May 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: Iris scanning
by Trei, Peter 07 May '03

07 May '03

> Harmon Seaver[SMTP:hseaver@cybershamanix.com] > > An article on BBC mentions how little iris scanning has actually been > tested, > and that China, for instance, is refusing to use it because of possible > dangers, > or at least, perceived dangers. Which has me wondering, could there be > actual > dangers from iris scanning, say a malfunctioning laser damaging the eye? > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3003571.stm > Iris scanning does not use lasers. It uses a high-definition TV camera to image the iris (the colored ring around the pupil). Retinal scanning sometimes uses lasers, but does not have to. There are some HUD displays which paint an image directly on the retina with low powered lasers, but they're pretty rare. Biometrics seems to be in a bit of a lull right now. Many people noted the *absence* of many biometrics at the RSA conference this year; I myself saw nothing besides fingerprint readers. Peter Trei

1 0

RE: Why are there so many statists and communists here on this li st now?
by Trei, Peter 07 May '03

07 May '03

> On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 08:12:15AM -0400, John Kelsey wrote: > > This is the interesting question: Would the anarchocapitalist society > have > > and keep an advantage? I don't think you can answer it except by > > experiment, but it's at least as feasible to me that the right kind of > > authoritarian state might be pretty damned good at keeping up with an > > anarchocapitalist one for technology, and would be better at some > > technology. > An anarchocapitalist society is capable of much swifter innovation than a centralized one - I think we agree on that (see Cold War for many examples). However, I don't think that a authoritarian society can absorb and use innovations gleaned from a decentralized one of similar size at a pace high enough to keep up. The barrier is that the centralized society requires some gating mechanism to decide *which* innovations to adopt. This gating mechanism (presumably a government ministry of some sort) has to vet innovations not only for 'is it useful?' but also for 'in the long term, will it undermine our central control?'. This mechanism has a limited bandwidth, and acts as a limiting factor in the centralized societies ability to absorb innovation. Examples are numerous; the tight restrictions on Internet access in many authoritarian countries is just one of the most recent. Peter Trei

1 0

Sleeper Cells
by Tyler Durden 07 May '03

07 May '03

Variola wrote... > >At 10:55 AM 5/6/03 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote: > > > >Speech is speech. I'll worry about May when he actually tries to bring >the > >"hoped for" nuke into downtown DC. Until then, he's a "sleeper cell". > >Tyler, we'll excuse you for your relative newness. We are *all* sleeper >cells. >Its an obligation. Quoth the bubblehead: You're either with us, or against >us (tm). Can't fully agree with you here, Variola. Anyone who doesn't keep up with CNN's agit-spew (and believe it) is a sleeper cell. -TD _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

1 0

Private meeting on privacy
by Declan McCullagh 07 May '03

07 May '03

COMMERCE National Academies Meeting on Privacy in the Information Age, May 7-9. Closed session summary posted after the meeting Location: National Academies, 500 5th St., NW, Washington, D.C..

1 0

Re: what moral obligation? (Re: DRM technology and policy)
by Major Variola (ret) 07 May '03

07 May '03

At 02:23 PM 4/29/03 +0100, David Howe wrote: >Yup. and copy protected audio "non cds" such as the more recent album releases are actually >an attempt to prevent you using your fair use rights, which are of course legal, without >performing an illegal circumvention of the protection under the terms of the DMCA. Actually, non-standard CDs sold with the CD logo are fraudulent, since they violate a published standard which the logo implies. I'm surprised this avenue hasn't been taken legally. The non-CD publishers are of course free to sell what they wish, but they can't claim standards-compliance, which they do.

10 11

Re: Crypto-making vs Crypto-breaking
by Ben Laurie 07 May '03

07 May '03

Anonymous wrote: > In order to avoid this, the bank can prove that it operated correctly > (that is, it raised its input to the same k power that g is raised to > in the public g^k value) using a zero-knowledge proof. I believe the > latest version of the Lucre software does this. Actually, Lucre uses the double-blinding method to avoid this. The paper discusses the ZK proof as an alternate way of doing it, but I chose not to use it because of its potential interpretation as a blind signature. There is an implementation of the ZK proof included in Lucre just for fun, though. Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff

2 2

Re: Why are there so many statists and communists here on this list n
by Tyler Durden 07 May '03

07 May '03

"Only those of us protected by the shield of anonymity have the freedom to criticize this vile and hateful man." Nah. Remember, May's got a big mouth, but I doubt he's ever killed anybody. Hell, I bet he's never even gotten into a real fight (which is probably why he mouths off so much about violence). Speech is speech. I'll worry about May when he actually tries to bring the "hoped for" nuke into downtown DC. Until then, he's a "sleeper cell". -TD >From: Nomen Nescio <nobody(a)dizum.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com >Subject: Re: Why are there so many statists and communists here on this >list n >Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 11:10:01 +0200 (CEST) > >Andy Lopata writes: > > > I subscribe to this list for a number of reasons. One of them is >because of > > the potential crypto has for destabilizing capitalist/monopolist and >state > > control over information and expression (e.g. Freenet). > >Excellent point. Few participants here understand that private attempts >to suppress freedom of speech are just as surely defeated by crypto as >government efforts. > >Remember when Tim May a few days ago suggested that newspaper editors who >printed false stories should be tortured and killed? > > > But the journalist and his editors are still alive. > > When they have been necklaced and lit, we can rest easier. > >("Necklacing" refers to the practice, common in South Africa during the >turbulent years fighting apartheid, of putting an automobile tire around >an opponent's neck, cutting his tongue and throat so that it hung down >like a neck tie, and lighting the tire on fire. Tim May endorses this >form of torture.) > >Cryptography can free publishers from intimidation by the likes of >May just as much as it protects them from coercion by the government. >Tim May and other hate-filled thugs will not be able to use threats of >violence to prevent unpopular voices from being heard. > >The mere fact that no one complains about language like this from May, >in a forum which supposedly fights for freedom of speech, is prima facie >evidence of the chilling effect of his violent language. Only those of >us protected by the shield of anonymity have the freedom to criticize >this vile and hateful man. _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

2 1

Re: Underestimating long-term consequences of cryptoanarchy
by Tyler Durden 07 May '03

07 May '03

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. -TD _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

2 1

Press Conduct
by J.A. Terranson 07 May '03

07 May '03

Reference: http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/03/smart.inquirer.ap/index.html SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (AP) -- Two reporters fired for working with the National Enquirer on an Elizabeth Smart story revealed their law enforcement sources to avoid legal action against them by the Smart family. Leaving aside the fact that the story and all of the components were patently false, I am interested in the opionions of the few press-persons we have here on the actions of the reporters. As a press person, are there any conditions under which you would reveal confidential sources? If so, under what conditions would you do so? If not, do you have any observations/comments/yawns you would like to share on the instant case? -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin(a)mfn.org

2 1

RPG vs. UN/US
by Major Variola (ret) 06 May '03

06 May '03

At 07:51 PM 5/6/03 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >The UN were also sent packing. The UN, weren't they a wholly-owned subsidiary of the USG until the french flew a jet into that building? Fortunately it was held together by all the wires linking the bugs in the walls..

1 0