Re: name of the Tor twin?

[J.A. Terranson]

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 23:44:17 +0200
> From: Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: name of the Tor twin?
>
>
> I recall a TCP/IP traffic remixing network (not a socks proxy like
> Tor) coming over the list a while back. My bookmarks are away, what's the
> name of the thing? Not p2net, something similiar.
>
> Hello Brain, this is Pinky. Please help.

Crowds?


-- 
Yours,

J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
0xBD4A95BF

  "...justice is a duty towards those whom you love and those whom you do
  not.  And people's rights will not be harmed if the opponent speaks out
  about them."  Osama Bin Laden
- - -

  "There aught to be limits to freedom!"George Bush
- - -

Which one scares you more?

Is Source Code Is Like a Machine Gun?

[R. A. Hettinga]

 Next: August 2, 2004  Up: August 6, 2004  Previous: August 6, 2004Contents




 Is Source Code Is Like a Machine Gun?

 Eugene Volokh has posted a message on the Cyberprof email list seeking
comments on a thought experiment as to whether the same scope of first
amendment protection should be accorded to a sculpture which happens also
to be a working automatic weapon as to the ``source code'' of a computer
program that can be used for illegal activities.1

That inspired the following response on my part:

 Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:19:49 EDT
 To: CyberProf List . . .
 From: "Peter D. Junger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 Subject: Re: Source code distribution restrictions as speech restrictions

 I will try to respond without quoting at length from Eugene's message
since I think that the basic difference that we have has to do with our
differing understandings of the nature of computer programs, including
source code and that it is probably easier to address that difference
directly.

 In the first place I cannot see how source code differs significantly from
any other computer program or, for that matter, from any other data stored
or transmitted as text, including as a string or stream of binary digits.

 Something very important seems to be missing from Eugene's thought
experiment: any reference to a computer. Yet it is a computer, and not a
computer program, that corresponds to Eugene's machine gun. The computer
and the machine gun are both tangible objects that persist for a period of
time in three dimensional space. Source code or any other data that is
processable by a computer is, on the other hand, pure information--nothing
more or less than a pattern or a number--and though a representation of
that information can be stored in, or on, some tangible medium like a
compact disk or a piece of paper, that compact disk or piece of paper is
not the source code or other data. (This is, I believe, equivalent to the
fact that in the law of copyright a copy of a work fixed in a tangible
medium of expression is not the intangible work itself.)

 Come to think of it, one can merge the machine gun and the source code by
etching the source code on the side of the machine gun, just as runes used
to be etched on sword blades or the words ``drink me'' were affixed to the
bottle that Alice came across at the bottom of the rabbit hole. Frankly I
don't see how that could somehow make it unconstitutional for the state to
outlaw the possession of the sword or the machine gun or the pure food and
drug people to outlaw the sale and distribution of the liquid contents of
Alice's bottle.

 But I would rather focus on the computer, rather than on the example of
the compact disk, because a compact disk just sits there and doesn't do
anything by itself whereas the computer --like the machine gun--actually
does something and so is functional in the way that a machine gun is
functional and source code, whether or not fixed in a tangible medium,
isn't.

 There is, of course, an important distinction between the functionality of
a machine gun and that of a computer. The function of a machine gun is to
kill. The function of a computer, on the other hand, is to compute, and to
compute is to process information.

 Computers, by the way, used to be people, who came equipped with ten
digits. Modern computers, on the other hand, are machines that are wired
(or otherwise structured) to process information represented as binary
digits.

 Now, since the computer has to a large extent replaced printing presses
and linotype machines, I find it difficult to believe that the freedom of
the press protected by the first amendment would permit the outlawing of
computers even though the need for a well regulated militia protected by
the second amendment does not forbid the outlawing of machine guns.

 But Eugene's thought experiment does not deal with computers so I do not
need to pursue the question of whether computers can be outlawed
constitutionally.

