- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Quartering soldiers
by BillyGOTO 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 03:59:35PM -0600, John Washburn wrote: > I seem to recall a case where a land owner used the third amendment to > refuse and block rent-free occupation of his land by the Border Patrol. > His land was bounded on the south by the Mexican/US border. > > This case (mid-70's)already makes the generalization from military to > agents of the state. > > I will try to find the citation. If found it will be posted. Reminds me of my favorite billboard ever! "Support Our Troops... At Home and Abroad" http://www.nycpba.org/tadam/03/tadam-030428-billboard.html | While the U.S. military is being asked to act more like police officers, | collaring bank robbers and otherwise keeping the peace in Baghdad and | other Iraqi locales, we police officers have to think and act more like | the military as we continue to fight the war against terrorism. The bond | between wearers of the uniform both military and police has never been | stronger. This is why we launched this outdoor display advertising | campaign. And remember, you can't spell Troops without OOPS!

1 0

RE: Quartering soldiers
by John Washburn 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

I seem to recall a case where a land owner used the third amendment to refuse and block rent-free occupation of his land by the Border Patrol. His land was bounded on the south by the Mexican/US border. This case (mid-70's)already makes the generalization from military to agents of the state. I will try to find the citation. If found it will be posted. -----Original Message----- From: bgt [mailto:bgt@chrootlabs.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:45 PM To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com Subject: Quartering soldiers On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 12:48, Tim May wrote: > On Jan 13, 2004, at 8:41 AM, Steve Schear wrote: > > > At 11:23 PM 1/12/2004, Tim May wrote: > >> "But if I own a computer and I rent out accounts to others and the FBI > >> comes to me and says "We are putting a Carnivore computer in your > >> place," how else can this be interpreted _except_ as a violation of > >> the Third?" > >> > The pure form of the Third (in this abstract sense) is when government > knocks on one's door and says "Here is something you must put inside > your house." For this to make sense, we have to interpret Soldier to mean not just agents of the armed forces (military), it has to mean law-enforcement as well. I can accept the idea of abstracting the Third beyond humans to software/hardware agents, etc... but I'm not so sure about the military vs. law enforcement distinction. Can anyone point me to some founder's writings that may help support the interpretation of Soldier to mean any agent of the government? Even if we did extend the Third to mean law-enforcement... since Congress has repeatedly ceded their authority to determine when the country was "in a time of war" to the Executive, and as such we are now in a perpetual time of war, any quartering has to be prescribed by law, rather than prohibited outright. For these reasons, I have to agree with Tim's earlier referenced post, to the effect of "the only solutions now available are Technology and Terrorism." > By the way, there have been a bunch of cases where residents of a > neighborhood were ordered to leave so that SWAT teams could be in their > houses to monitor a nearby house where a hostage situation had > developed. (It is possible that in each house they occupied they > received uncoerced permission to occupy the houses, but I don't think > this was always the case; however, I can't cite a concrete case of > this. Maybe Lexis has one.) > > If this takeover of houses to launch a raid is not a "black letter law" > case of the government quartering troops in residences, nothing is. > Exigent circumstance, perhaps, but so was King George's need to quarter > his troops. I think someone in this case would have a much better argument for a Fourth amendment violation (unreasonable seizure of their home, albeit temporarily), though probably, today, still unsuccessful in a court. --bgt

1 0

P2P + Instant Messaging = WASTE
by Tyler Durden 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

