Brian B. Riley wrote:
Don'tget me wrong. It scares the hell out of me too, but maybe, in addition to that various things Tim has suggested we might also consider how to make the GAK as secure as cam be to minimize its potential for disaster.
Glad, you asked... The reason I am posting as 'Fuck You' is that it saves time giving my standard answer to the increasing number of idiots, schills, and pawns on the CypherPunks list, these days. Not that I'm complaining, you understand. I 'like' saying, "Fuck You." I like it a lot. As a matter of fact, I like it so fucking much that I am amazed that the fucking idiots who ought to know better like the person who has stolen my Net persona more than me, just because she has a great pair of tits. Men... Oh yeah...about the post I am replying to, here. Brian. The bytes you saved by not including a Subject header were more than wasted by the useless words you put in the message body. Close, but no cigar, Bri. Let me rephrase that for you. "we might also consider how to make the GAK as 'apparently' secure as cam (bad grammar and spelling left intact) to minimize its potential for disaster." There _is_ no 'secure' in the government computer lexicon, Bri. Not even in the 'Cyphernomicon' will you find the word 'secure' found, used as a substite for the phrase, "We're SAFE now, the government is using a 'rubber'." Go back outside and come in again, next time with a Subject header and a new list persona. You've pretty much ruined the one you're using now. Fuck You --------