 All that a computer does is process information. Data encoded in the form
of binary digits--which can be called ``source code''--is fed into a
computer which then processes that data in accordance with way in which it
is wired and outputs other data encoded in the form of binary digits--which
can, if one wishes, be called ``object code.'' Now rewiring a computer is
called programming a computer, and that object code can--if it satisfies
various syntactical requirements--be fed into the computer in a way that
causes the computer to be reprogrammed, that is, to be rewired. But the
program does not do anything and it certainly does not rewire the computer.
To run the program someone must, directly or indirectly, flick a switch
that causes the computer to rewire itself in accordance with the
specifications (the ``instructions'' or the ``description'') contained in
the program. And it is the computer that, like the machine gun, 

Re: Michael Moore in Cambridge (download speech)

[Pete Capelli]

> The file will be available for download a short period of time.
> 
> Michael shows us what the upcoming election is all about.

It's all about a promotion tour for his movie?

Re: name of the Tor twin?

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 03:55:07PM -0700, jrandom wrote:

> We're not ready for widespread use yet, but I've been working on it
> fulltime for over a year, and we've made a lot of progress.  I'll

Thanks. I've just got spare bandwidth I'd like to put to good use (and
increase the amount of opaque traffic).

> post more when there's more to post.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl
__
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net


pgptwQSQ0vrr6.pgp
Description: PGP signature

stealth tempest wallpaper

[Sunder]

http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns6240
or http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns6240&lpos=home3


Stealth wallpaper keeps company secrets safe
 
10:00 08 August 04
 
Special Report from New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4 free 
issues.
 

A type of wallpaper that prevents Wi-Fi signals escaping from a building 
without blocking mobile phone signals has been developed by a British 
defence contractor. The technology is designed to stop outsiders gaining 
access to a secure network by using Wi-Fi networks casually set up by 
workers at the office. 




--Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos---
 + ^ + :"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.  /|\
  \|/  :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\
<--*-->:and our people, and neither do we." -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/
  /|\  : \|/
 + v + :War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President.
-

Re: name of the Tor twin?

[jrandom]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I'm guessing you're referring to i2p?
(you got the 2 and the p right)

We're not ready for widespread use yet, but I've been working on it
fulltime for over a year, and we've made a lot of progress.  I'll
post more when there's more to post.

=jr

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> I recall a TCP/IP traffic remixing network (not a socks proxy like
> Tor) coming over the list a while back. My bookmarks are away,
> what's the name of the thing? Not p2net, something similiar.
>
> Hello Brain, this is Pinky. Please help.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 8.1

iQA/AwUBQRau+BpxS9rYd+OGEQJM7ACfcBCtaLVic/U2mzNgH2q0UeTHaxUAn34w
ef0ffGdxYZBfqDBh+VLuFomT
=ZEiz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Bluesniper question

[Major Variola (ret)]

Why do the long range RF folks always use Yagis?  Aren't
Yagis supposed to be fairly broadband?  Aren't there
other highly-directional (ie high gain in one direction)
antennae which (simply by virtue of being narrow bandwidth)
would be better?

Or is it that Yagi's broadband-ness allows for more slop
in manufacturing, as when you're using pringles & hardware-store
washers?

BTW seems to me that a (wire-mesh, thank you Morlock)
parabolic would be better.The optical scope can
look right through the mesh.  (Use a night vision scope
and IR beacon on your target if the target agrees, or
is in a parked car with hot brake pads.  In Calif
NV scopes can't be put on rifles that launch projectiles
but you're not launching anything but photons (in the case
of sending Bluetooth commands.)

PS: From the photo the Yagi rifles look like they are polarization
sensitive, having linear (vs + shaped) directors.

Every Vote Counts - If It's Counted

[R. A. Hettinga]

CJR Campaign Desk: Archives

   Critique and analysis of 2004 campaign coverage
from Columbia Journalism Review





The Longer View
August 08, 2004

Every Vote Counts - If It's Counted



By Susan Q. Stranahan

On November 2, millions of Americans will vote on computers, many of which
may be vulnerable to partisan hackers, disgruntled poll workers, or anyone
else with a desire to alter the outcome of the election, writes Ronnie
Dugger in the current issue of The Nation. "The result," he says, "could be
the failure of an American presidential election and its collapse into
suspicions, accusations and a civic fury that will make Florida 2000 seem
like a family spat in the kitchen."

 Dugger's detailed analysis of the problems of electronic voting and the
potential for fraud and error would seem to be a crucial election story of
2004, full of the stuff journalists love -- hints of skullduggery,
cronyism, and conflicts of interest. But, with a few exceptions, the advent
of e-voting has remained an issue hovering persistently beneath the media's
radar.

