- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Credentials without Identity--Race Bits
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

:From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) :Why is the fascist United State of America considered a "civilized :country"? It lets in the refuse of the earth to offer them the opportunity of a better life? With little guarantee thay will repay the offer?

1 0

Re: Credentials without Identity--Race Bits
by Three Blind Mice 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Vangelis wrote: > Bill Stewart wrote: > > I've heard that in less civilized parts of the world you're actually > > required to carry government-issued ID cards to walk down the street > > or fly on airplanes. > > Umm.. tried to get on a flight without having ID lately? Doesn't work - > against policy. Anti-terrorism policy and all.. it's for your own > safety, of course. But my dear Vangelis, that's exactly what Bill is talking about. --3bmice

1 0

Re: Ebonics
by Mark Rosen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > There are several problems with your argument: > > * You are making glaring generalizations regarding all members of an > > ethnic body; you don't seem to realize that intellect is based not on color > > or how you talk but on your brain (which has the same color and other basic > > properties in all humans, I believe) > > That would be your generalization. Nowhere did anyone ever say that _all_ > black people speak "Ebonics". I don't see why someone should hire someone if > they can't even understand what that person is saying. Besides, I would > suspect that a reasonably intelligent person would know how to speak correct > English or at least make an attempt to do so. Especially in the computer field, language is irrelevant; as long as someone can "speak" C++ or HTML, they're fine. > > * You are completely forgetting the other "non-English" group in America; > > the so-called White Trash or heavy Southern accents, which are violate just > > as many prissy and stuck up rules of grammar as Ebonics > > No mention was made of "White Trash". You're drawing an invalid conclusion. Yes, though your same discrimination rules apply to "White Trash." I want to see if your language discrimination applies only to black Ebonics or to the white Southern twang also. > > I also think that you are forgetting about the human aspect of your > > discrimination. For a second, put yourself in the place of a really smart > > black guy applying for a job at Intel. He is overqualified for the job. You > > There is a logical correlation between intelligence and being able to follow > English grammatical rules. Not really. America is an incredibly diverse place. There are parts of the country where correct English-speaking people are minorities; if you've grown up in one of these places, you'll speak the native dialect no matter how smart or stupid your are. > Crypto will allow people to actively discriminate against whomever they wish. > It will also allow those who would be discriminated against to protect > information about themselves to prevent discrimination. I don't support > discrimination based on race, but language is a completely different matter. Spoken language, which is what you're discriminating against is vastly different from typed language. Everyone types pretty much the same way but everyone speaks differently. People who speak in Ebonics or with a Southern twang often know the rules of grammar, as expressed in writing, but they do not speak "correctly" because they are not accustomed to doing so. > P.S. Spelling and grammar flames will be ignored. What?! How can you say this? According to your position, it is my right to flame you because, as a better grammarian and orthographer, I am more intelligent than you and you should know this. In fact, your viewpoint can be extrapolated to say that anyone who make a grammar or spelling mistake in any message should be thrown off the list becuase they are not intelligent.

2 1

Re: Ebonics
by Mark Rosen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Yeah, Matt, in a free society I wouldn't have to "speak Ebonics." > > (Personally, I interviewed several folks while I was at Intel who could not > speak standard English. I recommended against their hiring, and they in > fact did not get invites to be interviewed at the main facilities. So much > for their jive talk habits.) > > Understand, I have nothing against the colored people speaking "Ebonics" to > each other, or to anyone who'll listen. But I don't have to deal with this > nonsense, nor do I have to hire them. > > (Until the People's Republic of Political Correctness demands that I > "justify" why not speaking standard English is a "valid job requirement," > and refuses to take my "Because I say it is" as a valid answer. Not > surprisingly, the Clintonistas have decided to enter the Proposition 209 > challenge on the side of the pro-discrimination side.) > > If I were designing a genocidal program to destroy the colored race, I > would be pushing for Ebonics, for encouraging coloreds to study "Human > Potential" and "African History" instead of math, science, and engineering, > and pushing for hiring quotas. > There are several problems with your argument: * You are making glaring generalizations regarding all members of an ethnic body; you don't seem to realize that intellect is based not on color or how you talk but on your brain (which has the same color and other basic properties in all humans, I believe) * You are completely forgetting the other "non-English" group in America; the so-called White Trash or heavy Southern accents, which are violate just as many prissy and stuck up rules of grammar as Ebonics * You don't have to speak ebonics. You also don't have to speak with a Southern twang (or whatever the politically correct name for that is) I also think that you are forgetting about the human aspect of your discrimination. For a second, put yourself in the place of a really smart black guy applying for a job at Intel. He is overqualified for the job. You turn him down. Have you ever wondered what it does to a person to be turned down not on the basis of their moral character or intellect but by their skin? For someone to be told that they are stupid and are not competent to do this job? You don't realize that you are crushing _human_ lives, people who have feelings. If you would just put yourself in their place, you would realize the hurt that your are inflicting. Out of curiousity, do you refuse from hiring people with Southern Accents? Or people who have heavy "asian" accents? I'm very surprised that a smart person like you, who believes in the power of strong cryptography, one of the greatest equalizing forces in the world, actively discriminates against other people who don't look or talk like you. Mark Rosen FireSoft - http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690 Mark Eats AOL - http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6660

