Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[mark burdett]

btw, for those of you arriving at OHM, there will be a meeting at Noisy²
this evening at 9pm!

--mark B.
On Jul 11, 2013 5:43 PM, "coderman"  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
> > ...
> > If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how DEFCON
> and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give the keynote!
>
> regarding same, seems the better half of these cons is giving pushback:
>
> "FEDS, WE NEED SOME TIME APART."
> https://defcon.org/
>
> "Jeff Moss (a.k.a. “The Dark Tangent”) suggested it was probably in
> the best interests of the feds to make themselves scarce at this
> year’s con... this announcement from DEF CON should serve as a fair
> warning to feds who do decide to stick around past Black Hat,[...]:
> Spot-the-Fed could well turn into a hack-the-fed competition."
> http://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/07/def-con-to-feds-stay-home-this-year/
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[coderman]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
> ...
> If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how DEFCON and 
> BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give the keynote!

regarding same, seems the better half of these cons is giving pushback:

"FEDS, WE NEED SOME TIME APART."
https://defcon.org/

"Jeff Moss (a.k.a. “The Dark Tangent”) suggested it was probably in
the best interests of the feds to make themselves scarce at this
year’s con... this announcement from DEF CON should serve as a fair
warning to feds who do decide to stick around past Black Hat,[...]:
Spot-the-Fed could well turn into a hack-the-fed competition."
http://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/07/def-con-to-feds-stay-home-this-year/
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Ruben Bloemgarten]

Yay, Dutchy pileup. Joining the fray.

WARNING : the following lecture contains the word penis.

(But it does not have the word fuck. (Can I say fuck on libtech ?))

On 06/26/2013 12:55 PM, Lex van Roon wrote:
> On 06/26/2013 12:18, groente wrote:
 Is this the pitch of "left unity at any cost"?  Because no, actually,
 it turns out that unity isn't the best thing ever.  Do you want a big
 tent that means nothing?  Do you think that the OHM orga is united in
 fighting for the destruction of the power of all governments to
 oppress their citizens?  Their actions indicate otherwise.  The
 pushback you're getting here is that no, we're not all actually on the
 same side.
>>>
>>> Thing is, as a dutch citizen, I do not (yet) believe that *all*
>>> governments need to be destroyed because they oppress their citizens
>>> (your words, not mine). The simple reasoning behind this, is that people
>>
>> The point was, i believe, not to destroy the government per se, but to 
>> destroy
>> its power to oppress its citizens.
> 
> Ok, I thought that Eleanor was pretty explicit in her wording, but I
> might be mistaking. 
She was, and you are. Probably because you injected "because" into your
'quote'.
I guess that she can make her wording more explicit
> and/or clarify them.
No need. "[...]the power of all governments to oppress their citizens?"
is perfectly clear.
> 
>>> can be 'loosely' divided into two groups: leaders and followers. If we'd
>>> follow your plan and destroy all governments, that would imply that all
>>> the followers would be without a leader. And you probably also understand
>>> what happens next right, the power vaccuum will be filled by someone that
>>> will abuse that position. Since we, as a global hacker community, do not
>>> have any power structures that we could use to fill this void, every
>>> action that takes place to create that void will be detrimental to our
>>> cause. And *thats* why I call for unity instead of division. We might
>>> not agree on everything, but we will need to have an united voice and an
>>> united power structure if we want to make a difference against the big
>>> powers.
Great idea. We need a leader ! Een leider, un chef, un capo, ein Fuhrer,
if you will. And lots of followers preferably. After all, there´s too
many of them, and not enough of us. Yay us!
>>
>> Well, the prerequisite for a united voice/power structure is a common goal 
>> and
>> methods which are not mutually exclusive. I frankly don't see how players 
>> like
>> THTC and Fox-IT fit into that picture. This may lead to awkward social 
>> situations
>> where personal friends are suddenly found on the other side of the dividing 
>> line
>> between those who empower the people and those who empower the state, but I 
>> fail
>> to see how it is useful to unite with players whose daily praxis is the 
>> direct
>> opposite of my (and i hope our) goals.
> 
> The fight we need to fight is a big one. From that perspective, it makes sense
> to employ military tactics; In this context, Sun Tzu explained the reasoning 
> approx two thousand years ago (translation mistakes come from wikipedia):
> 
> ~ So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a
>   hundred battles without a single loss.

Ok, we´re going for fortune cookie quotes. Great. Love those. How about
"Think you can. Think you can't. Either way, you'll be right." Or,
"Alas! The onion you are eating is someone else’s water lily." Oh oh.
How about this one : "If you want to fight a war without losing a single
battle, fight on both sides." Sound and fury.

> 
> If you look at the history of warfare, you will have noticed that this
> statement still holds true and can be applied to all forms of warfare.
Nope. Wrong. If the history of war teaches us anything its that
“sometimes you go back for your bag, and sometimes you don't"
It´s a regular quote bonanza! Yay.
> 
>>> Look, in the netherlands, we do not yet have or had any upcoming 
>>> authoritarian
>>> / totalitarian government like the us or germany for instance. We know that 
>>> it
Define authoritarian and, while your at it, define "had". How far back
are you going exactly?  Are you restricting a history of
authoritarianism to the Dutch European borders post 1839 ? (Well, post
1831, really. But let´s respect king William I´s refusal to recognize
Belgium shall we ? I still have a hard time recognizing Belgium, I think
even the Belgians do). Sounds perfectly sound. Who cares how the
Belgians interpret history, right ?  Let´s ignore Dutch colonial rule up
until, euh, now. To be clear : rule of Indonesia until 1949, ending
after "police actions" as they were and are euphemistically called. New
Guinea in 1963. Suriname in 1975. Granted, the malevolence of the
authoritarian nature of the Dutch state declined as the 20th century
progressed, but to suggest that Holland is and always has been this
haven of blissful innocence is at best an innocent display of i

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Ruben Bloemgarten]

Yay, Dutchy pileup. Joining the fray.

WARNING : the following lecture contains the word penis.

(But it does not have the word fuck. (Can I say fuck on libtech ?))

