perish by the sword, said the black. The judge smiled, his face shining with grease. What right man would have it any other way? he said. The good book does indeed count war an evil, said Irving. Yet there's many a bloody tale of war inside it. It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way. He turned to Brown, from whom he'd heard some whispered slur or demurrer. Ah Davy, he said. It's your own trade we honor here. Why not rather take a small bow. Let each acknowledge each. My trade? Certainly. What is my trade? War. War is your trade. Is it not? And it aint yours? Mine too. Very much so. What about all them notebooks and bones and stuff? All other trades are contained in that of war. Is that why war endures? No. It endures because young men love it and old men love it in them. Those that fought, those that did not. That's your notion. The judge smiled. Men are born for games. Nothing else. Every child knows that play is nobler than work. He knows too that the worth or merit of a game is not inherent in the game itself but rather in the value of that which is put at hazard. Games of chance require a wager to have meaning at all. Games of sport involve the skill and strength of the opponents and the humiliation of defeat and the pride of victory are in themselves sufficient stake because they inhere in the worth of the principals and define them. But trial of chance or trial of worth all games aspire to the condition of war for here that which is wagered swallows up game, player, all. Suppose two men at cards with nothing to wager save their lives. Who has not heard such a tale? A turn of the card. The whole universe for such a player has labored clanking to this moment which will tell if he is to die at that man's hand or that man at his. What more certain validation of a man's worth could there be? This enhancement of the game to its ultimate state admits no argument concerning the notion of fate. The selection of one man over another is a preference absolute and irrevocable and it is a dull man indeed who could reckon so profound a decision without agency or significance either one. In such games as have for their stake the annihilation of the defeated the decisions are quite clear. This man holding this particular arrangement of cards in his hand is thereby removed from existence. This is the nature of war, whose stake is at once a game and the authority and the justification. Seen so, war is the truest form of divination. It is the testing of one's will and the will of another within that larger will which because it binds them is therefore forced to select. War is the ultimate game because war is at last forcing of the unity of existence. War is god. Brown studied the judge. You're crazy Holden. Crazy at last. The judge smiled. Might does not make right, said Irving. The man that wins in some combat is not vindicated morally. Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the weak. Historical law subverts it at every turn. A moral view can never be proven right or wrong by any ultimate test. A man falling dead in a duel is not thought thereby to be proven in error as to his views. His very involvement in such a trial gives evidence of a new and broader view. The willingness of the principals to forgo further argument as the triviality which it in fact is and to petition directly the chambers of the historical absolute clearly indicates of how little moment are the opinions and of what great moment the divergences thereof. For the argument is indeed trivial, but not so the separate wills thereby made manifest. Man's vanity may well approach the infinite in capacity but his knowledge remains imperfect and howevermuch he comes to value his judgements ultimately he must submit them before a higher court. Here there can be no special pleading. Here are considerations of equity and rectitude and moral right rendered void and without warrant and here are the views of the litigants despised. Decisions of life and death, of what shall be and what shall not, beggar all question of right. In elections of these magnitudes are all lesser ones subsumed, moral, spiritual, natural. The judge searched out the circle for disputants. But what says the priest? he said. Tobin looked up. The priest does not say. The priest does not say, said the judge. Nihil dicit. But the priest has said. For the priest has put by the robes of his craft and taken up the tools of that higher calling which all men honor. The priest also would be no godserver but a god himself. Tobin shook his head. You've a blasphemous tongue, Holden. And in truth I was never a priest but only a novitiate to the order. Journeyman priest or apprentice priest, said the judge. Men of god and men of war have strange affinities. I'll not secondsay you in your notions, said Tobin. Dont ask it. Ah Priest, said the judge. What could I ask of you that you've not already given? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHE+ij7jyGKQlFZpAQG5SAf9GHe5Wu1JY7yw9/yk3HkYMFZqB+CbjCg8 a9Zzd7njUpmVCAYfp4HEL24Y3zHIZxA6eJjXRb+tS5Lxxr04ziC2LqLZQ6km5SY8 Dk4JNmLeKLUWzQyidZz2f1onnVy3QUbV094mtXnfY1Ee2uSB8Xh+hfdhPjrv5Kr0 C/ZXzf9e+rHzVOXQhDOjIvXN6nSyhaqAlF8HcxUIqIxRwT2lh41aGgQaNO7w+zO/ FBDquykmJeE4+EEKVszQCJOKg4PDQ74LhAYNtzT1/p4g8H5g4oFfffZKQR44tk7m VD+oIktoUgwB9mK8xAUyAEBQra18292Zk8+7Kv7WtB7jaJ8yVeE9xQ== =7ezR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own mother's dead body. /\ __/__\__ | 00 | Tim May |: \ :| | \_/| \__/

