Re: On the outright laughability of internet "democracy"
On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:18:32 -0400, you wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
At 12:51 PM -0700 on 8/11/02, A.Austrian.Idiot single hops yet another remailer and wrote:
Namecalling. Possibly your strongest argumentation?
I would think you might be interested in going deeper, as "Blind signatures for untraceable payments" is directly applicable to both digital settlement and digital voting.
Yes. Of course. And, if you actually read it, or even just thought about it instead of spewing oppositional bullshit to everything you disagree with politically, :-),
Must have touched quite a raw nerve here. My thanks for your not "spewing oppositional bullshit". And what, pray tell, am I disagreeing with "politically"?
you'd soon realize that you can't actually control an truly anonymous voting scheme any more than you can control a truly anonymous bearer asset. Like equity, an anonymous vote is completely salable.
Read first, spew later.
In short, sir, please to fuck off, until you actually know what you're talking about.
Another of your better argumentation. It is difficult to choose between your vulgar manner or your avoidance of facts, as the better explanation of the failure of your "Internet Bearer Underwriting" ventures. Cheers!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 4:33 PM -0500 on 8/11/02, the Austrian one-hop-wonder changed remailers again, jumped out of the kill-file, followed me around the mail list and started humping my leg with:
Namecalling. Possibly your strongest argumentation?
Not at all. I really do believe the word "idiot" is most appropriate to your level of intelligence, and that makes it merely an observation of fact on my part. However, to honor your persistence, I will call you names later, since you really want it so bad. But, first...
Must have touched quite a raw nerve here. My thanks for your not "spewing oppositional bullshit". And what, pray tell, am I disagreeing with "politically"?
You are clearly a statist. In my autodydactic but still fairly practiced opinion, an idiot statist. "Statist" because apparently you've never seen a nation-state you didn't want to suck up to. "Idiot", because when someone makes a statement of fact, like I did several times in a row in this thread, you refute it with something other than reason. Usually a repetition of the same thing over and over, even when it clearly doesn't work for you. Certainly the very definition of lunacy, if it's not actual idiocy. There. How's that for a characterization of your disagreeable politics?
you'd soon realize that you can't actually control an truly anonymous voting scheme any more than you can control a truly anonymous bearer asset. Like equity, an anonymous vote is completely salable.
Read first, spew later.
[This is, ladies, and gentlemen, exactly what *I* would call "oppositional bullshit". Notice that he merely said the logical equivalent of "I know you are, but what am I?" Oppositional. And Bullshit. Check, and Check. Notice he says nothing, including his previously ignored and recursively regurgitated "refutation" of that claim at the beginning of the thread, that actually counters what I've said all along, copied above in the interest of completeness, if not consistency, above. But enough of that, well, idiocy. Now, boys and girls, let's have some fun, shall we? He thinks I'm insulting. Clearly he hasn't been here long enough. :-) First a, um, warm-up. Where were we. Oh, yes. Here we are...]
Read first, spew later.
Cranky, Mr. One-Hop? Whatsa matter? Your ancient mother give you a friction burn in the sack last night? K-Y's cheap, you know. You should try it. I hear it even, um, comes in flavors these days... [...and, as promised, the main event...]
In short, sir, please to fuck off, until you actually know what you're talking about.
Another of your better argumentation. It is difficult to choose between your vulgar manner or your avoidance of facts,
Allow me to argue even better then, in a matter you seem to appreciate most. You, sir, are an imbecile. A Poltroon. A Spittlelicker and a toady [Thanks to Patrick O'Brien...]. [Postmodern anti-imperialist] A statist lackey (sorry Ryan :-)). A straw-felching pederast [my apologies to all felchers, straw-using, and otherwise, and, of course, to pederasts everywhere...] Ah, the pain of monolinguality. You've said it yourself, haven't you? I really should learn to use other languages, as my life would be so much richer. In that, um, vein, and in your multilingual honor, I hope I'm forgiven if I got some help,. The following are compliments of the good folks at <http://www.insults.net/>: Yiddish -- Yutz. Putz. (I'm sorry you'd don't qualify for "Schmuck", Mr. One-Hop, much less "Schlong", but, by the way you acquit yourself here on cypherpunks, that would be off by an order or two of magnitude. Or, heh, three. :-). Maybe it got dwarfed by friction burn, or something. Better put some ice on that?) Schlemeil, Schlmazel, [I feel like Laverne and Shirley, here...] Mishugena. Gayn Cacken Ofn yam. French -- Lhche mon cul. [I think that one says it all, don't you think? The French have *such* a classy expression for *everything*.] German -- Depp (sound familiar?), Arschgesicht, Leck mich am Arsch [there's an echo in here...], Hosenscheisser, and, probably most applicable to your career and qualifications, Arschkriecher [cf "Toady", above]. Afrikaans [vaguely brutal, and to the point] -- Poephol. Japanese [cute, in a "Hello Kitty" kind of way] -- kisama. Cantonese [phonetic] -- lay da yuen fay gay mm sai sou. Mandarin [also phonetic] -- Liu mang. Finnish [in honor of Linus] -- Ditisi nai poroja! Dutch [as one would expect :-), they're particularly creative, but I like a little irony, myself] -- droogkloot. And, finally, Latin [a classic, rendered in a classic tongue, and in memory of your aforementioned chronic lack of nightly lubrication]-- tua mater.
as the better explanation of the failure of your "Internet Bearer Underwriting" ventures.
We'll see, I suppose. At least I haven't quit yet. Nonetheless, it's a safe bet that as much as I'm too stupid to quit trying to make IBUC work, you will *always* be more stupid than I am. Now, somehow, I really feel like I got the better deal, here. Tell ya what, One-Hop: if I do get IBUC's arm out of the shark and sewn back on, I'll send you a little remuneration for all the entertainment you've provided all of us this evening. So, if and when IBUC actually *does* work, and given your ironic predilection for book-entry transactions and the use of violent government enforcement of non-repudiation, where, exactly, do you want me to send the check, and who do I make it out to? ;-) Cheers, RAH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 7.5 iQA/AwUBPVcYR8PxH8jf3ohaEQKzRwCg3RlP5nZu/rxRBX566zl/wAEOt7wAoItU PC5f0dwMuWUKnYLJ3EnGLAbi =O6Z1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
participants (2)
-
R. A. Hettinga
-
xganon