Re: How to Exit the Matrix
At 07:27 PM 8/1/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Network Forensics Evasion: How to Exit the Matrix https://n4ez7vf37i2yvz5g.onion/howtos/ExitTheMatrix/ Tor (tor.eff.org) required "Privacy and anonymity have been eroded to the point of non-existence in recent years. In fact, in many workplaces, employers spy on and control their employees Internet access, and this practice is widely considered to be acceptable. How we got to a legal state where this is allowed, I'm not quite sure. It seems to stem from an underlying assumption that while you are at work, you are a slave - a single unit of economic output under the direct and total control of your superiors. I believe this view is wrong. All of those problems derive from the fact that you are using your employers computing resources. Spend the $500 for your on laptop and connect to the Net via E VDO or one of the competing services. Then the only issue is your personal productivity which is completely under your own control. Obviously, if you are fighting the Great Enemy more advanced solutions are required.
Re: Well, they got what they want...
At 11:00 AM 7/22/2005, Tyler Durden wrote: OK, OK...so the police are deterrents against a few lone crazy copycats, who don't have enough sense to enter away from police line-of-site. But it sure seems damned silly to be giving up constitutional protection for the sake of an image of protection. For now you can refuse the search just as with the airlines by declining to travel. Since the searches are "random" you can try again via another entrance until you make it into the system without a search. Or you can decline to use government transportation entirely and call 212-777- for the Tel Aviv car service (most of who's drivers are the sons of Hagar rather than the sons of Ruth in spite of it's name). DCF
Re: Well, they got what they want...
At 02:08 PM 7/22/2005, Duncan Frissell wrote: entrance until you make it into the system without a search. Or you can decline to use government transportation entirely and call 212-777- for the Tel Aviv car service (most of who's drivers are the sons of Hagar rather than the sons of Ruth in spite of it's name). DCF Oops! I meant, of course: Or you can decline to use government transportation entirely and call 212-777- for the Tel Aviv car service (most of who's drivers are the sons of Hagar rather than the sons of Sarah in spite of its name).
Re:The Nazification Of America ("Show Me Your Papers" - Day 1)
Fine, I'll just order the birth certificate and get it over with, right? Wrong. New York wants affirmative proof of identity for a copy now: passport or your [missing] original birth certificate. Anyone else see a circular problem here? http://www.health.state.ny.us/vital_records/birth.htm Identification Requirements - application must be submitted with copies of either A or B: One (1) of the following forms of valid photo-ID: Driver license Non-Driver Photo-ID Card Passport Employment ID Two (2) of the following showing the applicant's name and address: Utility or telephone bills Letter from a government agency dated within the last six (6) months Employment ID (like school ID) can be issued by anyone since anyone in America can employ or teach others. If you want to be fancy, pick up one of these. http://www.staples.com/Catalog/Browse/Sku.asp?PageType=1&Sku=AVE02900 DCF
Re: Got.net and its narcing out of its customers
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Tim May wrote: > It happened in one of the "movies" groups (rec.arts.current-movies), > when the thread was on DVD copy protection and the (claimed) illegality > of making DVDs of movies. > > I explained how I was cheerfully making an average of a DVD a day of my > favorite current movies. > > A couple of "nyms" went ballistic and foamed that they had forwarded my > "admissions" to the RIAA and how I would face civil penalties and jail > time, oh my! > > Then one of them claimed he had arranged to have my account yanked, for > "violation of the DMCA." He claimed he had sent copies of my "criminal" > admissions to Got.net, to the RIAA, to "law enforcement" (shudder!), > and so on. I gather that the denizens of alt.video.dvd have yet to read the Betamax case. Perhaps they should expand their reading before they opine on the state of IP law. This is one of several times that the readers of Tim's posts have reported him to the authorities. I recall the Santa Cruz sherrif's office call of the early '90s occaisioned by a simple admission that Tim legally posessed weapons at home. I'm constantly amazed by the things that people think are illegal that aren't. Reporting people to the authorities is such an impolite thing to do. In a less enlightened era it would have led to an unfortunate breach of the peace. If you have a problem with someone's behavior speak to him nicely, first. And make damned sure that he's doing something wrong before you complain. Remember -- "Since Sodomy is a Virtue, can anything be a Vice?" DCF
Re: [declan@well.com: [Politech] FBI visits John Young, asks about anti-government activity [fs]]
It's a little late for Special Agent Todd Renner to avoid publicity: http://www.networks.org/?src=cnn:2003:US:Northeast:05:22:explosives.arrest "Todd Renner -- an FBI special agent assigned to the Joint Terrorist Task Force in New York" DCF At 02:39 PM 11/5/03 -0800, Eric Murray wrote: - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:01:52 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Politech] FBI visits John Young, asks about anti-government activity [fs] John Young is a longtime supporter of open government and public access to government information. See: http://www.mccullagh.org/cgi-bin/photosearch.cgi?name=john+young -Declan --- http://cryptome.org/fbi-cryptome.htm 4 November 2003 Cryptome received a visit today from FBI Special Agents Todd Renner and Christopher Kelly from the FBI Counterterrorism Office in New York, 26 Federal Plaza, telephone (212) 384-1000. Both agents presented official ID and business cards. SA Renner said that a person had reported Cryptome as a source of information that could be used to harm the United States. He said Cryptome website had been examined and nothing on the site was illegal but information there might be used for harmful purposes. He noted that information in the Cryptome CDs might wind up in the wrong hands. SA Renner said there is no investigation of Cryptome, that the purpose of the visit was to ask Cryptome to report to the FBI any information which Cryptome "had a gut feeling" could be a threat to the nation. There was a discussion