- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

[MONEY] biggest criminal theft in history - Goldman Sachs, and how they got away with it
by Zenaan Harkness 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

CNN Goldman Sachs & the Zio Matrix (132MiB - 15mins): youtube-dl Zw9EhjyU3JU CNN, the NYT, America's SEC and a Federal Judge, getting Goldman Sachs off the hooks for the world's biggest dollar heist ever. So, how could you thieve the greatest amount of wealth in history, and get off the hooks - I mean, you'd have to have your (((fellow tribal chosen bastards))) in the key "justice" positions as it goes down? Well, yes. For the Snowflake filters: this is a little David Duke piece of 15 minutes, linking the Zio dots of Goldman Sachs “world's biggest hiest ever”. Sad world...

1 0

fairness testing in animals - Fwd: Unfair Treatment of Caged Monkeys
by Zenaan Harkness 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

Here's the direct TED talk extract, 'tube link: youtube-dl meiU6TxysCg (the default download is about 31MiB). This shows, besides what is somewhat humorous, the fact that fairness can be reasonably easily tested in certain animals. ----- Forwarded message from Gil May <gilmay97(a)gmail.com> ----- Subject: Fwd: Unfair Treatment of Caged Monkeys Show this to the boys, a bit like my place? Hello Gil, Check this lot out. http://www.upworthy.com/2-monkeys-were-paid-unequally-see-what-happens-next… ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

jimbellproject.org is looking for volunteers
by jim bell 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

