Re: On the outright laughability of internet "democracy"

[R. A. Hettinga]

--- begin forwarded text


Status: RO
From: Somebody
To: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: On the outright laughability of internet "democracy"
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 22:57:28 -0500

Bob,

Cruising the old RAH file

A few days after I read your argument here, it hit me that the same was true
of absentee ballots, and voting by mail.  You get your ballot, give it to
me, I fill it out and seal it in the envelope.   I pay you the agreed price,
you sign the seal in my presence, and I mail it.

So then the question became, "What's so bad about a market for votes?"

And if there's to be a market, why not an electronic one?  It would at least
ensure that a fair price was had by all.

As it is, millions of the dead aren't getting their cut.



- Original Message -
From: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "e-gold list"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Digital Bearer Settlement List"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 4:06 PM
Subject: On the outright laughability of internet "democracy"


> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> (was Re: [dgc.chat] Re: [e-gold-list] Re: Thanks to Ragnar/Planetgold
> and Stefan/TGC)
>
> At 12:53 PM +0200 on 8/10/02, Arik Schenkler wrote:
>
>
> > Internet voting, IMHO, will bring true democracy rather than a
> > representatives democracy.
>
> Well, that's just plain wrong.
>
> Go look up discussions on google about cryptographic protocols for
> internet voting. It just ain't possible without the most strict,
> obscene, biometric, draconian, "is a person", non-anonymous methods
> you ever saw. Lions, tigers, and precious bodily fluids, boys and
> girls.
>
> The point to democracy, in the industrial/agricultural political
> sense, is one man, one vote. One *anonymous* vote. On the net,
> paradoxically, that is completely impossible. Votes can be sold. If
> you fix it so that you can't sell votes without forgoing your
> identity -- and thus your freedom -- and physically showing up
> somewhere to vote, or at least proving that you have a device that
> identifies you as a voter in the most immediate terms possible, you
> can sell your vote, anonymously, on the net, for whatever the market
> will bear, and *that* person can *re*sell your vote, and so on, just
> like it was voting rights to a share of stock. That bit of
> cryptographic mobiosity is probably down at the semantic level of
> consistency versus completeness. Somewhere, Goedel and Russell are
> laughing.
>
> The net result, of course, of any kind of truly anonymous internet
> voting, is anarchocapitalism, where people sell their voting control
> over assets, including political "assets", over and over in secondary
> markets, on a continuing basis, in real-time. No political small-d
> democrat (or small-r republican, or small-l libertarian, whatever)
> I've ever heard of would call that a "true" democracy.
>
> That particular prospect has anarchocapitalists, and
> crypto-anarchists, out at the bar, buying both Herr Professor Goedel
> and Lord Russell a beer or two...
>
> Cheers,
> RAH
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: PGP 7.5
>
> iQA/AwUBPVWANsPxH8jf3ohaEQLSXwCg7ohcz+ZCxGsX86HQSXFJHK3OOD8AoJAW
> 8doH9VU+LyGdpZ4x6zmz74Bv
> =G4Fp
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> --
> -
> 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'
>

--- end forwarded text


-- 
-
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'

Re: AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED

[R. A. Hettinga]

--- begin forwarded text


Status: RO
From: Somebody
To: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 22:40:59 -0500

Bob,

I was browsing some of my old mail when I came across this.  What's the
status of Gilmore's case?

Has there been a secret trial?




- Original Message -
From: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Digital Bearer Settlement List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 2:51 PM
Subject: AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED


>
> --- begin forwarded text
>
>
> Status: RO
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 14:12:25 -0400
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: "Duncan Frissell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>(by way of Duncan Frissell
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> Subject: AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Gilmore v. Ashcroft -- FAA ID
Challenge
> AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED
> Secret rule demanding 'Your Papers Please' claimed unconstitutional
>
> San Francisco - Civil libertarian John Gilmore today challenged as
> unconstitutional a secret federal rule that requires domestic US travelers
> to identify themselves.
>
>
>
>
>
> Smooth move. Attempt to board a flight to DC on July 4th "to petition the
> government for redress of grievances". Even if not successful, it will be
> annoying and will be worthwhile if it manages to crack out copies of the
> secret security directives (like FAA SD 96-05)establishing the system.
>
> Keep in mind that until the end of the first Clinton administration, it
was
> perfectly legal to fly domestically without ID.
>
> --
> Posted by Duncan Frissell to The
> Technoptimist at 7/18/2002 11:12:20 AM
>
> Powered by Blogger Pro
>
> --- end forwarded text
>
>
> --
> -
> 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'
>

--- end forwarded text


-- 
-
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'

Re: Fwd: [fc] list of papers accepted to FC'03

[R. A. Hettinga]

At 9:24 AM -0500 on 11/16/02, Stuart Schechter wrote:


>I don't think you'll find our paper to be overly technical - at least not
> from a computer science or cryptographic perspective.  We wrote this paper
> because we believe that determining the level of security necessary to deter
> an adversary is a problem of more general interest.