of the purpose of Cryptome, freedom of information, the need for more public information on threats to the nation and what citizens can do to protect themselves, the need for more public information about how the FBI functions in the field and the intention of visits like the one today. SA Kelly said such visits are increasingly common as the FBI works to improve the reporting of information about threats to the US. Asked what will happen as a result of the visit. SA Renner said he will write a report of the visit. Cryptome said it will publish a report of the visit, including naming the agents. Both agents expressed concern about their names being published for that might lead to a threat against them and/or their families -- one saying that due to copious personal databases any name can be traced. Cryptome said the reason for publishing names of agents is so that anyone can verify that a contact has been made, and that more public information is needed on how FBI agents function and who they are. Cryptome noted that on a previous occasion FBI agents had protested publication of their names by Cryptome. Cryptome did not agree to report anything to the FBI that is not available on the website. ___ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) - End forwarded message -
Re: Drunken US Troops Kill Rare Tiger
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Eric Cordian wrote: > In my opinion, the tiger was worth more than all the US Troops currently > occupying Iraq. Maybe the tiger "shot" first. > If AmeriKKKa freely re-elects Shrub, because Americans admire his bullying > the rest of the world, and the American people freely support and fund > such activities as the Pax AmeriKKKana, and unprovoked wars of aggression, > then it's probably true there are no civilians in AmeriKKKa either. I'm sure that the opposition shares that view already. And I may agree. Unfortunately if true, then that means that "the enemy peoples" are also all combatants and the US would be justified (as in a naval battle with no civilians) of ending the whole thing in 30 minutes by applying some advanced physics to enemy landscapes. Rough on the oil market though. DCF
Re: National Emergency?
Nothing much new. The answer is "forever". http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-358es.html Executive Orders and National Emergencies: How Presidents Have Come to "Run the Country" by Usurping Legislative Power DCF On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote: >So how much of the Constitution gets shredded by Bush's declaration of a > "national emergency" right after 9/11, and how long can he maintain that. I > mean, I realize the the Constitution/bill of rights is pretty much gone anyway, > but ... > > > -- > Harmon Seaver > CyberShamanix > http://www.cybershamanix.com >
Re: Year in Jail for Web Links
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Eric Cordian wrote: > An anarchist has been sentenced to a year in jail for having links to > explosives information on his Web site. AmeriKKKa is further fucking the > First Amendment by restricting whom he may associate with in the future, > and what views he may espouse. You can't protect people from cowardice. Jim Bell plead the first time. Michael Milkin plead. Bill Gates plead. Various Arabs plead recently. If you plead you can't be acquitted unless you can convince a judge to let you withdraw your plea tough. Courage. Prosecutors and cops are allowed to lie to you about their intent. Know the law. http://technoptimist.blogspot.com/2003_08_03_technoptimist_archive.html#106012921668886203 DCF
Re: Trials for those undermining the war effort
At 09:06 AM 3/29/2003 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: Tim wrote: To cut to the chase, several of my former friends are calling me a traitor and claiming to have reported me to the FBI for my statements about how the war machine ought to be hacked and undermined. See below. A so-called "conservative" group is also tossing the term traitor about. Often these groups serve as early indictators of what their friends in power in the Bush administration think. Remember that Free Congress' Weyrich helped push Ashcroft's nomination through the Senate when it was in danger of dying... -Declan No need to worry. Treason prosecutions never happen and sedition trials are almost as rare. Prosecutors hate those charges because they're so hard to prove. They usually pick the easier charges like the new "material support for terrorists." Usually requires acts which "look bad" to a jury. So far everyone's copped to those sorts of charges. Haven't had a full trial and set of appeals. Too new. Prosecutors won't pick smart and wealthy Christians or atheists who just talk. Prefer poor Muslims. DCF
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 12:43 PM 3/29/2003 -0800, Mike Rosing wrote: I totally agree. The US has lost everything in terms of world opinion. We are morons led by an insane lunatic and the US needs to be dealt with accordingly. Once we start invading Syria, the world will retaliate in a big way. We're already building excuses to do so, so I won't be supprised if the US "accidentally" bombs a few targets inside Syria. Washington are very capable of doing something really stupid and I don't think they appreciate how much military power can be brought to bear against them. If it stays in Iraq, the US has a chance. If they decide to make it bigger, the US will be toast. So when the rest of the world retaliates with all their military power that the US fails to appreciate, what strategic war plan does the rest of the world have for handling a couple thousand nukes? Just trying to figure their options? DCF
Re: Porn for neo-conservatives
Yes, I think it's terrible that tax money is stolen to buy weapons for public employees. Very immoral. That village should be destroyed by mercs operating on the free market. Perhaps for the oil companies. Then we could judge its morality depending on the guilt of the targets. As it is, such activities can only be wrong since those toys are paid for with stolen funds. DCF On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Steve Schear wrote: > >It is at http://www.thenausea.com/usa.html . Download from the link > >described thus: > > > >Afghanistan > >AC130_GunshipMed_a.wmv (4,69 Mb). A small village is destroyed (from a > >AC130 airplane) and everyone is killed mercyless. Men, women, children: > >from that altittude you are only an infrared spot. > > > >Or directly: > >http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/AC130_GunshipMed_a.wmv > > steve
Re: Give peace a chance?
