- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: The Real Plan: Making the Net Safe for Censorship
by Lizard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:42 PM 7/16/97 -0700, Ross Wright wrote: >On or About 16 Jul 97 at 18:12, Lizard wrote: > >> At 04:47 PM 7/16/97 -0700, Ross Wright wrote: >> >Marc: >> > >> >What a bunch of crap! Keep out of the internet, you government >> >flunky. Let business, commerce and freedom of speech remain in >> >it's new home, Cyberspace. And save your regulations for someone >> >who needs them. >> >> You will get a lot more respect on the net once you learn how to >> read messages. I'll leave it you to figure out what you got wrong. > >Umm, I think I understood the message, and Mr. Rotenberg's >involvement in the politics of censorship, as it relates to the >Internet. > No, you do not. >> Sheesh. And I retreated to mailing lists to get away from this kind >> of stuff on USENET. > >What? I just feel that there should be no laws or resolutions or >promises made or kept by the United States Government about the >internet. > That's not the kind of stuff I'm referring to. >On or About 16 Jul 97 at 14:42, Declan McCullagh wrote, about >something that Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg(a)epic.org> wrote: > >>On the other hand, without a proper law, > >See, when they say "without" that means they think we need one. > >>parents can purchase and >>activate measures to protect their children from adult material and >>still not feel secure in their homes from unwanted material. > >Ohhhh, so scary. Not safe in the home! Imagine that. Sigh. While occasionally I am prone to fits of charity and altruism, today is not one of those days. I shall leave it to someone more merciful than I (such as, perhaps, the Marquis de Sade, or Attila the Hun) to explain your error to you. Perhaps Marc himself will enlighten you, though, frankly, I hope he doesn't, as this could provide much amusement over time.

1 0

de minimus non curat lex
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

frissell(a)panix.com wrote: > At 11:16 AM 7/16/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >As for Lucky's point #2 -- Yes, I've read drafts of bills that would make > >it a Federal crime to misrate. --Declan > What ever happened to "de minimus non curat lex." The social damage from a > misrated website is too trivial to be believed. Punishing it is like > executing you for farting. The correct translation of "de minimus non curat lex" is: "No fart, no foul." In order for order to prevail, society must have the authority to punish those who fart in a crowded theater. On the other hand, if someone farts in a forest and nobody smells it... Never mind. I was having an AOL flashback. FartMonger

1 0

sorry
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My foot in my mouth. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

1 0

CDA II
by President 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear CypherPunks, I will shortly have one of my schills introduce CDA II to Congress, with provisions for declaring martial law on the InterNet and bombing any country which allows terrorists to fight for freedom, liberty and the right to privacy. Please be assured that our dictatorial powers will only be used to meet the legitimate needs of Fascism. Our first step will be to eliminate the scourge of drug dealing the same way we eliminated the scourge of gambling--the government will take over the industry. Our second step will be to eliminate child pornography by eliminating all the children. (It's so simple that I find it amazing that we hadn't thought of it before.) Originally, all we wanted was Poland, but lately we've had so many corporate lipstick marks on our butts that we've decided to go for the (Netscape) gold and require all future computers to contain our newest facistechnology, the "Slip'er A Dick" chip. In the past, the CypherPunks have been a pain in the ass during our attempts to subvert the Constitution, but we are willing to forgive and forget. Accordingly, we are adding an amendment to CDA II which provides $10,000,000 in funding for the continuation of the CypherPunks list. The amendment will put Kent Crispin in charge of moderating the list, and in return for this small compromise we are willing to add another amendment which makes it legal for CypherPunks to import and export air from their lungs. {This major concession is the result of the efforts of the EFF on your behalf.} I realize that abandoning your beliefs in order to feed at the public trough will lessen your reputation capital, so I am also willing to institute a bonus system for those who maintain the party line. I am certain that this will more than compensate for any loss of reputation you may suffer by becoming beltway lackeys. Example: You load 16 tons. What do you get...? Bad Billy C.