Certainly if it's *financially* calculable.

;-).

Cheers,
RAH
Who, for instance, sees nothing at all wrong with selling votes. Where I
come from, it's called "equity". :-).
-- 
-
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'

RE: Where's Osama? (Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's next)

[James A. Donald]

--
On 14 Nov 2002 at 14:47, Andrew John Lopata wrote:
> I'm no expert, but a friend of mine in the military suggested 
> that invading Iraq now would be a lot different than the Gulf 
> War.  He said that urban combat, which will be necessary to 
> depose Hussein, is the most difficult and dangerous type of 
> combat there is.

The last time the US engaged in urban combat, Somalia, US 
troops took significant casualties, and innocent bystanders 
suffered enormous casualties.

In Afghanistan, urban combat was avoided by three a dimensional 
envelopment.  The enemy inside the city was threatened by 
ground troops outside the city, from the sky, and by subversion 
from within the city.  It was this final threat, subversion 
from within, combined with containment from above and around, 
that provoked capitulation.

This third element, subversion from within, may well be 
unachievable in Iraq, or if it is achievable, the regular army 
not very deft at getting it done.

For the Iraq war to be completed without enormous civilian 
casualties, massive destruction of infrastructure, and 
intolerable US casualties, successful political warfare is 
likely to be essential.

> There is no readily available alternate government to install 
> in Hussein's place.  The resulting destabilization in the 
> region will likely result in a U.S. military presense in the 
> country for a much longer time than in the Gulf War.

When the US defeated Nazi germany, the nazi government was 
largely obliterated, and the remaining apparatus of government 
mostly signed up with the German communist party, which had 
been the second largest party before the nazis, and which was 
subservient to the Soviet Union.   Thus the US eventually had 
to suppress every vestige of German government and foster a new 
government from nothing.  It took about five years for a 
plausibly German government to get its hands on the reins of 
power, and few more years for it to get rid of the institutions 
and apparatus of nazism. 

--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 AoQslZIvueBx4Zn3xjfrmZVppIjzS70PWbcba9wQ
 4QY9/UCaEXMTq2ePACwR96pH+xkCwMdSGqYXRuXaA

Re: [>Htech] Lying With Pixels (fwd)

[jya]

Not unexpected that CNN will be described as a reliable medium compared to the
Internet when not so long ago it was described as the unreliable medium itself
due to lack of thoughtful mediation by authoritarian Speak Truths.

But TV was not so long ago seen as suspect compared to newspapers and
newspapers suspect compared to government edicts and government edicts suspect
compared to religious preachings and religious yarping nothing compared to
acts of gods angry at copulating humanoids.

So what if pixels lie, how is that different from any authority issuance from
heads all too often quoted as believe you us who know?

Shame on those pipsqueak authorities cited as being gravely concerned about
lying pixels and the unmanageable Internet. Their self-promoting lies are
showing hoary signs of thin-skinned unbelievability sensing doodoo die-out.

National defense of any persuasion is a matter of suspended disbelief, not
that you should not chaff  your sorry ass when the drones come sniffing: US
citizens in the US homeland are now fair game for the assassination squads
eager to show the budget inceases were not in vain. 

Blonde hair and blue eyes with chic cammie clothing is now the best
prophylactic against fat ethnics sitting with consoles programmed to blowdown
off-coloreds. Nothing illegal about killing your own kind when sanctioned by
secret presidential pixels.

Re: Fun with Rosslyn Chapel, or, What *was* the Templar's Cipher, anyway?

[R. A. Hettinga]

--- begin forwarded text


Status:  U
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "T. Wolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 00:00:51 +0100
Subject: Re: Fun with Rosslyn Chapel, or, What *was* the Templar's Cipher,
anyway?

Dear RAH,

I just found the old attached message of yours doing a web search.
Coincidentally, I'm currently looking for the very the same thing (i.e. the
ciphers the Templars used for their bearer certificates).

Since your message is two years old already, I'm hoping you found the
solution by now. If you did, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me!

