- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: lead remailer is shut down
by Ed Falk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can't remailers be written with basic spam safeguards? I.e. no mass crossposts, limited # of posts by each individual client per day, etc.?

1 0

Re: World's first Ecash note
by Marc Briceno 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:26 PM 2/6/97 -0800, Jeremey Barrett wrote: >The world's first Ecash note has been printed! > >A USD 0.01 note made out to anyone can be found at: > > http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey/ecash/1_cent.html > >The data portion of the note is a PDF417 2-D barcode, containing a >standard ecash payment of 1 US cent. Congratulations to Jeremey for printing the world's first Ecash note! I hereby declare Jeremey the winner of the "encoding Ecash as 2D-bar code" contest. The money will be awarded this Saturday. Now, we need decoding software. :-) [There is a $100 reward (out of my own pocket) for the first freeware decoder. Source required. This is a "just for fun" contest. I know that $100 won't pay for the time spent on the project.] -- Marc Briceno <mailto:marc@digicash.com> Ecash(tm) Electronic Cash Evangelist/Developers Support <http://www.digicash.com/>

1 0

automated moderation system
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

here's an idea for a simple "moderation" system with no one-moderator bottleneck/choke point. I'm trying to come up with a constructive solution with cyberspatial spirit. please send me email if you would be willing to try this system. flames ignored. if there is enough support I may be able to persuade a friend to write the code to do this. a new mailing list is set up, one that gets posts from a noisy mailing list. it filters the mail according to user preferences, and sends it out to its own subscribers. the filtering scheme is as follows: a web site is set up that allows people to express their own preferences as to who they wish to listen to in particular, and who they wish to killfile, based on email address. first, they hit the web site and have it send them a secret password to their email address. then they use that password to edit their "pass" and "zap" lists. (the password is for authentication) now, the mailing list works as follows. people always receive posts from people they put on their "pass" lists. mail from entities on their "zap" lists is always trashed. why are the lists kept on the server? the usefulness of this scheme is that now you have information about all entities, the number of votes to "pass" each entity, and the number of votes to "zap" each entity. now lets say that the system is considering sending me mail from someone that is neither on my pass or zap lists. I have no personal info on it, but the system could use the votes in some algorithmic way to decide whether to send it to me or not. various experiments could be tried to come up with a good scheme. my preference is at the moment something like this: every person indicates how much mail they wish to recieve from the list, and how much of a delay is acceptable. the system uses this information and the "pass/zap" ratio (or difference) to send out the "highest rated" messages in a given time window. during low list traffic, the messages that pass through would be ranked lower. or, the system could have a ranking threshold set by each individual user below which it will never pass the email. my feeling is to keep these lists public, although the scheme would allow a system that kept them private. of course I will be flamed for this. the system of course is essentially a reputation system, something everyone here talks about but nobody really seems to know what one is or how to set one up. anyway, I hope to hear from anyone with comments. if you might be able to support a cgi web site for the idea, please let me know. technically the system is pretty straightforward. my experience with these systems is that the great difficulty is getting people to try them, the "critical mass" problem.

1 0

Re: My messages not appearing on either of the lists?
by Mike Duvos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a previous message, I wrote: > That's all very nice, but I should point out that I have not yet > seen my message to which you are responding on the filtered list. It just trickled into my mailbox. I take that back. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $

1 0

Re: My messages not appearing on either of the lists?
by Mike Duvos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SANDY SANDFORT sez: > On Fri, 7 Feb 1997, Mike Duvos wrote: > > ...Messages apparently do not get moderated in the order in > > which they are received... > All messages are filtered and posted in the order in which I > receive them. That's all very nice, but I should point out that I have not yet seen my message to which you are responding on the filtered list. Others mileage may vary. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $

2 1

Re: Metzger, Denninger square off
by Eric Murray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Damaged Justice writes: > > [Forwarded from Wired news. Let's cut to the chase: Which side is in the > right? Who can tell me, in plain and simple language, who is fighting for > individual freedom and property rights, and who is not?] > [LINK] Foes Vow to Take Domain Name Fight to FCC > by Gene Koprowski > > 5:01 pm PST 6 Feb 97 - A proposal by the International Ad Hoc > Committee (IAHC) to expand the number of Internet top-level domain > names is stirring opposition among alternative domain name providers. [..] > Denninger said he received a leaked copy of the IACH proposal earlier > this week, and he and his colleagues are considering bringing their > protests to the FCC. "We're given open access under the telecom law," > says Denninger. "We might talk to the FCC or the Clinton > administration about this." Barring that, Denninger will lobby > Internet service providers around the country, asking them not to > recognize the new GTLDs. "There is no reason to support it. We will do > everything in our power to convince ISPs not to go along," he says. Karl's worried that the new GLTD system might mean that some sites will be unreachable, so he's going to lobby ISPs to not accept the new GLDTs to ensure that sites are unreachable? This reminds me of the Vietnam era "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." If I didn't already think that Karl was an idiot, I'd sure think so after reading this. -- Eric Murray ericm(a)lne.com ericm(a)motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF

