- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hotmail, Juno, Aol... > > How about using the email address as the hostage info? The goods are sent to > the email address, so the sender knows that the email address is good. On > breach of contract, the sender has the option of selling the email address of > the reciever to a bunch of known spammers. > > More rambling... ;) > > -- > Steve > > P.S. If this particular contribution to your idea goes anywhere, I want credit. :) > --

1 0

Arthur C. Clarke Supports Strong Crypto
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(Pardon me for mentioning crypto...) Arthur C. Clarke, known to most of you (author of many SF works, coiner of the phrase: "all sufficiently advanced technlogies are indistinguishable from magic," mention by Alan Olsen yesterday), has a role in a "Discovery Channel" program called "Mysterious Universe." The episode tonight dealt with famous ciphers, including the Beale Cipher (buried gold), the Voynich Manuscript (who knows what it is), and the Vinland Map (my ancestors beat the Italians to the New World). Clarke concluded by opining that strong ciphers that can only be read by the intended recipient are now more important than ever. --Tim May Boycott espionage-enabled 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, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

TEST
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TEST

1 0

Browsing Under the Influence, from the Netly News
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

********* http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1638,00.html The Netly News Network (http://netlynews.com/) December 16, 1997 Browsing Under the Influence by Tom Deerfield and Mark Dolley When Andre Khalifi and Chuck Haddad applied to open the CyberLounge in Fountain Valley, Ca., serving gourmet food with a cigar menu, Internet access and a full bar, they expected the community to enthusiastically embrace the proposal. Instead, their alcohol and Internet cocktail met with fierce opposition from local residents who saw the business as a potential threat to their safety. "How are we going to protect our women after these guys get liquored up, look at pornography and then roam the neighborhood late at night?" asked one resident at a public hearing. The Fountain Valley Police Department was worried too. Detective Sergeant Paul McGinnis -- a participant in the planning process -- was skeptical about "uncontrolled Internet access" from the get-go, according to Khalifi. McGinnis confirmed his concerns over the pornography question: "I've never actually been on the Internet, but my understanding is that you can get just about anything you want on there." [...]

1 0

Jim Bell Letter
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 15:32:43 -0800 To: jya(a)pipeline.com From: Anonymous Subject: Letter from Jim 12/17 I received a letter from Jim today. He apologizes for taking so long to reply, citing his transfer to the Federal Detention Center and that, at that time, everything except his legal papers were "lost", including my address and telephone number. ... He says (for your web page, John): ------------------------ . He mentions that he was sentenced to 11 months, and that mathematics suggests that since he's been in for almost 7 months, he only has 4 months to go. "It'll be hard to wait this long, but that's life." . "Unfortunately, I've been getting some highly-distorted (bad) publicity in the last few weeks. It is obvious that the government is trying to engage in a "character assassination" spree against me. They will fail in the end, but it will be painful to me until then. Please explain this to the public. Thanks." . Currently he's only allowed one call per week, and so he will be making that call to his relatives. However, he does intend to write. . It won't be possible to make visits to him at this time, because, "This place has weird rules, as it is supposed to be a "temporary" holding facility, and only close family members are allowed to visit." . "If anyone has an old paperback copy of the book "2010" that they can spare, I'd appreciate it." . His new address: Register 26906-086 Federal Detention Center P.O. Box 68976 Seattle, WA 98168 -----------------------

1 0

Home Business: $10 K/mth: No Selling:No MLM!!
by sammy＠mci2000.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

============================================================ Our research indicates that the following information is of interest to you. If you prefer not to be on this mailing list please hit "reply" , enter "remove and (your full email address)" as the subject and we will promptly remove you. Thank you... ============================================================ Hello Entrepreneur! QUESTION- What if... YOU could earn... an Immediate, Substantial $5,000 - $10,000+ Monthly Income... In As Little As 45-90 Days -- And all it required was a telephone? What if I could show you how to generate a six figure income in just several months? This is NOT MLM! CALL NOW to arrange an interview: 1-800-322-6169 Ext. 9508 (24hrs.) Are Any of Your Answers YES? Would You Like To: * Legally reduce business/personal taxes up to 95% * Protect any and all assets from any form of lien or judgment? * Learn how to preserve your privacy? * Create a six-figure income in the next 4-6 months? Are Any of Your Answers NO? * Are you earning 62.4% per annum on your savings and investments? * Do you know how to make your money work 40-800% harder for you? * Can you legally shelter all assets from all taxes? Learn HOW TO: * Earn a large daily income AND what to do with it. * Understand global economics quickly and easily. * Enjoy higher returns on investments. * Understand offshore investing and how YOU can benefit from it * Open foreign bank accounts. * Invest in foreign markets safely. * Set up offshore trusts * Reduce taxes To find out more how YOU can take advantage of all these benefits and more, call the following 800 number, listen to a short 2 minute message, then leave your name, phone number and a convenient time to get a hold of you. CALL NOW: 1-800-322-6169 Ext. 9508 (24hrs.) ============================================================ We maintain a current REMOVE list. If you wish to be removed from our list then please hit "reply" , enter "remove and (your full email address)" as the subject and we will promptly remove you from our list. Thank you... ============================================================

