- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Git falls - email keeps getting blocket - attempting from gmail web ui direct
by Zenaan Harkness 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

Ric, if you get this, please reply - my ISP kept giving me "Email ACCEPTED" and then sending it into a black hole it seems. Perhaps I used the word "sn0wfl4ke" too many times? cheers zen ----- Forwarded message from Zenaan Harkness <git-rev-news(a)freedbms.net> ----- From: Zenaan Harkness <git-rev-news(a)freedbms.net> To: CypherPunks <cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org> Cc: wayward4now(a)gmail.com, andrewanglin84(a)gmail.com, rms(a)gnu.org, inspector_rikati(a)yahoo.com.au Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 10:15:18 +1100 Subject: Re: Git falls to the giant swinging CoCs! -- [gitrevnews(a)gmail.com: Git Rev News edition 56] Anyone know A Better Way for such emails as below? Email is broken in some ways it seems - the below email evidently had a few trip words or repetitions such that the ISP, despite its mail server saying to me "ACCEPTED" for each (of 5) recipient, has not sent the email through. No error, no warning, just "Email ACCEPTED" and then into a black hole! This is disappointing of course. And I guess if they (Telstra's SMTP server in this case) lower their SPAM scoring, then too much spam gets through and folks get annoyed - looks like this is a "broken" in email? Anyway, may be this one will similarly be black holed ... let's see... On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 09:50:16AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > Those with limp and dodgy feelz, are inevitably compelled to seek > "safety" in numbers, introducing CoCs (code of conduct aka "community > stasi policing"), raging inflamed discussions, and censorship "safety > first" committees to make damnably sure their snow CoC is obeyed! > > Sadly, Git is the latest project to fall (see below). > > Perhaps we ought begin to consider anti-dotes to such snowflakery? > > > - separation of man and snowflake > > have the place (e.g. mailing list) for adults to get on with work > > have the snowflake hall, say snowflakes(a)$MY_PROJECT.$TLD > > > As we see recently with the FSF and Richard Stallman, those who > contribute over a long period of time, and have deceived the group by > successfully hiding their snowflakery and huge swinging CoC demands, > tend towards the public lynch mob, the coup, and the crucifixion of > good men, including the founder. > > > Such deception, where folks instead of finding or creating their own > space like a man, they simmer and seethe in anger, plotting their > evil for the day the leader takes a public hit from morons, are > deceivers and back stabbers, cowards of the first order. > > > - never surrender to terrorists > > name evil behaviour, and handle the evil behaviour first and > foremost, at all times, as the first evil, even in the face of > a lynch mob > > blackmail should be the first evil, the first "illegal" crime > punishable by severe punishments, even where the perpetrator of > the blackmail is a spook or deep CoC > > deception and hiding of snowflakery is a ground for dismissal - > sure, the flake might chuck an Amway retard programming spaz and > try to fuck over the group by "leave a big hole" (what do we > expect from CoCs anyway?) - but let's just be thankful for the > work they did do, and get on with being men - in the long run, > we'll be better off without that undermining shit! > > (for those who missed the memo, leave a big hole means "make my > pathetic self really valuable and then leave a huge hole in the > group by leaving" - well, men don't give a firetruck, we learn > the lesson of the CoC and move on, filling that hole, spoon by > bloody spoon if we have to!) > > > - always immediately (or as soon as possible) name a terrorist act > > e.g. > the Koch brothers come to your Think Pad Update Services > Association (TP-USA) offering "a million fiats for your CoC" > > make immediate public announcement "Koch brothers seek CoC, > attempt to corrupt men@list with limp fiats and demanding > censorship" > > e.g. > snowflake seeks to censor men@list with large swinging CoC, > even though snowflakes@list is offered and actively CoCing > around > > make public announcement "apparently snowflakes like CoC so > bad, they seek to ram CoC in face of men@list" > > > Yes, we should (probably, presumably, duty of care etc) > > - make an up front, open and honest declaration of intent for the > men@list list > > "are you a man or a f*#!& meme, if the former you may join the > primary list, if anything else, join the snowflakes and/ or seek > a mentor willing to personally tutor you; > if reading this message was overly stressful to your feelz, get > some firetrucking help already!" > > if your project is so fortunate as to have at least one > contributor who is willing to be on both the men@list list, and > the snowjobs@list, all the better - in fact there are plenty of > mediator types out there, so it's usually only a very short > matter of time before a White Knight steps up to vigorously seize > the CoC obeying kudos creds on the snowjobs list > > > Make such declarations so folks know what they're getting into from > the get go. > > After that, it's open season muffas :D > > "Oh PLEASE muh little snowflake, pleease step into the ring! > > Yes my precious, you know you wanna be a man, so join, don't > hesitate, join the list of men and leave your tissues outside. > " > > > Of course, if everyone, or everyone of any authority in a project, is > a censorship craving CoC nut, and you happen to be a man, or at least > a man in training, we suggest you join another project, or start yer > own, such as NoMoreAnalCommittees(a)for.men.only > > > Hopefully there are further decisive CoC-flake slaying ideas and > approaches out there - experiment and report back, so we can share > the winning to all men of good character and high ideals. > > > Peace, > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Git Rev News Team <gitrevnews(a)gmail.com> ----- > > From: Git Rev News Team <gitrevnews(a)gmail.com> > To: git-rev-news(a)freedbms.net > Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 19:38:22 +0000 > Subject: Git Rev News edition 56 > List-ID: 318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757mc list <318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757.118053.list-id.mcsv.net> > > > > View this email in your browser (https://mailchi.mp/5e0c777b9b30/git-rev-news-edition-56?e=2778fe651d) > > > ** Git Rev News: Edition 56 (October 26th, 2019) > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Welcome to the 56th edition of Git Rev News (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , a digest of all things Git. For our goals, the archives, the way we work, and how to contribute or to subscribe, see the Git Rev News page (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) on git.github.io. > > This edition covers what happened during the month of September 2019. > > > ** Discussions > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ** General > ------------------------------------------------------------ > * Growing the Git community (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > Derrick Stolee, who prefers to be called Stolee, emailed the mailing list after the Virtual Contributor Summit (see previous edition (/rev_news/2019/09/25/edition-55/#general) ) saying he wanted to further discuss some ideas, that had been shared during the Summit, about “Inclusion & Diversity” with the goal of making the community more welcoming to new contributors of all kinds. > He listed some possible problems that could prevent new contributors entering the community: > 1. Discovering how to contribute to Git is non-obvious. > 2. Submitting to a mailing list is a new experience for most developers. This includes the full review and discussion process. > 3. The high standards for patch quality are intimidating to new contributors. > 4. Some people do not feel comfortable engaging in a community without a clear Code of Conduct. This discomfort is significant and based on real experiences throughout society. > 5. Since Git development happens in a different place than where users acquire the end product, some are not aware that they can contribute. > Then Stolee proposed actions to address the problems: > 1. Improve the documentation for contributing to Git. > 2. Add more pointers to GitGitGadget. > 3. Introduce a new “mentors” mailing list. > 4. Add an official Code of Conduct. > 5. Advertise that Git wants new contributors. > Each action was explained and justified, sometimes pointing to interesting research like the recent paper "”We Don’t Do That Here”: How Collaborative Editing With Mentors Improves Engagement in Social Q&A Communities” (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) . > Stolee also proposed some metrics to be measured between releases to monitor how the community are doing: > 1. How many first-time contributors sent a patch? > 2. How many contributors had their first commit accepted into the release? > 3. How many contributors started reviewing? > 4. How many total patches/reviews did the list receive? > His email was very detailed with many suggestions about how to implement the actions, and he asked interesting questions to gather peoples’ opinion. > Denton Liu replied to Stolee sharing some thoughts as a “relatively new contributor (just less than a year)”. He said that from his experience to get more contributors, we should try to answer the “how do we make it more fun to contribute to Git?” question. > He recalled that most of his time learning to contribute to Git “stemmed from the fact that there’s a lot of tribal knowledge that’s not really written down anywhere”. > As Stolee had mentioned the “My First Contribution” document (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , which was recently contributed by Emily Shaffer, Denton said that it would have really helped him get started. > Denton also suggested improving transparency about what happens to patches sent to the mailing list. > Mike Hommey replied to Stolee suggesting an additional problem which is that newcomers don’t really have any idea what they could contribute. > Johannes Schindelin, alias Dscho, replied to Mike that newcomers need experienced developers to validate the ideas they would like to implement in Git, before they can be confident enough to work on them. And they also need to be shown ideas they could implement. Dscho then talked about the GitGitGadget issue list (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) which is open and “intended to accumulate possible project ideas”. Dscho also acknowledged the Chromium Git issue list (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) which is another issue tracker with a similar purpose. > Replying to Stolee, Jeff King, alias Peff, who is responsible for the main Git web site (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , suggested improving the community page (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) to add more information for beginners. He said he was open to accepting patches or pull requests (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) . > Elijah Newren mostly agreed with Stolee’s email, but suggested a less strongly worded tone when talking about goals and existing problems. > Junio Hamano, the Git maintainer, replied to Stolee about the goal of the project and the metrics that we could use with the following: > > We first should make sure that we serve existing users and existing community members well. So well that other people who are not yet our “existing” users and members would want to become part of us, in order to join the fun and share the benefit. If we cannot serve even the existing members well, we shouldn’t be talking about acquiring new members. > He then proposed to measure “community-member happiness” with metrics like “This many percent of total community member population have been active this month”. > The discussion involved a number of other Git developers like Jakub Narębski, Emily Shaffer, Garima Singh, Pierre Tardy, Philip Oakley and Randall S. Becker. > A number of people commented especially on the subject of adding an official Code of Conduct, which will be reported on in a separate article below. > Otherwise it remains to be seen if many actions will be taken to make the project more welcoming to new contributors. > * [PATCH] add a Code of Conduct document (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > Following the Virtual Contributor Summit (see previous edition (/rev_news/2019/09/25/edition-55/#general) ) and the discussions about growing the Git community (see the article above), Jeff King, alias Peff, decided to send a patch to add a code of conduct. > In his patch he says that “it may be a good time to cement our expectations when things are quiet, since it gives everybody some distance rather than focusing on a current contentious issue”. Many people indeed agreed in the previous discussions with that point of view, and the idea of a Code of Conduct in the first place. > Peff says that his patch adapts the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct from https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757… and that “it’s also the same document used by the Git for Windows project”. > One of the changes is that for dealing with community issues, the document spreads the responsibility to the Project Leadership Committee (git(a)sfconservancy.org) instead of the only maintainer, Junio C Hamano. > Peff also mentioned a commit (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Michael Haggerty from June 2013 that he found in a previous discussion and that has nice set of guidelines about how to review code. > A number of the replies were about the Project Leadership Committee as it’s not easy to know who is part of it. This was acknowledged by Peff who sent a follow-up patch (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) to address the issue by listing the Project Leadership Committee members with their email addresses and by saying that they can also be contacted individually. > Even though there was some disagreement, in general most of the people taking part in the discussion agreed with Peff’s patches. Junio later sent a follow-up email (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) with the subject “Raise your hand to Ack jk/code-of-conduct if your Ack fell thru cracks” to get more developers to formally agree with the final patch, which then several did. > The commit adding the Code of Conduct has since been merged into the master branch. > > > ** Releases > ------------------------------------------------------------ > * Git 2.24.0-rc0 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * Git for Windows 2.24.0-rc0 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * GitHub Enterprise 2.18.4 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.17.10 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.16.19 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.15.24 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.18.3 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.17.9 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.16.18 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.15.23 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * GitLab 12.4 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 12.3.5, 12.2.8, and 12.1.14 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 12.3.4 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 12.3.3, 12.2.7, and 12.1.13 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 12.3.2, 12.2.6, and 12.1.12 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 12.3.1 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 12.3 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * Bitbucket Server 6.7 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * Gerrit Code Review 3.0.3 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * GitKraken 6.3.0 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 6.2.1 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > * GitHub Desktop 2.2.1 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) , 2.2.0 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > > > ** Other News > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Various > * A new maintainer for Git-Gui, Pratyush Yadav (@prati0100), came forward (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) . Let’s praise and thank him for volunteering. > * The Gerrit User Summit 2019 is going to be broadcasted on live.gerritforge.com (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) and will include talks about JGit and Gerrit Code Review, including major members of the Git Community, like Jonathan Nieder and Terry Parker. > > Light reading > * Commit graph drawing algorithms (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by pvigier (Pierre Vigier), describes algorithms used by various tools including one in pvigier’s prototype git client called gitamine (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) . > * Git Pathspecs and How to Use Them (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Adam Giese. > * GitHub Actions, the missing notes: CMake, Qt and IFW (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Michele ‘skypjack’ Caini, shows how he uses GitHub Actions (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) in his project. (GitHub Actions, still in public beta, were first covered in Git Rev News #44 (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) ) > * An Unintentionally Comprehensive Introduction to GitHub Actions CI (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Tierney Cyren – with example of an application build on top of Node.js. > * Scheduling Jekyll posts with Netlify and GitHub Actions (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Nicholas C. Zakas on his Human Who Codes blog: using a GitHub Action cron job to schedule Netlify builds for static site generated blog posts (which was previously done using Netlify and AWS Lambda (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) ). > * “git request-pull” and confusing diffstats [LWN.net] (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Jonathan Corbet talks about what to do if the history to be pulled includes merges from outside (e.g. to obtain the dependencies for a fix), and why it happens. > * How Bash completion works (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) and Adding Bash completion to my tool (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) by Chris Patuzzo; Git’s Bash completion can be found in contrib/completion/git-completion.bash (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) . > > Git tools and sites > * Gollum (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) is a simple, Git-powered wiki written in Ruby with a sweet API and local frontend. > * git_examples.sh (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) – 99% of the Git commands you’ll need at work, demonstrated in a single script. > > > ** Credits > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > This edition of Git Rev News was curated by Christian Couder , Jakub Narębski , Markus Jansen and Gabriel Alcaras with help from Emily Shaffer, Luca Milanesio and George Espinoza. > > ============================================================ > You are receiving this email because you signed up to receive the Git Rev News newsletter. > > Our mailing address is: > Software Freedom Conservancy - Git Project > 137 Montague ST STE 380 > New York, NY 11201 > USA > ** unsubscribe from this list (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757…) > ** update subscription preferences (https://github.us10.list-manage.com/profile?u=318f078aaef2e75d94c2bf757&id=…) > Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp > http://www.mailchimp.com/monkey-rewards/?utm_source=freemium_newsletter&utm… > > ----- End forwarded message ----- ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

