May 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Some CA elected officials need killing
by barabbus＠hushmail.com 08 May '03

08 May '03

On Tue, 06 May 2003 18:53:39 -0700 Neil Johnson <njohnsn(a)njohnsn.com> wrote: >On Tuesday 06 May 2003 12:34 am, barabbus(a)hushmail.com wrote: >> [Can anyone post meatspace identity data (home address, bus, home >and >> cell numbers, SSN, auto licens numbres, recent photos, including >family)for >> the accused? >> > > >Oh Looky ! Looks like they are trying a new tact now that they >have figured >out the "How do I build a B*o$o#m%b ?" crap won't work. If you're suggesting my request was a baiting or part of some sort of sting, nothing could be further from the truth. B Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get FREE encrypted email: https://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger https://www.hushmail.com/services.php?subloc=messenger&l=434 Big $$$ to be made with the HushMail Affiliate Program: https://www.hushmail.com/about.php?subloc=affiliate&l=427

1 0

Re: Collectivism in "community gardens"
by Tyler Durden 08 May '03

08 May '03

"We have a few here in Santa Cruz. Bums and winos make a token effort to stand around and rake. Mostly it's an excuse for community money to be handed out to the "farmers." I've also walked past the weed-choked community garden in Berkeley, on the site of "People's Park," IIRC. Skanks and bums. New slogan for these urban community gardens: "Hoes fo da hoes!" Life in NYC is radically different and, I trhink, poses some interesting questions to purer libertarians. In NYC there are many community gardens in poorer neighborhoods. These community gardens receive no meny from either state or city governments, and occur on lots that have been abandoned for (sometimes) decades. In many cases the lot has come under the technical ownership of the city, which left the lot basically a field of bricks and illegally dumped garbage, which the locals transformed into a thing of relative beauty.. Recently, for the purposes of building low-income housing, the city has decvided to bulldoze some of these gardens, which the locals have put a lot of sweat into over the years. Needless to say, the locals don't want their garden bulldozed and, despite the fact that they are often of very low income themselves, don't want additional housing built on the garden's lot. However, the cost of buying the land is normaly well beyond the reach of even a large group of such locals (though a couple of years ago there was a move among some celebs to buy up the land and donate it to the community, but I think that only occured in Manhattan.) So, one could make he argument that "they should have found private property to make their garden", but this misses the point that part of the purpose of the garden is to greatly increase the visual livability of the neighborhood. (Also, these people simply could not afford to buy up such land.) And now, after creating a nice space in those lots for so many years the city wants to bulldoze them. Should thery be allowed to do so? Should the city be forced to sign over such land to the locals for them to "own"? Or should active resistance be utilized tostop the bulldozers? (Or is bulldozing the right thing to do?) I really don't know the answer. Anyone care to comment? -TD >From: Tim May <timcmay(a)got.net> >To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com >Subject: Collectivism in "community gardens" >Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 09:17:18 -0700 > >On Thursday, May 8, 2003, at 07:21 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: >> When we were working with the local gov't community garden >>committee, and suggested that they quit applying chemical fertilzers and >>pesticides to the garden areas, noting that the Madison community gardens >>had >>gone organic 30 years ago, one of them stated "Oh, but that's Madison." >>Finally >>got them to stop the chemicals, but they still insist on coming in every >>Spring >>with heavy equipment to plow up all the plots, and, given the wet clay >>soil >>there, can't do that until very late, so people aren't allowed into their >>plots >>until May 25 -- in an area where you want to plant potatoes and peas mid >>April. Our suggestions that people just be allowed to do it themselves >>with >>tillers or by hand as they do elsewhere came to naught -- "But we've >>always done >>it that way." > >This is a minor, but illustrative, example of why the problem is best fixed >by property rights, not collectivism. > >(Funny, the word "collectivism" rarely pops up here. We ought to use it >more, as it better describes a bunch of things we often call socialism.) > >On your own property, in your own garden, one doesn't have to argue with >committees and government officials and city councils about spraying or >when one can start working the soil. > >This is the commons problem cropping up again in this common garden. > >Me, I have my own garden plot on my own land. And even if I didn't own >land, working out a deal with someone who _did_ have land would be >preferable to working in a so-called "community garden." > >(We have a few here in Santa Cruz. Bums and winos make a token effort to >stand around and rake. Mostly it's an excuse for community money to be >handed out to the "farmers." I've also walked past the weed-choked >community garden in Berkeley, on the site of "People's Park," IIRC. Skanks >and bums. New slogan for these urban community gardens: "Hoes fo da hoes! > > > >--Tim May, Citizen-unit of of the once free United States >" The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of >patriots & tyrants. "--Thomas Jefferson, 1787 _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