On 06/26/2013 12:55 PM, Lex van Roon wrote:
> On 06/26/2013 12:18, groente wrote:
 Is this the pitch of "left unity at any cost"?  Because no, actually,
 it turns out that unity isn't the best thing ever.  Do you want a big
 tent that means nothing?  Do you think that the OHM orga is united in
 fighting for the destruction of the power of all governments to
 oppress their citizens?  Their actions indicate otherwise.  The
 pushback you're getting here is that no, we're not all actually on the
 same side.
>>>
>>> Thing is, as a dutch citizen, I do not (yet) believe that *all*
>>> governments need to be destroyed because they oppress their citizens
>>> (your words, not mine). The simple reasoning behind this, is that people
>>
>> The point was, i believe, not to destroy the government per se, but to 
>> destroy
>> its power to oppress its citizens.
> 
> Ok, I thought that Eleanor was pretty explicit in her wording, but I
> might be mistaking. 
She was, and you are. Probably because you injected "because" into your
'quote'.
I guess that she can make her wording more explicit
> and/or clarify them.
No need. "[...]the power of all governments to oppress their citizens?"
is perfectly clear.
> 
>>> can be 'loosely' divided into two groups: leaders and followers. If we'd
>>> follow your plan and destroy all governments, that would imply that all
>>> the followers would be without a leader. And you probably also understand
>>> what happens next right, the power vaccuum will be filled by someone that
>>> will abuse that position. Since we, as a global hacker community, do not
>>> have any power structures that we could use to fill this void, every
>>> action that takes place to create that void will be detrimental to our
>>> cause. And *thats* why I call for unity instead of division. We might
>>> not agree on everything, but we will need to have an united voice and an
>>> united power structure if we want to make a difference against the big
>>> powers.
Great idea. We need a leader ! Een leider, un chef, un capo, ein Fuhrer,
if you will. And lots of followers preferably. After all, there´s too
many of them, and not enough of us. Yay us!
>>
>> Well, the prerequisite for a united voice/power structure is a common goal 
>> and
>> methods which are not mutually exclusive. I frankly don't see how players 
>> like
>> THTC and Fox-IT fit into that picture. This may lead to awkward social 
>> situations
>> where personal friends are suddenly found on the other side of the dividing 
>> line
>> between those who empower the people and those who empower the state, but I 
>> fail
>> to see how it is useful to unite with players whose daily praxis is the 
>> direct
>> opposite of my (and i hope our) goals.
> 
> The fight we need to fight is a big one. From that perspective, it makes sense
> to employ military tactics; In this context, Sun Tzu explained the reasoning 
> approx two thousand years ago (translation mistakes come from wikipedia):
> 
> ~ So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a
>   hundred battles without a single loss.

Ok, we´re going for fortune cookie quotes. Great. Love those. How about
"Think you can. Think you can't. Either way, you'll be right." Or,
"Alas! The onion you are eating is someone else’s water lily." Oh oh.
How about this one : "If you want to fight a war without losing a single
battle, fight on both sides." Sound and fury.

> 
> If you look at the history of warfare, you will have noticed that this
> statement still holds true and can be applied to all forms of warfare.
Nope. Wrong. If the history of war teaches us anything its that
“sometimes you go back for your bag, and sometimes you don't"
It´s a regular quote bonanza! Yay.
> 
>>> Look, in the netherlands, we do not yet have or had any upcoming 
>>> authoritarian
>>> / totalitarian government like the us or germany for instance. We know that 
>>> it
Define authoritarian and, while your at it, define "had". How far back
are you going exactly?  Are you restricting a history of
authoritarianism to the Dutch European borders post 1839 ? (Well, post
1831, really. But let´s respect king William I´s refusal to recognize
Belgium shall we ? I still have a hard time recognizing Belgium, I think
even the Belgians do). Sounds perfectly sound. Who cares how the
Belgians interpret history, right ?  Let´s ignore Dutch colonial rule up
until, euh, now. To be clear : rule of Indonesia until 1949, ending
after "police actions" as they were and are euphemistically called. New
Guinea in 1963. Suriname in 1975. Granted, the malevolence of the
authoritarian nature of the Dutch state declined as the 20th century
progressed, but to suggest that Holland is and always has been this
haven of blissful innocence is at best an innocent display of i

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Lex van Roon]

On 06/26/2013 12:18, groente wrote:
> > > Is this the pitch of "left unity at any cost"?  Because no, actually,
> > > it turns out that unity isn't the best thing ever.  Do you want a big
> > > tent that means nothing?  Do you think that the OHM orga is united in
> > > fighting for the destruction of the power of all governments to
> > > oppress their citizens?  Their actions indicate otherwise.  The
> > > pushback you're getting here is that no, we're not all actually on the
> > > same side.
> > 
> > Thing is, as a dutch citizen, I do not (yet) believe that *all*
> > governments need to be destroyed because they oppress their citizens
> > (your words, not mine). The simple reasoning behind this, is that people
> 
> The point was, i believe, not to destroy the government per se, but to destroy
> its power to oppress its citizens.

Ok, I thought that Eleanor was pretty explicit in her wording, but I
might be mistaking. I guess that she can make her wording more explicit
and/or clarify them.

> > can be 'loosely' divided into two groups: leaders and followers. If we'd
> > follow your plan and destroy all governments, that would imply that all
> > the followers would be without a leader. And you probably also understand
> > what happens next right, the power vaccuum will be filled by someone that
> > will abuse that position. Since we, as a global hacker community, do not
> > have any power structures that we could use to fill this void, every
> > action that takes place to create that void will be detrimental to our
> > cause. And *thats* why I call for unity instead of division. We might
> > not agree on everything, but we will need to have an united voice and an
> > united power structure if we want to make a difference against the big
> > powers.
> 
> Well, the prerequisite for a united voice/power structure is a common goal and
> methods which are not mutually exclusive. I frankly don't see how players like
> THTC and Fox-IT fit into that picture. This may lead to awkward social 
> situations
> where personal friends are suddenly found on the other side of the dividing 
> line
> between those who empower the people and those who empower the state, but I 
> fail
> to see how it is useful to unite with players whose daily praxis is the direct
> opposite of my (and i hope our) goals.

