December 2017 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

zine idea
by \0xDynamite 31 Dec '17

31 Dec '17

The CYPHERPUNK, a F/oss monthly. "A zine about internet culture, urban nomadism, and post-industrial life (via radical sustainability and low-watt FM radio). Taking back the internet commons from the large-media conglomerates, providing recipes for mental liberation, and strapping down the inhuman machine that has become the American populace, putting on a harness, and riding it like a bucking cowboy. If you know how to code, this zine is for you. For those who are neophytes, Floss stands for “free, libre, open-source software”. The computer is a lawmaker, this is for the liberators of the machine." Article ideas: Internet Revolution: taking it back from blogs and hogs. Hack the Law: How to use the law to make more freedom Encryption Techniques: for Entertainment Only Some comics: Samurai Jack, the elite coder that once turned an O(n^4) problem into an O(1) problem, simply by outputting "yes". Indymedia: solving the low-watt transmitter problem Hacker Manifestos: what we (still?) stand for.. Activism Updates: Occupy? ASCII Art: Why 80 columns was better. This is a call for writers. Write me. \0xd

1 0

Fwd: <nettime> Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain
by John Newman 31 Dec '17

31 Dec '17

Begin forwarded message: > From: byfield <tbyfield(a)panix.com> > Date: December 29, 2017 at 12:05:02 PM EST > To: "Florian Cramer" <flrncrmr(a)gmail.com>, "Morlock Elloi" <morlockelloi(a)gmail.com> > Cc: nettime-l(a)mx.kein.org > Subject: Re: <nettime> Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain > > On 29 Dec 2017, at 10:01, Florian Cramer wrote: > >>> The *goal* of the Bitcoin proof of concept was 'an electronic payment >>> system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two >>> willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a >>> trusted third party.' So when the author of this avid-reader essay >>> complains 'but Visa... but FDIC... but NASDAQ,' one reasonable response is: >>> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. The point of Bitcoin wasn't to succeed to the degree that it >>> has, or in the way that it has. >> >> Hi Ted, >> >> If that had been Bitcoin's only goal, then it would have sufficed to create >> a crypographic peer-to-peer payment system based on/supporting existing >> currencies and their exchange rates. >> >> Things got politically murky with the introduction of Bitcoin as its own >> currency based on Hayek's and Mises' economic theory, i.e. with built-in >> deflation and absence of political control except through owners. > > Well, the difference is your addition of 'only,' as in it's 'only goal.' If I say I love you, Florian, that would be special, wouldn't it? But if I say I love *only* you, Florian, that's a different kettle of fish. 'Only' is one of those tricky words that serves as a mule for smuggling entire ideological apparatuses. 'Still' is another one: 'You *still* believe that? > > As someone who's thought a lot about design, you probably understand better than many what a proof of concept is: an implementation — or we'd maybe we should think of it in more anthropological terms, as an *artifact* — that, more or less, tests a specific proposal. How that test is constructed, and the context in which it's conducted, involve a lot of artifice. Many of the assumptions that shape that artifice go unstated. The questions we're left with, in the case of Bitcoin, are what those assumptions were, and what they might mean. > > If I'd said that goal was Bitcoin's *only* goal, then I'd agree with your objection, but I didn't: instead, I talked about the explicit ideological beliefs that dominated the cypherpunks milieu, including their implacable hostility to the state, their all but explicit aim of attacking models of trust anchored in ~public institutions, the ambiguity of their use of the idea of honesty, and — crucially — their interest in Vernor Vinge's novella _True Names_. It didn't seem worth the effort to say they were libertarian free-market extremists, because that's widely discussed. So your point is right on, but it seems like more of an elaboration ('and') than an objection ('but'). They didn't think talking about Hayek or Mises in the original Bitcoin paper, but as you say those ideas were baked into it from the beginning. > > Whoever designed Bitcoin assumed that 'currency' and 'an electronic payment system' were interchangeable or even identical. They (and I'm pretty sure it was a group, not an individual) didn't set out to design better banknotes *or* to develop a better PayPal, they set out to create something entirely new that could function as either/both but wasn't *only* limited to meeting those specifications. > > That brings us to Morlock's point about whether Bitcoin succeeded or failed. Two responses, one good, one bad. \_(ツ)_/¯. > >> This reminds me of discourses on theory and practice of communism. One good, the other bad. >> >> Bitcoin failed for practical/mundane reason: it ceased to be distributed long time ago (today 4 Chinese mints control 50+% of hash power), while talking heads deceivingly ignored this, and continued to proselytize the initial but long extinct 'distributed' meme. It's more centralized than US dollar. >> >> PoW concentration is mandated by its technological nature and there are no signs that anything will change any time soon. Every other 'proof' introduces either benevolent coordinating authority (which is utter bs), or switches CPU for something that has not been demonstrated as concentrate-able yet because no one bothered (such as proof of space - big disks are naturally distributed ... right.) >> >> There is little more to say. Bitcoin is a big lie, for many too big to be acknowledged. >> >> Possible futures and promises will continue to be built on the miserably failed premise, with non-working workarounds (But maybe the next workaround will work? ... Bitcoin is just the first try, the concept is good? ... It's such great idea and must be revisited? ... etc.) > > Morlock, your point about its concentration nails it, and in that sense, yes, Bitcoin was a miserable failure. That structural tendency toward concentration was obvious in many of the experiments that contributed to Bitcoin, like the distributed cracks of RC5, which were dominated by actors with immense computing power at their disposal. Cypherpunk-types loved heartwarming talk about how Zapatistas and victims of sexual abuse would use PGP etc, but that was just playing to the crowd: they were much more concerned with systemic architectures and their baked-in biases because they knew cryptography was and would remain inevitably *politically* asymmetric. > > But as you may remember (if you're the same Morlock Elloi who was kicking around in those circles), all that talk about crypto-anarchy was, at its heart, about class. Much of what normal people think about 'class' depends on the state: if there's no state, there are no classes, there are just arbitrary individuals and groups who are more or less adept at navigating and negotiating whatever resources are available to them. Whatever human potential gets lost in the fray is just the cost of doing business — and 'twas ever thus. > > So...if Bitcoin has made some people fabulously wealthy, enabled new 'free markets' (including dark commerce, a growing parade of ICO cons, etc), and generally moved a bunch of Overton windows, do you really think some of them — Tim May, for example — would be upset that it was eventually dominated by a few Chinese mints rather than being equitably accessible for sheeple-to-sheeple use? If all of history a single catastrophe that keeps piling wreckage upon wreckage, what's a few more as long as they make you and yours rich? > > What engineer ever objected if his/her/their proof of concept failed on a specified front but succeeded in creating a dozen new ones? It's as if the Wright Brothers' plane crashed — on the moon. > > Cheers, > Ted > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime(a)kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

