- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Tax Evasion Morality
by j.hastings6＠genie.geis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Libertarian Political Doctrine 101 >I wonder if people are really trying to just avoid taxes through >privacy. Avoidance is legal, of course, so I assume evasion is what you mean. Is taxation legalized theft or the price we pay for civilization? - From an individual rights point of view, the assumed government "social contract" is bogus because it is not voluntary. It is a coercive monopoly, like a Mafia protection racket with a flag. Muscle in on the TG's (Territorial Gangsters) turf at your own risk. But might doesn't make right. Just because thugs in D.C. control military machines, doesn't give them the right to rob and kill us. Are we obliged to obey them, or should we resist evil? Aside from the support of an elite or a few marginal basket cases, are we better off with the existing system or with competing courts and defense agents? Such a non-coercive alternative might provide order and efficient defense against retail criminals without giving wholesale power to a centralized gang of political tyrants. A well-connected network, being necessary to the integrity of a free State (of Being, man), the right of the people to keep and bear strong cryptography shall not be infringed. Kent - j.hastings6(a)genie.geis.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLiyHbDQYUX1dU7vxAQGAGgP/Skez+0dumZOg+jqX1R8qPa6dFkktY0ab E48er0KVakS+C8HRVrnsX3sEu5jl5it1P1eRU07WyjHub8hKBhvXxvFcV2NkUpSN 0VHn7OstiFBClOo6QYjTRjvwA0r0RpGJpHnADZjYJT+fipiS193RX7VZL59AvkMW OFcwgzSU0Hw= =b8ZX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Censorship in Cyberspace in London Sunday Times
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Last Sunday's Times (of London) had a cover story in the color supplement entitled "Lost in Cyberspace" by Stephen Amidon about the fact that you can't censor same. Included history of film and video censorship in the UK. Sober. No mention of TDPs (Terrorists, Drug-dealers, Pederasts). Said governments and major corporations were worried. Mentioned virtual sex. Suggested we try giving people other interests rather than censoring their inputs (since we can't anyway. DCF "If you think that those people are worthy or capable of ruling you then you're probably right."

1 0

GUT and P=NP
by kkirksey＠world.std.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I was reading Hawking's _Black Holes & Baby Universes_ and an interesting question struck me: If a Grand Unified Theory exists, would it not prove P=NP to be true? My Armchair Cosmologist's (TM) reasoning goes something like this: If a GUT exists, and that GUT is proven to be true (making it the Grand Unified Law, I suppose), any behaviour we believe to be non-deterministic really isn't: it obeys the GUL. So P=NP must be true, since NP is an artifact our pre-GUL way of looking at things. Am I way off base here? Can anyone with more knowledge in this area than I tell me if I'm right, wrong, or somewhere in between? Many thanks, Ken ============================================================================= Ken Kirksey kkirksey(a)world.std.com Mac Guru & Developer - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harassment is a power issue, and power is neither male nor female. Whoever is behind the desk has the opportunity to abuse power, and women will take advantage as often as men. - Michael Crichton (in _Disclosure_) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLisd3+sZNYlu+zuBAQFIewP+Pailgh2SFHki+eakhVU9wRCX4kvTXGt/ A2cL/GdIAWkMTPDwOIjzG6MusXcyNUTnTIiAp+Ctzti2xa8F2hsyXU5yd8RQh6aE ukmmKGvzYBocmiPV2ekl5aSlubV8+0BG4bLDDY5IKOwy1P+oXhY9539YumXuVq+D xKp/7PdRBcU= =Gx6j -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 7

Nat'l ID # ?
by Carl Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It strikes me as anachronistic to worry about national ID numbers for privacy reasons. With data processing of the 1950's, someone would have needed a single index number in order to gather all records about me into one place. With today's excess computing power, there's no problem doing a kind of fuzzy fill algorithm -- find all my various numbers, record links between them and therefore equate them (MC 1234 5678 8765 1982) = (AMEX 9876 123655 83002) = (SS 788 84 2345) = Carl M. Ellison 2130 Mass Ave; Cambridge 02140 = (617) 876-6644 etc. To aid those who are computationally challenged, this entity could also create its own index number and let others refer to that -- even call it a national ID number. None of this requires a national ID card.

3 2

Re: Card Playing Protocol
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by kentborg(a)world.std.com (Kent Borg) on Mon, 18 Jul 11:18 PM >>No. Schneier is a start, but the source papers... > >So I should wonder about how to find the sources >mentioned in his bibliography? kb, the Kent who is only human: Get <who cypherpunks> and assign each c'punk, alphabetically, to send you 900/#c'punks sources.