1 0

Nyms with keys
by Don 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am compiling a list of PGP keys from well known nyms. I only remember a few, I was wondering if anyone could think of any others: Pr0duct Cypher CancelMoose Cypherpunk Enquirer needs one, if nothing more than for kicks Scamizat any signatures on RC2, RC4 for HP, etc. I'd swear there's a couple more but I can't think of them. Also wondering if anyone besides Bill Stewart has been done anything with nym-key-signing, especially on a first-come first-serve, no verification basis. thanks Don Discovered today that secretly replacing your computer with a can of Folgers crystals(TM) undermines all online security. I will be applying for a patent soon which uses a Mr Coffee(TM) machine to detect this invasion. PS: ObNukes: None.

2 1

Can't Find Your Web Site
by up＠uplinkpro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can't find your web site? Uplink will post your site to 50 search engines for $89. We guarantee your satisfaction, or you pay nothing! Millions of people every day use search engines to find web sites. Uplink makes your site easier to find by posting it to the top 50 search engines. Here's how it works: 1. Fill out the form below, and return it to us. 2. We'll post your site to the top 50 search engines within two business days and send you a full promotion report. 3. Pay nothing now. We'll send you a bill for $89 with the promotion report. If you're not completely happy, simply write "cancel" on the bill, and you'll owe nothing. THE SEARCH ENGINES Here's the list of top search engines to which we'll post your site: Alta Vista, Excite, Galaxy, HotBot, Infoseek, Lycos, Magellan, Open Text Web Index, Web Crawler, BizWeb, New Riders WWW Yellow Pages, LinkMonster, True North, Northern Light, YelloWWWeb, The Weekly Bookmark, The Galactic Galaxy, TurnPike, Unlock:The Information Exchange, Your WebScout, Manufacturers Information Network, Net Happenings, Net Mall, Web World Internet Directory, WebVenture Hotlist, What's New, WhatUSeek, JumpLink, Linkcentre Directory, InfoSpace, Jayde Online Directory, BC Internet, BizCardz Business Directory, Net-Announce, New Page ListOne World Plaza, PageHost A-Z, PeekABoo, Project Cool, Scrub The Web, Seven Wonders, Sserv, Starting Point, Web 100, Web Walker, Where2Go, World Wide Business Yellow Pages, Wow! Web Wonders!, WWW Worm, JumpCity. ORDER FORM Hit the REPLY button on your e-mail program and fill out the following information. (This information will be posted to the search engines/indexes): URL: http:// Site Title: Description (250 characters): Key words (250 characters, in descending order of importance): Your name: Company Name: Address: City: State/Prov: Zip/Postal Code: Telephone: Fax: Email address: Contact e-mail address (in case we have questions about this order): If billing a different address, please complete the following: Addressee: Company Name: Address: City: State/Prov: Zip/Postal Code: Telephone: Fax: Email address: TERMS Terms are net 15 days from date of invoice. ______________________________________________________________________ Uplink, Inc. 39B Mill Plain Road Danbury, CT 06811 Phone: (203) 791-7351 Fax: (203) 790-6407 E-mail: up(a)uplinkpro.com

1 0

Re: free speech and the government
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Feb 04, 1996 14:40:51, 'Alan Olsen <alano(a)teleport.com>' wrote: > >Crypto relevence: Some people regard the ability to hide "dangerous" >information to be as "dangerous" as the information hidden. Freedom of >Speech includes the right to choose who can listen to that speech. > I do not think that his last sentence is accurate. The primary example os a group that exercises its freedom of speech (maybe even fights in the courts for it) by holding a rally in the Village Green. Does their right to hold their rally also include the right to choose who can listen to the rally speeches in the Village Green? Of course not! Fundamentally, I think that speaking is a speech issue; determining who can listen is a privacy issue. They are very much *not* the same thing. The separation is not done away with by things like the cellular phone anti-eavesdropping or satellite cable broadcast laws. (Aspects of the separation are, however, addressed by PGPhone, or rather should one say made "unaddressable". --tallpaul PS: Olsen's post did have some good themes on the nature of the internet "as public library."

