June 2020 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

How the NSA identified Satoshi Nakamoto
by grarpamp 16 Apr '25

16 Apr '25

https://medium.com/cryptomuse/how-the-nsa-caught-satoshi-nakamoto-868affcef… The ‘creator’ of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, is the world’s most elusive billionaire (worth more than $7B as of November 2017). Very few people outside of the Department of Homeland Security know Satoshi’s real name. In fact, DHS will not publicly confirm that even THEY know the billionaire’s identity. Satoshi has taken great care to keep his identity secret employing the latest encryption and obfuscation methods in his communications. Despite these efforts (according to my source at the DHS) Satoshi Nakamoto gave investigators the only tool they needed to find him ... http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/ https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/finneynakamotoemails.pdf

4 3

Coronavirus: Thread
by grarpamp 10 Jan '24

10 Jan '24

On 3/5/20, Georgi Guninski <guninski(a)guninski.com> wrote: > Is the so called "society" ready for the time when there > are not enough hospitals for ill from corona virus? > > AFAIK all ill from corona virus are sent to hospitals > to not spread the disease further. > > The Chinese built a new hospital for about a week. General purpose hospital is utterly stupid thing to be flooding cases into under a mass affliction. Hospital are general triage and specialized case facilities. Flood them with disease transmitters and you end up wiping out the entire staff thus shutting the entire hospital down. Staff and facilities are far more valuable alive to handle the random shit that shows up at hospitals and do the specialized things. Instead focus care efficiently tuned to the mass affliction by diverting all the diseased people away from hospitals and out to warehouses, cruise ships, new rapid builds, etc full of cots, food service, mass produced respirators and other med gear and supplies, tv's, internet, books, showers, tent farms, drywalled family rooms inside, etc. Everybody there is already afflicted with the single underlying issue, so train them to self care and peer care for that, same as they'd get in the flooded out hospitals for that issue. Then move whatever number you can handle out to more complex "hospital" treatment sections of the same isolation farms as needed. And accept that big losses will happen. Flooding your hospitals is *not* going to change that, and *will* make things worse. Trying to wipe out all your hospitals, all your doctors, surgeons, knowledge, etc... is not smart. Civilization shutdown its mass facilities, wrote off and forgot how to deal with massive single cause casualties since 70 years quiet since last big wars, and other causes on that scale, many of which were easy... "stop the bleeding"... not "do not catch it too" kind of pandemic hasn't really been seen in 100+ years. Now all you have left in cities of *millions* of people, is under 500 beds total worth of proper isolation wards, those are largely meant for holding new unknown bugs and the recurring background noise of known nasties, with all other space on hospital land dedicated to five star baby birthing hotels, trendy cancer shops, pointless architectural atriums, big office rooms, etc. And all other space in the cities completely tuned to commercial purposes. With zero durables supply stockpiles, and no excess production capacity maintained on decade[s] span cold standby... because "just in time" wiped all that out. Deadly contagion is fucked up, expect that. You should have. People warned you. Oldnews Protip: Think, prepare, options, then you can isolate yourselves from people, buy some time, ride some things out. https://old.reddit.com/r/preppers+prepping+supplychain/

22 1068

Listing of Parts of Life
by Karl 27 Feb '23

27 Feb '23

-> Keep something similar to how it has been (body, environment, culture, home ...) -> Hold different approaches together and their merits (ways, cultures, genes, personalities, memes) Feel free to rewrite.

2 4

Torsocks Errors
by Se7en 11 Aug '21

11 Aug '21

I am unable to torify my fetchmail anymore, because Torsocks prevents setguid programs from running, which does not interfeer with fetchmail but does interfeer with procmail. Does anyone know a solution? I am still able to send torified, but am unable to recieve torified via pop3 and I do not want to continue this behavior. -- |-----/ | Se7en / The One and Only! | se7en(a)cock.email / | 0x0F83F93882CF6116 / | https://se7en-site.neocities.org

4 3

Why could this list be a target for (paid) trolls?
by Georgi Guninski 07 Mar '21

07 Mar '21

Why could this list be a target for (paid) trolls? I hear that this list is target of (paid) trolls and browsing it appears to support this. Why so? I don't see enough "value" in the list for such attack, short of just propaganda playground.

