Sorry to appear so ignorant, but what is a "*coin tipjar"?         Jim Bell ________________________________ From: coderman <coderman@gmail.com> To: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com>; Jacob Appelbaum <jacob@appelbaum.net> Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 10:06 PM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany ... hey Jim, (and Jake) neither one of you appear to have a *coin tipjar yet... why holding out? :) best regards,

coderman ha scritto: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> wrote:

...

Sorry to appear so ignorant, but what is a "*coin tipjar"? its a way to convert digital shared hallucinations into fiat denominated shared hallucinations.

I prefer my shared hallucinations to be in the form of Lindens [1], where at least my pretend money can be put to use to buy myself a fancy pretend dress, decorate my pretend house, or take part in pretend masked balls (until the server crashes, anyway). Much like modern fiat currency, Lindens are commonly earned through menial labor and sexwork, though of course currency conversion is the most popular method of obtaining them. Like Bitcoin you can buy your way in, and unlike Bitcoin, the currency conversion process is straightforward. The perceived value of Lindens is tightly controlled by their governing body, while Bitcoin's perceived value is dictated by media interest and speculation. ~Griffin [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linden_Dollar#Economic_issues

Il 31.12.2013 03:51 coderman ha scritto:

i'll let you cypherpunks in on a secret financial tip: the smart money banks in dogecoin: http://dogecoin.com/ ▄ ▄ ▌▒█ ▄▀▒▌ such coin ▌▒▒█ ▄▀▒▒▒▐ ▐▄▀▒▒▀▀▀▀▄▄▄▀▒▒▒▒▒▐ very ▄▄▀▒░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█▒▒▄█▒▐ crypto ▄▀▒▒▒░░░▒▒▒░░░▒▒▒▀██▀▒▌ ▐▒▒▒▄▄▒▒▒▒░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▀▄▒▒▌ ▌░░▌█▀▒▒▒▒▒▄▀█▄▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█▒▐ ▐░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▌██▀▒▒░░░▒▒▒▀▄▌ ▌░▒▄██▄▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▌ ▀▒▀▐▄█▄█▌▄░▀▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▐ doge tax? ▐▒▒▐▀▐▀▒░▄▄▒▄▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒░▒░▒▒▒▒▌ ▐▒▒▒▀▀▄▄▒▒▒▄▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒░▒░▒▒▐ ▌▒▒▒▒▒▒▀▀▀▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒░▒░▒░▒▒▒▌ ▐▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒░▒░▒▒▄▒▒▐ dread ▀▄▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒░▒░▒▄▒▒▒▒▌ pirate ▀▄▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▄▄▄▀▒▒▒▒▄▀ dogeberts ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▒▒▒▒▒▄▄▀ cypherdoge ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▀▀

Yeah, it was tragic. Probaby $10 was stolen in that heist...lol On 12/31/2013 09:29 AM, Silent1 wrote:

Ahh, Dogecoin, didn't an online wallet service of theirs get hacked last week and completely cleaned out of hundreds of thousands of coins?

-----Original Message----- From: cypherpunks [mailto:cypherpunks-bounces@cpunks.org] On Behalf Of coderman Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:51 AM To: Griffin Boyce Cc: cpunks Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net> wrote:

...

... I prefer my shared hallucinations to be in the form of Lindens [1], ...

i'll let you cypherpunks in on a secret financial tip: the smart money banks in dogecoin: http://dogecoin.com/

I am an alum of MIT (Class of 1980; Chemistry).  I've just read the Wikipedia article on Aaron Swartz, and I am very sympathetic to him.   I wish I'd been aware of his situation while he was alive; I might have been able to help, and would have tried to do so.           Jim Bell ________________________________ From: Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> To: Silent1 <lists@silent1.net> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks@cpunks.org> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:03 AM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany dear sir we are reaching out to MIT alumni to make a public call of outrage re among other things the aaron swartz treatment by MIT would u b willing to b included? specifically we would b asking for shifts in functionality not just complaining to the bricks THANKS On 12/31/13, Silent1 <lists@silent1.net> wrote:

Ahh, Dogecoin, didn't an online wallet service of theirs get hacked last week and completely cleaned out of hundreds of thousands of coins?

-----Original Message----- From: cypherpunks [mailto:cypherpunks-bounces@cpunks.org] On Behalf Of coderman Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:51 AM To: Griffin Boyce Cc: cpunks Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net> wrote:

...

...   I prefer my shared hallucinations to be in the form of Lindens [1], ...

i'll let you cypherpunks in on a secret financial tip:   the smart money banks in dogecoin: http://dogecoin.com/

-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Skype carimachet - 646-652-6434 Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.

--On Wednesday, January 01, 2014 7:38 AM +1000 "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:

In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law,

The hell do you mean? If by 'the law' you mean natural rights, then the people who think that they are above the law are all governemnt shitbags. Every single member of every government is a criminal who thinks he is 'above the law'. Take a thorough sack of shit like thomas jefferson for instance. The guy babbled about 'god given equal rights' while enslaving his fellows. If that's not being 'above the law', I don't know what it is. As to Swartz he didn't commit any real crime so he never was, or pretended to be, 'above the law'.

and that in particular Swartz believed he was above the law, and was shocked to find that he was not.

There might be some sincere practitioners of civil disobedience,

What is a sincere practitioner of civil disobedience?

but Swartz was not, and the big heroes of the civil disobedience brigade, Ghandi and Thoreau, were not.

