- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: Quarantines may be justified
by Vincent Penquerc'h 01 May '03

01 May '03

> While we're at it, there should be a law against noisy kids playing Why is it that many people here get red faced whenever someone hints at their private property and can't even imagine that some people might have a slightly different view of the world they're in ? Why do you want private property ? You want it because it helps you live a better life, basically. So I'll pass the ownership of land (as it's a dumb concept but unfortunately unavoidable to enable the ownership of immobile goods (like what's built upon it)), so property rights are just a visible barrier people put between them and others. It makes perfect sense to imagine this barrier having a different geometry for other people. I, for one, am very annoyed at people who take a bath in perfume and seem to have destroyed their nose doing it for their lifetime. Anyway, the whole thing is trying to live a better life through a mix of interaction with others and separation from others. And property rights is just a way to attain this. Someone needn't start tinkering with your owned stuff to interact with you, be it in a way you like or not. Property rights are only a part of the notional barrier, which is really the barrier of where others' freedom stops and yours begin. And it's a fuzzy barrier at best. Property rights are just an attempt at codifying it, and not perfect, though sufficient in a variety of ways. <rant> And to get back to this moronic argument that says "if you don't like smoke, don't go downwind", have you fucking considered that maybe I *didn't* go downwind, but the fucking smoker went upwind of where I was ? </rant> -- Vincent Penquerc'h

2 1

Re: Mike Hawash
by Declan McCullagh 01 May '03

01 May '03

On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 09:58:01AM -0400, Sunder wrote: > As for the hotel not having a record of him, it could be they misplaced > it, or more likely misspelled his name, etc, or he didn't want to be > tracked so he used Mike Smith... Also keep in mind that the evidence against Hawash re: his China trip largely came from Chinese government functionaries, who as we know from SARS are reliable exemplars of truthtelling at all times. -Declan

1 0

Re: Mike Hawash
by Declan McCullagh 01 May '03

01 May '03

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 12:24:30PM -0400, Sunder wrote: > What trail? You think "Mike" will ever see the light of day? If there's > going to be a trial it will be in secret - by a kangaroo shadow court, and > it will be classified. If he's found innocent, then he'll probably be Actually, the judge seems better than many other members of the federal judiciary. Unlike other "material witness" cases in which judges permitted prisoners to be held for over a year without a trial, the judge gave the DOJ a deadline (this week) to decide what to do with Hawash. Well, now we know. -Declan

1 0

NTSB can't explain Wellstone wetwork
by Major Variola (ret) 01 May '03

01 May '03

NTSB: Wellstone Crash Cause Still Unknown MINNEAPOLIS - A faulty landing beacon at the Eveleth airport cannot fully explain why the plane carrying Sen. Paul Wellstone crashed last year, killing him and seven others, according to the National Transportation Safety Board (news <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/DailyNews/manual/*http://search.news.yahoo.com/searc…> - web sites <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/DailyNews/manual/*http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search…>). http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030430/ap_on_go_co/brf_… .... Privacy's been dead for 30 years because we can't risk it. The only privacy left is the inside of your head. You think we're the end of democracy? I think we're democracy's last hope. Jon Voight as Thomas Brian Reynolds, NSA ENEMY OF THE STATE

1 0

Re: Making Money in Digital Money
by zem 01 May '03

01 May '03

> So Bob either redistributes the decrypted bits, or cruises through > the analog hole. Game over. All your Valentis are belong to us. Point is Bob can't redistribute the file with Alice's approval rating still intact. And it's the approval rating that people are paying her for, not the content. Bob can't redistribute the profitable part, only the worthless part. -- mailto:zem@vigilant.tv F289 2BDB 1DA0 F4C4 DC87 EC36 B2E3 4E75 C853 FD93 http://vigilant.tv/ "..I'm invisible, I'm invisible, I'm invisible.."