4 5

Ripple reaches second place by marketing capitalization
by Georgi Guninski 30 Dec '17

30 Dec '17

Ripple (XRP) reached second place by marketing capitalization. Before: https://web.archive.org/web/20171227090813/https://coinmarketcap.com/ After: https://web.archive.org/web/20171229110520/https://coinmarketcap.com/ Realtime: https://coinmarketcap.com/ What should investors know before investing in XRP?

3 5

Ripple reaches second place by marketing capitalization
by grarpamp 30 Dec '17

30 Dec '17

3 4

size of the imperial american nazi government
by juan 30 Dec '17

30 Dec '17

"Up until Collateral Murder we were a cause célèbre in the United States among various groups; actually we are still a cause célèbre, but it is in a smaller left-wing or libertarian right-wing community now.237 According to Reuters, across twenty-four countries we have the support of over three-quarters of the gen- eral population. Our support is worst in the United States, where we have the support of over 40 percent of the population, which is still pretty good considering what has been happening. As a result of embarrassing the US military and diplomatic class, we have had a counterattack. That counterattack is significant. This is a very significant power group that is not just at the top of the White House, it’s not just a few generals; rather, it is all the people con- nected to and profiting from that system. That’s about a third of the US population, all the way from Chelsea Clinton to someone in the gutters of San Antonio whose brother is deployed in Iraq. There are 900,000 people in the United States with top-secret security clear- ances at this moment. There are two and a half million that have classified security clearances.239 If we go back over the past twenty years and ask how many people had security clearances, maybe it is 15 million. If we then go and look at all their spouses and business partners and children we are looking at something like 30 percent of the population of the United States that is one degree removed from that ideological structure and that patronage system. It is quite diffi- cult in the United States to say something that is against that system." j. assange

3 5

[RUS] [SWPL] humans - the enduring existential reality we all live among
by Zenaan Harkness 29 Dec '17

