- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: mailing list
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:54 AM 1/18/97 -0500, roamer.fau wrote: >Please place me on your mailing list. > Thank You, > Mark > > cypherpunks-request(a)toad.com "help" # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

Re: Fascist cocksuckers: 0, Freedom of speech: 1
by Otto Matic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> John Young wrote: >> > Governments in China, Burma and >> > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with >> > minimal success. >> >> Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you >> just being a goddamn tease? > >For example, the fascist cocksuckers Sandfart and Geekmore have been >totally impotent in their failed attempts to suppress free speech. > >Gilmore's as inept as the governments of China, Burma and Singapore combined. > > FUCK CENSORSHIP. FUCK EFF (EFFEMINATE FASCISTS FOUNDATION). > >--- > Seems as if you've been censored! Bummer, dude! 0tto otto =-=-=-=-=- Otto Matic "Fuckin' A, Miller!" Bud, Repo Man --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation (fwd)
by proff＠suburbia.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From owner-freebsd-hackers(a)freefall.freebsd.org Wed Jan 22 09:05:30 1997 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers(a)freefall.freebsd.org> Delivered-To: proff(a)suburbia.net Received: (qmail 7399 invoked from network); 22 Jan 1997 09:05:21 -0000 Received: from mail.webspan.net (206.154.70.7) by suburbia.net with SMTP; 22 Jan 1997 09:05:21 -0000 Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.18]) by mail.webspan.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA22296; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:00:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA22550; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:25:14 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA22415 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:20:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au (ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au [130.102.222.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA22410 for <hackers(a)FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:20:25 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gdr@localhost) by ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au (8.6.8/8.6.6) id SAA11281; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:18:43 +1000 From: Gary Roberts <gdr(a)ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au> Message-Id: <199701220818.SAA11281(a)ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au> Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation To: jkh(a)time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:18:42 +1000 (EST) Cc: hackers(a)FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <1045.853896142(a)time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 21, 97 05:22:22 pm Organisation: The University of Queensland Phone: +617 3844 0400 Reply-To: gdr(a)wcs.uq.edu.au X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Sender: owner-hackers(a)FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jordan K. Hubbard writes: > But that doesn't even raise the biggest issue, which is: > > > Freddy Kruger (Kruger(a)ElmStreet.org) has submitted the > > following policy topic for discussion: > > > > > FreeBSD should move from a.out to ELF. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > [ ... various amounts of discussion for 5 days ... ] > > Freddy raises the issue and 10 people vote on it, 7 feeling ELF-ish > enough that the motion "passes." > > Now what? We've got this as a supposed piece of "FreeBSD Policy" now > and users will surely expect it to be implemented or there wouldn't be ... Actually, I think you'll find he was proposing a two stage process where the above example only allows a further vote to be taken as to whether or not it should become `policy'. This second stage is where you spend your vote tokens if you want to stop something passing. You are really alluding to the possibility of things `passing' due to apathy of the vast majority. That could be easily fixed. I imaging that people with `vote tokens' have them because they are registered as `adherents' to the FreeBSD religion. The Votebot could send each adherent a re-registration slip, say every three months. No reply means you are automatically removed from the adherents list and your voting rights disappear. You can easily re-instate yourself at any time and your previous vote tokens (if any) are then restored. In this way you trim out people who have lost the religion. At the first stage of voting, a decision to have a real vote on a policy change will *only* be made if (a) a significant fraction of adherents take part in the vote AND (b) there is a majority of `yes' over `no'. That way, if there is general apathy, the thing dies. At the second `real vote' stage, you must then decide whether to spend your vote tokens. Once again, things `pass' only if a quorum is involved and there is a majority of `yes' over `no' votes. The required quorum could be quite different for the first and second stages of voting. For example, the quorum to decide whether or not to put things to a vote could be set at say 20% which would not stifle the process but the quorum to actually change policy could be say 40 - 50% to make sure that a vocal minority couldn't `roll' the silent majority. Terry did offer to implement the voting system. Why not take him up on his offer with the first question to be decided being:- Q. Should changes in FreeBSD policy be made by an auto-voting system? and if you get a `yes' on that then the second could be:- Q. Does the Emperor have some clothes after all?? :-). Seriously, it might be useful to have the user community vote on important policy issues (like a.out versus ELF) knowing that there is really no binding commitment on volunteers to do anything if it doesn't suit the volunteers. I'm sure everyone really does understand and accept that. It would also be useful to kill off discussion that has exceeded its use-by date (like this thread) by putting it to a vote and then getting on with more useful things. All the above is, of course, IMHO. Cheers, -- Gary Roberts (gdr(a)wcs.uq.edu.au) (Ph +617 3844 0400 Fax +617 3844 0444) 4th Floor, South Bank House, 234 Grey St, South Bank QLD 4101 Australia.