10 14

Re: Ebonics
by Matthew J. Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 03:02 PM 12/21/96 -0500, Mark M. wrote: [snip] >There is a logical correlation between intelligence and being able to follow >English grammatical rules. Why is it that personal freedom, sometimes expressed by choice of dialect or language, seemingly has such arbitrary limits? Many on the list complain that they are subject to too many rules, and yet, seem to chime in on multi-linugual issues in this way. Crypto angle, here? Much of Ebonics has been based upon a need or desire to communicate in a private way. "5-0" was initiated as a way to communicate the presence of a police officer. Surely, we are not arguing against the development of a low-level way to scramble language. Or in fact, are you arguing that attempts to curtail the police should *not* be encouraged? This seems odd coming from some members of the list (Collapse of Governments and all) ;-). Matt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMrx7eLpijqL8wiT1AQGfmAQAnwxX/ks/LmKIrvSZi1q7PfjlU3n+/rob 05JSMNl8Qg5sj7Xsd/mdxvVwIUWd3mzz3PCyr1CKSDNVsE9miSYwnIoWCRkxOzle dJUdEAACFX5csk/rpGMWTBpxyucmPfSugt9o6bikVWAP7Gh6YSIJobvQh6KvLMEQ XhZErmf1vHk= =azuR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

7 7

RE: some clarification of jurisdiction in Berstein (long)
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: attila The DOJ is not interested in either justice or the Bill of Rights. Federal attorneys are striving for high conviction rates, like Vietnam body counts --and are enforcing the policies of the administration, not the courts, the constitution, or the people. ........................................................... (I just read this message, even though Attila posted it this past Thursday.) I wanted to comment that it was a quite interesting post, because it deals with elements of courts and law which really baffle me - all the talk about which District Court stated this, and whether this will apply only in Northern California, and whether Judge Patel's ruling will be observed elsewhere or appealed to a higher court - I think to myself, sheesh, this is like being in a maze and trying to find the way out: If you go through this corridor, will you be on the straight path out, or is there perhaps a dead end around to the left of that edge up ahead, so maybe you should instead try going around that wall on the right? And how do you know how close you are to the exit? How do you know you aren't on a circuitous path going around & around, going nowhere? There are so many detailed decisions, so many objections, such meticulous, scrupulous study of every word & potential meaning therein, and all the judicious players appear so knowledgeable of what is or could not be valid, what is or could not be moral and therefore supportable, of which decision made by which judge on what year relating to what number on a document this all relates back to. It appears that there is a reason for the extreme concern for propriety and the extreme complexity in the assessment of it in a courtroom, in courtroom after level of courtroom. It appears that judges and lawyers and courts are deeply concerned about life proceeding in a moral way, and that they would play the role of catching it from degrading into corruption, affecting the quality of life in the US. Yet if the individual whose actions are in questions goes to jail, the atmosphere of intelligence or mental ability suddenly disappears, the delicacy towards morality and quality of behavior cuts off and there is no similar meticulous examination the institution wherein they are incarcerated, to continue ensuring that all processes there are aligned in the direction of goodness. Therefore what was it all for? If the quality of Truth and Morality is being saved from corruption by these Judges of Law, then why is one person's decision valid only in North California, but not as soon as one travels south (what's the boundary line for "North" California)? Or why does it "hold" in that state, but not anywhere else on the continent? I always think in the same terms used in the Constitution - about human nature and other such categories of thought. Not about where that human nature happens to be residing at any particular time, but what it is per se, and what is or is not right for it per se, regardless of whether it is in North or South Rhode Island. In terms of governmental roles, I'm aghast that they relate their judgements back to each other rather than back to principles. Because this means that, in the end, we are subordinate to the reasoning of some appointed individual, and subject to the lucidity of their mind at the particular moment that we come to their attention, as during a dispute regarding the publication of source code. We could never refer back to valid principles of thought or the Laws of Nature in determing what is right or what not to do, because overriding those considerations would be the calculations of some public overseer. I realize that not all lawyers & judges are this way, but it is still very unsettling to realize just how superficial is the 'honor' which accrues to them. Thanks for the elaboration on this, Attila. .. Blanc