The fight we need to fight is a big one. From that perspective, it makes sense
to employ military tactics; In this context, Sun Tzu explained the reasoning 
approx two thousand years ago (translation mistakes come from wikipedia):

~ So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a
  hundred battles without a single loss.

If you look at the history of warfare, you will have noticed that this
statement still holds true and can be applied to all forms of warfare.

> > Look, in the netherlands, we do not yet have or had any upcoming 
> > authoritarian
> > / totalitarian government like the us or germany for instance. We know that 
> > it
> 
> I'm sorry, but have you been paying attention to the ammount of new laws that
> were introduced over the last ten years? Have you forgotten we hold the world
> record in phone tapping? This kind of rhetoric about the dutch government
> supposedly being some kind of oasis of enlightenment and humanitarianism among
> the evil states that surround it seems to be based on either naivety or 
> blatant
> nationalism, i'm not sure which is worse..

I haven't forgotten what our government does, and if you would have read the
rest of the paragraph, you'll notice that I'm not making up excuses for the
dutch government. I'm just clarifying things from a general and realistic
perspective. I oppose them as much as you do, but like I said, I disagree with
the measures we can and should take, at this moment (note this last part).

> > will happen over time, since the netherlands is for most part a follower of
> > the .us and .uk political flows. Yes, this means that we currently have
> > a generation of people that is so laidback and comfortable that we're a
> > ripe target for a government with evil intentions. And also take into
> > account, that the netherlands is really tiny and insignificant compared to 
> > the
> > major players in the rest of the country. We cannot do that much about (eg)
> > the major pervasive surveillance, warcrimes, torture, food shortages and
> > other civil unrest in the rest of the world, since there are a lot of
> > practical issues surrounding that that will make that next to impossible.
> > The strict .us border control as a result of 'terrorism' comes to mind.
> 
> Which is different from the strict .nl border control how, exactly?
> Anyway, there are things .nl could do against pervasive surveillance, 
> warcrimes,
> etc, but the problem is the dutch state is really not that different from 
> (and 
> therefor just as much part of the problem as) the others. The dutch 
> government 
> could protest prism, just like it could end its praxis of m

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[groente]

> > Is this the pitch of "left unity at any cost"?  Because no, actually,
> > it turns out that unity isn't the best thing ever.  Do you want a big
> > tent that means nothing?  Do you think that the OHM orga is united in
> > fighting for the destruction of the power of all governments to
> > oppress their citizens?  Their actions indicate otherwise.  The
> > pushback you're getting here is that no, we're not all actually on the
> > same side.
> 
> Thing is, as a dutch citizen, I do not (yet) believe that *all*
> governments need to be destroyed because they oppress their citizens
> (your words, not mine). The simple reasoning behind this, is that people

The point was, i believe, not to destroy the government per se, but to destroy
its power to oppress its citizens.

> can be 'loosely' divided into two groups: leaders and followers. If we'd
> follow your plan and destroy all governments, that would imply that all
> the followers would be without a leader. And you probably also understand
> what happens next right, the power vaccuum will be filled by someone that
> will abuse that position. Since we, as a global hacker community, do not
> have any power structures that we could use to fill this void, every
> action that takes place to create that void will be detrimental to our
> cause. And *thats* why I call for unity instead of division. We might
> not agree on everything, but we will need to have an united voice and an
> united power structure if we want to make a difference against the big
> powers.

Well, the prerequisite for a united voice/power structure is a common goal and
methods which are not mutually exclusive. I frankly don't see how players like
THTC and Fox-IT fit into that picture. This may lead to awkward social 
situations
where personal friends are suddenly found on the other side of the dividing line
between those who empower the people and those who empower the state, but I fail
to see how it is useful to unite with players whose daily praxis is the direct
opposite of my (and i hope our) goals.

> Look, in the netherlands, we do not yet have or had any upcoming authoritarian
> / totalitarian government like the us or germany for instance. We know that it

I'm sorry, but have you been paying attention to the ammount of new laws that
were introduced over the last ten years? Have you forgotten we hold the world
record in phone tapping? This kind of rhetoric about the dutch government
supposedly being some kind of oasis of enlightenment and humanitarianism among
the evil states that surround it seems to be based on either naivety or blatant
nationalism, i'm not sure which is worse..

> will happen over time, since the netherlands is for most part a follower of
> the .us and .uk political flows. Yes, this means that we currently have
> a generation of people that is so laidback and comfortable that we're a
> ripe target for a government with evil intentions. And also take into
> account, that the netherlands is really tiny and insignificant compared to the
> major players in the rest of the country. We cannot do that much about (eg)
> the major pervasive surveillance, warcrimes, torture, food shortages and
> other civil unrest in the rest of the world, since there are a lot of
> practical issues surrounding that that will make that next to impossible.
> The strict .us border control as a result of 'terrorism' comes to mind.

Which is different from the strict .nl border control how, exactly?
Anyway, there are things .nl could do against pervasive surveillance, warcrimes,
etc, but the problem is the dutch state is really not that different from (and 
therefor just as much part of the problem as) the others. The dutch government 
could protest prism, just like it could end its praxis of massive wiretapping,
the point is it doesn't. That's not because .nl is a marginal player, it's
because it has no will to do so.

> Our 'anti-islam' political parties didn't do very well with the rest of
> the world as well, unfortunately.
> 
> There are things we can actually do. Within the netherlands, there are people
> that try to help out other societies and nations with their internal problems.
> Most of those people will be in NoisySquare, so if you want to meet the people
> that actually *do* make a difference, that will be the place to meet them.

Well, there we can agree, I'm very happy to see N^2 work out the way it does and
hope to see you all there.

 
>
> Like others have said before, and I shall say it again, a hacker event
> is *never*ever*ever* a safe place to be, because of the enormous amount
> of attention it receives from intelligence agencies and governments around
> the globe. OHM is not more/less safe then any other hacker event in that
> regard.

Surely there is no such thing as absolute safety, but we can try to maintain
cultural norms aiming at maximizing our safety. A clear rejection of the intel
community as our peers seems to be a good start.

cheers,

groente
--
Too many emails? 

