more deranged lunatic ravings -- just delete 'em!
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <pmetzger@lehman.com>
Why all this silly speculation? We will all know the complete answers soon enough. There is no need for us to reach out and "investigate".
ah yes, just like everyone 'soon enough' knew the 'complete answers' behind the Steve Jackson Games investigation. All we have to do is sit around and wait for it to be handed to us by everyone involved, including The Enemy. Look at that E911 investigation -- this was an example of *community* involvement. Laywers on *both* sides were unaware of the fact that E911 documents were publicly available, that they could even be *ordered* from Mountain Bell with no restriction, until someone 'out there' made the link and pointed it out -- and this was a *very* significant aspect of the defense case.
"We" need no information. We are not the attorneys. EFF and the rest are involved and have fine lawyers and investigators. Anything "We" uncover will be useful only for personal amusement.
the situation *directly affects* us *now*. what is the scope of the grand jury investigation? could it potentially be *expanded* beyond this initial inquiry? what about sites that are currently distributing PGP outside the U.S.? what about the fact that cypherpunks have *always* been closely involved with PGP and its international distribution?
"We" don't even have our facts right -- the "NSA" has not been directly harassing ANYONE.
say *what*?! Grady Ward has been posting for over a week on a bazillion Usenet groups that Agent X from the NSA has contacted him, with a phone number, fax, and identification standard for NSA employees (I forwarded one of his early messages here). A representative from Austin Code Works informed a Cypherpunk (who wasn't afraid to do a little poking around himself) they have been prodded by the NSA months prior over DES export. And "the NSA has not been directly harassing ANYONE." well, yes, I guess they haven't stuck anybody on the rack, if that's what you mean.
I'd calm down, Mr. Detweiler. Write some code -- its a productive persuit.
ah yes, I'm 'persuing' the sequels to PGP and Moby Crypt right now <g> you seem to be fundamentally averse to excitement. this is the Cryptographic Case of a decade, and we're all to just wait patiently for the bleached official reports prior to a proper, dainty discussion? not I. but in deference to you, Mr. Metzger, and others, I will not post any more speculation ... without some new juicy articles to speculate on :)
"L. Detweiler" says:
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <pmetzger@lehman.com>
Why all this silly speculation? We will all know the complete answers soon enough. There is no need for us to reach out and "investigate".
ah yes, just like everyone 'soon enough' knew the 'complete answers' behind the Steve Jackson Games investigation.
We did, yes. You see, the ATTORNEYS, who were being PAID, because they were PROFESSIONALS, handled things. As I've noted in private mail to you, *WE* are not conducting this investigation. *WE* are not involved. *WE* haven't been summoned to provide evidence in court.
Look at that E911 investigation -- this was an example of *community* involvement. Laywers on *both* sides were unaware of the fact that E911 documents were publicly available, that they could even be *ordered* from Mountain Bell with no restriction, until someone 'out there' made the link and pointed it out -- and this was a *very* significant aspect of the defense case.
Well, yes -- so what? If you wanted to go out and make a systematic list of encryption software available overseas for the defense, that would indeed be a useful act. It seems, however, that you are intent on yammering. Its one thing if you were looking for useful evidence, but it seems that you are simply going around screaming about how the NSA is out to get us. Well, the yammering is not an "investigation". If you do want to help, find something productive.
"We" need no information. We are not the attorneys. EFF and the rest are involved and have fine lawyers and investigators. Anything "We" uncover will be useful only for personal amusement.
the situation *directly affects* us *now*. what is the scope of the grand jury investigation?
Thats a secret. Even if you found out, which would require subborning a juror (a crime) or otherwise bribing an official (a crime), you would be put in jail for contempt of court if you told anyone.
could it potentially be *expanded* beyond this initial inquiry?
Of course. Anything can be expanded. It could also fail to bring indictments -- but thats unlikely. It is said, not without truth, that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutor asks.
what about sites that are currently distributing PGP outside the U.S.?
They are beyond the scope of U.S. law. None of these are hard questions. They are all, in fact, trivial. You know, many of the decafinated brands taste just as good as the real thing nowadays. I'd try them.
you seem to be fundamentally averse to excitement.