1 0

Fwd: Dec. 16 column -- Bill of Rights
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ---------------- Date: 12/18 8:38 AM Received: 12/18 11:04 PM From: Vin Suprynowicz)(by way of Hardy Macia, Vin_Suprynowicz(a)lvrj.com Reply-To: Vermont Libertarian, vtlp-list(a)catamount.com To: Multiple recipients of vtlp-list, vtlp-list(a)catamount.com This article comes from Vin Suprynowicz's mailing list. Should we have a celebrat Bill of Rights Day? -- Hardy _______________________ FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED DEC. 16, 1997 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Our second national holiday Americans make a big hubbub over the Fourth of July. True, the victory of 1781 was an amazing triumph, and the vision of those gathered in Philadelphia five years before -- that men may rightfully form or disband governments at will, for the higher purpose of protecting our God-given individual rights -- is still worth celebrating. But that confederation of free men ended on June 21, 1788, when New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the new United States Constitution, making it the law of the land. At that point, the organization of free peoples created by the Declaration of Independence -- the one we still celebrate each July -- passed away. Our government school teachers tell us this was necessary because the Articles of Confederation "weren't working out." But they are woefully light on specifics. Push them, and most will mutter uncertainly some trivia about seaboard states charging tariffs on goods transshipped to landlocked states. Point out that the first landlocked states -- Vermont and Kentucky -- weren't admitted until 1791 and 1792, and they will usually fall into a puzzled, grumbling silence. Anyway, there it is: The people fell for the siren song of "federalism," accepting solemn promises that the powers of the new central government would be sharply limited to those expressly spelled out -- funding a Navy, granting patents and copyrights, coining metal money. Not much more. Fast forward 210 years. As a recipe for limited government, this Constitution now matches the creature it's supposed to describe about as well as a Chihuahua's carry-on "Pet Kennel" would fit a drooling Irish wolfhound. The prima facie proof of this failure now stares at us from every acre of the former marshland north of the Potomac, a granite necropolis and memorial park to our deceased freedoms at least a hundred times larger in manpower and frenzied ambition to control our lives than Mr. Jefferson could ever have imagined (though one suspects Mr. Hamilton would have smiled.) In the face of this unchained monster, our thin remaining hope against outright tyranny lies in the fact that Rhode Island and North Carolina (bless them) outright refused to ratify that Constitution until a Bill of Rights was added -- while Massachusetts, Maryland, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia And New York all ratified only on the condition that some such set of amendments be quickly appended, as was solemnly promised. And so, on the day we should probably celebrate as our SECOND great national holiday, on Dec. 15, 1791, Virginia became the 11th state to ratify the first 10 proposed amendments -- Mr. Madison's "Bill of Rights" -- though a better name might be the "Bill of Prohibitions" on government conduct. This Dec. 15, as usual, that anniversary passed with the kind of afterthought mention on the daily news and propaganda broadcasts usually reserved for "On this day 70 years ago, Commander Perry reached the North Pole" -- about as much attention as was paid, two days later, to the 224th anniversary of the great event of Dec. 17, 1773 ("The most magnificent movement of all. There is a dignity, a majesty, a sublimity in this last effort of the patriots that I greatly admire," said future president John Adams of the tax-resisting militiamen who that day dumped 342 chests of tea into Boston harbor.) An establishment of religion To their credit, Aaron Zelman and J.E. Simkin of the little Milwaukee-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership battled for months this year to get city councils around the country to adopt proclamations honoring Dec. 15 as Bill of Rights Day -- succeeding with a small, proud band which now includes Randolph County, N.C.; Cobb County, Ga.; the City of Asheboro; the town of Rainier, Wash.; and spunky little Valley City, N.D. JPFO has also just brought out the latest in their line of "Gran'pa Jack" comic books, "It's Common Sense to Use Our Bill of Rights ... Or Lose Them!" suitable to explain the Bill of Rights to any kid, aged 6 to 60 ... of which more later. But against Mr. Zelman's admirable efforts, the question remains: Why do the folks now in charge of our national offices -- including the government schools -- so pass over and ignore the historic ratification of those 462 little words which have made us for two centuries the envy of men and women seeking freedom the world around -- this Bill of Rights? Because they fear folks might actually read them? They're in plain English, you know. It was never intended we should need an attorney to tell us what they mean -- let alone that we should tolerate courts telling us they don't mean what we can plainly read there for ourselves. It couldn't be because they're afraid we'd actually go read the First Amendment, could it, which begins, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."