Re: Bankrupt Digicash Made $481K in 1999

[R. A. Hettinga]

At 12:12 PM -0700 on 8/20/02, Steve Schear wrote:


> Perhaps its my ignorance, but doesn't this form merely mean DC paid the
> Chaum Family Trust $481K, not  that the company made $481K?

An even more interesting question, to be forever unanswered :-), is exactly
how JYA got a copy of that 1099...



Cheers,
RAH

-- 
-
R. A. Hettinga 
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

Selling Privacy for ETC

[Duncan Frissell]

A Faraday Cage for your EZPass:

EZShield.com

EZPass is an Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) system used in the
Northeast. A small white box is attached to your windshield and is
queried by radios in passing toll booths. Your account is debited for the
toll. Your account lists all the booths passed and when so it can be very
useful for law enforcement and civil attorneys (including domestic
relations lawyers). EZPass has already been featured on an episode of Law
and Order. In addition since the system is protected by weak or no
encryption, attackers with radios could extract some information by
querying your EZPass. Perhaps duplicating it to steal tolls from you.

The EZShield is a little box with a drawer to hold your EZPass. According
to the photo, it doesn't increase the EZPass form factor by much. What
you are supposed to do in open the drawer to expose your EZPass only when
you want to use it and keep it enclosed when you don't.

The interesting thing is that EZShield's sellers believe that there is
enough interest in a technological privacy fix that they are willing to
advertise it on mass media. I heard it just before the Rush Limbaugh show
on WABC in NYC.

--
Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 8/19/2002 1:52:02 PM

Powered by Blogger Pro

Re: Bankrupt Digicash Made $481K in 1999

[Steve Schear]

At 12:33 PM 8/20/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>Digicash 1999 IRS forms:
>
>   http://cryptome.org/digicash-481k.htm

Perhaps its my ignorance, but doesn't this form merely mean DC paid the 
Chaum Family Trust $481K, not  that the company made $481K?

steve

Bankrupt Digicash Made $481K in 1999

[John Young]

Digicash 1999 IRS forms:

  http://cryptome.org/digicash-481k.htm

Re: Declan McCullagh on politics and DMCA

[John Young]

Bear in mind that Declan has always favored the copyright industry,
after all that fits his ambition to be a star in that field, not that he
is alone in seeking media celebrity by seducing others with the
allure of attention and fame. He drops way too many names
not to come across as an accomplished, striving star-sucker.

Declan covers issues in a balanced way, so the story always
goes, though the balance is always tipped toward those he
wants to flatter -- which is toward the winners side, the bigger the
winners the more likely the scale will be tipped by Times magazine
speak of featuring the stars which mesmerize star-struck readers 
and, not least, publishers and editors and the copyright bandits
which thrive on celebrity mongering -- fabrication, gloss,
lies, deception, condescension toward the nobodies which
buy their dreck, a la Waterboy Valenti et al.

Promoting winners over losers is a giant industry, the American
way of doing business. Sorry to say, Nomen, this is not courageous
reporting, it is formulaic suck-up.

This is not to demean Declan as a person, he's "a nice guy," --
he slurs me condescendingly similarly -- only to note what he 
does for who he works for is vile, pretentious, not at all objective.
In that hired-gun demeanor he is a professional, if you know what 
I demean.




At 08:30 AM 8/20/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>Congratulations to Declan McCullagh for two recent articles which
>challenge the conventional wisdom of the cyber rights crowd.
>
>Last week it was http://news.com.com/2010-1071-949275.html?tag=politech,
>arguing the futility of political participation in a world where
>government is dominated by powerful economic interests.  Instead he
>quotes cypherpunks Adam Back and Lance Cottrell to the effect that a
>better approach is to change the terms of the debate by writing code
>that creates technology.
>
>(Bizarrely, he refers to "the motto of the Cypherpunks" while managing
>to actually avoid saying "cypherpunks write code".  Maybe we can blame
>the editor for that omission.)
>
>Now at http://news.com.com/2010-12-950229.html?tag=fd_lede, Declan steps
>into the viper's nest by coming out against DMCA sensationalism on the
>part of the EFF.  He refers to "overly aggressive advocacy" by the EFF,
>and provides quotes describing their efforts as "fear-mongering".
>
>He quotes Orin Kerr, law professor at GWU:
>
>"Opponents of the DMCA want to dramatize its effects, so they want people
>to believe that the law is incredibly broad," Kerr says. "If the public
>believes that the DMCA is stopping Professor Felten and other researchers
>from conducting legitimate research, then that is a major victory for
>opponents of the law."
>
>All this is anathema to the slashdot crowd, of course.  The last thing
>they want to hear is that DMCA isn't as bad as they've been told.
>
>Again, kudos to Declan for taking a stance which is sure to be unpopular
>and controversial among his supporters.  I may have to take back all
>the nasty things I have said about him over the years.  Now let's see
>what he has to say about Palladium...

Re: Startups, Bubbles, and Unemployment

[Eric Cordian]

Tim philosophizes:

> I read with interest the comments on the "why are so many applied 
> cryptographers unemployed?" thread.

> I know a _lot_ of unemployed folks. Or folks looking for more than "part 
> time consulting" work.

> Lots of issues, lots of possible reasons for the high unemployment rate 
> of applied cryptographers:

> (This writer, an acquaintance of mine, has been trying for several years 
> to get various projects going. Sad to say, his very words above indicate 
> just how flaky his ideas are. He thinks others will fund projects as a 
> kind of charityware. 

Such people can be greatly helped by giving them an hour of your time, and
repeating the words "but what's the product?" every 90 seconds as they are
trying to talk.

> "We're young, we're Cypherpunks, let's raise some money, get a nice 
> office space with our espresso bar and hot tub, hire our friends, and 
> become rich."