How a months-old AMD microcode bug destroyed my weekend [UPDATED]
by coderman 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

[Stylized image of spiders creeping across screen covered with code.][Enlarge](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/bugs… / Ryzen 3000's RDRAND function—what should be a high-quality pseudo-random number generator—just returns 0xFFFFFFFFF every time, until its microcode is patched. This weekend, I was excited to deploy my first Ryzen 3000-powered workstation in my home office. Unfortunately, a microcode bug—originally discovered in July but still floating around in large numbers in the wild—wrecked my good time. I eventually got my Ryzen 3700X system working, and it's definitely fast. But unfortunately, it's still bugged, and there's no easy way to fix it. Not long after the product launch, AMD Ryzen 3000 customers started noticing problems with their shiny new CPUs. Windows users couldn't successfully launch Destiny 2 (due to a power-management bug, unrelated to the one sidelining my system), and Linux users in many cases couldn't even get their system to boot. Jason Evangelho [covered](https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/07/12/amd-motherb… the initial discovery and report of the bug at Forbes back in July, and an AMD representative provided him with a statement by email: > AMD has identified the root cause and implemented a BIOS fix for an issue impacting the ability to run certain Linux distributions and Destiny 2 on Ryzen 3000 processors. We have distributed an updated BIOS to our motherboard partners, and we expect consumers to have access to the new BIOS over the coming days. This sounds happy and upbeat, but the reality isn't quite so simple. When there's a bug in the CPU microcode, you're at the mercy of your motherboard vendor to release a new system BIOS that will update it for you—you can't just go to some download link at AMD and apply a fix yourself. AMD responded to the bug in July. As far as I can tell, AMD did so only by direct email response; there's no press release about it—and the company's response made it sound like everything would be fixed in a week or two. I have the unfortunate duty of reporting to you, three months later, that it is not. What’s an RDRAND? The microcode bug in question is a faulty response to the RDRAND instruction. Modern x86_64 CPUs—beginning with Intel's Broadwell and AMD's Zen architectures—are supposed to have high-quality onboard random number generators (RNGs), which use thermal "noise" to very rapidly offer high-entropy pseudorandom numbers to anybody with kernel-level access who wants it. [RDRAND](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RdRand) is, in turn, the instruction that provides these random numbers. All of this is supposed to be fairly failsafe. There's a CPUID function call that checks for the availability of RDRAND, and there's also a "carry bit" in the return value from a call to RDRAND that's supposed to let the calling application know if the CPU's RNG was unable to generate a sufficiently random number. Unfortunately, unpatched Ryzen 3000 says "yes" to the CPUID 01H call, sets the carry bit indicating it has successfully created the most artisanal, organic high-quality random number possible... and gives you a 0xFFFFFFFF for the "random" number, every single time. Obvious RDRAND bug impacts When the RDRAND bug in Ryzen 3000 first surfaced back in June, Linux users widely reported that their entire Ryzen 3000-powered systems wouldn't boot. The failure to boot was due to systemd's use of RDRAND—and it wasn't systemd's first clash with AMD and a buggy random-number generator, unfortunately. A much earlier bug in older CPUs caused some AMD systems to stop generating properly "random" numbers after resuming from suspend. The new bug caused Ryzen 3000 users to never get any proper random numbers at all. Both problems caused lockups in Linux operating systems using systemd, so in May systemd committed a [patch](https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/b62bc66018fa1ada09554e7ee4… that falls back to using alternate RNG sources if systemd receives the characteristic 0xFFFFFFFF back from the RNG. (This kinda sucks, because 0xFFFFFFFF is technically a perfectly valid random number—the implication here is that, after a sufficient length of time, systemd will decide any system has a buggy RNG when it eventually receives the "bad" number, even if it has never seen that number before.) Systemd's patch is ugly, but it certainly works well enough to allow systems to boot. Unfortunately, it doesn't fix the actual problem, which is that the CPU's random number generator is no more "random" than a two-headed penny. On my own system, I spent my entire weekend chasing phantom problems, first suspecting the system's brand-new RX 590 graphics card and (necessarily) updating distro and kernel versions before haring off from there. [My shiny new system kept barfing these nasty BUG: soft lockup<br /> —PU#n stuck for 22s errors, which would rapidly lock the whole system up. This call trace from /var/log/syslog didn't tell me the actual problem, but it was the first clue.](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/calltrace.png… / My shiny new system kept barfing these nasty BUG: soft lockup —PU#n stuck for 22s errors, which would rapidly lock the whole system up. This call trace from /var/log/syslog didn't tell me the actual problem, but it was the first clue. Jim Salter Eventually, after many false trails and much swearing, coffee, and less-respectable beverages, I actually read the call trace from my frequent CPU lockups—and "WireGuard" was right there, in every one of them. As it turns out, WireGuard relies on RDRAND (when available) to generate new session IDs. The session IDs need to be unique, and WireGuard wants them not to be simple consecutive integers, so it pulls a pseudorandom value from RDRAND, compares it against its existing session ID list to make sure there's no collision, then assigns it to the session. Read that last part again carefully—it makes sure there's no collision first. If an existing session has the same ID as the new number, WireGuard asks RDRAND for another "random" number, checks it for uniqueness, and so on. Since RDRAND on my system—and any non-microcode-updated Ryzen 3000 system—always returned 0xFFFFFFFF no matter what, that means infinite loop. Infinite loops in kernel code are bad; they introduce you to the value of the hardware reset button in a hurry. I want to be very clear here, this is not a WireGuard bug! WireGuard correctly checks to see if RDRAND is available, fetches a value if it is, and correctly checks to see if the carry bit is set. Then it indicates that, not only is there a value, it's a properly random one. Nevertheless, it's a problem that will lock up affected systems hard. A modern system needs high-quality pseudo-random numbers for lots of tasks, and the security implications of "random" meaning "always return0xFFFFFFFF" are difficult to predict. One obvious candidate is Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR). Both [Windows](http://blog.ptsecurity.com/2012/12/windows-8-aslr-internals.html) and [Linux](https://lwn.net/Articles/569635/) use RDRAND as at least part of the randomness used to make sure code is never loaded in the same order twice, which mitigates against [stack-smashing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_buffer_overflow) attacks. Fixing the problem—or at least recognizing it As AMD's representatives told reporters back in July, the real fix comes from applying BIOS updates to your motherboard and hoping that the BIOS update also includes the microcode patch for the CPU itself. When I checked my own BIOS using the dmidecode utility, I saw a date of August 12, 2019. But when I looked at Asus' download page for my motherboard, I saw downloads dated in September! Hurray! So I downloaded the BIOS update, saved it to a FAT32 thumb drive, rebooted my system, and went into setup. Unfortunately, after successfully applying the update and rebooting again, I realized my error—yes, Asus showed a later date for the BIOS, but the actual version was the same as the one I already had—3.2.0. My CPU still thought 0xFFFFFFFF was the randomest number ever, always, no matter what. At this point, I began to get paranoid—systemd had already quietly worked around the bug. But with most applications just quietly ignoring the problem, how would I know if it ever had been patched? What if two years later, I was still vulnerable to stack-smashing that I shouldn't have been, due to ASLR that wasn't actually randomizing? I discovered that I could use the linux utility hexdump against the kernel device /dev/hwrng to demonstrate that I had the problem. Unfortunately, the WireGuard project's Jason Donenfeld warned me that /dev/hwrng could, on some systems, derive its randomness from other sources—so while seeing a bunch of FF from it demonstrates that you have the problem, seeing valid pseudorandom data doesn't necessarily demonstrate that you don't. So he generously whipped up a couple of test utilities for the purpose that safely access RDRAND directly. If you're a Linux user, you can download [rdrand-test.zip](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/rdr…, unzip it, and run it directly in the folder that you unzipped it in. ./amd-rdrandbug will tell you in plain English whether you have this specific bug, and ./test-rdrand will output 20 test RDRAND fetches. So you can confirm for yourself that you're not vulnerable to similar bugs either—if running ./test-rdrand produces the same set of values every time, it doesn't really matter whether they "look random," your RNG is broken! If you're a Windows user, you have a little more work ahead of you. First, [download](https://ubuntu.com/download/desktop) an Ubuntu desktop installer, then create an Ubuntu installer thumb drive. Then you can boot into the Ubuntu thumb drive's live environment (click "Try Ubuntu") and download and run the tests from there: you@ubuntu-live:~$ wget https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/rdrand-test.zip you@ubuntu-live:~$ unzip rdrand-test.zip you@ubuntu-live:~$ cd rdrand-test you@ubuntu-live:~$ ./amd-rdrand.bug [In a sufficiently broad dataset, 20 consecutive 0xFFFFFFFF returns might be considered a valid "random" grouping. This is not a sufficiently broad dataset.](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/rdrand-fai… / In a sufficiently broad dataset, 20 consecutive 0xFFFFFFFF returns might be considered a valid "random" grouping. This is not a sufficiently broad dataset. Jim Salter Conclusions A broken random-number generator is a very serious bug, and it's troubling that more hasn't been said or done about this issue by AMD in the last three months. Ryzen 3000 is a great CPU platform in general, and I've been very impressed with the new system... except for spending an entire frustrated weekend troubleshooting it, being uneasy about the impact this will have on my overall system security, and having no idea when I can expect to be able to actually fix it. I reached out to AMD representatives earlier today, and they've responded with questions about my hardware but no solutions yet. I'll update this article with any fixes or recommendations as they arrive. Update: When I reached out to AMD for comment, a representative inquired about the make and model of my motherboard (Asrock Rack X470D4U) and the representative reached out in turn to Asrock. Asrock's team offered a custom BIOS available with the appropriate microcode fix; I respectfully declined to flash a one-off BIOS for me and me only, but the better news is that Asrock told AMD that the BIOS update should be publicly available in mid-November. (It is worth noting that some motherboards do already have BIOS updates available which do include the microcode fixes. Why the Asrock Rack X470D4U wasn't one of them is anybody's guess.) Readers in comments have suggested workarounds and mitigations in the meantime. The first was to pass nordrand as an argument to GRUB when booting. That doesn't fix the issue; it tells the kernel not to use the RDRAND instruction, but that doesn't have any impact on the advertised availability of the instruction in general. It's still exposed to the system, and any code that checks for the availability of RDRAND via CPUID is still going to see it there, and will still be able to use it directly. This is also the case with the similar random.trust_cpu Linux boot option. Neither of these workarounds actually disables RDRAND, so neither actually fixes the issue. Readers also suggested that if the amd64-microcode package were installed, it would fix the issue. This, too, is not the case; the amd64-microcode and intel-microcode packages are both installed by default on all Ubuntu 19.10 systems, including the one I'm experiencing the RDRAND failure on. I contacted AMD and asked representatives to check the status of that package and see if anything needs to (or can) be done about updating it. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/10/how-a-months-old-amd-microcode-bug-…

5 6

Interesting request for Cypherpunks posts, limited to period of 1999-through July 2013.
by jim bell 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

https://cryptoanarchy.wiki/blog/2018/07/05/the-cypherpunks-mailing-list-arc… Tom, I ask that you increase this request for postings on the Cypherpunks list to include the full 1995 period. I have just discovered a very mysterious omission of many postings during various periods in 1995, and simultaneously a similarly mysterious 'coincidence' that virtually all postings naming me "Jim Bell" and "assassination politics" (except for a very few dated November and December 1995) are simply missing, when there should certainly be hundreds present, if not much more.Also, I ask for your assistance to try to determine the pattern of missing postings, to determine if they include text other than "Jim Bell" or "assassination pollitics". (Often, even usually, abbreviated to "AP"). See this, too, which may be the major source for the CP archive you currently handle. http://cypherpunks.venona.com/raw/ At least, this seems to have some of the very same omissions, "jim bell" and "cypherpunks". I have also discovered an additional clue. The name of my essay, "Assassination Politics", was mercifically and quickly shortened to 'AP' rather quickly, for obvious reasons. (Although, as the author, I think I tended to be persistent at spelling the whole thing out, DAMMIT!!!.) However, searching the venona file for 1995 does not seem to include such 'AP' references, although I scanned pages of search results. But in at nearly fifteen(15) instances, I saw references to a bigger string, 'ap story', meaning a story out of the Associated Press. (it might have been a bit less.) And, of course, the string 'ap' appears in words like "cryptogrAPic". and there was one reference to 'killer ap', presumably misspelled from the more usual 'killer app'. And there was a Sept 28 posting from Duncan Frissell, that said in relevant part: "are provided by the Associated Press and United Press International (which may soon merge with AP or go under), The NewYork Times-Washington Post wire services, and several foreign wire ser- vices like Reuters." If someone had simply decided to go through every message and remove that message if the string 'ap' appears, hundreds of messages I now see would be gone. 'cryptographic' would die a quick death. "Self-appointed" would be gone. "Wiretap" would be erased. "Paper" would die. But as John Belushi famously said, "But NOOOOO!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q4JfaHjAng (Note to the younger ones out there: John Belushi made up one of the first groups of comedians on Saturday Night Live. He was also in the movies "Animal House" and "Blues Brothers". He famously died when some woman gave him a "speedball" injection when he was unconscious, with unfortunate results.)And if someone had limited this erasure to messages that have the string '_ap_', where the underscore stands in for a space, then why did nearly 15 ap references to the Associated Press stay in the archive?I think we have an increasingly big mystery here. Or maybe it's really no mystery at all. It appears, therefore, that an "intelligence" removed all 'ap', meaning assassination politics, but spared 'ap', meaning Associated Press, or 'killer ap', etc, So, this wasn't simple, blind work with a search-and-replace function. It was very deliberately done.--------------------- You might also look at, and post, the number of messages per month that you have, for each month in 1995. News of my "assassination politics" essay may have first appeared in March 1995, and discussion of it would have been extremely heavy during and after that month, but if all those postings were mysteriously removed, the number of non-assassination-politics postings that remain might be far less than usual. If you want to see postings of that nature "in the wild", take a look at the 1996 CP archive, which still seems to have thousands of them. (at least, under the name "AP", and some under the name assassination politics.) I love a mystery. Jim Bell If you have any cypherpunks mailing list posts which do not appear in our archvies then please send them to me, no matter how incomplete the collection. All posts between 1999 and July 2013 should be sent. | | | | cryptoanarchy.wiki - Cypherpunks Mailing List Archive Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences! | | | You can contact me via: - Twitter: @_CryptoAnarchy (DMs are open) - Email: tom(a)busby.ninja - Github Issue: cryptoanarchywiki/cryptoanarchywiki.github.io Update: A user going by “juan” on the current cypherpunks mailing list replied to my appeal with a (seemingly) quite complete archive of the period of 2000 to 2016. The raw archive of this data can be found here: cryptoanarchywiki/2000-to-2016-raw-cypherpunks-archive.

