Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users
Igor Chudov wrote: I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy in order to avoid seeing my banners. too bad, you lost. no, there's no way you can do that. I'm operating a junkbuster proxy for 100+ people in the company and let's just say that if you find a way to block us out, I'll find a way to get in again and send the patch in.
Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users
Igor Chudov wrote: This may or may not be true. This all depends on how junkbusters script works. Perhaps junkbusters filters out all 480x90 images, for instance. In which case I can place a 480x90 transparent gif at the bottom of my entrance page, and upon request of such gif I can set something in the user's cookie that would allow him/her further browsing. A lot of things are computer detectable. why don't you simply look at the source? Maybe it is collapsing for companies who hire dozens of programmers to create some trivial nonsensical sites, e.g. drkoop.com. I created my site by myself, with no costs other than my time involved (and I enjoyed doing it anyway, so the true cost is near zero), and banners nicely supplement my income. I am not looking for a multimillion IPO, just looking to make some $$ after all expenses. I have the benefit of a nice name (www.algebra.com), so I do not need to spend any $$ at all to attract visitors. without sparking a political discussion about the PC of banner ads, your main problem is that banner services (i.e. external sources) are undetectable to you because junkbuster never does anything to YOUR site - it just refuses to grab the ads from the external site. you may have a way if you would serve the banners yourself. but I doubt there's money in that.
Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users
Alan Olsen wrote: Actually you can. Junkbusters mucks with the http headers for client type. subject to configuration. not reliable.
Re: NZ: Sweeping powers for spy agencies
This report is consistent with DoJ's advocacy of a US national,
as well as international, system for police agencies to collect
and share criminal justice information, and to do so while there
is no law against using advanced technology for this purpose.
As noted here recently, see a presentation by DoJ on how
to override with a PR campaign citizens' concerns with privacy
violations of such systems:
http://cryptome.org/doj-ji-pi.ppt
This continues the transfer and use of technology developed
for national security purposes to law enforcement agencies,
worldwide, with the initiative being taken by DoJ and FBI,
assisted and advised by DoD and the intel community (with
former members of the latter now employed by domestic
agencies or running companies selling natsec-derived
services to domestic customers).
What is fascinating about this evolution is the screaming
by domestic victims when they learn that means and methods
are being applied to them that they wholeheartedly approve
when aimed at foreigners, immigrants, criminals and other
stigmatized targets such as radicals, anarchists, commies,
neo-nazis, dissidents and whoever is different from you and
me, well, no doubt you include me in your bullseye and me
you when we get a whiff of the terrifying scent spread
by the malodor-spreading criminal justice mongerers.
Nothing about this whipsawing of terror and anti-terror
technology is new to this forum, but the news reports do
confirm the need to keep grinding out new outlaw means
and methods to defy the inlaw ("justice", crime-fighting)
initiatives that just cant spend money fast enough to abrade
and salve. The invention of new (advanced-tech) criminality
is high on the agenda, right up there with the propagation
of assurance that only governments can combat burgeoning
national and economic security-threatening outlawry.
What is not said, or maybe only whispered to oversighters
hairy ears, is do not ask us to look into mirrors to see
true outlaws agrinning. Do not ask us to conduct our
affairs in non-outlaw secret settings.
Turncoats are a special feature of the official outlaw
cartel, when those who once faught official criminality are
recruited to ID, track, provoke, gather evidence, indict
and convict former associates. Read Michael Froomkin
on ICANN's board members who cant forgo power-
wielding:
http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/boardsquat.htm
This is a tip of the iceberg of large numbers of means
and methods technicians being drawn into the global
justice system with sweetheart contracts and jobs and
places on advisory boards. To serve the national interest
and to get regular whisperings from those in the know it
all business.