JimBellproject.org is looking for volunteers I, Jim Bell https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003796765303 , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Bell , am newly back from Prague, Czech Republic, from the Paralel Polis https://liberate.hcpp.cz/ convention. I was invited there by Pavol Luptak https://www.facebook.com/wilderko to speak on a subject of my choice, so naturally I chose my favorite. https://steemit.com/hcpp/@digital-liberty/hcpp17-talks-sorted-by-the-topic But importantly, while there I announced my Jim Bell Project, and its http://jimbellproject.org website, where is explained that I will be leading my project to study, perfect, publicize, and obtain people's approval of my idea to replace all existing governments with a new system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KLqi1v2zSE . That new system is based on my provocatively-named Assassination Politics (AP) essay https://cryptome.org/ap.htm from 1995-6, described as an assassination market in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_market . That essay has received the scrutiny of the public since Part 1 was finished in early 1995, and has appeared before the public with the long-term helpful assistance of John Young, owner of the Cryptome.org website, at which the text of my AP essay has resided for decades. The seemingly-improbable goals of this system include eliminating all wars, militaries, nuclear weapons, and holocausts, as well as all governments and taxes, and their costs, variously economic, social, and individual. To a person unfamiliar with the details AP, these goals may and probably should seem obviously impossible or at least wildly improbable, but since 1995 I have believed that they are all not merely possible, but certainly probable,and in fact are individually and collectively inevitable: This means that to any modern society, an AP-type system is not genuinely a choice or option, but are in fact an unavoidable destiny once the combination of good encryption, anonymous networking, and anonymous digital cash have appeared and are allowed to function. This means that even if a large majority of the public claims to be steadfastly "against" the emergence and operation of the AP system, nevertheless even with only 1% of the people willing to use it, it will eventually appear and function effectively, and that 1% of the people will employ it to achieve the outcomes described above. As the AP system achieves its goals and produces the benefits which are claimed, a larger proportion of the people will recognize those advantages, and the opposition to its functioning will be gradually minimized and will eventually disappear. To my knowledge, the AP system has, surprisingly enough, only been considered and analyzed into publicly-available documents by two people: One, R. Sukumaran of the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, in India, https://idsa.in/taxonomy/term/664 , https://idsa.in/system/files/strategicanalysis_sukumaran_0604.pdf , and Robert Vroman. http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=009ape (Vroman's business partner, Bob Murphy, made a half-hearted attempt to disprove it, although his effort may only exist as a publicly-available document on the Wayback Machine https://archive.org/web/ . One of Murphy's pamphlets is here: https://issuu.com/renatos.grun/docs/robert_p._murphy_chaos_theory_two_e ) Before I state my view of the function of the Jim Bell Project, I should say what it is not: It is not intended to be a rapid move to the immediate implementation of a functioning AP organization, accepting wagers on predictions, and paying for correct predictions, each after implementing a functioning AP-type system. This is true, even though I am quite confident that such a move would be fully justified and well-understood by many people. The reality is that the vast majority of the population have simply never heard of the possibility of the AP concept, and of those most probably "understand" AP only to be a high-tech version of Kickstarter or GoFundMe. That majority simply don't recognize that a functioning AP system would inevitably lead to dramatic changes in our society, very efficiently fixing most societal problems: The ones caused by the existence of government. Instead, I foresee that despite the long time the essay has been available, 22 years for the earliest parts, there is still much academic work to be done. In part, that's because of the comparative lack of technical analyses done by members of the public, punctuated only by the works of R. Sukumaran and Robert Vroman. The reality, I believe, is that any system that claims to be able to eliminate even one of the following: wars, militaries, nuclear weapons, holocausts, and all governments and taxes, would arguably be the most astonishing development in the history of human relations if such a capability could be logically verified and proven. Little did I understand, before I wrote a word of Part 1, that my idea would be so shamefully ignored and disregarded for even a few years, let alone a full 22 years. To get an idea of the significance of this concept, on October 6, 2017 the the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. While I shouldn't discount the sincerity of their efforts, I must point out that my careful study of their website does not reveal any strategy capable of "abolishing" the last nuclear weapon, let alone the last 1000 such bombs. So, I have lost my patience. Individuals, as individuals, certainly have the right to ignore AP. But as groups, societies, and including philosophers, educators, scientists, social engineers, sociologists, governments, and nations, we have a compelling moral obligation to recognize the existence of problems, and at least consider proposed solutions for their effectiveness. Therefore, I propose that a group of volunteers, assisted by the population, complete the technical study of the AP proposal, find and fix any problems if they exist, and publicize the results so that the public is to afraid of its capabilities and likely results. If it should happen that the AP proposal is likely to work, and is without significant flaws, and if a substantial fraction of the public (for a ballpark figure, 1% or more?) can understand and agree in principle with the implementation of an AP system, then a decision should be made to implement it and let it function. To be sure, there is no absolute requirement that it be the Jim Bell Project who will do that implemention, nor necessarily the first such implemention, and certainly not the only implementation. Myself, I would much prefer it if the responsibility for the actual implementation and running of a functioning AP system be done by someone, anyone else. FUNDING As an attempt to fund the Jim Bell Project, jimbellproject.org, I have proposed and implemented a set of Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Ether tipjars, and I have cheekily proposed that all owners of such electronic cash give me 1/1000 of their value. I propose this, in part, because I believed that the publication of this proposal would cause a 'run' on Bitcoins, raising the prices greatly. I released the text of a protype 'speech', onto the jimbellproject.org website although not the one I actually gave, on October 7,, 2017 . I finally gave the speech approximately 19:00 UTC October 7 2017, Prague Czech time. At that time, the value of Bitcoin in dollars appears to be about: $4350.31. (The price had been essentially constant on the previous 1 1/3day.) A sudden spurt of increase occurred within about an hour, and by Friday, October 13, 2:40-2:49 UTC, (Friday the 13th ?!?!?) the price in dollars had reached $5814.18. So, within about 6 days, the increase of $1463 had occurred. Did I do that? Or most of that? Given that there are about 16.6 million Bitcoins extant, this represents an increase of around $23 billion dollars. Is it reasonable for me to think that I should be given 1/1000 of that increase, say $23 million dollars? Anyone who owns Bitcoins should pause to consider this. They get 999, and I get 1. Sounds fair to me. Jim Bell

11 54

Re: theocracy was Re: jimbellproject.org is looking for volunteers
by \0xDynamite 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

>> World Game <http://wiki.hackerspaces.org/PangaiaWorldGame>. > > Actually, pages missing all around - what happened here? Typical freshmen-level anarchists (in other words: totalitarians): they hid my pages when they were deemed not "hacker enough". To be fair it was only one user in their midst, yet effectively censorship without ability to appeal. Here 'tis: <http://wiki.hackerspaces.org/User:Average/Pangaia_World_Game>. Marxos