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:54 PM, James A. Donald <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:

Just look at the smirk on Schwartz's face. Obviously he never expected to be punished. He committed suicide not because a year in a country club prison was terribly harsh punishment, but because it was revealed he was not above the law after all.

If anyone in the world was prepared to suffer for his beliefs, that person was not Aaron Schwartz.

As to Swartz he didn't commit any real crime so he never was, or pretended

...

to be, 'above the law'.

Accessing someone else's computers without permission to obtain the information therein is trespass. The powerful trespass against the less powerful. He had mistaken ideas about how powerful he was.

Just so people on this list are aware, James is either trolling or really hated Aaron for some reason. Earlier this year on the randombit crypto mailing list, he stated that it was a good thing Aaron killed himself seeing as he "needed killing." http://lists.randombit.net/pipermail/cryptography/2013-March/003947.html

On 2014-01-01, 00:00, James A. Donald wrote:

On 2014-01-01 07:52, Juan Garofalo wrote:

...

What is a sincere practitioner of civil disobedience?

Someone who expects to suffer for his beliefs, and is willing to do so is a sincere practitioner of civil disobedience.

[...]

In practice, 99% of civil disobedience is Pussy Riot tearing down someone else's crucifix on someone else's property. The message is "You have to obey our laws, but we do not have to obey even our own laws".

I know what you want to say (I think), but I believe that you are incorrectly referring to such people as "Pussy Riot". The three incarcerated Pussy Riot members have had immensely harsh sentences. They called the Putin amnesty that set them free a "PR gag" and convinced at least me that they were serious when they said that they would have preferred to serve their sentences until the last day. Sounds like people "who expect to suffer for their beliefs, and are willing to do so" to me. Fun, Stephan PS: If I recall (but I haven't checked), the incident in question was singing an anti-Putin song in a church, not "tearing down someone else's crucifix on someone else's property", for which they were convicted of "rowdyism".

James A. Donald <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote: In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil

disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law, and that in particular Swartz believed he was above the law, and was shocked to find that he was not.

There might be some sincere practitioners of civil disobedience, but Swartz was not, and the big heroes of the civil disobedience brigade, Ghandi and Thoreau, were not.

It seems in practice that there is a relation issue involved in who judges and determines lawfulness in the shared situation. oftentimes, the person who judges is actually 'the criminal' and can "represent the state" and 'the people' though misleadingly, subverting this relation. such that, a person who exists within and operates in a criminal way, including relying upon lies as a day to day framework, then convicts those who may break one law or tell one lie in their lives or go beyond a boundary out of principle and larger ethics that question the ruleset and what happens or appears to is that all the power is with those who cheat, lie, and steal within the state along with their accomplices, and that these people 'are the state' that then judges and determines the fate of otherwise law-abiding citizens or those who seek to serve its best interests, not least by enforcing its framework or utilizing its freedoms, testing the parameters only to find they are not observed, are fiction only (else, perhaps other more active strategies exist though are correct in principle, in not adhering to laws that are inaccurate or overbearing and allow the corruption its continuing power) what this is to suggest is that the judge-convicted relation is: 99.99% falsity + 0.01% truth vs. 99.99% truth + error (in that the evaluation occurs in a warped framework where judgement is divorced from its own adherence to truth, via the same corrupted constitution that allows for this relation) 99% wrong ---> judgement ---> 0.01% wrong and yet this viewpoint (based on power) is itself based upon LIES and deception, unaccountable to the same rules and thus is beyond law. and thus it _must show falsity in another yet never allow this to be accounted for in its own viewpoint or actions-- which is how authoritarian, totalitarian, and the secret dictatorship triumph in these conditions, because it is beyond accountability, it is just about believing in higher power that is based on lies and opinions, as it filters down into culture via illiteracy, loss of education, social relations, normalization of vice, oppression, exploitation, criminality this is why the state must be abolished, because it has become thoroughly rotten from the inside out due to the outdated source code that provides loopholes to oppress citizens and humans and the planet and animals worldwide due to loss of truth, and making this lying 'legal' as a basis for 'shared power' by who shares and is in on the lie, as this then scales and becomes organization, authority, judgement fjisw sosip wsznx

// more realistic context of post-1960s worldview: strange-read-reply function, to paraphrase: In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil

disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law, and that in particular [users of illegal drugs: cocaine, meth, heroin, acid, ~pot; once alchohol] believed [they were] above the law, and [perhaps will be] shocked to find that [they are] not.

There might be some sincere practitioners of civil disobedience, [including drug users and dealers], big heroes of the [counterculture and its ideological] brigade....

or:

In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law, and that in particular [psychiatric prescribing of harmful pills: "anti-psychotics", "antidepressants" etc] believed [they were] above the law, and [perhaps will be] shocked to find that [they are] not.

There might be some sincere practitioners of civil disobedience, but [psychiatrists] was not, and the big heroes of the [political takeover] brigade....

it is the problem of analysis: focus on the person who takes a gun and shoots people, not on the pills they were prescribe, the failed institutions surrounding them, etc. too simplistic, inaccurate model does not distinguish symptoms from disease, allows it to continue (lose accurate, empirical logical reasoning, no way to address this, thus loss of language, no matter encrypted comms, this situation; because it cannot be modeled or related to in realistic framework, and thus short-circuits into power games and political engineering, which is inherently violent and leads to those terms of resolution) 82729 02020 82802

--On Thursday, January 02, 2014 8:53 PM -0500 Ulex Europae <europus@gmail.com> wrote:

At 04:38 PM 12/31/2013, James A. Donald wrote:

...