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Lex van Roon]

On 06/25/2013 10:50, Eleanor Saitta wrote:
> On 2013.06.25 07.37, Lex van Roon wrote:
> > In my opinion, us (the people) being divided is whats taking away
> > our power, and that's imho much, MUCH more important then
> > governments losing their power and cracking down on us (the people)
> > so that they can stay in power. If we unite, we've got a chance of
> > beating them. If we dont unite, we will lose our freedom, thats how
> > I see it. So how about we let go of all the fearmongering and
> > actually start talking with each other how to fix the problems
> > we're currently facing, instead of slinging (unfounded, imho) mud
> > around ..
> 
> This mud is very well founded, TYVM, but that's separate from my point
> here:

I do not think so, and I know most of the people involved with the orga
personally. Statements like the above imho only show premature judgement
based on unfounded rumours, but lets leave that point and continue with
the rest.

> 
> Is this the pitch of "left unity at any cost"?  Because no, actually,
> it turns out that unity isn't the best thing ever.  Do you want a big
> tent that means nothing?  Do you think that the OHM orga is united in
> fighting for the destruction of the power of all governments to
> oppress their citizens?  Their actions indicate otherwise.  The
> pushback you're getting here is that no, we're not all actually on the
> same side.

Thing is, as a dutch citizen, I do not (yet) believe that *all*
governments need to be destroyed because they oppress their citizens
(your words, not mine). The simple reasoning behind this, is that people
can be 'loosely' divided into two groups: leaders and followers. If we'd
follow your plan and destroy all governments, that would imply that all
the followers would be without a leader. And you probably also understand
what happens next right, the power vaccuum will be filled by someone that
will abuse that position. Since we, as a global hacker community, do not
have any power structures that we could use to fill this void, every
action that takes place to create that void will be detrimental to our
cause. And *thats* why I call for unity instead of division. We might
not agree on everything, but we will need to have an united voice and an
united power structure if we want to make a difference against the big
powers.

Look, in the netherlands, we do not yet have or had any upcoming authoritarian
/ totalitarian government like the us or germany for instance. We know that it
will happen over time, since the netherlands is for most part a follower of
the .us and .uk political flows. Yes, this means that we currently have
a generation of people that is so laidback and comfortable that we're a
ripe target for a government with evil intentions. And also take into
account, that the netherlands is really tiny and insignificant compared to the
major players in the rest of the country. We cannot do that much about (eg)
the major pervasive surveillance, warcrimes, torture, food shortages and
other civil unrest in the rest of the world, since there are a lot of
practical issues surrounding that that will make that next to impossible.
The strict .us border control as a result of 'terrorism' comes to mind.
Our 'anti-islam' political parties didn't do very well with the rest of
the world as well, unfortunately.

There are things we can actually do. Within the netherlands, there are people
that try to help out other societies and nations with their internal problems.
Most of those people will be in NoisySquare, so if you want to meet the people
that actually *do* make a difference, that will be the place to meet them.
Dismissing all of that might be a way to proceed forward, but it's not
fair to the people that *are* fighting to make the world a better place.

> If you want a claim to unity, first show that you're on the same side.

If you would have read my disclaimer, you would have noticed that I was
talking on a personal note. You however are dismissing that and making
judgements about me based on the fact that you cannot see me and OHM
separately. This is a thinking error on your part, please correct that.
Furthermore, please do some research before you sling mud. I *am* on
your side, I only disagree with the severity of measures based on the
amount of suffering I see happening around me and based on what *I* can
change while not being imprisoned and/or shot.

> There are reasons for going that aren't about unity, and opportunities
> there that do still make it interesting, but they're about what can be
> done in a contested, unsafe space.

Like others have said before, and I shall say it again, a hacker event
is *never*ever*ever* a safe place to be, because of the enormous amount
of attention it receives from intelligence agencies and governments around
the globe. OHM is not more/less safe then any other hacker event in that
regard.

gr, Lex
-- 
LRO-RIPE | 570DE0BE | 9BF5 922E AF87 8584 E9CA C3AD C508 39A9 570D E0BE
--
Too many emails? Uns

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jillian C. York]

I was 11 years old.


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Jurre andmore  wrote:

> I wish we all spoke out against the police being present 20 years ago and
> not in 2013.
>
> 2013/6/25 Jillian C. York 
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
>>
>>> Nadim Kobeissi:
>>> >
>>> > On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
>>> >> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations
>>> >> in the US.
>>> >>
>>> >> It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence
>>> >> of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head
>>> >> of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing
>>> >> things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to
>>> >> pass judgement on OHM organizers when our own ecosystem is so
>>> >> unbelievably toxic.
>>> >
>>> > Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
>>> >
>>> > Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an
>>> > opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate people
>>> > at a legitimate and exciting event.
>>>
>>> Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of people,
>>> including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part of the
>>> discussion?
>>>
>>> Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such a
>>> social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be safe
>>> for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't changed to
>>> take their concerns into account, either.
>>>
>>> Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!
>>>
>>> > I myself am presenting a talk and
>>> > a workshop at OHM and NoisySquare.
>>>
>>> Congratulations on your talk and workshop.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how
>>> > DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give
>>> > the keynote!
>>> >
>>>
>>> Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching OHM,
>>> right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to the
>>> previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.
>>>
>>> I suspect that Gen. A won't receive a warm welcome at Defcon or BlackHat
>>> - though I wager he won't get the customary cream pie prank either.
>>> Either way - this is a stark contrast to the "lets make a village" and
>>> "our cops are fine and dandy" dialog I've heard from many people during
>>> various OHM dialogs.
>>>
>>
>> I have to agree with Jake here.  While I am not choosing to boycott the
>> event myself, I've also been very put off by the excuses made about the
>> police presence.  I also do not feel comfortable around police, and while I
>> am pragmatically sympathetic to the fact that Dutch law requires some
>> presence (correct me if I'm wrong), I do think that the concerns around
>> this have been handled too lightly.
>>
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>> Jacob
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings
>>> at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088
>> site:  jilliancyork.com * | *
>> twitter: @jilliancyork* *
>>
>> "We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want
>> the seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel*
>>
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>
>
>
> --
> With kind regards,
>
> Jurre van Bergen
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088
site:  jilliancyork.com * | *
twitter: @jilliancyork* *

"We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the
seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel*
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Eleanor Saitta]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 2013.06.25 09.00, Douwe Schmidt wrote:
> Please help us to put the Resistance Back in OHM

What is the line where the organizers of a hacker event are so given
over to collaboration that the event becomes unreclaimable?  Would
they have to be shown to be stealing candy from small children?