1 0

[MINISTRY] Israeli's jump the shark - New Zealand's Zionist community calls for expulsion of Iranian diplomat after his 'fiery' remarks
by Zenaan Harkness 29 Oct '17

29 Oct '17

Well, well, well! Who could ever believe, let alone imagine an Israeli abroad trying to Shut it Down?! That's just so eye-poppingly rare it blows the mind or something. Smarmy smiling assassin faces (Juliet Moses from New Zealand in this case), creating campaigns to evict Iran's diplomat Hormoz Ghahremani from NZ ... surely you must be joking? Nope, Mr Ghahremani actually spoke, and he spoke at a private meeting, and he was recorded, and Mr Moses is building a campaign to evict him from NZ because he spoke some things she doesn't like - you know the usual things (((these chosen bastards))) don't like like facts and sheeit… Can't have facts being spoken privately - could expose Israel's “involuntary sterilization of its black citizenry” [a now officially discontinued campaign], their admitted support for Al-Nusra and other “moderate head choppers” and the ongoing Palestinian genocidal relationship. Serving two masters: New Zealand's Zionist community calls for expulsion of Iranian diplomat after his 'fiery' remarks http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/10/serving-two-masters-new-zealands.html It is true that Secretary Ghahremani's remarks may, in their now public disclosure, be regarded as "inflammatory". But unless there is something significantly salacious in the rest of his speech that has as-yet gone unreported, I am not entirely sure I would suggest that anything he has said is manifestly counter-factual. Apparently Israel has a Jewish majority problem: Israel puts bill to ‘ensure Jewish majority’ in Jerusalem on hold to ‘coordinate with US’ https://www.rt.com/news/408142-jerusalem-settlements-annexation-postponed/ … surprising, actually. Aand, plenty of tick tock to spice our day: Putin’s revenge may see petro-yuan replace petrodollar https://www.rt.com/op-edge/408006-china-oil-petro-yuan-russia/

1 0

[OT] [Trump] Amazing Halloween Costumes
by Cecilia Tanaka 29 Oct '17

29 Oct '17

God, the third costume is hilarious, very unexpected and fun! It made laugh like a crazy a few minutes ago! :D :D :D https://www.boredpanda.com/creative-halloween-costumes Wish you all a lovely, very happy Sunday! <3 Ceci ---------- "Don't let anyone rob you of your imagination, your creativity, or your curiosity. It's your place in the world; it's your life. Go on and do all you can with it, and make it the life you want to live." - Mae Jemison

1 0

Keep Warm With Crypto Swag
by grarpamp 29 Oct '17

29 Oct '17

https://hodlmoon.com/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/794ycj/girlfriend_got_me_this_mug/

2 1

How to shut down the US Federal criminal "Justice" System, for $10-15 million per year.
by jim bell 29 Oct '17