2 1

Digital Liberty by Bill Frezza, aka DigitaLiberty
by grarpamp 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/10652/1995_Winter.pdf Digital Liberty by Bill Frezza From: email list server To: cpsr-announce(a)Sunnyside.COM Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 18:38:13 -0800 Subject: DigitaLiberty Friends of Liberty, It is becoming increasingly apparent that the arrival of cyberspace is destined to engender a fundamental discontinuity in the course of human relations. This is a source of great optimism and opportunity for those of us who believe in freedom. Many of you who participate in the lively debates that take place in these forums have seen a number of activist organizations spring up claiming to represent the cause of freedom. And if you are like me you have cheered these groups on only to watch them get bogged down in a quagmire of realpolitics. It is a sad fact that the beast in Washington has evolved into a self- perpetuating engine expert at co-opting the principles of even the most ardent reformers. Slowly but surely all those who engage the system are ultimately absorbed into the mainstream miasma of majoritarianism. For example, what can be more discouraging than watching an organization that started out as a cyber-civil liberties group shift its focus to creating new forms of government entitlements while endorsing intrusive wiretap legislation because they didn't want to jeopardize their influence and prestige amongst the Washington power elite? Some of us believe we can seek ultimate redress at the polls. Many pundits have declared our recent national elections a watershed in politics, a turning point that represents the high water mark of big government. Nonsense. The names have changed, the chairs have been rearranged, but the game remains the same. The so-called "choices" we are presented with are false, hardly better than the mock one-party elections held by failed totalitarian regimes. There must be a better way. I would like to announce the formation of a new group - DigitaLiberty - that has chosen a different path. We intend to bypass the existing political process. We reject consensus building based on the calculus of compromise. Instead we plan to leave the past behind, much as our pioneering forefathers did when they set out to settle new lands. It is our mission to create the basis for a different kind of society. If you would like to join us I invite you to read the information below. Yours in freedom, Bill Frezza Co-founder, DigitaLiberty December 6, 1994 What is DigitaLiberty? DigitaLiberty is an advocacy group dedicated to the principled defense of freedom in cyberspace. We intend to conduct this defense not by engaging in traditional power politics but by setting an active, persuasive example - creating tangible opportunities for others to join us as we construct new global communities. We believe deeply in free markets and free minds and are convinced that we can construct a domain in which the uncoerced choices of individuals supplant the social compact politics of the tyranny of the majority. Is DigitaLiberty a political party or a lobbying group? Neither. DigitaLiberty does not seek to educate or influence politicians in the hope of obtaining legislation favorable to our constituents. We plan to make politicians and legislators irrelevant to the future of network based commerce, education, leisure, and social intercourse. DigitaLiberty does not seek to persuade a majority of the electorate to adopt views which can then be forced upon the minority. We hope to make majoritarianism irrelevant. We invite only like minded individuals to help us build the future according to our uncompromised shared values. What do you hope to accomplish? DigitaLiberty is not hopeful that widespread freedom will come to the physical world, at least not in our lifetime. Too many constituencies depend upon the largess and redistributive power of national governments and therefore oppose freedom and the individual responsibility it entails. But we do believe that liberty can and will prevail in the virtual domains we are building on the net and that national governments will be powerless to stop us. We believe that cyberspace will transcend national borders, national cultures, and national economies. We believe that no one will hold sovereignty over this new realm because coercive force is impotent in cyberspace. In keeping with the self-organizing nature of on-line societies we believe we will chose to invent new institutions to serve our varied economic and social purposes. DigitaLiberty intends to be in the forefront of the discovery and construction of these institutions. But what about the construction of the "Information Superhighway"? The fabric of cyberspace is rapidly being built by all manner of entities espousing the full range of political and economic philosophies. While political activity can certainly accelerate or retard the growth of the net in various places and times it cannot stop it nor can it effectively control how the net will be used. Our focus is not on the institutions that can and will impact the building of the physical "information highway" but on those that will shape life on the net as an ever increasing portion of our productive activities move there. What makes you think cyberspace will be so different? The United States of America was the only country in history ever to be built upon an idea. Unfortunately, this idea was lost as we slowly traded away our liberties in exchange for the false promise of security. DigitaLiberty believes that technology can set us free. The economies of the developed world are now making a major transition from an industrial base to an information base. As they do, the science of cryptology will finally and forever guarantee the unbreachable right of privacy, protecting individuals, groups, and corporations from the prying eyes and grasping hands of sovereigns. We will all be free to conduct our lives, and most importantly our economic relations, as we each see fit. Cyberspace is also infinitely extensible. There will be no brutal competition for lebensraum. Multiple virtual communities can exist side by side and without destructive conflict, each organized according to the principles of their members. We seek only to build one such community, a community based on individual liberty. Others are free to build communities based on other principles, even diametrically opposed principles. But they must do so without our coerced assistance. Effective communities will thrive and grow. Dysfunctional communities will wither and die. And for the first time in human history, rapacious societies will no longer have the power to make war on their neighbors nor can bankrupt communities take their neighbors down with them. What does this have to do with my real life? I can't eat data. I don't live in a computer. Yes, but imagine the ultimate impact of mankind's transition from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy to an information economy. Our founding fathers would have consider anyone insane who predicted that a nation of 250 million could feed itself with fewer than 3% of its citizens involved in agriculture. Similarly, economist and politicians trapped in the policies of the past lament our move from a manufacturing economy to a knowledge worker and service based economy. We see this as a cause to rejoice. The day will come when fewer than 5% of the citizens of a nation of 1 billion will be involved in manufacturing - if we still bother calling geographically defined entities "nations". What will the rest of us be doing? We will be providing each other with an exploding array of services and we will be creating, consuming, and exchanging information. Most of this will occur entirely within or be mediated at least in part by our activities in cyberspace. Many of us will earn a very good living on the net. Our race, our religion, our gender, our age, our physical appearance and limitations will all be irrelevant and undetectable. Hard working individuals from underdeveloped nations who in the past might have been forced to emigrate in search of economic freedom and opportunity can now build productive lives in cyberspace. And much if not all of the wealth we create that we do not transform into visible physical assets will be ours to keep and use, beyond the grasp of sovereigns. What is the purpose of this forum? The DigitaLiberty Forum is a place where like minded individuals can share their views, observations, and strategies related to the development of virtual communities based on freedom. It is a place where people can exchange information and advice about how they have developed extra-territorial business and social relationships - away from the influence and outside the jurisdiction of governments. It is a forum for the posting of essays, questions, and ideas on the topic of liberty. It is a place where we can meet and debate the forms that our new institutions might take and discuss the practical problems and responsibilities that freedom entail. In time as our technology matures some of us will move on to more ambitious projects, launch other programs, and begin our virtual migration from the swamp of coerced collectivism. Best of all, there will be no need to physically move to 'Galt's Gulch' or escape to a floating 'Freedonia'. We can all participate in this exodus without hastily quitting our jobs or disrupting our lives. And as a larger and larger portion of our economic and social activities move onto the net we will create a new society, open to all with the will to enter. This new world will be interleaved with the physical world in which we now live and yet will be separate. And free. Join us as we begin the journey. Who can join DigitaLiberty? The DigitaLiberty Forum is open to anyone that can honestly answer yes to the following two questions: 1. I renounce the use of coercive force as a tool of social or economic policy. 2. I do not derive the majority of my income from funds taken from taxpayers. How do I join DigitaLiberty? If you qualify, send a message to DigitaLiberty-request(a)phantom.com with the words "SUBSCRIBE" in the subject line and the message body as follows SUBSCRIBE DigitaLiberty And welcome to the future.