1 0

Re: the Cypherpunk and the Shadow
by sidney＠taurus.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please point me to appropriate references if I am going over old territory. What if an anonymous remailer required that messages were digitally signed? To use such a remailer, you would have to register an e-mail address and public key with the remailer. Mail that you send through the remailer would only go through if it were properly signed with your key. The return address on the remailed message would be something that the remailer could use to get replies back to you. Chained remailing would still be possible if each remailer signed the messages that it sent out, verifying that it had been received from an address that is registered with it (which may be a user or another such remailer). This would provide a way of dealing with someone mail-bombing a remailer or through a remailer, because the messages from one person could be identified and filtered out either by the remailer or later on, as appropriate. If someone tried to generate a million different identities and public keys, that could be dealt with by imposing a time delay for registration, which would not have to be imposed under normal circumstances. The current cypherpunk remailers maintain strict anonymity by not keeping records the way the Finnish anonymous remailer does. But if you want to be able to get a reply, you still have to place an encrypted reply block in your message, which the remailer can decrypt, so you still lose anonymity in the case that someone compromises the remailer. That is no better than registering an e-mail address (which can be your anonXXXX address anyway) that the mailer stores encrypted along with your public key. For that matter, this would work if everyone had to register a public key with the remailer in order to send mail through it, but only people who wanted to be able to receive replies also registered their e-mail address. Then the only thing that would be required to prevent a mail-bomb attack would be to enforce a registration delay during such time as it became necessary. Having all messages identified, even though still anonymous, would make building of reputations possible. -- sidney markowitz <sidney(a)apple.com>

1 0

PRIVACY SEMINAR
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

C'punks, Several of you have asked *where* my proposed privacy would be held. The answer is "cyberspace," natch. It would be "free" to you, but TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lecture). Duncan and I, however, retain the right to charge you through the nose for personal consultations or services. The "when" questions will be answered as soon as Duncan and I can come up with a good plan of action. Thanks for all the positive responses. S a n d y

1 0

Re: Kragen == LD?
by adwestro＠ouray.Denver.Colorado.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> octopus? Something with tentacles? And isn't Kragen's user name, > xentrac, close to an anagram for tentacle? And isn't unm the University > of New Mexico, adjacent to Detweiler's home state of Colorado? The Alliance for Bandwidth Conservation (ABC), asked me to point out: LD> I don't have a voice without them. My Nyx account would be LD> censored immediately from your screeching complaints if I didn't LD> post through them! LD's account is anon????(a)nyx.cs.du.edu (? = hex digit). This is the first I knew of this, but it doesn't surprise me -- Nyx is a public access site at the University of Denver. And please don't all mailbomb his overworked sysadmin (who volunteers his time to run Nyx), right away. LD's been fairly mild lately, compared to last Nov-Dec. I think it suffices for him to know that this will occur if he becomes abusive -- damn surprised he mentioned Nyx, in fact! His sysadmin *can* correlate anon accounts with True Names, if necessary. btw, anyone can telnet there and read the list gated as newsgroup mail.cypherpunks. You'll have to jump through some hoops to be able to post from there, though. Sigh...awaiting the (awestrop = Detweiler?) thread, Alan Westrope <awestrop(a)nyx.cs.du.edu> __________/|-, <adwestro(a)ouray.denver.colorado.edu> (_) \|-' finger for pgp 2.6 public key PGP fingerprint: D6 89 74 03 77 C8 2D 43 7C CA 6D 57 29 25 69 23

1 0

Re: the Cypherpunk and the Shadow
by sidney＠taurus.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I said: >If someone tried to generate a million different identities >and public keys, that could be dealt with by imposing a time delay for >registration Whoops. Of course that wouldn't work. If a delay was imposed after any registration before processing any next one, then there's an obvious denial of service attack by simply sending in lots of registrations. And if there isn't, someone can simply register a zillion different e-mail addresses and public keys and send each copy of a mail bomb from a different one. Someone who wants to build up a reputation can already do it anonymously (like Pr0duct Cypher), while someone who wants to make trouble doesn't need to build up a reputation. Oh well. -- sidney <sidney(a)apple.com>

1 0

Re: Ms. Nym's stigmata
by catalyst-remailer＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A quick review of the patent stigmata: > I have been reading some fascinating interpretations of these and > other prophecies lately. Frequent Biblical allusions, particularly fond of apocalyptic references. > I think your cause for privacy would actually be > *advanced* by promoting an ID *card* under the following condition: Attempts to mask underlying obsession with veneer of rationality. > Anyone can obtain as many ID cards as they want. Fixation on multiple personalities (tentacles, "pseudo-anonymity"). > Before you accuse me of heresy, consider the system of email address > privacy that was championed earlier by Perry Metzger: you can get any [ and later ] > Well, I do not appreciate threats in my mailbox such as "Go away--I'm not > as gentle as Perry Metzger". I can't believe how torqued-up all you guys > are. This mailing list is like a firing range. Frequent mention of Perry Metzger. Standard unit of torment: Perry Metzger. > system with government? Or do you just want to get rid of governments, > and use "privacy" as the reason? Yikes. Tireless apologist and supporter of government. > People, you may successfully get me to lose this account for no reason. Paranoia never far below the surface.

3 2