Here's a recent article on the price paid by scholars to
see CIA classified material:
http://cryptome.org/cia-price.htm
Mootos
There has recently been some discussion on UKcrypto of a hypothesised eavesdropping-safe boot CD containing OS necessary software to get encrypted IP links to a (predetermined?) safe site. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/peter.fairbrother/ The "won't be able to import files" and so on sounds familiar from a long time ago. Isn't this the case in the maximum implementation of the old coloured book standards? (Too boring to look it up) Also I'd like to see a "multi-platform CD that users boot from" that would work with OC, Mac, Sun etc... Ken first few lines: Moot! is a cryptosuite designed to avoid RIPA pt3 and govermnent access to keys/plaintext in general. All storage is in an offshore data haven. Moot! is designed to consist of a multi-platform CD that users boot from. It is designed to be hard to emulate in software. It's also open-source, free if I can get enough help, or at least cheap, and I plan to publish the security designs and ask for comments and suggestions (and help!) before actually implementing anything. It works sort of like this: in the box (on the CD): w/p, spreadsheet, database s/w etc: crypto package: comms s/w eg TCP/IP, modem and ethernet drivers etc.: minimal operating system: no local storage
RE: digital angel (tracking device)
Sampo A Syreeni[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote: The unit can be turned off by the wearer, thereby making the monitoring voluntary. It will not intrude on personal privacy except in applications applied to the tracking of criminals. Heh. Digital Angel[tm] measures bodily parameters. It does not interact with the body chemically or biologically. Designed to be completely harmless, Digital Angel will not interfere with bodily functions in any way... at least in this version. And pulling the last two together, we have Digital Angel/IE (Instant Execution), for those really Bad Seeds. The plus model will zap the offender if brought near Digital Angel/FC (For Children). Sampo Syreeni [EMAIL PROTECTED], aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university Go check out Harlan Ellison's short story "Repent Harlequin! cried the Tick Tock Man". This is really life imitating art. Peter Trei
RE: Parties
At 09:04 10/30/2000 -0600, Carskadden, Rush wrote: where he actually says this himself). Under no circumstances do I consider it wise to fly in the face of checks and balances when your cause is "right" but you do not have the majority power. There is a reason that Congress makes laws, just as there is a reason that the Presidents can veto, as there is a reason that the Judicial system interprets the law. It's designed to create a balance that protects us from a loose cannon government going off and acting recklessly. Ah, but they already have. Your beloved "checks and balances" don't work. -Declan
RE: Parties
Rush, You certainly are an earnest fellow, but that doesn't get you very far. It seems to me that folks like you, who are college sophomores with the unfortunate experience of one or two undergraduate political science classes, don't have much to contribute to cypherpunkly discussions. Your points, such as they are, might be better made on alt.politics.banal-ideas. You: * Don't seem to understand the nature of modern political parties * Don't seem to understand the nature of checks and balances * Don't seem to understand how Washington works, and the interplay between the legislative branch, executive branch, lobbyists, and advocacy groups * Have not read the basic literature that would enable us to take you seriously My participation in this sad discussion is now over, except that I will volunteer a reading list for you at some later point. -Declan At 10:10 10/30/2000 -0600, Carskadden, Rush wrote: Comments below: -Original Message- From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 5:17 PM To: Carskadden, Rush Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Parties Rush is clearly someone with too much time on his hands and too little (demonstrated) ability to think things through. I apologize for being uncharacteristically blunt, but the essay below is terribly naive. You might as well try to draft C.J Parker for president. I appreciate your candid approach. I am admittedly pretty young and uninformed compared to you, which is why I sought opinions anyway. It can only lead to more information and access to varied points of view. First, political parties are not single-issue parties, at least not right now. Education and taxes and health care will likely continue to be more important in most people's lives than technology policy for the foreseeable future. Agreed. Second, privacy is an amorphous issue. It's used by leftists to regulate the private sector and outlaw transactions between consenting adults. Liberals use it to talk about abortion. Conservatives link it to everything from the FBI files under Clinton to Carnivore. What do *you* mean? And why do you think everyone else is going to agree? By no means do I think that everyone will agree with me on my own personal views. I started out by pointing out in the house voting record that the actual rift between Democrats and Republicans in voting records (based on scores that I believe you put together) in technology issues was not too large. I then further hypothesized, based on this observation, that partisan politics were not creating a strong stance regarding privacy and technological freedom either way on either side. So, the conclusion I drew was that if I were to have a strong view on technology (EITHER a 100 OR a 0 on your scale), then that strong view would not be fit to serve as a factor that may align me in any reliable way with either party. A second, personal, conclusion was that I was not content with the relatively mediocre (according to your scores) standing on technology by both parties. I do not feel I am being represented on this issue, though I do feel I am represented strongly on other issues, such as education, taxes, and health care. What I was looking for on this list was not agreement. I was looking for some points of view on a question that this line of reasoning left me with. If I want stronger representation in Washington on technology issues (EITHER WAY), is it easier to try to influence an existing party to take up