Re: citizens can be named as enemy combatants
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 11:11:26PM -0600, Wes Hellman wrote: Since terrorists are the enemy, and they (obviously) operate within our borders to do harm, it's not a terrible stretch to think that it won't be long before a US citizen who's actually here in the states could be designated an enemy combatant. And obviously, they needn't have Terrorists are *an* enemy of freedom. There is such as case: Padilla v. Bush. Much more important (based on the facts) than the one we're discussing here. -Declan
Re: bin Laden, Hanssen, Inslaw Promis, Oh My!
At 09:58 AM 1/9/03 -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20030106-75579570.htm --- Greets to the TLA moths flitting to the flame of keywords.. Though the article would be better if it had named the former NJ Governor Thomas H. Kean instead of David H. Kean. DCF
Re: Pigs Kill Family Pet
On 9 Jan 2003, lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote: On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:35:38 -0500, you wrote: No they don't; or they wouldn't have had the balls to stop the car in the first place. Most cops in Cookeville, TN have dogs. I wonder if they would mind them being shotgunned to death. If the dog presents a threat of any type like running up wagging its tail like it did on the cop's video it is procedure to shoot them. If it's good enough for passing motorists pets it's sure good enough for cop's dogs seems to me. You just can't allow that threat to go unstopped you know? Buck shot is best according to the cops. Ick. Shooting a dog because it is wagging its tail is not justified, no matter what the cops do. You can't put a dog down just because of who its masters are -- dogs lack the intellectual reasoning capabilities to understand that their owners are evil. Instead, any cop who shows such blatant disrespect for life and property as the Tennessee cops in question should himself be shot in the face with a shotgun, and left on the side of the road to rot.
Re: crypto car keys
On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 07:13:31 -0800 (PST) Mike Rosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The dealer said it's a rolling code system, and from the white paper this includes a 40 bit challenge, an encryption operation on the key (!) then a 24 bit response from the key. Hi Mike, do you have an actual specification of the algorithm used by the rolling code system or is that just another ingenious high-level whitepaper leaving out all the nice details ? I tried to find details for rolling code systems used in car keys a couple of years ago and came up with basically zilch on the specific algorithms employed by the manufacturers for their challenge reponse systems. Have you tried opening the key and had a look at the chip - doubt this will help much but to identify since I suspect car manufacturers customize these with their home-brewn algorithm. This is just an unfounded speculation on my part however. Also, I'd be interested where you can get these replacement keys for USD 8, and whether it's for Ford only. Cheers, Ralf
Re: Pigs Kill Family Pet
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:35:38 -0500, you wrote: No they don't; or they wouldn't have had the balls to stop the car in the first place. Most cops in Cookeville, TN have dogs. I wonder if they would mind them being shotgunned to death. If the dog presents a threat of any type like running up wagging its tail like it did on the cop's video it is procedure to shoot them. If it's good enough for passing motorists pets it's sure good enough for cop's dogs seems to me. You just can't allow that threat to go unstopped you know? Buck shot is best according to the cops.
Re: citizens can be named as enemy combatants
Here's a December ruling favorable to the gvt in the Padilla case: http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/04/padilla.ruling/index.html Note this has not been affirmed by an appeals court (yet). -Declan On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 11:25:42PM -0600, Wes Hellman wrote: Oh, it seems that I've missed the fact that the situation I was talking about seems to be playing itself out nicely with that dirty bomb guy. Sure, the court didn't say that this applied to his case, but they didn't say it *didn't* apply, either. They've left it wide open. I suspect it won't be long before a similar ruling is made for him.
Re: Security cameras are getting smart -- and scary
At 9:17 AM -0800 on 1/9/03, Bill Stewart wrote: I've usually been the one wearing the fedora in cooler weather, and a few people wore Red Hats back in the day. Don't ever do it without your fez on? :-). Cheers, RAH Not that a fez would work very well for that kind of thing. Well, not *that* kind of fez. For *that* kind of thing, anyway. Yes, well -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 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'
Oooh, hackers are bad!