In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law, and that in particular Swartz believed he was above the law, and was shocked to find that he was not.

You seem to be laboring under a pernicious misapprehension: that there is a legitimate mandate to obey laws that are unconstitutional and/or unjust. There is a mandate, but it is just as illegitimate as the unconstitutional or the unjust law.

..but youre implicitly asserting that people are supposed to obey 'laws' that are 'constitutional'?(whatever the fuck 'constitutional' means) this list just keeps getting better. or worse.

--On Thursday, January 02, 2014 9:34 PM -0500 Ulex Europae <europus@gmail.com> wrote:

At 09:10 PM 1/2/2014, Juan Garofalo wrote:

...

this list just keeps getting better. or worse.

I agree. Your nitpicking and bloviating figures prominently in that.

You mean, to highlight the garbage you post is to 'nitpick'? Oh I'm so sorry I upset yet another brain dead government worshiper! HELP, HURRY, CALL THE DEPARTMENT OF HEIMLAND-CONSTITUTION!!

On 01/03/2014 03:10 AM, Juan Garofalo wrote:

--On Thursday, January 02, 2014 8:53 PM -0500 Ulex Europae <europus@gmail.com> wrote:

...

...

In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law, and that in particular Swartz believed he was above the law, and was shocked to find that he was not. You seem to be laboring under a pernicious misapprehension: that there is a legitimate mandate to obey laws that are unconstitutional and/or unjust. There is a mandate, but it is just as illegitimate as the unconstitutional or the unjust law. ..but youre implicitly asserting that people are supposed to obey 'laws'

At 04:38 PM 12/31/2013, James A. Donald wrote: that are 'constitutional'?(whatever the fuck 'constitutional' means)

this list just keeps getting better. or worse. I see what you're up to.

Illegitimate =? unconstitutional | unjust As for me, I don't give a fuck about your constitutions, and in many cases I don't care about your theories of justice either.

At 06:34 AM 1/3/2014, James A. Donald wrote:

If someone was to hide a laptop in one of my cupboards, to steal such large amounts of information from my home network as to disrupt its functioning, I would take a sledgehammer to his laptop, and when he showed up to collect his laptop, a sledgehammer to him.

What I'm hearing from you is, the original malfeasance of putting publicly-funded research data the taxpaying public has already bought and paid for behind a paywall and extorting the taxpaying public for access to that data does not warrant extraordinary measures to liberate that data in the manner it should have been liberated in the first place. That there were unintended consequences of the exact method used to liberate that data is secondary, perhaps it is even inconsequential to the real central principle here.

Swartz committed a crime against people more powerful than he was, incorrectly thinking he was more powerful than they.

I seem to recall some quote about trees, blood, liberty... and patriots. Do you know it? --ue

At 02:30 PM 1/3/2014, James A. Donald wrote:

That he did not rate limit the download is an announcement "I am powerful and have the correct political connections, and you do not", which assessment turned out to be incorrect.

Or it might've simply been an unintentional oversight, a mistake, a malfunction or who knows what. You're pretty heavy on the condemnations, don't read more into the facts as we know them than a fair reading allows. --ue

Dnia sobota, 4 stycznia 2014 17:42:16 James A. Donald pisze:

At 02:30 PM 1/3/2014, James A. Donald wrote:

...

...

That he did not rate limit the download is an announcement "I am powerful and have the correct political connections, and you do not", which assessment turned out to be incorrect.

On 2014-01-04 10:13, Ulex Europae wrote:

...

Or it might've simply been an unintentional oversight, a mistake, a malfunction or who knows what.

The expression on his face, and his choice of reading material, suggests deliberate intent.

"I interpret an expression on a photo of a face of a person I have never met in a certain, peculiar way, hence I have the right to judge them and have the insight to understand their actions and motivations in full." There are whole articles about good that "the smirky kid" had brought in to this world. Please tell us, "James A. Donald", what good have you brought to this world and its inhabitants? Just take your time. -- Pozdr rysiek

On 01/05/2014 07:36 PM, James A. Donald wrote:

Same principle as one can apply to Henry Louis Gates. "Do you know who I am!", Gates tells the cop. The arrogant voice of the ruler to the ruled.

Except, in the Gates example, Gates (as a U.S. citizen) is the ruler - at least theoretically. Remember the tale about how the U.S. political system is established through the consent - pretty important word - of those who can vote and establish the republic? So the cop, all cops, are serving those whose votes establish the police, pay their paychecks, and set the rules for their behavior. It's really simple: cops in the US think they run the show. Well they do, but their rule is not legitimate. It's an inversion of the mythology that created the US political system. We can extend this logic to the financial system, and government in general. Do you get it? The same logic applies to Aaron S.'s case.

At 02:42 AM 1/4/2014, James A. Donald wrote:

...

Or it might've simply been an unintentional oversight, a mistake, a malfunction or who knows what.

The expression on his face, and his choice of reading material, suggests deliberate intent.