my stance, or would it be easier to align myself with a "third" party that already has a strong stance on the topic (EITHER WAY) and try to maneuver it into a position where it could provide the needed strong representation. I would have liked to be able to say to myself, for instance, "Gee, certain vocal members of the cypherpunks list seem to think that it would be easier to just try to gain partisan support than to get a "third" party the strength it needs to represent me, and here's why...", but I can't because my naive nature is so overpowering that people would rather try to inform me of the Libertarian party, in which I have been active for years, than answer my question. Third, there already is (as others have suggested) a party that's concerned about personal freedom: the LP. If you mirror their positions -- or even a substantial subset -- you will be similarly marginalized. If not, don't look for support -- I humbly suggest -- on the cpunx list. The Libertarian party does not have enough power to strongly represent me, assuming that I agree with their stance on technology, which I don't know that I have said. This does not answer my question at all. Fourth, nowadays it seems that political parties can be formed (Ross Perot, Ralph Nader) or popularized only by a strong and well-known personality. It will help if they're a billionaire. May I suggest a recruiting trip to the
Libertarians and political parties
Speaking of such, here are some actual facts. I wrote about Rasmussen in a recent Wired article. Here's what their polls say: http://www.portraitofamerica.com/html/poll-1468.html Earlier this year, Rasmussen Research conducted a survey measuring the electorate along a scale favored by many libertarians. This survey found 16% of American voters are functionally libertarian. However, only 2% of voters claim the title of libertarian to describe their own views. -Declan
Re: Parties
Rush rapped: Glad to hear that all it takes to "get your vote" is a reckless executive pardon of criminals that is designed to utilize executive power to bypass the checks and balances system and negate the efforts of the legislative and judicial branches of government Spoken like a true fascist. What the fuck do you think executive pardon is but just another "checks and balances"? The fact is that it's the criminal scum in power at the moment who are fucking the constitution with their dirty little "war on some drugs". Basic 1st Amemdment freedom of religion went right down the drain with the very first drug law. It's religious persecution pure and simple, nothing more, nothing less. Harry Browne should go further, if elected he should not only pardon every person ever convicted of a drug or gun offense, but he should order the immediate arrest of anyone who ever voted for a drug or gun law, and who ever enforced these despicable illegal laws. Exactly correct. Under libertarian principles they are fully guilty of initiating "force and/or fraud". And there are no "statutes of limitation" on our response to these people regardless of current law. Now would be an excellent time for anyone to go to their county voter's registration office, and order a copy of the voter's registration database for current and future use. Jim Bell
Why Bill Joy is elitist, myopic, and wrong
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/30/2058257mode=nested Why Bill Joy is Elitist, Myopic, and Wrong By Lizard October 30, 2000 The smallpox vaccine will cause people to turn into cows. Trains cannot be permitted to travel more than 20 miles per hour, or else the passengers will asphyxiate. The atomic bomb will detonate the entire atmosphere of Earth. The history of science is filled with dire predictions of the consequences of technology, few of which ever come true. (Granted, many of the more lofty hopes for technology likewise fail to appear. Where's my personal helicopter and laser gun, dammit?) But fear sells papers, which explains why Bill Joy is given far more column-inches than he deserves. (Joy, the cofounder of Sun Microsystems, spoke at a Camden Technology conference over the weekend.) The most distressing thing about his Luddite stand is the undercurrent of elitism which flows by without criticism. The common man must not be permitted access to the glorious fruits of science, he says, because out there among the teeming masses might be murderers and madmen. Well, we'd probably better make sure they don't get their hands on fire and the wheel, too -- who knows what might happen? Joy is wrong on a wide range of levels, but his most egregious error is that he has precisely the wrong solution to the alleged problem. If he fears the misuse of biotech or nanotech, the last thing that should be done is to turn these technologies into state secrets, because that puts the knowledge right into the hands of those with a history of using it for evil, namely, politicians. If something can be done, it will be done, and all that suppressing information will achieve is ensuring there is not ready access to counter-measures to whatever devious plots Joy's hypothetical supercriminals may devise. "Open sourcing" technology will all but guarantee that for every uber-anthrax, there's an uber-vaccine; for every bit of world-devouring grey-goo, there's something that will eat it even faster. Locking technology away is no solution. If the public knowledge base of the world has reached the point where one scientist can make the next breakthrough, then there are dozens of other scientists who can do likewise. And, of course, who will watch the watchers? We've already seen that secrets aren't: There are more leaks in the U.S. national security apparatus than in a Russian space station. Better to simply open it up and be done with it. There is nothing dehumanizing about the probable merger of flesh and silicon. It simply continues the path man began when the first barely-erect hairy ape realized a fist holding a rock got you more than a fist alone. From that moment on, we became defined by our tools. There is no point and no purpose in trying to stop now. Joy is fond of saying "the future doesn't need us." He is almost completely wrong. The future needs most of us. It's just that the future -- and the present -- doesn't need him. To post your response or contact the author, visit: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/30/2058257mode=nested
Your 60 day Free offer!
