Where is Coderman?

[John Newman]

On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 04:53:15PM -0700, Mirimir wrote:
> On 12/31/2018 02:30 PM, Where is Coderman? wrote:
> > Where is Coderman?
> > 
> > Searching public database and https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/ shows no record of Martin Peck in prison.
> > 
> > He filed Court case "Roark v. United States 6:12-cv-01354-MC" at address:
> > 27464 SW Vandershuere Road
> > Hillsboro, OR 97123
> > https://www.google.com/maps/place/27464+SW+Vanderschuere+Rd,+Hillsboro,+OR+97123,+USA/@45.394192,-122.9598845,259m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x549514881c65e9fd:0x8a97ff4b304f7948!8m2!3d45.3941779!4d-122.959525
> > 
> > This looks to be not there anymore? Or maybe Coderman got rid of horses.
> > 
> > A while back Coderman posted about FBI disruption strategies. Did Coderman get disrupted? Or is Coderman dead?
> 
> My best guess: he gave up the persona after being outed as Martin Peck.
> 
> This was my news of it:
> 
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: Re: Pastebin of banned accounts found
> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 19:59:07 +0200
> From: carlo von lynX <lynX at time.to.get.psyced.org>
> To: <SNIP>
> 
> Hello, illustre group of recipients. I made a bit of research
> into the matter, wanting to figure out which e-mail exchange
> made "coderman" think I belong into a list of troublemakers
> even if I do my best to always discuss rationally - and how
> such a list would come about with so many respected names
> along mine. Well, I was successful. Here is what I found.
> 
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-December/035866.html
> 
> Mr coderman admits to go by the real name "Martin R. Peck".
> He caused some confusion by promoting a fake NSA program that
> didn't actually exist. On the Whonix forum he "anonymously"
> reported his own news, introducing himself as follows:
> 
> > Martin R. Peck, software engineer, has created this BigSun automated
> redaction system, which he has offered to provide to the NSA.
> 
> At the same time I had been having an exchange with him
> where I had openly dared to doubt the safety of the debian
> binary distribution system - a threat that he tried to
> downplay by comparing it with much less likely threats.
> 
>     See
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-December/035867.html
>     thru
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-December/035879.html
> 
> We didn't actually arrive at any inflammatory tones, he
> just disappeared after his identity had been lifted and
> his argumentation started to look suspicious more than anything.
> 
> Disappearing was a smart move, as I had indeed forgotten
> entirely about him. Probably so have you.
> 
> What do I gather from this? Keeping my hands off of debian
> or any of its derivates has been a good choice. Same goes
> for fedora. Everybody get your gentoo skills back in shape,
> or help Guix/Nix get ready for prime time.

It's been years since I used gentoo/portage, but my understanding is
that its trended towards binary packages.. of course, this may be a
misunderstanding, because I haven't used it in years :) 

And I'm sure you can still use portage in strictly source build mode.

I've noticed the same thing with FreeBSD - unless you keep your own
package repo with poudriere, or maybe portmaster or something,
trying to keep a mix of stuff installed via src, from ports, and
binaries installed directly via the pkg command, can cause some
issues. The.. "issues"..  are largely to do with whether you went
in and changed options in the `make config` stage of building a
particular port.  I suppose if you just built EVERYTHING from src
out of ports (which actually converts what you just built into a
FreeBSD txz pkg in the process of `make install`) and never installed
a binary package, it might not be such a big deal.. until you tried
to do a major OS update, via freebsd-update or via make
buildworld/buildkernel && make installworld/installkernel, in either
case you generally need to upgrade all your packages to use the new
ABI, if you're doing a major version jump.


> 
> <SNIP>

-- 
GPG fingerprint: 17FD 615A D20D AFE8 B3E4  C9D2 E324 20BE D47A 78C7
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20190102/a1f79cc6/attachment.sig>