December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Click HERE for Boy Sex
by secret＠nsa.fbi.cia.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An interesting anti-censorship experiment is currently taking place on Usenet. It's ingredients: One Libertarian-minded California ISP named InterBBS which provides a variety of services to various pay XXX Web sites, for resale to their customers, including an uncensored, unfiltered, and unexpurgated newsfeed, which InterBBS is protected by Common Carrier status from liability for the contents of. A nifty piece of software, recently added to InterBBS, which runs something called "newspix", a web-based interface to Usenet binaries pictures groups, pre-decoded and cross-referenced for your instant point-and-clicking pleasure. A guy named "Dave", a customer of InterBBS, who is reselling the services of InterBBS through a pay boy pictures site, including web access to a number of boy-related erotica newsgroups, whose content neither Dave nor InterBBS controls. Dave is very careful to tell us that it is imperative that we not download anything which would be illegal according to our community standards, and that if we "unknowingly" do so, we should delete it immediately. InterBBS, and its lawyers, maintain that their decoded neatly indexed web-accessible Usenet pictures service enjoys the same immunity for its content due to their Common Carrier status as the raw newsfeed does, and of course, they wouldn't think of keeping records on which customers read which Usenet articles. The owner of InterBBS is Marlin Schwanke, who also runs *CENSORED*.com, and is well known for giving bandwidth to persecuted causes. The net effect of all of these things coming together is that there now exists convenient pseudoanonymous web access to all boy-related child porn pictures posted to Usenet, for a small fee you may bill monthly to the credit card of your choice. This new service has caused a huge rift amongst Net Boylovers, who believe that even if this operation is technically legal, and protects the confidentiality of its customers, that such conspicuous promotion of locations on Usenet where illegal material is very likely to be found, and facilitating its easy access to the non-technically minded for profit, is not in anyones best interests. For Further Reading: http://boypics.com/newspix.html (Dave's Naughty Pix) http://www.ivan.net/bc/messages/38850.htm (Marlin Answers His Critics) http://www.interbbs.com/ (InterBBS home page) Surely the Feds are not going to take this lying down. :) Will Marlin and Dave be dragged to Tennessee or Utah to face trial in front of a bunch of inbred jurors? Will yokels from the cast of "Deliverance" in the courtroom audience squeal like pigs when the words "10 year old erect penis" are mentioned? Will Dave get a cell next to Robert Thomas of AA BBS fame? Will Reno and Freeh engage in unnatural sex and have a deformed cow? Is this the technology that will finally drive Officer Mike "Sewer Site" Paladino to take his own life? Stay tuned for the next episode of "Boy Pics from Dave." --BoySexMonger

1 0

FUTUREWEAR (fashion, clothing and clubwear)
by daniel＠relaxed.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FUTUREWEAR (fashion, clothing and clubwear) by Daniel Eder FUTUREWEAR T-SHIRTS NOW AVAILABLE: http://www.futurewear.com/ -------- wholesalers, resalers and promoters: contact me at daniel(a)futurewear.com