Plan ahead and get a jump on the competition! Get next season's campers interested in you NOW! Take advantage of 60 days FREE advertising on the world's first 100% graphic-based, travel-dedicated search engine! http://www.travel-its.net/join_gtbd/camping LeadBlaster Marketing Group Inc. 5503 Green Valley Drive Suite 200 Bloomington MN 55437 In the US call 1 800 GET FREE (438-3733) International call 1 952 831 9194 - To be removed from this mailing list email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject line "Remove" or click on the link below http://tri-2.gtbd.com/maillist/camping.cgi?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Info on Sun key compromise?
Does anybody on this list have details about the key compromise Sun experienced? See http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1851 AFIK, this is the first published private key compromise of a major vendor. How did it happen? Thanks, -- Lucky Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP encrypted email preferred.
the wild ones
http://members.tripod.com/bill_3_2/load2.htm Us wild ones are having FUN
Re: Sagan's V-Chips
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Ann Onim wrote:
BTW: Can Uncle Sam slap a secrecy order on GPL/public domain code, or
do you have to actually apply to the patent office to risk this
happening?
He can slap that order on anything he likes, even if it is an unpublished
(literally, not the copyright meaning) private work. This is a common
method used by the fedz to avoid having to do a complete "site
clearance" on certain new defense contractors (at least this was true in
the late 80's - I have no reason to think it has changed). If work is
expected to yeild "national secrets", but it is expected to do so without
utilizing previously classified materials ("classified" being over
"Sensitive"), the work is normally allowed to progress until such time as
a "secret" work product is produced, at which time it is retroactively
classified to it's appropriate level(s).
These shenanigans work in the fedz favor because it costs real dollars to
send out the men with the little plastic ID cards to do site surveys and
personnel background checks. If the work is unsuccessful, they have not
wasted the $$. If it comes to fruition, they impart a "temporary" site
and personnel classification, classify the work product, and only then
spend the necessary money and D.I.S. hours.
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example:
Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of
unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in
the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and
elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire
populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate...
This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States
as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers,
associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of
those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the
first place...
Important Text - ebay4sex gets laid
We're not weird..we're sexy http://www.ebay4sex.com http://www.net4inc.com eBay4Sex goes LIVE! Toronto, Ontario, October 26, 2000 SPE Group introduces leader in Adult entertainment auctions. This past weekend at Torontos Everything to do with Sex show, an online auction catering to the truly authentic amateur and fetish market announced its arrival! Developed by partnering company Rakil.com and served by leading Canadian portal provider Net4Inc.com eBay4Sex is nothing short of a techie-miracle, and Adult wonderland of the rare, used and amateur. The original launch will see the first 10,000 registering visitors to the auction, be given FULL access to one of the nets leading Adult Entertainment web portals, http://www.modeltraders.com. As a result of many partnerships from Russia, Iran, Canada and USA, eBay4Sex offers leading edge functionality and certified security for all online transactions. The ability for users to pay each other for products has almost been completed and we look forward to this attraction. Original product line will be offered from leading manufactures such as the BenWa - Sex toy and paraphernalia products as well as TotallyAmatuer.com Videos. Stay tuned as eBay4Sex sure to become the online auction for the adult entertainment industry.