? What does it mean for a government to "establish" a religion? Why, clearly, to establish one religion as that enforced by the government, against all others ... like the Church of England. Let us suppose, for instance, that an extremist cult were to arise, which holds it is a mortal sin to plow under any weed, or to destroy any bug or small verminous rodent which we may find on our own property, providing the priests of this extremist cult should decide (based on divine revelation) to list that weed or bug in their own scriptures as "threatened" or "endangered." That would be no problem, so long as the priests of this weird sect had no legal authority to do anything but preach against us from their own, private pulpits. But let us now suppose the government were to erect a headquarters for this sect in Washington at taxpayer expense, and issue them guns and badges, empowering them to enter onto our private property, arresting and jailing us and seizing our land and homes if they should find us killing our own weeds and bugs, to which no one else can demonstrate any legal title? That would be "an establishment of religion," wouldn't it, and thus banned under the First Amendment? Why, such extralegal usurpations might even tempt government agents to eventually storm, burn and massacre harmless citizens in their own churches of a Sunday afternoon, for practicing some religion not approved by Washington, mightn't it? Thank goodness we have a First Amendment to prevent that kind of thing. So (start ital)that(end ital) couldn't be the one they don't want us to read. It couldn't be because they're afraid we'd actually go read the (start ital)Second(end ital) Amendment, could it? The one that says "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? Shall not be infringed What's that word "free" doing in there? Mr. Madison knew full well that no citizen-militia was necessary to protect the security of the kingdoms of France or Russia. Mercenary, professional, standing armies did just fine to protect their borders -- at the price of their own disarmed populaces being subject to tyranny under the same muskets. Only a "free" country requires that the bulk of the potential armed forces consist of free, private citizens better armed than the men commanded by the central government, just as the unofficial "Fairfax County Militia" of Messrs. Washington and Mason had been better armed than the special militia or "National Guard" available to obey the orders of the crown's "governor of Virginia" in 1776 ... else the Revolution still fresh in Mr. Madison's mind could never even have been launched, let alone won. What the Second Amendment clearly means is that -- as a guarantee against the threat of internal government tyranny -- any law-abiding American adult not obviously insane or severely retarded has a right to own and carry with him -- down to the federal courthouse, to a rally in Washington City, or onto an airplane -- a belt-fed 30-caliber Browning machine gun, or a shoulder-launched heat-seeking missile. (You're not going to argue we could stand up to the FBI, the ATF, or the 87th Airborne with a Ruger 10-22 and a few old muzzle-loaders, I hope?) And when it says that right shall not be "infringed," that means neither the weapon, nor its ammunition, nor the buying or transport of either, may be taxed, regulated, or subjected to any "permitting" process. The government can't even require that the store clerk who sells me my machine gun "check my ID," or write down my name. Certainly, under a Constitution so amended, no congresswomen would ever be allowed to ban the import and private purchase of certain militarily useful firearms because their pistol grips and removable magazines makes them (start ital)too(end ital) useful to freedom-fighters ... would they? Nor would any president be able to remain in office if he ordered surplus government M-1 Garands and Colt 1911s shredded and melted to keep them out of the hands of our own civilian militia ... or banned the re-importation of American-made Garands and M-1 carbines without even submitting a bill to Congress, instead merely signing some royal decree, or so-called "executive order" ... would he? No; that's all clear enough. (start ital)That(end ital) can't be the one they don't want us to read. An impartial jury Could it be they're afraid we might read the (start ital)Sixth(end ital) Article of Amendment, which begins, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury ..." The high court, of course, now holds this doesn't mean what it appears to mean to us non-lawyers, at all. Rather than see the courts grow too crowded, her eminence Sandra Day O'Connor now informs us no trial is required if the state agrees to jail us for fewer than 180 days ... or even for fewer than 180 days on (start ital)each charge(end ital). But crowded courts are a self-correcting problem, once all defendants are guaranteed a "speedy" trial. The correct answer is to force every case to trial before a jury within one week ... to ban all "plea bargains." (Do we really believe the cops arrest all those people on the wrong charges?) Forced to pick and choose the few cases they really have time to try, prosecutors would be forced (under the existing "speedy trial" provision) to promptly release the 95 percent of