- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Oh my God...
by Jim Thompson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forgive me if this has been covered on cypherpunks. I hang out on coderpunks, and this is far too political for that list. Please keep me Cc'd on any discussion on this topic. If true, RSA is dirty, SDI is dirty, Robertson Stevens is dirty, and Ron Brown, Jim Bizdos, Al Gore, John Huang and Sanford Robertson are going to jail. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/smith/980915.comcs.html Jim Thompson / Smallworks, Inc. / jim(a)smallworks.com 512 338 0619 phone / 512 338 0625 fax C++ is like jamming a helicopter inside a Miata and expecting some sort of improvement. -- Drew Olbrich

2 1

Re: How I Would Ban Strong Crypto in the U.S.
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:58 AM 7/15/96 -0400, Raph Levien wrote: >4. Thus, the best leverage for the TLAs to win is to guide the >development of a key management infrastructure with the following >property: if you don't register your key, you can't play. I believe that >this is the true meaning of the word "voluntary:" you're free to make >the choice not to participate. > >5. This is _important_. If you can't get the keys for your >correspondents, you can't use encryption. If they build a key management >infrastructure that actually works, people will use it. The obvious counter is to use the key management infrastructure for authentication, but use a technique like Diffie-Hellman to decide on a session key. I see two problems with this approach: (1) It still allows traffic analysis. (2) It will be difficult to implement for one-way transmissions (e.g. email). A more complex structure would overcome (2) above. Use you GAK key to sign your PGP key. Post your PGP key on the MIT server (or successors), and people who want non-GAKed communication with you would use your PGP key, with the benefit of government approved authentication. I still think this whole GAK thing is going to fail on the, "Which government?" question. I don't see either multi-nationals or their governments wanting to share their secrets with each other, and I don't see how to set up universal GAK to prevent that form of industrial espionage. Also, the key which decodes the GAKed data is just too valuable and too easy to steal. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet may fairly be | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | regarded as a never-ending | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | worldwide conversation. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: Markoff on Clipper III
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:20 AM 7/15/96 -0700, David Sternlight wrote: >At 3:50 AM -0700 7/15/96, Duncan Frissell wrote: >>At 09:35 PM 7/14/96 -0700, David Sternlight wrote: >> >>>Did you miss the part in the Constitution about "provide for the common >>>defence" >> >>That's a meaningless part of the Preamble. > >Anyone who thinks substantive parts of the Preamble are "meaningless" is >deserving only of contumely. Perhaps you should review your high school >civics course--you did have one of those, yes? > >David > Welcome to the list. Yes my high school Civics class was good. So were my law school Con Law courses. Yes, David I would say you practice "contumely" -- Rudeness or contempt arising from arrogance; insolence. But then so do I. I'll say again, the Preamble speaks of the reasons the drafters of the Constitution had for writing the thing, it does not set forth any powers of the federal government. Goals not means. GAK is a means not a goal. DCF

2 2

d.Comm: Your Login Information
by hotlists＠d-comm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for logging into d.Comm. At d.Comm we believe a key part of any successful product, magazine or other, is a comprehensive knowledge of the market; in our case our readers. The information you provide us with not only helps us to fine-tune the magazine, but also enables you to manage your information content, through the hotlist section. We therefore wish to thank you once again for helping us to keep d.Comm dynamic. When your World Wide Web browser prompts you for a login and password use the following: Login: cypherpunks Passwd: 107084 URL: http://www.d-comm.com/ (note: your login is case-sensitive) You may end up back at the login when you try to enter a section of d.Comm that you attempted to enter before you received your username. If this happens, please click the reload button on your Web browser. If you have trouble and need some help, please send mail to: hotlists(a)d-comm.com Note: If you wish to change your allotted password, Password management is available at : http://www.d-comm.com/s-bin/hl_passwd If for any reason you encounter any problems, please do not hesitate to contact us. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eddie Hold Editor d.Comm & Communicate The Economist Group http://www.d-comm.com/