The Smoking Gun has the complaint and police reports up: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates1.html It wasn't the T-shirts. They were proselytizing other customers. Allegations of verbal disputes. Discourages shopping. LLOYD CORP. v. TANNER, 407 U.S. 551 (1972) http://laws.findlaw.com/us/407/551.html is the controlling SC case. DCF
Re: A prediction
At 03:24 PM 2/18/03 -0800, James A. Donald wrote: -- The Iraq war will, as everyone knows, be launched on the 27 or 28th of february. I was thinking about 0400 hours (GMT+3) on the morning of the 28th (that being "Sunday" in Muslim countries). Sunday the 2nd is dark of the moon and an earlier attack would lead into it nicely. DCF "Western Civilization didn't invent tyranny, slavery, racism, or the oppression of women. What it did do is eliminate those evils (to the extent they have been eliminated). The rest of the world should be damn grateful and if they're not we should return them to the ancient tyrannies from which we so recently rescued them. Would serve them right."
Re: Supressed? speech by Sen. Robert Byrd -- Reckless Administration May Reap Disastrous Consequences
At 05:49 PM 2/16/03 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: Peter: I think you're right. It's had some, spotty coverage: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=%22robert+byrd%22+war+iraq+floor&btnG=Search+News One reason why it may not have been picked up (speaking as a political journalist, albeit not one who writes about this area) is that it's not particularly novel: Some Democrats have been saying this for a while. Introducing a bill to rescind Bush's war power, calling for impeachment, endorsing Rep. Paul's legislation, etc. would have been far more newsworthy, and more than just talk. The right-wing alternative media covered it. I saw clips on Fox and heard clips on Rush & Sean. They used it as an opportunity to beat up on "KKK-Byrd" as well as the content of the speech. DCF "The government is just people." "People, my eye, they're Democrats." --The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
Guns & Duct Tape
Curtis & Kuby on WABC Radio On WABC radio in NYC this morning, Curtis Sliwa (head of the Guardian Angels) and Ron Kuby (radical lawyer, communist, and partner of the late William Kunsler) were chatting about terrorist attack preparations. Ron repeated his point that guns and plenty of ammo were the most important part of any emergency survival kit. Ron's classic quote: "Guns will get you through times of no duct tape better than duct tape will get you through times of no guns." -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 2/14/2003 9:26:27 AM Powered by Blogger Pro
Re: The Statism Meme
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Tim May wrote: > I'm struck by how many of them this year treat civil liberties as gone, > either as old-fashioned or as just plain ignorable. I love the frequent use of facial recognition systems on TV as well. With, of course, no mention of the fact that they don't work. DCF
RE: The Statism Meme
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Blanc wrote: > Years ago I asked a group of Libertarians at a meeting what they would do if > a particular politican, who was then running for President, won and turned > everything into a bona-fide, outright statist state like Russia was at the > time. They couldn't adequately answer my question; they couldn't come up > with any ideas of how to deal with it, what they would do if they suddenly > were faced with having to live with it. Maybe they were just being You mean no one said, "I'd grab the .30-06 and head for the hills"? We're not quite there yet. Since no one did it during WWII when the oppression was greater -- 200,000 internees, rationing, travel controls, bans on posession of radio equipment, conscription, etc. -- we have some time to think. DCF
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: citizens can be named as enemy combatants
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Tim May wrote: > Fuck the U.S. Fuck it dead. Do it soon. > > This is one of the rulings which completes the shredding of the > Constitution. Every member of that Court should be killed for their > crimes against the Constitution. It's a good thing he was captured by the Feds instead of a militia or a Private Defense Force of some sort. Note that such forces are not required to accept surrenders and can simply kill enemy forces (and vice-versa of course). Private citizens are not bound by the Constitution either of course (it binds only the governments). The Padilla case will be more important than the Hamdi case because he was arrested in Chicago rather than Afghanistan. Under the traditional laws of war, Padilla (if he is an enemy soldier) could have been executed as a spy since he entered the country in civilian clothes rather than in uniform. All Al-Quida combatants in the US should definitely wear their uniforms so they can "get off on a technicality" if captured. I wonder what an Al-Quida uniform looks like? DCF
RE: JYA ping
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > We paid a surprise Sunday morning visit to the CIA back entrance, got > surrounded by HMMVs and spiffy guards with hands on guns, interrogated by a > swell looking Ms. Security who ran our Duncan Frissell ID card through the > master file, idled for 1/2 hour observing gaps in the maginot line, and then > received a heartfelt thanks for cooperating, Duncan, wink. Aren't you glad that I kept my files vacuumed just for you? Clean Team-Dirty Team. Works every time. DCF Don't nuke Mecca. Build a cathedral there instead.
