December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

G-10 on Electronic Money
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We offer the April 1997 report of the G-10 countries* "Electronic Money." http://jya.com/g10emoney.htm (121K) This is a survey of the electronic payments systems of the ten countries, and the status and prospects in each for policy, law enforcement, privacy and related issues. The report is by a Working Party set up after the Lyon conference in June 1996 to examine three policy areas: (1) consumer issues; (2) law enforcement issues; and (3) supervisory issues It was presented at a G-10 conference in DC on April 28 and publically released in the US on May 7 by the Treasury Department. * Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States.

1 0

RE: McVeigh? Nimrods.....
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <sigh> If you don't want your children to get blown up don't put them in harms way. The government *KNEW* that this building was the target of numerious groups. They especially knew that it was a major risk on that day. They did nothing to warn the occupants of the building. This is no different than palcing a daycare center in a munition factory durring a time of war and then blaming the bomber pilots for blowing up children. The Judge of the McVeigh case said himself in his instructions to the jury that there was no evidence that McVeigh knew of the day care center in the building. McVeigh was going after the ATF agents in the building (all of which were conviently gone at the time of the bombing). A just where were your tears for the children that were burned alive by the ATF in Waco or the children of Weaver guned down by sinpers at Ruby Ridge? I guess it only ok to kill children if it's the Federal Government doing it. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5W3749Co1n+aLhhAQEsWQP/R2nbcaI5ZgcLJRrjfoXTcDOJ8mFDzVv1 BzDomMwafGWQw9NDAyFg1M7B31899OF0LnVrP4ezg5cRLOMUpjP7lBlKkxduBvUi yy/37h8czmepT3ejTAvLwdFWR1uIx3B8A2t79b52XwcO2WHSpRHLruK0oAUOGWMK Bfe2uIKzVOE= =WigK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Who "invented" remailers?
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <Pine.GSO.3.96.970604112313.13859B-100000(a)linda.teleport.com>, on 06/04/97 at 11:46 AM, Alan <alano(a)teleport.com> said: >Unfortunatly for mixmaster to work effectivly, you need a threshold of >usage. That threshold has not been reached yet. With the successful >campaign against remailers by those who oppose them, the problem is made >worse. (As well as supporting a form of encryption not commonly >available to "Joe Sixpack".) Currently, use of the Mixmaster remailer >system is out of reach of most of the average users out there. The only >serious project to address that need has been Private Idaho and >development has stopped on that project. Development has not stoped on PI. As a matter of fact I just received an announcement that a new release is out. I am currently working on a simmilar project for the OS/2 platform. I am not sure what is being done on the Mac or *nix. Currently I am testing remailer support using PGP encryption but should have mixmaster support as soon as I get the mixmaster code ported over. I just downloaded the new mixmaster code so I will have to se what changes have been made. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5XAVI9Co1n+aLhhAQF1TQP+KlLlU6B3+mIcvMncireVvaY2Pr1bRoQk h9xdrBTYpIONHrbzp2eK4eMCDfuySbtm2F5/tCZhUpk5KF+AU9TqHf1zTGzEooUE brrheFXemwgjPHXEldSStvC9rW9XbrdN9cYKOZ9kcIrCS2+xqt0rlirI6e0D2JQu 9yHjqd/BJDM= =rrZK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Spam costs and questions
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A friend who's going to be speaking on one of the FTC panels next week sent me a few questions about spam. Does anyone want to try their hand at answering them? I'll forward along all responses I get. What are the costs to consumers of unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it takes to delete it might be one, hard drive space might be another. I would like to know how to quantify it, and compare it with the cost of sending e-mail. If you banned commercial e-mail, wouldn't it just affect legitimate commercial transactions? That is to say, wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme builders still be able to spam? I would think that if they are so untraceable that it's hard to block their spam that it wouldn't really matter if it were simply made illegal. -Declan

4 3

nude gifs plz
by User Name 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

plz sends da gifz of naked chicks!!!

