- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Paternity issues
by Julian Assange 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

Ray Dillinger <bear(a)sonic.net> writes: > at http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/ctf706.htm: > ... In about a > third of the welfare cases and 10% of other > cases, lab directors say that the father named by > the mother turns out not to be the biological > parent.... What's more amusing is the number of cases where fraternal twins show differing paternity. -- Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people |together to collect wood or assign them tasks and proff(a)iq.org |work, but rather teach them to long for the endless proff(a)gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery

1 0

One of Jim Bell's former hobbies.
by Trei, Peter 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

I was researching something entirely non-cpunkish (yes, it was work-related :-) and came across this page: http://www.multigame.com/spacewar.html Jim apparenly had/has a really cool Spacewar console at home, which an appreciative gamer rescued shortly before the JBTs moved in. Peter Trei

1 0

FREE Biotech Stock Info! 666
by biotechstox53＠earthlink.net 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

1 0

RE: Paternity issues
by Trei, Peter 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

> Ray Dillinger[SMTP:bear@sonic.net] > > On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > > > >I've heard similar figures from the CDC - when they discover > >genetic disease, they often do tests to find out which parent > >it was inherited through - and about the same fraction of the > >time, they find that kids are no relation to their fathers. > > > > Here's another tidbit ... this time on a page that deals with > genetic testing. Their estimates for general population seem > to be in the 10% range. > > at http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/ctf706.htm: > ... In about a > third of the welfare cases and 10% of other > cases, lab directors say that the father named by > the mother turns out not to be the biological > parent.... > > Bear > This is still a mis-reading. The population they are refering to is self-selected - men who, for one reason or another, decide to spend the $450 - $600 it costs to do the tests. For most people, that's not an insignificant outlay, and will not be taken unless there is some other reason for suspicion. When the price gets down to the <$100 range, I hope that it becomes a standard part of the childbirth package. I heard somewhere that ~10% of firstborns are cuckoos (can't give a cite), but the number is lower for later children. Peter Trei

1 0

Re: [Re: If law is based on precedence]
by LUIS VILDOSOLA 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

Just like the legal system, a cryptosystem holds a key to unravel a hidden order/disorder. If you can't read between the lines Sunder, it reads: *The Constitution is a false key* Sunder <sunder(a)sunder.net> wrote: > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > Why is the Constitution not the root precedent? > > Clue: this is cypherpunks, not lawyerpunks. > > -- > ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- > + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ > \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ > <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ > /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ > + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. > --------_sunder_(a)_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

6 8

RE: WSJ: NSA Computer Upgrade
by aluger＠hushmail.com 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 20:41:27 -0500, John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> wrote: >The reports of DNA evidence showing that up to 28% of >fathers are not the biological fathers of children for whom they >are legal parents is a reminder that revisionist intelligence is >not limited to the spooks as data mining becomes more >widely available. I'd like to see a cite to this. Free, encrypted, secure Web-based email at www.hushmail.com

9 10

[Fwd: IWF newsgroups policy summary paper plus John Carr's submission]
by Ken Brown 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

