- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

BIO_nfo
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A biocryptoanarchy link to Adleman's DNA work? 6-8-96. FiTi: "Bioinformatics: the jobs of the future." One of the biggest manpower shortages today is in bioinformatics, the area in which biology meets computer science. Biology is becoming a data-intensive science, in the same way that physics did almost 50 years ago when it became clear that computers would be needed not only to store information but also to process it. There's a great shortage of people, partly because a lot of organisations are simultaneously seeing the need for bioinformatics and partly because the skills required are changing so fast: + Search and analysis, including new mathematical techniques for finding patterns in data; + Knowledge management, including ways to integrate information from different databases; + Mapping and genomics, including approaches to identifying the genetic components of complex traits; + Sequence/structure/function including rapid methods to predict the biological function of a gene from its DNA. The mainstream computer and information technology companies are only just beginning to take an interest in bioinformatics. "There's a huge vacuum there." For an undergraduate scientist searching for a field in which to specialise, there are no better job prospects than bioinformatics or - cheminformatics. BIO_nfo

1 0

Re: Clam Wars
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> 2. The anti-scientologists have caused many cypherpunks > anonymous remailers to shut down via their egotistical > misuse of them, viz. criminally posting copyrighted Co$ > writings to Usenet. They did it knowing that the Co$ is > likely to harrass the remailer operators, causing them to > shut down and depriving everyone of their services. This scenario is beginning to sound suspiciously similar each time it happens: an anonymous individual or individuals utilize a remailer in a way that's deemed abusive, certain individuals complain loudly, and the remailer (or mail2news gateway) either shuts down or blocks the affected newsgroup. Thus far I've seen it happen with the alt.religion.scientology, alt.smokers, and alt.syntax.tactical newsgroups. This is setting a bad precedent. It sends the message that you merely have to fabricate a little "abuse" through one or more remailers to get what you want -- the elimination of your opponents' platform to dissent without fear of retribution. Whether the abuse in any of the aforementioned instances was actually fabricated or not is immaterial. If it wasn't, it very could have been, with identical results in either case. The problem being, with an anonymous attack through a remailer and/or mail2news gateway, how do you identify the intended victim? Was it the NG or the remailer/gateway itself? The first two NGs have one striking similarity: both involve a product or service where those who stand to profit from it have recently been plagued with "whistle blowers" and "defectors" from among their ranks -- the CO$ and the tobacco industry. In both cases, those who've come forward and divulged secrets have reported harassment. I'm at a loss to understand the blocking of the third NG, alt.syntax.tactical, however, unless the intent was strictly punitive. I can't imagine anyone from a.s.t. coming forward to complain about "abuse"! That would be like complaining about foul language on alt.blasphemy. <g>

1 0

Re: NSA/CIA to snoop INSIDE the U.S.???
by Anonymous User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: This is a fucking big story. : Allowing the CIA and NSA to snoop domestically, and using only a handful of : suspicions and anecdotes about cybernastiness and evil cryptohackers to : justify this major policy shift -- well, it's fucking amazing. : Nunn's proposal, unfortunately, was more than a "suggestion." This is very serious. Why has there not been more discussion about this on the list? How close/far is this from becoming law? If they are now trying to make it legal for the CIA and NSA to snoop inside the US I would guess that it's happening already. Remember wiretaps? Do it now and they will make it legal later.

1 0

Re: Internet solution for law enforcement
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Alan Horowitz" alanh(a)infi.net wrote: >It appears that someone has figured out that medium-sized jurisdictions >don't want to be left out of the trendiness. And has put together a >product that can be peddled at the trade shows where Police Chiefs go. > >I recall reading that there's something like 25,000 different police >departments in America. It's a sizeable market. And a very politically >correct one, right now. > >Do these managers _need_ this stuff? Well, did they _need_ all those >black-ninja hollywood flavored SWAT uniforms? > >Now, if they could just get a few more PC-of-the-month phraseologies into >the title of their product, they'd sell twice as many. Start with >"anti-deadbeat-dad software", maybe. "Pro Diversity". "Environmentally >Friendly Software". > >Is America great, or what? You bet. PC stuff is essential. Here in Tucson, the cops came up with a novel, simple, cheap, and efficacious method to determine cocaine HCl usage: Put a strip of Scotch (TM) tape across the nostrils of a suspectee/apprehendee and see if there's any toot on it. Local judges disallowed this procedure because, in the absence of a substantial presence of African-Americans in the "community" (they comprise <2% of local population), almost all of those arrested were Hispanic-surnamed Latinos.