Thanks,
Thomas

-
Your old message
(http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/crypto/2000-q2/0315.html)
-
I'm dong an IBUC shirt for EFCE2K, and, given that we're in Edinburgh, and
Rosslyn Chapel, the famous Templar, um, Mecca, is here, and the Templars
ran the original money transfer business, using cryptography no less,
Fearghas and I popped out to Roslin to root around for stuff to stick on
the aforesaid shirt.


Close, but, more or less, no cigar. We saw the faded remains of a Templar
floriated cross on the Earl of St. Clair's supposed crypt-cover (kinda
small, people speculate about all kinds of goodies in there), which might
have been cool, but it was all eroded and I haven't found line art of one
on the web and it's late.


I've gotten a couple kinda-crypto things, of which I'll pick one for the
shirt tomorrow morning before we mail it out to the silkscreener, but what
I'd *really* like to know, if it's not one of the many "secrets" of the
Templars [like the shroud of Turin is DeMolay, or that the Templars were
Masons, or vice versa, or that they had the head of John the Baptist (or
christ, or Joseph, or the original Green Man) or that they *really* had the
Ark of the Covenent, or the Holy Grail, or that DeMolay was the Second
Gunman on the Grassy Knoll :-), or, whatever] is...


Has anyone ever figured out, or "discovered" or whatever, what kind of
cryptosystem the Templars used to encrypt, decrypt, sign/modify the chits
(dare I say bearer certificates? ;-)) they used so that people could go
from preceptory to preceptory, getting cash/food/whatever, all the way to
the holy land (and get the remains of their money back, or a bill :-), when
they returned home?


Cheers,
RAH,
Who, oddly enough, and by the sheerest coincidence (and I swear on a stack
of Illuminati), lives in the Roslindale section of Boston, named for
Roslin, home of Rosslyn Chapel

--- end forwarded text


-- 
-
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'

Re: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd)

[Dave Emery]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 10:20:42PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
> At 11:59 PM 11/15/2002 -0500, Dave Emery wrote:
> >And I am on record as advising some of the folks doing gnu-radio
> >that in my personal opinion it was rather unlikely that a user
> >programmable open source software radio would ever get FCC approval or
> >be legally sold in the USA under current regulations on scanning radio
> >receivers.
> 
> No FCC approval should be required.  GNURadio is not a RADIO but an 
> extensible toolkit of signal processing software for building test 
> instruments.  Test instruments are essentially unregulated by the FCC.  See 
> for yourself by checking out the regulatory compliance section a spectrum 
> analyzer or signal generator from HP or Tektronix.

This probably will work as long as software is not sold with
hardware as a complete integrated package and as long as neither is
marketed as a scanning radio receiver or a kit to make one.   But the
FCC looks very dimly on attempts to market "test equipment" that is
really an otherwise banned scanner and they have pushed a couple
of such products off the market.

There is very little doubt that the gnuradio package has lots of
applicablity to test equipment use and to various kinds of measurement
and calibration requirements in real radio systems as well as use in R&D
simulating and analyzing radio systems.  And clearly hams can use it as
they wish for ham projects.  And perhaps someone will come up with a
sufficiently closed and secured application to pass FCC muster for use
in a real radio system sold to the general public - but likely that
would have to be more or less a sealed box (like Linux in Tivo units)
which could not be user altered or added to and might well have to
include digital signatures or other mechanisms to ensure this.

Of course I probably have an axe to grind here as a collector
and user of test equipment and related professional electronics of
various sorts - I'd sure as hell not like to see private ownership or
purchase or sale of such licensed, regulated or even banned.   And there
already was one such attempt by the cellular industry to persuade the
FCC to restrict private ownership of certain RF test equipment back in
the late 90s which fortunately the ham community was able to persuade
the FCC was foolish and would damage the ability of hams to serve the
country in times of emergency.  Had the FCC gone along with the cellular
industry proposals, virtually all rf test equipment such as spectrum
analyzers, modulation meters, service monitors, signal generators,
network analyzers, protocol analyzers, microwave counters, test and
measurement receivers and the like and perhaps even things like certain
logic analyzers and scopes would have become controlled items that could
only be bought or sold by communications carriers and companies making
or servicing  equipment for them or government and military agencies.
Private sale oe ownership would have been banned, and might even have
become a crime.

As it was finally resolved, the FCC ruled that as long as test
equipment was not marketed to the general public it could be bought,
sold, used and possessed by members of the public - especially hams -
without any restrictions on what an individual could buy or own.  But
in the NPRM the FCC made quite clear that if someone was trying to
sell otherwise banned or unapproved electronics to the general public
as "test equipment" they would take action.


> 
> steve

-- 
Dave Emery N1PRE,  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. 
PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2  5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18