1 0

Fuck You Rating Systems, Inc.
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ANNOUNCEMENT: Fuck You Ratings Software Escapes Beta-Test! We are proud to announce that "Fuck You" ratings software has managed to escape our beta-test laboratory and is now available in tit bars and crack houses around the nation. Our software makes it easy and convenient to attach ratings labels to your web site which reflect your attitude toward the anal retentive assholes who are surfing for trouble. "Fuck You, you Christian asshole! All I have on this web site is *real* pussy, not *imaginary* saviors!" "Fuck You, you LEA prick! This web site is leased in the name of my dead grandmother, so don't bother getting a subpoena unless you're willing to do some digging." "Fuck You, mom and dad! Until you flush your dope down the toilet, I don't need to hear any of your moralistic crapola." "Fuck You" ratings software has the "Lenny Bruce Found-fucking-dation" Seal of Approval. What others have to say about "Fuck You" ratings software: "Fuck." - Tim May "Shit." - Declan McCullagh "Cocksucker." - Dr. Dimitri Vulis, KOTM "Am not." - John Gilmore "Are too." - Paul Bradley "Fuck." - Kent Crispin "If you check the archives, you'll find that I said 'Fuck' earlier in this post." - Tim May "Darn." - Dorothy Denning "Heck." - Senator Snatch (hee, hee) Order "Fuck You" ratings software before Dec. 32, 2299, and get a free copy of "Bite Me" autoresponder software. {Offer not valid in states where having sexual relations with animals is against local ordinances.}

1 0

Re: All of my fucking material is suitable for children of all ages
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > my posts should be read by children of all ages, no matter what > fucking language I use. Children should be exposed to language and images > of all types, so all of my material would of course be "suitable for > children." I have to agree with the rat-bastard, cocksucking, motherfucking sack of shit, Tim May, on this one. Having Tourette Syndrome, I object to anal retentives who would criminalize my God-given verbal predelictions. Neither would my receiving an exception on the grounds of being disabled be remotely acceptable to me, since I sincerely believe that my TS is a "gift" that allows me to say anything that others say to a judge, *plus* being able to call him or her a Nazi ratfucker. (Anyone who thinks this is a "disability" is fucking crazy.) On the other hand, it would be kind of neat to launch a class action lawsuit demanding that ratings systems incorporate a label such as: "Suitable (FUCK!) for children (COCKSUCKER!) with Tourette Syndrome" FUCKMonger > -- > [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the U.S. Communications Decency > Act of 1996] > And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why > don't you boys just come on in and fuck them right here in my house - I'll > just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said: > "Dad's getting old. I say we should fuck him before he's too old to fuck." > So the two daughters got him drunk and screwed him all that night. Sure > enough, Dad got them pregnant, and had an incestuous bastard son....Onan > really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant > while his brother got all the credit, so he pulled out before he > came....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your > brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals, unless of course > God tells you to. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular > Translation, TCM, 1996]

2 1

EuroEnglish
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-------------------------------------------------------------------- ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION COMMISSIONERS An agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling has some room for improvement and has accepted a five-year phased plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (Euro for short). In the first year, "s" will be used instead of "c". Sertainly sivil servants will resieve this news with joy. Also, the hard "c" will be replaced with "k". Not only will this klear up konfusion, but komputers and typewriters kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced by "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20 per sent shorter. In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of silent "e"s in the languag is disgracful, and they would go. By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou", and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer. ZE DREM VIL FINALI KUM TRU. ---------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: HISTORY - pre-CDA, "compromise", untrue civil-liberties groups (fwd)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 17:19:58 -0400 From: Jonah Seiger <jseiger(a)cdt.org> To: Seth Finkelstein <sethf(a)mit.edu>, fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Cc: jberman(a)cdt.org Subject: Re: HISTORY - pre-CDA, "compromise", untrue civil-liberties groups At 4:44 PM -0400 7/17/97, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > I finally went back digging through my archives, to confirm my >memory that we had gone through almost exactly this sort of argument >in the run-up to the CDA. All the elements were there - the >"compromise" in terms of attempts to use labeling, the defensiveness >from EFF, CDT, compared to opposition from the ACLU, and so on. Not a >whole lot has changed. Mike Godwin was just as snide and snotty then >as he is now :-). > ><....> Ah, the old 'drag out CDT's funding list' trick. For the record, CDT is supported by companies and foundations who share our agenda and goals, and believe that we are effective advocates of our views. Search all you want for a consipracy -- you aren't going to find one. While CDT makes no apology for our position (along with EFF and others) to reluctantly support White's proposal 2.5 years ago given the context of the debate (read our statement at http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp311204.html) - the fact is that the Supreme Court decision settled this debate, and the White compromise was never passed by Congress. As for your claim that what happened yesterday at the white house is similar to the "compromise" of December 1995, you are way off base. White 1995 White House 1997 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Content Regulations imposed No content regulations, no law by Congress on all Internet or regulation of Net, no requiement Publishers. to label or rate content. Criminal Penalties for No criminal penalties for anything display of Harmful To besides trafficing in child Minors Material w/o good pornography, obscenity or faith effort to block stalking kids online (illegal before kids access CDA) The bottom line is that these are two remarkably different approaches. Even White himself is supportive of the direction the President articulated yesterday. Hope that helps clarify a bit. Jonah * Value Your Privacy? The Government Doesn't. Say 'No' to Key Escrow! * Adopt Your Legislator - http://www.crypto.com/adopt -- Jonah Seiger, Communications Director (v) +1.202.637.9800 Center for Democracy and Technology pager: +1.202.859.2151 <jseiger(a)cdt.org> http://www.cdt.org PGP Key via finger http://www.cdt.org/homes/jseiger/