The stories that have appeared largely have been local, piecemeal and
rarely rise much beyond the "he said/she said" level of reporting. As a
result, the public -- to the extent that it's even aware of the controversy
-- is left to its own devices to figure out a complex issue, with
considerable ramifications.

New York Times editorial page writer Adam Cohen is one of the very few who
has delved into the subject, spending much of the year writing about the
"mechanics" of democracy in a series entitled "Making Votes Count."
Electronic voting -- and its lack of accountability -- has been a frequent
topic.

Cohen, a lawyer with an interest in politics and technology, opened his
series last January with this warning:

The morning after the 2000 election, Americans woke up to a disturbing
realization: Our electoral system was too flawed to say with certainty who
had won. Three years later, things may actually be worse. If this year's
presidential election is at all close, there is every reason to believe
that there will be another national trauma over who the rightful winner is,
this time compounded by troubling new questions about the reliability of
electronic voting machines.

This is no way to run a democracy.

Given the media's lack of interest in the subject, it can also be said:
This is no way to cover one, either. Come November, can you be sure that
your vote will be accurately recorded? It seems a rather fundamental
question that cries out for an answer.

About one-third of the expected computerized vote this fall will be
tabulated by touch-screen machines that will provide no paper trail of a
voter's choices, and, as a result, are vulnerable to tampering. Writes
Dugger: "The United States therefore faces the likelihood that about three
out of 10 of the votes in the national election this November will be
unverifiable, unauditable and unrecountable."

In Florida, where the outcome of the 2000 presidential election remained in
limbo for 36 days due to voting irregularities, more than half the state's
voters will rely on paperless touch-screen systems. Florida is a crucial
swing state, with its winner garnering 27 electoral votes -- 10 percent of
the total needed.

Ironically, it was the chaos of the Florida returns four years ago that
catapulted the nation towards electronic voting. In 2002, Congress passed
the Help America Vote Act, and when President Bush signed it, he declared
that "when problems arise in the administration of elections, we have a
responsibility to fix them." But, as the Times' Cohen noted earlier this
year, the president's budget provided only $40 million of the $800 million
promised by Congress for election improvements at the state level. Wrote
Cohen: "[N]either the president nor Congress is very serious about fixing
the system."

Some states scrambled to switch to electronic voting, and for the limited
federal funds to buy new equipment. About 20 percent of the nation's 3,114
counties will have switched completely to computerized voting by November,
according to Election Data Services, Inc., a Washington, D.C. research
company. (Some of those machines offer a printed copy of the ballot as a
backup; some do not.)

But the states also discovered that there are no federal guidelines or
security standards for the equipment. That will come at a later date, long
after this presidential vote. (The Election Assistance Commission,
appointed by President Bush to set those standards and oversee the
transition, has been slow to get organized, in part because of a lack of
funding.)

The electronic voting market is dominated by a handful of companies, which
stand to make huge profits from the shift to touch-screen computers and the
software that runs them. Nearly 100 million votes will be cast on the
computers operated by this tiny group, which has aggressively promoted its
product and just as vigor

Michael Moore in Cambridge (download speech)

[Nomen Nescio]

Very interesting speech by Michael Moore in Cambridge July 27, 10 MB

http://hem.bredband.net/b114631/tillf/Michael_Moore_in_Cambridge_04072
7.rm

The file will be available for download a short period of time.

Michael shows us what the upcoming election is all about.

NSA Overcomes Fiber-Optic and Encryption

[John Young]

Excerpt below from a Baltimore Sun article of August 8, 2004.
Some of it could be true, but.


http://cryptome.org/dirnsa-shift.htm

-

Director of NSA shifts to new path

By Scott Shane
Sun National Staff

August 8, 2004  

..

Technology revolution   

Given the dire assessments a few years ago, it is notable that Hayden 
says the communications revolution has on the whole been a plus, not a 
minus, for the NSA.   

The NSA director declines to elaborate. But interviews with outside 
experts suggest that the agency has managed to overcome the challenges 
posed by fiber-optic cable and encryption.   

"My opinion is that at this point, those are little more than a speed 
bump to NSA," says Steve Uhrig, president of SWS Security, a Harford 
County firm that builds eavesdropping and counter-eavesdropping systems 
for U.S. and foreign police agencies. "They have a virtually unlimited 
budget, and they can put amazing resources to work on a problem."   

