- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

NSA phone spying didn't stop terrorist
by jim bell 04 Sep '20

04 Sep '20

https://www.quora.com/q/techinsider/The-NSA-phone-spying-program-exposed-by… Jim Bell's comment: However, I wonder if that this phone recording was ever used to backtrack to get other evidence.

2 1

Trump: your 'Civil Duty' as a Trump voter is to test mail in vote system by "voting twice", mail + at the poll - [PEACE] + [MUCH LAUGHTER]
by Zenaan Harkness 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

OK, the BabylonBee.com is simply not going to be able to satirize this one, life in 2020 is just that far fetchedly humorous in actual real life :D So Trump calls on ALL red voters to TEST the dem-rats "mail in voting" system by VOTING TWICE! Literally can't make this shirt up :D This is a very rational move, because by TESTING the Demon-rat mail in voting system that the "Democratic" party is pushing so hard (and pre- sending out some 80 million blank ballots), whilst at the same time these demon rats are denying the possibly of any relevant level of "voter fraud", this "voting system of integrity" which the Dem-rats are so desperate for must, of course, be diligently tested by dutiful Trump voters, to, of course, ensure the integrity of the voting system. Now not that it would happen in these circles, but if you DID happen to have some feelz about how bad the orange man is for making this call, remember the very recent call by a prominent public Demon-rat who says as follows: Trump Leads Biden At The Bookies Amid Surge In Black Americans' Support https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trump-leads-biden-bookies-amid-surge-bl… ... it appears Democrats may be preparing for just such a scenario, as a top Democratic data and analytics firm told "Axios on HBO" it's highly likely that President Trump will appear to have won - potentially in a landslide - on election night, even if he ultimately loses when all the votes are counted. https://www.axios.com/bloomberg-group-trump-election-night-scenarios-a554e8… "We are sounding an alarm and saying that this is a very real possibility, that the data is going to show on election night an incredible victory for Donald Trump," Hawkfish CEO Josh Mendelsohn said. "[but], when every legitimate vote is tallied and we get to that final day, which will be some day after Election Day, it will in fact show that what happened on election night was exactly that, a mirage." How about that hey? If Trump wins on election night, it will be nothing but "a mirage" as day after day, week after week, Democrat mail in votes will tip each relevant state and ultimately Biden WILL win". How about that, hey? According to the Demon-rats, no matter what happens around November 3, there WILL subsequently be an endless stream of mail in Democrat votes for Biden, which will eventually win Biden the election! And so, is anyone surprised that a rational response was forthcoming? Hey hey, some might be surprised, but damn, dis one fine, fine piece of master-stroke response: Trump triggers cries of ‘voter fraud’ from Dems after suggesting his supporters could try vote TWICE to test NC mail-in system https://www.rt.com/usa/499749-trump-vote-twice-mail-in/ US President Donald Trump has proposed that voters in North Carolina cast their ballots twice to test the state’s mail-in voting system, prompting criticism that he promoted the same “fraud” his detractors insist was impossible. “Well, they’ll go out and they’ll vote, and they’re going to have to go check their vote by going to the poll and voting that way, because if it tabulates, then they won’t be able to do that,” the president told reporters during a visit to North Carolina on Wednesday when asked about his confidence in mail-in voting. Let them send it in and let them go vote, and if their system’s as good as they say it is, then obviously they won’t be able to vote. If it isn’t tabulated, they’ll be able to vote. That’s the way it is. Trump clearly tells his supporters to commit election fraud in North Carolina. pic.twitter.com/qDrgm1gLls — Ted Corcoran (Red T Raccoon) (@RedTRaccoon) September 3, 2020 I have one word: fire, trucking, brilliant, response! (See that? Count each of those 1 words :D ) Check mate, Demon-rats!! And let me just say to the tactical counter-ops guys on this one: well, fire, trucking, done. And we can be pretty sure that this integrity test will be occurring NOT just in North Carolina - the whole firetrucking country must be tested, since we KNOW there are different systems in different states. What can we say, but that this is merely a civil duty of each and every Trump voter, to mail in their vote, and to test their ability to vote on voting day. The timing suggests that to REALLY put these "wonderful Democrat promoted voting machines and systems for mail in voting" to the PROPER test, that your mail in vote needs to be mailed in about 4 or 5 days prior to election day - you really need to give the system a few days to properly tabulate your vote PRIOR to election day!

