Anonymous wrote:
> Are you really that dumb, Sandy ?
> You can not think of anything
> more intelligent than challenging
> the anonymous poster for not being
> proactive ?
No, but if that's what I'd actually done, I'd have to agree with you. But I
asked for more than (and which you chose not to quote). What I was pointing
out was the hypocritical, gutless tendency of an all-talk critic who (a)
utters unsubstantiated libels, (b) fails to see the obvious counter examples
(e.g., the DES cracker) and (c) appears to be a Mitty-esque sidewalk
supervisor.
> I agree that most cypherpunks are just
> aged and overweight pranksters.
Your "aged and overweight" ad hominem is irrelevant, even if true. As with
the Secret Squirrel, I'd like you to substantiate your prankster
characterization. Since you say this describes "most cypherpunks" a few
dozen examples would be appreciated. After all, from time to time there
have been a couple of thousand "aged and overweight pranksters" on the
Cypherpunks mailing list.
> What is the "Stego" project, pray
> tell ? Something very well known
> in your circle ?
Yes, in Cypherpunk circles. Do a web search.
> And what did YOU do Sandy, that somehow
> impaired government's ability to harvest ?
First, I am not "most Cypherpunks" which was the thrust of Secret Squirrel
and your statement. Whether or not I've done any "good works" is therefore
irrelevant. I've done more than my share, but I will not discuss it in this
context. (However, watch this space for something I'm currently working
on.)
S a n d y