1 0

Re: Asperger's Syndrome
by Major Variola (ret) 08 May '03

08 May '03

At 08:41 PM 5/7/03 -0700, John Kozubik wrote: >However, did he discuss _how_ common it is ? Just because it is common >does not mean it is the norm. Probably means "don't count on it, but I've seen it many times before". >leave you now with a level of vision that still represents a retrograde >motion (albeit smaller) since you first got corrected, it could still be >consistent with my uninformed musing. Its well known that folks become far-sighted (short-armed 8-) with age. Its well known that close-work leads to near-sightedness, or you might just be born with it. So you might think they would cross over at some point --leading to retrograde acuity. I'm nearing 40 and it hasn't happened yet, though I haven't asked my optometrist to plot the second derivative of my resolution. Its encouraging to find that Neil is benefitting from age. He chose better ancestors in that respect than me.

1 0

Re: Sheeple Syndrome [was: Asperger's Syndrome]
by Tyler Durden 08 May '03

08 May '03

>Smith's Syndrome is where the sufferer demonstrates an inability to >remember things that didn't happen, in contravention of official >truth. So you're saying that "sleeper cells" have something biologically wrong with them? Perhaps they should be quarantined... -TD _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

1 0

Re: Underestimating long-term consequences of cryptoanarchy
by Tyler Durden 08 May '03

08 May '03

Tim May wrote... >>But my point is that heavy crypto will probably have unforseeable effects >>on the notion of the state, >>probably not wipe it out. >Banal comments. >Come back when you have something to actually say. Poo poo, King of the Anarchists. Those banal comments were made in response to an earlier statement of mine taken out of context. -TD PS: How long, on average, after someone signs onto the list does it take for you to 'plonk' them? I guess this means you need a constant supply of "fresh meat" in order for you to find out what's being discussed! >From: Tim May <timcmay(a)got.net> >To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com >Subject: Re: Underestimating long-term consequences of cryptoanarchy >Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 23:59:57 -0700 > >On Tuesday, May 6, 2003, at 08:05 AM, Tyler Durden wrote: > >>Kevin S. vanHorn wrote... >> >>>>Likewise with governments. I still need my trash taken out, and for >>>>potholes to be fixed. >>> >>> >>>What makes you think government is needed at all for these? My trash is >>>taken out by a private company, not by any government. And privately >>>built and maintained roads have existed for a very long time. >> >>Of course. But you've got to read further into my post to see the point. >>I'm thinking that in the future, some aspects of government might be >>competitive with the private sector to obtain public $$$, much like the US >>mail now competes with UPS and FedEx. Like in Stephenson's Snow Crash, >>many functions might be opt-in, including possibly war.... >> >>For instance, imagine where budget items are voted on directly, and >>regularly by voters. Would IraqII have occurred? (I bet not.) (My Jazz >>musician brother has suggested that "you should be able to vote any >>elected official directly into jail, no questions asked".) >> >>But my point is that heavy crypto will probably have unforseeable effects >>on the notion of the state, probably not wipe it out. > >Banal comments. > >Come back when you have something to actually say. > > > >--Tim May >"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress >to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or >to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from >keeping their own arms." --Samuel Adams _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

3 2

lucre double-blinding? (Re: Crypto-making vs Crypto-breaking)
by Nomen Nescio 08 May '03

08 May '03

A Back asks: > It's been a while since I looked at the Lucre white paper but > extrapolating from the Chaum context doesn't double blinding mean the > payer and payee have to be simultaneously online with the bank? No, this is something else. It just means that two random numbers rather than one are used to blind the data when it is sent to the bank to be signed (oops, "transformed"). Doing this makes it impossible for the bank to recognize deposited coins even if it misbehaves. Earlier proposals that used a single random blinding factor were shown to be inadequate.