2 6

Do you serfs feel happier?
by Steven Schear 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

https://twitter.com/FGMR/status/1190338706080747520?s=20

2 2

On another note...
by \0xDynamite 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

Here's a cool site, which will allow you to experiment with different ciphers and see them encode and decrypt with an plug-and-play javascrim interface: http://cryptii.com

1 0

The ongoing criminlization of attraction to fertility - [PEACE]
by Zenaan Harkness 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

"The official stance is that women shouldn’t be chaste, but they shouldn’t have sex with or marry older men (or any men at all, for that matter) because of some convoluted “power dynamic” that is somehow not an issue with men of the same age despite men being biologically stronger and smarter." Ladies, you are encouraged to do the politically correct thang, and ride that cock carousel hard, baby! Get all used up, get a career, buy all tha things and be a happy, cock hungry consumer! You might crash and burn in your mid 30s, but HEY! Don't you listen to that shit - you gotta have fun, life is all and only about the maximum personal pleasure you can personally achieve - more money, more sex, is more fun, is more satisfaction, is the primary pursuit you are encouraged to pursue. Do NOT consider family, fertility, long term relationships, children or any other of those old fashioned ideas! Obese Old Hag Wants to Prevent People Younger Than 18 from Marrying http://dstormer6em3i4km.onion/obese-old-hag-wants-to-prevent-people-younger…

1 0

[WAR] a turning point? Brzezinski, Mastermind of US Hegemony, Says Abandon Imperial Pipe Dreams
by Zenaan Harkness 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

This looks highly significant to me - public statement of defeat of US "world hegemony" regime, by Brzezinsky, very arguably "the US regime's architect". ** Even Brzezinski, Mastermind of US Hegemony, Says Abandon Imperial Pipe Dreams (http://russia-insider.us9.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa2faf7034c3c3c413c…) ------------------------------------------------------------ by Mike Whitney on Wed, Aug 31, 2016 The original title of this article was: The Broken Chessboard: Brezinski Gives up on EmpireThe main architect of Washington’s plan to rule the world has abandoned the scheme and called for the forging of ties with Russia and China. Read more » (http://russia-insider.us9.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa2faf7034c3c3c413c…)

13 95

[zen@freedbms.net: Re: [WAR] ...]
by Zenaan Harkness 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

----- Forwarded message from Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> ----- From: Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> To: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 22:35:47 +1000 Subject: Re: [WAR] ... List-Id: The Cypherpunks Mailing List <cypherpunks.lists.cpunks.org> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:47:08AM -0600, Mirimir wrote: > How about we implement a working AP system? As I said in a previous thread, I now believe that to be fundamentally flawed - that it will not achieve anything resembling justice, even in the long term. Fundamentally, the oligarchs and humans generally need a much higher level of education and discourse. "When all you have is a hammer ..." In the current climate of a majority of extremely dummed down "citizens", who are and feel disempowered, who cling to any iota of power that presents such as any public lynching, where intelligent "discourse" is simply not possible, restraint never exercised and certainly not possible to exercise collectively, AP would be at best a hammer to completely destroy society. I support anarchism, not chaos. ----- End forwarded message -----

6 12

Re: Harper's Magazine Fact-Checking For the article you say you intend to shortly publish about "assassination markets".
by jim bell 02 Nov '19