Oh, so sorry. I'll be watching for you on the next poker championship since you are so accurate and reliable at reading tells. Or, you could refrain from attributing motives beyond those that may be safely inferred from a fair reading of the known facts. --ue

James A. Donald <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:

If someone was to hide a laptop in one of my cupboards, to steal such large amounts of information from my home network as to disrupt its functioning, I would take a sledgehammer to his laptop, and when he showed up to collect his laptop, a sledgehammer to him.

my intent is not to offend in saying this, though i think this situation may not be the situation most would encounter with on-site surveillance, in that a barrier would exist between bugs & procurement so that the sledgehammer-effect would have to occur by a different route. if it did go as you describe, most likely evidence would be shifted and you would be framed, either immediately killed, if not via 'suicide' by helpers, and anything you would do would be evaluated in one-sided terms legally, with removal of basic situational data that makes your viewpoint impossible to corroborate with evidence or others testimony, if you would survive an encounter with violent, aggressive, onsite corruption with the intent to bring you down via evidence, real or fabricated basically whatever you do would result in your being dead or sent away to prison, and likely include severe bodily harm either short term or long term in a prison or other environment to me that is more likely than anything else, if a personal encounter outside the law was involved, such that there are no rules, no legal framework to appeal to, just brute deliverance of power onsite, which tends towards the ~hegemonic police state of a onesided political takeover, that nightmare what is scary is that a piece of signed paper or secret agreement somehow could allow such dynamics to develop, yet which are not evaluatable by external truth or accountable to truth beyond a particular (private) self-interest that can be warped, skewed, political, yet stand in for 'government' this would be tyranny then. not far from having guns removed from residents, etc. no defense, just submission, subjugation to corrupt authority, baseness as evaluation of worth - conformance or not consider a different scenario. everything is tapped, you have sledgehammer in apartment or house, and then have to interface with *bureaucracy* to try to deal with situation, smash skulls as payback. what stands between you and justice would be piles of signed paper, denials, ignoring of issues and pleas for information or rule-following, then followed up by pure corruption: your mail is tampered with and lost, you lose your job, your checks or payments go missing, accounts are hacked, there are gossip and whisper campaigns about you heard all over within earshot, people saying you are crazy, you need psychiatrist, spouse wants a divorce or requires you to get psychiatrist, go on medication. problems begin with plumbing or electrical requiring expensive fixes or repairs, car continually starts to break down and cannot be repaired successfully. noises start in your environment that keep you awake and thus you cannot get enough sleep, your health plummets, massive depression and also extreme paranoia set in, threats are delivered via phone and email about assassination and physical harm, you are robbed or things are stolen from you, documents go missing, evidence of black bag job with things amiss in environment, computer stops working, lose electronic files, records needed to prove certain information, you question your own memory, your own sanity, people stop talking to you because they are afraid or turn on you, increasingly isolated, suicidal thoughts impossible to ignore, there is no information available about what to do in such situations because it is considered unreal in 'democracy', any truth you say that is out of line threatens your survival and livelihood in surrounding system, further marginalized, your anger functions against you, you become more and more ill as the stress takes its toll, needing to internalize all the hate and violence versus project it outward, thus the condition of being peaceful is at the cost of interior violence, either denial or taming or holding back rage, any error you make can be used to prosecute you to the fullest extent by political enemies and this is going on in the background- and nothing you can do can change this basic situation. and all of it exists because of signed pieces of paper, agreements, allowing this power-situation to exist/persist, and yet no one observes 'truth' beyond their private relativistic boundary, now you are on the outside of in this way, corrupt police or TLA could set up camp in the house or apartment next door and beam hostile energy into your domain, and by privacy law, you can do nothing to stop them, even if they are attacking you, trying to kill you and influence and deteriorate your functioning - and anything you do against them is a violation of their rights (Jim Bell situation, seemingly), such that law is onesided, not observed by oppressors yet the persecuted are held accountable to it, though within warped terms such that it is a trap, a ruse, to enforce injustice and malicious authority structures over and against citizens and populations, to subjugate and control for private self interest of hegemonic group they *legally* can get away with murder, and there is nothing you can do -within language- to reason otherwise or protect yourself, words are just words, the truth is inaccessible because it is neither defined or controlled by you, they _own the interpretive rights as government connected entities of an established structural falsity, an ideological position of authority beyond all law that becomes law by fiat of action believed justifiable in private warped relativistic terms, where bias is normalized as POV parallel to this is a situation of exchange, as it relates to trust and truth and information. economics today and commerce provide direct corollary to this situation in more direct terms, of this corruption it is the past it is unlikely someone would be able to sell a rotten bushel of wheat as if it was a bushel of fine quality. and if they went around doing this to customers, the customers would likely require that their money be returned because of an unfair exchange, if not the person put out of business in other words, a merchant or other person selling shoddy goods then would have an implicit relation to the purchaser as part of the exchange -- shared truth -- that the goods are of a certain quality, and if not a ripoff would occur. and it would seemingly also involve vengeance if a swindle, such that the seller could be hanged or killed as a form of communal justice, for cheating/theft would be a crime in terms of unfair exchange. people likely have been killed throughout history for selling broken goods or misrepresenting items in terms of exchange, where this unevenness requires evening itself back out to return to civil relations or parity between the two parties on a basis for shared truth and trust, that what is sold is what is purchased. they money is for a quality bushel of wheat, not a rotten bushel unless this is otherwise noted, and the exchange rate modified accordingly to those parameters into the 20th century, say post-Crystal Palace world exhibitions of invention, tinkerers and hobbyists going to stores for supplies -- presumably if going to purchase magnets for an experiment or device, upon purchase they would be magnets and not some fraudulent non-magnetic imposter material and if this did occur, likely legal recourse or other justice would be available, via shared sensibility that a person does not do this to another