Several sources who regularly speak with NSA officials say they believe 
Uhrig is right. Although they do not know the details, they say the 
agency has almost certainly managed to tap fiber cables on a large-scale 
basis, making access to the information inside less of a problem than its 
overwhelming volume.   

The NSA has also found a silver lining to the use of encrypted e-mail: 
Even if a particular message cannot be read, the very use of encryption 
can flag it for NSA's attention. By tracking the relatively few Internet 
users in a certain country or region who take such security measures, NSA 
analysts might be able to sketch a picture of a terrorist network.   

Information 'in motion'   

And by focusing their electronic tricks on messages as they are first 
typed on a computer or when they are read on the other end - what 
security experts call "information at rest" - NSA technical experts might 
be able to bypass otherwise-unbreakable encryption used when the 
information is "in motion."   

Meanwhile, the popularity of e-mail and particularly of cell phones has 
worked to the NSA's advantage in the battle against terrorism.   

The NSA's computers can track and sort huge volumes of e-mail far more 
easily than they can manage telephone intercepts, because text is 
consistently represented in digital code.   

And cell phones - as handy for terrorist plotters as for everyone else - 
provide not just an eavesdropping target but also a way to physically 
track the user.   

Uhrig, who has installed cellular intercept systems in several countries, 
says that as cell phones have proliferated, the "cells" served by a tower 
or other antenna have correspondingly grown smaller. "A big hotel may 
have a cell for every other floor. Every big office building is its own 
cell," he says.   

Easier tracking   

By following a switched-on cell phone as it shifts from cell to cell, 
"you can watch the person move," Uhrig says. "You can tell the direction 
he's moving. If he's moving slow, he's walking. If he's moving fast, he's 
in a car. The tracking is sometimes of much more interest than the 
contents of a call."   

-

Olympics snooping

[Eric Murray]

http://sports.yahoo.com/oly/news?slug=ap-securitytech&prov=ap&type=lgns

Unprecedented electronic net over the Olympics

By MIRON VAROUHAKIS, Associated Press Writer

August 9, 2004

ATHENS, Greece (AP) -- If you're going to the Olympics, you'd better be
careful what you say and do in public.

Software will be watching and listening.

Recent leaps in technology have paired highly sophisticated software
with street surveillance cameras to create digital security guards with
intelligence-gathering skills.

`It is a very vast network and it is the first time it is being done
on such a scale at an international level,'' Greek police spokesman
Col. Lefteris Ikonomou told The Associated Press.

The system -- developed by a consortium led by San Diego-based Science
Applications International Corp., or SAIC -- cost about $312 million
and took up a sizable chunk of Athens' record security budget of more
than $1.5 billion.

It gathers images and audio from an electronic web of over 1,000
high-resolution and infrared cameras, 12 patrol boats, 4,000 vehicles,
nine helicopters, a sensor-laden blimp and four mobile command centers.

Spoken words collected by the cameras with speech-recognition software
are transcribed into text that is then searched for patterns along
with other electronic communications entering and leaving the area --
including e-mail and image files.

The system, which includes components already used by U.S. and British
government intelligence agencies, covers all of greater Athens, nine
ports, airports and all other Olympic cities.

Ikonomou said it ``allows the users to manage a critical incident in
the best way possible and in the shortest time possible because they
have all the information in front of them.''

The software used for surveillance camera recordings is designed to spot
and rank possible risks, said Dionysios Dendrinos, general manager of
One Siemens in Greece, one of the companies in the consortium.

``They can distinguish the sound of a flat tire from an explosion or
a gunshot and inform the user at the command center of the incident,''
he said. ``This is also the case with any anomaly in the picture, such
as a traffic jam.''

Technology also allows the users of the system at the main command center
to save and analyze data from the surveillance network and beyond. And
the material from the closed circuit cameras is kept for seven days,
Ikonomou said, so specific incidents can be analyzed in depth.

Much of that analysis is enabled by software from London-based Autonomy
Corp., whose clients include the U.S. National Security Agency, that
parses words and phrases collected by surveillance cameras and in
communications traffic.

In June, the Greek government expanded surveillance powers to screen
mobile and fixed-line telephone calls during the Olympics.