8 11

Chloroquine is "highly effective" at inhibiting reproduction of Novel Coronavirus nCov in cell culture.
by jim bell 31 Jan '21

31 Jan '21

[chloroquine is an old-line drug typically used against malaria] [partial quote follows] https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/science/020620/could-an-old-malaria-drug-… ASBMB Today Science Could an old malaria drug help fight the new coronavirus? Could an old malaria drug help fight the new coronavirus? By John Arnst February 06, 2020 Chloroquine might be getting new life as an antiviral treatment for the novel coronavirus that emerged in Wuhan, China in late 2019 and has infected some 25,000 people in more than 25 countries. For decades, the drug was a front-line treatment and prophylactic for malaria. In a three-page paper published Tuesday in Cell Research, scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s State Key Laboratory of Virology write that both chloroquine and the antiviral remdesivir were, individually, “highly effective” at inhibiting replication of the novel coronavirus in cell culture. Their drug screen evaluated five other drugs that were not effective. The authors could not be reached for comment. Though the paper is brief, John Lednicky, a professor at the University of Florida’s Emerging Pathogens Institute, found its results intriguing. “It’s interesting in that it really lacks a lot of details but, nevertheless, if you look at the data as presented, at least in vitro, it seems like chloroquine can be used as an early-stage drug,” he said. “It would be very good if these types of experiments were repeated by more laboratories to see whether the same results occur across the board.” Chloroquine is a synthetic form of quinine, a compound found in the bark of cinchona trees native to Peru and used for centuries to treat malaria. Chloroquine was an essential element of mass drug administration campaigns to combat malaria throughout the second half of the 20th century, and remains one of the World Health Organization’s essential medicines. However, after the malaria parasites Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax began exhibiting resistance to the drug in the 1960s and 1980s, respectively, it was replaced by similar antimalarial compounds and combination therapies. Chloroquine is still widely used against the three other species of plasmodium and to treat autoimmune disorders and some cases of amebiasis, an intestinal infection caused by the amoeba Entamoeba histolytica. Chloroquine’s antiviral properties were explored in the mid-1990s against HIV and in the following decade against severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, which is closely related to the novel coronavirus. In 2004, researchers in Belgium found that chloroquine inhibited replication of SARS in cell culture. The following year, however, another team at Utah State University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong evaluated a gamut of compounds against SARS replication in mice infected with the virus, finding that chloroquine was only effective as an anti-inflammatory agent. They recommended that it could be used in combination with compounds that prevent replication. Nevertheless, in 2009, the Belgian group found that lethal infections of human coronavirus OC43, a relative of SARS, could be averted in newborn mice by administering chloroquine through the mother’s milk. [end of partial quote] Also: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41422-020-0282-0 Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro Manli Wang, Ruiyuan Cao, Leike Zhang, Xinglou Yang, Jia Liu, Mingyue Xu, Zhengli Shi, Zhihong Hu, Wu Zhong & Gengfu Xiao Cell Research (2020)Cite this article 171k Accesses 1108 Altmetric Metrics details Dear Editor, In December 2019, a novel pneumonia caused by a previously unknown pathogen emerged in Wuhan, a