29 Oct '17

===================== I have found a truly excellent statement of a large part of the problem in the following webpage: https://www.hrw.org/report/2013/12/05/offer-you-cant-refuse/how-us-federal-… This one itself cites: https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/12/05/us-forced-guilty-pleas-drug-cases It is long, but it is also very thorough and quite convincing. It focuses on drug crimes, and does not address my concern, "political" biases in charging and sentencing, but it is so descriptive of the problem that I will definitely be citing it in the Business Plan. I have also decided to contact Human Rights Watch, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch Theirs is a marvelous statement of the problem, but sadly it does not offer any kind of solution. Therefore, I am convinced that HRW will view positively my idea. The Wikipedia article describes HRW, expenditures as follows: "The organization's annual expenses totaled $50.6 million in 2011[3] and $69.2 million in 2014.[4]" Interestingly, it describe a funder as being George Soros, saying: "Financier and philanthropist George Soros of the Open Society Foundation announced in 2010 his intention to grant US $100 million to HRW over a period of ten years to help it expand its efforts internationally. He said, "Human Rights Watch is one of the most effective organizations I support. Human rights underpin our greatest aspirations: they're at the heart of open societies."[30][31][32] The donation increases Human Rights Watch's operating staff of 300 by 120 people. The donation was the largest in the organization's history.[33]" The importance of the involvement of HRW will not be as a sole source of funding; rather, I think it will open the door to its own funders, such as George Soros. I have little doubt that HRW will ratify my idea. ============================How to accomplish the below project: INFORMATIONAL REQUIREMENT: There is an online system called "PACER.GOV", which provides information on Federal Court records, both civil and criminal. This system can be searched to identify new Federal Criminal defendants, and likely their current addresses. (in jail, perhaps?) These records show full names, possibly addresses (home) as well, and the specific court in which the defendant was indicted. While I don't yet know this information, a given defendant for a given court is probably: 1. In unusual cases, is "bailed out", and allowed to live at home. His prior address will probably be valid.2. In the usual cases, he is arrested, and held in some sort of jail.2a. This might be some sort of Federal criminal jail, such as Seatac FDC in Seatac, Washington state. 2b. Or, it might be in some sort of county or city jail. What is needed is to identify his full name and current physical address, and possibly the name and address of his attorney. In 2016, there were about 77,000 new defendants, which amounts to 210 new defendants per calendar day. That attorney MIGHT be cooperative, and forward a letter to his client. At that point, all such newly-identified Federal criminal defendants should be mailed a letter, making the following offer: (announcement?) Dear Sir: Our records indicate that you are a newly-charged Federal Criminal defendant. We have what we hope will be some good news, a change from the bad news you have gotten. We have a project ongoing to encourage the use of the Jury Trial system in the Federal Criminal Court system. In 2016, of about 77,000 new defendants, 97.3% of those pleaded guilty. We think that's wrong. The large majority of those people were effectively extorted to plead guilty by threat of an increased sentence. We believe that the only people the Federal Criminal system should be able to convict and sentence are those who went through a jury trial. If that were to happen, the total number of people sentenced might drop by a factor of 20x. Most people in your position would have to be released without further charge. Therefore, we are telling you, and every other Federal Criminal defendant that we can find, that IF you plead not-guilty, and IF you demand a jury trial, and IF you receive that jury trial, we will be paying you $3,000 (three thousand dollars). This happens, regardless of whether you are found guilty or not-guilty. We encourage you to spread this message to any other Federal criminal defendant you may happen to meet. We have included extra copies of this letter for you to give to them. Further, please have your friends and family check out our website at: www.//liber....project.org. We believe that the Federal Court system can probably only put on 3,000 criminal trials per year. If "everyone" who is charged pleads not-guilty, and then insists on a jury trial, then the vast majority of those defendants will have to have their charges dropped. That's our intention. If you plead not guilty and insist on a jury trial, and receive it, you will get the $3,000. Our intention is that the vast majority of defendants will have their charges dropped and they will have to be released. If your charges are dropped, or reduced below the point that you can demand a jury trial, or you plead guilty, then you will not receive any money from us. But, hopefully you will get released, which is the goal. You do not need to do anything to "accept" this arrangement, But, we encourage you to respond to us by filling out the form, included, and returning it to us. It will speed the process. Sincerely,--------------------- Of course, there are 'mailing list' companies that make it a business to collect information and sell it. But this is a very odd and selective list. It is not "commercial": Ordinarily, it may not be possible to make money on such a list. Nevertheless, it may be possible to obtain this information (names and addresses of new Federal criminal defendants) via some existing source. FUNDING: The amount of money required for this project is: 1. Administration. Perhaps 10 people full time, paid with expenses perhaps $100,000 each. Or, perhaps $1 million per year. Each person can work from home. No central office should be needed. Mailing might be done automatically, using some automated commercial service, or perhaps manually. 