Raise the Fist Webmaster pleads guilty
RTF Webmaster Pleads Guilty RTF Webmaster to be Convicted on Monday, Sept 23rd Raisethefist.com, Sherman Austin will be convicted on Monday, Sept 23rd as he pleads guilty to felony count: 18 U.S.C. 842 (p)(2)(A): DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION RELATING TO EXPLOSIVES, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION WITH THE INTENT THAT SUCH INFORMATION BE USED IN FURTHERANCE OF A FEDERAL CRIME OF VIOLENCE. The plea bargain gives Austin a felony conviction with 1 month in jail, 5 months in a half-way home and 3 years supervised release. Austin does not start his sentencing on Monday, but will find out the exact date at his court appearance. The arraignment is at the downtown federal building in Los Angeles on 255 east temple on the 3rd floor at 8:30am Another one of those unfortunate chicken defendants we seem to get. He would have got a max of 4-5 at trial. So now he has a felony conviction anyway plus endless parole supervision which gives the Feds way too much control over you. And he gives up a chance to challenge the "Publish Bomb Plans" go to jail law. If you go to trial and lose and do your time you are then free of supervision. Plus you never admitted any crime. A plea is an admission. When you are in custody, your cooperation is the only thing you can deny your captors. See some of the actual links: http://www.raisethefist.com/news.cgi?artical=wire/9846413t4a.article and http://www.raisethefist.com/news.cgi?artical=wire/9845643t4a.article -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 9/25/2002 1:54:34 PM Powered by Blogger Pro
The SSA in Peace and War
>From Syracuse's invaluable Transactional Records Clearing House site: The SSA in Peace and War The federal agency with the most international terrorism referrals in April was a surprisethe Social Security Administration. It recommended 78 individuals be indicted for such crimes, compared with only 39 referrals during the month from the FBI. The Department of Transportation was third with 23 new referrals, followed by the INS and Customs. The FBI was the source of most referrals for domestic terrorism. See table. We warned you that the Social Security Administration would become an instrument of totalitarian control back in 1935 when it was created. But you didn't listen -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 9/5/2002 2:52:44 PM Powered by Blogger Pro
Selling Privacy for ETC
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: White House Sounds Call For New Internet Standards
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Lucky Green wrote: > > How about IPv6 with IPSEC? > > --Lucky > Isn't that a creaky, cranky 10-year-old protocol? DCF
A Q&A exchange between me and Eugene Volokh
A Q&A exchange between me and Eugene Volokh: [Eugene's responses in square brackets.] The topic was Gilmore v. Ashcroft -- FAA ID Challenge in which John Gilmore is suing the Feds to be allowed to fly domestically without ID. So, does John have a chance? [No.] So it is your view that the Feds can ban anyone (except those wealthy enough to rent, buy, or build their own aircraft) from flying, for life, using secret orders, and without any access to judicial process. Seems a bit extreme to me. Could they do the same thing for riding in a car or walking? What about boats? [My view is only that they can insist that people show id.] So if there is a "Don't Fly" list, you would support people being able to sue to get off it? [Of course.] How can they force you to present something that they can't force you to have in the first place? [Same reason as for driver's licenses to drive. If you don't want an identification, that's fine -- but then you won't be allowed to do certain things where identification is necessary for security reasons.] I promised that I wouldn't send him any more mail for at least a week but now the time is up. One doesn't need a driver's license to ride in a car. The government is now claiming that you need ID to ride in a commercial aircraft. Since the development of passports for international travel at the beginning of the 20th century, passports (or other travel documents) have been necessary to enter other nations. Commercial carriers began to check them on boarding not for security reasons but because if passengers were refused entry at their destination the carrier was responsible for their maintenance and return. The problem with such ID requirements is not merely that ID is required. The problem is that the activity can be barred for reasons other than lack of ID. You will also be banned for your characteristics. After all, what's the point of requiring ID to fight terrorism if you can't ban terrorists from flights. Or people who fit a terrorist profile. Or people who owe child support (drivers licenses, fishing licenses, and passports are denied to those owing child support). An ID requirement, when you combine it with online verification and authorization, creates a federal license requirement to engage in the particular activity. In the above case, a federal license to fly on a commercial aircraft. In other proposals, a federal license to take a job, open a bank account or rent an apartment. A federal license that can be denied for any reason since it is issued via a computer analysis system driven by a secret algorithm. It's a license because the federal government is required to affirmatively grant you permission before you can do something. The right to fly is controlled by the Computer Assisted Passenger Profile System (CAPPS) -- soon to be replaced by the presumably wider-ranging CAPPS2. At the heart of CAPPS is a secret algorithm that determines whether you are or may be a terrorist. You can't know what facts or behaviors cause CAPPS to ban you from a flight since the algorithm is not for public consumption. In fact, since the Feds have not set up an administrative procedure for you to challenge a denial of flight boarding (or any of the future activities that will be subject to CAPPS2 and similar systems) only those with the $25K to 100K needed to bring a federal civil suit will be able to challenge their denials. The Feds require private businesses that deny you credit to follow an appeals process but don't impose such a requirement on themselves in the much more significant denials that CAPPS2 will make. And even for the rich, these court challenges will be hard to win since the reasons for the denials will be a state secret. So those who support such ID requirements and such federal licenses should be required to answer a basic question -- what activities should be subject to state and federal permission and which activities should not? DCF -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 7/30/2002 10:40:04 PM
Is Latvia Offshore?