city of 11 million people in central China. The initial cases were linked to exposures in a seafood market in Wuhan.1 As of January 27, 2020, the Chinese authorities reported 2835 confirmed cases in mainland China, including 81 deaths. Additionally, 19 confirmed cases were identified in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan, and 39 imported cases were identified in Thailand, Japan, South Korea, United States, Vietnam, Singapore, Nepal, France, Australia and Canada. The pathogen was soon identified as a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), which is closely related to sever acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV).2 Currently, there is no specific treatment against the new virus. Therefore, identifying effective antiviral agents to combat the disease is urgently needed. An efficient approach to drug discovery is to test whether the existing antiviral drugs are effective in treating related viral infections. The 2019-nCoV belongs to Betacoronavirus which also contains SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV). Several drugs, such as ribavirin, interferon, lopinavir-ritonavir, corticosteroids, have been used in patients with SARS or MERS, although the efficacy of some drugs remains controversial.3 In this study, we evaluated the antiviral efficiency of five FAD-approved drugs including ribavirin, penciclovir, nitazoxanide, nafamostat, chloroquine and two well-known broad-spectrum antiviral drugs remdesivir (GS-5734) and favipiravir (T-705) against a clinical isolate of 2019-nCoV in vitro. Standard assays were carried out to measure the effects of these compounds on the cytotoxicity, virus yield and infection rates of 2019-nCoVs. Firstly, the cytotoxicity of the candidate compounds in Vero E6 cells (ATCC-1586) was determined by the CCK8 assay. Then, Vero E6 cells were infected with nCoV-2019BetaCoV/Wuhan/WIV04/20192 at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 0.05 in the presence of varying concentrations of the test drugs. DMSO was used in the controls. Efficacies were evaluated by quantification of viral copy numbers in the cell supernatant via quantitative real-time RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) and confirmed with visualization of virus nucleoprotein (NP) expression through immunofluorescence microscopy at 48 h post infection (p.i.) (cytopathic effect was not obvious at this time point of infection). Among the seven tested drugs, high concentrations of three nucleoside analogs including ribavirin (half-maximal effective concentration (EC50) = 109.50 μM, half-cytotoxic concentration (CC50) > 400 μM, selectivity index (SI) > 3.65), penciclovir (EC50 = 95.96 μM, CC50 > 400 μM, SI > 4.17) and favipiravir (EC50 = 61.88 μM, CC50 > 400 μM, SI > 6.46) were required to reduce the viral infection (Fig. 1a and Supplementary information, Fig. S1). However, favipiravir has been shown to be 100% effective in protecting mice against Ebola virus challenge, although its EC50 value in Vero E6 cells was as high as 67 μM,4 suggesting further in vivo studies are recommended to evaluate this antiviral nucleoside. Nafamostat, a potent inhibitor of MERS-CoV, which prevents membrane fusion, was inhibitive against the 2019-nCoV infection (EC50 = 22.50 μM, CC50 > 100 μM, SI > 4.44). Nitazoxanide, a commercial antiprotozoal agent with an antiviral potential against a broad range of viruses including human and animal coronaviruses, inhibited the 2019-nCoV at a low-micromolar concentration (EC50 = 2.12 μM; CC50 > 35.53 μM; SI > 16.76). Further in vivo evaluation of this drug against 2019-nCoV infection is recommended. Notably, two compounds remdesivir (EC50 = 0.77 μM; CC50 > 100 μM; SI > 129.87) and chloroquine (EC50 = 1.13 μM; CC50 > 100 μM, SI > 88.50) potently blocked virus infection at low-micromolar concentration and showed high SI (Fig. 1a, b).