1 0

Choices
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Both Monty Cantsin and WHGIII have commented upon current personal conditions being the result of one's past choices (leading up to it). While I agree from a mere causal viewpoint, on a personal level I would like to point out a few things nevertheless: We can take as given, that everybody's life is a stream of decisions or choices. We make 'em to the best of our ability as we go along in life. However, having a choice in matters does not imply the guarantee of making the _right_ choices. In fact, even society acknowledges that fact by making certain choices available only after a certain point in life, such as voting, marriage, driving, drinking etc.etc on the ground, that making such decisions requires a certain level of insight and maturity. But there's _still_ no guarantee for making right choices even after the "magical" age of 18 (or 21). The only thing one can do is to gather enough information in order to make the best choice based on available information and conditions _known_ to you _at that time_. And here's also the catch. By making a certain choice, one does usually _not_ choose the consequences of his/her actions consciously! In fact, the possible consequences may not even be foreseeable, predictable or expected in any way! One does not drive a car with the previous conscious knowledge of crashing it and living in a wheelchair ever after. One does not climb Mt. Everest with the expectation of perishing in a snow-storm. One does not start using PGP based on the prediction, that your key will be GAK'ed at some point. Let's take the example of Janice one more time (violins for Monty:)) : certainly her decision to get married and have 4 kids was her personal and free choice at that time. But it was not foreseeable nor expectable for her, that her husband would take off after a while for another chick, leaving her with the kids and a bunch of bills to pay! Thus she married him and later did what every wife would do: supporting him while he went to school instead of keeping the money for herself as a backup-cushion in case he leaves. Is that really so out of the ordinary a choice?? But even if one is able to make fairly good decisions overall in life: you may not have previous conditions necessary to make certain choices. If you're born into a poor family, who just can't afford to send you to College, how much of a choice to study will you have in that event? More likely is, that you'll have to work and aid in the support of the family instead of going to College. But are you to be held responsible for the conditions that you are born into or grow up under? Clearly not. As you go along in life, one's personal ability to influence your surroundings, conditions and overall life increase (with right effort). But to expect everybody to be able to make certain choices in a certain (right) way, or even expecting those choices being available, is not based on the realities of life but a mere projection from _your_ reality onto "theirs". So is the statement of "screw 'em all" (if they weren't able to make certain choices for reasons we don't know about). Not only does it lack basic notions of humanity, such as caring for other people, but also devalues the human ability to learn and change. Just because you were young and careless (out of lack of understanding at that time) or you were born in a slum in Rio de Janeiro (or NYC) shouldn't mean, that you should still get "screwed" for it when you're fifty or you now deserve the dis-respect of society and no chances anymore. You may have never had them... While technically it is probably correct to say, that current conditions are caused by previous actions (different people have different expressions for that: karma, choices, fate etc.), there's no justification for suffering and certainly none for watching it passively and saying "they deserve it", IMHO. But then this is also a valid choice one can freely make. You just have to live with the consequences of it :) Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* E-mail: harka(at)nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail pref'd) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ ... "Of course I care about other people...I watch CNN!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBNFOmJjltEBIEF0MBAQHsKwf/Sh6IWC0UCvSiWAQsTcmDqyw4k6v7AuIg z0IlsrcSbpkBA0c3q2ghaq2TfqFIfOgSIIFr8FKK2Za3erIp6yPfcvc8V+7Lwg70 r7tnBM0janv/3j9asehV4PxiXtghQIZOxqL+14yzKgCHGzYkDglIzMmOBOcz2xrQ lziiPMirHzOii06PJ0daBwhxhqva4zw2m6fWnqdkMfr2/mNZ8/39Y8juCqG6AeSs /WP4D4cpXP581ldHskRMkTvYZEEN6IjnRU9PwWbYvSikU61Y7LXTaD4H39N4Xr2V LYx0AdvAmaOC4H3f/8tU29AkAMFgsVGn3moKzG2FE6frFlbG3L1HPg== =XB87 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...

1 0

Choices
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You are What you do When it counts The Masao ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Ohio registers Trick-or-Treaters [CNN] [Politics]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > OHIO TOWN REQUIRES TRICK-OR-TREATERS TO BE LICENSED > > Graphic October 26, 1997 > Web posted at: 4:29 p.m. EST (2129 GMT) > > BRIDGEPORT, Ohio (CNN) -- The Bridgeport City Council, fearing too > many out-of-town children would descend on the community for > Halloween, is requiring trick-or-treaters to have a license to ask > for candy this year. > > Kids age 14 and under who register with the city will be given an > orange sticker to wear in order to receive goodies. Bridgeport has > also moved Halloween celebrations from Friday to Thursday to avoid > busy Friday night traffic. > > While Police Chief William Fraser is going along with the sticker > plan, he and his officers won't be out looking for unlicensed > goblins. After all, there won't be a penalty for not having a > sticker. > > The Associated Press contributed to this report.

1 0

Re: Click HERE for Boy Sex
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

secret(a)nsa.fbi.cia.org writes: [And to think I almost deleted this without reading it, presuming it was SPAM] > InterBBS, and its lawyers, maintain that their decoded neatly indexed > web-accessible Usenet pictures service enjoys the same immunity for > its content due to their Common Carrier status as the raw newsfeed > does, and of course, they wouldn't think of keeping records on which > customers read which Usenet articles. Didn't the feds raid some company right here in Texas a while back, called NetPics, for providing decoded Usenet pictures via a Web interface? As I recall, NetPics got raided even though they tried to filter out child porn, and had all of their equipment seized. One hesitates to even think of what the feds will do to someone who is deliberately offering only decoded boysex newsgroups over the Web, but it will undoubtedly involve sharpened castration shears and lots of really bad publicity. > The net effect of all of these things coming together is that there > now exists convenient pseudoanonymous web access to all boy-related > child porn pictures posted to Usenet, for a small fee you may bill > monthly to the credit card of your choice. Providing the Feds haven't already taken it over, killed everyone associated with it, and decided to run it as a sting. Of course, this is an interesting legal question. Clearly, offering raw Usenet content the ISP doesn't originate absolutely shields the ISP from responsibility for the material, under current telecommunications law. The unanswered legal question is whether processing the raw news feed in some way, such as would be needed to provide web access to decoded pictures, also enjoys the same protection. It would seem that automatic transcoding of Usenet, in a way which is not content sensitive, should not be considered the origination of new content. On the other hand, the Feds are hardly going to sit still for a URL which, when clicked upon, fills ones browser screen with hundreds of thumbnails of blond pre-teen Scandinavian boys in mid-orgasm, with a legend which reads - "Click on thumbnail to get full-sized picture." And all for only $6 a month. > http://www.ivan.net/bc/messages/38850.htm (Marlin Answers His Critics) This guy has elephant-sized balls. I wish him well in his quest to push the envelope. Certainly a lot more interesting than Prof. Bernstein and that Snuffle thing. :) > Surely the Feds are not going to take this lying down. :) "If it saves only one child..." -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