1 0

US: Domestic Encryption Protected by US Constitution?
by C Matthew Curtin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Something that has come up in my recent random thoughts... Given that the US State Department classifies strong crypto as munitions, is it possible that any laws passed outlawing the use of strong crypto among US citizens could be declared unconsitutional, in violation of the second amendment? Are there any legal precedents that apply here? Is the question purely academic (i.e., no such laws exist, no such bills are in the works, or none have been tried)? Does anyone know of any laws on the books that might be relevant to my question? -- C Matthew Curtin Chief Hacker Fahlgren, Inc. 655 Metro Pl S, Ste 700, Box 7159 Dublin OH 43017-7159 http://www.local.com/~cmcurtin/ cmcurtin(a)fahlgren.com PGP Mail Preferred

1 0

Re: Anti-Scientologists
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>1. There's a gang of flamers (David Gerard, Jon Noring, Ron Newman, Rob J. >Nauta, and the like) who try to stop $cientologists from discussing their >religion on the Usenet newsgroup alt.religion.scientology. Most of them are >disgruntled former cult members and/or members of other similar cults. Untruth #1. Aside from the "religion" red herring you tossed in (it's a cult), the critics expose the lies, doubletalk and inconsistencies posted by cult apologists. (It should be noted that these people aren't generally "just another satisfied Scientologist," but are cult employees who are carefully vetted to distribute propaaganda without ever answering critics' questions.) [snip] >3. These harrassers are Usenet Cabal supporters, and they are sometimes >joined by initerant cabal enforcers such as Peter Vorobieff, who visit a.r.s >to lend a helping hand and to flame Co$. So what's your point? Besides, there is no Cabal fnord. :-) >4. Recently the anti-scientologists have asked me for a copy of my cancelbot, >and have been using it to forge cancels for scientologist posts on a.r.s. Untruth #2. Articles canceled from a.r.s. have been multiple postings of standard Scientology tracts (over 10,000 in all, so my newsreader says), spread out over various alleged users. These aren't intended to promote discussion -- they're intended to bury the newsgroup in noise. Apparently being selected Kook of the Month causes disturbances in one's ability to distinguish the correct from the incorrect. (Or is that how one gets the award in the first place?)

1 0

Re: [Off-Topic] "Curfews"
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 8 Jun 96 at 12:40, jim bell wrote: > JFA wrote: > >I did something I always bitch at when done by others: looking at a > >situation outside of it's appropriate and complete context. > > As you can see, this is one of the big difficulties that people can > have understanding AP: Since it changes just about everything about > how a society works, you can't analyze it "easily" using your > built-up knowledge of societies. Actually, it makes one realize that society and the "collective" is nothing, that the basic building block is the individual. If you analyse the motivation of the individual, AP is not difficult to understand. > As I've said so many times before, AP is like a political Rorschach > test: Your reaction to it is strongly related to your political > philosophy. That's part of the magic. Please stay out of magic. The actual politician are enough into it. JFA DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee; Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultants: physicists, technologists and engineers. PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891

1 0

Re: Asendmail Status & Politikal Rant
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Addressed to: Ben Holiday <ncognito(a)gate.net> Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> ** Reply to note from Ben Holiday <ncognito(a)gate.net> 05/29/96 10:30pm -0400 as to the politiks --if we do not standup now, we will not even be able to speak up later. there is no question that every means of confronting a totalitarian driven government apparati must be developed, and the means of impletation well known. the only safety is in numbers; and, yes, some of the "brethern" will fall. anymore than the aging Chinese despots were able to contain the news of Tinnamin square, and I stood at the corner by the Forbidden City as it was starting to form, despots everywhere are faced with the same problem. in China, the free speach and democracy protestors faced enormous technological and communication deficiencies --so far, we do not. -- The result of today's 'government' is new world disorder, unfolding at warp velocity.