``It listens, reads and watches,'' Dominic Johnson, Autonomy's
chief marketing officer, said of his company's software. Then it
synthesizes. Beyond Greek and English the software understands Arabic,
Farsi and all major European languages, Johnson said.

Other companies in the SAIC consortium include Germany's Siemens AG;
General Dynamics Corp. and Honeywell International Inc. of the United
States; and the Israeli company Elbit Systems. Several Greek companies
also are participating.

According to the contract, the system was to be delivered by May 28,
but due to construction delays at some Olympic venues -- such as the
main Olympic stadium -- it was delivered just weeks before the opening
ceremony.

Nevertheless, Public Order Minister Giorgos Voulgarakis declared last
week that all the security systems were in full deployment and working
smoothly.

There'll be other sniffing going on, of course.

A network of sensors designed to detect chemical agents has also been
deployed near Olympic venues and around the capital, including on the
security blimp.

Advanced technology is also used in the creation of the Olympic
credentials, which use such security features as holograms. All cardholder
information, such as a person's photo and passport number, are printed
on a very thin film designed to make the cards impossible to forge.

The digitally enhanced surveillance net may provide comfort to Olympics
attendees, but not everyone is happy at authorities' computer-aided eyes
and ears.

Several groups have held protests in recent months against what they say
is an invasion of their privacy, and some demonstrators have spray-painted
street cameras, seeking to blind them.

``The Olympic Games are accompanied with extended security measures
that are unprecedented for Greece,'' six human rights groups said in a
protest letter to Greek Parliament in July. ``Although the state's right
to take all necessary measures that it deems necessary is recognized,
there is fear that these measures will have a negative impact on basic
human rights.''

Re: Is Source Code Is Like a Machine Gun?

[Major Variola (ret)]

Re "Is Source Code Is Like a Machine Gun?"

A better thought experiment would be a numerically controlled machine
and a control tape, which, when the machine is turned on, produces
sculpture that is also a machine gun (or merely the sear for a machine
gun which can be dropped into a semi-automatic commodity rifle).
The NCM is as neutral as the CPU.

Also Junger is incorrect when he says "the function of a machine gun
is to kill".  The function of a machine gun is to propel bullets at a
given
rate, given a supply of cartridges, when asked to do so by a human.

The human who points the machine gun decides whether to kill
or merely punch holes in paper.  If you don't understand the distinction

you should probably avoid handling sharp objects.

And you probably don't understand that a P2P program is not for
ripping off hollywood but for free communication; its the user who
decides what content to use the tool with.

>> Eugene Volokh has posted a message on the Cyberprof email list
seeking
comments on a thought experiment as to whether the same scope of first
amendment protection should be accorded to a sculpture which happens
also
to be a working automatic weapon as to the ``source code'' of a computer

program that can be used for illegal activities.<<

Re: Every Vote Counts - If It's Counted

[PerformanceArt]

Jim Bell For President!



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/2004

name of the Tor twin?

[Eugen Leitl]

I recall a TCP/IP traffic remixing network (not a socks proxy like
Tor) coming over the list a while back. My bookmarks are away, what's the
name of the thing? Not p2net, something similiar.

Hello Brain, this is Pinky. Please help.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl
__
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net


pgprNVMdIQY2d.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: IRS may use First Data info for help in finding tax evaders

[Eric Cordian]

RAH pasted:

>  A federal judge has granted the Internal Revenue Service the right to seek
> information from First Data Corp. about certain credit-card transactions
> the company has processed.

>  The IRS wants the information as part of its crackdown on tax evaders.

> Specifically, the IRS wants information about holders of American Express,
> Visa and MasterCard credit cards that were issued by or on behalf of
> certain offshore financial institutions.

> The government listed more than 30 offshore jurisdictions, including
> Aruba, the Bahamas, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Hong Kong, Singapore and
> Switzerland.

>  The IRS said in a court filing that it believes those account holders "may
> fail, or may have failed, to comply with internal revenue laws."

Anonymity good.  Confidentiality bad.

-- 
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

"...and Mr. Hughes wants to give it to him."

[R. A. Hettinga]

Linux Journal - The Premier Magazine of the Linux Community

 Guest Editorial
Date: Thursday, July 01, 1999
Topic: Linux Community

 Eric Hughes

 The average Joe wants something for nothing, and Mr. Hughes wants to give
it to him.