2 1

Re: My messages not appearing on either of the lists?
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >(It is true that Vulis uses the phrase "Limey faggots," in reference to >beer-serving habits, but he does not directly insult any list members with >this phrase. If Sandy is calling this phrase a flame, then Cypherpunks will >be blocked from their usual characterizations of Congresscritters and NSA >stooges.) TCM defending Vulis, I think I've died and am in some strange dreamworld. hehehehe

1 0

automated moderation system
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

here's an idea for a simple "moderation" system with no one-moderator bottleneck/choke point. I'm trying to come up with a constructive solution with cyberspatial spirit. please send me email if you would be willing to try this system. flames ignored. if there is enough support I may be able to persuade a friend to write the code to do this. a new mailing list is set up, one that gets posts from a noisy mailing list. it filters the mail according to user preferences, and sends it out to its own subscribers. the filtering scheme is as follows: a web site is set up that allows people to express their own preferences as to who they wish to listen to in particular, and who they wish to killfile, based on email address. first, they hit the web site and have it send them a secret password to their email address. then they use that password to edit their "pass" and "zap" lists. (the password is for authentication) now, the mailing list works as follows. people always receive posts from people they put on their "pass" lists. mail from entities on their "zap" lists is always trashed. why are the lists kept on the server? the usefulness of this scheme is that now you have information about all entities, the number of votes to "pass" each entity, and the number of votes to "zap" each entity. now lets say that the system is considering sending me mail from someone that is neither on my pass or zap lists. I have no personal info on it, but the system could use the votes in some algorithmic way to decide whether to send it to me or not. various experiments could be tried to come up with a good scheme. my preference is at the moment something like this: every person indicates how much mail they wish to recieve from the list, and how much of a delay is acceptable. the system uses this information and the "pass/zap" ratio (or difference) to send out the "highest rated" messages in a given time window. during low list traffic, the messages that pass through would be ranked lower. or, the system could have a ranking threshold set by each individual user below which it will never pass the email. my feeling is to keep these lists public, although the scheme would allow a system that kept them private. of course I will be flamed for this. the system of course is essentially a reputation system, something everyone here talks about but nobody really seems to know what one is or how to set one up. anyway, I hope to hear from anyone with comments. if you might be able to support a cgi web site for the idea, please let me know. technically the system is pretty straightforward. my experience with these systems is that the great difficulty is getting people to try them, the "critical mass" problem.

1 0

Re: My messages not appearing on either of the lists?
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:59 PM -0800 2/7/97, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >> >>(It is true that Vulis uses the phrase "Limey faggots," in reference to >>beer-serving habits, but he does not directly insult any list members with >>this phrase. If Sandy is calling this phrase a flame, then Cypherpunks will >>be blocked from their usual characterizations of Congresscritters and NSA >>stooges.) > >TCM defending Vulis, I think I've died and am in some strange >dreamworld. hehehehe I'm arguing against two things: 1. The basic notion of centralized moderation, with the name "Cypherpunks" now closely associated with a Big Brotherish, "we know what's better for you than you do" sort of censorship. 2. The apparently careless and inconsistent way Sandy is censoring posts. As others have also noted, non-flamish posts are being sent to the Flames list. A censor who will not take the time to read the list traffic on a continuing basis, e.g., by spending the several hours a day on it that many of us spend (or used to spend), is not suited to be a censor. I suggested at the time of his self-appointment to the role of Censor that Sandy would not devote the needed time to this task. (Not that this makes censorship OK, mind you.) I'm not defending Vulis per se, and I continue to think Vulis is a twit. But one of the goals Vulis apparently set out to accomplish (just as you did a couple of years ago, Larry) was to force the list to start censoring itself, even to force the list to shut down. It seems likely that Vulis is quite happy with the outcome here. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Re: Is Sandy really censoring criticisms of Stronghold, his product?
by Against Moderation 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Okay, I went through my old mail, and I'm fairly sure this is the message. I'm convinced it never went to the flames list, and now that I've found out I'm on the -unedited list after all, I think it probably didn't go to the regular cypherpunks list either. Can people on the various lists confirm this for me? Given the total lack of technical content, the flamey nature of the article, and the fact that it is verifiably false (stronghold source code is available), I can see people arguing it should have gone to -flames (though I would probably disagree). However, I don't want to debate that. What I object to more strongly and think is wrong is the fact that it went to *neither* list. A lot of people out there are subscribing to the cypherpunks-flames and cypherpunks lists thinking that they will see everything that gets rejected (albeit with a substantial delay). If this is not the case, it should be made clear. Otherwise, it's not moderation, but dishonesty. -- >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Thu Jan 30 17:26:50 1997 From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Subject: Security alert!!! To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:15:21 EST Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA18833; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:17:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from uu.psi.com (uu.psi.com [38.9.86.2]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA18824; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:16:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA02017 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:57:10 -0500 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:19:19 EST for cypherpunks(a)toad.com Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: <aw5c2D4w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk Lines: 19 WARNING: There's a rogue trojan horse out there on the internet known as the "stronghold web server". It's actually a hacked-up version of Apache with a backdoor, which allows hackers (or whoever knows the backdoor) to steal credit card numbers and other confidentil information on the Internet. Be careful! Always use encryption. Do not send confidential information 9such as passwords and credit card numbers) to any site running the trojan horse "stronghold". In general, beware of "snake oil" security products and hacked-up versions of free software. Please repost this warning to all relevant computer security forums. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

6 5