2. Actual reward money: This will be limited by the product of the number of Federal Criminal trials that the Feds can put on yearly. Maybe that is 3,000, but shouldn't be much more. Multiplied by the amount of money that would be necessary to offer to each defendant, to get a large fraction of the Federal Criminal Defendants to plead not-guilty, and demand a jury trial. Currently I estimate that to be $3,000. It might be lower or higher, of course. While certainly there are defendants for whom a reward of $3,000 won't be significant or relevant, I believe that the large majority of them will be swayed by such an offer. And it is important that these people learn and know that EVERY new Federal Criminal defendant is being given the same offer. This will encourage them to act, as if they are in a group, and all will demand jury trials. Of course, it is my intention to virtually shut down the Federal Criminal "Justice" system, or at least drop its capacity for convicting people by a factor of about 20x. Who should be willing to give? It is not my intention that the burden of this project should be shouldered on libertarians, alone. Fortunately, I think there are many potential sources of funding, each with their own peculiar motivation: A: "Liberals", and especially "Hollywood Liberals". Newly rather beaten up by the Harvey Weinstein fiasco, liberals are famously in favor of illegal aliens (err...undocumented immigrants). While there are other ways to simply eject such people, one way requires a criminal trial: "Illegal re-entry", which is a felony, and conviction of that offense requires a trial, and they could insist on a jury trial. Liberals also should generally be against laws against currently-illegal drugs. B: "Conservatives", including "Libertarians", may actually believe in the 2nd Amendment, and believe that there should not be "gun offenses" except for people who actively employ a gun in the commission of a crime. ("Felons" were not prohibited from owning guns until the early 1930's, and even then the prohibition was against "violent felons". It was not until 1968 that "felons", in general, were prohibited from owning guns.) C: "Libertarians" will be against laws prohibiting victimless crimes, such as drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc. The figure of $10 million per year can either be seen as "very large", or "very small", depending on how you look at it. As I explain below, this will save the Federal government perhaps $6.8 billion per year in prison costs. And, this should produce an ENORMOUS amount of publicity for libertarians. It will "force the issue" for freedom, in a way that is not normally considered possible. And, of course, this system could be expanded to cover the state criminal systems also: Together, they are about 10x times larger than the Federal system. Naturally, the cost will be higher, but if it is worth it for the Feds, it would be worth it for the State systems. ============================== [something I wrote about a week ago] A few years back, probably 2011 I thought of a marvelous way to virtually destroy the Federal criminal "justice" system. At least, the people who make up that system will certainly think it is being destroyed. I mentioned it a few years ago. It might cost little more than $10 million per year. There are many high-profile cases which would militate in favor of initiating such a system. One, Ross Ulbricht, who was sentenced to two life terms for, ostensibly, running the Silk Road website. Another Kim Dotcom, who is threatened with extradition in New Zealand. Julian Assange, whose story is too well known here to need to describe it. Edward Snowden, who is presumably still in Moscow for leaking a huge quantity of NSA information. There are also major drug cases, such as El Chapo, Joaquin Guzman. In some of these cases, the defendant should have had a lot of money, such as Ulbricht, although it was lost to the Feds. Kim Dotcom may still be rich. Julian Assange could probably raise a lot of money, Snowden might do so as well. Guzman, and probably many other Mexican drug cartels, could easily raise millions per year, if they actually wanted to do this. Maybe even Martha Stewart would hold some residual grudges. Anyone who thinks he is at risk of Federal criminal prosecution would want to see the system essentially shut down. How? Well, let's go to the statistics. Last year, there were 77,152 new criminal defendants in the Federal criminal system, see http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/28/federal-criminal-prosecutio… . According to https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/rese… , "In fiscal year 2016 the vast majority of offenders (97.3%) pleaded guilty." If that figure can be believed, then there were presumably no more than 2.8% x 77,152 criminal trials, or only 2160 trials. Perhaps this statistic would surprise most people. I think the average sentence is about 3 years. The ability of the Federal criminal system to actually put on criminal trials is very limited. There are only a limited number of courts, and judges, and prosecutors, and this system must share space and time with civil trials. It is quite possible that it would