Re: europe physical meeting
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: here's the rundown: - a time my current plan says: Friday, 29th. September 2000 that is close enough to actually happen, and still long enough to allow for planning and travel arrangements. if anyone wants to come, but can't on that specific date, please yell NOW and make an alternative suggestion. sounds ok. has anyone heard what happened to the RSA patent expiration party on sept 20, that was supposed to take place in amsterdam btw ? - a place = since the number of participants is a total variable, that's a difficult part. I'm currently looking for some kind of cafe or other place with both indoors and outdoors seats/tables that's large enough, has an acceptable atmosphere and is otherwise suitable. hmm.. we're still talking about hamburg here, right ? you're right in so far as since this is the first european cypherpunk meeting one can have absolutely no idea how many people will be showing. depending on how well announced the meeting is i'd guess 50 people however (maybe the bay area people can give us a rough count on how much people are showing to an averge meeting there and we can try to extrapolate something from that - cultural difference nonwithstanding :)... there were physical meetings in non-west-coast places as well, dunno remember where however. the numbers for those should be a little bit more of a benchmark/pointer to us). A cafe sounds like a good idea, we might try meeting at a mall, on a public place or somewhere else however. - an agenda === there should be at least a rough outline and a topic or two. if anyone wants to speak about a specific topic, tell me. still thinking about that. i have a couple of topics in mind. will post to the list after further re-consideration. let's get things kicking! cheers, -ralf -- Ralf-P. Weinmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP fingerprint: 2048/46C772078ACB58DEF6EBF8030CBF1724
Re: europe physical meeting
At 2:19 PM +0200 9/4/00, Tom Vogt wrote:
- a place
=
since the number of participants is a total variable, that's a difficult
part. I'm currently looking for some kind of cafe or other place with
both indoors and outdoors seats/tables that's large enough, has an
acceptable atmosphere and is otherwise suitable.
- an agenda
===
there should be at least a rough outline and a topic or two. if anyone
wants to speak about a specific topic, tell me.
First, good luck on your meeting.
Second, here's my experience with informal Cypherpunks physical meetings:
* we in the Bay Area have had numerous informal gatherings at coffee
shops, outdoor seating areas, other public areas (a la '2600"). And
this is with an attendance sometimes reaching 50.
(Which, in my crotchety opinion, is too high. Attendance over about
20 tends to make the event a lecture rather than a gathering.)
* agendas are seldom needed. We got by in the first, and most
interesting, few years of the Cypherpunks will little or no agenda in
advance. We sat around a table or on the floor and we talked.
Sometimes someone got up and went to a blackboard, if available, and
drew pictures.
* too much of a formal agenda tends to encourage "guest speakers,"
which, in my view, is _not_ a good idea. Sometimes a notable guest
speaker is a good idea, but usually the result is that someone not
part of the culture talks about what his or her company or
organization is doing...things which are readily discoverable from
Web sources.
* and don't be afraid to discuss politics and political implications
of technologies. Again, this used to be more common in the early days
of the Bay Area Cypherpunks meetings. (As time passed, as meetings
grew larger, politics just about vanished completely. Perhaps this is
too harsh an assessment, but I believe the Bay Area Cypherpunks
meetings in the past few years have just become the place for
twentysomething geeks to show up to talk to others and to check out
job prospects. Almost _none_ of the 50 or so attendees at a typical
Saturday gathering are participants in the Cypherpunks list,
tellingly.)
Bigger is not always better.