This is worth a laugh. I have never before heard of or seen a hacker as bad as this one. Oh my. http://www.andrews.af.mil/89cg/89cs/scbsi/images/poster8.jpg Yours Bo Elkjaer, Denmark -- EOT
Re: Subject: CDR: Re: QM, EPR, A/B
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, blah wrote: From: Jim Choate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, blah wrote: Not from the photons perspective, from a photons perspective there is -no- time. A photon has no perspective. Yes it does. It is a particle and it interacts with the rest of the cosmos. The cosmos views it, it views the cosmos. Anyone that wishes to have the short version and skip the detailed corrections to misconceptions, they may note simply that an observer in special relativity compares their results with other observers through a lorentz transform. The photon -is- an observer. It observes the device, just as the device observes it. There is a 'c' and a 'v' in -any- Lorentz transform. Do the math with v=c. 'v' is -always- in relation to 'c' because 'c' is -always constant-. There exists no lorentz transform by which any observer may transform coordinates to a photon, Really why? It's called relativity because it assumes no absolute frame against which speeds must be referenced. Wrong. -ALL- speeds are measured against c. That -is- the whole point of Lorentz transforms. 'c' is -always- c. c is a -constant-. Therefore it -is absolute-. There is no -space- constant, to that I will agree. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: Let there be Blah
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Anonymous wrote: As a (fellow) trained physicst, do you actually believe that quantum-encrypted signals are truly secure as a byproduct of basic physical law, or do even YOU believe that QM is merely a useful calculational tool, No 'label' is ever the thing it labels. QM as instantiated in the math is nothing more than a useful calculation tool, it is not the system we are interested in. so that (by inference), Quantum-encrypted signals may one day be interceptable without either Bob nor Alice knowing that a third party is listening? You can do that now provided it's involving entangled photons. It's called a BEC and you stop the photon and smear that baby over a whole bunch of atoms. Measure it's state and then send it on its way without changing its state. Nobody has tried it with entangled photons to date but I'll wager that when one is stopped and measured the other one doesn't know a thing about it. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: Quantum suicide without suicide
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Tim May wrote: -- Newcomb's Paradox (discussed in Pearl, Joyce, Nozick, etc.) This is no paradox, it is a silly question with an obvious answer that a lot of smart people have wasted a lot of time over. You mug the alien and take both boxes. Hence if the alien could -really- predict what every human would do it wouldn't have offered the box to you in the first place. The answer is The only way to win is not to play the game. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: Let there be Blah
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, blah wrote: Blah wrote quite an excellent post. In fact, I've met few physics PhDs which would have been able to respond so well. So needless to say, my curiosity is peaked concerning who Blah is in the real world. (Tim May, Thanks. It's nice to run into physicists and as a physicist, you'll appreciate the followup to mr. choate's response, since what he suggests is essentially contrary to special relativity. Please explain how? My assertion that the behaviour of the photon in a split beam as described by the general model is incomplete is actually backed up by the postulates of Special General Relativity. Let's look at Specials one at a time shall we? 1. Space-Time is a 4-dimensional continuum In other words you can't talk about 'space' without taking into consideration 'time'. In the regular view of the split beam where is time included other than to ask how it can be in two places at one time? 2. The existance of globally inertial frames This means there are 4-D coordinates in which non-accelerated particles move in straight lines. In general relativity this is replaced with local frames. My assertion stands in General Relativity as well. 3. The speed of light is a constant (we can complicate this with BEC's now but I'll eschew that for the time being) 4. The laws of physics are the same in any inertial frame Now which one is inconsistent? 1? No, my statement rests upon the assertion that by talking about the distance between slits is incomplete unless one includes the time axis. 2.? I certainly make no statement about non-accelerated particles, If the photon is not undergoing some sort of acceleration how can it go through both slits at the same time? Is going through two slits at once a 'straight line'? Since space-time allows -two- different sorts of acceleration (one in space, the other in time) we are left with the question of where the acceleration is taking place? 