be very difficult to put on much more than those 2160 trials. That court space has to be shared with civil cases, as well. All, or at least most of those people had a right to a jury trial. If all, or most of those defendants were somehow motivated to demand such a trial, rather than plead guilty, havoc would ensue. Even if the number of trials could increase, say to about 3000, then the remainder, 77,152-3000, or 74,152, would have to walk free, because the system could not possibly try them all. The limitation is not merely court space: Trials are "expensive" in preparation, research, and evidence. And that led me to yet another "awfully wonderful, wonderfully awful" idea, to paraphrase Dr. Seuss and the Grinch. What would motivate all of these people to demand a jury trial? Well, currently they are threatened with much more punishment if they plead not guilty and demand a trial, and lose. Like a variant on the "Prisoner's dilemma", each one is forced to conclude that it is better to 'take the deal' rather than resist, and demand a trial. What would change this system around? Well, the lot of a prisoner in Federal prison is poor, if he has no money. No money, no commissary. No drinks, cookies, crackers, soups, candies, etc. I know: I spent 13 years in prison, time I shouldn't have spent. Many enter prison broke. What if they were offered, say, $3000 if they agreed to demand a jury trial, and thus forced the government to actually put them on trial, form a jury, and put on a trial. If the government dropped the case, or reduced the charges to something that didn't require a trial, the defendant would get nothing. If we assume that the Federal court system could put on 3,000 trials, one defendant per trial typically, the cost for such a project would be 3,000 x $3,000, or 9 million dollars. It would be limited by the number of actual trials the Feds could put on each year, multiplied by the dollar amount that would have to be paid to motivate a defendant to demand a trial. Tell each new Federal defendant that if he pleads not guilty, and insists on a jury trial, and if he actually gets that trial, he will be paid the $3,000. Guilty or not guilty, it won't matter. Have a trial, get the money, simple as that. I am merely guessing what the 'proper' figure would be, in order to motivate such people adequately. But if most people were already demanding a jury trial, and tens of thousands of fellow defendants were being freed due to lack of ability to give them trials, it shouldn't take a lot of money to induce these people to 'stand in line', and demand a trial. After all, they would know that if they didn't get the money, that would mean that they would have been freed. And that's the goal, isn't it? At least for the defendant, that is. You can imagine what would happen. The Feds would have to ration trials. Only the most "worthy" defendants would get prosecuted. And yes, there are definitely some worthy defendants. I met a few!! But the total number of people who could enter the Federal prison system per year would drop from perhaps 75,000 per year to 3,000 per year. This year, there are about 185,300 Federal prisoners. Drop the input to 3,000 per year, and the total population could easily drop to 20,000, and perhaps to as low as 10,000, after a few years. Dozens of prisons across the nation would have to close, maybe well over 100. It costs approximately $40,000 to feed and house a Federal prisoner. Most of that money probably goes to prison staff salaries and supplies, and most of the rest goes to prison construction. Drop the total Federal prison population from 185,000 to 15,000, and they will save about 170,000 multiplied by $40,000, or about $6.8 billion dollars per year. Doesn't this sound like a worthy goal? We may speculate about who would be motivated to fund such a project. Give them the ability to donate anonymously, and they might act. There might arguably be 200,000 people per year who fear some sort of Federal prosecution. A donation of $50 per year, average, would raise $10 million. It would not take many tax evaders, resistors, or avoiders to foot the bill. People who resented a prior prosecution would add up, as well. Why not? =================================

3 5

Using Prediction Markets to Enhance US Intelligence
by juan 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-public… 'intelligence' in scare quotes of course anyway, I thought it was funny that cia webpages use JavaScript Intellectual Property from Facebook...

2 2

Re: [Cryptography] Severe flaw in WPA2 protocol leaves Wi-Fi traffic open to eavesdropping
by grarpamp 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

> From: The eero team <support(a)eero.com> > Subject: Your network's been automatically updated > >To my delight, I just received [yet another binary blob] ! > I gotta tell ya, that's just amazing. It gives me the good chills. As opposed to delight, others may rightfully find it amazingly, 'eer'ily, chilling, to be buying and using effectively closed source software, on closed hardware, that carries vital and private network traffic within their home, is connected to the wide open internet, accepts new code blobs under unpublished and unreviewed management, authentication and security models, from unknown remote locations by unknown entities, who may be subject to outside attack, control, coercion, bribery, operation, infiltration, or legal usurption, who may in fact get off on monitoring everything in your home, to wit cameras and microphones in today's always on, funneling environment to internet, corporate mined, 'smart' devices. Beware bliss of breezy day, lest it blow chill into your boudoir at night. #OpenFabs, #OpenHW, #OpenSW

1 0