- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Exit Wikileaks
by professor rat 05 Jan '21

05 Jan '21

That judge just handed the present management at WL a heavy weapon to block the return of its prodigious sun-king. Its difficult, if not impossible to see a return of the WL of its heyday. Too much PR baggage. Too much surveillance in plain sight. The last thing a blacknet platform needs in charge is a cop-magnet like this Bozo celebrity 'journalist ' and Mr Chicken. So WL has done its dash - a risen souffle can't rise twice. The time it would take a clever comeback king...well, the calendar takes care of everything. By the time we get to CYPHERPUNK 2027 no one will even remember who Satoshi was. Vorward.

1 0

Xeni weighs in
by professor rat 05 Jan '21

05 Jan '21

xeni - 7h The Devil went down to Georgia he was looking for some votes to steal He was in a bind 11,800 votes behind and he was ready to make a deal

2 1

BACKSTABBER the new Bull Goose Loony Cypherpunk
by professor rat 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

Adam Backs success in picking winners - or perhaps making the fewest mistakes - has propelled him to the forefront of cypherpunks. So this is a good time to look back at his original proof-of-work idea. It was before my time but I gather the list had a problem with spam and ' hashcash' was a proposed workaround for that. I don't think it worked as advertised since Mong opted for open slather and Gilmore declared ' The death of cypherpunks '. The long-running civil-war between governance by code or down by law. Adam has always eschewed the overtly political so tilting toward code even when situations get blurred and ' code is law ' and ' code is whatever Mongo sez it is '. Temperamentally conservative he capitalized brilliantly off Btc and helped build the WL Trojan Horse. There is no-one else in this space with this sort of hefty reputation capital. Its a citadel in its own right. The Blockstream satellite almost just a cherry on top. Praise with faint damns for the bullgoose loony cypherpunk disguised as a meek, mild mannered publicist for a major metropolitan newspaper. If he ever needs a doorman for the Blockstream building. Here I am.

1 0

FSFE / Matthias Kirschner stalking case
by Debian Community News Team 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

https://fsfellowship.eu/court-case-fsfe-women-and-volunteers-face-modern-da…

2 1

Cryptome gets a plug in UK ruling
by professor rat 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1346109169129185283/photo/1 Baraitser has little time for the bullshit claims that Trump was targeting Assange personally.

1 0

Rendering Julian Assmange
by professor rat 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

Whats the point of having this expensive, shiny-new army if you never use it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

1 0

From Labrador to Golden Retriever
by professor rat 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

Lets hope he winds up like John Galton did - in " Anarchopulco "! https://cointelegraph.com/news/crypto-users-donate-400k-to-julian-assange-d…

1 0

Appeal to Satoshi
by professor rat 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

Satoshi, if you're listening, please tell us what a carpetbagging waste-of-time Julian Assmange is, since you created at least some cryptoanarchist value while he keeps trying to drag our good name through the mud. The first drafts of world history are being written - surely you don't want to be handcuffed to this cretin for all eternity. Your machine kills secrets - go tell it on a mountain.

1 0

Judge cites Jim Bell brain-damage in decision
by professor rat 04 Jan '21

04 Jan '21

UK judge describes ' sad fate ' of ' once feisty and intelligent " cypherpunk that was jailed for over 12 years in the US prison system when electing to excuse Assange. " Ten years of the Jim Bell treatment could turn a delicate scaredy-cat, like Julian, into a vacuous, dribbling imbecile - as Bell himself proves ", she said. " I could not in good conscience assist to create any more walking-dead, cypherpunk zombies"

1 0

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