1 1

It's an Ill Wind
by Peter Fairbrother 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

2- It's an Ill Wind https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XRc389TvG8 So now we know: first, that the UK government is actually deliberately trying to infect over 40 million UK citizens, and in doing so expecting, on their figures, 400,000 deaths. The reason given for this is to develop "herd immunity", where there are so many people who have had the virus that there is nobody for someone who later contracts it to give it to, as everybody has already had it and is immune. But the Chinese didn't do that. They implemented strong containment and stopped the virus dead. They didn't "lessen the peak", they obliterated the peak. There is no reason why we can't do that too. But the Government insists on buying herd immunity at the cost of at least 400,000 (more likely a million [1]) deaths. Why? The question arises, what good would herd immunity, bought at such a terrible cost in deaths, do? The reason given is that the Government believes that COVID-19 will turn into a seasonal disease, and herd immunity might protect us from it's return next year. There are three big problems with that - First, we don't know that it will return at all. Second, if it does return next year, it will have mutated - and like flu, it is likely that the herd immunity, so dearly bought, will not be effective against next year's version, if it happens. There is also concern about people in China who seem to have gotten the disease twice. We don't know why that is, whether it is two different strains of the virus (there are several hundred known varieties of the COVID-19 virus, it mutates fairly rapidly) or people getting the disease twice - however in either case that would lower the usefulness of any herd immunity. So, I don't see why the UK Government are killing 400,000 people. Apparently it isn't because the UK has a large proportion of older people. Older people who need extensive healthcare, expensive pensions, who tie up a lot of wealth and property - of the predicted 400,000 (million) deaths the vast majority would be of older people. This clearing away of unproductive and expensive (and wealthy) older population would more than balance the budget, releasing £10 billion per year in state pensions, £20 billion per year in heathcare costs, and so on. It would stop the disease in the UK fairly quickly, and it would be the cheapest option (ignoring the actuarial but not-real-pounds cost of the deaths). It would release several hundred thousand badly-needed homes (and cause a property price crash; the UK needs about 1 million homes, which is why UK property is so expensive) and would provide a more balanced population pyramid. So for the UK as a nation it would not be a bad thing (ignoring the deaths), and I fear some politicians may think "Hey, it's just the useless oldies, who cares?". But no. There is probably a sensible reason we don't implement strong confinement and stop the virus in its tracks, rather than letting it have its way. Unfortunately I don't know what that reason is. Peter Fairbrother [1] I calculate around a million deaths, but that is a bit of a back-of-the envelope calculation based on known death rates elsewhere and comparative population age spreads. Exact figures also depend on some assumptions about things we do not know about the disease. I have made what I think are reasonable assumptions. I don't know how reasonable the Goverment's assumptions are, or how they came up with the 400,000 figure.

9 23

Amazon drivers hang phones in trees to compete for new orders - Business Insider
by jim bell 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-drivers-whole-foods-deliveries-hang-… Sneaky !!!!!

2 1

These Darknet Markets May Soon See More Bitcoin Flowing - Decrypt
by jim bell 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

https://decrypt.co/40456/darknet-markets-may-soon-see-more-crypto-flowing

1 0

The Feds Want to Snoop on Your Encrypted Data. It's "for the Children." | Mises Wire
by jim bell 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

https://mises.org/wire/feds-want-snoop-your-encrypted-data-its-children

1 0

POLITICO: Court rules NSA phone snooping illegal — after 7-year delay
by jim bell 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

POLITICO: Court rules NSA phone snooping illegal — after 7-year delay. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/02/court-rules-nsa-phone-snooping-ill…