3.? I make no statement contrary to this. In fact I rely on the fact that photons represent the ultimate end with regard to time-space dilation effects. That time and space are one from the perspective of a photon. That in fact consideration of these effects is critical to a correct understanding of what is actually happening. The device exists in 4D frame where time and space are not zero. The photon has one of two views (which it can actually have at the same time). It either shrinks the 4D space to a point at the origin (ie the photon), or else spreads the photons position out over the entire cosmos (this is more like a probability or guide wave at this point - there is zero problem with changes of state happening instantly here since it's not a thing but a potential that is being altered). Now this takes place for -every- photon. That means that from a photons perspective each and every photon is co-resident with every other photon. Now if two or more of those photons are entangled why should it take any 'time' from our perspective to do anything with regard to dis-entanglement? 4.? Ah, here is where -your- system is in error because the -only- frame of reference that is considered is the one of the mechanism. At no point in the standard approach is the view of the photon considered. There is -nothing- special about the frame of reference of the split mechanism itself. There are -two- views of this experiment and they are both valid; the view of the device of the photon and the photons view of the device. They are not the same. I'll ask again: - How big is the cosmos to a photon? - How does time behave to a photon? - What is the distance between the slits from the perspective of the photon? - How much time does it take the photon to move 'across' the device? Surely a physicist as well trained as yourself should find such answers childs play. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: crypto car keys
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Ralf-Philipp Weinmann wrote: do you have an actual specification of the algorithm used by the rolling code system or is that just another ingenious high-level whitepaper leaving out all the nice details ? No nice details, just whitepaper blurbs. That's why I'm asking! I tried to find details for rolling code systems used in car keys a couple of years ago and came up with basically zilch on the specific algorithms employed by the manufacturers for their challenge reponse systems. I went to my local hardware store and they have an Ilco tester. It said my key is made by TI. A web search on TI rfid has given me a few clues, but the best I get for the algorithm is a document number which you need an NDA to get. I still don't know if it's the same thing used by Ford, they may have a modified version just to make sure we can't figure it out :-) Have you tried opening the key and had a look at the chip - doubt this will help much but to identify since I suspect car manufacturers customize these with their home-brewn algorithm. This is just an unfounded speculation on my part however. I just ordered 5 key blanks. 2 for spares and 3 to cut up :-) Also, I'd be interested where you can get these replacement keys for USD 8, and whether it's for Ford only. I've found a lot of places that sell key blanks for every brand of car. The version I own has no third party supplier, only Strattec makes it. Check out this web site: http://www.nvo.com/deter/transponders/ Turns out I had to pay USD 13, but the older style keys are cheaper. Also do a web search on immobilizer and chip key. Nobody has any cryto details tho, so this is looking loke a fun challenge :-) Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: It's Baaaaaaaaaaaaack
michael cardenas wrote: What was the bit length of the rsa key that they factored? I probably should have highlighted this with more than an Oh my at the end of the exerpt, but the point of the quote was to poke some fun at the legendary ability of the British IT Press to get breaking computer stories almost totally wrong. Unless there are developments I don't yet know about, Neo was working on the RSA Challenge, which has nothing to do with Microsoft, and Neo hasn't factored anything yet. Sorry for any confusion. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law
Re: Indo European Origins and other stuff
Major Variola wrote... Reference). Of course, the Bhagavad Gita is a subsection of the Maybe your highschool has firewalled off anything that will lead you to Hoffman, Ott, Huxley, etc. Yeah, read all a lot of that shit 25 years ago. Seems easier to ask in an email while making some points. My mind only has a finite stack, and right now its still filled with SONET and OFAs. New financial crap comin' in knockin' the stuff out the bottom. Blame it on the 70s and (at the time) legal MDMA. Hmm, the 21st century: all the world's libraries at your fingertips, but now you're obligated to use them! Bullshit. A tiny fraction of what's been in print is available online. Try to find Jung's Eranos Jarbuchs online (well, maybe it has shown up recently). ... Of course Hitler and the gang appropriated this term and pumped it with some very different meanings, LIST: even playing with a kitten and a laser pointer get tiring eventually. Tyler, we know this shit. We're not undergrads doing September here. Next you're going to tell us how the swastik was a groovy Amerind sign before it was coopted by Austrians. Or continue to slog through the history of the old world tribes. See _guns germs and steel_, btw. Hard to tell, based on what I read here. I've been assuming everyone was so totally friggin' clever here, but its occuring to me that a lotta the shit I've written here was completely misunderstood. including notions of racial purity. I was curious as to whether Tim May meant this version of the term or what (and all that is concomittant, including hoped-for genocides), in which case bludgeoning him with a heavy, blunt object in the base of the skull would be a break for all humanity. -TD Here's