On 10/13/2016 05:27 PM, juan wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 17:14:40 -0700
> Razer <ray...@riseup.net> wrote:
>> On 10/13/2016 12:54 PM, jim bell wrote:
>>> But if just about everybody had phones installed with
>>> 'good' (rather than 'perfect') encryption, encryption that it would
>>> take a large amount of the NSA's resources to crack, we'd be living
>>> in a far better world than what we have now.
>> This is my take on tor as well.
> Why do you keep posting pentagon's propaganda razer?
That's not Pentagon propaganda Juan. That's my opinion of the
statistical probability of finding every needle in a haystack and the
energy expended to do so. Their peeps would claim tor's god-like
infallibility. That IS NOT what I'm saying nor have I ever claimed that.
>> There's safety in numbers. On the
>> ground OR in cyberworld. If EVERYONE used it, well yeah, they'll get
>> ALL the dataz, but they could use up all the silicon on the planet
>> storing it, and all the carbon burned up to run the machinery to
>> process that data... etc.
>> It's possible to make their technology so expensive to use the US
>> treasury couldn't support the drain.
>> Ps. The silicon IS going away... The next best substitute, whatever
>> that might be, and re-engineering everything to use some
>> less-efficient substrate, ought to cool the computer industry's jets
>> a little...
>>> *From:* Zenaan Harkness <z...@freedbms.net>
>>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:03:36PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>>> On 7/24/14, Ulex Europae <euro...@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:euro...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>> At 05:25 AM 1/17/2014, Jim Bell forwarded:
>>> To me, the problem is obviously the people who write such articles,
>>> and perhaps others that write the headlines, people who know far
>>> less about security even than those who merely frequent the
>>> Cypherpunks list. (In better times, when most of the posts were
>>> on-topic.) Prior to the revelation of NSA's massive data farms (for
>>> instance, the one recently revealed in Utah), even the ordinary
>>> POTS (plain old telephone system) was 'fair' in security, in the
>>> sense that the large majority of the 'wheat' (the stuff the NSA
>>> wants to record, store, and search for) was immersed in a ton of
>>> 'chaff', the billions of phone calls made on a daily basis. The
>>> government couldn't look at information that they didn't know
>>> existed, and didn't have a copy of. Relatively good would be
>>> encrypted security that cannot be (easily) broken by even the NSA.
>>> Even better would be a system which eliminates metadata, sort of
>>> a Tor-ized cell phone system. Why doesn't that currently exist? A
>>> start would be if the major cell-phone companies publicly announced
>>> that they refuse to even collect such metadata, or at least it
>>> would be automatically erased at the end of each individual phone
>>> call. (Since most phone billing is no longer sensitive to
>>> distance, or even time, why record such information in a central
>>> Such an announcement would not be automatically believable,
>>> especially to cynics like us, but the long-term non-existence of
>>> news of criminal trials which actually admitted such evidence would
>>> tend to convince the public that the evidence is either not being
>>> collected at all, or at least is only being used secret, and not
>>> openly in criminal trials.
>>>> Is that even possible unless you:
>>>> 1) personally pick up your phone off the factory
>>>> floor production line at random?
>>> To _us_, the cypherpunks, the answer is obviously "no". But if just
>>> about everybody had phones installed with 'good' (rather than
>>> 'perfect') encryption, encryption that it would take a large amount
>>> of the NSA's resources to crack, we'd be living in a far better
>>> world than what we have now. An even better addition would be a
>>> system which actually made the NSA _FEAR_ to use such surveillance
>>> results. Would the average telephone user be willing to spend 10
>>> cents per month to supply a fund to kill any government worker who
>>> assisted in the recording, storage, decrypting, or using such
>>> recorded information, including prosecutors, judges, and government
>>> investigators in criminal trials? $25 million per month, in
>>> America, would buy 250 deaths at $100,000 each, per month. Somehow,
>>> I think that this would solve the problem.
>>> Jim Bell