2 1

i miss carol anne cyphergrrl
by Zooko Journeyman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

or whatever her name was. A dangerous radical named Steve allegedly typed: > Seems to me that having only a few, heavily trafficed, NAPs is a > topological weakness in the Net which needs to be delt with soon. The problem is economic. During info-peace-time non- robust networks are cheaper. Redundancy and other robustness techniques are an expense that doesn't pay back. During info-peace-time. Under duress-- be it accidents, load, or info-war-- such designs are inadequate. What's the solution? I dunno. Here're some options: A. Make design which is robust under attack but still cheap for everyday use. Not sure if it is feasible. B. Convince people to spend more on robustness of systems. But this is infeasible on a huge scale and in anarchic and uncoordinated social system e.g. Internet. C. Hire info-warriors to attack systems, hopefully doing as little permanent damage as possible but achieving enough penetration to convince even the most thick-headed manager that his system is weak. Hence I propose a fund, The Randall Schwartz Memorial Cracking Reward Fund, which will regularly award dcash payments to the cracker who most illustriously exposed the weaknesses of system. Scaring the pants off of the managers and leaders is a plus. Enlightening the public about the dangers of a specific system or technique is a plus. Scaring the public into thinking that all systems/networks/computers/software are dangerous is arguably a plus or a minus. :-) Doing permanent damage or unnecessary disruption of service is a big minus. Usually a calling card saying "Soo Do Nym was here" is sufficient. The pay-off could be instituted by way of an "Assassination Systemics" scheme (which is merely an application of Idea Futures, of course), in which the bettor who most accurately predicted the time and other details of the target system's penetration receives the bulk of the winnings. I hereby bet 10 cyberbucks that no clever hacker will be able to redirect "www.internic.net" to point to AlterNIC. Zooko Journeyman "We are an internation of code and not of laws."

1 0

Re: VeriSign Granted First Federal Approval to Issue CertificatesEnabling Export of Strong Encryption
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:16 PM -0400 7/15/97, ptharrison wrote, on e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >At 11:49 AM 7/15/97 -0400, VERISIGN PR wrote: >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>...allowing approved organizations to use 128-bit encryption >>... U.S.-based companies -- with servers located in the U.S. -- >> and international banks -- with servers located in the US and abroad -- >>... was granted approval after review and consultation >> from the National Security Agency (NSA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation >> (FBI). >> ...Companies will not need to escrow their keys in order >> to take advantage of this program. >> ...VeriSign...can ensure that...Global Server IDs will only be granted to > >> > legitimate businesses that meet the necessary U.S. government >qualifications >> Thanks to the cooperation of the U.S. government, we are now able to offer >>law-> abiding companies a legal alternative for secure communication and >>commerce." >> ... >> MICROSOFT >> said Mike Dusche, "The U.S. government is sending a strong message to the >world >> by approving these applications and we're happy to be working with them... > >Yes, and what might that message be? With this announcement, it has become clear to me what the US government is attempting to do. They are relaxing the export of strong crypto -- if you use a US-based certification authority. Why does this matter? Look at the Kerry bill. My guess is that they already know that Verisign will go along with a key escrow requirement, in exchange for protection from liability, and so their goal now is to put Verisign in the loop as much as possible. I started to think of the loopholes this could create -- US companies outsourcing web sites for foreign companies, etc. Then I realized: IT DOESN'T MATTER, as far as the US government is concerned, because they're going to have those keys escrowed. The Kerrey bill may not pass this go-around, but they are counting on something like this. The hard part, now, is to figure out how to explain this to industry, public and the press, without sounding like raving lunatics. We meed to make it more concrete. Remind people that certificates expire every year, and point them at the Kerrey legislation. Ask foreign banks how they feel about their transactions being fully accessible to the US government -- or anyone capable of bribing a low-level functionary in the US government. --Steve PGP mail preferred, see http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur(a)netcom.com 7075 West Gowan Road | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 Suite 2148 | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; The courage to change the things I can; The weapons that make the difference; And the wisdom to hide the bodies of the people that got in my way;-) "Surveilence is ultimately just another form of media, and thus, potential entertainment." --G. Beato "We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true." -- Dr. Robert Silensky

1 0