In conclusion, I encourage you to just "hang loose." ("lose sein")
--Tim May
--
-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Sean Roach wrote: As regards Petro's response to same. Read up on the history of the U.S.A., and U.K. Unless I've misinterpreted, slaves were forbidden to learn to read in the U.S. Not exactly. They weren't forbidden to learn; however, it was forbidden for anyone (including other slaves) to teach them. It amounts to the same general thing (instruction being unavailable to them) but when a bunch of slaves gathered around Sojourner Truth for lessons in reading, it was her that was breaking the law, not them. Native Americans were made to give up thier traditions in favor of "civilized" customs. Yeah. And some of them did and some of them didn't. And the Irish were similary denied the ability to read, or to play thier traditional music. (Bards tended to sing songs counter to the english policies.) It's a long damn tradition, unfortunately. In England, it goes back to the Norman invasion and the way the Saxons were treated; but the Normans were just copying the Romans, and the Romans were just copying the Greeks. Last I heard, the bagpipe was still considered a weapon. There's a guy who gives Foghorn "concerts" in Golden Gate Park. He has to wear hearing protection and a padded suit, otherwise it leaves bruises all over his body and he can't hear for a few days. His face still winds up black-and-blue, especially around the eyes. There's a law against playing amplified instruments without a permit -- but foghorns aren't amplified, they're just LOUD. After hearing this guy once, I did an interesting study in sound physics, which leads me to believe it is probably possible to create a vehicle-mounted, deisel-powered bagpipe-like device that could be used to play tunes and which would simultaneously destroy buildings. Considering the bagpipe a weapon isn't that far off and not just for reasons of the ideas behind the songs they traditionally accompany. If I heard right, It became illegal to speak Scottish Gaelic, for a time. When the culture of a conqueror is sufficiently different, and they can get away with it, they always try to take the native language away. That takes away all the old songs and poetry, and most of the stories, and makes it easier to stamp your own culture on a subjugated people. Bear
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: And the Irish were similary denied the ability to read, or to play thier traditional music. (Bards tended to sing songs counter to the english policies.) It's a long damn tradition, unfortunately. In England, it goes back to the Norman invasion and the way the Saxons were treated; but the Normans were just copying the Romans, and the Romans were just copying the Greeks. It's easy to look at history in this way, seeing some people as villians and other as victims. But do remember that St Patrick wasn't Irish at all. He was an English boy, stolen by Irish pirates and sold into slavery in Ireland. And for centuries English kings used Irish mercenaries to subdue their unruly subjects. When the culture of a conqueror is sufficiently different, and they can get away with it, they always try to take the native language away. That takes away all the old songs and poetry, and most of the stories, and makes it easier to stamp your own culture on a subjugated people. But this is mostly just laziness. When Patrick didn't do what he was told, I'm sure that his masters made no effort to learn his language. They just shouted at him louder in Gaelic. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
No Subject
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
But do remember that St Patrick wasn't Irish at all. He was an English boy, stolen by Irish pirates and sold into slavery in Ireland. De-lurking briefly to correct this... St Patrick was a Romano-Briton. There were no English in Britain at the time he lauched his Irish mission. There was no English language, and certainly no English identity. The Angles, Saxons and Jutes that make up the English (an identity that only established itself when the Franco-Norman ruling dynasty in England lost its territories in France) were spread across Germany and Denmark at the time. But this is mostly just laziness. When Patrick didn't do what he was told, I'm sure that his masters made no effort to learn his language. They just shouted at him louder in Gaelic. Patrick would have spoken Gaelic or Latin as his first language. The Irish would have been no more difficult to understand than a Californian to a Noo Yawker. The upper echelons of Irish society may even have spoken Latin. All the best Tiarnan
..do not count on the anonymity of the Internet to serve as a shield for your illegal conduct
"Anyone who would use the Internet to commit a crime should understand one thing -- do not count on the anonymity of the Internet to serve as a shield for your illegal conduct. As technology advances, so do our investigative techniques and our abilities to protect the public." Quite true. However, any well informed LE-type will tell you only amateurs are likely to be caught. I dare say if we select one of this list's more informed members, say Black Unicorn, and assume he intended to engage in a similar exploit as this fellow from Bloomberg. I would find it highly unlikely that BU would ever be apprehended for the deed (assuming he didn't brag). ks
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patrick would have spoken Gaelic or Latin as his first language. The Irish would have been no more difficult to understand than a Californian to a Noo Yawker. The upper echelons of Irish society may even have spoken Latin. An interesting point: There are ancient inscriptions in Wales that no one has been able to read in modern times. Deciphering an unknown langauge, not related to known languages, when it is written in an unknown script is a feat of linguistics that transcends mere cryptanalysis and has, so far, rarely or never been done. And, as language, doubtless it has regular structure, patterns, grammar, and the flexibility of use that people in everyday lives need in speaking - and presumably they're not even encrypted. "Poor Man's Crypto", possibly even better than digital crypto, may consist in creating an artificial language together, and then using it whenever you don't want to be eavesdropped on. Bear