2 1

Cryptocurrency: Sound Money Is Key To Defending Our Liberties
by grarpamp 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

Sound Money Is Key to Defending Our Liberties Tags BitcoinMoney and BanksStrategy 11 hours agoThorsten Polleit The title of this article epitomizes what the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises (1881–1973) called the “sound money principle.” As Mises put it: The sound-money principle has two aspects. It is affirmative in approving the market’s choice of a commonly used medium of exchange. It is negative in obstructing the government’s propensity to meddle with the currency system.1 And further: It is impossible to grasp the meaning of the idea of sound money if one does not realise that it was devised as an instrument for the protection of civil liberties against despotic inroads on the part of governments. Ideologically it belongs in the same class with political constitutions and bills of right.2 Mises tells us that sound money is an indispensable line of defense of people's liberties against the encroachment on the part of the state and that sound money is a kind of money that is not dictated by the state but is chosen by the people in the free marketplace. The world we find ourselves in is a rather different place. Our monies—be it the US dollar, the euro, the Chinese renminbi, the yen, or the Swiss franc—represent fiat currencies, monopolized by the state. Fiat money is economically and socially destructive—with far-reaching and seriously harmful economic and societal consequences, effects that extend beyond what most people would imagine. Fiat money is inflationary; it benefits a few at the expense of many others; it causes boom-and-bust cycles; it leads to overindebtedness; it corrupts society’s morals; and it paves the way toward the almighty, all-powerful state, toward tyranny. Central Banking Is Marxist It is certainly no coincidence that “the state” has been expanding ever since the world adopted an unfettered fiat money regime back in the early 1970s, and that as a result individual liberties and freedoms have been under pressure ever since. The state feeds itself on fiat money. It simply issues new debt, which is then monetized by the its central bank, which is at the heart of the fiat money regime. Perhaps you will find it surprising that I believe that the concept of central banking is truly a Marxist concept. (I am not saying that central banking is only favored by Marxists. Not at all! There are also many other ideologies which approve of central banking.) In their Communist Manifesto of 1848, Karl Marx (1818–83) and Friedrich Engels (1820–95) compiled a list of measures necessary to establish communism. Measure number 5 reads as follows: Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. Against this backdrop there should be no doubt that once the state has become the absolute ruler of fiat money, the door is open for it to grow bigger and bigger, eventually turning into the dreaded deep state. And the deep state, as we know well from history, has little regard for individual freedoms and liberties. Making Money Great Again: Returning to Sound Money What needs to be done? Well, the challenge at hand is “Making Money Great Again”! This requires, first and foremost, ending the state’s money production monopoly and opening up a free market in money. A free market in money means that people have the freedom to choose the kind of money they wish to use and that people have the freedom to provide their fellow men with alternative goods that may serve them well as money. As things stand, however, a final solution to the “money problem” has not arrived yet—even considering the emergence of the cryptocurrency space. This is because the financial intermediation problem is still unsolved in the cryptocurrency ecosystem; we will come back to this issue in a moment. But first let us address the question: How can we get from a state-controlled fiat money regime to a free market in money? The first strategy is monetary enlightenment—informing the widest possible audience about the evils of fiat money and how it affects their personal lives, families, and communities. This also includes explaining to people that there is a superior and practicable alternative to a fiat money regime, namely a free market in money. The second strategy is making progress in the field of alternative currencies and payment systems, especially in terms of technological disruptions and their economic profitability. This is the activity space for those among us who are propelled by entrepreneurial spirit. The Limits of Cryptocurrency The cryptocurrency community, the bitcoin community in particular, and also precious metals–based payment system providers have been making some headway in this area in recent years, but unfortunately victory has not yet been achieved. For instance, bitcoin still has some scalability and performance issues. Currently, the bitcoin network settles a peak of around 350,000 transactions worldwide every day, and given its present configuration, it is presumably running at almost full capacity. By comparison, the German fiat money payment system alone processes more than 75 million transactions on average every business day.3 