2 1

Re: text analysis
by Major Variola (ret) 01 May '03

01 May '03

At 12:37 AM 5/1/03 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 12:09 AM 04/30/2003 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >>On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Major Variola (ret) wrote: >> >> > FWIW: There's a paragraph in the current _Science_ that mentions >> > "Winnow", a program by some .il researchers that guesses the sex of >> authors by their >> > writing. They claim 80% accuracy on general lit >> >>Perhaps impressive, perhaps not. What's the actual percentage ratio? I bet >>it's decidedly male. >> >> > and 74% accuracy on 30 science papers. >> >>Considering the known sex ration in science fields one can guess 'male' >>all the time and hit that level. > >Yup. >Weather forecasting in Ithaca New York was similarly simple. >"50% chance of rain today" (Or snow, in the winter...) Jeez Bill, I'd expect such cluelessness to be limited to JC.. Don't you think they'd pick their sample set to be more useful? If you're testing weather prediction algorithms then a desert is not a useful place. --- A stopped clock is right more often than one that runs fast (or slow)

1 0

Factoring progress (was: RE: All trust is economics)
by Trei, Peter 01 May '03

01 May '03

> Eric Cordian[SMTP:emc@artifact.psychedelic.net] wrote: > > Is anyone even working on factoring any more? How long has it been since > the last RSA Challenge number was factored? Seems like aeons. > > RSA-160 was factored only a month ago. This is a 530 bit number. The effort appears comparable to that for the previous 512-bit challenge (much quicker due to advances in hardware over the intervening four years). RSA-160 is one of the old series of challenges, which carried piddling prizes, and were dropped by RSA a few years ago. As a result, Franke's team did not receive a prize from RSA. The newer challenges (see http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/challenges/) carry more substantial prizes, ranging from $10,000 (RSA-576) to $200,000 (RSA-2048). Note that the labling has changed - the old series denoted challenges by the number of digits in the decimal representation of the moduli. The new series uses the number of binary bits. So, old RSA-160 would be about equivalent to new RSA-530. Peter Trei ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- http://www.loria.fr/~zimmerma/records/rsa160