person, based on shared ethics, morality, connected with law and fair exchange. the offender or cheat or crooked person could be imprisoned or worse, murdered by a vigilante group or person perhaps, as a form of justice if the law did not adequately address the unjust situation. in that morality or truth can trump what is recognized or allowed within certain parameters and a gap can develop, in particular via language that does not adequately account for or model given situations- thus requiring interpretation or external analysis and accounting to balance the dynamics and return to a shared framework of justice, based on shared truth, the basis for shared exchange somewhere approximately with computers, it became legal to make and sell shoddy goods, and this became protected by law, by legal interpretation, by signed documents that map to protected views and positiosn of authority. in this way, unequal exchange was normalized, where an item could be sold 'broken' or could be made to break, and thus this corruption has been institutionalized as its own business practice, a way to increase profit (via upgrades or fixes, repairs, replacement, new devices). in doing so, the issue of quality has vanished in exchange, so that the money that is traded for a given item is not purchasing something in proper working condition that is made to sustain itself in these parameters, and instead of a clockwork device that automatically winds down into disrepair, designed this way, requiring maintenance to upkeep- or even, allowed to be made dysfunctional via updates hidden or not, that can limit or disallow functioning of the device via a deteriorated/devolved condition, and this has become the cornerstone of 'new economy', 'communication', 'education', 'careers', 'development', 'social relations', and so on- the economy itself. what protects this process are signed pieces of paper, that prevent this abuse from being dealt with fairly in terms of its being a massive swindle that takes money via deceptive and fraudulent practices and removes power and functioning from citizens and moves this to those in positions of authority, at the top of the pyramid scheme, who 'mismanage' the entire works as a giant malfunctioning organism that they are in control of, via schemes that operate and function beyond the law, yet as the law it is not possible to 'reason' or argue with the legal documents because they are not based in truth, only in power that maps into money as the embodiment of truth-- such that the language is hollow, it is only about maintaining power and authority over interpretation, and not of observing shared truth of the situation. it is biased, onesided, ideological, and must be 'signed' to make it legal, to have or use tools and equipment on these corrupt terms, aka- user agreements. thus the unequal exchange is thus institutionalized, normalized, and becomes the foundation for a new bubble society & civilization operating within these corrupt terms -- protected and defended by ungrounded language that has its signs substitute for truth, this [signage] becoming the one-way administration and management of ideological power that is borne from the corrupt code of the US constitution as legal right of citizens, which instead due to its gender-bias, maps into both private wo|man and corporations as having their allegiance only to themselves and not public humanity, which then can be exploited to the utmost, notably within basic exchange with commerce in the everyday-- much sold is subverted, corrupted, broken by design or manufacturing via sabotage, where people are paying for something they are not receiving -- yet there is no legal recourse to this due to the shield of language devoid of truth, that is not beholden to being accounted for in its truth, outside or beyond this private framework of authority and power over it and others, institutionalized by pieces of signed paper that do not observe truth beyond those views and beliefs that benefit their own interests firstly. this is religious, yet devoid of morality and ethics beyond a context and framework of money- money is the core, yet it is 'nothing' without truth, yet stands in for it as sign, thus money verifies and legitimates the correctness of this practice as it validates beneficence of onesided profit in exchange, a warped view of capitalism this extends into issues of security. planting bugs in equipment to protect the sacristy of the state (that is, its commitment to truth) is one thing. breaking equipment so people cannot communicate or use tools to improve their situation, because it threatens self-interest and control of hidden managers is another. signed documents or language protects these activities without holding them accountable so both purposes fall under the same language, yet different in interpretation, what truth is allowed or denied, is it human or antihuman values administering the policies and attacks on privacy, etc. and language itself, disconnected and nonobservant of truth, is just communication as babble in turn, as it does not ground to the shared reality that exists, and instead falls into some lines of force of bias, of some fragmentary view or another, contained within layers and layers deep of lies and bullshit, and this is where violence and laws and intimidation are occurring, and yet cannot be mediated in terms of reason with institutions signing off on tactics via secret meetings or proceedings -- the feedback is not about 'truth', it is about maintaining power and authority, removed of accounting for external truth beyond what is beneficial to those in the shared set or committee or demographic, profiting from it you cannot get anywhere with logically reasoning truth in this environment or bureaucracy. this then is an extreme form of mental violence, emotional and psychological violence, that cannot be dealt with, and yet must be grounded by individuals- where basically people are constrained and mute, unable to communicate or reason about what is going on because they lost fundamental truth with themselves by adapting and integrating the lies into their own lies and likely benefiting along the way, until some day it goes against their interests, large or small, though will only grow the more out of phase it gets anything the person does is considered or interpretable as violence against the corrupted state that can and will and does *retaliate* in response to any slight, as if extremely petty, accounting for any error while subsisting on this state of error to rule over everyone captured within the concentration camp it creates, citizens prisoners within a state that does not represent them though also seeks their demise by systematic, manufactured means. surveillance, psychiatric or other drugs, illiteracy, toxic food, toxic air, toxic shelter, toxic social relations, sociopathic media, etc. anything you do against its wishes is prosecutable via onesided 'processing' of warped views, madness itself that is in charge and judge, surrounding jury of invaders and traitors, and active executioner, passive & active signed paper and bureaucracy beat sledgehammer every time no truth, no accountability to logical empirical reasoning of situation in constitution context, ones (T) and zeros (F) then it is _impossible to get framework for fairness mathematically impossible. insane violence, this is the state is mad and beyond any law, and functioning against citizens in dictatorial mode, purging dissenters it can legally be dealt with via original code: military takes over control of the state, martial law, constitutional convention -> new US constitution within human parameters of 3-value/N-value logic v. binary interest of private gender to represent all (first thing would be refunds for the epic PC swindle) -- this a joke of course, meant for the lawyers :)