From the payment processing viewpoint, bitcoin cannot outshine fiat currencies yet. What is more, a currency in a modern economy must provide for the possibility of financial intermediation (an issue I mentioned earlier).4 People typically demand payment or storage services for their money, or they want to lend and borrow money—irrespective of the kind of money they actually use. Often peer-to-peer is not enough, a third party is required. Providing intermediation services outside existing state regulation is difficult. In fact, it would put an upper limit on the financial sophistication of any cryptocurrency. This is a heavy drag on their competitiveness compared to fiat currencies. And if a cryptocurrency comes out into the open space, it will have the state breathing down its neck, drowning it in business-destroying regulations and restrictions. Because the financial intermediation problem is still unsolved, one has reason to remain skeptical that—given the current circumstances—existing cryptocurrencies will succeed in pushing aside the state and replacing its fiat currency just like that. Precious metals suffer from similar problems. In many countries, the state subjects gold and silver to value-added taxes and/or capital gains taxes. This makes them uncompetitive versus fiat currencies in terms of using them in daily transactions. The Key to Free Market Money Is Deconstructing the State In fact, is it possible that a free market in money can ever emerge as long as there is the kind of state we know today? The state is, as most of you probably know, the territorial monopolist of ultimate decision-making with the right to tax its citizens. We can rightfully expect that this kind of state will do its best to crush any competitor to its fiat money and prevent a free market in money from emerging. So if we want a free market in money, the sobering logical conclusion is this: we need to reform, to deconstruct, the state (as we know it today). Now the uncomfortable truth is out, because the state is possibly the fiercest adversary you could choose. How can we hope to achieve victory? Well, there is certainly no magic spell. One possible and straightforward strategy might be appealing to people's inner self, and that is their right to self-determination. The right to self-determination is inalienable and it is an indisputable truth. Each and every individual is the owner of his or her body and the owner of goods acquired in nonaggressive ways (without violating the physical integrity of someone else's property). We cannot dispute these words without causing a logical contradiction. The right to self-determination implies that the citizens of a state have the right (1) to make it known, by a freely conducted plebiscite, that they no longer wish to be members of the state and (2) to form an independent state or to attach themselves to some other state. In other words: the right to self-determination includes the right of secession, that is, people's right to break up the big state and to deconstruct it into smaller units. Smaller political units are less powerful, more peaceful, and free market oriented. They keep taxation low, or may even go without it and become wealthier. Just think of, e.g., Shanghai, Hong Kong, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, or Monaco. This is because small political units must compete for capital and talents with other political units. They must behave themselves nicely. Otherwise, people and capital will leave their territory. Given a great number of small political units, there is a good chance that some of them will allow for, even encourage, a free market in money, setting an example that creates emulators. Conclusion It is hard to say which route would be the most effective in “Making Money Great Again.” Perhaps the cryptocurrency community will somehow succeed in ending the state (as we know it today), leaving a truly free market in money in its place. In the meantime, however, it certainly would not hurt if we (1) kept educating the wider audience about what good money is and what bad money is and also (2) kept unmasking the state (as we know it today), showing that it is incompatible with and a violation of the inalienable right to self-determination of each and every human being. In any case, it is of the utmost importance to wrest the money monopoly out of the hands of the state. Otherwise, there is indeed little hope that the free society (or what little is left of it) can survive.

1 0

Cryptocurrency: How Ta Invest - Legacy vs New 2020's Style, CipherTrace OpSec
by grarpamp 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoeaytgytZ0 Financial Success in the 1990's https://ccnews24.net/kazakhstan-is-negotiating-a-gigantic-investment-in-cry… Financial Success in the 2020's https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/il2c12/in_light_of_ciphertrace_let…

1 0

SKS PGP Keyservers Nodecount Dropping
by grarpamp 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

https://sks-keyservers.net/status/ https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://sks-keyservers.net/status/ Number of servers in pool slowly dropping, might need volunteers at some point, including more nodes on Tor, I2P, CJDNS...

5 6