2 1

Re: brokers as middlemen
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:48 PM 7/15/96, L. Detweiler wrote: >this reminds me of something else. the stock exchange as it now stands >is not the paradigm of true capitalism as some would have others >believe. in fact I see it as the paradigm of what might be called >"middleman capitalism", a version of capitalism that is rapidly >diminishing and disappearing in the onslaught of the information age. > >essentially, in the new version of capitalism, middlemen who do not >*add*value* to the delivery of a product are going to be increasingly >cut out of the loop. I am not saying *all* middlemen will be cut out, >but many that now exist will be. I agree with Vlad/Larry's points, and this is in one of the other recommendations for the NASDAQ, that it be even further electronic-mediated, with more information made available on bid/ask spreads. The rise of discount brokers, who provide essentially no advice to customers, is part of this "disintermediation." Ditto for electronic trading systems, such as Accu-Trade. >in my opinion, the *stock*broker* as his job is now defined is in many >ways the classic middleman that does not necessarily add value to the >information that flows through his hands. if he is just an agent for >carrying out the demands of clients, then I'd say that this role is >going to disappear as markets become more automated, or rather capital >moves toward stock exchanges that diminish this overhead. however, there >are many brokers that add far many more services than mere >blind investor response, such as analyzing company profitability, >forecasting, etc-- these are adding value imho. Agreed, and this is already happening. >I think the end result of the information age is going to be something >that could be regarded as the ultimate capitalist market-- something >that eliminates all "unnecessary" middlemen. I suspect the stock exchanges >of the future will *not* be regulated because they *cannot* be. it >will be a matter of buyers and sellers choosing the systems that >best suit them regardless of what governments feel is appropriate, fair, >or whatever. I emphatically agree! There is little need for regulation in this new environment, and "reputations matter." And regulation is becoming problematic. (To cite one example. Some are calling for registration and regulation of "investment advice," which is largely unregulated in the U.S. today. That is, I can self-publish a newsletter, "Tim's Stock Picks," and the First Amendment says this can't be restricted (Caveat: But I can't sell "Tim's Legal Advice," "Tim's Earthquake Safety Advice," or "Tim's Medical Advice" to clients...go figure). Some want investment newsletter writers "held accountable." Great, so I'll move my newsletter to Anguilla or Monaco. What do they do then? Stop U.S. subscribers from getting them? Set up postal stings, where illegal investment or medical advice is treated as illegal child porn from Denmark? Use key escrow to monitor received Net traffic?) >its interesting how the restrictions on stock buying and selling are >becoming quite orwellian in the way they are designed to limit >mere information transfer in many cases, it seems. TCM has written >about this far better than I could in previous posts. ("inside trading" >restrictions). Again, I agree. I won't quote anymore of Vlad/Larry's piece, as I agree with it all. (Vznuri should probably "reclaim" his Detweiler personna, so that such good messages as these accrue to his True Name's reputation.) --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."

2 1

It's Nobody's Business!
by Whtsametau＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I see things haven't changed much around here. [BIG GRIN!] Stan, bass/vocals Nobody's Business members.aol.com/StanSqncrs/nobiz.html

1 0

RE: Cyberpunks Signal-to-Noise Ratio
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Isn't it in bad form to filter the Cypherpunk anonymous remailers on the cypherpunk list? ---Matthew James Gering <mgering(a)ecosystems.net> wrote: > > What! I can't hear you! > > You could always filter *aol*, *anon* and *sixdegrees*. > > Or shout louder (i.e. contribute signal). > > Matt

1 0

Ground Floor Pre-IPO Opportunity
by best25＠worldonline.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Most Wall Street investors cannot participate on the upside of an IPO since the investment firms reserve the stock for themselves. Get the scoop and learn how to target these companies before they trade on the NASDAQ Small Cap and Bulletin Board. REMEMBER, THE MONEY IS ALWAYS MADE GOING INTO THE DEAL. WANT MORE? Go To: Click Here

1 0

WashPost: A "hate speech" horseman of a different color
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Search July 15th www.washingtonpost.com for "massive armamentarium" [sic]. With Innovative Use, the Web Empowers the First Amendment By John Schwartz Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, July 15 1996; Page F19 The Washington Post [...] Lately, though, I've gotten a nice, big dose of hope from watching hatemongers on the Net as they duke it out with the truth-squaders. In any intellectual combat, those who can support their arguments with facts are better armed. And guess what? The Internet gives us a new kind of arsenal. That might go against what you've been reading. A lot of journalists are discovering "hate speech" on the Internet -- racism, antisemitism, the whole vile package. It's the cover story for the current issue of Emerge, with the arresting image of a mouse cord tied in a noose. Such groups as the Simon Wiesenthal Center in California try to persuade publications to run stories on this loathsome trend, and they urge governments to drive those who spread messages of hate off the Net. [...] The on-line guest book at Nizkor is an evolving testament to the power of free speech. One visitor wrote: "As the child of survivors of the Holocaust I am particularly dismayed when intelligent and reasonable people are influenced by revisionist pap. I'm often frustrated to the point where I'd sooner tolerate censorship than the promulgation of neo-Nazi lies. Your work restores my faith in reasoned debate and the drive of honest people to find and spread the truth." Memo to the Founders: Thanks, guys. You got it right. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMeqQV5NcNyVVy0jxAQF8vAIAlGyi91nOxj1qhRN7GPXcChO9FOraJSc1 h/WyEC01HJj/W5uj51AxZbJIHjkz/eCcMb2AmjclfGeKIThrsSoY9A== =Olej -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

re: Organized Crime Home Page - Four Horsemen, No Waiting
by Charley Sparks 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Well, with the UCMJ ( Uniform Code of Military Justice ) and the Oath >of Allegiance Military Personnel take on induction being re-written >to Support and defend the United Nations and to accept direct and >lawful orders from UN personnel, this doesn't surprise me.Soon, UN >Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, or someone like him will >repeal more of the amendments to our constitution. First our guns, >then our code. > >I'll give up my pass phrase when > they pry it from my cold dead fingers ! Charley Sparks Booz Allen & Hamilton http://www.clark.net/pub/charley/index.htm Public Key Available

1 0