Here's an article off the Lightreading website. Probably nothing new for this list, but it does bring together a number of interesting ideas. Are we seeing the birth of blacknet here? And now imagining adding telephony to Blacknet... -TD Two of the hottest applications in networking -- peer-to-peer networks and instant messaging -- are being combined in the form of private P2P networks that are taking shape in the more secretive corners of the Internet, industry insiders say. The most popular software for creating these private networks is WASTE, which enables anyone with a computer and a Net connection to set up a private peer-to-peer network over the Internet. Between the FBI and the Justice Department and the Record Industry of America Association cracking down on file sharing, it was only a matter of time before users found a more secure, private way to swap software and music, says Brian Bruns, security administrator at SOSDG (Summit Open Source Development Group). The SOSDG hosts one of about 30 different sites where the WASTE software can be downloaded for free. WASTE differs from P2P networks like Kazaa and Limewire as it creates a closed network for instant messaging and file-sharing with trusted users. The person running the network has to swap a key with potential users before they are allowed on the network. An encryption layer is then set up between two computers using private keys to authenticate the parties. Up to 50 people can be on one network. There are thousands of copies out there, but theres no way to tell exactly how many people are using it, as its designed to be secure, says Bruns. WASTE was developed a year ago by developer Justin Frankel, founder of Nullsoft. AOL (NYSE: TWX - message board) acquired Nullsoft for its Winamp MP3 software, and while Frankel was with the company he wrote WASTE. However it was deemed to be an unauthorized project, according to Bruns, and AOL yanked it. Michael Gartenberg, analyst with Jupiter Research Ltd., says anything believed to encourage illegal file sharing would have a major black mark against it, which is probably why AOL scrapped the project after posting it on a site for one day. He says the crackdown by the RIAA on illegal file sharing has fueled the distribution of this software. The more consequences there are for actions, the more the activity is driven underground Criminals dont hold public meetings, Gartenberg says. Its a way to chat without having someone watching you, says Bruns. His open source group took a copy of the entire WASTE site as it was posted on AOL, and stored it away for future use. It has since been distributed widely, including to SourceForge, which has worked on improving the original code. Gartenberg notes that WASTE is unlikely to reach the lofty heights of fame achieved by Kazaa, which has been downloaded over 200 million times. With WASTE you have to know someone in the network, it closes down the number of people available, he says. Still, the concept of private or personal P2P networks might still find its way into the mainstream, courtesy of Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT - message board). The software giant is trialing a program called www.threedegrees.com (nothing to do with the 70s pop divas, it seems), which allows users to create small private networks of up to 10 people to exchange instant messages, animations, pictures and music. Right now the software is part of Microsofts NetGen division, which aims to develop products aimed at 13- to 24-year-olds, but there are broader implications for this product within the corporate world. Think of workgroups collaborating on documents or powerpoint presentations. Microsoft had not returned calls for comment by press time. Jo Maitland, Senior Editor, Boardwatch _________________________________________________________________ High-speed usersbe more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1

1 0

US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment
by Nostradumbass＠SAFe-mail.net 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

The great American experiment finally fizzled on December 1, 2003, when the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from a 9th Federal Circuit decision which gutted the Second Amendment. It was a nice run - over two hundred years. As of December 1, 2003, the US Supreme Court issued its ruling, refusing to hear an appeal in the case of Silveira vs. Lockyer. That made Silveira the law of the land, you see. You might think that the Silveria case was about the definition of an b assault weaponb but youbd be mistaken. In Silveira, the 9th Circuit Court made the following pronouncement: there is no individual right to bear arms contained within the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. That means that no American citizen, since December 1, 2003, has a fundamental right to possess a firearm. http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp Gun enthusiasts (especially those who are members of the National Rifle Association http://www.nra.org and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership http://www.jpfo.org) may have now reached a crossroads. They have spent years and hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying politicians and the public to support their view that in the US the right to own firearms is granted to individuals and not state militias (a view I completely support). But now, with the Supreme Court refusing to hear their appeal of the 9th Circuit decision in Silveira v. Lockyer, they are faced with the likelihood that Congress and state leglislatures will feel free to further restrict gun ownership, perhaps even eliminate it over time, as has happened in other countries. Further appeals to Congress and the states are no longer a sure bet. The soap box and the ballot box have been throughly tried, is it now time to get out the ammo box?

11 28

Hand-Held Device for DVD Movies Raises Legal Issues
by Steve Schear 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