29 Dec '17

Over and over again, 'tis the human, that is us, we, our brethren and sistren around the world, who shape our own world (of course). (There are links not embedded in the copypasta below.) This is a sobering and heart felt "reality" take, reminding us of poignant "facts on the ground" so to speak. A true story for those with empathy. http://www.unz.com/akarlin/translation-a-hell-of-their-own-making/ Translation: A Hell of Their Own Making Anatoly Karlin • December 19, 2012 Believe it or not but some people call me a Russophobe. Even more shockingly, perhaps, I plead guilty (at least in the sense that I do not have a very high opinion of the Russian people). There are only two logical alternatives: (1) Claims that Russia really is as good as Western Europe and the US on issues like corruption, social cohesion, etc., which is quite simply implausible to almost anyone who lived there; (2) That the cronyism, bad roads, etc. are all the fault of “corrupt bureaucrats” or even just “Putin”, as if to pretend that they are not real Russians but an occupying force, which is simply bizarre and only believed in by liberals. The most plausible but rather banal explanation is that to the extent that things are bad in Russia (although, ironically, as I’ve frequently shown here they are nowhere near as bad as portrayed in the Western media) they are bad because of Russians themselves, or more precisely the crook-enabling and general impudent go-fuck-yourself attitudes inherited from the Soviet era. There is no way to quickly change this, least of all by decree, and Putin himself implicitly recognizes this, although as President, he has to sugarcoat things and explain them to the people in a fatherly way (whereas as a blogger I am perhaps a bit blunt about these things). Anyhow, the following account basically encapsulates the basic thing that is wrong with Russia and, indirectly, the liberal interpretation of the symptoms (that they are the Kremlin’s fault). And while A Hell of their Own Making is set in Ukraine, any Russian would recognize this in her own country; only Ukrainian nationalists would seriously deny that social attitudes in Russia and Ukraine are rather similar. *** A Hell of Their Own Making I live abroad. Once upon a time, I came to visit my mother in Ukraine with my husband. I got the kin together for a barbecue picnic. We decided to go to a place not far from mother’s house – a beautiful valley with a lake and a small forest. During my childhood I loved to wander there among the sweet-smelling grass and wild flowers, and to bathe in the lake. We came there. The wild grass was now covered with tall weeds, many places were burnt out or filled up with plastic rubbish. I was so disappointed! We could barely find a more or less clean clearing by the lake. We tidied up the trash and cigarette butts so that we could sit, then we started a fire in the mangal grill. The barbecue was delicious, but the sight of my beloved valley depressed me – everything was so dirty, so pathetic… The lake was murky and desiccated. I did not risk swimming in it. >From the start I told my relatives not to throw the trash into the grass and bushes, but to gather it up and put it into a special bag. When we were leaving I checked that we had left nothing behind. For I was very sad about this forest clearing. And I was loudly distraught that people could so comprehensively foul up a place where they themselves went to relax. Is it really so difficult to carry the trash over to the bins that are one hundred meters away at the valley’s end? When we were preparing to leave, I found out that no-one had the trash bag in their hands. I started asking who had it. And my mom waved it way – we’ve already thrown it away. “How did you do it, where?” I whispered. “There, into the reeds. What, are we garbage men or something? Everyone dumps it there!” It was hard to refrain from swearing out loud. It was impossible to retrieve the trash from there – it had already lodged in the reeds by the cliff. At that moment I recognized a great truth: They deserve the lives they lead. They deserve their cracked asphalt, broken lampposts, dirty streets, and reeking rivers, and their criminal government, and their miserly wages and pensions. They spit on themselves, so why shouldn’t the government spit on them? They do not respect themselves – so who will respect them? It is not the government which litters on the streets and trashes children’s playgrounds. It is not the President who steals lampposts and cables. I no longer trust your complaints. My countrymen, it is you who created your own hell, and it’s you who will have to live in it. *** Harsh but it rings true. I wonder if any “Russophiles” will now call the author a Russophobe (or perhaps Ukrainophobe) herself? The only thing I have to add is that many Russians – especially liberals, and those who love to complain – really do not realize how their own actions and attitudes (or the lack of them; in a recent poll, only 50% of Russians said they’d report a drunk driver, compared to about 90% in the US and the UK) contribute to problems. It is always someone else who is to blame, like Putin, or the US, or oligarchs, or ethnic minorities. Oftentimes this hatred is expressed in shockingly violent and callous terms to popular approval. They cannot see fault in themselves, so ironically enough, it is the much loathed Russian state itself which is left with the unenviable task of trying to re-inculcate basic moral values and respect for the law into a self-hating and crook-enabling society. That is why I support it. The words of the liberal-conservative Vekhi are as relevant now as they were back in 1909: “We ought to fear the people and bless this government which, with its prisons and bayonets, still protects us from the people’s fury.” (Republished from Da Russophile by permission of author or representative)

1 0

Re: USA: National Security Strategy, Juan's Wet Dream -- OFF-TOPIC (James Donald is a creep)
by Cecilia Tanaka 29 Dec '17

29 Dec '17

On Dec 29, 2017 03:03, <jamesd(a)echeque.com> wrote: > > Blah, blah, blah... And wrote more non-stop blabbing blah, blah, blah in another message... Aff... :P Well, James, I said it once and I’ll say it again... >:( It.