And the abuse that orga team has hurled at my friends?  What happens
about that?

> ps. we are still working on a multi-quadrocopter-powered air
> bridge to bring people into the village without touching
> OHM-ground. You will then be in a radically democratic and
> borderless territory free from oppression and surveillance. It must
> be said that this might be a one-way-ticket, aka the
> Ecuadorian-lock-in.

Ok, get this working and I might be tempted. ;-)

E.
- -- 
Ideas are my favorite toys.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlHJrrgACgkQQwkE2RkM0wrcbQD7BCcVJ5mXaB5JDa3vAZyzou4W
V6d1KG/8rS/0KUqetp8A/0wts7H9sgUB6e4vjLgH0rHwJgy9CPuHY9I+SbDBkm/I
=72p7
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Eleanor Saitta]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 2013.06.25 07.37, Lex van Roon wrote:
> In my opinion, us (the people) being divided is whats taking away
> our power, and that's imho much, MUCH more important then
> governments losing their power and cracking down on us (the people)
> so that they can stay in power. If we unite, we've got a chance of
> beating them. If we dont unite, we will lose our freedom, thats how
> I see it. So how about we let go of all the fearmongering and
> actually start talking with each other how to fix the problems
> we're currently facing, instead of slinging (unfounded, imho) mud
> around ..

This mud is very well founded, TYVM, but that's separate from my point
here:

Is this the pitch of "left unity at any cost"?  Because no, actually,
it turns out that unity isn't the best thing ever.  Do you want a big
tent that means nothing?  Do you think that the OHM orga is united in
fighting for the destruction of the power of all governments to
oppress their citizens?  Their actions indicate otherwise.  The
pushback you're getting here is that no, we're not all actually on the
same side.

If you want a claim to unity, first show that you're on the same side.

There are reasons for going that aren't about unity, and opportunities
there that do still make it interesting, but they're about what can be
done in a contested, unsafe space.

E.

- -- 
Ideas are my favorite toys.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlHJrj8ACgkQQwkE2RkM0woHdQD9G/vnEvr9IYZRQsszirJN61PG
iHLgLTUVyIfahwYYs0sA/3UEXYmB4bNihz3xiKnfIyqmiT5knEFYkv82dfkJBGw2
=/i9J
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Eleanor Saitta]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 2013.06.25 04.32, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 09:08:59PM -0300, hellekin wrote:
>>> They are ramping such a system up but it isn't in place yet, 
>>> remember, they are firing 600 people in the following years.
>>> 
>> *** I guess you mean: outsourcing to the private sector.
> 
> The budgets in general will shrink a lot in the coming years, 
> whether black, or not. There's only that much parasite load a given
> host can bear, especially if energy intake is going down.
> 
> It might be well the last big splurge in sigint, and they will have
> to let many analysts go. The data might be still collected, for a
> while, before the number of tap points goes down to attrition, but
> less and less can be made from it.
> 
> Perhaps we're witnessing Peak Spook.

While I love this notion, I see absolutely no evidence for it in any
way.  I think we're going to see the opposite -- surveillance is still
getting cheaper, fast, and I don't see much real sign of the big
players cutting their budgets.  While I don't know that they'll be
able to achieve the same kind of geopolitical reach that the NSA has,
I'd assume that most country's internal police will be looking to
reach a similar pervasiveness of surveillance.

E.

- -- 
Ideas are my favorite toys.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlHJrGgACgkQQwkE2RkM0wr9rQD6Amb2dwibQ3ztHaLgdq5UWAf7
8cFFWXIdsTuXFFDmp2wA/R5hgIY6/yPdvWebt8zinbcH+8ycPbc9M120MyYrjPtc
=oi8v
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Douwe Schmidt]

Hey All,

Thank you for your valuable and insightful input into this ongoing discussion. 
As part of the organization of the Noisy Square (N2) I follow it with great 
interest. With the N2 we will try to facilitate part of it at OHM2013. 

I thought it to be a good idea to explain a little bit on where the N2 comes 
from.
When we where confronted with these arguments (and many more) some months ago 
we found we have three options regarding the OHM festival:

1) Don't go.
2) Build a shadow festival at the same time where these issues don't play (or 
at least try to mitigate them) (and probably have only the incrowd there)
3) Go to OHM and bring our best arguments, knowledge and values to the table.

It is clear what we chose.
Next to that we thought that we can go as individuals and wait for OHM to make 
room for this discussion on the official program. Or we dedicate a Village to 
it facilitating these and other discussions 24/7. That is the main reason 
d'être for the N2.

We started of with a tiny tent but good so much great feedback from the 
community that we had to expand. Now we'll have a giant 200 person tent hosting 
more then 15 different NGO's, companies and an yet unknown amount of 
volunteers. These groups and individuals come from a wide background and I can 
by no means talk for all of them or their motivations. But that OHM will be a 
place where many people will meet and that it is a good place to discuss the 
Politics of our Society in general and Politics of the Net in particular seems 
a common denominator. It is by no means the only, maybe not even the best, 
place to do this. But it is the biggest gathering of hackers in The Netherlands 
with over 3.000 people attending, happens only once every four years and has a 
great legacy to build upon. And maybe even to defend.

I don't believe my arguments will win anyone over to either side to the debate, 
but I do believe we need everyones arguments to make this a good and diverse 
debate. And in the end there is much more to talk about than the decisions and 
explanations made by a handful of OHM organizers. There are even much more 
people to talk to then OHM organizers, Officers, Foxes or ourselves. Let's say 
there will be around 2.500 that might want to learn about these and many other 
discussions. Do we let them learn the ropes from the Foxes? Or are we gonna but 
some weight in the balance as well?