5 9

Re: Are you a man, or a pouty little bitch? - [PEACE]
by Zenaan Harkness 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

The shuttening - "No Fap" website? It's a thing, for sure, and it's being targetted by the (((shut it downs))). Surprising. But also not surprising. Man, dats amazin'! >From the "I'll believe it when I see it" and the "snake no prisoners", sorry, I mean "take no prisoners" departments: The Porn Industry is Trying to Shut Down Anti-Masturbation “NoFap” Movement, Lawsuits Filed http://dstormer6em3i4km.onion/the-porn-industry-is-trying-to-shut-down-anti… NoFap “is a website and community forum that serves as a support group for those who wish to avoid pornography and masturbation.” https://www.nofap.com/ There’s also a Reddit community with the same name, where a post announces that “the porn industry and its friends” are trying to shut it down. https://www.reddit.com/r/NoFap/comments/duumhs/the_porn_industry_and_its_fr… The website has more details about what’s happening: https://nofap.com/defend-alex/ In retaliation for effectively whistleblowing the negative effects of compulsive Internet porn use, the porn industry and its allies are on a mission to defame, deplatform, and destroy NoFap and its founder Alexander Rhodes. … Alex has filed a lawsuit against the main orchestrator of defamation against him. For transparency’s sake to further prove the legitimacy, necessity, and authenticity of this crowdfunding campaign, the complaint is being provided in its entirety. https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/30620620/RHODES_v_PRAUSE_et_al Alexander Rhodes is the founder of NoFap. As a result of creating and operating this website, he has been targeted by an unprecedented campaign of defamation from entities who appear to be closely associated with the porn industry. Alex was forced to file a lawsuit to defend himself, as this defamation campaign is intended to destroy his reputation and distort public opinion about our website. Not only is this defamation destroying Alex’s quality of life and sleep, ultimately, we believe that this campaign is soon going to threaten our ability to continue keeping NoFap online. We need your help. ... From the lawsuit: https://nofap.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Alexander-Rhodes-vs-Nicole-Pra… Defendant Prause also accuses NoFap of being a hate group, that NoFap promotes discrimination against protected groups, that NoFap advertises multiple antisemitic groups, and that by visiting NoFap people are supporting misogyny and antisemitism. The accusations against both Plaintiff Rhodes and NoFap will herein be referred to as the “False Statements”. ... 5 days muffas ... On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:17:35PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > A 6 minute true story for y'all (and just a couple mentions o' God). > > tl;dr - "Am I a man . . . or a pouty little bitch?" > > Fell Back Into the Fallen State ... All For a Girl! ... > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpWnAdhv3J8 > ~5:54 > > "I'm going to get myself out of this hole, because I put myself in > this hole." > > > JLP - "Rebuilding the family by rebuilding the man." > > > -- > 5 day challenge muffas :) > Do not wake the snake for 5 days.

2 3

From the Assange indictment: Is there Extraterritoriality present in the Statutes the Indictment references?
by jim bell 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

From: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1153486/download 15(B) to intentionally access a computer, without authorization and exceeding authorizedaccess, to obtain information from a department and agency of the United States infurtherance of a criminal act in violation of the laws of the United States, that is, aviolation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 641, 793(c), and 793(e).(In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 371, 1030(a)(l), 1030(a)(2),1030(c)(2)(B)(ii).) [end of partial quote] There is a principle of American law, upheld by the Supreme Court, that a Federal law is only supposed to be considered of "extraterritorial" application (applies outside the boundaries of United States territory) if the Congress specifically intended that application, and was signified by including such language within the law itself.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterritorial_jurisdiction × "In Morrison v. National Australia Bank, 2010, the Supreme Court held that in interpreting a statute, the "presumption against extraterritoriality" is absolute unless the text of the statute explicitly says otherwise." "https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2016/06/us-supreme-court-cont… http://www.virginialawreview.org/volumes/content/rjr-nabisco-and-runaway-ca… >From that: "The Supreme Court threw out the lawsuit after invoking the presumption against extraterritoriality. That canon of statutory interpretation instructs judges to assume “that legislation of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”[8] In applying the presumption in RJR Nabisco, however, a majority of four Justices[9] rejected multiple indications that Congress intended RICO’s private right of action to extend abroad[10] while raising the bar on what Congress must do to make its extraterritorial expectations clear.[11]" [end of quote] Understanding the presumption against extraterritoriality: https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1170&conte… Very interesting: https://www.thefacultylounge.org/2019/04/some-thoughts-on-the-extradition-o… >From that:"THE RULE OF DUAL CRIMINALITY: Even if extradition is sought only under the computer intrusion indictment, it will still need to meet the test of dual criminality, found in Article 2, which provides that "An offense shall be an extraditable offense if the conduct on which the offense is based is punishable under the laws in both States." Although computer hacking is no doubt also a crime in the U.K., there is a further wrinkle of territoriality, because Assange's alleged offense was committed outside the United States. Another section of Article 2 provides:If the offense has been committed outside the territory of the Requesting State, extradition shall be granted in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty if the laws in the Requested State provide for the punishment of such conduct committed outside its territory in similar circumstances. If the laws in the Requested State do not provide for the punishment of such conduct committed outside of its territory in similar circumstances, the executive authority of the Requested State, in its discretion, may grant extradition provided that all other requirements of this Treaty are met." Unlike the U.S., however, Britain apparently takes a strict view of territorial jurisdiction. According to The New York Times, Britain has already denied a U.S. extradition request for computer intrusion, on the grounds that the offense was committed on British soil and would therefore have to be tried in the U.K. [end of quote] 18 U.S.C. 641 does not appear to explicitly have an extraterritoriality reference. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/641 18 U.S.C. 793(c), nor the whole 793, does not appear to explicitly have an extraterritoriality reference. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793 × 18 U.S.C. 371 does not appear to explicitly have an extraterritoriality reference. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/371 18 U.S.C. 1030 does not appear to explicitly have an extraterritoriality reference. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030 Jim Bell

