- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

I would like to sell the Chinese on democracy
by Ryan Carboni 13 Mar '20

13 Mar '20

It is to my understanding that the Chinese are under the impression that American politics is comprised on homogeneous and widespread beliefs. Clearly this American democracy would be a solution for Chinese issues of civil unrest or factional infighting, and hopefully the Chinese would immediately adopt American democracy as a solution to their long standing problems that they've thus far been unable to solve.

1 0

The Heckler's Veto
by Ryan Carboni 13 Mar '20

13 Mar '20

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin_Bache_(journalist) In April 1797, while Bache was investigating the construction of the ship USS United States, Clement Humphreys, the son of the ship's architect, physically assaulted him. Bache escaped, but heard remarks from the crowd that he deserved the beating. He had printed an accusation that the ship's carpenters were taking bribes. In May 1798, Bache's residence and office were threatened by a mob. They smashed the glass door leading to his office, but refrained from vandalizing his home. His family was terrified.

1 0

Chelsea Manning ordered released from jail - The Washington Post
by jim bell 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/chelsea-manning-ordered-…

1 0

CNN: National security surveillance authorities to expire after Senate negotiations collapse
by jim bell 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

CNN: National security surveillance authorities to expire after Senate negotiations collapse. https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/12/politics/fisa-reauthorization-expiration-con… Jim Bell's comment:. Could be good news !

1 0

test message
by Se7en 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

This is a test message. A user from this list emailed me to ask if our mutual email provider has been banned or if he is individually banned. If it goes through, it's his. -- |-----/ | Se7en / The One and Only! | se7en(a)cock.email / | 0x73518A15BA3C1476 / | https://se7en-site.neocities.org

8 12

US Elections 2020: Democrats Reveal GunGrab plan via Biden in Detroit [for later Oppression]
by grarpamp 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/fgfx5z/joe_biden_told_a_factory_… https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-on-video-lashes-out-at-detroit-auto-… Today's white hot political news... US Democrat Candidates Lay Out Joint Goals to Enable Oppression... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUJMigPmv1w Biden aggresses detroit union worker Union worker calmly peacefully defends self from aggro Democrats with "This is not OK". Amid aggressing body language and well documented lies... Biden: "Don't tell me that, pal, or I'm going to go outside with your ass." Worker: "You're working for me, man" Biden: "I'm not working for you. Don't be such a horse's ass." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8IfsczVYZ0 w Colion Noir https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TohNTSpez0c w Anthony Logan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVGykWCsiG8 w Colion Noir re Beto O'Rourke team https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYIZvNawYMI Beto the Mandatory Confiscator for Biden "Bye Bye Democrats" -- USA (twitter) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX2QbrRFZ-A Colion w Joe Rogan "I really wasn't pro gun. And on mental health care, education, gangs, stats, conversations, understanding, addressing underlying, and more." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgB0yMTZ4UE Defenseless https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYD4Zj2eotw Equalized https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-HbOJGSPSg Freedom's Safe Place https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trv7-sFZcCE Leverage Simple intros all over the net https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI4CjcjURoM Options https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDfl2Yhs2pI Responsibility https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Vrc2R1oGU Safety https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRr8Ro3sbuU Etc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSIYXWvkAo8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME5D_XsTcwI Makers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLhCo9fkuzQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPfMiCtiwTA LE too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaksUhEIjic Responsible rights https://twitter.com/MrColionNoir https://www.youtube.com/user/MrColionNoir/videos http://www.mrcolionnoir.com/ https://www.facebook.com/colionnoir https://www.nra.org/ https://www.nraila.org/ https://nra.tv/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F1p_foL2Iw w Tavis Smiley https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJoHtRS1j9Y Colion on Sanders and stupid lawsuits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3t7j2tUec Part of stopping shootings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq4vPgyRQY8 Colion notes Biden https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsX91mHWDao Warren https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4PJf1gDYf4 Bernie Lies Dem Mandatory Takeback https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_FVIpvxVRw Biden, Beto, Harris, Warren Takeback https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzpypeECnYM Biden https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLtdL29pwHc Biden Self Defended from law ignoring criminal thugs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGBEDCxmyzs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cw4B_XbW7ds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thVhVjn59mg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGov0H08ySU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d_tcE5BW_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Aj0MAwO0Hk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xg8YZYO0RKc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_KUnq99QP8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lnPqbgEU7o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxEc29Z9ZpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caMHdcRNEkc Why you should not start learning! "Who am I kidding, this shit is fun :)" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsT_SKlBctc Why not Bernie Sanders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party How much Tax? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBIKP4W50-I Bernie Sanders on your Natural Rights (note Stasi end) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjlT4BME2aE Swiss Credit pt1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgYJ5V2HYy4 Swiss Credit pt2 USA is unique country in world to have wide arms rights backing freedom, safety, defense, sport, and from tyranny even "democratic" governments turn into. Wake up Americans, your freedom and more is at stake. Insane US Democrats hardly seem to proffer trying to understand and solve underlying society issues, first, those things they claim to be about. Perhaps because that requires them to, first, have honorable personal hands-on responsibility to themself and others... to empower, not to grab power. A self political problem. "Guns" are not the problem. "Drugs" are not the problem. America should focus on education, responsibility, care, charity, non stigmatizing even free anon support, repositioning the culture, personal mentality... largests benefits will only come from that. Not from, and with doing the former no need for, the already diminishing returns, and further inflaming nature... of unfree laws, Stasi papers, and grabs the people will rightly find offensive to culture, history, uniqueness. No law can ever come even close to being able to do what good ingrained freedom responsible education care etc can do voluntarily together. Try that, first.