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But do remember that St Patrick wasn't Irish at all. He was an English boy, stolen by Irish pirates and sold into slavery in Ireland. De-lurking briefly to correct this... Oo Shows what happen when you post casually to the cypherpunks list ;-) You are right. I should have said that he was a British lad. St Patrick was a Romano-Briton. There were no English in Britain at the time he lauched his Irish mission. There was no English language, and certainly no English identity. The Angles, Saxons and Jutes that make up the English (an identity that only established itself when the Franco-Norman ruling dynasty in England lost its territories in France) were spread across Germany and Denmark at the time. But this is mostly just laziness. When Patrick didn't do what he was told, I'm sure that his masters made no effort to learn his language. They just shouted at him louder in Gaelic. Patrick would have spoken Gaelic or Latin as his first language. The Irish would have been no more difficult to understand than a Californian to a Noo Yawker. The upper echelons of Irish society may even have spoken Latin. Several authorities, eg the Cathoic Encyclopedia, say that St Patrick became fluent in the language of the Irish while in slavery. Some claim that he was born in Scotland, some say in Wales. None support your suggestion that the language of his masters was his native tongue. The real point here is that the Irish, generally portrayed as victims of the British, were sometimes victims, sometimes villians -- like most everybody else. PS. I am immensely fond of Ireland; me mother is Irish, in fact ;-) -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
Patrick would have spoken Gaelic or Latin as his first language. The Irish would have been no more difficult to understand than a Californian to a Noo Yawker. The upper echelons of Irish society may even have spoken Latin. Several authorities, eg the Cathoic Encyclopedia, say that St Patrick became fluent in the language of the Irish while in slavery. Some claim that he was born in Scotland, some say in Wales. Both Scotland and Wales contained people who spoke Celtic languages. Although it is difficult to determine where Patrick is from, I believe the scholarly working consensus is that he was from the Roman province of Britannia, where the majority of the inhabitants would have spoken a language of Celtic origin. Perhaps my analogy of New York and Californain English was misleading: a truer example would be the relationship of Spanish with Catalan, or Sicilian with Tyrolean. That's to say, mutually intelligible, with difficulty. Traders and slave-traders (such as the slaver who captured Patrick) would have traded with the Roman Empire in Britain and elsewhere, so presumably a lingua franca emerged. No doubt Patrick learned his powerful mastery of Old Irish from his captors. [If you want to read more on the subject, from sources more up-to-date and historically accurate than the Catholic Encyclopedia, try http://www.ucc.ie/~peritia for a jumping off point.] None support your suggestion that the language of his masters was his native tongue. The real point here is that the Irish, generally portrayed as victims of the British, were sometimes victims, sometimes villians -- like most everybody else. I don't deny it for a minute. I had a problem with the way you took the currently existing region known as England and its current (troubled) relations with Ireland, and projected it back into a period of history where an entirely different socio-political scene existed. All the best Tiarnan
Bruble2 is back
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi to all,
Bruble2 is now back and kicking. Queued mail processed
You can add capabilities string
$remailer{"bruble2"} = [EMAIL PROTECTED] "cpunk mix hybrid middle pgp pgponly
latent ek ekx esub cut hash repgp remix ext max test inflt150 rhop5 klen1024";
Keys are unchanged and available from remailer.
Yours
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: N/A
iQEVAwUBObLX8rjwkQXxOXLNAQFPlgf+Kiv1KbQoVz9krMj/eXZajHRv6sWd2V6o
y4q7PN75kzlnuiYvN2OKC1kk2ENrDXf5MptE8RRecuytXrCCCFhy+eZnJ35gaSWJ
gLvPEHga75IlcMXlNhkk6Vcw1ENi03k4D2g17/GfbjKavKQYAB2c1sVJWLOj7NbX
gIr/JyMHnYmekGpWraen18c1R78+UYK21vtjiVkmunVF5RCFq6d0dLQfwAdD1stN
Fc450ZHP0IVHpHxMXI4hYSGP9L4w576pQQb34LZitVExZ7lKymypy/RPMJWh5Yc/
FGMtOqUv2z8s2WRM2ptOfHbt1kClxRNsMOgLLYqcdCQj29KAw3T7kQ==
=bCD5
- -END PGP SIGNATURE-
~~~
This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message.
It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.alias.net.
Date: Mon Sep 4 21:41:19 2000 GMT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: 2.6.2
iQEVAwUBObQXA05NDhYLYPHNAQFcuQf+PnrKlVwJ8ycrDC5O3YSGyplSVyq3Np5w
w3fQ9O+dpJPhgspR2FueEvBqQb1WXyXZ/3va3b1PjFRjH29Wt1ygiCOGBbVghDJe
XcE0nqXGWCA90jn6UeMUl8KPF9EFC016gFlxq8/exqSXGGKRNdBijPj5Umm3aTPN
ApeVYY6ZJPE9xl06aajYOFTvytqc3afJz5QB+BF1cjbieqfDwWkBTlzMJog4V2bu
Ws22euXYAMu2/jLkd95HDkBJXOrDiKXUj1LsvqVzhH4v9zamOzKb+FR78fpbBcwX
lFhazroDa8szrUlxbq5byHOIpYiKCPFg67l+Q94iYst2WOa0/2IO2w==
=dVcc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
At 1:24 PM -0700 9/4/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: An interesting point: There are ancient inscriptions in Wales that no one has been able to read in modern times. Deciphering an unknown langauge, not related to known languages, when it is written in an unknown script is a feat of linguistics that transcends mere cryptanalysis and has, so far, rarely or never been done. And, as language, doubtless it has regular structure, patterns, grammar, and the flexibility of use that people in everyday lives need in speaking - and presumably they're not even encrypted. "Poor Man's Crypto", possibly even better than digital crypto, may consist in creating an artificial language together, and then using it whenever you don't want to be eavesdropped on. How is your "Poor Man's Crypto" different in any way from _codes_? Cf. any standard text on why codes are not nearly as useful as ciphers. --Tim May -- -:-:-:-:-:-:-: Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