Well, yes. I don't get easily excited about court cases. The case is IMPORTANT, but having had long experience with courts, I know that things are going to take years to resolve. I was once involved in a civil suit that required five years to resolve -- and there are probate cases around that have required decades. Look at the process here. The Grand Jury investigation gets followed, possibly, with indictments, which are followed, some very long period of time later, by a trial, which also takes a long period. It could be a year or even several before we even finish the trial phase on this, and by the time it goes through all the levels of appeal to the Supreme Court (assuming fundamental questions of constitutional law come up_ it could be many years before its all over. I have a great deal of trouble getting excited over something that will take years to resolve, yes. This is not like watching the D-Day invasion, or even like watching trench warfare in WWI. This is very much like watching people playing chess while immersed in ice cold molasses. Hard to get thrilled by the pace, Mr. Detweiler. Perry
As I've noted in private mail to you, *WE* are not conducting this investigation. *WE* are not involved. *WE* haven't been summoned to provide evidence in court.
First off, 'we' ARE involved. This case is IMPORTANT, and can have far- reaching consequences for us. This reminds me of the old story that starts out 'they came and got the Jews, and I said nothing because I wasn't a Jew...'.
Well, yes. I don't get easily excited about court cases. The case is IMPORTANT, but having had long experience with courts, I know that
Agreed, it IS important!
I have a great deal of trouble getting excited over something that will take years to resolve, yes. This is not like watching the D-Day invasion, or even like watching trench warfare in WWI. This is very much like watching people playing chess while immersed in ice cold molasses. Hard to get thrilled by the pace, Mr. Detweiler.
The attorneys and other experts looking at this case apparantly don't share your lack of enthuasism. Even in the very early stages, the groundwork that is laid in a case like this is of TREMENDOUS importance to the outcome of the case, regardless of how long it takes to be resolved. Frankly, I'm surprised at your lackadaisical attitude - if you had been involved in the justice system in this country for any length of time, you'd have realized that EVERY step taken along the way is IMPORTANT, regardless of how trivial or unimportant those steps appear now. Cases involving billions of dollars have been decided by trivial details. -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@apple.com 510/659-9560 anon-0001@khijol.uucp If you want magic, let go of your armor. Magic is so much stronger than steel! -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"
Ed Carp says:
As I've noted in private mail to you, *WE* are not conducting this investigation. *WE* are not involved. *WE* haven't been summoned to provide evidence in court.
First off, 'we' ARE involved.
Oh? Have you been hired as an attorney for either side?
This case is IMPORTANT, and can have far- reaching consequences for us.
Yes, thats fine and well, but this is very different from saying that "*WE* have to conduct an investigation and get to the bottom of this" as if "we" are even a group or in possession of resources to do any such thing. Indeed, what Mr. Detweiler has largely been proposing is yammering. Cypherpunks CODE. Quit yammering and start coding. I'm coding. Its fine to keep up to date. Its fine to send big checks to EFF. Its fine to do some legwork if you think it can help. However, what is the point in saying inane things like "we have to find out what the grand jury is investigating" when its a bloody secret and we don't get to find out until they unseal their indictments?
I have a great deal of trouble getting excited over something that will take years to resolve, yes. This is not like watching the D-Day invasion, or even like watching trench warfare in WWI. This is very much like watching people playing chess while immersed in ice cold molasses. Hard to get thrilled by the pace, Mr. Detweiler.
The attorneys and other experts looking at this case apparantly don't share your lack of enthuasism. Even in the very early stages, the groundwork that is laid in a case like this is of TREMENDOUS importance to the outcome of the case, regardless of how long it takes to be resolved. Frankly, I'm surprised at your lackadaisical attitude
Not lackadaisical. Simply not in a state of hyperactive disarray. WE are not doing the groundwork. The attorneys are. WE are not about to be charged with a crime. WE have no reason to go into a frenzy of activity -- I see nothing that WE can do. It isn't up to us. You sound like someone upset that the supreme court is about to rule about abortion and screaming "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING". Well what, precisely, do you propose to do? Take over the legal work when you aren't a lawyer? Complain? Scratch your crotch and look important? This isn't in our hands. If you think you have information of use to the lawyers, give it to them and be done with it -- there is nothing else you can do.
Cases involving billions of dollars have been decided by trivial details.
Oh? How many cases involving billion dollar settlements can you name? Care to give us a list? Perry
Ed Carp says:
As I've noted in private mail to you, *WE* are not conducting this investigation. *WE* are not involved. *WE* haven't been summoned to provide evidence in court.
First off, 'we' ARE involved.
Oh? Have you been hired as an attorney for either side?
Nope. That's not the point, and you know it. The point being (and I'm not even sure why I'm bothering to explain this to you - you're intelligent) this case has the potential to affect ALL of us, not just the participants in the case.
This case is IMPORTANT, and can have far- reaching consequences for us.