3 2

Re: Asperger's Syndrome
by Sarad AV 08 May '03

08 May '03

That should be some good use for a common citizen of a swat team :) Sarath. >A world without mosquitoes would be pretty bleak >given how many other >things eat them. Better to wipe out the malaria and >swat the >mosquitos! >Patience, persistence, truth, >Dr. mike __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: Capitalism and monopolism: "Obvious" it ain't.
by Tyler Durden 08 May '03

08 May '03

James Donald wrote... "Used to be that in the third world most people were skinny, so fat was a status symbol. Now diet books are outselling cookbooks, and Rubenesque women are everywhere out of fashion." Uh, where? In China? In India? Indonesia? RIght there you have almost half the world's population, and what you've written has almost zero applicability. ANd despite the economic advances of, say, China, outside coastal regions acquiring enough calories is still a challenge. And the occasional floods in central China make it extremely difficult every few years. Overall, however, it would seem that the standard of living and life expectancy of both China and India are increasing (and not just for a small number). Based on this I cautiously agree, but it's not exactly "obvious", and a few natural disasters in the most populated parts of China could put a dent in the curve. -TD >From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd(a)echeque.com> >To: "Tyler Durden" <camera_lumina(a)hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: Capitalism and monopolism: "Obvious" it ain't. >Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 07:49:19 -0700 > > -- >James Donald: > > > "Despite the fact that the trend has been in the other > > > direction for the past two hundred years, despite the fact > > > that what Marx wrote was obviously false then, and has > > > become more obviously false in the 150 years since he > > > wrote, Marxists repeat Marx's prophecies with the more > > > confidence, the more obviously the facts contradict them." > >On 6 May 2003 at 10:28, Tyler Durden wrote: > > A lot of people living in the US make this kind of mistake. > > Actually, developed nations make up a minority of the world's > > population (though with China and India this may change > > wihtin our lifetimes). When one considers the abverage living > > standard for the entire world its been debated that it may > > actually be going down. > >Dont be silly. > >Used to be that in the third world most people were skinny, so >fat was a status symbol. Now diet books are outselling >cookbooks, and Rubenesque women are everywhere out of fashion. >There are a bunch of statistics that supposedly show people >have more stuff and eat better, but just walking around, you >can see the beggars are fat. Used to be there were famines all >over the place, but for the past fifty years, the only really >serious famines have been those produced by socialism or war. >These days, that means North Korea, though for a while there >was massive malnutrition in Cuba, producing widespread >deficiency related blindness. > > --digsig > James A. Donald > 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG > sSOEbbSEJGo81S1JHNPpZ5ibmlEOAgb/1acJD04s > 491VtSnlEEh03icnNCWM5sIy+8k9imCCYe3WnCgs9 > _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