So I wonder. Is Latvia Offshore? I am in receipt of a fun piece of spam: Dear Customer, Looking for a superior asset protection and tax management tool? Concerned about preserving your wealth in the heart of Europe without personal identity disclosure? We have a superior solution, which is able to meet the most demanding asset protection needs of our prospective customers. Please take your time to study this incredible and exclusive opportunity at www.offshore-cards.com -- Offshore Cirrus ATM card Complete anonymity when withdrawing cash No ID requirements Would cost you just $180 http://www.offshore-cards.com/anoncir.htm So I wander over to NSI and discover where "the Heart of Europe" is (OFFSHORE-CARDS.COM) and discover that it is Latvia. Now it is certainly possible that heroic Latvians could be offering fabulous anonymous bank accounts and credit and debit cards but how would one know this in advance. Then there's the fact that the record was created in May. A bit young. Give it a while to age. DCF -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 7/30/2002 9:52:30 AM
Pizza with a credit card
<http://villagevoice.com/issues/0230/baard.php>Buying Trouble In which the Village Voice discusses the use of commercial databases including supermarket discount cards in hunting terrorists. One useful piece of advice: Don't but pizza with a credit card: Oddly enough, "one of the factors was if you were a person who frequently ordered pizza and paid with a credit card," Ponemon says, describing the buying habits of a nation of college students. "Sometimes data leads to an empirical inference when you add it to other variables. Whether this one is relevant or completely spurious remains to be seen, but those kinds of weird things happen with data." Course all those terrorists buying their pizzas with cash get away clean. DCF Posted by Duncan Frissell to <http://technoptimist.blogspot.com>The Technoptimist at 7/29/2002 10:19:30 AM
Hollywood Hackers
Congressman Wants to Let Entertainment Industry Get Into Your Computer Rep. Howard L. Berman, D-Calif., formally proposed legislation that would give the industry unprecedented new authority to secretly hack into consumers' computers or knock them off-line entirely if they are caught downloading copyrighted material. I've been reading things like this for a while but I wonder how practical such an attack would be. They won't be able to hack into computers with reasonable firewalls and while they might try DOS attacks, upstream connectivity suppliers might object. Under current P2P software they may be able to do a little hacking but the opposition will rewrite the software to block. DOS attacks and phony file uploads can be defeated with digital signatures and reputation systems (including third party certification). Another problem -- Napster had 55 million customers. That's a lot of people to attack. I don't think Hollywood has the troops. DCF
How to Defeat DVD Zone Controls
From Ditherati: YOU CAN'T FIRE ME, I SUBMIT "I care more about this than getting myself fired, but the fact is that getting myself fired today would have hurt Hewlett-Packard's Linux program." Open-source guru Bruce Perens, on his courageous decision to keep drawing a paycheck instead of teaching conference- goers how to hack a DVD player, Wired News, 26 July 2002 http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,54168,00.html Insteard of going to a conference, you could go to your favorite Hypermarche in Belgium or France and buy a multi zone DVD player. Course then you can't use your NSTC tv set to connect it to but that's another problem. DCF
Re: Are the Feds Wimps or What?
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Optimizzin Al-gorithym wrote: > >I'm back to not showing ID to get into work just like before the war. > > > > Well, you showed it to them enough times, they believe you now :-) Maybe it was the 14 years they'd been seeing me. I actually didn't show it that much even during the early part of the war. I often went to the back of the building and entered using the electronic lock. DCF
RE: Are the Feds Wimps or What?