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with this approach, as long as you are
being paid to think about something, with no expectation that a product
will be produced or sold.

"We're young.  We're Cypherpunks.  Let's find a research firm with a pool,
tennis courts, and free Coke, and get the government to pay us for a few
years to think about the cryptographic software needs of the
Rehabilitation Services Administration."

Where this model fails is when people want you to pay them to sit around
the pool and think up some product that is going to put Intel and
Microsoft out of business and make everyone rich.  Of course, only people
with no clue think in such terms, or expect someone else to fund their
lifestyle while they sit around "thinking off" all day.

Nice work if you can get it.

> Note: This is NOT directed at ZKS, which actually DID hire a guy like 
> Ian Goldberg! 

And coasted for quite a long time on Ian Goldberg's reputation capital
before the petard exploded and hoisted them.  Of course, the fact that the
actual users of the service were saying things like "it's slow", "it
sucks", "it blows", might have been a great hint that it was not destined
to become the next AOL/Time Warner.

> The third and probably most important reason is that a "good idea" is 
> not enough. Products that people actually pay money for is the raison 
> d'etre of companies. 

Some of the most exciting, stimulating software engineering projects you
can imagine are things no one in their right mind would ever want to buy.

Yet, it's startling how often "fun to work on" rises to the top of why a
project should be done.

> A lot of folks seem to think companies are just cool places to play 
> around with ideas at.

As the VP for R&D at Boeing once put it, "This isn't Boeing University."

Most of my friends who are rich and retired now did it not by inventing
any wonder product.  They did it by taking any job that was secure and
paid reasonably well, living on a shoestring, putting their money into
rental properties, fixing them up, renting them out, and reselling them.

A few lived on a shoestring, and put all their money into Fidelity
Magellan before it was a household word, or put their money into stocks,
or whatever, but you get the idea.

After you're loaded, then you can tinker in your garage without having to
ask anyone to fund your hobby.

I worry when people with niche skills bemoan high unemployment in their
niche.  It's a very bad time for Applied Cryptographers, Smalltalk-80
programmers, Algol-68 compiler bug fixers, Lisp Machine operators, or
whatever, they whine.

Again, take any job that pays well.  Live on a shoestring.  Do something
reasonably intelligent with your money.

If someone wanders by who has the next wonder product already developed,
and people are beating a path to their door to buy it, by all means pick
up some stock pre-IPO.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a wealthy McDonalds franchisee
whose hobby is Applied Cryptography, instead of a poor unemployed Applied
Cryptographer.

To Summarize:

1.  Hobbies are things we do for fun.  Jobs are things we do because
they provide the world with a necessary good or service.  Don't
make the mistake of thinking the world owes you a job that is also
your hobby.  It's nice, but it rarely happens.  

2.  Take any job that pays well.  Live on a shoestring.  Do something
intelligent with the leftover money.

3.  Invest some money in already developed products that look like they
may become the Next Big Thing.

4.  Don't expect anyone to pay you to sit around and figure out what the
Next Big Thing is going to be. 

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

Re: get me the fuck out of oz

[Bill Stewart]

Click your heels together three times and say "There's No Place Like Home"
and you'll be back in bed in Kansas.  And yer little dog, too

Declan McCullagh on politics and DMCA

[Nomen Nescio]

Congratulations to Declan McCullagh for two recent articles which
challenge the conventional wisdom of the cyber rights crowd.

Last week it was http://news.com.com/2010-1071-949275.html?tag=politech,
arguing the futility of political participation in a world where
government is dominated by powerful economic interests.  Instead he
quotes cypherpunks Adam Back and Lance Cottrell to the effect that a
better approach is to change the terms of the debate by writing code
that creates technology.

(Bizarrely, he refers to "the motto of the Cypherpunks" while managing
to actually avoid saying "cypherpunks write code".  Maybe we can blame
the editor for that omission.)

Now at http://news.com.com/2010-12-950229.html?tag=fd_lede, Declan steps
into the viper's nest by coming out against DMCA sensationalism on the
part of the EFF.  He refers to "overly aggressive advocacy" by the EFF,
and provides quotes describing their efforts as "fear-mongering".

He quotes Orin Kerr, law professor at GWU:

"Opponents of the DMCA want to dramatize its effects, so they want people
to believe that the law is incredibly broad," Kerr says. "If the public
believes that the DMCA is stopping Professor Felten and other researchers
from conducting legitimate research, then that is a major victory for
opponents of the law."

All this is anathema to the slashdot crowd, of course.  The last thing
they want to hear is that DMCA isn't as bad as they've been told.

Again, kudos to Declan for taking a stance which is sure to be unpopular
and controversial among his supporters.  I may have to take back all
the nasty things I have said about him over the years.  Now let's see
what he has to say about Palladium...

Data Security class programming project

[Jason Holt]

I'm working on designing the programming projects for a data security class.  
What do you think of this one?

I love its intrinsic irony, but can we actually get away with requiring it for
a university class?  I mean, Elcomsoft really is in court for this.  My
University is unfortunately not the type of organization to stand at the
forefront and protect our civil rights.

-J

---
DRM Lab
---

Options
---
* Make the lab open-ended - they get to pick what to break and how, as long as
they don't use a pre-packaged tool.  DVDs, CDs, .WMA, etc.

Objective
-
To demonstrate the fundamental futility of current attempts to prevent
unauthorized copying of published works.

Requirements

_Here_ you can find a copy of Dmitry Sklyarov's Defcon slides in Adobe's eBook
format.  They were created with the eBookPro compiler, advertised as "the only
software in the universe that makes your information virtually 100%
burglarproof!".

Extract all text from the slides using the method of your choice and turn in
the resulting text file.  It needs no special formatting.