1 0

VANGUARD: May Day (fwd)
by Jim Choate 01 May '03

01 May '03

Not sure why I got it....YMMV (mine certainly did). ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 19:18:49 -0700 From: Rod D. Martin <Rod.Martin(a)theVanguard.org> To: TheVanguard.org <Vanguard(a)theVanguard.org> Subject: VANGUARD: May Day Vanguard of the Revolution http://www.theVanguard.org MAY DAY by Rod D. Martin, 1 May 2003 You would have never heard of Karl Marx had it not been for V.I. Lenin. Marx was neither terribly successful nor terribly important in his own right, and had it not been for a revolution carried out three decades after his death, he would be a footnote at best. But on this May Day, the high holy day of Communism and Socialism, it is important that we remember. As a student, both in England and America, I often heard the refrain -- even from conservatives -- that "communism wouldn't have been so bad if it had been carried out like Marx suggested, without all that junk from Lenin and Stalin." It still amazes me the degree to which this leftist propaganda can be passed off as true. It shows that the speaker has never read much (if any) Marx or Lenin, and, usually, that he wants to sound "intellectual". It also shows that socialists, whether of the national socialist (Nazi) or of the international socialist (Communist/Socialist) stripe, have been very successful in employing Herr Goebbels' doctrine of "the big lie." In fact, Marx never produced a political program at all. The entirety of his plan for his new world order was contained in ten short points -- nothing more than slogans, really -- in his very first "book", the Communist Manifesto. He never defined them further. He never saw a need. Marx had grander work in mind. He was producing a religion. Marx, the anti-Semitic Jew, the hater of Christianity and all it stood for, created an entire atheology. It was, in the words of James Billington, "fire in the minds of men." Marx sought to turn the old order on its head, to regenerate mankind through chaos. He preached a dialectical view of history which seemed to derive from Fuerbach but really just represented ancient dualism. He propounded a materialism which he said "turned Hegel right-side up," and which said that no person was anything more than a mechanistically determined automaton, "matter in motion." He wedded to this a naively classical interpretation of the labor theory of value to produce his economics, and a utopian view of the state that said man, who was morally neutral and therefore perfectible, could be utterly re-made -- regenerated, or "saved" -- by a state or party which completely controlled and molded his environment. To all of this he added an eschatology of victory, a certainty of success which was raised to the level of first principle, of dogma, of prerequisite faith. It is eternally worth noting that Whittaker Chambers, even when he embraced freedom, believed without question that he was abandoning the winning side. The contagiousness of the Communist faith was such that virtually everyone at the time agreed. The tenor of the "worker's paradise" to come was already apparent in Marx's own leadership of the International Workingmen's Association, which was nothing if not dictatorial. Once in the hands of a state, however, Communist atheology became truly consistent with its presuppositions. Since the individual man was just a biological machine, he could be discarded at will. Since good and evil were entirely relative, they could be defined entirely by the party and therefore by the state. Since the state/party could and must regenerate man and build the paradise to come, it's power must be absolute and unquestioned. And since victory was inevitable, millions gave up their individuality, their families, even their lives, without a fight. Marx's atheology created the greatest idol of all, the idol of the omnipotent state. This idol appealed to men more than any other in history, because it made all morality relative and it gave ambitious men the means to become gods themselves. But it also appealed precisely because it was not an idol of stone or wood, but an idol of power: prayers to it could be answered, needs and greeds fulfilled. And because it indulged all of man's basest instincts while ever appealing to his noblest motives, it was exactly the sort of god man wanted to create, a god in his own image. Marx's work was nothing new -- it was the logical conclusion of left-wing Enlightenment humanism, and had roots as old as Pharaoh -- and it was left to others -- Lenin, Stalin, Mao -- to carry out his work. Yet Marx's idol was and remains in many ways the most successful false god of human history. In its heyday enslaving more than half the world (and nearly taking the rest), its presuppositions still remain the dominant faith of the ruling elites of most of the western world. That is itself a terrifying thought. Marxism in this century killed a hundred million people, and sent probably two billion to hell. It withered whatever it touched, and it frankly touched us all. If Lenin's minions were the "vanguard" of the old revolution, we must be the vanguard of the new. Nothing has taught us better than Marxism the danger of holding false theological presuppositions, even in the absence of a clear political program. Mankind may embrace the truth, or he may embrace a lie. The difference between the American Revolution and the Russian is the difference between worlds; and it is that better world -- indeed a better world even still -- which we must build. Copyright: Rod D. Martin, 1 May 2003. This column first appeared (with minor differences) on 1 May 1998. -- Rod D. Martin, Founder and Chairman of Vanguard PAC (http://www.theVanguard.org) is an attorney and writer from Little Rock, Arkansas. A former policy director to Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, he is the Center for Cultural Leadership's Senior Fellow in Public Policy and Political Affairs, and Special Counsel to PayPal.com Founder Peter Thiel. ================================================================ SEVEN GREAT CONSERVATIVE BOOKS! Don't miss these outstanding conservative book selections, ON SALE NOW by arrangement between the Vanguard Bookstore and Amazon.com. 1. "Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty Year Struggle And Final Triumph Over Communism", by Peter Schweizer http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385504713/vanguardoftherev/ 2. "Let Freedom Ring", by Sean Hannity http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060514558/vanguardoftherev/ 3. "Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got it Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First", by Mona Charen http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895261391/vanguardoftherev/ 4. "The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left's Assault on Our Culture and Values", by Tammy Bruce http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0761516638/vanguardoftherev/ 5. "Shooting Straight: Telling the Truth About Guns in America", by Wayne LaPierre, James Jay Baker and Charlton Heston http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895261235/vanguardoftherev 6. "Why the Left Hates America: Exposing the Lies That Have Obscured Our Nation's Greatness", by Daniel J. Flynn http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/076156375X/vanguardoftherev 7. "What's So Great About America", by Dinesh D'Souza http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895261537/vanguardoftherev TheVanguard Bookstore: America's Conservative Choice http://www.theVanguard.org/ ================================================================ ADVERTISEMENT FOR SALE: The Nel-Vic Tour Home Own a piece of history, and an impressive investment property, business or home! Located in one of the world's most beautiful settings -- overlooking the King's River, just six miles from magnificent Eureka Springs, Arkansas -- this tour home, museum, and coveted spot for Victorian weddings, is now for sale. A portion of the proceeds will support conservative causes through Vanguard PAC. For More Information: http://www.theVanguard.org/nelvictourhome/ VanguardPAC(a)theVanguard.org ================================================================ To subscribe to "Vanguard of the Revolution", send the message "Subscribe Vanguard", or the message "Unsubscribe Vanguard" to unsubscribe, to listadmin(a)theVanguard.org. Contact listowner(a)theVanguard.org if you have questions. ================================================================ http://www.theVanguard.org Vanguard(a)theVanguard.org Vanguard PAC P. O. Box 250038 Little Rock, AR 72225 The information contained herein may be disseminated for non- commercial purposes as long as attribution (including our Web address) is provided. ================================================================