1 0

Re: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs
by Richard L. Field 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

That would be Samuel Slater, who built his mill in Pawtucket, Rhode Island (still there, on Roosevelt Avenue) in 1793. He reproduced his former boss's factory from memory in order to collect on a bounty offered in the US on the export-restricted patent. - Richard Field At 06:39 PM 1/21/97 -0500, Sean Roach <roach_s(a)alph.swosu.edu> wrote: >This has often reminded me of something that occurred around 1776. >I can't remember if it was before or after. >Remember how the colonies got sophisticated spinning gear? >I believe it was spinning gear. >Great Britain had a ban on the export of functional models, diagrams or >manufacturing instructions to one particular class of equipment. This was >so that they could maintain the monopoly on cheaply made cloth, holding the >outlying colonies in line by maintaining a dependancy. >One man memorized the structure of one of these machines and then came to >the American shores, where he reproduced it workably. > >I can't remember the name of the man or the machine, just that it was used >in the manufacture of cloth, the "spinning jenny" i think. Nor can I >remember the date.

1 0

Re: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment"
by Bill Campbell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sean Roach <roach_s(a)alph.swosu.edu> wrote: > At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > >Bill Campbell wrote: > > > >> I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > >> more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > > > > Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't > >worked, to date. > > > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the > members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one > less challenger in the fight over our rights. > Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. I thought my meaning was obvious, but thanks for pointing it out to those who didn't get it. When I first began reading this list, I realized that a lot of important information was being put out; and it certainly raised my awareness of issues that I had not previously thought about. I believe that many other subscribers to the list also were exposed to many of these concepts, and that many subscribers to the list were people who could make a difference. I fear that many have now left the list, since it now seems to resemble, in many ways, a list consisting of high school age "wannabes" who think it's really cool to attack people just because they can. The downward spiral into inconsequential meaningless postings began with posts containing the word "fart". So cool, dudes. =Bill=

1 0

Re: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs
by Richard L. Field 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

That would be Samuel Slater, who built his mill in Pawtucket, Rhode Island (still there, on Roosevelt Avenue) in 1793. He reproduced his former boss's factory from memory in order to collect on a bounty offered in the US on the export-restricted patent. - Richard Field At 06:39 PM 1/21/97 -0500, Sean Roach <roach_s(a)alph.swosu.edu> wrote: >This has often reminded me of something that occurred around 1776. >I can't remember if it was before or after. >Remember how the colonies got sophisticated spinning gear? >I believe it was spinning gear. >Great Britain had a ban on the export of functional models, diagrams or >manufacturing instructions to one particular class of equipment. This was >so that they could maintain the monopoly on cheaply made cloth, holding the >outlying colonies in line by maintaining a dependancy. >One man memorized the structure of one of these machines and then came to >the American shores, where he reproduced it workably. > >I can't remember the name of the man or the machine, just that it was used >in the manufacture of cloth, the "spinning jenny" i think. Nor can I >remember the date.

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd)
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. Do you really want Clinton and GingWretch having a say in how we run our web? (I don't). It may be 'their' country ('their' being the government), but it is 'their' world ('their' being the people). There was a reason that the Western powers didn't return East Germans who broke the laws of their country by climbing over the wall and running for freedom. Making information available does not 'force' a view on anyone. > > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > > speech. I want a couple of whatever this guy is on. > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the communications of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the government to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. Toto

1 0

Re: ADSL (Was: GSM technology
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: >> Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > >They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) >phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that >the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at >your local telco wire center. Of course, your local telco has to >have something useful to do with the bits once the user sends >them to the telco, and has to have some useful bits to send the user. >This means they've got to haggle about standards for 5 more years >(or just do the right thing and deploy IP, with some respectable >bandwidth to the outside world) (or deploy ATM to get a layer 2 >connection to something outside.) That was the intent of at least one sectio of the recently enacted Telecom Reform Act, but now the Baby Bells are trying to block local access provisions in the SC which would allow, for example, ISP to offer ISDN/ADSL/HDSL via their own CO equipment (bypassing the telco switches). > >Don't know if the telcos have a clue about pricing, either. >It's obviously got to be more than cost, but they'll probably >thrash around a lot the way they did with IP.... > ># Thanks; Bill ># Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com ># You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp ># (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

RE: ADSL (Was: GSM technology
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote re: ADSL lines> They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at your local telco wire center. A previous poster mentioned that because of the copper wire restriction, that they may deploy first in older centers. This would appear to be the case, since a Canadian telco (Sasktel) is offering ADSL in Saskatoon for 60$/month with unlimited internet access. Saskatoon falls into this category - in my opinion. I was only is SK briefly over New Years, but perhaps Toto can fill in details. James

1 0

David Kahn advocates GAK
by Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl' 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In today's (22 Jan 97) Long Island, NY Newsday Viewpoints, p. A31: "Let Feds Overheard Cellular-Phone Talk" by David Kahn (an editor at Newsday and author of "The Codebreakers") He intones the usual horseman: "...such criminals as terrorists, drug- runners, kidnappers and child-pornographers are increasingly using encryption to conceal their plans and activities, the FBI says." He also mis-states opponenents of GAK positions, claimingthe criticism is that "key escrow [at least he doesn't call it key recovery] won't work all the time", ignoring anti-GAK mentions of COINTELPRO, J.Edgar Stalin^H^H^H^H^H^HHoover, etc. etc. And the usual nonsense about "every day that criminal messages can be heard is a gain" w/out noting that anyone smart enough to use crypto now will not use it if GAK is fully implemented. Newsday is part of the LA Times Syndicate, so member papers may also have the same viewpoint appearing in their pages within the next couple of days. Their website is http://www.newsday.com ... I don't know if the viewpoint is on-line there. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl(a)unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key.

1 0