- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Digital Watermarks (long, getting off-topic)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:14 PM 7/24/96, Gary Howland wrote: >Timothy C. May wrote: > >> Pre-recorded DAT tapes were available for a while...they did not sell. I >> believe this was because DAT machine purchasers were sophisticated and new >> how to make CD-to-DAT copies, with or without SCMS. > >Don't forget that pre-recorded DAT tapes are at least an order of >magnitude more expensive to manufacture than CDs. The _selling_ price of DATs was only slightly higher than CDs, around $15 in the U.S. Some DATs were priced identically to CDs, and still didn't sell. (Not surprisingly to me, given the chicken-and-egg effect.) Manufacturing costs of CDs are very low--I've seen estimates as low as 10 cents or less--and the final selling price is dominated by royalties, overhead staff costs, distribution cost, and, of course, "what the market will bear." DAT manufacturing costs could be $1-2, but the above factors would still dominate. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Boobytraps and the American Legal System
by Chris Adams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 24 Jul 96 01:21:34 -0800, dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com wrote: >I think Tim May is growing senile... This is new? <g> >> (Later examples were to be even worse. For example, the burglar who climbed >> on a roof and stepped through a skylight. He sued, and won. I guess the >> owner of the property was obligated to install night lights so burglars >> could see their way, and to generally make his property more >> "burglar-friendly." > >Actually, he fell through the roof of a school he was trying to burgalize. > >In a similar incident a burglar broke into a house that was being treated >for pests (i.e., was full of toxic fumes). He died; his family sued the >owners and won. > >Maybe someone can post a reference to these two cases. I recall that both >happened in New York, but I could be wrong. I remember hearing about a case on this end of the continent (west coast) that involved a store that had been robbed many times. The owner noticed that most burglars came through the skylight, so he electrified it. Not much of a charge, just something like 12 volts - enough to keep someones hands off of it... However, a klutzy burglar managed to fall into the skylight and get stuck. His partner deserted him. Over the course of several hours, he died... *ouch* Needless to say, his next-of-kin sued and won. The guy lost his store. Another one I liked: in (I believe) Pennsylvania, a drunk peed on an electrified third rail. His next of kin sued the trolley company and won... A man tried to commit suicide in Chicago by jumping onto an El track. He was only crippled, so he sued and won! // Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript! // Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject // of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful!

1 0

Brute-forcing DES
by trollins＠interactive.visa.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Anyone have a FPGA chip PCI board layout that they would like to share. Having seen the paper "Minimal Key Lengths for Symmetric Ciphers to Provide Adequate Commercial Security", the FPGA chip seems like a perfect addition to my pc. Count me in... Thanks, -tom > Any one up for a distributed brute force attack on single DES? My > back-of-the-envelope calculations and guesstimates put this on the > hairy edge of doability (the critical factor is how many machines can > be recruited - a non-trivial cash prize would help). -- Tom Rollins <trollins(a)interactive.visa.com>

1 0

Re: Kids and Computer Privacy Was Re: No more stupid gun thread ...
by David Rosoff 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 03.48 AM 7/24/96 -0500, Scott Schryvers wrote: >Should kids have crypto? [weapons] Your analogy fails when I consider the simple point that crypto is not a weapon in and of itself, no matter what the misguided ITAR says. "... two plus two make five ..." >Under Itar crypto is a weapon. If a kid were to bring a disk >containing pgp to school could they be expelled for carrying a weapon? No, because crypto, *by itself* does NOT present a threat to any other kid or to any teacher or to the kid carrying the code. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMfZR5hguzHDTdpL5AQHqsgP5AcEWBP0SeGCWwgOKGgDVuzz4yJRXk218 lSepjhxa+OnK6Aw5Gxk/+ykJAZM++VPH4LKR3ztRP5X3CJMC8zJ+f4qatmqzRptU yKagSL8yF2/xN9ltwJcl6T3F4f88LJKD0vDpp4M+FeIX90zDosxPl0TYYv3niG2u v2ePUFTwWKI= =IlGz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

FW: Schelling Points, Rights, and Game Theory--Part II
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: tcmay(a)got.net >...certainly a Schelling point or evolutionary game >theory interpretation of what we call "rights" is superior to an appeal-to-God or "natural rights" interpretation. ........................................................................ ................. So there is the "game theory" interpretation of "rights" as would be understood by an individual within a group of 2 or more, or a "society" of many individuals, and then there is the interpretation of how anyone might interpret the concept even if they were not a member of any society but lived totally alone in the wilderness? I don't know why these would be categorized as being part of a "game" - evolutionary or otherwise. A game is something that is evaluated somewhat outside the context of our regular life - a diversion, an accessory, even if it also can be taken seriously or if it can become a career for some people. It is not given the same significance as other practical pursuits like medicine or engineering, which are intended to have definite, practical, beneficial results. Any person normally posseses some ability to determine the propriety to themselves of certain things in existence: they have some measure of ability to make judgements over what is "right" or "wrong" for humankind similar to themselves. Most people develop some sensitivity to the difference between that which is destructive to the goals & values of living things versus that which is supportive of them; most everyone is expected to improve the ability to think about these things as they grow up, even if they don't hold formal arguments with anyone else about it. But people's minds work on overtime and just because they can make judgements, they therefore do make judgements, and furthermore they intend that everyone else should accept these same conclusions - they go into "global mode", expecting that their perspective will be incontestably valid over all. But I wouldn't think that they imagine themselves to be playing a game. I think they're quite serious about it, and "rightly" so, as the consequences of these decisions have major effects upon the quality of their life and happiness. I think that to think of these concepts in terms of game theory is to miss the place of significance which these decisions have in the life of conscious, self-determining beings like ourselves; that it doesn't do justice to the need to achieve correspondence with the facts of life & molecular physics. Or, what's the Prize for these Olympics (and who cares)? .. Blanc ~ Blanc