2 1

Re: NAMBLA embattled -- mirror sites?
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan writes: >Folks on f-c and cypherpunks have mirrored holocaust revisionist web >pages, banned books, and censored newspapers. Now I understand that NAMBLA >is in danger of losing its home on the web. Anyone up for mirroring the >(text-only) publications of perhaps the world's most controversial >organization? Nah, I'll pass on this one. If the membership list is included, I'd be glad to forward it to my local police, though... I'm not sure the right to free speech includes the right to endorse guys fucking little boys, whether they give it a moniker like "transgenerational love" or not. Any sex with a minor is rape, since they can't legally give consent. All Hillary Klinton's "It Takes A Village" bullshit aside, I can't see giving NAMBLA the same kind of protection as someone like Zundel. Ratbert

3 2

Republic of Texas seperatist go on trial [CNN]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > TRIAL SET FOR REPUBLIC OF TEXAS SEPARATISTS > > > > ALPINE, Texas (Reuters) - Texas separatists who held off police in a > seven-day armed standoff in May before surrendering are to go on > trial this week on charges of engaging in organized criminal > activity. > > Republic of Texas "ambassador" Richard McLaren and three of his > followers could face up to 99 years in prison if found guilty of the > first-degree state felony charges. > > McLaren and his bodyguard Robert "White Eagle" Otto are facing trial > together, as are Gregg and Karen Paulson, a married couple who also > joined the Republic of Texas group. > > All four defendants claim that Texas was illegally annexed by the > United States in 1845 and that neither state or federal courts have > jurisdiction over them. > > Prosecutors allege McLaren and his followers are common criminals > who used the rhetoric of Texas independence as a cover for > fraudulent schemes aimed at taking property away from individuals > and businesses. > > McLaren, his wife and several other Republic members also face > separate federal fraud and conspiracy charges for allegedly issuing > $1.8 billion in bogus financial warrants. > > Copyright 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

1 0

Re: Orthogonal (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:33:58 -0800 > From: Kent Crispin <kent(a)bywater.songbird.com> > Subject: Re: Orthogonal > The first context where I am aware of this use of the term orthogonal > is from language design -- it was promoted by Niklaus Wirth and other > purists, with languages like Pascal, Modula, CLU, and so on. Larry > Wall's "perl" language, with its slogan "there's more than one way to > do it", is a direct revolt against the language purists. > > The basic idea is that a computer language should have the minimum > number of constructs necessary to span the intended application. So > for example, you don't provide hyperbolic trig functions, because the > user can implement them using simpler math functions. On the other > hand, you do supply commonly used math functions that would otherwise > require iterative algorithms. > > I do believe the use of the term this way was inspired by the > notion of a 'basis' in a vector space -- a set of orthogonal > vectors that span the space, ideally, unit vectors. Can you better define the term 'basis'? I can see the union 'build complicated things out of basic building blocks' and the use of Occam's Razor (I'm as lazy as any other programmer) but fail to see how this maps to anything relating to the concept of orthogonal. Which clearly doesn't have any inherent minimalist cast. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

3 2

cryptographic anecdotes
by Julian Assange 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm involved in producing a segment on cryptograpic issues for Radio National (ABC) to be aired latter this week. I have no problems with the technical issues but could use some (reliable) "colour" i.e small quirky or unusual anecdotes that will draw in and hold the larger order of listeners who don't otherwise have any cryptography/ cryptographic-policy background. e.g o RSA export-a-crypto-system .sig o algorithm tatoos (couldn't find any confirmation of this :() o if cryptography is arms, then US constitution right to bear arms o programming languages embody freedom of speech (patel) o (otoh) machine-understandable languages are not protected speech: as soon as a computer can understand Ulysses it's no-longer protected. (I'm not sure about Ulysses but Oracle and the computational linguistics groups at Edinburgh and MIT have code to perform summaries of the King James bible). Cheers, Julian. -- Prof. Julian Assange |"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your | Ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down proff(a)iq.org | people's throats." proff(a)gnu.ai.mit.edu | -- Howard Aiken

5 4