Cross-posted without permission from another list. This one's on-topic in a know-your-enemy sort of way. As near to a reasoned argument for net censorship as you can get. Needless to say I disagree with it. (As does Yaman - he is merely the messenger here). The section that begins "The fact that the Internet is an international medium " is particularly incoherent. The IWF is a UK ISP's club, John Carr is a well-known campaigner against freedom of speech, the issue is whether ISPs should be expected to censor newsfeeds. Ken Brown Yaman Akdeniz wrote: > > A summary of the responses to the IWF newsgroups policy paper is > at http://www.iwf.org.uk/about/newsgroupconsultationsummary.htm > For some unknown or unclear reason, the IWF is now inviting "further > comments over the next four weeks" before the IWF board publishes > its recommendations on this issue. > > In the meantime here is John Carr's submission to the IWF. Mine is at > http://www.cyber-rights.org/reports/crcl_iwf_newsgroups.htm > > Yaman > > ============================================ > > Children's Charities Coalition for Internet Safety Working to Make > the Internet a Safer Place for Kids > > Response to IWF Consultation Document on Newsgroups > > Introduction > > The Internet Watch Foundation was established in 1996 following the > publication of The Safety Net Agreement", a tri-partite statement of > aims signed by the UK's Internet Service Providers (ISPs), the > Metropolitan Police, and the DTI on behalf of the Government. > > A major objective of the Safety Net Agreement was to set out the > operating principles for a UK HotLine aimed at removing any illegal > material found on the Internet. > > Anyone finding what they believe to be illegal material is encouraged > to report it to the IWF who will inspect it and, if they agree that it is > likely to be found to be illegal by a UK court, take steps to have it > removed from all UK-based servers. The IWF simlutaneously informs > the Police. If the material is found to originate overseas or to reside on > an overseas sever, the IWF arranges for it to be reported to the > relevant overseas police force. > > A particular priority has always been given to child pornography and > this is principally found within Newsgroups. > > Variation in practice > > Some UK ISPs do not provide access to any Newsgroups. Some > provide only a partial "feed" based on their own commercial > assessment of what their customers want. Others might provide either > a full or a partial feed but will specifically block access to all the > Newsgroups known to contain child pornography on a regular basis. > Other ISPs offer a full feed and in so doing are providing access to > Newsgroups known to contain child pornography on a regular basis. > ISPs in this category will only remove specific postings containing > illegal material as and when these are drawn to their attention. Such > material might therefore be available on their servers for 24 hours or > more, depending on how long it takes for someone to find it, examine > it, report it to the IWF, for the IWF to examine and issue a notice > requiring it to be removed and for the ISP then to act on the notice. > > Such divergent practice greatly weakens the credibility of the IWF > and reflects badly on the Internet industry in general. > > Thus we are pleased that the IWF has recently decided to undertake > a consultation exercise on how, in future, to handle Newsgroups that > regularly contain child pornography. Hopefully at the end of this > process a new position will be agreed which every member of IWF > can accept and act upon without there being any significant differences > or contradictions. > > Numerical background > > We note that there are over 30,000 Newsgroups currently in > existence and that, of these, according to the IWF's own definition > only about 28 "regularly contain child pornography". > > Seventy seven per cent (77%) of all illegal material reported to the > IWF came from these 28 or so Newsgroups. We note also that not > everything within these Newsgroups is illegal material: the average > seems to be 10-15%, rising to 45% in some of the worst groups. > Thus a decision to block these groups is also seemingly a decision, > effectively, to block some legal communications. > > We support blocking > > We think it is important to attack and harry paedophiles and child > pornographers whenever and wherever they seek to ply their trade. > Thus our view, unreservedly, is that the IWF should support a total > block on all Newsgroups that are known to contain child pornography > on a regular basis and that all members of the IWF should be required > to implement this decision. > > The UK's ISPs should be doing everything they can to make it as > hard as possible for child pornographers to find or distribute their > illegal material. We acknowledge that, because of the nature of the > Internet, barring Newsgroups will not stop all UK residents from > either obtaining or distributing child pornography over the Internet. It > is very likely, however, to reduce the numbers. We must not let the > best be the enemy of the good. > > The fact that the Internet is an international medium is no reason why, > it seems to us, each country should not stake out its own position, set > its own standards in these culturally and legally-defined areas, and > then attempt wherever possible to rally others to its stand. The > alternative, of waiting for worldwide agreement, is simply a recipe for > inaction. > > Risk of displacement > > We acknowledge that if a blocking policy is implemented there is a > risk of displacement into other Newsgroups. However this happens > anyway. If 77% of reported illegal material comes from the 28 then, > obviously, the remaining 23% came from the 29,978 other > Newsgroups which exist. > > The spread of Newsgroups affected by this policy will therefore need > to be kept under review. New ones might need to be added, or > indeed previously banned ones might qualify to be re-admitted. These > are judgement calls that the IWF, working closely with the Police, is > well-placed to make. > > In relation to the potential denial of free speech to those who use the > 28 identified Newsgroups for legal purposes: if the fact of closing > down a Newsgroup was actually the same as preventing someone > from airing their legal views, then there may be a real free speech issue > to consider. > > Reject sophistry > > The so-called "free speech" argument is in this context entirely > disingenuous. It should be rejected as mere sophistry. > > Any responsible Internet user who was concerned to isolate or reduce > the traffic in illegal child pornography would surely shun and have no > contact with Newsgroups where illegal material is regularly to be > found? > > We would suggest that if users of Newsgroups where child > pornography is regularly found, and which generally have explicit titles > like "Having sex with very young children", truly want to continue > posting legal material to those Newsgroups, and really do feel they > cannot say their legal speech anywhere else in cyberspace, then they > ought to take it up with the other users of that Newsgroup and get > them to stop posting illegal material there. > > Alternatively maybe they could start another group but make it clear > that they only want legal material to be posted there? Surely it is the > actions of the illegal users that are causing the problems, not those of > us who are trying to reduce the traffic in illegal and highly damaging > child pornography? ***** 3 > > =============================================== > Information on how to subscribe and unsubscribe to the cyber-rights-UK > mailing list is at <http://www.cyber-rights.org/mailing.htm>. > ===============================================