1 0

A cunning French linguist (Milner) cautions climactic consent contracts
by Zenaan Harkness 29 Dec '17

29 Dec '17

To be honest, it's a pretty prickly provocative paradox parading promptly across our current social reality. The best part? A truly public dialogic climax is approaching, and none too soon I might add ... the world truly needs to get a grip and lay down some law and order already! The PHP community should finally be able to resolve their dilemma of who may be permitted to attend a seminar - with strict, and binding, rules upon all who <Enter>, to rope in all miscreants who would sully the good, clean and 100% sex-free image of the one true language to rule all computers! “Consent Conscious Kit”: Political correctness is now destroying relationships Human contact now under attack by political correctness. http://redpilltimes.com/sign-a-contract-before-sex-political-correctness-de… It was bound to happen. All liberal left roads were pushing towards it. Signing a contract, and iron-clad contract, before any intimacy was to take place. A “Consent Conscious Kit”, now for sale, so no sexual assault claims spring up, one, two or twenty years after the act goes down. …

1 0

the endeavour to live free, and courage
by Zenaan Harkness 29 Dec '17

29 Dec '17

A gem, from zerohedge (and other choice one liners sprinkled throughout the rest of the linked article) - enjoy :) https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-28/how-defeat-tyranny-no-shortcuts-n… How To Defeat Tyranny: "No Shortcuts... No Secret Weapon... Only Indomitable Spirit" … The Source Of All Freedom ------------------------- Beyond the internalized conflicts within liberty movements, there is a defining methodology at stake. The gravitational pull that strengthens communities, the fuel that drives optimism and a respect for the future, the thing that makes us all more than what we seem to be on the surface, the thing that catches authoritarians off guard, is our propensity for courage and human kindness. Without these two things, any fight against tyranny is destined to implode. Endeavor requires risk, and all risk requires courage (or perhaps stupidity, but courage can often be mistaken as stupidity). The greatest endeavor in the history of mankind is the endeavor to live free. This is one of the few things in the world actually worth fighting or dying for. It only follows that such a fantastic goal would require ultimate risk. Courage is the willingness to take risks while knowing full well the consequences of failure. In some cases, courage means taking action while knowing that there will be consequences even in success. Sometimes, there are no benefits to the courageous beyond the knowledge that they have benefited others. The fight is not about profit. The fight is not about personal survival. The fight is about something much more. Something difficult to define, but intuitively felt. Taking terrible risks with the intention of benefiting others, many of them not even born yet, requires human kindness. Kindness in itself can be a form of risk. A self-absorbed sociopath or narcissist will never achieve greatness, because greatness requires actions that are counter-intuitive to self preservation. A person who embraces moral relativism will also never accomplish much for the future. Kindness requires moral resolve, not moral “flexibility.” It is these two characteristics that will help to dissolve the conflicts within liberty activism listed above. It is these two characteristics that defeat tyrants, and so it will be these two characteristics that tyrants will seek to undermine. It is difficult to conquer a people when they are not afraid of sacrifice and when they are not afraid to organize in the real world. It is difficult to isolate people with selfishness when they are driven by the empathy inherent in kindness. ALL solutions, all practical strategies rely on the existence of these two forces within a movement. As 2017 comes to a close, it is my hope that every liberty activist prepares for more dangerous days ahead. But above all else, their preparations must flow from a foundation of struggle and self sacrifice, foresight and endurance, community and practicality, courage and kindness. If not, then really, what is the point? …

1 0

Exposing Banking's Global Financial Surveillance Networks
by grarpamp 29 Dec '17

29 Dec '17

https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9070-financial_surveillance Banks have built a huge surveillance infrastructure sweeping up millions of innocent people. Investigative journalists Jasmin Klofta and Tom Wills explain how, as part of an international collaboration, they exposed World-Check, the privately-run system. A database used to make decisions affecting people and organisations all over the world. They include a mosque that had its bank account shut without explanation, activists blacklisted for a peaceful protest, and ordinary citizens whose political activities were secretly catalogued. We discovered the human impact of this Kafkaesque system, which is used by almost every major bank and many other institutions. We will also ask whether we really want banks to be held responsible for the crimes of their customers? Are Financial Intelligence Units pre-crime agencies?

1 0