02 Nov '19

New New News. Over the last couple of days, I have inadvertenly uncovered an extremely odd and mysterious fact. The archives for the Cypherpunks list, from about April 1995 through October 1995, make NO (zero; nada) reference to "Jim Bell" or "assassination politics". Since you won't automatically realize what this all means, I must give you some background events, I believe I began writing my Assassination Politics essay in about February 1995, having thought of this idea in January 1995, I initially posted Part 1 of that essay on the "Digitaliberty" mail list, run by Bill Frezza. He had started that email list to use technology to promote libertarian, obviously a good goal, but unfortunately he (?) found my AP idea 'too radical'. But, someone who was also aware of the Cypherpunks email list (I don't recall who; I wasn't aware of the existence of the CP list at that time) saw it on Digitaliberty, and cross-posted it onto Cypherpunks. At that point, I was invited to join the CP list, which I did. (remember, thats 24 years ago!!!) There was, as I recall, a HUGE amount of discussion on the subject of AP, since it was clearly a major subject relevant to Cypherpunks. The CP list has an archive, a database of what , ideally, should have been "all" postings that have appeared on CP. Until a couple of days ago, I suppose that the people on CP thought that the archive contents were probably reasonably complete. I had no reason to doubt that concept, although I had never bothered to access the archive. I had no immediate reason to do so., That changed. Talking to you two, Will Stephenson and Brian Merchant, I raised the issue of my long-standing allegation that the Federal Government had its agent, Daniel J. Saban, purchase the home next door to me, 7302 Corregidor, and hired away its previous owner, John Hauer, to the Pacific Northwest National Laboraties in West Richland, Washington. In about 2000 I had first found out that that the Clark County Assessor's office dated the sale on March 1, 1995, but I pointed out to you a few days ago,that this was only roughly accurate: It might have been a date simply selected for tax or other purposes. I initially did this investigation in about May 2000, because I strongly suspected that the Feds had decided to 'declare war' on me due to my posting of the AP essay around March or April of 1995. At that time, of course, I was entirely unaware of the pre-April-2000 existence of the faked "appeal case" 99-30210. This is a large part of the reason I wrote my lawsuit in 2002-2003, and had this information, having been locked up since November 2000. If I had known of the illegal pre-April 2000 existence of appeal case 99-30210, I would have virtually been able to "blow the doors off" of my cell: My subsequent "trial" would have been a farce, because I would have been easily able to show that the government guys had been FAKING that appeal case, and in doing do committing literally dozens of felonies. I did this because since the article you are intending to publish is (you say) on the subject of "assassination markets", term used generally, I think it is highly relevant if the Federal Government is using extraordinarily ILLEGAL tactics to go after people for using their First Amendment rights of free speech to discuss such 'hot' subjects on what was just about the beginning of what I call the "internet era". (Yes, I realize that the "Internet" existed at least as early as about 1975; I used it in 1978 at MIT myself.) I'm talking about the time period where a large proportion of the public started to know about "The Internet" and many of them actually had access to it. Unfortunately, I don't think the archives for the Digitaliberty list are still available, or perhaps even ever were, so the actual first date of the public appearance of the AP essay, Part 1, probably can't be known precisely. But I do recall that rather quickly, just a few days later, I was told that AP Part 1 had been copied to the CP list, and I was invited there. I showed up at the CP list very quickly, no more than a few days as I recall. So, the first day of appearance of the AP essay on the CP list would rather closely pinpoint the first date of its publication on the Digitaliberty list. You, as journalists, should consider this very important: I am alleging that the Federal government decided to, virtually instantly, spy on me for no other reason that I had written a short document, an essay, in which I _didn't_ say I intended to do ANYTHING illegal, I merely discussed a theoretical idea. (Hardly worse than others did on similar subjects in the very early period of the Cypherpunks, perhaps 1990, 1991, or 1992., which I wasn't aware of at the time.) One of the best ways you and Brian Merchant could display extreme bias is if, after being exposed to my numerous well-documented allegations (including described in a 195-page lawsuit, written 2003), you express absolutely no interest in these events and very serious allegations. The reason that I told you about the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case 99-30210, was to reveal how many Federal employees committed dozens of felonies against me by faking an appeal case, nearly two years after they had asked their stooge, Ryan Thomas Lund, assault me on November 25, 1997, in order to force me to accept a phony plea deal. See my lawsuit, https://cryptome.org/jdb-v-usa-106.htm and its October 2004 Amendment. (The latter discusses very extensively the forged fake appeal, 99-30210, which was mostly missing from the July 2003 lawsuit: I had only found out about the fake-nature of the 99-30210 appeal in about June 20, 2003. http://cryptome.org/jdb/jdb-v-usa-oct2004.pdf ) Prior to that date, June 20, 2003, I had been under the impression that this appeal case had been initiated by MY letter to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals One of my allegations, in my lawsuit Amendmentin about Claim 505 through at least Claim 515, is that shortly after the Ninth Circuit's receipt of my letter to them demanding an appeal, in about March or April 2000, government agents of that court engaged in an extensive effort to RE-forge the contents of that appeal case, 99-30210, which had been phonied-up since at least June 1999. My unexpected letter to them had put them into an extraordinary embarrassing situation: While I was actually 10 months (!!!) LATE to ask for an appeal, it turns out that despite my ignorance of case 99-30210, my "appeal" actually had ALREADY been initiated in June 1999 and had continued, to date, April 2000,. The personnel of that court, the Ninth Circuit, knew that I DIDN'T know about the appeal, 99-30210, because they had been keeping its existence secret from me since its inception on June 1999. Since I had unexpectedly demanded "an appeal", they couldn't "deny" me the appeal that they had (seemingly) ALREADY 'granted' me, at least the process! This may very well have constituted the weirdest example of court corruption that had ever occurred in the modern era!! At that time, the Ninth Circuit had the terrible problem that _I_ was under the impression that I could demand an appeal, 10 months 'too late', yet they had to 'play along' and find a corrupt attorney who would agree to conceal from me the pre-April 2000 existence of case 99-30210. Which he, Solovy, did. While I didn't know much law in April 2000, (I heavily started learning Federal law in Decemer 2000) if any of a dozen or so of the usual mailings that would ordinarily be mailed to me during the pendency of that appeal case had actually been delivered to me (they weren't) I would have become instantly aware of enough information to complely expose the ongoing fraud. Each of these letters' existence were recorded on a continuing document called a "docket" associated with that specific case, a document that I actually first saw about June 20, 2003. Did the Ninth Circuit Court not make the mailings? That would have been "mail fraud", many felonies. Or were the mailings made, and they were waylaid at the mail office at the prison (FCI Phoenix) where I happened to be from about September 7, 1999 through April 2000. That's also mail fraud. Tampering with the docket of the Ninth Circuit is probably one of the most serious felonies they would commit. I had trained myself to be a 'jailhouse lawyer' during the period of December 2000 through June 2003, and had started my lawsuit in mid-2002. At one point, I began to consider it odd that my appeal case had started with the numbers "99", as in "99-30210. This was odd, because in 2000 I was under the impression that I had started that appeal with my April (?) letter to the Ninth Circuit Court. But I eventually realized that if that that appeal had begun April 2000, the first two digits of that appeal case would have been assigned to be "00", rather than "99". Something, I realized, was quite wrong. I knew I had to see a copy of that docket. So, I wrote a letter to the Ninth Circuit in early June 2003, asking for a copy of that docket. Once I eventually received that docket, in June 20, 2003 it was obvious what was wrong: Anyone (at least, any lawyer) looking at that docket would have been under the impression that I had been actively aware of, and indeed representing myself ("pro se", as lawyers say). Yet, in June 2003 I knew I had not been doing so, and I further knew that none of the 'docket items' listed on that docket had ever been delivered to me during the peiod of 1999 through April 2000. So it was at this point I understood most of the court-initiated (?) fraud that had been going on since at least 1999, and really since mid 1997, and later the assult by Ryan Thomas Lund. What I believe happened, subsequent to my letter written to the Ninth Circuit Court in March/April 2000, is that these court people had been maintaining a forged docket, but realize that they were going to have to actually give me the appeal that they couldn't avoid. I believe that they greatly modified the then-existing docket for 99-30210 after receiving my letter, so by the time a lawyer named Jonathan Solovy had been assigned to my case, the docket probably looked entirely different than it had pre-March-2000. --- However, up until 2 days ago, I was essentially certain that the Cypherpunks email list archives for that period were available, at least in principle. At least, people on CP referred to it, the archive. I believe that the process of converting of the recorded materials to a publicly-accessible archive began just a few years ago, although there