2 1

Re: Fake News for Big Brother
by David Howe 01 May '03

01 May '03

at Tuesday, April 29, 2003 3:16 PM, Trei, Peter <ptrei(a)rsasecurity.com> was seen to say: > I'm not sure how I feel about this. Problems would arise if there > *were* a law against news media presenting false information. > The question becomes 'What is truth?', and > 'Who decides". Laws of this type are used in many tyrannies (recently, > Zimbabwe) to persecute reporters on the grounds that they > were 'libeling the government'. I think there is a distinction between truth as an absolute, the twisted wording required to avoid libel in the uk, and deliberately lieing to people who believe you are a source of truth about the world they can't see. The UK has some pretty strong rules in this area - for instance, a newsreader can't be seen to promote (advertise) a product, as a viewer could confuse marketing (which is always a bit suspect) with "news" (which is supposed to be unbiassed and as accurate as the broadcaster can make it) and in libel/slander cases, the burden of proof is on the defendant - not fun at all. > 'Truth in media' is a sword that cuts both ways. Indeed - but (at least in a free press) there is supposed to be a distinction between "marketing" "news" and "propaganda". Of course, freedom of the presses has only ever been available to those who own presses....

3 4

Re: Making Money in Digital Money
by zem 01 May '03

01 May '03

Anonymous writes: > Let me explain it so simply you can't miss it. This system does not > work, because by the time the content is in the hands of just a few > people, they will be bidding against each other to sell it on the net. > Such a state of competition will quickly drive the prices down to the > cost of reproduction, which is effectively zero. Therefore you can't > sell more than a dozen-odd copies of the software at a non-zero price. > > If most of the people buying this software are doing so with the > expectation of recouping their costs by re-selling, then no one will > buy after the first few, since they will not be able to make any money > selling at zero. But this means that even those first few buyers won't > be able to sell at non-zero, since these second-wave potential buyers > were their customers. You're assuming that resellers add zero value to the content. They can make a profit by providing some service over and above the content itself. Take file sharing networks as an example. Current networks are flooded with bogus, incomplete or poor quality files. A nym could build a reputation as a validating service - a critic, if you like. Perhaps something like this: Alice the music critic buys copies of new content at relatively high prices from the creator, or close sources. When Bob requests a copy of a particular file, Alice encrypts it to Bob's public key and signs the encrypted copy, selling him this 'reviewed' copy for reproduction cost + profit. Bob can verify he's received a good copy, but he can't redistribute Alice's reviewed version without revealing his secret key. (Yeah, Mallory can create a one-shot key pair with the intention of revealing it and redistributing Alice's reviewed file. Alice can reduce her losses by refusing to deal with unknown buyers, or by demanding pre-payment for 100 copies up front, or something like that.) -- mailto:zem@vigilant.tv F289 2BDB 1DA0 F4C4 DC87 EC36 B2E3 4E75 C853 FD93 http://vigilant.tv/ "..I'm invisible, I'm invisible, I'm invisible.."

2 1