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Trei, Peter wrote: > Well, the other possible interpretation is that the Feds are not > black-at-heart, Big Brother, neo Stalinist fascist JBTs > pouncing on any opportunity to make confetti of the Bill of Rights; > but rather are actually trying to respond to 9/11 with a minimal > impact on US Citizens. > > ...but of course, that would be an unpopular interpretation on > this mailing list. I agree. I assume that they have enough on their hands without adding wholesale oppression. Takes time. Very expensive. That's one of the advantages of an advanced market economy. Salaries and other operating costs are high and the wealth of your adversaries is also so high that unless you're making a profit on the transaction it's hard to "buy" too much of something even if that something is oppression. If the activity to be regulated doubles in size, the regulators had better double in number too or they begin to fall behind. SEC? Markets can adapt to demand changes because the actors are self-financing in the long run so they scale well. Government actors aren't self-financed (only a small number are in charge of theft) so scaling is difficult. Also voluntary transactions are easier to complete than coerced transactions (think prostitution vs. rape) since there is no resistance. We'll see. DCF Governments do not become nicer or nastier because of their capabilities and attitudes. They become nastier or nicer because of *our* capabilities and attitudes.
Are the Feds Wimps or What?
So far the massive crackdown by the Feds that has stripped me of my civil liberties hasn't managed to do much. They have to work a bit harder. I'm back to not showing ID to get into work just like before the war. The states where I choose not to obtain a drivers license have upped their ID requirements for initial license applications but I already have one and don't patronize them in any case. They still let foreigners drive with foreign licenses so I will become a foreigner if they get too uppity. Flight delays only slightly worse than usual (particularly since I mostly fly internationally and have always shown my passport). Domestic flight ID fascism is 6 years old this August so no change there. As far as we know, only a little more than 1000 detained out of a pop of 270 megs. I was expecting that we would at least make WWII levels -- 200,000+ out of a population of 132 megs. I guess there could be a few more internees but they'd be tough to hide. Too many others would note their absence. I thinks the Feds are just to wimpy to indulge in actual oppression these days. At least on a wholesale basis. Maybe I'm wrong but I need more evidence first. -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to The Technoptimist at 7/20/2002 9:06:27 PM Powered by Blogger Pro
Re: Tax consequences of becoming a US citizen.
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Tim May wrote: > Why do you think a person without a green card is exempt from IRS > jurisdiction? I assumed that he meant a US non-resident. Obvi > > Unless one's stay is a short one (see below), income or other money > earned while in the U.S. (and maybe earned outside the U.S. if the IRS > can make a nexus case) is taxable. Illegal aliens are supposed to file > tax returns...and they certainly don't have green cards! > > Here's what Uncle Sam says: > > "You will be considered a U.S. resident for tax purposes if you meet the > substantial presence test for the calendar year. To meet this test, you > must be physically present in the United States on at least: > > 1.31 days during the current year, and > 2.183 days during the 3-year period that includes the current year > and the 2 years immediately before that, counting: > * All the days you were present in the current year, and > * 1/3 of the days you were present in the first year before the > current year, and > * 1/6 of the days you were present in the second year before the > current year. > > --end IRS quote-- > > There are some exemptions, for student visa persons and athletes > competing in games, but basically the idea is that you owe tax on money > earned in the U.S., regardless of citizenship, green card, or other > status. > > > or > > get a US citizenship since you're already in their jurisdiction anyway. > > > > I think this is terrible advice. Becoming a U.S. citizen exposes a > person to not only the _current year_ tax scheme but also the "for ten > years after you leave the U.S." tax scheme. (Yes, any U.S. citizen who > moves anywhere in the world must, technically, file U.S. tax returns for > 10 years after leaving. And pay various kinds of taxes, though the > amount may be different from what he would have paid had he remained in > the U.S.) > > Also, a person having extensive offshore (outside the U.S.) assets may > well find his assets are now taxable in the U.S. And for those with > capital assets not taxed in their home countries (e.g., Germany, Japan), > this may be quite a shock. > > A U.S. passport buys almost no protection. The U.S. will not defend its > citizens, only its imperialist interests. > > > > --Tim May > "That government is best which governs not at all." --Henry David Thoreau
Re: [OT] why was private gold ownership made illegal in the US? (Re: "to outlaw general purpose computers")
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Adam Back wrote: > Just curious, but what was the rationale under which private possession > of gold was made illegal in the US? It boggles the mind... > > Adam Eric's comment are correct. A bit more info. The US wanted to devalue the $ and substitute a general gold standard for a government to government gold standard. The gold standard price of gold was $20.67/ounce. By forcing Americans to turn in their gold before devaluation, the Feds got more gold for less money. They also wanted the freedom to inflate. Gold clauses were common in contracts and they would have made soft money difficult. As is traditional under US law, gold ownership was banned for US citizens and permanent residents anywhere on earth. There were controlled exemptions for coin collectors, jewelers, and dentists. Gold smuggling became popular during the Vietnam war and the monetary crises of the '60s and '70s. It was re-legalized in January of 1975 (the only decent act of the Ford Admin). DCF
Re: Eyes on the Prize...not the Millicent Ghetto
On Tue, 14 May 2002, Richard Fiero wrote: > As the article points out, $1 million fits in a briefcase > nicely but the Euro's largest denomination is 500 which will > allow $1 million to fit into a purse. From the article: > " I am not an expert in cryptography, but I think it may take > quite a while to devise an electronic money that guarantees > anonymity in the same way that cash does." Or my favorite 1000 swiss franc notes currently worth about $618 each. DCF
Choate a Spammer or a Victim?