Hand-Held Device for DVD Movies Raises Legal Issues PARIS -- Hollywood's bid to control how its movies are copied, stored and played is being tested by an unlikely source: a former French oil engineer in an out-of-the-way Paris suburb, Wednesday's Wall Street Journal reported. Henri Crohas's company, Archos SA, makes a small hand-held device, like a bulky Palm Pilot, that can record and then play back scores of movies, TV shows and digital photos on its color screen or a TV set. The gadget -- which in effect does to movies what Apple Computer Inc.'s iPod does to music -- already has sold 100,000 units world-wide during the past six months, beating the big consumer electronics makers to the U.S. market. Archos's device, which costs about $500 to $900 depending on the model, ignores an anticopying code found on a majority of prerecorded DVDs. That means consumers can plug the Archos device into a DVD player and transfer a movie to it. Users also can transfer recorded TV programs and digital music files to the Archos device. The Archos uses a video compression standard called MPEG-4 to cram as many as 320 hours of video at near-DVD quality onto its hard drive, the company says -- the equivalent of 160 two-hour movies. A second kind of anticopying protection thwarts users from recording a playable copy of a DVD movie onto the hard-drive of a personal computer and then onto the Archos. But videos can be transferred from the Archos to a PC, where they could be burned onto a DVD or sent over the Internet, though that would likely violate copyright laws. The gadgets alone aren't likely to spawn a Napster-style boom in online film piracy. Already, scofflaws with a PC equipped with a DVD player and special software can rip off films and share them over the Internet. And the process is slow: It takes as long to copy a DVD movie to the Archos device as it does to watch the movie. Still, Mr. Crohas and his 150-employee team at Archos ( pronounced AR kos) present a fresh headache for Hollywood because they show how the industry's campaign to keep control of its films could be challenged by small players. Wall Street Journal Staff Reporters Kevin J. Delaney and Bruce Orwall contributed to this article.

1 0

Re: new CDR node?
by Eric Murray 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 04:27:08AM -0500, An Metet wrote: > On Monday, 12 Jan 2004 at 15:47, Riad S. Wahby <rsw(a)jfet.org> wrote: > > I'm thinking of setting up a new CDR node much like LNE's. Current > > CDR operators, would you email me off-list so we can discuss adding me > > to the backbone and arrange to transfer user lists so that I can limit > > posting to subscribers (and of course known anonymous entry points). > > Create your own white list. Include your own subscribers. Inspect rejects > and add any valid emails' addresses. That means that more posts from list members languish awaiting forwarding. Eric

1 0

Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment
by Major Variola (ret) 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

At 01:28 PM 1/13/04 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >It would seem that once GNURadio comes to fruition that many devices, >including those the FCC would like to regulate, could be built from its >generic, non-video, architecture. In that case, wouldn't FCC mandates >applied to end-users (since end users will be the only ones who will >configure the SW, FW and HW for an application the FCC would like to >regulate, be a 3rd Amend. issue? The FCC could consider the GNUser to be a "manufacturer", just like the ATF does if you change the sear on your semiauto rifle or trim the stock and barrel too much.. While they don't have the black flak jacket penache of the ATF thugs, the FCC does enforce things if you play on the wrong bands. Reception, of course, is a little harder to monitor :-)

1 0

spoofing Tomboy Ridge
by Major Variola (ret) 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

At 12:21 PM 1/12/04 -0500, Nostradumbass(a)SAFe-mail.net wrote: >>There was a mildly publicized incident in another part of Brooklyn >recently where someone was ticketed after their child's balloon popped >in public. I recently asked a NYC friend if he had popped off firecrackers in NY Square recently. He hadn't, spoilsport.

2 1

new CDR node?
by Riad S. Wahby 14 Jan '04

14 Jan '04

I'm thinking of setting up a new CDR node much like LNE's. Current CDR operators, would you email me off-list so we can discuss adding me to the backbone and arrange to transfer user lists so that I can limit posting to subscribers (and of course known anonymous entry points). Sorry for not emailing y'all individually, but I don't really know which nodes are still alive (there seems to be some question about that in general) and thought I'd get better results this way. Cool. -- Riad Wahby rsw(a)jfet.org MIT VI-2 M.Eng

2 1

Hello BGT
by Major Variola (ret) 12 Jan '04

12 Jan '04

At 12:55 PM 1/12/04 -0600, bgt wrote: >Of course the police tried to take the site down but the court >upheld the site's right to publish any publicly available >information about the cops (I believe they excepted the SSN's). > >--bgt The SSNs were initially published, later removed in an incremental withdrawl, as I recall. ....... I think people have not quite gotten their hands around the speed at which information can be disseminated online. -Monica Lewinsky, LATimes 9 may 01 http://www.latimes.com/business/columns/celebsetup/lat_monica010510.htm

1 0