may have been partial efforts previous to that. Well, two days ago I accessed that site, and looking at the 1995 archive, I was quite astonished to discover that contrary to what I thought should have been present, appearances of my name ("jim bell") and ("assassination politics") occurred only as early as November 1995, and certainly not as early as March or April 1995. Yet, the first posting recorded in the 1995 archive was dated January 1, 1995, and they continued solidly, although there were two mysterious omissions duirng the March-July 1995 time frame. So, there were huge numbers of postings, yet none mentioning me, and none mentioning "assassination politics" until about 6 months later. (frequently, even usually shorted to "AP" during this period.) Tampering with computer records is, no doubt, a serious felony. But given the large number of felonies that Federal government employees had already committed associated with my case, engaging in fakery with the Cypherpunks archive must have seemed minor. At this early date, I am still fairly confident that there will be records to show that the government almost instantly began to spy on me in March or April 1995. What is very interpreting now is this new discovery, which strongly suggests that there has been forgery of the Cypherpunks list archive, potentially implicating additional conspirators. I am sure you are glad to receive this fascinating information, which I'm sure will be so useful to your efforts. Jim Bell On Thursday, October 31, 2019, 11:07:48 AM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: I wanted to add some more. Below, I didn't completelyy answer something you asked: ">--Is it correct to say you were arrested in the 1990s for obstructing IRS agents and using false Social Security numbers? And spent just under a year in prison? Also that, shortly after your release, you were found to have violated your parole after admitting to looking up information at a public library about the FBI agents assigned to tail you? And subsequently spent much of the Aughts in prison? " Check out the Wikipedia on 'Jim Bell'. But even if I were to say the information on that article is 'accurate', it is nevertheless BIASED, The reason in large part the policy of Wikipedia to rely on what it calls "secondary sources": Newspapers, magazines, news broadcasts, articles on the Internet. Are you aware that MY story was never told, almost entirely because the news media didn't ask me? And that, mostly because I was locked up in jail or prison at the government's behest? People like you never sought the truth. The Wikipedia article was somewhat 'fixed' in late 2009 and early 2010, at least the wild inaccuracies were changed. But one thing that could never be changed is the egregious omission of MY side of the story. The side of the story which was never told, at least the news media didn't bother to find out. I've raised a lot of issues to Brian Merchant and you. Neither of you seem very inclined to ask me about astonishing things I have claimed. Is this because you automatically disbelieve them? Or you believe them and don't care? I am not optimistic. Yes, you want to publish a specific article. Fine, but don't pretend you aren't ignoring a hugely more important story, one that I am quite willing to tell you...and provide written documentation to boot. Do you reject, accept, or merely ignore my claim that the AP system will eliminate all militaries, all war, and all nuclear weapons? I think that is a very important question!!! I don't really know what you actually intend to publish, but I think you need to accept the full story. If I am correct, this is a very important factor that ought to be considered. And I invite you, again, even if this detail isn't appropriate for this particular article, to publish a second article that tells this important truth. As for the "false social security numbers": During the 1980's, multiple bank tellers told me that they merely needed an identifiable "number" to identify a bank account. It didn't have to be a Social Security Number, they said. From the point of view of the bank, they merely needed a unique identifier for me, I believed them. I had heard, also, that private businesses were not allowed to demand you use the SSN, (This may very well have been the law during that period). I opened a few accounts with such non-SSN numbers. And didn't change them. I was NOT defrauding ANYONE, then or later. But I think as years went by, and perhaps without actually changing the law, the government changed POLICY. Actualy, on-the-ground policy, not the law. So, my account numbers which were "legal" in the early 1980's stayed what they were, and gradually the 'policy' changed to seemingly make my practice illegal. Do you know otherwise? Since you are interested NOW, and you just asked the question NOW, you should be prepared to find out whether it was legal for a person in the 1980's to use as his bank account number something other than his SSN. Don't merely ASSUME that the law actually forbade it! Or don't assume that banks consistently insisted on getting an actual SSN, during that era. I never heard during the 1980's and 1990's that the law changed to make using a non-SSN for a bank account illegal. I never claimed to be an expert, but I was not knowingly doing anything illegal. What happened, however, is that my bank accounts stayed the same. Also, keep in mind that the way these laws tend to be written, they may prohibit false numbers 'for fraudulent purposes', not merely for purposes of privacy. The government knew that I was not going to get any sort of "defense" in 1997: That's why they got Ryan Thomas Lund to assault me on their orders November 25, 1997. "My" attorney was VERY "cooperative"... with THEM!!! And remember, I assert that the Federal Government effectively declared "war" on me. I have narrowed down one date: The sales date on Clark County Washington Property Tax records for the address 7302 Corregidor showed a sale date of March 1, 1995, when it was sold to Daniel J Saban and his wife, Dori J. . I don't know how "real" that date was: Maybe such records get assigned some arbitrary date, agreeable to both the buyer and seller, since the exact date doesn't really matter. But at some point, the Federal government learned of Part 1 of my AP essay, and decided it was going to war with me. It just didn't bother to tell me so. They never admitted this, but the records will confirm its intentions. In 1997, when I was arrested, the government needed SOMETHING to charge me. Their employee, Steven Walsh, acting under the phony name "Steve Wilson", apparently got run out of the Multnomah County Common Law Court. At least, he never came back after many months of secret involvement. Is THAT the "interfering with IRS agents" that you are referring to? Walsh eventually admitted, at my trial in April 2001, that he had 'no legitimate law enforcement objective' to infiltrate the MCCLC organization. The Federal government does not LIKE, of course, people who dislike it, But that doesn't make peoples dislike into a crime worthy of investigation. They eventually 'charged' me with...writing my AP essay! Remembeer the First Amendment? Remember freedom of speech? It's why YOU and your magazine can stay in buisness !!! And I was assaulted by Ryan Thomas Lund on November 25, 1997, in order to force me to accept a plea agreement., It's in my 2003 lawsuit. https://cryptome.org/jdb-v-usa-106.htm See claims #104-#108. Lund was a government informant, actually a low-life 'snitch', who did this job for them because they needed it to be done. Did you know about that? Probably not, because Brian Merchant didn't write about it, I suspect. Because he didn't ask me, probably. There was a lot to talk about !! Please DON'T merely repeat the tiny subset of 'facts' that the Government wants you to state and therefore, amplify. I have been trying to get MY side of the story told, which has to be far more fascinating. Are you aware that a few weeks after Lund assaulted me, he was in the SHU (special housing unit; 'solitary'; 'the hole') and he claimed he had a 'slip and fall accident', unwitnessed by anyone. His lawsuit was filed, as I recall from memory, December 31, 1998. It was settled, for an undisclosed cash amount. As yourself: How does the Government pay off a 'snitch' an arbitrary amount of money, without clear justification, without raising eyebrows? That's what I allege was done. See claim #108 in my lawsuit. By claiming a 'slip and fall accident', which my claim dates at about December 15, 1997, he and the Government would "settle" on any arbitrary settlement they agreed to,. Are YOU the 'fact checker' ? Okay, CHECK SOME FACTS!! There's plenty more where this came from! You have my lawsuit. Have somebody READ IT. Ideally, by a lawyer, but if not, by a person who is generally aware of the law, Such people exist! You also said " you were found to have violated your parole after admitting to looking up information at a public library about the FBI agents assigned to tail you?" I am uncertain of the incident you are referring to, Could you give me an approximate date? I vaguely recall I was released about April 13, 1998, then re-arrested the day after Father's Day Sunday 1998. (yes, there is a REASON I remember it as "the day after Father's Day Sunday 1998", rather than the exact date. Ask me why!!!) There actually WAS a very fascinating story about a series of MANY 'tails' that government employees did on my on Father's Day Sunday, 1998, but I didn't and still don't know the details about who those people actually were, I took down many car license plate numbers on that day, in a car trip from my home in Vancouver Washington to an address , and I eventually checked those plates in perhaps May 2000 after I was released. I found that with perhaps one exception, all were vehicles whose last official registration was in Clackamas County Oregon. But, I suspected them and I worked to confirm the possibility that these vehicles had somehow been obtained from their last non-government owners, and not re-registered in the Oregon database. They were using these vehicles to tail me. More soon. Please ACKNOWLEDGE what I have sent to you. There is an amazing story here, actually many of them, Jim Bell Jim Bell On Wednesday, October 30, 2019, 04:02:52 PM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: For some reason, this didn't come through: https://gis.clark.wa.gov/gishome/Property/?pid=findSN&account=37911446 Note this information: | | Sales History | | | Sale