Has anyone noticed genuine spam wrapped in Choatian wrappers? Perhaps someone who's good at header analysis can comment. This is the header of a mailing list sales pitch I retrieved from my trash file (where Choate and MattX go. I also got some porno spam. Innovation thy name is spam. DCF Received: by mail1.panix.com (mbox frissell) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Tue Apr 23 10:26:19 2002) X-From_: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Apr 20 17:33:35 2002 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from slack.lne.com (dns.lne.com [209.157.136.81]) by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD5DF9029 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 17:33:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by slack.lne.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id g3KKwsS17398 for cypherpunks-goingout; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:58:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: slack.lne.com: majordom set sender to [EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f X-Mailsort: cypherpunks From: "Jim Choate " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:57:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: SAFELY Message-ID: <3CC181EB.19337.2529338@localhost> In-reply-to: <3CA5CC82.15240.6A42ED@localhost> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.01) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-description: Mail message body X-Unsubscription-Info: http://einstein.ssz.com/cdr Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Status: RO X-Status:
Supremes Legalize Virtual Kiddieporn
According to WABC at 10:30, the Supremem Court overturned the ban on virtual or morphed kiddie porn. DCF
Re: Among the Bourgeoisophobes
Not to mention continent-wide free trade zone since 1790-1803 or so. Lower taxes. Relaxed regulatory environment. Free(er) media and art industry. DCF On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, Julian Assange wrote: > > and awe (arrogance), the rejection of superstition (godlessness), > > Europeans certainly don't dislike Americans for Godlessness. The > extraordinary religiosity (whether over Gods or Presidents) in the > US is one of the reasons for European frowning over that country. > > Americans would do well to consider its scientific and economic > successes as primarily stemming from: > > a) Lack of distruction in WWII > b) large graph where the edges speak a common language and common > rules. > c) A large tax base with substantial centralisation of tax > assets. > > -- > Julian Assange|If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people >|together to collect wood or assign them tasks and > [EMAIL PROTECTED] |work, but rather teach them to long for the endless > [EMAIL PROTECTED] |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery >
Re: One for declan Mc CATOhead,pass it on dec!
On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, matthew X wrote: > http://theage.com.au/articles/2002/04/12/1018333413565.html > 700,000 awarded against British American Tobacco.Possible 1,000,000 fine > for destroying evidence. > Put that in your pipe and smoke it you cheap shill. > But I thought: "No opinion a law -- no opinion a crime." ---Alexander Berkman Smoke 'em if you've got 'em. DCF
Re: pre-paid/pay-as-you go cell phone service (Re: all about transferable off-line ecash)
At 12:47 AM 4/10/02 +0100, Adam Back wrote: >But from what I saw it was around 4x more expensive. A SIM with a >years contract (all paid up front) is pretty easy to obtain for 10 - >50 pounds depending on number of free minutes included. > > > And some people even like anonymity. > >Yes other things being equal I would find the anonymity aspects of >buying SIM without contract etc quite cool if there was not such a >price disparity. > >Adam I bought my Nokia a year ago for £29.99 on BT Cellnet from Carphone Warehouse. I had it delivered to my hotel. Last Christmas I was in Ireland and bought a SIM (subscriber identity module) for about 15 Punts just before the Euro arrived. The services were in a Pay As You Go price war during 2000 and 2001 so some phone got under 20 quid. They stopped doing this towards the end of last year and concentrated on subscription services. The phones are still fairly reasonable. Cards to feed the phones can be bought for cash at any news agent. You just punch the appropriate menu item on the phone and key in the number to add money. £10 to £50 denominations with low denominations predominating. Here's the current Carphone Warehouse catalog for Pay As You Go sorted by price: http://www1.carphonewarehouse.com/NASApp/commerce/gben-express-GBENExpressPurchase?xpprevutilname=ExpressUtilModel&xputilname=ExpressUtilModel&prodgroupid=none&pricelistid=WWW&prodcatid=PPAY&model=&network=&tar_id=&tarvar_id=&NEXT_LOCATION=gben-express-GBENExpressPurchase&NEXT_KEY=model&ITEMID0=&PRODDISPLAYPAGE=0&CATEGORY=HANDSET&ITEMSELECTED=false&ISSELECTED=false&pag=0&sw=Lowest+Price You can get a SIM for £9.99 and a phone (with SIM) for £39.99 and up (mostly up). Verizon offers a Pay As You Go phone (FREEUP) in the US for $99. http://www.verizonwireless.com/ics/plsql/prepay.intro Unfortunately, US prepay plans don't use SIMs (save for a few geographically limited prepay services). SIMs are advantageous because they allow you to easily change numbers without changing phones. Note that some GSM phones are now tracking handsets as well as SIMs so this privacy aspect may be disappearing in Europe. DCF "It doesn't matter what your race, creed, or color is; you can still be a son of a bitch." -- Duncan Philip Frissell 1899-1965
ID & Citizenship Believe it or Nots