1 0

Re: Credentials without Identity--Race Bits
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:50 PM 12/20/96 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >At least they weren't doing most of this paranoia when I visited my >sister earlier this summer, bringing a couple pounds of Silly Putty >in my luggage as presents for her kids, packed near the alarm clock.... ># Thanks; Bill For years, Radio Shack has sold an indoor/outdoor thermometer with max/min temperature function. Going on a long trip and carrying a 5-pound loaf of cheese? Stick the outdoor thermo pickup in the cheese before you depart, to ensure that it wasn't exposed to damaging temperature excursions! I'm sure this looks wonderful on an X-ray. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Ebonics
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Matthew J. Miszewski writes: >Why is it that personal freedom, sometimes expressed by choice of dialect >or language, seemingly has such arbitrary limits? Many on the list >complain that they are subject to too many rules, and yet, seem to chime in >on multi-linugual issues in this way. Mr. Miszewski: As an attorney, you may be acquainted with the concept of "reasonableness." I can certainly express my personal freedom by passing wind at home (subject only to the possibly vociferous objections of my family). Were I to fart in church or in a board meeting, that would be a horse of a different color, nicht wahr?

2 1

Re: Security hole in premail
by Mixmaster 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Mixmaster wrote: > *** premail.orig Fri Dec 20 18:46:01 1996 > --- premail Fri Dec 20 18:55:54 1996 > *************** > *** 3574,3579 **** > --- 3574,3582 ---- > } > for ($triesleft = 2; !$done && $triesleft; $triesleft--) { > $pass = &getpass ($x); > + if(!-O $ps) { > + &error ("Secrets file exists and is owned by another user\n"); > + } > $status = &decrypt_secrets ($ps_pgp, $ps, $pass); > if (!-s $ps) { unlink $ps; } > $done = (!$status && -e $ps); That patch doesn't work. It will always return an error. I have tested the following patch and it does work as intended: *** premail.orig Wed Oct 30 22:25:10 1996 --- premail Sat Dec 21 15:45:41 1996 *************** *** 3631,3636 **** --- 3631,3639 ---- $invoc .= ' > '.$ps; $invoc .= ' 2> '.$errfile; &pdv ("Invoking PGP as $invoc\n"); + if(-e $ps) { + &error ("Premail secrets file already exists\n"); + } $status = &open_pgp ($invoc, $pass, ''); $err = &read_and_delete ($errfile); &pdv ($err); Sorry about the previous mistake.

1 0

Re: Ebonics
by Omegaman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Mark Rosen wrote: > No. Speaking in Ebonics is the same as speaking with an accent. You can't > control their expression; you learned to speak with a Southern accent as a > child, while other people learned to speak with an Ebonic accent (?). By > condoning speaking in a Southern accent, you condone speaking in Ebonics. Whatever rational basis your arguments may have had were eradicated by the ludicrous logical conclusion drawn above. > I can't understand thick Southern accents. No matter how smart you are, > I'm not going to hire you because I can't understand you. How do you feel? Oh so sad. Let me make this clear, an accent is far different from grammatically incorrect speech. I can speak with grammatic perfection and a drawl so heavy it'll make your eyeballs hurt. (Of course, being from New Orleans, my normal accent is more like brooklyn than Nashville -- four years in Mississippi changed all that) > Replace the word Ebonics with "Southern accent" and "black English" with > "Southern twang" and you'll see how hypocritical you are. Also, why do you > make an exception for foriegn accents? They're just as difficult to > understand. And can still be spoken with proper grammar. I make an exception for foreign accents because we are dealing a completely separate language. Speakers of ebonics are certainly not bilingual in this sense (and neither am I). I don't see hypocrisy at all. I do see an apologist, pampering, paternal point of view, however. And we southern folk jes' don't abide that sorta thang. > Language is completely different from intellect. You can't control whether > you were taught, Ebonics, a Southern accent, or "normal" English. I wasn't "taught" a Southern accent. I absorbed it in daily conversation. I certainly wasn't taught a Southern dialect. I was taught the English language. I'll say it again...the notion that Ebonics exists as a separate language -- not derived as slang from standard English -- is absurd. me _______________________________________________________________ Omegaman <mailto:omega@bigeasy.com> PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2 59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key _______________________________________________________________

1 0