federal defendants who have committed no violent felony, but only violated some arbitrary bureaucratic edict. Aw, gee. And by the way, what's that word "impartial" doing in there? The British common-law jury system with which the Founders were familiar made no provision for the judge to ask potential jurors in advance whether they favored the enforcement of the law in question ... which is why the misguided government could never get any convictions in the North in the 1850s on charges of violating the hated Fugitive Slave Act, any more than a government saddled with the same jury system could convict William Penn in London, some years before, on charges of preaching a Quaker sermon. Importantly, it is only the (start ital)defendant(end ital) who is guaranteed an impartial jury -- we find here no guarantee that "the state shall enjoy ..." When the judge asks the jury pool whether anyone would have a problem sending someone to jail for smoking pot, or for owning an ancient collectable World War One machine gun without having previously submitted his fingerprints to the ATF, or for declining to pay a federal income tax on wages -- and when that judge promptly sends home anyone who raises his or her hand -- he is not empaneling an "impartial" jury; he is pre-screening a jury guaranteed to be predisposed to the government's case. He is violating the Sixth Amendment. The original term for a jury trial was a trial "en pays," or "on the country." The jury is supposed to represent a cross-section of our fellow citizens. Unless a law has broad -- 92 percent, actually -- public support, the chances are that a randomly-selected group of 12 citizens will include one member (8.33 percent of the panel) who finds the law a hateful abomination, and who will refuse to convict. Hung jury: Defendant walks. That is the meaning, and the intent, of the Sixth Amendment prohibition on government taking away our life, liberty or property without "a speedy trial ... by an impartial jury." And what about the Tenth Amendment, which specifies, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This means 90 percent of the laws, agencies, orders and regulators now pouring forth from Washington City like demons breaching the walls of hell are null and void -- deformed, fatherless creatures, apt to melt away like Goblins if ever tested in the harsh daylight of the Bill of Rights. 'Which one? Point to it' It doesn't matter whether you like these rights and prohibitions, consider that they might tempt disorder, or think it's a good idea to "allow" them -- any more than it matters whether you think we should "allow" the sun to rise tomorrow, or the birds to fly. It doesn't work that way. The several sovereign states only ratified the Constitution on our behalf on condition that these protections of our unalienable rights against government "infringement" be made the highest law of the land. Without the first 10 amendments, the whole contract is null and void ... without them, there IS no legitimate federal government, and their tax collectors become nothing but common thieves, subject to being shot on sight if ever caught outside their federal asylum on the Potomac. Any government official who declines to protect and defend these amendments, in their clear meaning, is a traitor, in violation of the sacred oath they all take to protect and defend this Constitution. Such persons should be indicted -- impeached, if they are high officials -- and, only if convicted by either the Senate or an impartial citizen jury, hanged. This includes a whole lot of Congressmen, who have voted for a massive snare of laws which "sounded like a good idea" without doing their sworn duty, which was to open said Constitution to Article I Section 8 (the Powers of Congress), scan through the 431 words found there, and then ask the sponsor, "Which one of these 18 sentences gives you the specific, delegated power to spend FEDERAL tax money to pay the medical bills of barefoot Appalachian widows? Which one? Point to it." The comic book "Gran'pa Jack No. 3: 'Common Sense' " is available at $4 per single copy, $20 for 25, $30 for 50, from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, 2874 S. Wentworth Ave., Milwaukee, Wisc. 53207. The first Gran'pa Jack comic, " 'Gun Control' Kills Kids," is also still available, at $3 single copy, $14 for 25, $20 for 50 -- Wisconsin residents add 5.6 percent sales tax. Or telephone the JPFO at 414-769-0760. Meantime, go buy a copy of the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights, and read them to a child. It's our next-to-last last hope. Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin(a)lvrj.com. The web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin(a)lvrj.com "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of se--------------------------------------------------- This message is from the VTLP-list (Vermont Libertarian) mailing list. To send a message to everyone on this list send email to <vtlp-list(a)catamount.com>. To unsubscribe from the list send eamil to <macjordomo(a)catamount.com> with "unsubscribe vtlp-list" in the body of the message. To subscribe to the list send email to <macjordomo(a)catamount.com> with "subscribe vtlp-list your name" in the body of the message. ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path, and leave a trail." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

1 0