4 15

Vaccine
by jim bell 01 Jan '21

01 Jan '21

Coronavirus vaccine still years away, experts warn https://www.yahoo.com/gma/health-experts-warn-life-saving-coronavirus-vacci…

3 3

Behind the curve. The mathematics of deaths.
by Peter Fairbrother 30 Dec '20

30 Dec '20

Please recirculate freely. Behind the curve. The mathematics of deaths. The present United Kingdom strategy on COVID-19 was to initially try to contain the virus with a weak containment policy, and when that failed to move to the "delay phase" we are in now to try to slow its spread. This delay would place a lower maximum load on healthcare, spread heathcare requirements over time, and thereby allow more per-patient care. An underlying assumption and consequential end result of that policy is that practically everybody in the UK will inevitably eventually catch the virus. And the Red Death will hold illimitable dominion over all. The strategy made sense if, as was believed when it was made, there would be no way of eventually stopping the epidemic by containment, something I myself believed. However, that does not seem to be the case: the disease is not quite as infectious as at first thought, as recent evidence shows that the Chinese have managed to slow it almost to a stop using strong confinement. If they succeed in containing the disease, as seems very likely, then most Chinese people will never catch the virus - whereas if the present UK policy is continued then at some point a majority of people in the UK will catch the disease, and a million people will die unnecessarily [1]. So what new policy should be adopted? Well we have the Chinese example to follow. Strong containment is working for the Chinese, it should work for us. All people entering the UK should be quarantined. The UK has a "moat" in the seas surrounding it, and should take advantage of that. Schools and universities should close. Large public gatherings should be banned. People should be encouraged to wear masks, not discouraged - even a tiny difference in transmission rate can be the straw which will make the difference between the epidemic dying out or growing: that is how the chain reaction of an epidemic works. If each infected person infects more than one other person on average then the epidemic spreads, if on average each infected person infects less than one then the epidemic dies out. We should be taking extreme measures to get that figure of new infections per case down to less than 1. Testing should be stepped up by at least an order of magnitude. Medical staff should have the power to require testing, and if positive then quarantine should be enforced if necessary. But most of all, we have to stop thinking that a million people will die and there is nothing we can do to prevent it. Diligent and intense containment can work if we are willing to pay the price now, the Chinese example is proof of that. Any delay in implementing strong containment will cost lives. Failing to implement strong confinement will result in a million unnecessary deaths over the next few months. [1] "One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." - Joe Stalin. The UK age demographic contains more older people than the Chinese, and older people are far more likely to die of COVID-19 than younger people; so the UK fatality rate would be more than the Chinese rate, which works out to a bit over a million deaths if we assume 3/4 of the population get the virus. A delay to provide better health care might reduce the death toll to about a million. Strong confinement now could reduce it to a few thousand. Peter Fairbrother

4 13