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If anyone doubts Gary Burnore's vindictive nature and his disregard for the privacy of others, read this message from him where he dug up an old tax lien filed against one of his critics and broadcast it worldwide on Usenet in order to embarass him and intimidate him into silence about Gary Burnore and his abusive tactics: --- BEGIN INCLUDED MESSAGE --- Subject: Re: Monkey-boys position From: gburnore(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 02:01:14 GMT Message-ID: <gburnoreE5Iqy2.H8C(a)netcom.com> Organization: the home office in Wazoo, NE Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet References: <gburnoreE51xvo.2zK(a)netcom.com> <5doim6$32q$1(a)monkeys.com> <twficE5G4HL.Fp9(a)netcom.com> <wotanE5Gu0t.8Hv(a)netcom.com> <5drvl3$bvr$1(a)monkeys.com> Ronald F. Guilmette (rfg(a)monkeys.com) wrote: { In article <wotanE5Gu0t.8Hv(a)netcom.com>, <Wotan> wrote: { >In article <twficE5G4HL.Fp9(a)netcom.com>, { >Ty Fairchild <twfic(a)netcom.com> wrote while drinking: { > { >>Fortunately this thread will not be extended by any further follow from { >>monkeyboy. His public pronouncement states his position. { > { >Y'all mean bent over a post spreading his ass cheeks and yelling "Fuck { >me" to any passing entity? { Atta boy Wotan, my little BaBaBasicks bean brain. Jump in again any time. What say each time you slam DataBasix for no reason, we post some publicly available information about monkeys.com. HEre's the first try: + +Filing Number: 90226822 +Document Type: STATE TAX +Filing Date: 04/30/90 +Amount: $157,705 +Debtor: GUILMETTE, RONALD F, <ssn deleted> + 550 PAULARINO AV, COSTA MESA, CA +Court/County: ORANGE REC, ORANGE, CA +Certificate: 90114005621 +Tax Authority: FRANCHISE TAX BOARD +Release Number: 90431912 +Release Date: 08/15/90 + +Filing Number: 336573L +Document Type: STATE TAX +Filing Date: 04/27/90 +Amount: $157,705 +Debtor: GUILMETTE, RONALD F, <ssn deleted> + 550 PAULARINO AV, COSTA MESA, CA +Court/County: SANTA CLARA REC, SANTA CLARA, CA +Certificate: 90114005622 +Tax Authority: FRANCHISE TAX BOARD +Release Number: 4451377L +Release Date: 08/10/90 + More where this came from. Yu wanna keep slamming DataBasix for no good reason? -- gburnore(a)databasix.com mailto:gburnore@databasix.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- What's another word for Thesaurus? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary L. Burnore | ][3:]3^3:]3][3:]3^3:]3]3^3:]3]][3 DataBasix | ][3:]3^3:]3][3:]3^3:]3]3^3:]3]][3 San Francisco, CA | ][3:]3^3:]3][3:]3^3:]3]3^3:]3]][3 | ][3 3 4 1 4 2 ]3^3 6 9 0 6 9 ][3 http://www.databasix.com | Official Proof of Purchase =========================================================================== --- END INCLUDED MESSAGE --- --

1 0

Re: How anonymous?
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Ian Sparkes wrote: >If all anonymous posters make a concerted effort to write like Mr. >Nakatuji, not only will anonymity be assured, but the list will be a *lot* >funnier. "You know Mixmaster? Send me 50 dollar, I show you how use." But seriously, there is something to be said for adopting a style of writing specific to a nym or group of nyms. Anyone who has read The Economist magazine on various occasions knows how its language and tone are consistent, as if one author writes every article, issue after issue. Having the writings of a nym "edited" by others as a way of foiling Stylometry -- the statistical analysis of literary style -- may prove to be a lucrative business if nyms ever gain wide use, especially if they are used in ecommerce where anonymity of the nym holder is paramount to avoid the wrath of the tax man in his physical jurisdiction. Much of our writing style is unconscious. We habitually use certain vocabulary, sentence structure, punctuation. Our writings are like a fingerprint. The more we write, the greater the detail of that fingerprint. We can try to alter the style. Write shorter or longer sentences. Choose our words capriciously. But on some occasions (think ecommerce) it may be necessary to have a second party rewrite the original text. Enter the "nym editor" to remove the stylometric clues from a nym's writings. Correspondence between the nym owner and editor could be achieved anonymously using remailers, nym servers and "throw away" email accounts (Hotmail and Mailexcite). When the nym owner locates an editor and they agree on the terms of engagement, the owner submits his text to the editor. The editor reworks it, and sends it back to the owner. The owner may then make a few small changes or even submit it to another nym editor before posting the text under his nym. A nym owner may prefer a certain editor's style and continue to use him. Thus the nym will offer stylometric clues of the editor, not the owner. The nym owner can pay the editor using ecash, preferably of the fully-anonymous flavor. If the nym owner stiffs the editor on a payment, he can then broadcast it through the relevant channels. The nym suffers loss of reputation capital. It seems reasonable to assume that the likelihood of fraud by the nym holder is slim, especially if the editor tends to deal with persistent nyms. Fraud by the nym editor is also unlikely. The worst he could do is publish the unedited text, giving stylometric clues about the nym holder. The prudent nym holder who uses more than one editor can better avoid such a situation, though that risk is never entirely eliminated. However if the nym editor is uncertain of the author of the text he is reworking, there is little incentive to blackmail the nym holder since all he may be doing is passing on stylometric clues about another nym editor. Amad3us wrote elsewhere: >What do people think this nym is for? Only nyms can trade with >impunity in the tax free cypherspace. But only as long as the nym holder remains anonymous. Digital mixes are superb, but what good are they when we give away clues about who we are with every keystroke we embed in our digitally-signed messages? Nerthus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNHElEuFWwZe05jcJAQFSpwf6A63ba2/dSjXMJgdc4s5PvxbX+p4+J0Yw Hs+0unBnW+ULINMzyWyAs/q0oMVkXFHwD14t3VGQb+ofuhxXyC1c/tmuzKadgM5d OUAj1lmthAJncv9nJWulWAVJuksei4/xgGfAq18wSL4l9bt9L7UTY4m0zSnvlvDf KR3F+koKreO4dn9C0AcIMeClHWwpepUpxZflJwSszaPnCciuOHJ1ga/lKz+NCvmp CXPXzGW2PpfwhRBt0AkkX4WfnYNiFupalSx6pxgrHDiMHAMEr4G0W8fZlAUW8dSB X+1DSTMdCZLDMTsfSozUXDMiZB2Jgxwlu5vxcvY+kODBcCy9RGZBPw== =H2qx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1