a very general clue: Tim has a clue. Tim's exposed himself under that nym for some time now, do some research. Yeah, I did a little bit and that which I found was inconclusive. He seemed to reject the concept of race (indicating he has a clue), but he's also indicated that frying 2 million welfare mutants would be desirable. How much time do you think I need to spend? How much time do you think I have? Seemed a hell of lot easier to ask. Another hint: keep your irony meter powered up when reading posts here. Carefully remove the sarcasm filter from the satire window to detect tongue-in-cheek rays. Bigger hint: you might have saved us all some once-ever-so-precious-bandwidth by writing off Aryan as a simple sound pun: Bay Area -an, get it? Finally, here's something to keep in mind: culture != race. You can slam a culture --after all, values are choices-- pretty rationally, thought there's not much evidence for slamming gene-based human groups. You can decry zionist colonialism without animosity towards hebrews. You can mock decrepit urban negro, or appalachian caucasoid, or suburban soccermom culture without impugning the genome of the actors. Well, this I agree with, and in certain special cases it may actually be a fruitful thing to do. Believe me I'm not so politically correct as to not say I'm not sure the culture of most people in mainland China is such that they could handle something like democracy (I lived in China in the 80s). Or African Americans have made absolutely world-class contributions to the arts, but most of them settle for the white-produced ghetto bullshit that's designed to keep them away from white jobs. But this explaining of the obvious is becoming painful, please assume we're a group of at least peers, if not polite tolerant but decreasingly amused elders. OK, I'm hearing your pain. For the larger part, what you yourself post has seemed to be on the money, and there's a significant fraction of what May posts that I agree with (unfortunately, he doesn't seem to realize that because my own opinions are not couched in the obvious rhetoric). At the same time, throwing out praise for the death of millions indicates the guy's never seen any real suffering in his life. Add to that the fact that he has consistently told me not to post, or reiterated his rules for whatever, and smells to me like a fascist. Do I need to stick my nose up his ass in order to figure out what he had for dinner? As for Elders, how old are most residents here?. Don't confuse an online personality with reality. Granted, I'm not in my 50s yet, but I've been around the block a time or two. I do, however, allow myself to periodically morph into and out of said online personality (sometimes mid sentence). I'd also point out the need to be deliberately oblique. I'm not sure we aren't actually headed towards a time where any of us can be carted away for expressing how we really think. I also don't kid myself about whether someone could be listening. And I'm also not convinced that those techniques our boys at the School of the Americas have been teaching might not start to be used here at home for our own good. You know, I really don't want to be tortured.
Re: Indo European Origins and other stuff
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: I'd also point out the need to be deliberately oblique. I'm not sure we aren't actually headed towards a time where any of us can be carted away for expressing how we really think. I also don't kid myself about whether someone could be listening. And I'm also not convinced that those techniques our boys at the School of the Americas have been teaching might not start to be used here at home for our own good. You know, I really don't want to be tortured. Some people think list-servs are a form of torture :-) The main thrust of destroying the constitution was completed in the 70's with RICO and polished off with the WoD in the 80's. By 2000 even some congress critters were noticing and were actually trying to slow down forfiture law. But it's all out the window now, and the precedents are set. The illegal combatant fiction is just one more small step in a few decades of totalitarian crap. Fortunatly dictators are incompetent idiots. It's not that hard to stay out of their way. But it seems to me it's safe to assume the US is a totalitarian state and act accordingly. Be a bureaucrat to survive, and maybe we'll get a Gorbachev to tear the whole thing down. Only another 40 years to go! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: Oooh, hackers are bad!
At 12:14 PM 01/10/2003 +0100, Bo Elkjaer wrote: This is worth a laugh. I have never before heard of or seen a hacker as bad as this one. Oh my. http://www.andrews.af.mil/89cg/89cs/scbsi/images/poster8.jpg Obviously the artist had been playing Quake or Ultima Online or whatever and just gotten his ass fragged again :-)
Re: Security cameras are getting smart -- and scary
Some guy wrote You are moron. Care to be a little more specific? (I'm not afraid of a little criticism, particularly if its constructive.) Even if true, I don't see how that comment pertains to my reply. For all I know, I've been posting on a list haunted by a bunch of crypto-white supremists (crypto, as in secret, hidden). And if that's the case, then I want to know. Figured I'd ask for clarification on this issue. (And from some of May's comments in the past, it wasn't clear to me.) If that makes me a moron, so be it. BTW...You're not the guy with the Chomsky Dis website are you? -TD _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