Please help us to put the Resistance Back in OHM

Douwe Schmidt
Organizer at the Noisy Square and employee at Greenhost
https://ohm2013.org/wiki/Village:Noisy_Square

ps. we are still working on a multi-quadrocopter-powered air bridge to bring 
people into the village without touching OHM-ground. You will then be in a 
radically democratic and borderless territory free from oppression and 
surveillance. It must be said that this might be a one-way-ticket, aka the 
Ecuadorian-lock-in.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Lex van Roon]

Full-Disclosure: Eventhough I am part of the OHM organisation, this email on a
personal note.

On 06/24/2013 23:35, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
> Jurre andmore:
> > Sorry, but why would 30c3 be this place and not any other venue in the
> > world? Without context this sounds silly.
> > 
> 
> It was merely a suggestion and it is hardly without context.
> 
> Any event or space that is willing to create an explicitly safe space
> for an open dialog is probably in a good position to host such a discussion.

When the current power structures start losing their power (as we see
happening in a couple of places around the globe), things will get very nasty.
Furthermore, this is not someting that you and/or I can solve on our own, or
OHM, or CCC/DEFCON or whatever group can solve on their own. This implies that
you will not be safe, regardless of the venue you're at.

If people want to take you down (and they know the key players, thnx prism :),
they will. This also implies that the whole discussion of OHM being a good
place or not is pretty irrelevant, and this makes the discussion sound more
like fear mongering, which is *exactly* the type of thing that our governments
are doing (fear mongering) to remove all of our civil rights. And you want to
apply that to OHM as well?

In my opinion, us (the people) being divided is whats taking away our power,
and that's imho much, MUCH more important then governments losing their
power and cracking down on us (the people) so that they can stay in
power. If we unite, we've got a chance of beating them. If we dont
unite, we will lose our freedom, thats how I see it. So how about we let go
of all the fearmongering and actually start talking with each other how to fix
the problems we're currently facing, instead of slinging (unfounded, imho)
mud around ..

gr, Lex
-- 
LRO-RIPE | 570DE0BE | 9BF5 922E AF87 8584 E9CA C3AD C508 39A9 570D E0BE
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Griffin Boyce]

Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:

> Congratulations. I look forward to seeing them, probably on a remote
> stream but also perhaps in person.


It should be fun. =)  I'm not sure that my Noisy Square talk [1] will be
recorded though.

No one has said that the cops shouldn't submit a talk - many have even
> called for debate panels and for the cops to join up. What is the status
> on that? Did any of those high tech police or intelligence agencies
> actually offer to join as a peer? Are they coming to share their new
> forensics techniques with the community?
>

  My hope was that they would contribute a talk, as their American
counterparts have done on occasion. It's hard to hold an event when some of
the attendees have guns and generally act sketchy.

  Part of my issue is this: there are a million asshole cops in the world
that we will probably never reach.  Then there are the people who
apathetically claim to just be doing their job.  These people are arguably
worse, but my feeling is that seeing us as well-rounded (or as close as
you'll get at a hacker con) might change their mind.  I wish they ~would~
join us as peers, preferably to help us fight for a better world, but at
least to talk about the issues.

To arrest someone against their will is to commit an act of violence
> against them. If one is required by law to perform such arrests, one
> should avoid such an event - it puts the community in danger.
>

  It's poor practice to expect a cop to not be a cop just because they
aren't at work.  Having said that, I think a lot can be gained by there
being an open dialogue between the two groups -- beyond employee/employer
or target/surveillant.  Something on equal footing where there's at least a
chance of understanding.  It's sad that it doesn't appear to be in the
cards.

  Most people on libtech have only ever seen me as an email signature, and
probably wouldn't expect that I've dealt with police oppression in one form
or another my entire life.  For the benefit of the peanut gallery: I'm
completely othered and marginalized by the police and people like the TSA.
 I've been held at gunpoint for such crimes as walking down the street.

  I'm not a huge defender of the police, just in general =P

P.S. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjMLZuuXDRQ


An American Classic. :D


[1] C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 01 GEESTMERAMBACHT

From the desk of ██

RE: "The Secret Life of Documents"

██
██ everyone ███
██ is ██
██


██ talking 
 about ██
█ whistleblowers 
██ these ██ days 
███
 "so few talks about cat memes" 
█

## END OF TRANSMISSION ##

-- 
Just another hacker in the City of Spies.
#Foucault / PGP: 0xAE792C97 / OTR: sa...@jabber.ccc.de

My posts, while frequently amusing, are not representative of the thoughts
of my employer.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Eugen Leitl]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 09:08:59PM -0300, hellekin wrote:
> > They are ramping such a system up but it isn't in place yet,
> > remember, they are firing 600 people in the following years.
> > 
> *** I guess you mean: outsourcing to the private sector.

The budgets in general will shrink a lot in the coming years,
whether black, or not. There's only that much parasite load
a given host can bear, especially if energy intake is going
down.

It might be well the last big splurge in sigint, and they
will have to let many analysts go. The data might be still
collected, for a while, before the number of tap points goes
down to attrition, but less and less can be made from it.

Perhaps we're witnessing Peak Spook. 
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Eugen Leitl]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 04:28:11PM -0700, coderman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
> > ...
> > If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how DEFCON 
> > and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give the keynote!
> 
> 
> they bring great exploit kit; make yourself a target and get world
> class "auditing" for free...

So the feds are part of the hostile environment? It's not just
the attendees? It appears unlikely, since there will be a heavy
catch haul in all the honeypots. It would be telling. 
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[micah]

Jacob Appelbaum  writes:

> micah:
>> Eleanor Saitta  writes:
>> 
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA256
>>>
>>> On 2013.06.24 07.19, Douwe Schmidt wrote:
 Dear LibTech Readers,

 In a little bit over a month OHM2013 is happening in The
 Netherlands. There has been a lot of controversy in the run-up to
 this gathering. There was criticism of the involvement of tech
 security company Fox-IT, then there was a heated debate on the
 presence of Dutch High-tech Crime Unit in a village of their own.
 Both discussions have calmed down. But the relevance of these
 topics was clarified and reinforced.
>>>
>>> It's very sad that the organizing team has not actually taken any
>>> meaningful steps to address either their complicity with the
>>> manufacture of surveillance equipment, their acceptance of the
>>> promotion of a fascist police force, or the way they treated people
>>> who had previously been part of their own team during the "discussion"
>>> that ensued.  In fact, as far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has
>>> happened on their end, they've just out-waited any discussion.
>>>
>>> A lot of people are asking me to change my mind on attending, and it
>>> sounds like you guys are going to have a lot of fun, but I'm finding
>>> myself pretty unmotivated to change my mind given that much of the
>>> organizing team doesn't seem to care at all about human rights.
>> 
>> I felt the same way as you, but someone convinced me that boycotting
>> just removes my voice from this conversation, and that attending gives a
>> chance to have this well needed discussion with the community.
>
> This is a false dichotomy of an argument if ever I've heard one. I keep
> hearing it too. It bums me out to no end.

