Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com)
I dunno...I don't see a ton of Leitl stuff on the al-qaeda node. That which does come through seems fairly relevant. I'm thinking Choate and RAH are tsk-ing his failed attempt at pure stream-of-consciousness posting. -TD From: Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com) Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 00:01:33 +0200 On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:13:18PM -0700, cypherpunk wrote: And of course there is Eugen* Leitl, who mindlessly forwards far and wide everything that enters his mailbox. I don't know whether we Consider me bitten by Choate. It's totally incurable. should be annoyed or relieved that he fails to exercise the slightest editorial effort by adding his own thoughts, if he has any, to the material he passes around. I don't need the list. Goddamn heise has more cypherpunk content than the list. Tim May's tired trolls have more cypherpunk content than the list. I'm trying to keep it going by keeping a steady trickle of relevant info but I'm honestly wondering if it's worth the effort. If you think I'm going to add editing effort, thus cutting some 10 minutes out of my already busy day you're out of your fucking mind. If you want high quality content, post it yourself. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ 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 [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com)
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:13:18PM -0700, cypherpunk wrote: And of course there is Eugen* Leitl, who mindlessly forwards far and wide everything that enters his mailbox. I don't know whether we Consider me bitten by Choate. It's totally incurable. should be annoyed or relieved that he fails to exercise the slightest editorial effort by adding his own thoughts, if he has any, to the material he passes around. I don't need the list. Goddamn heise has more cypherpunk content than the list. Tim May's tired trolls have more cypherpunk content than the list. I'm trying to keep it going by keeping a steady trickle of relevant info but I'm honestly wondering if it's worth the effort. If you think I'm going to add editing effort, thus cutting some 10 minutes out of my already busy day you're out of your fucking mind. If you want high quality content, post it yourself. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ 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 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com)
A Politech article forwarded email from a liar named [EMAIL PROTECTED]: From the EE-Times, a between the lines look at the future of RFID tracking: re: E-passport makers hail U.S. retreat Junko Yoshida [FAIR USE] EE Times (04/29/2005 1:38 PM EDT) PARIS - Global electronic passports suppliers hailed a decision by the U.S. State Department to drop a requirement for additional security measures in next-generation U.S. passports. The specifications have yet to be finalized. Neville Pattinson, director of technology development and government affairs for smart card provider Axalto Americas, said Friday (April 29) that adding security measures such as Basic Access Control and a metallic shield cover to U.S. passports could completely make the information [stored in the e-passport] undetectable. http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=162100152 is the actual EE times article. The true article reads, as you can see for yourself: PARIS Global electronic passports suppliers hailed a decision by the U.S. State Department to add a requirement for additional security measures in next-generation U.S. passports. The specifications have yet to be finalized. Can you see the difference? What's wrong with this picture? The true article says that the U.S. will ADD a requirement for additional security measures. The article as quoted by liar Parks had been changed to say that the U.S. will DROP the requirement. Of course that made the article read as confused and inconsistent, which is what led me to track down the original. I'm pissed at Parks for lying and editing a supposedly forwarded article to make some kind of rhetorical point. He had his own comments interspersed among the article's supposed text so he had plenty of opportunity to make his own arguments. Altering the text of material you are quoting is the lowest of despicable argumentation techniques. I'm also pissed at McCullagh for forwarding this on without the slightest fact checking. Of course anyone familiar with his work will know better than to expect a correction or even acknowledgement of his error. He is a hack reporter who cares nothing about accuracy or truth, only on stirring things up and pushing the predictable buttons of his readers. And of course there is Eugen* Leitl, who mindlessly forwards far and wide everything that enters his mailbox. I don't know whether we should be annoyed or relieved that he fails to exercise the slightest editorial effort by adding his own thoughts, if he has any, to the material he passes around. CP
Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com)
I dunno...I don't see a ton of Leitl stuff on the al-qaeda node. That which does come through seems fairly relevant. I'm thinking Choate and RAH are tsk-ing his failed attempt at pure stream-of-consciousness posting. -TD From: Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com) Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 00:01:33 +0200 On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:13:18PM -0700, cypherpunk wrote: And of course there is Eugen* Leitl, who mindlessly forwards far and wide everything that enters his mailbox. I don't know whether we Consider me bitten by Choate. It's totally incurable. should be annoyed or relieved that he fails to exercise the slightest editorial effort by adding his own thoughts, if he has any, to the material he passes around. I don't need the list. Goddamn heise has more cypherpunk content than the list. Tim May's tired trolls have more cypherpunk content than the list. I'm trying to keep it going by keeping a steady trickle of relevant info but I'm honestly wondering if it's worth the effort. If you think I'm going to add editing effort, thus cutting some 10 minutes out of my already busy day you're out of your fucking mind. If you want high quality content, post it yourself. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ 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 [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com)
A Politech article forwarded email from a liar named [EMAIL PROTECTED]: From the EE-Times, a between the lines look at the future of RFID tracking: re: E-passport makers hail U.S. retreat Junko Yoshida [FAIR USE] EE Times (04/29/2005 1:38 PM EDT) PARIS - Global electronic passports suppliers hailed a decision by the U.S. State Department to drop a requirement for additional security measures in next-generation U.S. passports. The specifications have yet to be finalized. Neville Pattinson, director of technology development and government affairs for smart card provider Axalto Americas, said Friday (April 29) that adding security measures such as Basic Access Control and a metallic shield cover to U.S. passports could completely make the information [stored in the e-passport] undetectable. http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=162100152 is the actual EE times article. The true article reads, as you can see for yourself: PARIS Global electronic passports suppliers hailed a decision by the U.S. State Department to add a requirement for additional security measures in next-generation U.S. passports. The specifications have yet to be finalized. Can you see the difference? What's wrong with this picture? The true article says that the U.S. will ADD a requirement for additional security measures. The article as quoted by liar Parks had been changed to say that the U.S. will DROP the requirement. Of course that made the article read as confused and inconsistent, which is what led me to track down the original. I'm pissed at Parks for lying and editing a supposedly forwarded article to make some kind of rhetorical point. He had his own comments interspersed among the article's supposed text so he had plenty of opportunity to make his own arguments. Altering the text of material you are quoting is the lowest of despicable argumentation techniques. I'm also pissed at McCullagh for forwarding this on without the slightest fact checking. Of course anyone familiar with his work will know better than to expect a correction or even acknowledgement of his error. He is a hack reporter who cares nothing about accuracy or truth, only on stirring things up and pushing the predictable buttons of his readers. And of course there is Eugen* Leitl, who mindlessly forwards far and wide everything that enters his mailbox. I don't know whether we should be annoyed or relieved that he fails to exercise the slightest editorial effort by adding his own thoughts, if he has any, to the material he passes around. CP
Re: [Politech] Passport RFID tracking: a between-the-lines read [priv] (fwd from declan@well.com)
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:13:18PM -0700, cypherpunk wrote: And of course there is Eugen* Leitl, who mindlessly forwards far and wide everything that enters his mailbox. I don't know whether we Consider me bitten by Choate. It's totally incurable. should be annoyed or relieved that he fails to exercise the slightest editorial effort by adding his own thoughts, if he has any, to the material he passes around. I don't need the list. Goddamn heise has more cypherpunk content than the list. Tim May's tired trolls have more cypherpunk content than the list. I'm trying to keep it going by keeping a steady trickle of relevant info but I'm honestly wondering if it's worth the effort. If you think I'm going to add editing effort, thus cutting some 10 minutes out of my already busy day you're out of your fucking mind. If you want high quality content, post it yourself. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ 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 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