Yes, thats fine and well, but this is very different from saying that "*WE* have to conduct an investigation and get to the bottom of this" as if "we" are even a group or in possession of resources to do any such thing. Indeed, what Mr. Detweiler has largely been proposing is yammering.
*I* proposed no such thing. Get your facts straight.
Cypherpunks CODE. Quit yammering and start coding. I'm coding. Its
Yeah, and women are supposed to stay home, barefoot and preggers. Yeah, right.
fine to keep up to date. Its fine to send big checks to EFF. Its fine to do some legwork if you think it can help. However, what is the point in saying inane things like "we have to find out what the grand jury is investigating" when its a bloody secret and we don't get to find out until they unseal their indictments?
I think it's pretty clear what they're investigating.
I have a great deal of trouble getting excited over something that will take years to resolve, yes. This is not like watching the D-Day invasion, or even like watching trench warfare in WWI. This is very much like watching people playing chess while immersed in ice cold molasses. Hard to get thrilled by the pace, Mr. Detweiler.
The attorneys and other experts looking at this case apparantly don't share your lack of enthuasism. Even in the very early stages, the groundwork that is laid in a case like this is of TREMENDOUS importance to the outcome of the case, regardless of how long it takes to be resolved. Frankly, I'm surprised at your lackadaisical attitude
Not lackadaisical. Simply not in a state of hyperactive disarray. WE are not doing the groundwork. The attorneys are. WE are not about to be charged with a crime. WE have no reason to go into a frenzy of activity -- I see nothing that WE can do. It isn't up to us.
Oh, Jesus-Christ-on-a-crutch...It *IS* up to us! WE are THE PEOPLE ... or do you believe that the words "We, the People" on the Declaration of Independence have no meaning? WE are going to decide the outcome of this case. WE are going to be sitting on the jury, WE are going to be writing letters to the local newspapers, WE are going to be watching the trial (if one ever comes about).
You sound like someone upset that the supreme court is about to rule about abortion and screaming "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING". Well what, precisely, do you propose to do? Take over the legal work when you aren't a lawyer? Complain? Scratch your crotch and look important?
Well, scratching my crotch and looking important HAD crossed my mind. :) What do you think, that even the Supreme Court works in a social and political vacumm? If you believe that, you are pretty naive. Public opinion shapes everything we do, everything we see. If we aren't out there helping to shape puyblic opinion, SOMEONE is going to be doing it, and they might not be so supportive of individual rights.
This isn't in our hands. If you think you have information of use to the lawyers, give it to them and be done with it -- there is nothing else you can do.
Cases involving billions of dollars have been decided by trivial details.
Oh? How many cases involving billion dollar settlements can you name? Care to give us a list?
Many. The Getty Oil deal of several years back comes to mind, as does the Texaco vs. Pennzoil deal. You don't think that Roe v. Wade didn't have an economic impact? -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@apple.com 510/659-9560 anon-0001@khijol.uucp If you want magic, let go of your armor. Magic is so much stronger than steel! -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"
[much bickering between Perry and Detweiler deleted] OK, why don't you guys bounce flaming email back and forth between yourselves after the first volley... So that everyone knows, Perry wants us to shut up and write code, and Detweiler wants us to get up and fight... Well, do both... Perry, you write some really awesome code, and Detweiler and some others will go off and investigate what they feel to be important... If Perry does not want to listent to Detweiler's calls to action, don't - just delete the message and move on. We need to recognize that some of us are prone to get agitated more easily than others are, but that's OK... we all want basically the same thing. What we want done will never get done if all of us write code, and it won't get done if we all rant and rave, either. Just don't fucking bicker about wether we should investigate things or write code. It's getting annoying! -nate -- +-------------------------------------------------------------------- | Nate Sammons email: nate@VIS.ColoState.Edu | Colorado State University Computer Visualization Laboratory | Finger nate@monet.VIS.ColoState.Edu for my PGP key | #include <std.disclaimer> | Always remember "Brazil" +----------------------+
nate@vis.colostate.edu says:
Well, do both... Perry, you write some really awesome code, and Detweiler and some others will go off and investigate what they feel to be important... If Perry does not want to listent to Detweiler's calls to action, don't - just delete the message and move on.
Its not as simple as that. Phil Zimmermann has explicitly asked, on advice of his attorneys, that people stay calm on this and not start spewing accusations out or agitating so as not to cause harm to his case. Detweiler thinks he's "helping" even though Phil and others don't want his help and feel that they could end up in jail as a result of it. Perry
participants (4)
-
khijol!erc＠apple.com -
L. Detweiler -
nate＠VIS.ColoState.EDU -
Perry E. Metzger