A false dichotomy would be to suggest that this discussion cannot happen
anywhere else, except for at OHM, when in reality there are plenty of
other potential options for discussion... for example what we are doing
here. I would be quite silly to suggest that it is not possible to have
this discussion anywhere other than OHM while in the middle of having
such a discussion which is obviously not at OHM.

There *is* a dichotomy involved in what we are talking about, but it is
a real one: you either go to this event or you do not. Although, I've
already had discussions online with the organizers about their various
poor choices, as well as others in the community who were upset and
uncomfortable with how things happened, the ones that have been most
useful have been the ones that I've had in person. Online discussions
have never been as persuasive or as productive as real face to face
discussions. 

I would hope that nobody thinks that this discussion can just wait until
we are all together in person at OHM, and then once that is finished
then pencils down! no more discussion. Rather let us talk about it now
(we are!), let us organize ourselves to bring a strong statement to OHM
against this disease that rots the hacker community, and let us continue
to discuss it afterwards.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

2013/6/25 hellekin 

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 06/24/2013 09:06 PM, Jurre andmore wrote:
> >
> > They are ramping such a system up but it isn't in place yet,
> > remember, they are firing 600 people in the following years.
> >
> *** I guess you mean: outsourcing to the private sector.
>

Yup, fox-it is a good example..


>
> ==
> hk
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJRyN+aAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg9B8wQAK0Mk7ZwAReC9FaZBu7jNSJN
> DvvLuR63eBpdksBdYTKgtaBIG2oKW/tIq1FSWAwcBLSCpdug74j8TxMhkpbqFDD6
> P+r7YmNtEPSBVarxmgiYjXSr4RtzlMlmCUSnL72y49BQda+LsHwgZeRxuPHfAoNS
> QEkzltJLfKQ4hUMtIPIbVgyjtJA88PMdQ97KtyLepJGFLpnuUUX5b1T3Qez0KuXG
> A/YHZrEeASOcUzAQVLy3NJ3yNmIZI6M0HJna3DDjgHHIx1N9WJdWnB5Qc5rqrOVP
> AuZ1Dx1vgSgCzG8tHczh/5NLDjecrU45aP+eT7s9eEZbgCi3PwzbnqzcUaJFU1MZ
> SJerCpp9CrV08uvuDYVhDA4prOQ9huorRksm+IsAT3t8laEGw2f0tEhQiE4RAbqG
> mLYrU/WMWZY9WLs06c6t4e9WGmwUFGIPQhV76KDbjxkw9jpDvVHAZpQzA2AHGUKO
> JRBC/SALK8/v5A8XcF032h6ez5yAJdE5Rhj/Fha2rq0/qxvub0hGKXFa1LRW0vAn
> Yh6BvE9Pk5SBj9twuj+MFVRWM2NaGgCVYo62GLgCYzR8DhIXmOFDE6vVLbLwwPog
> mEGd2fpMbLYQ/UmHcJ8q22irc3WotdE7J/6SqGZuUmCTOf4xwvAJUGDS0JI9pRpR
> j/Stv2rKaCFOGMchC+BT
> =yRvk
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

2013/6/25 Jacob Appelbaum 

> Jurre andmore:
> > I wish we all spoke out against the police being present 20 years ago and
> > not in 2013.
>
> Actually, I think a lot of old-school Dutch hackers did just that -
> especially against the undercover cops who infiltrated the scene. This
> was documented in the hacking zines of that era.
>
> In any case, if you wished for it then, what are you doing about it now?
>
> I'm speaking out about it because it bothers me. Others have spoken out
> as well.
>

I'm definitely outspoken, I do not wish cops at our only party we have
every 4 years. I wish things were going better and im working with a bunch
of good people in Amsterdam to fight for this better Holland.

The problem here is, every hacker conference has undercover feds these
days. I see a bunch of them at CCC as well, that isn't going to stop me
from not going. Instead, I want to make it very clear that those people are
not welcome.

This is why we started noisysquare and we will win in the end.

-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[hellekin]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 06/24/2013 09:06 PM, Jurre andmore wrote:
> 
> They are ramping such a system up but it isn't in place yet,
> remember, they are firing 600 people in the following years.
> 
*** I guess you mean: outsourcing to the private sector.

==
hk

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=yRvk
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

2013/6/25 Jacob Appelbaum 

> Jurre andmore:
> > 2013/6/25 Jacob Appelbaum 
> >
> >> Nadim Kobeissi:
> >>>
> >>> On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce
> >>>  wrote:
> >>>
>  Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will
>  be presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead
>  conversations in the US.
> 
>  It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the
>  presence of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't
>  have the head of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating
>  a child for doing things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I
>  find it really hard to pass judgement on OHM organizers when
>  our own ecosystem is so unbelievably toxic.
> >>>
> >>> Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
> >>>
> >>> Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an
> >>> opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate
> >>> people at a legitimate and exciting event.
> >>
> >> Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of
> >> people, including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part
> >> of the discussion?
> >>
> >> Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such
> >> a social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be
> >> safe for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't
> >> changed to take their concerns into account, either.
> >>
> >> Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!
> >>
> >>> I myself am presenting a talk and a workshop at OHM and
> >>> NoisySquare.
> >>
> >> Congratulations on your talk and workshop.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at
> >>> how DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander
> >>> to give the keynote!
> >>>
> >>
> >> Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching
> >> OHM, right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to
> >> the previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.
> >>
> >
> > Unless the AIVD will cut and splice the fiber somewhere along the way
> > or install blackboxes without the NOC knowing at the DC which is NOC
> > controlled (who don't like spooks at all..) I don't see how this
> > stands-up.
>
> Did you see the BOUNDLESSINFORMANT map? Did you hear about the
> statements by various members of the Dutch government about using PRISM?
>

Yes I watched the discussion in parliament about this, there is a lot
unclear. All what I know off, there aren't any spook black boxes at the
main gateways in Amsterdam.

