Re: For Liars and Loafers, Cellphones Offer an Alibi

I think they do some form of triangulation from the cell towers. --bgt

Re: Palm Hack?

On Jun 3, 2004, at 9:50, Tyler Durden wrote: Actually, this is really my threat model. What I really want to know is that, given the above possibility, is there a "fire wall" for a PDA for this kind of attack? (Yes I know it's possible to put a Password on stuff in your Palm, BUT I bet that woul

Re: message, but also test

compromise your nym (like your real name, or your other nym's names, etc). --bgt

Re: The Gilmore Dimissal

that. I notice now that Amtrak requires ID as well: http://www.amtrak.com/idrequire.html Does anyone know when this happened, or have experiences with having to show ID on Amtrak? You need ID to drive, bus, train, or fly... I guess all that's left is walking and possibly biking. :P --bgt

Re: Anonymizer employees need killing

it from Tim, who started this list, and the original physical meetings, it's no secret I've gotten really tired of the "need killing" chest-puffing *I* did not say anyone needed killing, so I'm assuming this part of your rant was targeted at someone else. --bgt

Re: Anonymizer employees need killing

mizer." Even if we leave aside the question of whether one should trust a service which /could/ betray you if it were run by an untrustworthy operator, you state openly in your policy that you're not to be trusted! --bgt

Re: Anonymizer employees need killing

ust as a point of curiosity (because I think it's irrelevant, for the reason above), An Metet, how are you sure there was no subpoena or court order involved? --bgt

Re: How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web

On Mar 4, 2004, at 10:49, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 10:30 PM 3/3/04 -0500, R. A. Hettinga wrote: The New York Times March 4, 2004 How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web A

Re: Lunar Colony

rs colonization after the Chinese announced their plans to colonize and mine the moon awhile ago. --bgt

Re: Quantum Loop Gravity Be For Whitey

> On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 00:20, bgt wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 10:48, cubic-dog wrote: > > > in force, because, we finally get slave, indentured servants who > > > will either take the 90 cents and hour or be deported. > > > > This kind of rhetori

Quartering soldiers

> If this takeover of houses to launch a raid is not a "black letter law" > case of the government quartering troops in residences, nothing is. > Exigent circumstance, perhaps, but so was King George's need to quarter > his troops. I think someone in this case would have a much better argument for a Fourth amendment violation (unreasonable seizure of their home, albeit temporarily), though probably, today, still unsuccessful in a court. --bgt

Re: Quantum Loop Gravity Be For Whitey

On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 14:15, cubic-dog wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, bgt wrote: > > ... Anyway... "be productive or be deported" does not constitute > > I don't think I said that, you put it in quotes, implying I did. > It's an okay paraphrase though, so

Re: Quantum Loop Gravity Be For Whitey

Aargh, damn computer... I apologize for my incomplete post. On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 00:20, bgt wrote: > On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 10:48, cubic-dog wrote: > > in force, because, we finally get slave, indentured servants who > > will either take the 90 cents and hour or be deported. &g

Re: Quantum Loop Gravity Be For Whitey

On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 10:48, cubic-dog wrote: > in force, because, we finally get slave, indentured servants who > will either take the 90 cents and hour or be deported. This kind of rhetoric is extremely irritating. If they can be deported, they are neither slaves or indentured servants. If t

Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

es, phone numbers, etc). Of course the police tried to take the site down but the court upheld the site's right to publish any publicly available information about the cops (I believe they excepted the SSN's). --bgt

Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 01:07, Tim May wrote: > On Jan 11, 2004, at 2:12 PM, bgt wrote: > > > On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 13:57, Tim May wrote: > >> I don't know if he did, but of course there is no requirement in the > >> U.S. that citizen-units either carry or present

Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

pinion continued, "is that it is the observable conduct, not the identity, of a person, upon which an officer must legally rely when investigating crimes and enforcing the law." The US Supreme Court has agreed to review and is scheduled to hear arguments this year. http://www.epic.org/privacy/hiibel/default.html --bgt

Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

On Sat, 2004-01-10 at 00:22, bgt wrote: > On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 10:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > That made Silveira the law of the land, you see. > > That means that no American citizen, since December 1, 2003, has a fundamental > > right to possess a firearm. > &

Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

though, given their historical extreme reluctance to hear any 2nd amendment cases. And it's very dubious what the decision would be. --bgt

Re: Sources and Sinks

after a several-year hiatus. How the hell did so many statists ever get the idea that ubiquitous cryptography would ever further their goals? Or are they just here to distract us with statism vs liberty type political debates so we can't get any real work done??) --bgt