2 1

Physics News Update 636 (fwd)
by Jim Choate 07 May '03

07 May '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 11:48:12 -0400 From: physnews(a)aip.org To: ravage(a)SSZ.COM Subject: Physics News Update 636 PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 636 May 7, 2003 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein, and James Riordon ULTRA-LOW-ENERGY ELECTRONS CAN BREAK UP URACIL, a new study shows. How injurious is radiation (alpha, beta, and gamma rays or heavy ions) to living cells? This important question has been addressed in many ways. Much attention has centered on the secondary particles produced in the wake of the intruding primary radiation, especially electrons (about 40,000 electrons are produced for each MeV of energy deposited) with typical energies of tens of electron volts. Many of these secondary particles quickly lose their energy and become attached (solvated) to water molecules in the cell. What is the general effect of electron energies below 20 eV? A report from three years ago (Boudaiffa et al., Science 287, 1658, 2000) showed that electrons in the 3-20 eV range are able to produce substantial genotoxic damage, including breaking single- and double-stranded DNA? What about secondary electrons with even smaller energies? To look at this energy range for the first time, Tilmann Maerk and his colleagues at the Universitat Innsbruck (Austria) and the University Claude Bernard Lyon (France) scattered a beam of sub-eV electrons from a beam of gaseous uracil molecules. Uracil is one of the base units of RNA molecules, and is thus a crucial component in cells. These scientists found that uracil is efficiently fragmented by electrons with energies as small as milli-electron-volts. It's not the electron's kinetic energy that causes the disruption, but the electron's charge, which changes the uracil's internal potential energy environment. Furthermore, in the process a very mobile atomic hydrogen can be freed, which on its own, as a radical (a free chemical unit by itself), can do damage to biomolecules (see a movie of this process at http://info.uibk.ac.at/ionenphysik/ClusterGroup/Uracil.html; schematic at http://www.aip.org/mgr/png/2003/187.htm ). Maerk (tilmann.maerk(a)uibk.ac.at, 43-512-507-6240) says that this low-energy damage seems to be a general result since his group has since performed similar work with thymine (a DNA base) and have seen similar fragmentation. (Hanel et al., Physical Review Letters, 9 May 2003; Innsbruck website, http://info.uibk.ac.at/c/c7/c722/e-index.html ) PERFECT INSULIN CRYSTALS. {SSZ: Text deleted] THE TINIEST SOLID-STATE LIGHT EMITTER, produced by Phaedon Avouris and his colleagues at IBM, consists of a single-walled carbon nanotube (NT) strung between two electrodes, and controlled by a third. The business part of this minuscule transistor is a nanotube only 1.4 nm wide and tailored to be semiconducting. In this arena electrons coming from one electrode meet with positively charged "holes" coming from the other electrode. When the two species meet they combine and emit a tiny burst of light. This light is conveniently engineered to be at a wavelength of 1.5 microns, invisible to the human eye but perfect for photonic applications. Why use a NT when a larger piece of bulk semiconductor could also produce light? Because of the potentially much greater energy efficiency and compactness of the light emitting region. Single-molecule light emission has been instigated before, but not under the auspices of solid state wiring. The NT wire also seems to be robust: it is able to carry 6 micro-amps of current, for a current density of more than 100 million amps per square cm. (Misewich et al., Science 2 May 2003.) *********** PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE is a digest of physics news items arising from physics meetings, physics journals, newspapers and magazines, and other news sources. It is provided free of charge as a way of broadly disseminating information about physics and physicists. For that reason, you are free to post it, if you like, where others can read it, providing only that you credit AIP. Physics News Update appears approximately once a week. AUTO-SUBSCRIPTION OR DELETION: By using the expression "subscribe physnews" in your e-mail message, you will have automatically added the address from which your message was sent to the distribution list for Physics News Update. If you use the "signoff physnews" expression in your e-mail message, the address in your message header will be deleted from the distribution list. Please send your message to: listserv(a)listserv.aip.org (Leave the "Subject:" line blank.)

1 0

Re: Overestimating your importance (Was: Re: CDR: Re: Underestimating long-term consequences of cryptoanarchy)
by Tyler Durden 07 May '03

07 May '03

"I haven't added you next to Choate and profv yet, as you sometimes have a point, but keep working it, and the cost of your postings will outweigh the utility of reading them. Will you then rant about Jamie's killfile?" Well I had two reasons for saying this. First of all, May suggested I stop posting due to the fact that I had "nothing to say". Well, even if that's true, he seems to be exposed to only pieces of my posts that get quoted by others, and in this particular case out of context. So if he's going to suggest I have nothing to say while I am supposedly in his kill file, then it's fair game for me to point out that from his vantage point he can only be full of crap. The next point has to do with him (again) telling me not to post. And from what I can tell, most of the people who've been around for a while and are regular posters have been 'plonked' by the King of the Anarchists, Mr May. That leaves only newer people who either don't have an opinion on anything, or who don't post, or who don't disagree with him. (OK, maybe there are exceptions...) So again I get the distinct impression that Mr May is verbally trying to suppress minds that have any opinion that he didn't already give them. And that's OK, as long as he doesn't try it on me. -TD >From: Jamie Lawrence <jal(a)jal.org> >To: cypherpunks(a)minder.net >Subject: Overestimating your importance (Was: Re: CDR: Re: Underestimating >long-term consequences of cryptoanarchy) >Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 13:12:49 -0500 > >On Wed, 07 May 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: > > > PS: How long, on average, after someone signs onto the list does it take > > for you to 'plonk' them? I guess this means you need a constant supply >of > > "fresh meat" in order for you to find out what's being discussed! > > >OK, you're being a crank now. > >I've been on the list from one address or another since 1993, have had >some fights with Tim, and (so far as I know) never been killfiled by >him. > >I usually only post when I have something to say, which may have >something to do with that. > >And if I were included, who cares? why are cranks so interested in the >contents of Tim's killfile? I suppose I don't understand the desire to >dance at the edge of a given poster's range of annoyance. > >I can't speak for Tim, but ranting about list politics is something that >gets you into *my* procmailrc rather quickly. I haven't added you next >to Choate and profv yet, as you sometimes have a point, but keep working >it, and the cost of your postings will outweigh the utility of reading >them. Will you then rant about Jamie's killfile? > >-j > > >-- >Jamie Lawrence jal(a)jal.org >Computer Science is Applied Philosophy. _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

4 3