Identification & Citizenship Believe it or Nots by Duncan Frissell http://technoptimist.blogspot.com/?/2002_04_07_technoptimist_archive.html Last September's attack on the United States vastly increased debate on identification, citizenship, and immigration. For your education and amusement, here are some truly strange facts about these topics. ... 2) World War II was won by US Army Generals and Navy Admirals who commanded armies, air forces, and fleets and possessed and used all manner of weapons up to and including nuclear bombs -- all without ever having proved their identities to the US government. ... 8) One is not required to apply for a Social Security Number. ... 18) The machine-readable lines on your passport (at the bottom of the page that has your picture on it) include space for a National ID number. ... 21) It is not a crime to be an illegal alien in the US. It is a civil matter. It is a crime to use fraudulent documents to gain entry. It is a minor offense to evade inspection when crossing the border. But if you overstay your visa, it is not a crime. You can, of course, be arrested and deported but the mere status of being illegally present in the US does not constitute a crime. DCF If you worry that Multinational Corporations or National Governments control your life, simply employ a random number generator to determine what actions you take. By this simple technological fix, you will guarantee that no one (including yourself) is Master of Your Fate and Captain of Your Soul.
Re: DOJ press release: Visa offshore records to be turned over
At 07:17 PM 3/28/02 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > >COURT APPROVES IRS SUMMONS FOR OFFSHORE CREDIT CARD RECORDS Records from >VISA International Will Identify People Who Use Offshore Credit Cards to >Evade Federal Income Taxes WASHINGTON, D.C. - A federal court in San >Francisco, Calif. on Wednesday issued an order authorizing the IRS to >serve a summons on VISA International for offshore credit card >records. The court acted just two days after the Justice I guess it must be almost April 15th. As sure as the crocuses bloom in the spring, press releases blossom in the Department of the Treasury. "Al Capone, Lou Costello, Willie Nelson caught by heroic Agents of the Infernal Robbery Service. You may be next." If I were one of those 2 million offshore card holders I'd really be sweating it. Why I might end up being like one of the 632 Americans prosecuted in 2000 for tax evasion. http://trac.syr.edu/tracirs/findings/national/aousc.html. 2 million offshore card holders (plus another 8-10 million non-filers and 8-10 million filing evaders who *don't* have offshore credit cards) being taken down at the rate of 632/year. It won't be long before they're all in stir. 3.16 convictions per 100,000 evaders in 2000 vs a murder rate of 6-9 per 100,000. http://trac.syr.edu/tracirs/findings/aboutIRS/keyFindings.html "The IRS's use of levies has continued a long-term slide. Liens, while going up somewhat last year, remain extremely low compared with past years. IRS seizures have for all practical purposes been abandoned. Tax delinquent investigations aimed at both individuals and businesses were down last year. (See graph and table.) The law authorizes the IRS to bring civil suits in federal court against recalcitrant taxpayers. In 1992, according to data recorded by United States Attorneys, the agency filed 2,519 such actions. In 1999, it filed 641. (See graph and table.) An even more serious sanction involves allegations of criminal tax violations. According to federal court data, federal tax prosecutionsmost of them by the IRSrecently have dropped by more than half1,550 in 1987 (at its peak), 632 in 2000. (See graph and table.) " DCF [1] And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel. [3} ... but, my lord the king, are they not all my lord's servants? why then doth my lord require this thing? why will he be a cause of trespass to Israel? [7] And God was displeased with this thing; therefore he smote Israel. 1 Chronicles 21.
Is Illegal Immigration Illegal?
I'm trying to figure out the answer to what should be a simple question. Is it illegal to be Illegal. I've wandered through various US Code sections: TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 75 > Sec. 1546. Sec. 1546. - Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1546.html TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part V > Sec. 1253. Sec. 1253. - Penalties related to removal http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1253.html TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > Sec. 1325. Sec. 1325. - Improper entry by alien http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1325.html TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > Sec. 1324d. Sec. 1324d. - Civil penalties for failure to depart http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1324d.html and it looks like there are the normal criminal penalties for forgery and uttering a false document and a minor misdemeanor charge for sneaking accross the border but merely a fine for overstaying a visa. If you fail to leave after you are ordered to do so you may be imprisoned but the language is the language of "civil" penalties rather than "crimes." Is this correct? I know that Illegals are usually just subject to deportation and that this is a civil matter. (Which is why all the detainees arrested after September 11th don't have the right to a free lawyer since they are not charged with any crimes.) As far as any of you know, are there any "pure crimes" involved in illegal immigration other than those outlined above? If not, this should be pointed out in arguments on the topic. DCF