2 3

Chance discovery brings quantum computing using standard microchips a step closer | Science | AAAS
by jim bell 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/chance-discovery-brings-quantum-com… Jim Bell's comment: My isotope-modified integrated circuit material invention https://daltonium.com/ uses a very similar principle, putting spin-containing atomic nuclei into an electric field. The main difference is, my invention does not act on individual atoms, but fields of atoms in a layer. Also, Intel was just granted a patent for an isotopically-purified way to build a material relatively free of nuclear spin. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/10388848.html So, effectively, in patent terms, I will own the right hand of a duplex, while Intel will own the left hand of a duplex. Jim Bell [quote] Chance discovery brings quantum computing using standard microchips a step closer By Adrian ChoMar. 11, 2020 , 12:35 PM An accidental innovation has given a dark-horse approach to quantum computing a boost. For decades, scientists have dreamed of using atomic nuclei embedded in silicon—the familiar stuff of microchips—as quantum bits, or qubits, in a superpowerful quantum computer, manipulating them with magnetic fields. Now, researchers in Australia have stumbled across a way to control such a nucleus with more-manageable electric fields, raising the prospect of controlling the qubits in much the same way as transistors in an ordinary microchip. “That’s incredibly important,” says Thaddeus Ladd, a research physicist at HRL Laboratories LLC., a private research company. “This could potentially change the game for nuclear qubits in silicon.” An ordinary computer flips bits from 1 to 0 and back again. A quantum computer employs qubits that can be set to 0, 1, or, thanks to the bizarre rules of quantum mechanics, 0 and 1 at the same time. This enables a quantum computer to crunch a huge number of inputs simultaneously, which is one reason why a big one should able to solve certain types of complex problems that would swamp any conventional computer. Last year, researchers with Google claimed their small quantum computer performed an abstruse calculation that would have taken conventional supercomputers millennia. Jim | | Virus-free. www.avast.com |

1 0

It's an ill wind...
by Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

Consider, if you will, a possible outcome of the current bio-crisis. (I want it over, swiftly, and with as little damage to humanity as possible, I really do, but it doesn't look promising at the moment) We're seeing some congress critters self-quarantining. I think it likely that more will do the same. And yet, they (and some of you, even it not not so much me) want the work of the Congress to continue. How to resolve this? One solution is teleconferencing. Votes, meetings, etc., could be carried out this way, and work (such as it is) can get done. Think of the transparency (if not voluntarily achieved, perhaps attained with the help of some volunteer work by technologically sophisticated persons of flexible morals). If this goes on for a while, there's no reason why they (the accumulated they of Congress and staff) wouldn't become acculturated and accustomed to this new way. At that point, what's to stop the congress critters and their remoras, with suitable encouragement, to permanently relocate to their own districts. It would certainly make lobbying more difficult, being in view of their constituents, rather than sequestered in the summer hellhole that is DC. I have a dream... Kurt

1 0

[OSI] [ESR] Open Source Iniciative bans co-founder, Eric S. Raymond.
by Cecilia Tanaka 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