Swartz committed a crime against people more powerful than he was, incorrectly thinking he was more powerful than they.

only more powerful on paper, in terms of money. Swartz had truth on his side, the basis for true power whereas documents devoid of it, or money without truth backing it - as a form of power - is only virtual, and may exert power only insofar as this condition is not accounted for bongo bingo ringo

From: "dan@geer.org" <dan@geer.org> To: James A. Donald <jamesd@echeque.com> Cc: cypherpunks@cpunks.org Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 9:40 AM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany | In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil | disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* | above the law, and that in particular Swartz believed he was above the | law, and was shocked to find that he was not. | | There might be some sincere practitioners of civil disobedience, but | Swartz was not, and the big heroes of the civil disobedience brigade, | Ghandi and Thoreau, were not.

A long time ago, I spent a couple of weeks in jail for trespass (occupation of the site where the Seabrook reactor now stands).  Nearly everyone eventually pled not guilty with a notable exception: every single Quaker pleaded guilty on the grounds that in doing so and only in so doing did they bear witness.

However, those Quakers' positions may have been erroneous, based on a misunderstanding of the relevant law.  A person may claim to be 'not guilty' based on the fact that he wasn't there, he didn't do it, etc.  But, he may also claim to be 'not guilty' because what he did didn't constitute a crime, or he was justified based on extenuating circumstances, or he was trying to prevent a bigger crime. BTW, have you considered the implications of nuclear power, today?  Getting rid of the nuclear waste is still a problem, but now the big environmental problem is claimed to be 'global warming', or 'climate change', whatever they are calling it these days.  The typical twenty-something environmentalist can claim innocence (he was not around in the 1970's), but the building and operation of nuclear power plants was and is definitely a trade-off.  How many millions of tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere would have been avoided had people not deterred the construction of a more extensive nuclear power system?           Jim Bell

.... However, those Quakers' positions may have been erroneous, based on a misunderstanding of the relevant law.  A person may claim to be 'not guilty' based on the fact that he wasn't there, he didn't do it, etc.  But, he may also claim to be 'not guilty' because what he did didn't constitute a crime, or he was justified based on extenuating circumstances, or he was trying to prevent a bigger crime. in the US court system, is there an equivalent of jury nullification applied to a judicial ruling?

From: coderman <coderman@gmail.com> To: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> wrote: that is to say: is it possible to plead guilty, but a judge acting to nullify a perceived unjust law, could find you not guilty? Yes, the concept of 'jury nullification' exists in American law.   See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Informed_Jury_Association  .    Unfortunately, courts generally take the position that while jurors have the right to acquit regardless of the evidence, judges are not obliged to inform the jurors of that right.  Worse, judges usually take the position that they can order defense attorneys to not inform jurors of those jurors' rights on this subject.  See  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sparf_v._United_States A judge can also declare a defendant 'not guilty', despite a guilty verdict by a jury:  This is called "Judgment notwithstanding the verdict", abbreviated (from Latin, I believe) "j.n.o.v.".  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JNOV               Jim Bell

that someone sees a system > a construct (law) made by mankind and still inside of a build as infallible would believe in belief and would think they needed such things as "heros" > the greeks wrote about that pretty long ago u may want to update ur mindset intellectual rigor > and some lawyers i know figure your thought processies about as common as it gets mayb u cld bring urself to do some research On 1/1/14, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:

I sincerely wish you could have helped aaron it is all beyond sad and though some of his projects are being carried out i think we have to do more - Yes I am aware you are an alumni - do u have connections with other alumni ? We think the alumni are a pressure point they cld not ignore

Will connect with you further as the project progresses

Thanks very very much

Sent from my iPhone

On 31.12.2013, at 20:59, Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> wrote:

...

I am an alum of MIT (Class of 1980; Chemistry). I've just read the Wikipedia article on Aaron Swartz, and I am very sympathetic to him. I wish I'd been aware of his situation while he was alive; I might have been able to help, and would have tried to do so. Jim Bell

From: Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> To: Silent1 <lists@silent1.net> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks@cpunks.org> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:03 AM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

dear sir

we are reaching out to MIT alumni to make a public call of outrage re among other things the aaron swartz treatment by MIT would u b willing to b included?

specifically we would b asking for shifts in functionality not just complaining to the bricks

THANKS

On 12/31/13, Silent1 <lists@silent1.net> wrote:

...

Ahh, Dogecoin, didn't an online wallet service of theirs get hacked last week and completely cleaned out of hundreds of thousands of coins?

-----Original Message----- From: cypherpunks [mailto:cypherpunks-bounces@cpunks.org] On Behalf Of coderman Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:51 AM To: Griffin Boyce Cc: cpunks Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net> wrote:

...

... I prefer my shared hallucinations to be in the form of Lindens [1], ...

i'll let you cypherpunks in on a secret financial tip: the smart money banks in dogecoin: http://dogecoin.com/

...

-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Skype carimachet - 646-652-6434 Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>

Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.

-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.

Thanks that is very interesting I will pass the knowledge to others I know From what I understand Aaron was profoundly unhinged by the fact that he would have to live his life as a convicted felon and that was his major issue Pure sadness ... Sent from my iPhoney On 01.01.2014, at 21:28, Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> wrote:

No, I'm sorry, I have no links with other MIT alums.