Date | 09/05/2003 | | Document Type | D-QCD | | Excise Number | 527393 | | Document Number | | | Sale Amount | $0.00 | | | | | Sale Date | 03/01/1995 | | Document Type | DEED | | Excise Number | 379498 | | Document Number | | | Sale Amount | $180,000.00 | | | | | | The sale on 9/5/2003 was possibly associated with their divorce. Notice the sale on 03/01/1995, March 1, 1995. Unfortunately, I think there are no records for Bill Frezza's 'Digitaliberty' website, at least none that I am aware of. However, there should be archives for the Cypherpunks list, and the first day that Part 1 of my AP essay appeared should be available.https://cryptoanarchy.wiki/ However, there may be some holes in the archive, including March 1995 and some later months,. On Wednesday, October 30, 2019, 10:37:54 AM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: This is the Clark County Washington Property account for the house at 7302 Corregidor, the house next door to mine at 7214 Corregidor. This was the house that was acquired from the previous owner about March 1995, and used to spy on me. The person ostensibly acquiring that house is Daniel J. Saban, and Dori Saban, who at the time were married. They ran, and still run, a company called "Sundown Development Construction". I extensively named them in my July 2003 lawsuit, https://cryptome.org/jdb-v-usa-106.htm I had acquired these records in 2000 from the Clark County Assessor's office, aware that the government had induced Saban to purchase Hauer's property,. I will try to familiarize myself with the Clark County Assessor's website and confirm the specific month and day that the Sabans purchased the property from John Hauer. Note that Hauer, a schoolteacher, would have been under contract by the local school system for the year 1994-1995. It would have been extremely unusual for Hauer to suddenly abandon that school contract in March 1995, a few months prior to June 1995 when it ordinarily would have expired, (I learned this, because my late mother, who died in 2007, had been a school teacher and school counselor at a junior high school from 1967 through about 1989. She explained that it is extremely unusual.) See what I wrote in that lawsuit as Claim 47: Claim #47 At an unknown time but before 1997, a Richland, Washington research laboratory called "Pacific Northwest National Laboratories," acting for the benefit of the conspiracy, made a job offer to the previous resident of 7302 Corregidor, John Hauer. They made contact with Mr. Hauer by mail and telephone, constituting mail fraud and wire fraud. This offer was made for the purpose of luring Mr. Hauer away from the Vancouver, Washington area and so that his house would be put onto the market so it could be purchased by confederates of the conspiracy, Daniel J. and Dori J. Saban. This occurred. Thus, it was purchased by the Sabans for the wrongful purpose of engaging in illegal surveillance and harassment of James Bell and his parents, and the Sabans acted in furtherance of this intent. The Sabans and other unknown-named confederates engaged in these wrongful activities, intending to assist their government-employee defendant-co-conspirators in violating the constitutional rights of the Bells. [end of quote] This information is from LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-hauer-466413b3/ "Retired from National Laboratory". John Hauer may, or may not, have eventually discovered why he was lured away from his house, You can, and eventually you should, learn from him what circumstances led him to accept a job at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in West Richland Washington, Did he apply for a job? Was he approached? This is all important, because the Federal Government's 'story' was that _I_ had somehow initiated the problem that led them to prosecute me, In reality, the Feds had decided to go to war against me at least as early as March 1995. Also, you need to become familiar with the Multnomah County Common Law Court (MCCLC), and the Feds' employee Steven Walsh, acting under the name 'Steve Wilson'. He infiltrated himself into the MCCLC, probably before October 1996. He insinuated himself into a position of control over the MCCLC, as I vaguely recall one of three main leaders, This was apparently all planned. Walsh caused the MCCLC to take actions that the Federal Government's prosecutors would later denounce. This kind of undercover activity is well-known, in general, What I understand is usually done is that one individual or group of individual investigators CAUSES a criminal action to occur, and they quickly abandon the scene. Then, a different group of investigators are sent, and they begin to prosecute those left, Steven Walsh had little choice but to admit his role in my April 2001 'trial', but he did so solely because by then I was well aware of his role, Yet, I could not actually fully expose him because the person acting as "my" lawyer was acting fully against me, and failing to raise the issues that were necessary, Had i been aware of the fully corrupt nature of the Ninth Circuit Appeal case 99-30210 in, say, April 2001, I would have been easily able to totally destroy a few dozen Feds for the crimes they had already committed, But a different corrupt attorney, named Jonathan Solovy (I think, not to be confused by his father, also an attorney, I believe also named Jonathan Solovy, who was entirely uninvolved) did not reveal to me the pre-April 2000 existence of case 99-30210, This matter is extensively addressed in the October 2004 Amendment http://cryptome.org/jdb/jdb-v-usa-oct2004.pdf to my July 2003 lawsuit James Dalton Bell et al v. USA et al . | | | | James Dalton Bell et al v. USA et al | | | | | | | James Dalton Bell et al v. USA et al | | | See claims 504-516. Jim Bell On Tuesday, October 29, 2019, 02:41:16 PM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: You should read: https://cpunks.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/jim-bell-to-andy-greenberg-your-err… The following is the amendment to my lawsuit that describes the Federal Government's fraudulent treatment of Appeal case 99-30120. See Claims 504 onwards to at least Claim 516. http://cryptome.org/jdb/jdb-v-usa-oct2004.pdf Jim Bell On Tuesday, October 29, 2019, 11:29:12 AM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: My comments inserted inline: On Tuesday, October 29, 2019, 09:04:23 AM PDT, Will Stephenson <will(a)harpers.org> wrote: >Sounds good, here's a list: >--We write that you wrote the essay "Assassination Politics" in 1995; is that accurate? I thought of the idea in about January 1995. I was considering a West Virginia Senator named Robert Byrd,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd who was famous for bringing 'pork barrel' spending back to his state, probably too much I thought. I thought 'the people of 49 states would be better off if Byrd woke up one day dead'. But each person might only benefit a few dollars, which was why Byrd was still alive. This sounded to me like an engineering problem: Could donations from everyone be pooled to be paid to somebody who accomplished the desired task? But shortly, I realized that this concept could also solve many other social problems, mostly concerning government and laws. And then I realized that it would solve a problem that I had long believed existed into the stability of anarchic and libertarian societies. (The rest of the essay was written from July 1995 through about April 1996), I thought about it many weeks, to convince myself that publishing the idea "early" wouldn't let the government (whatever government) prevent its development. Eventually, I was satisfied that publishing Part 1 would not let the government stop it, I published it on a mail list called "Digitaliberty" run by Bill Frezza. Eventually, someone from the Cypherpunks list noticed it and copied it over. (Somebody on Digitaliberty soon decided that my idea, which I called "Assassination Politics" was TOO radical) I was entirely unaware of the Cypherpunks list at that time, Although, I believe I was vaguely aware of the concept of 'hiring people on computer networks to kill others'. Not the actual practice, of course, just the debated idea. Until about April 1995, I had not accessed the Internet, at least not since about 1980, when I was a student at MIT. (BS Chemistry 1980.) The computer network I mainly used from the 1980's until early in 1995 was called FIDOnet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FidoNet I probably read of the idea in the few years leading up to 1995, commented by someone who indirectly heard of the disccusion elsewhere, I was also unaware of Tim May's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_May prior discussions of 'assassination markets" prior to 1995,However, I eventually learned that he (and others on Cypherpunks) were discussing the concept of"Anonymous person A" anonymously hires "anonymous person B" to kill named-person C" in the early 1990's. Simple idea with profound implications. I actually worked at Intel during some of the same times as Tim May, but he worked at Santa Clara California, and I worked at Intel in Aloha 3 in Oregon, (I began in July 1980, quit in January 1982 to form my own company, SemiDisk Systems.) I am certain that I never met Time May, he was famous. Yet, I was quite well aware of Tim May at the time: He had become quite famous for his hypothesis that alpha particles (nuclei of helium atoms) impacted the memory cells of dynamic RAMs (DRAMS). http://www.s100computers.com/Hardware%20Folder/SemiDisk/History/History.htm In 1995, and unaware of Tim May's and others' discussions, I added the features: "Thousands of anonymous persons A1, A2, A3..." pool their money, anonymously, to hire "anyone on earth" to kill named person "C", In doing that, I added both "crowdsourcing" and "crowdfunding" to the idea, long before those terms were in use. In making my invention, I eventually realized that I had also solved a problem with the stability of anarchic societies. This was the problem postulated by David Friedman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_D._Friedman in his book The Machinery of Freedom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Machinery_of_Freedom written in 1973, republished in 1989, and republished in 2014. But I was not aware of David Friedman or his "Hard Problem" until years after 1995, when I invented AP, I had learned in 1975 that I had always been a libertarian. (The Libertarian Party had been formed in 1972. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States) I saw some of their literature that my late uncle had requested. >--Is it fair to describe you, at the time, as an anarchist and an engineer? Who had studied at MIT and worked at Intel? >From 1975 until early 1995, I classified myself as a 'minarchist libertarian', as opposed to being an 'anarchist libertarian'. The reason is this: I was not specifically aware of David Friedman, or his problem he labelled "The Hard Problem" , described in his book "The Machinery of Freedom". While not aware of that name, "The Hard Problem" I had independently realized that there would be a problem with an independent region, run by libertarian principles, yet unable to tax their own citizens, to defend themselves. Why couldn't such a region be invaded by other nations which operated under 'traditional' principles of taxation, militaries, and war, I was unable to figure out a solution to this problem, so I considered 'anarchism' impractical and felt that without a solution to this problem, it probably wouldn't work. Naturally, I had no idea I would eventually solve Friedman's "The Hard Problem" !!! I was not aware of the existence of David Friedman until years after I joined the Cypherpunks list in about April 1995. Friedman had actually been a participant in the Cypherpunks list, My invention of the AP idea 'fixed' anarchism, making it stable: Long before I had published Part 1 of the AP essay, I realized that people in an anarchistic society could use AP to attack, and kill, the leadership of other nations, It could, and evitably would, be used to attack anyone who possessed nuclear weapons, so that such possessors would have no choice but to publicly dismantle those weapons, >--You write about being inspired by Scientific American's concept of "encrypted signatures." Was the article (or series of articles) in question concerned with "digital cash"? (Is that your coinage?) And was "digital cash" / crypto-currency something that didn't yet exist in any meaningful way, in 1995? No, that article (you should read it!) was by David Chaum, the inventor of the concept of "Digital Cash". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chaum Chaum actually experimentally implemented "Digicash", although it wasn't commercially successful, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigiCash >--We describe you as a member of the "Cypherpunks," which we say was a movement of internet privacy and cryptography advocates that emerged in Silicon Valley in the early 1990s. Does that sound accurate? Yes, at least subsequent to me being invited to join the Cypherpunks mail list in about April 1995. The only way they learned about me was my publication of the Part 1 of AP on the Digitaliberty list, run by Bill Frezza. And the way I learned about Cypherpunks was their discovery of my AP Part 1 essay, and their contacting me. >(And is it correct to say that John Gilmore and Timothy C. May were as well?) I wonder if the word "member" works in this context? Look at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypherpunk This list indicates that both Gilmore and May were founders of the list, I don't think "member" was really a concept applicable to Cypherpunks. People who subscribed to the Cypherpunks list, and make postings, were as close to "members" as the concept implies. >--Is it correct to say you were arrested in the 1990s for obstructing IRS agents and using false Social Security numbers? And spent just under a year in prison? Also that, shortly after your release, you were found to have violated your parole after admitting to looking up information at a public library about the FBI agents assigned to tail you? And subsequently spent much of the Aughts in prison? Saying it this way is VERY misleading, Government investigators were ILLEGALLY infiltrating an organization called the Multnomah County Common Law Court in 1996-97, putting one of their number (Steven Walsh, acting under the phony name "Steven Wilson") in a position of power, and causing that organization to take actions that the government later denounced, Do you want to hear more? You need to hear the FULL story! https://cryptome.org/jdb/jdb-v-usa-ric.htm This is the text of the long lawsuit I eventually wrote and published 2002-2003. Look for the Claims, which while not especially 'well-formed' from a lawyer's perspective, amounted to a 'diary' of the events that I was aware of. Basically, MY side of the story, Which the biased news media never cared about, or asked Not just the government's very limited version of it. First off, in about March 1995, very shortly after I posted Part 1 of what eventually became my 10-part AP essay, https://cryptome.org/ap.htm , the house next door (7302 Corregidor, Vancouver Washington 98664; I am at 7214 Corregidor Vancouver) was purchased from its owner, a schoolteacher. He was given a job at the Pacific Northwest National Labs in Richland Washington. The purpose of this ruse was to set up a spying operation next to my house, and it was necessary to accomplish this to attack me. (term "attack" used broadly). This tactic of acquiring a location nearby to do spying is common. Consider what the FBI did to Robert Hanssen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen While I don't see a reference, I believe that part of the surveillance the FBI did to their employee, Hanssen, was to acquire a house nearby to do spying, Now, I'm not claiming that such a tactic is automatically illegitimate. But they used that against me, not because they actually thought I was committing a crime, but instead because they knew they intended to engage in a WAR with me, Not a legal, legitimate war, but instead a secret, underhanded, illegitimate war of their own devising, Do a google search of: 'James dalton bell district courts of tacoma and seattle' Naturally, none of these facts ever came out in a case the Government brought against me, Why? Simple: First, I was assaulted in November 1997 by Ryan Thomas Lund, a government stooge, in order to force me to accept a plea deal that was phony, Secondly, every attorney that ever represented me in a criminal case worked to sabotage my positions, and to help the Government, Do a google search for '99-30210' bell to find out the truth. The government actually forged, faked, concocted a phony 'appeal case' that was ostensibly being run by me during the period June 1999 and May 2000, but was simply faked, If you don't understand this, you need to ask me DOZENS, if not HUNDREDS, of questions, Google ' "99-30210" bell' Do you want to know how Federal government agents committed dozens of felonies? https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.thebird/WbikMZSqOq4/0x3WvQSYK1cJ And no, we aren't done discussing this matter, If you say something like, 'we are done', that will be a signal that you have no intention of covering this issue as it should be covered, Go ahead and write and run your article about "assassination markets". But in fact you have a much larger story, which I am happy to tell you, of a huge amount of government corruption that has long been ignored by the news media. You simply have to decide that you want to make a large amount of publicity against the Federal Government, based on their actions from 1995-late 2001. Do you dare? >--We write that you've been encouraged by the efforts to create actual assassination marketplaces so far? That's a misleading way to put it. Some things that are labelled 'assassination markets' are not actually that, Etereum and Augur, together, are merely a 'death prediction market', and will not encourage even a single "assassination" to occur, You will not understand why this is, but to learn you will first have to continue to talk to me, and I will have to be given the time to explain why, >And have continued to promote the Assassination Politics idea, giving talks in (for instance) the Czech Republic and at Anarchapulco, a libertarian conference in Mexico? Yes, I did travel to Anarchapulco, twice, and Prague, once, and I discussed the AP concept, Even if they aren't yet aware of it, my solution to David Friedman's "The Hard Problem" is monumental to the anarchist concept, The vast majority of them were, and presumably still are, completely unaware that 'anarchism', as an idea, simply would not work...at least not until I fixed that problem in 1995. I should also mention my belief that a very large fraction of people who call themselves "anarchists", and people who are called "anarchists" by others, are simply died-in-the-wool leftists, Socialist, and Communists, who call themselves "anarchists" simply because their preferred politics was throughly discredited, and ultimately died: Certainly within the last 30 years, but really within the last 100 years, All countries which still claim to be "Communist" are simply totalitarian dictatorships, And I think you need to understand something. The idea, which I labelled Assassination Politics, would continue to 'work' even if I declare it I no longer 'like' it, If I were to stand up and claim that 'Assassination Politics won't work', people who hear that will ask me for proof, and I would be completely unable to supply such proof to them. You simply cannot kill a correct idea. How many clueless people have protested against wars, militaries, and nuclear weapons? Yet none of them have ever proposed a way to get rid of ALL of those things, completely and forever, I did, in 1995, and why is the world not discussing that outcome? Are people simply clueless? If YOU aren't aware of this, you need to learn why I claim this, >Thanks again, We shall see how much 'thanks' you want to give me, Let's have some more questions! Jim Bell On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 8:32 PM jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: You could do both. How about start with email questions, and later a phone call follow-up. On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:02 PM, Will Stephenson<will(a)harpers.org> wrote: Jim, I work at Harper's and am currently fact-checking a piece on deep-web assasination marketplaces. The writer, Brian Merchant, interviewed you for the story, and your writing and ideas are discussed as well -- I was hoping to confirm a few of the basic details with you this week. Would you be free to talk on the phone in the next couple of days? Or I could email over a list of questions if that would be more convenient. Thanks! -- Will StephensonAssistant EditorHarper's Magazine212-420-5724 -- Will StephensonAssistant EditorHarper's Magazine212-420-5724

2 2