1 0

Re: McVeigh? Nimrods.....
by bennett_t1＠popmail.firn.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Chris DiBona wrote: > > <rant> > > Okay folks...what the hell is wrong with you? First off, this whole McVeigh > Crap is a bit off topic..but we all know this. The amazing thing about the > string of posts has been that people have forgotten that He has been found > guilty of murdering quite a few people. Guilty, Guilty, Guilty. Jury of > his peers, dare I say, people like us all. Randomly selected. This is how > our system works. > > Yes there are flaws in the system. > > Yes the US govt. has it's problems in the past, present and future. > > Yes people have died because schnooks in DC have had thier heads up thier > ass. Or not. > > So whether or not you belive he did it.....how can anyone be _for_ what > _happened_. People died senselessly, I can't believe that anyone (in this > case Duncan Frissell frissell(a)panix.com, lets give credit where it is due) > can be so callous and , frankly, sick , to say : > > <> > As to the Children of OKC, people who turn the care of their children over > to > government employees or contractors do not place too high a value on those > children. > <> > > Are you serious? You should be ashamed that you think this way. Do you > really > think those children who died weren't cared for? You are a sick person who > should seriously consider therapy. Anyone who read this and said "Yeah!" > is > on the same plane. > > To all the people who defend blowing shit and people up to get thier point > across.... > > Okay..so the IRA does it, and HAMMAS does it, and the CIA does it. So does > the > PLFP the FARC and a zillion other terrorist groups. And it appears McVeigh > did it. > But that doesn't make blowing up children in freakin' day care all right. > Do you > understand this? There is no reason to blow up kids. It's wrong. For any > reason. > Bad. Duncan...looking over your past posts.. .I've got to wonder if you > were on acid > when you wrote this, many of your posts were fairly cozigent. But this? Do > you have > children? Any cousins who are children? A nephew or neice? Do these > children > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > radius or > shooting range of : > > A government office. > A large corporations headquarters. > A law firm. > A post office. > A town square. > A restaurant. > A bank. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a car be drunk and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and a car and be drunk and go loopy. > > If they even could, I'm someone somewhere will find a way to fuck up that > safe place. > > You get the point, I could go on....but I won't. Perhaps you should think > and read > over your posts before you post again. The only good thing (and I mean > ONLY) to > come out of the whole Mcveigh thing being discussed here on cypherpunks, is > that it has allowed me to add to my killfiles people who have for some > reason, > had a prefrontal. > > To all the dipshits who could possibly think otherwise. I should also > mention it > is an EQUALLY fucked up thing to blow up adults. > > Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : > > For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. > > Chris DiBona > > </rant> If these parents DID care, then why in the hell WOULD they put them in a federal building? If I remember fully a past post (i forget which, and my memory ISN'T perfect) that place (the building) had been threatened by numerous attacks, and yet these ignorant parents put their kids in there. I would put my kid a regular day care. If someone blew up a regular daycare, then they ARE fucked up. He wasn't attacking a DAY CARE, his midn was on blowing up the federals in there. I'm not JUSTIFYING killing children. Who knows whether or not it will be beneficial to the anti-federal cause. Geiger gave a few examples. To accomplish some things you gotta break a few eggs (Tim May's post). Not that it's right to do it, but things happen.

1 0

No Subject
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

May Timothy C. Mayo's forgeries get stuck up his ass so he'll have to shit through his filthy mouth for the rest of its miserable life. o o /< >\ Timothy C. Mayo \\\_______/// // \\

2 1

Re: McVeigh? Nimrods.....
by Kent Crispin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, Jun 04, 1997 at 03:47:02PM -0700, Lucky Green wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Chris DiBona wrote: > > Do these children > > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > > radius or > > shooting range of : > > [list of public places elided] > > Perhaps taking your kids to day care in a downtown area is not a very good > idea in the first place. But putting them into daycare inside a federal > building is criminally stupid. > > Some on this list will even > say that the kids' deaths fortunately > reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never land. Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming revolution. And thank you, Lucky, for enlightening me -- it isn't the OKC bomber who is the criminal, it's the people who put their children in the daycare center! There's only one punishment suitable for such "criminally stupid" behavior! Lock and Load! -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent(a)songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

5 4

RE: McVeigh? Nimrods.....
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Chris DiBona wrote: > Do these children > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > radius or > shooting range of : [list of public places elided] Perhaps taking your kids to day care in a downtown area is not a very good idea in the first place. But putting them into daycare inside a federal building is criminally stupid. Some on this list will even say that the kids' deaths fortunately reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. --Lucky

2 1

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

17 Dec '03

Hi, Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)amaranth.com> > Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > I think that your analogy is slightly flawed. > > While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do > not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road. Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the road at least once. > There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no > right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can > stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the > packets will be watching. :) If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage(a)ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________|

3 2