- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

CDR: re: Imagine
by auto105391＠hushmail.com 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

I guess you realize this is satire, but lets be accurate! 1. W won't actually be declared the winner until January 6th. Until then, he is therefore self-declared. 2. That's democracy as in "the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privilege," and having some say in how the republic is governed. The Electoral College was in part created to safeguard the powers of the smaller colonies. If America hadn't already been parceled up into colonies, it is doubtful that they would have come up with the Electoral College. 3. The "fact" that votes were not counted previously (when there was a clear winner) is not germain (what do the damn Germans have to do with this?) to the question of who in this case received the most votes. The number of ballots needed to say this is disputed is a small fraction of those 1% of ballots that a machine could not read. These are ballots that a republican "mob" are attempting to reject from the count. So basically, you're saying that people who most likely vote republican but can't follow instructions should be counted, but people who most likely vote democrat but can't follow instructions should not? 4. One would think that the appropriate credentials for designing a ballot would be human factors training, not party affiliation. It was probably crystal clear to them what the ballot said. I'm sure math teachers can read each others tests, but that doesn't really address whether the test is fair for the students. Again, past results which were not scrutinized hardly constitute a valid argument as to the effectiveness of the ballot. Remembering which hole you punched is not related to how you decided which hole to punch. 5. Is it not true that minorities turned out in record numbers and most of them voted democrat? If all else fails, call them a commie! Do the words "ad hominem" come to mind? 6. Are you saying the state police are commies? 7. Again the original statement is true. The margin of victory was less than the margin of error. And yet someone declared themself the winner. Any hand recounts performed (and some were not performed, others stopped) were in full view of republican operatives. 8. Again the original statement is true. Of course the result of two machine counts jibe, it would be really scary if it didn't. If you're going declare a winner based on the machine count, and the machine count has an error rate greater than the difference, it is a tie. A more accurate count requires a more accurate machine (i.e. a human). If you can document a case of tampering, I suggest you take it to the appropriate authorities. 9. Which part is false? 10. Again which part is false? You simply changed the subject. I'm sure Newt or Delay are very interested in bridging the gulf with Clinton! This Nixon thing amuses me. Nixon arguably lost the popular vote, was behind in electoral votes, and disputing Illinois would have brought him that much closer to winning. In this case, Bush lost the popular (not as arguably) vote, and without Florida is losing in electoral votes. Who should have conceded? Ashcroft conceded for political reasons, not for the country. While it is probably important to some people in Missouri, most of the country doesn't know who Missouri's senators are. He would have been contesting a grieving widow and the memory of a the Govenor. >From one misguided minion to another

1 0

[e-gold-list] ecash news
by Jeff Fitzmyers 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

Business 2.0: Citigroup to Push Ecash into Primetime. Citigroup and America Online certainly know about consumers. They are, after all, the world's leading financial institution and the top online service provider. Now the two bet that by joining forces, they can bring electronic-payment services into the mainstream... By 2005, market-research firm Ovum predicts, e-payment transactions will exceed $2.2 trillion... c2it will be free to users for the first three months, after which it will cost $2 for each person-to-person transaction. http://www.business2.com/content/channels/ebusiness/2000/11/28/23068 SJ Mercury: Jumping on bandwagon of eBay criticism. There's reason to believe -- maybe not now, but soon -- that eBay's $170 million acquisition of Billpoint, its online bill-payment service, may need to be re-examined. In the worst case, some people are predicting that eBay may even consider selling it.... A month ago, PayPal began imposing charges on sellers of 1.9 percent plus a 35-cent transaction fee, not unreasonable in the credit card world. And in a case of one company zigging while the other zags, Billpoint has suspended its ordinary 2.5 percent seller charge for Visa users over the holidays in an effort to gain market. http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/columns/front/docs/sh112700.htm From: http://www.tomalak.org/todayslinks/newsletter.html --- <Snippage> --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

[e-gold-list] ecash news
by Jeff Fitzmyers 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

Business 2.0: Citigroup to Push Ecash into Primetime. Citigroup and America Online certainly know about consumers. They are, after all, the world's leading financial institution and the top online service provider. Now the two bet that by joining forces, they can bring electronic-payment services into the mainstream... By 2005, market-research firm Ovum predicts, e-payment transactions will exceed $2.2 trillion... c2it will be free to users for the first three months, after which it will cost $2 for each person-to-person transaction. http://www.business2.com/content/channels/ebusiness/2000/11/28/23068 SJ Mercury: Jumping on bandwagon of eBay criticism. There's reason to believe -- maybe not now, but soon -- that eBay's $170 million acquisition of Billpoint, its online bill-payment service, may need to be re-examined. In the worst case, some people are predicting that eBay may even consider selling it.... A month ago, PayPal began imposing charges on sellers of 1.9 percent plus a 35-cent transaction fee, not unreasonable in the credit card world. And in a case of one company zigging while the other zags, Billpoint has suspended its ordinary 2.5 percent seller charge for Visa users over the holidays in an effort to gain market. http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/columns/front/docs/sh112700.htm From: http://www.tomalak.org/todayslinks/newsletter.html --- <Snippage> --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

CDR: bell does usenet
by Anonymous Remailer 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

3 2

CDR: Re: Vinge
by brflgnk＠cotse.com 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

Quoting Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net>: > Considering that the new edition of "True Names" is just about to > appear, > and has a bunch of related essays in it, I certainly wouldn't have paid > $25 > for the pb. Any idea when? Amazon's had me on backorder for 15 months.