1 0

Proven Online Income Method
by Friend＠hotmail.com 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

Hello Friends, I am an IT Manager making $50,000+ a year, but I want to show you what I do for fun, which will make me an ADDITIONAL $250,000 THIS YEAR ALONE....and it takes only a fraction of the time that you and I spend at our regular jobs. Basically, I send out as many of these emails as I can, then people send me cash in the mail for information that I just email back to them. Every day, I walk out to my mailbox knowing that there are at least a few hundred dollars waiting for me. And the best part, IT IS COMPLETELY LEGAL. Just read the next few pages and see what you think. If you like what you read, great....If you don't, read it again because you must have missed something. WildCard DEAR FRIENDS AND FUTURE MILLIONAIRES: AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV: "Making over half million dollars every 4 to 5 months from your home for an investment of only $25 US Dollars expense one time. THANKS TO THE COMPUTER AGE AND THE INTERNET! BE A MILLIONAIRE LIKE OTHERS WITHIN A YEAR!!! Before you say "Bull", please read the following. This is the letter you have been hearing about on the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a national weekly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of this program described below, to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are "absolutely NO laws prohibiting the participation in the program and if people can follow the simple instructions, they are bound to make some mega bucks with only $25 out of pocket cost". DUE TO THE RECENT INCREASE OF POPULARITY & RESPECT THIS PROGRAM HAS ATTAINED, IT IS CURRENTLY WORKING BETTER THAN EVER. This is what one had to say: "Thanks to this profitable opportunity. I was approached many times before but each time I passed on it. I am so glad I finally joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received a total $610,470.00 in 21 weeks, with money still coming in." Pam Hedland, Fort Lee, New Jersey. PRINT THIS NOW FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $500,000 every 4 to 5 months easily and comfortably, please read the following, THEN READ IT AGAIN AND AGAIN!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ FOLLOW THE SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW AND YOUR FINANCIAL DREAMS WILL COME TRUE, GUARANTEED! INSTRUCTIONS: ===========Order all 5 reports shown on the list below===== For each report, send $5 CASH, THE NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING AND YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS to the person whose name appears ON THAT LIST next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE TOP LEFT CORNER in case of any mail problems. When you place your order, make Sure you order each of the 5 reports. You will need all 5 reports so that you Can save them on your computer and resell them. YOUR TOTAL COST... $ 5 X 5 = $ 25.00. Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the 5 reports from these 5 different individuals. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. Also make a floppy of these reports and keep it on your desk in case something happens to your computer. IMPORTANT: DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than what is instructed below in each step "1 through 6" or you will lose out on majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you will also see how it does not work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter, it will NOT work!! People have tried to put their friends/relatives names on all five thinking they could get all the money. But it does not work this way. Believe us, we all have tried to be greedy and then nothing happened. So Do Not try to change anything other thanwhat is instructed, because if you do, it will not work for you. Remember, honesty reaps the reward!!! 1. After you have ordered all 5 reports, take this advertisement and REMOVE the name & address of the person in REPORT # 5. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their fortune. 2. Move the name & address in REPORT # 4 down to report # 5. 3. Move the name & address in REPORT # 3 down to report # 4. 4. Move the name & address in REPORT # 2 down to report # 3. 5. Move the name & address in REPORT # 1 down to report # 2. 6. Insert YOUR name & address in the REPORT # 1 Position. PLEASE MAKE SURE you copy every name & address ACCURATELY! ***Take this entire letter, with the modified list of names, and save it on your computer. DO NOT MAKE ANY OTHER CHANGES. Save this on a disk as well just in case if you lose any data. To assist you with marketing your business on the internet, the 5 reports you purchase will provide you with invaluable marketing information which includes how to send bulk e-mails legally, where to find thousands of free classified ads and much more. There are 2 Primary methods to get this venture going: METHOD #1: BY SENDING BULK E-MAIL LEGALLY =========================================================== Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we will assume you and those involved send out only 5,000 e-mails each. Let's also assume that the mailing receive only a 0.2% response (the response could be much better but lets just