One big misunderstanding that would have been able to clear up with aaron swartz had I been aware of his situation, that I hope other readers will now learn, is the issue of how much time he (or other federal defendants) would have faced if convicted. Federal criminal laws generally include with them a statement of the maximum punishment that can be applied: They are generally even numbers, such as "5 years", "10 years", "15 years" or so. However, such statements are basically archaic: In 1987, the laws were changed (prisoners called it "new law") to calculate sentences based on the defendant's criminal history, the severity of the crime, and other facts. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines

The following sentencing table is part of that Wikipedia article. I assume that Aaron Swartz would have had a "zero" "criminal history", in other words the Column labelled "I" (0 or 1) would have been used. An offense level up to 8 would have specified a sentence between 0 and 6 months. I would have to look up the specific charges to see what he faced, but I strongly doubt that he would have been sentenced to over 2 years, and probably under 1 year. Jim Bell

================quote from Wikipedia begins================

Sentencing table The sentencing table is an integral part of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.[24] The Offense Level (1-43) forms the vertical axis of the Sentencing Table. The Criminal History Category (I-VI) forms the horizontal axis of the Table. The intersection of the Offense Level and Criminal History Category displays the Guideline Range in months of imprisonment. "Life" means life imprisonment. For example, the guideline range applicable to a defendant with an Offense Level of 15 and a Criminal History Category of III is 24–30 months of imprisonment. Sentencing Table (effective Nov. 2012) (showing months of imprisonment)[25][26] Offense Level ↓ Criminal History Category (Criminal History Points) I (0 or 1) II (2 or 3) III (4,5,6) IV (7,8,9) V (10,11,12) VI (13+) Zone A 1 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 2 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 1-7 3 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 2-8 3-9 4 0-6 0-6 0-6 2-8 4-10 6-12 5 0-6 0-6 1-7 4-10 6-12 9-15 6 0-6 1-7 2-8 6-12 9-15 12-18 7 0-6 2-8 4-10 8-14 12-18 15-21 8 0-6 4-10 6-12 10-16 15-21 18-24 Zone B 9 4-10 6-12 8-14 12-18 18-24 21-27 10 6-12 8-14 10-16 15-21 21-27 24-30 11 8-14 10-16 12-18 18-24 24-30 27-33 Zone C 12 10-16 12-18 15-21 21-27 27-33 30-37 13 12-18 15-21 18-24 24-30 30-37 33-41 Zone D 14 15-21 18-24 21-27 27-33 33-41 37-46 15 18-24 21-27 24-30 30-37 37-46 41-51 16 21-27 24-30 27-33 33-41 41-51 46-57 17 24-30 27-33 30-37 37-46 46-57 51-63 18 27-33 30-37 33-41 41-51 51-63 57-71 19 30-37 33-41 37-46 46-57 57-71 63-78 20 33-41 37-46 41-51 51-63 63-78 70-87 21 37-46 41-51 46-57 57-71 70-87 77-96 22 41-51 46-57 51-63 63-78 77-96 84-105 23 46-57 51-63 57-71 70-87 84-105 92-115 24 51-63 57-71 63-78 77-96 92-115 100-125 25 57-71 63-78 70-87 84-105 100-125 110-137 26 63-78 70-87 78-97 92-115 110-137 120-150 27 70-87 78-97 87-108 100-125 120-150 130-162 28 78-97 87-108 97-121 110-137 130-162 140-175 29 87-108 97-121 108-135 121-151 140-175 151-188 30 97-121 108-135 121-151 135-168 151-188 168-210 31 108-135 121-151 135-168 151-188 168-210 188-235 32 121-151 135-168 151-188 168-210 188-235 210-262 33 135-168 151-188 168-210 188-235 210-262 235-293 34 151-188 168-210 188-235 210-262 235-293 262-327 35 168-210 188-235 210-262 235-293 262-327 292-365 36 188-235 210-262 235-293 262-327 292-365 324-405 37 210-262 235-293 262-327 292-365 324-405 360-life 38 235-293 262-327 292-365 324-405 360-life 360-life 39 262-327 292-365 324-405 360-life 360-life 360-life 40 292-365 324-405 360-life 360-life 360-life 360-life 41 324-405 360-life 360-life 360-life 360-life 360-life 42 360-life 360-life 360-life 360-life 360-life 360-life 43 life life life life life life

From: Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> To: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>; "lists@silent1.net" <lists@silent1.net> Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2014 1:04 AM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

I sincerely wish you could have helped aaron it is all beyond sad and though some of his projects are being carried out i think we have to do more - Yes I am aware you are an alumni - do u have connections with other alumni ? We think the alumni are a pressure point they cld not ignore

Will connect with you further as the project progresses

Thanks very very much

Sent from my iPhone

On 31.12.2013, at 20:59, Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> wrote:

...

I am an alum of MIT (Class of 1980; Chemistry). I've just read the Wikipedia article on Aaron Swartz, and I am very sympathetic to him. I wish I'd been aware of his situation while he was alive; I might have been able to help, and would have tried to do so. Jim Bell

From: Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> To: Silent1 <lists@silent1.net> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks@cpunks.org> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:03 AM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

dear sir

we are reaching out to MIT alumni to make a public call of outrage re among other things the aaron swartz treatment by MIT would u b willing to b included?

specifically we would b asking for shifts in functionality not just complaining to the bricks

THANKS

On 12/31/13, Silent1 <lists@silent1.net> wrote:

...