1 0

Re: FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bryce wrote (whilst on his high horse): > Hm. I think the best we could hope for is along the lines of > "The suspect subscribed to the 'Cypherpunks' discussion group on > the Internet, but his violent views were rejected by the members > of the group." Not every member of this list rejects his views. I for one do not reject them outright, but will not defend his views publically for fear of embarassing the corporation that I work for. I do not reject Jim Bell's violent views for the simple reason that violence is often required to fight violence. In other words, the best you can hope for is "... but his violent views were rejected by some members of the group." > It is important that the reporter manages to _not_ use the word > "member" to indicate that Bell is a "member" of Cypherpunks. He *is* a member. And why shouldn't he be? Are you suggesting that this group become moderated? (hiss). The whole AP concept is very relevent to the Cypherpunks, whether the majority like it or not. > I think that conversing with Bell, or publically replying to him > at all, even to insult him, makes him more of a "member" and > makes his pet topic more a part of cypherpunks, both in appearance > and in substance. So don't do it. That means you, too, > Black Unicorn. At _least_ you can take it to private e-mail in > order to prevent the reporters from getting the wrong idea, and > in order to spare the rest of us the tedium of deleting the > messages. No platform for lunatics??? If there is one thing that a Cypherpunk should have learned during his time in the group, is that the answer to hate speech (or violent speech, or whatever you wish to call it) is more speech. If your fear is that reporters will get hold of the wrong end of the stick, then perhaps you are correct, but the real problem is the *reporters*, not the attitude of the Cypherpunks. blame them. propose a solution. (how about abolition of all libel laws?) > This is assuming that the statement "his violent views were > rejected by the members of the group" is actually true! If > there _is_ anyone else here who shares Bell's evil enthusiasms, > I strongly encourage you to begin a new list dedicated to that > topic. I disagree with the phrase "evil enthusiasms." Bell is not an evil man. A little crazy perhaps, but not evil. If you bothered to listen to him, you would find that his aim is to create a "better" world, where people (especially politicians) are very much more responsible for their own actions. He suggests that the number of deaths due to AP will be less that the number of deaths due to the current corrupt system. think about it. how many on this group would have another man killed for his views? For his noisy stereo? For a competive advantage in business? I am confident the answer will be zero. On the other hand, I would gladly throw in a few dollars to have certain politicians killed. gladly. and I will be able to sleep at night. I will sleep better knowing that, although I was partly responsible for a mans death, I will have saved countless others (a bit like dropping an a-bomb on Japan). Question for Jim - would you resort to AP to have Bryce popped off? Question for Bryce - would you resort to AP to have Jim popped off?

1 0

Re: [Off-Topic] "Curfews"
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:03 AM 6/9/96 +0000, Jean-Francois Avon wrote: >On 8 Jun 96 at 12:40, jim bell wrote: >> As you can see, this is one of the big difficulties that people can >> have understanding AP: Since it changes just about everything about >> how a society works, you can't analyze it "easily" using your >> built-up knowledge of societies. > >Actually, it makes one realize that society and the "collective" is >nothing, that the basic building block is the individual. If you >analyse the motivation of the individual, AP is not difficult to >understand. It is, however, hard to separate out all the familiar assumptions we make about the world based on the current way of doing things. > >> As I've said so many times before, AP is like a political Rorschach >> test: Your reaction to it is strongly related to your political >> philosophy. That's part of the magic. > >Please stay out of magic. The actual politician are enough into it. Well, I was speaking hyperbolically. (hyperbole.) Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0