say it is only 0.2%. Also, many people will send out hundreds of thousands of e-mails instead of only 5,000 each). Continuing with this example, you send out only 5,000 e-mails. With a 0.2% response, that is only 10 orders for report # 1. Those 10 people responded by sending out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 50,000. Out of those 50,000 e-mails, only 0.2% responded with orders. That's 100 people responding to and ordering Report # 2. Those 100 people mail out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 500,000 e-mails. The 0.2% response to that is 1000 orders for Report # 3. Those 1000 people send out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 5 million e-mails. The 0.2% response to that is 10,000 orders for Report # 4. Those 10,000 people send out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 50,000,000 (50 million) e-mails. The 0.2% response to that is 100,000 orders for Report # 5. THAT'S 100,000 ORDERS TIMES $5 EACH = $ 500,000.00 (half million). Your total income in this example is: 1...$ 50 + 2...$ 500 + 3..$ 5,000 + 4... $ 50,000 + 5... $ 500,000... GRAND TOTAL = $ 555,550.00 NUMBERS DO NOT LIE. GET A PENCIL & PAPER AND FIGURE OUT THE WORST POSSIBLE RESPONSES AND NO MATTER HOW YOU CALCULATE IT, YOU WILL STILL MAKE A LOT OF MONEY! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING ONLY 10 PEOPLE ORDERING OUT OF 5,000 YOU MAILED TO. Dare to think for a moment what would happen if everyone or half or even one 4th of those people mailed 100,000 e-mails each or more? There are over 150 million people on the Internet worldwide and counting. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! METHOD # 2: BY PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET Advertising on the net is very, very inexpensive and there are hundreds of FREE places to advertise. Placing a lot of free ads on the internet will easily get a larger response. We strongly suggest you start with Method # 1 and add METHOD # 2 as you go along. For every $5 you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the Report they ordered. That's it. Always provide same day service on all orders. This will guarantee that the e-mail they send out, with your name and address on it, will be prompt because they can not advertise until they receive the report. AVAILABLE REPORTS ========================================= ORDER EACH REPORT BY ITS NUMBER & NAME ONLY. Notes: Always send $ 5 cash (US CURRENCY) for each report. Checks NOT accepted. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in atleast 2 sheets of paper. On one of those sheets of paper, write the NUMBER & NAME of the Report you are ordering., YOUR E-MAIL ADDERSS and your name and postal address. PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THESE REPORTS NOW: REPORT # 1: "The Insider's Guide To Advertising For Free On The Net" Order Report # 1 from: Clay Montgomery 12725 E. 76th Circle N. Owasso, OK 74055 Report #2: "The Insider's Guide To Sending Bulk E-Mail On The Net" Order Report #2 from: Rick Dennis P.O. Box 93649 Anchorage, AK 99509-3649 Report # 3: "The Secret To Multilevel Marketing On The Net" Order Report # 3 from: Christian Ward PO Box 212537 Augusta, GA 30917-2537 Report # 4: "How To Become A Millionaire Utilizing MLM & The Net" Order Report # 4 from: David Benear 3415 Town & Country Dr., Apt 6B Little Rock, AR 72204 Report # 5: "How To Send 1 Million E-Mails For Free" Order Report # 5 from: Mike Nichols PO Box 270061 Flower Mound, TX 75027 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ YOUR SUCCESS GUIDE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you do not receive at least 10 orders for Report # 1 within 2 weeks, continue sending e-mails until you do. After you have received 10 orders, 2 to 3 weeks after that you should receive 100 orders or more for Report # 2. If you did not, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for Report # 2, YOU CAN RELAX, Because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a different report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. IF YOU WANT TO GENERATE MORE INCOME, SEND ANOTHER BATCH OF E- MAILS AND START THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN. There is no limit to the income you can generate from this business!!! FOLLOWING IS A NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with NO RISK and JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT. You can make more money in the next few weeks and months than you haveever imagined. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in anyway. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report after you have put your name and address in Report # 1 and moved others to # 2...# 5 as instructed above. One of the people you send this to may send out 100,000 or more e-mails and your name will be on every one of them. Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent. IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! ===================================================== This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301. Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, http://www.senate.gov/~murkowski/commercialemail/ Further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address with the word "remove" in the subject line.