<https://lunduke.com/posts/2020-03-9-b> Open Source Initiative bans co-founder, Eric S Raymond Mar 9, 2020 Last week, Eric S Raymond (often known as ESR <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond>, author of The Cathedral and the Bazaar <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar>, and co-founder of the Open Source Intiative <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Initiative>) was banned from the Open Source Intiative (the “OSI”). Specifically, Raymond was banned from the mailing lists used to organize and communicate with the OSI. For an organization to ban their founder from communicating with the group (such as via a mailing list) is a noteworthy move. At a time when we have seen other founders (of multiple Free and Open Source related initiatives) pushed out of the organizations they founded (such as with Richard Stallman being compelled to resign from the Free Software Foundation, or the attempts to remove Linus Torvalds from the Linux Kernel – both of which happened within the last year) it seems worth taking a deeper look at what, specifically, is happening with the Open Source Initiative. I don't wish to tell any of you what you should think about this significant move. As such I will simply provide as much of the relevant information as I can, show the timeline of events, and reach out to all involved parties for their points of view and comments. Raymond made the following statement, on February 27, 2020, on his personal blog <http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609>: “I – OSI’s co-founder and its president for its first six years – was kicked off their lists for being too rhetorically forceful in opposing certain recent attempts to subvert OSD clauses 5 and 6. This despite the fact that I had vocal support from multiple list members who thanked me for being willing to speak out. It shouldn’t be news to anyone that there is an effort afoot to change – I would say corrupt – the fundamental premises of the open-source culture. Instead of meritocracy and “show me the code”, we are now urged to behave so that no-one will ever feel uncomfortable. The effect – the intended effect – is to diminish the prestige and autonomy of people who do the work – write the code – in favor of self-appointed tone-policers. In the process, the freedom to speak necessary truths even when the manner in which they are expressed is unpleasant is being gradually strangled. And that is bad for us. Very bad. Both directly – it damages our self-correction process – and in its second-order effects. The habit of institutional tone policing, even when well-intentioned, too easily slides into the active censorship of disfavored views.” So what, exactly, prompted this extreme measure? What could happen that would be so problematic that an organization would ban their founder (and one of the most well known individuals in the Open Source world)? Thankfully the Open Source Initiative keeps a public archive <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/> of all the posts to their mailing lists. I did what any journalist would do in this scenario… I started reading. And I didn't have to go very far back through the archive, either. Turns out the first post (in a very long time) from Raymond was 3 short days before he was banned (and before the blog post he penned above). February 24th, 2020. Raymond posted the following <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org…> to an OSI mailing list with the title “A wild co-founder appears”: “After twenty years of staying off this list, I have joined it. I didn't, until now, because whenever I checked in on this list the regulars seemed to be doing the job I expected them to do quite competently. And I had enough of an “I can't be everywhere, dammit!” problem without adding to it. But there are two recent developments I find concerning that have convinced me I need to weigh in. Please pay careful attention, as I am not making this choice [lightly]. I will start individual threads for both issues.” What followed from there were several posts by Eric Raymond over the next two days – having conversations on multiple topics relating to Open Source licensing and how the OSI should handle potential revoking of certification of licenses. Some of the messages had strong disagreements over OSI policy. However, I was unable to find any messages, from Raymond (or anyone else) that would (based on my understanding of the Code of Conduct <https://opensource.org/codeofconduct/licensing> that the OSI has adopted for their mailing lists) constitute a banning… of a founder or of any regular member. Then, on February 26, 2020, “Moderator(a)OpenSource.xn--org-9o0a posted the following statement <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org…> : The OSI Board is aware that some offensive emails have been sent to this list. The OSI does not tolerate deliberately divisive or disrespectful messages from any quarter. We have already taken moderation actions to this effect and we will apply further sanctions if necessary. No further details were provided, making this difficult to verify. The next day (February 27, 2020), Josh Berkus (a Red Hat employee and regular speaker at Open Source conferences) posted the following <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org…> : ESR's “sharp language” is not an attempt to persuade. It is an attempt to intimidate opponents; to “win” an argument by making others afraid to participate. Indeed, even today OSI mailing list composition is entirely folks with enough privilege to be resistant to personal attacks. That's a sad, terrible thing. It's not “free speech” when it's an attempt to shout others down so that they have no voice. It's something else entirely. Further, not one of ESR's points is original or even original to this list. In his absence, not one of the ideas he so “colorfully” expressed will be lost. In the meantime, we're missing the input of so many people who will not participate in OSI because of our tolerance for wholly uncivilized behavior like his posts. Followed shortly thereafter (February 28, 2020) by Pamela Chestek (a member of the OSI Board <https://opensource.org/docs/board-annotated>) who posted the following <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org…> to the OSI Mailing list with the title “Member conduct”: Following an incident on Open Source Initiative mailing lists, the Board has removed a subscriber from both the License-Review and License-Discuss mailing lists for repeatedly violating the Code of Conduct. The Board took steps to mitigate the issue and began deliberating immediately after the incident, reached a decision early this morning, and notified the subscriber of the decision this afternoon. The Board regrets that some material was published that should not have been, in spite of our best moderation efforts. We ask for all mailing list participants to be cautious with the use of CC, BCC, and Reply-All fields in the future. Although we have failed in this instance, the OSI continues to work on making the email lists safe environments where all people and viewpoints are greeted with an open mind and treated with dignity and respect. OSI has a broad constituency and that remains a fundamental asset to our mission. We will be following up in the coming weeks with a more general public statement about the current state of our moderation efforts, as well as relevant projects that are in flight. We are grateful for the feedback we’ve received and welcome further input on our efforts. We hope that our continued efforts will bring more underrepresented voices to the table, and that those who left will feel safe returning. We want you all with us on this journey. I reached out to the Board and leadership of the Open Source Initiative for comment, and to provide the quote from Eric Raymond that prompted the decission to ban him. As of the writing of this article, I had not yet received any reply from the Open Source Initiative leadership. I also reached out to Eric S Raymond to see if he could shed any further light on the situation and get his views. What follows are his complete responses to me. *Lunduke*: Any idea what statement/email you sent that specifically caused the banning? *Eric S Raymond*: “They never told me specifically which message was the cause. In fact, they haven't publicly admitted to banning me, though I got an email telling me I had been banned.” *Lunduke*: I've also asked the OSI board the same question (and others)… but have yet to hear back from them. *Eric S Raymond*: “Don't hold your breath waiting. Full political ass-covering mode will be in effect now, and you can quote me on that. These people are an utter disgrace to the ideals on which I founded OSI.” *Lunduke*: What do you see as the root cause of the issues you see with the OSI (which you call out in your blog post <http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609>)? *Eric S Raymond*: The fetishization of ‘nice’ behavior, where ‘nice’ ends up defined as being any behavior some self-appointed censor doesn't like. Usually (and in this case) accompanied by a lot of bafflegab about “inclusion” and “diversity” so thay anyone who isn't a fan of the new, censorious rules can be cast as some sort of bigot. *Lunduke*: How would you go about fixing those issues? *Eric S Raymond*: Abolish “Codes of Conduct” and all the Orwellian doublespeak that goes with them. It's less bad that people sometimes got their feelings hurt than it is to institutionalize a means by which dissenting opinions are crushed under the rubric of “not nice”. Let's take a step back, for a moment, and look at thing from a high level. Where are we at, as of the writing of this article? - Eric S Raymond (ESR), one of the founders of the Open Source Initiative, has been banned from OSI mailing lists. - No verifiable reason has been given, by the OSI, for the banning. Based on the timeline, presumably the offending message (or messages) would have been sent in the two day window between February 24th and February 26th. - The Open Source Initiative has not responded to a request for clarification or comment. Perhaps interestingly, the Open Source Initiative is right in the middle of an election for a few of their Board seats <https://opensource.org/elections>. With such clear and strong conflicts happening between a founder of the OSI – and some of the current leadership of the OSI – it will be interesting to see what direction the current OSI leadership and membeship choose to go in.