At 01:24 PM 9/4/2000 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: ... An interesting point: There are ancient inscriptions in Wales that no one has been able to read in modern times. Deciphering an unknown langauge, not related to known languages, when it is written in an unknown script is a feat of linguistics that transcends mere cryptanalysis and has, so far, rarely or never been done. And, as language, doubtless it has regular structure, patterns, grammar, and the flexibility of use that people in everyday lives need in speaking - and presumably they're not even encrypted. "Poor Man's Crypto", possibly even better than digital crypto, may consist in creating an artificial language together, and then using it whenever you don't want to be eavesdropped on. That sound like the Navajo codetalkers. I can see two easy problems with this. A secret shared is no secret. If even one person versed in the language were to side with the opposing front, all records written in that cypher would become open. A new language would have to have new words for practically everything. Any borrowed word would open the language up to analysis. If you didn't get around to inventing a word for digital recording. You had digital, but you forgot recording, then saying digital recording in a sentance, would give someone a clue to grammatical structure. Unfortunately, to get a sufficient vocabulary to be flexible, would require a larger population using the language. If the language is sufficiently difficult to learn, it might be useful as a code but it would be hard to extend the population who could use it. If I remember my history, which is not to say that I do, the Codetalkers method worked because there was a small population who knew the language already, none of them were acquired by the Japaneese, learning the language was difficult, (the missionary who suggested it had managed to learn it some, if memory serves), and the language had existed, and been used, enough to be sufficiently complex. Still not complex enough. They had to spell some things out, like placenames. If just two people contrived it, then what they might have to say to one another might be secure, but would be limited to topics they had discussed in detail before, or related topics. If a population of 1,000 spoke it with fluency, and had for several years, the language may be able to deal with just about any current concept or object, but the opposition would almost certainly have access to the language as well. This would seem to limit the language to making disparaging comments about the person ahead of you at the checkout stand, confident that she didn't know what you were saying about him or her. Or discussing the shoplifting of luxeries with your schoolmates, relatively confident that the store clerk wouldn't know what you were planning, or even that you might not be casually discussing last nights game. Both examples I've suspected I might have witnessed. Good luck, Sean
Re: Whipped Europeans
At 06:15 AM 9/3/00 -0400, you wrote: On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, David Marshall wrote: Not to mention that there exists a certain peptide, the name of which escapes me at the moment, which is naturally occuring in the brain. It is five amino acids long, and exerts an effect about 5000 times stronger than that of Heroin. There are far more where that came from. Of course. Just as there is anandamide, the transmitter which hemp compounds mainly mimic. Only you do not easily get such substances into the brain without using a needle - proteins generally do not get through the blood-brain barrier absent active transport. Most inhaled substances can easily circumvent the brain-blood barrier through a nasal path (forget which). Its now become a common dosage approach for certain brain medicines. steve
Re: Treatment of subjugated people (and bagpipes)
At 07:42 PM 9/4/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: At 4:38 PM -0400 9/4/00, Steven Furlong wrote: Ray Dillinger wrote: There are good reasons for the governments of the world (even Italy's, for our Italian friend who is insulted that we don't write enough about Italy) not to want to test the limits of the law: adhocracies like ambiguity. What about the right to remain silent? How does the Fifth Amendment impinge on this issue? A criminal defendant has the right to remain silent. He cannot be compelled to tell where evidence is located. He cannot be compelled to testify against himself. Although this list is mainly focused on the social implications of crypto and privacy. It has also been a frequent forum for libertarian ideals: like smaller government. There can be no greater lever to reduce the size of government than "...to cut off its oxygen," that is revenue. One of the better examples of the intersection of the Fifth Amendment and taxes involves W4 and 1040 U.S. federal tax forms. For many years legislators have publicly maintained that we have a nation of voluntary tax compliance. (Yet woe onto those who decide not to volunteer.) Widely accepted federal court rulings consider statements on these tax forms as testimony (not evidence) in a court of law. Since under our Constitution one cannot be compelled to testify against himself it seems reasonable that one cannot be compelled to submit to endorsing either form. Only one case I know of (Conklin vs. U.S.) has been adjudicated on this issue. Conklin won but the case. The federal court ruled that submission of tax forms was voluntary, but the ruling was suppressed by a legal procedure which allow courts to selectively deny its citing in subsequent cases. Adhocracies like ambiguity Napster has tapped into a broad reservoir of resentment and resistance to paying too much for music. I believe all U.S. libertarians on the list should be considering how a high profile test case of the constitutionality of the U.S. federal tax system might tap into a similar disdain for taxation and achieve substantially more constraint of government encroachment on civil liberties than our valiant crypto coding efforts. ks