1 0

Re: Netscape
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:39 PM 7/24/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote: >The Deviant wrote: >> >> I would have suggested even being as nice as "We'll do the same as MIT >> does with PGP's distrobution, or RSA does with RSAREF (just so you'll >> know, RSA's FTP basicly has a readme file that says "the files in >> subdir of a dir thats -r+x to you, so if you're a citizen go to >> dist/usaRANDOM_NUMBER_HERE", thats it). Then make them explain why >> Netscape should be any different. > >MIT reportedly has a letter stating that their systems is okay. The >state department wouldn't give us such a letter because they were >"currently reevaluating their guidelines", or some such thing. We >convinced them to give us temporary permission for this system until >they had finalized their new policy. That still doesn't make since. First, there were laws. And we had to obey them. Then, they added ITAR. And they want us to obey it. Finally, it seems, they're giving us "guidelines." Not law, Not ITAR. Next it's gonna be their their fondest desires, their preferences,and finally their whims. What's wrong with this picture? Do I detect an ass-kissing contest? You should have told them that if they're "evaluating their guidelines" that means that NO future modifications to those guidelines is binding on you, since it is not part of ITAR and is CERTAINLY not part of the law. You should have memorialized the contact with a lawyer's letter, and promptly posted the new version of your software with whatever version of the precautions (MIT, RSA, or?) you felt most happy with. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

4 3

Re: [Noise] Re: <rant> Re: Devil's Bargain
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I don't know if it was terrorist activity, I was just annoyed at >the extensive every 15 minutes even tho' there is nothing new to say I >gotta get my mug and my voice on the ether coverage. It's also yet another excuse for the government to say "Be Afraid! Be Very Afraid! We're Here To Help You" - Clinton's first speech after the event had him bringing up terrorism and making sure everyone knew that even though there was as yet no evidence that it wasn't an accident, he was tough on terrorism and he'd be making sure we have more controls on the population to protect us from terrorists. I'm surprised I haven't heard Kallstrom calling for radically increased wiretapping yet or Freeh calling for bans on encryption like he did after OKCity. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs # Confuse Authority!

1 0

Re: Digital Watermarks (long, getting off-topic)
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:26 AM 7/24/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: >Isn't it odd that when music is sold, CD's are MORE expensive than cassette >tapes, even though you _know_ that the manufacturing cost of CD's is less? CDs sell for more because buyers decided that they wanted a wider range of titles with shallower sales (hence higher unit costs) rather than a narrower range of titles with lower sales prices. The number of CD titles available is far greater (in general distribution) than the number of vinyl titles that were available during vinyl's peak year. This greater availability of short run pressings raises average unit sales costs justifying the higher prices. Had the market decided (when physical production costs fell) that it was satisfied with a Top-40 CD stock, average CD prices would have fallen to vinyl levels. >Another oddity: The price for a blank, standard-quality videocassette is >about the same as that of a blank, standard-quality audio cassette tape, >despite the fact that the volume of tape included in the former is probably >about a factor of 10 higher. Materials cost is a minor part of total cost. In both cases, the cost of production is a small part of the cost of goods sold. Almost all of that cost is the cost of marketing (as with all mass-market products in a modern capitalist economy. DCF "The only adequate description of the Universe is the Universe itself. The only fair price of an item is the market price. Neither the Universe nor the Market can be adequately duplicated in the head of a Congresscritter."

2 1

RPK Public Key Cryptography
by Stephen Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

New algorithm from outside US, new crypto challenge? My apologies to the list if this subject is old hat but someone just pointed me to the RPK Public Key Cryptography site and I was wondering what people thought of this particular technology. The RPK Public Key Cryptography site at http://crypto.swdev.co.nz/ says: Have a look at this new approach to information privacy, designed and developed in New Zealand. The RPK public key cryptosystem provides industrial-strength public key cryptography that's available worldwide. You'll find full technical information, free evaluation software and development tools, and details of our SafeCracker Challenge program where you can earn a $$$ REWARD $$$ while trying to put us out of business! The inventor and developer of the RPK system is aparently Dr. William M.Raike who holds a US patent as co-inventor of scrambler which NSA banned in the US. The Nicolai/Raike case attracted some media attention and, after the NSA rescinded the order, it was one of the first instances in which an NSA director commented publicly on patent secrecy issues. That invention had its roots in spread spectrum technology. Note sure if that has any bearing on the public key offering. Note that I have no connection with this person, software or site, just natural curiousity about what cypherpunks think about it. Stephen Cobb, CISSP

1 0

Re: Game Theory and its Relevance to Cypherpunks
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:21 AM 7/21/96 -0700, Llywarch Hen wrote: > What Timothy May espouses is not the appearance of craziness but actual > insanity itself. The best way to convince others you are crazy is to actually be crazy. More practically, if you organize your nuclear forces so that any serious war is likely to escalate uncontrollably into the battle of armageddon, regardless of your intentions and desires, which is how the American government organized its nuclear forces in Europe, then you can pretty much guarantee you will not have to face a serious war. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

3 2