- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Chinese conundrum
by professor rat 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

How do the red-fascist Chinese pigs listen in? https://dailyhodl.com/2021/01/11/researchers-say-hack-proof-quantum-network… Anarchy for the PRC!?

1 0

[ot] Re: Anarchists murder the political right
by Karl 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

cc'ing list which i left out. this gives me time to add an [ot] tag. On 1/12/21, Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: > professor rat, I have a label on your e-mails reminding me that you > requested I reply with rational responses only. > > What you're saying here, I want to let you know that I don't > understand it. It doesn't look clear what you are talking about. It > sounds like you are worried that a political value is under specific > attack by anarchism, and I don't see why this would be. > > I'm curious whether posting new threads as your only way of > communicating is something that you desire to do or not. > > I kind of get on this list in bursts and it might be some time, or I > might not even see, a reply, or it could be quick who knows. But this > is my reply to you here. > > On 1/12/21, professor rat <pro2rat(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: >> Harming the political right is what we anarchists live for. >> >> Deplatforming, cancelling, and demonetization is actual harm, and has >> escalated to physical assault, and sometimes actual murder. " Propaganda >> of >> the deed ". >> >> Its all good when most people don't like the political right ( or >> Marxist-communist left ) >> >> Smacked my Bishop up. >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Soldevilla_y_Romero >> >> List Nazi's will die. >> >

1 0

Anarchists murder the political right
by professor rat 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

Harming the political right is what we anarchists live for. Deplatforming, cancelling, and demonetization is actual harm, and has escalated to physical assault, and sometimes actual murder. " Propaganda of the deed ". Its all good when most people don't like the political right ( or Marxist-communist left ) Smacked my Bishop up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Soldevilla_y_Romero List Nazi's will die.

1 0

Re: hopeful letters and numbers
by Karl 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

attaching since copypasting from a terminal can mess whitespace up

1 0

Re: Typically stupid for Parler's CEO to refer to Twitter as a "techno-fascist" company
by Karl 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

sorry, i accidentally replied to professor rat directly. On 1/12/21, Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: > this sounds like the kind of problem secure scuttlebutt was designed to > solve. > > secure scuttlebutt is friend-to-friend social network without > centralised servers, where content is cryptographically verified. the > network automatically breaks itself into communities with shared > interests, because of its protocol. > > the system has a small handful of bugs making it hard to use in a > stable manner right now, but some new programmers could probably fix > that very fast. > > https://scuttlebutt.nz/ > > On 1/12/21, professor rat <pro2rat(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: >> "... silly for Parler's CEO to refer to Twitter as >> a "techno-fascist" company for its content moderation policies, when his >> company appears to be doing basically the same thing. ...' >> >> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-predicted-parler-… >> >> I went on Gab and posted a Stiffs deadpool on the POTUS about a year or >> two >> ago. >> It was quickly taken down. >> So GAB is censorious garbage. >> >

1 0

Typically stupid for Parler's CEO to refer to Twitter as a "techno-fascist" company
by professor rat 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

"... silly for Parler's CEO to refer to Twitter as a "techno-fascist" company for its content moderation policies, when his company appears to be doing basically the same thing. ...' https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-predicted-parler-… I went on Gab and posted a Stiffs deadpool on the POTUS about a year or two ago. It was quickly taken down. So GAB is censorious garbage.

1 0

How stupid US Libertarians destroy themselves
by professor rat 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

https://theworld.com/~mhuben/libindex.html Inverse Marxists and extreme morons. Follow your John Galton leader!

1 0

Thou shalt not hack indiscriminately, High Court of England tells Britain's spy agencies
by coderman 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/11/equipment_interference_privacy_inter… A landmark High Court ruling has struck down Britain's ability to hack millions of people at a time through so-called "general warrants" in what privacy campaigners are hailing as a major victory. The ruling, obtained by Privacy International, means that some bulk equipment interference (aka hacking) warrants are no longer usable by the British authorities, something the campaign group says enhances legal safeguards protecting innocent people from dragnet surveillance. Speaking on Friday afternoon when the judicial review judgment was handed down, Caroline Wilson Palow, PI's legal director, said in a statement: "General warrants are no more permissible today than they were in the 18th century. The government had been getting away with using them for too long. We welcome the High Court's affirmation of these fundamental constitutional principles." The judgment struck down a previous ruling from rubberstamping figleaf operation spy agency court the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), which, true to [its principles](https://www.theregister.com/2018/07/23/investigatory_powers_tri…, previously ruled there was [nothing wrong with the idea of one single warrant](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIPTrib/2016/14_85-CH.html) authorising mass surveillance by MI5, MI6, and GCHQ. Summing up the case, Lord Justice Bean and Mrs Justice Farbey said in their judgment: "The question posed in the Statement of Facts and Grounds is: 'Does section 5 of [[the Intelligence Services Act 1994](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/13/section/5)] permit the issue of a 'thematic' computer hacking warrant authorising acts in respect of an entire class of people or an entire class of such acts?'" Such "equipment interference" (EI) warrants are [startlingly broad](https://www.theregister.com/2016/02/09/intelligence_security_committ…, as El Reg reported when the infamous Snoopers' Charter was making its way through Parliament in 2016, covering entire groups of people together with any hackable gadgets in use by the "class" being targeted. Barrister Ben Jaffey QC, for PI, told the High Court that in its previous ruling OK'ing this kind of thing, the IPT had made a crucial legal mistake: instead of focusing on whether a warrant was lawful if it "adequately described" what items the spy agencies wanted to hack, the law said these things had to be "specified". The difference is that when the items to be hacked are "specified" in a warrant that means drawing up a list, not giving carte blanche permission for hacking anything and everything. Agreeing, the judges drew analogies with 18th century legal precedents that are still in force today. Those cases said that general warrants authorising agents of the state to pick out suspects at their own discretion for searches were unlawfully broad. The modern court said last week: In view of the importance of the constitutional principle that there can be no interference with property without clear and specific legal authorisation, the words of an enactment must be unambiguous before the court may interpret Parliament as intending to override rights. There are no such unambiguous words in section 5. The national security context makes no difference as otherwise the courts would sanction wide powers to override fundamental rights. The judgment is a vindication of PI not only on the bulk hacking warrants but also on a previous case involving the IPT. That case, also a judicial review, [overturned anti-scrutiny laws that made the IPT a one-stop shop whose rulings could never be challenged](https://www.theregister.com/2019/05/15/supreme_court_ipt_judici… by higher courts. Irritated by what it perceives as the persistent misuse of judicial review to conduct politics through the courts, Boris Johnson's Conservative government [started a formal review](https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2020/08/03/the-judicial-review-rev… last year aimed at reducing the power of judicial reviews to change the law. ®

1 0

Looking 4-ward to the destruction of Goggle, Fedbook and Twatter!
by professor rat 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

"... strong and continuous anti-trust cases against Facebook, Google, and Amazon. 2. Pass very strong privacy legislation to destroy their business models. 3. Don't object when other countries bring anti-trust legislation or outright ban them. (If I were in charge of any sovereign state, I would immediately ban the American tech monopolies after seeing the vast power then are exercising in the US.) 4. Require every tech firm to decide whether they are a publisher or a common carrier. .." https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/01/should-twitter-ha…

1 0

Calls for more crypto-anarchism
by professor rat 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

https://www.coindesk.com/now-is-the-time-to-advance-the-decentralized-web Fuck your " pie in the sky when you die by-and-by ". If there was any internet God it would be necessary to destroy it.

1 0