I paid for my university education, in that I paid an institution for
access to its faculty and for use of its facilities. The knowledge was
free; all I had to do was take advantage of the fact that it was there for
the learning. I've told many people about things I learned in school. I
didn't need to pay a license fee to tell other people about Hamiltonian
mechanics or Gödel incompleteness. The academics who created this body of
knowledge published papers and gave away their knowledge. As far as I'm
concerned, I got something for nothing from them.

 Michael Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction and thereby paved the
way for the electricity and electronics industry. The value he captured
from this development was nowhere near all the value he created for
everyone else. Such was his station in life. He made the choice to freely
give his time to the advancement of science. Many others have followed his
example, but nowhere near a majority. Yet this tiny fraction of people has
exerted a significant, disproportional change on the world. Such is the
fate of certain knowledge workers. Get used to it.

 On first blush, software appears to follow this academic pathway. Yet
software has users, who must find the software useful to keep it.
Researchers do not have to make their output useful, just accurate, novel
and potentially useful. To wit, researchers don't have to do market
research. Clearly, software developers don't think they have to understand
their users. Developers need to understand their users only when they
expect to have users.

 The distribution of software clearly follows the model of academic
knowledge--create it once for free, then make the user pay for its
distribution. Yet the creation of software does not mirror the creation of
knowledge quite so accurately. The principle of ``academic freedom'' is
about as antithetical to the principle of ``attaining user benefit'' as
possible. The two just don't fit and can't. The university never had a
monopoly on creating knowledge--or on developing free software--and it
never will. The university, however, does embody the understanding that
some development requires nurturing that cannot be easily obtained
elsewhere. Software development has no such analogous institutions, and it
needs one that is not the university.

 This new institution should be a non-profit, tax-exempt corporation
especially created to pay for the design, construction and delivery of
public software. Let's be obvious about this: giving away software for free
is about as close as possible to the center of the charitable purpose
requirement of a tax-exempt company. Like the university, the staff--no,
let us call them the talent--the talent working at this institution are not
motivated by dreams of entrepreneurial riches, but by the advancement of
the craft. The talent needs to come from a wide variety of disciplines,
essentially all that are present at a for-profit software company. This new
institution will always be in competition with commercial interests for
talent, so it will have to pay for talent accordingly. Talent gets paid,
the institution creates some well-needed feeling of solidity, and regular
folks get free software.

 ``Public software'' is any software that people can obtain and use without
any entanglement with intellectual property issues. Public software also
denotes the ubiquity of the software and the corresponding expectation that
people encounter it frequently. Some open-source software is public
software, some is not. Public software is a concept rooted in the nature of
its end use, not in the means of creating it. All the wrangling over
license terms for derivative works has obscured the obvious point that the
license is in service of some goal; if you don't name your goal, you can't
possibly attain it. I know what my goal is--it is free beer.

 I still can't figure out how the claim that the GNU Public License
encourages free speech is not utterly disingenuous. The GPL is the opposite
of free speech; it's a highly detailed copyright agreement with the purpose
of restricting the expression of derivative works. If I can't keep an
expression to myself, I am restricted. All license agreements begin from
the starting point of complete restriction, that is, total prohibition
against use, and then work forward from that point. The summit of free
speech is public domain expression--if you want to speak it again, go
ahead, and for whatever purpose you care to seek. As much as I am an
advocate of free speech and all other civil rights, my purpose with public
software is not free speech--it's free beer.

 The crucial reason the GPL has achieved such limited success in scope is
that i

Re: Wired on Navy's new version of Onion Routing

[Major Variola (ret)]

At 04:58 AM 8/6/04 -0700, Sarad AV wrote:
>Since they are using symmetric keys, for a network of
>'n' nodes, each node  need to know the secret key that
>they share with the remaining (n-1) nodes.Total number
>of symmetric keys that need to be distributed is
>[n*(n-1)]/2. Key management is harder when they
>network gets larger.

That's not the problem ---if your node freely gives out its
public key, no problem collecting them.

The real problem is: how do you know its truly a given
node's key?  The web of trust is full of holes :-), trust
isn't transitive, and Verislime is 1. not liable 2. 0wn3d by
the Fedz.