2 1

CDR: Re: Lost password
by Bill Stewart 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

At 10:07 AM 11/28/00 -0800, Console Cowboy wrote: >Has anyone though about setting this list to only accept mail from it's >members? That would seem to solve quite a few of these issues (issues >meaning lots of spam, like 2-5 messages a day of spam from this address.) Newbie, eh? We probably haven't discussed this for a month or so. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart(a)pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639

1 0

CDR: Get your own free links site for free
by Free web tools 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

Hi, You are invited to get your own free links page for free at: http://jp.internations.net/freebies8/fl1.html or http://www.mb10free.com/freebies911/fl1.html or http://63.82.144.35/totalfree/fl1.html Thank You! To be removed from our list just click the link below then click send. mailto:fl1remove@unbounded.com?Subject=remove ########################################################### Please report any internet abuse to: compliancecontrol(a)unbounded.com

1 0

CDR: FREE SHIPPING of The African American Bible
by AfricanAmericanBibles.com 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

This is the Bible every African American family should have. Now you can have one for your family to cherish for many years to come. For a limited time Planet Jubilee Inc. is offering free shipping for The African American Jubilee Edition Bible. See and learn God's word through the unique perspective of the African American experience. This unique Bible includes the Old and New Testaments as well as 284 richly illustrated pages of the history of African Americans, the history of the Black Church in America as well as the presence of Africans in the Bible. This remarkable Bible includes: Many full color reproductions of works by renowned African American artists. Contributions by famous African American historians and theologians. Pages in the front of the book to record your own family history. Of course, every Bible purchased comes with a 100% money back guarantee. Please click here purchase or to learn more about this special Bible. Your purchase is safe and secure. http://www.AfricanAmericanBibles.com ****************************************************************** You have received this email because you opted to receive Afro-Centric offers on-line. If you believe you received this message in error or do not wish to receive any more mailings from Planet Jubilee please reply to this message and type "REMOVE" in the subject area and your name will be deleted from all our future mailings. ******************************************************************

1 0

CDR: RE: CNN.com - U.S. Supreme Court strikes down drug roadblocks - November 28, 2000
by Trei, Peter 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

> Jim Choate wrote: > On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, sunder wrote: >[Please don't post 64k of html when a URL would do] > > This is such a fucking waste of space and time. Why are you so hard > headed? > > I never learned to say 'baaah' and I feel no obligation to satisfy your > desires or wants. I certainly feel no desire to live my life according to > your ethics. If it really bothers you see a shrink. > > Just another wannbe tyrant. > > The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate > No, just a reasonable man asking you not to piss where we drink. Jim, you're being a jerk. When I post long texts, I post only the text, even if I have to pull the page source into emacs to do so. If appropriate, I post the URL instead. This is common courtesy. As you say, it's an open list. No one can actually stop you from being a jerk except yourself. However, as your jerk index increases, people gradually pay less and less attention to you. It hurts your reputation, which is the closest thing to gold you possess in an online form such as this. There's a difference between (1) being a sheep, and (2) acting with consideration; a difference which appears to be too subtle for you. Peter Trei Disclaimer: It's just my opinion, OK?

1 0

CDR: Industry Standard: Legislating Cookies
by Steve Schear 29 Nov '00

29 Nov '00

Legislating Cookies By John Roemer November 28, 2000 In the absence of legislation written specifically to regulate Net privacy, should a 14-year-old wiretapping law be applied to Internet privacy issues? Two federal class actions filed last week raise this question, claiming that online ad companies violate federal laws by tracking consumers' browsing habits without their permission. Filed in Denver against Excite@Home subsidiary MatchLogic and in Redmond, Wash., against the online advertiser Avenue A, the suits complain that the two companies planted cookies on consumers' hard drives to track their Web habits for commercial purposes, thereby violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, passed by Congress to deter wiretapping, and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. As concerns about Internet privacy grow, legal experts believe that the outcome of these two suits could shape the development of future Net privacy practices. If the judges decide that existing wiretapping laws forbid the practice of tracking consumer information via cookies, Web advertisers will face legal liability for cookie use unless they are scrupulous about notifying consumers of the practice. Conversely, if the courts decide that the existing wiretapping laws don't forbid the use of cookies without adequate notification, it could be open season for advertisers to harvest and sell information about site visitors, at least until Congress drafts new legislation to govern consumers' privacy rights in cyberspace. Although both companies declined to comment on the suits, attorneys at the powerhouse class-action firm Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach who joined both suits are trying to convince the judges that the existing law regulating wiretapping can also be applied to the Web. They argue that the online advertisers accessed consumers' information without their knowledge, using a method similar to one a wiretapper would use to intercept a phone conversation. But Denver attorney Philip Gordon, an expert in wiretapping statutes and a fellow of the nonprofit Privacy Foundation, points out that Congress intended ECPA to protect the content of communications, such as the words spoken in a phone conversation, not transactional data, such as the number dialed and the length and cost of the call. In Web usage, that transactional information is of value to advertisers. Gordon noted that the cases might turn on whether the defendants can show that users reviewed and understood the privacy policies that were posted on the sites. Another hurdle for the plantiffs is whether all of Net users' experiences are sufficiently similar for the cases to qualify as a class action. The outcome, whichever direction it takes, is likely to clarify an area of Internet law that remains murky, at least for the time being. "Internet law is simply not developed in this area," Gordon says. "Ideally, the courts should grapple with these issues and decide if federal statutes can be applied to the novel technologies presented." Online Ad Companies Hit With Privacy Suits http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-3821026.html Review: Online Toy Stores Fall Short on Privacy Protection (InfoWorld) http://tm0.com/thestandard/sbct.cgi?s=64852336&i=281243&d=672624 Privacy Foundation http://www.privacyfoundation.org

1 0