Ahh, Dogecoin, didn't an online wallet service of theirs get hacked last week and completely cleaned out of hundreds of thousands of coins?

-----Original Message----- From: cypherpunks [mailto:cypherpunks-bounces@cpunks.org] On Behalf Of coderman Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 8:51 AM To: Griffin Boyce Cc: cpunks Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net> wrote:

...

... I prefer my shared hallucinations to be in the form of Lindens [1], ...

i'll let you cypherpunks in on a secret financial tip: the smart money banks in dogecoin: http://dogecoin.com/

...

-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Skype carimachet - 646-652-6434 Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>

Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.

hey Jim, that is too much information.  In this age less is more. :)  Can't you just use pgp to sign the email and whoever wants to verify can do so?   -Joe ________________________________ From: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> To: coderman <coderman@gmail.com>; "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>; "jacob@appelbaum.net" <jacob@appelbaum.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 4:58 PM Subject: Fw: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany Having had "*coin tipjar" explained to me, I have set up a BTC receive address.    "jim btc tipjar"      1AzNPQ1NhiD9uG1hU5g5Kdaccb88Dus2Bo     Please note:  This address is the BTC tipjar for "Jim Bell", "James Dalton Bell", living at 7214 Corregidor, Vancouver WA 98664.  (phone and cell on request; As far as I know I'm listed.  I've never had an unlisted/unpublished phone number.).   Ham Call N7IJS (apparently I am the LAST "Tech-Plus" in existence; the FCC has refused to re-up my 2010 license application, but the laws say I can still do ham.)     Note Also:  Having been on (and off) the Cypherpunks list since 1995 (mostly off, of course), I understand that a reasonable sense of caution will make many of you think, "Is this REALLY the 'Jim Bell' who wrote the AP essay, etc?"   For those who doubt, I have Skype set up to do a voice videophone.  There is a picture of me, in a green sweater, taken by Declan McCullagh about June 2000 on the web; I haven't changed a lot.  (I even have my green sweater, too!).          Jim Disclaimer:    I am not associated with 'Sanjuro's "Assassination Market" in any way.  I don't know who 'Sanjuro' is.  ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> To: coderman <coderman@gmail.com>; "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>; "jacob@appelbaum.net" <jacob@appelbaum.net> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 11:09 PM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany Sorry to appear so ignorant, but what is a "*coin tipjar"?         Jim Bell ________________________________ From: coderman <coderman@gmail.com> To: Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com>; Jacob Appelbaum <jacob@appelbaum.net> Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 10:06 PM Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany ... hey Jim, (and Jake) neither one of you appear to have a *coin tipjar yet... why holding out? :) best regards,

Hi Jim, still love your sense of humour. All the best --Michael PS Some of your old stuff is at cpunks.wordpress.com and at JYA cryptome.org as well. 31.12.2013 10:46 Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com>:

I currently do not have a PGP key. This lack is not entirely due to laziness or ignorance. I also don't know anybody locally who has a PGP key, so I can't enter into the 'web of trust'. And having been so long disassociated with the CP list (and computers, too: Having been stuck in prison or denied access to computers for most of 15 years), I don't even recall how to do it. I have another reason to not 'do' PGP: Particularly due to the (unexpected) arrival of this 'Sanjuro' person, I am well aware that there are probably more than a few Feds who are on ultra-high alert, and from their point of view they may think of me as being "Suspect #1". If I go back and start using PGP again (even if only for signing things) I wonder what they will think. At the moment I have little need for secrecy, so I choose to not do PGP. (Also, I am virtually assuming that everything on my computer can be, and probably is, being read by a few dozen spy organizations of technically-competent nations. I use ordinary anti-virus programs, but I'm under no illusion that the NSA/CIA/GCHQ/TLA's of other nations can't devise a targeted bug that such software cannot find.) If any of you are interested in helping me confirm or deny this paranoid suspicion, I would very much appreciate your assistance.) Jim Bell

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Jim Bell <jamesdbell8@yahoo.com> wrote:

I currently do not have a PGP key. ... If I go back and start using PGP again (even if only for signing things) I wonder what they will think. At the moment I have little need for secrecy, so I choose to not do PGP.

this makes sense, and leads to a question; see below.

(Also, I am virtually assuming that everything on my computer can be, and probably is, being read by a few dozen spy organizations of technically-competent nations. I use ordinary anti-virus programs, but I'm under no illusion that the NSA/CIA/GCHQ/TLA's of other nations can't devise a targeted bug that such software cannot find.) If any of you are interested in helping me confirm or deny this paranoid suspicion, I would very much appreciate your assistance.)

so far we've seen 0.5%[0] of confirmations of general and nearly insurmountable vulnerability against a state level actor, ... let's see what 2014 has in store! :) the question: do you believe the counter-surveillance was a factor in the extreme measures used in your prosecution? AP seemed the most controversial and outwardly demonised aspect of the whole debacle, but perhaps i am giving too much weight to AP. the judge sealing the entire court file raises questions, but i also admit knowing little about the particulars of the facts and legal motions of the case. best regards, 0. snowden leaks, ~1.6% to ~.40% released http://cryptome.org/2013/11/snowden-tally.htm see also, tailored access megapwnage: http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-tao-ant.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-quantum-tasking.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-quantumtheory.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-catalog-appelbaum.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-tao-ant-pdf.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-catalog.zip http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-bildschirm.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-w-lan.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-usb.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-tastatu.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-server.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-router.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-rechner.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-raumuber.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-mobilfunk.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-handys.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-ant-firewalls.pdf