2 1

Excerpts from Machiavelli's Discourse on Livy
by Ryan Carboni 11 Mar '20

11 Mar '20

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Discourses_on_Livy/Third_Book/Chapters_I-VII THAT WHICH MAKES A KING LOSE THE KINGDOM THAT WAS INHERITED BY HIM Tarquinius Superbus having killed Servius Tullus, and the latter not leaving any heirs, he (Tarquinius) came to possess the kingdom with security, not having to fear those things which had harmed his predecessors. And although the manner of his occupying the kingdom was irregular and odious, none the less had he observed the ancient institutions of the other Kings, he would have been tolerated, and the Senate and Plebs would never have arisen against him and taken the State away from him. This man, therefore, was not driven out because of his son Sextus having violated Lucretia, but for having broken the laws and governed it (his Kingdom) tyrannically; having taken away all authority from the Senate and assumed it himself, and those funds which were marked for public improvements with which the Roman Senate was satisfied, he diverted to the building of his own palace, with disgust and envy for him resulting. So that in a very short time, he despoiled Rome of all that liberty which she had maintained under the other previous Kings. And it was not enough for him to make the Fathers (Senators) his enemies, but he aroused the Plebs against himself, working them hard in mechanical labor and all unlike those which his predecessors had employed. So that by having filled Rome with such cruel and haughty examples of his, he had already disposed the minds of all the Romans to rebellion whenever they should have the opportunity. And if the incident of Lucretia had not happened, even so another would have arisen which would have produced the same result: For if Tarquin had lived like the other Kings and his son Sextus had not made that error, Brutus and Collatinus would have had recourse to Tarquin for vengeance against Sextus, and to the Roman People. Princes should understand, therefore, that they begin to lose the State from that hour when they begin to break the laws and ancient institutions under which men have lived for a long time. And if as private citizens, having lost the State, they should ever become so prudent to see with what facility Principalities are kept by those who are counselled wisely, they would regret their loss much more, and would condemn themselves to greater punishment than that to which others have condemned them: For it is much more easy to be loved by the good than the bad, and to obey the laws then to enforce them. And in wanting to learn the course that they should have to hold to do this, they do not have to endure any other hardship than to mirror for themselves the lives of good Princes, such as Timoleon the Corinthian, Aratus the Sicyonian, and similar ones, in the lives of whom they would find as much security and satisfaction to him who ruled as to he who is ruled; so that they ought to want to imitate him, being able to do so for the reasons mentioned: For men when they are well governed, do not seek or desire any other liberty; as happened to the people governed by the above named (Princes), whom they constrained to be Princes as long as they lived, even though they often had been tempted to return to private life. And as in this and the two preceding chapters, there has been discussed the dispositions aroused against Princes, and of the Conspiracy made by the sons of Brutus against their country, and of those made against Tarquinius Priscus and Servius Tullus, it does not appear to me to be something outside this subject to speak at length of them in the following chapter, being a matter worthy of being noted by Princes and Private Citizens. OF CONSPIRACIES And it does not appear proper to me to omit the discussion of Conspiracies, being a matter of so much danger to Princes and Private Citizens. For it is seen that many more Princes have lost their lives and States through them, than by open war. For it is conceded only to a few to be able to make open war against a Prince, but the ability to conspire against them is conceded to everyone. On the other hand, private citizens do not enter in an enterprise more perilous nor more foolhardy than this, as it is difficult and most dangerous in all of its parts. Whence it happens that many are attempted, and very few have the desired ending. So that, therefore, Princes may learn to guard themselves from these dangers, and that Private Citizens may less rashly engage in them, and rather may learn to live contentedly under the Rule that has been assigned to them by chance and by their state, I shall speak widely, not omitting any notable case, in documenting the one and the other. And truly that sentence of Cornelius Tacitus is golden, which says that men have to honor things past but obey the present, and ought to desire good Princes, but tolerate the ones they have. And truly, whoever does otherwise, most of the time will ruin himself and his country. We ought, therefore, ((in entering on this matter)) to consider first against whom conspiracies are made, and we will find them to be made either against a country or against a Prince. It is of these two that I want us to discuss at present; for those which are made to give a town over to the enemy who besiege it, or that have some reason similar to this, have been talked about above sufficiently. And in this first part we shall treat of that against a Prince, and first we will examine the reasons for it, which are many, but there is one which is more important than all the others: and this is his being hated by the general public; for in the case of that Prince who has aroused this universal hatred, it is reasonable (to suppose) that there are some particular individuals who have been injured by him more (then others) and who desire to avenge themselves. This desire of theirs is increased by that universal ill disposition that they see is aroused against him. A Prince ought therefore to avoid these public charges, but I do not want to talk here ((having treated of this elsewhere)) of what he should do to avoid them. For by guarding himself against this (hatred), the simple offenses against particular individuals will make less war against him: One, because rarely is a man met who thinks so much of an injury that he will put himself in so much danger to avenge it: The other, even if they should be of a mind and power to do so, they are held back by that universal benevolence that they see the Prince to have. Injuries that happen to an individual are of Possessions (taking them from him), of Blood (physical injury), or of Honor. Of those of Blood, threats are most dangerous, and there is no peril in the execution, because he who is dead cannot think of vengeance, and those who remain alive most of the time leave such thoughts to the dead: but he who is threatened, and sees himself constrained by necessity either to act or to suffer, becomes a most dangerous man for the Prince, as we shall relate in detail in its place. Outside of this necessity, those (injuries) of Possession and Honor, are matters that harm men more than any other offense, and against which the Prince ought to guard himself, for he can never despoil one so much that he does not leave a mind obstinate to vengeance. And of (injuries) of honor, that are inflicted on men, that against their women is most important, and after that, insult to their person. This (kind of injury) armed Pausanias against Phillip of Macedonia: this has armed many others against many other Princes: and in our times, Julio Belanti would not have set in motion a conspiracy against Pandolfo, Tyrant of Siena, except that the latter had given him a daughter for his wife, and then took her away, as we will relate in its place. The major cause that made the Pazzi conspire against the Medici, was the inheritance of Giovanni Borromei, which was taken from the former by the latter.

1 0