1 0

Sample Rights.com Quotations
by Jim Choate 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

http://www.rights.com/sample.html -- The Laws of Serendipity: 1. In order to discover anything, you must be looking for something. 2. If you wish to make an improved product, you must first be engaged in making an inferior one. Tivoli Certification Group, OSCT James Choate jchoate(a)tivoli.com Senior Engineer 512-436-1062

1 0

Canada's new child porn laws--implications for ZKS?
by Tim May 15 Mar '01

15 Mar '01

While few countries are havens for child porn, and no one expected Canada to suddenly become one, it is clear from legislation happening in Canada that is about to become a very poor place to run an anonymity service from. Check the Reuters headlines, e.g., at Yahoo: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010314/wr/canada_porn_dc_1.html --begin excerpt of article-- Wednesday March 14 3:52 PM ET Canada to Criminalize Surfing for Child Porn By Randall Palmer OTTAWA (Reuters) - The Canadian government, apparently breaking new ground internationally, introduced a bill on Wednesday to make it a crime to surf for child pornography on the Internet, with penalties of up to 10 years in jail. Canadian officials said they were unaware of any other country with similar legislation designed to crack down on child porn in an age when it is just a mouse-click away. ... In Canada, as in the United States and many other jurisdictions, possession of child pornography downloaded from a computer is a crime. But the bill would go further to ban knowingly bringing it up on a computer screen. ... It would create a new criminal offense of transmitting child pornography, for example by e-mail, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Exporting it from Canada would also become criminal. Importing it is already illegal. --end excerpt of article-- Anonymity services like ZKS may be able to claim that they are not in violation of the new law, or any existing law, because the suspected child porn material was never visible to them or anyone in their company. A law holding ISPs or nym services responsible for the contents of material flowing through their system would of course be a slam dunk against ZKS and other such places. So far, this is not what the new Canadian legislation has. In Britain, the RIP bill which forces encryption keys to be turned over is likely to have effects as well. The Napster case, and others, show us that anonymity/piracy/porn services are likely to come under heavy legal assault if their nexus of operations is identifiable. This was foreseeable many years ago and was discussed on this list beginning in 1992-3. Any data haven or black market service with a giant target painted on it is, well, a _target_. I don't know what the current ZKS business model is...haven't followed it for a while...but I would expect them to get a lot of heat from this and similar laws. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay(a)got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns

2 1