>
> Is there a reason to think that OHM is exempt from NSA dragnet
> surveillance and that AiVD will never query the NSA database for such
> information?
>

Probably they will like all the previous conferences before or the early
infiltrations that they did during the hippies from hell era. The Amsterdam
TOOOL association of lockpickers got an undercover cop at their meetings
for a while.


>
> > Next to that, the AIVD/MIVD hasn't deployed a nationwide
> > eavesdropping setup for internet unlike the Swedes, Germans and
> > Americans.
>
>
> I find it a bit hard to imagine being so certain about what spy agencies
> *aren't* doing.
>
> Did you feel certain that there was also {an or no} NSA program spying
> on the Netherlands? Or perhaps just as certain that AiVD used and
> continues to use the data gleaned from that system (of systems)?
>

I don't see how much this is related to the ohm discussion, I thought we
had more class but at the same time that was having a bit of hope left. I
guess we were all wrong.


>
> I wouldn't be so sure about AiVD/MiVD having deployed or not having
> deployed a nationwide eavesdropping setup. Furthermore, if they get to
> query the NSA database, I'd hardly say that it matters if they deployed
> it. Though I'm sure they helped when requested. In any case, what
> matters to the Big Picture is that they take what they need, what or are
> able to get from such a system.
>

They are ramping such a system up but it isn't in place yet, remember, they
are firing 600 people in the following years.


>
> >
> > GSM is a different story..
> >
>
> I'd say it is essentially the same story at a different scale. Though
> with GSM, we've had trouble denying it for quite some time. I suppose it
> will take time to come to terms with the latest news.
>
They actually do bulk intercepting, processing for keywords and storing
since the 2000s! Huzzay!


>
> All the best,
> Jacob
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[hellekin]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 06/24/2013 08:39 PM, Jurre andmore wrote:
> 
> I don't see how this stands-up. Next to that, the AIVD/MIVD hasn't
> deployed a nationwide eavesdropping setup for internet unlike the
> Swedes, Germans and Americans.
> 
*** Does anyone remember the low altitude AWACS stunt at HAL2001?

Do not be fooled. Cops are cops. They work for the politico-legal
system, and the system tells that hackers are terrorists.

Surely, there won't be any arrest, and there will be clueless cops
asking for tips to download illegal music. And there will be more
smoke to throw at your eyes to catch you off-guard, sooner or later.

First thing, as nothing special will happen, many attendants will look
at Eleanor, Jake, and other voices as paranoids the next time they
tell the truth.

Of course, there's nothing different between OHM nor other
conferences: cops are present, they're watching, they're learning.
They surely even learn a lot of bullshit from their paranoid point of
view. And they can make that bullshit into a case that might even lead
them to some special.

The huge difference, and now it's not even related to OHM per se, is
the outlook people will take on the scene. Between those who will
consider police harmless, or dumb, or those who will take them as
friendly, or heroic, there we have a problem. The problem is not
police, it's not us vs. them. The problem is blurring the lines
between resistance to the society of control, and collaboration to
keep that corrupted system running.

Everyone wants to love the mayor on election day.

==
hk
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=Axhb
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Jurre andmore:
> I wish we all spoke out against the police being present 20 years ago and
> not in 2013.

Actually, I think a lot of old-school Dutch hackers did just that -
especially against the undercover cops who infiltrated the scene. This
was documented in the hacking zines of that era.

In any case, if you wished for it then, what are you doing about it now?

I'm speaking out about it because it bothers me. Others have spoken out
as well.

All the best,
Jacob

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

I wish we all spoke out against the police being present 20 years ago and
not in 2013.

2013/6/25 Jillian C. York 

>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
>
>> Nadim Kobeissi:
>> >
>> > On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
>> >> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations
>> >> in the US.
>> >>
>> >> It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence
>> >> of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head
>> >> of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing
>> >> things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to
>> >> pass judgement on OHM organizers when our own ecosystem is so
>> >> unbelievably toxic.
>> >
>> > Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
>> >
>> > Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an
>> > opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate people
>> > at a legitimate and exciting event.
>>
>> Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of people,
>> including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part of the
>> discussion?
>>
>> Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such a
>> social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be safe
>> for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't changed to
>> take their concerns into account, either.
>>
>> Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!
>>
>> > I myself am presenting a talk and
>> > a workshop at OHM and NoisySquare.
>>
>> Congratulations on your talk and workshop.
>>
>> >
>> > If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how
>> > DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give
>> > the keynote!
>> >
>>
>> Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching OHM,
>> right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to the
>> previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.
>>
>> I suspect that Gen. A won't receive a warm welcome at Defcon or BlackHat
>> - though I wager he won't get the customary cream pie prank either.
>> Either way - this is a stark contrast to the "lets make a village" and
>> "our cops are fine and dandy" dialog I've heard from many people during
>> various OHM dialogs.
>>
>
> I have to agree with Jake here.  While I am not choosing to boycott the
> event myself, I've also been very put off by the excuses made about the
> police presence.  I also do not feel comfortable around police, and while I
> am pragmatically sympathetic to the fact that Dutch law requires some
> presence (correct me if I'm wrong), I do think that the concerns around
> this have been handled too lightly.
>
>>
>> All the best,
>> Jacob
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>
>
>
> --
> US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088
> site:  jilliancyork.com * | *
> twitter: @jilliancyork* *
>
> "We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the
> seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel*
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Jurre andmore:
> 2013/6/25 Jacob Appelbaum 
> 
>> Nadim Kobeissi:
>>> 
>>> On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
 Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will
 be presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead
 conversations in the US.
 
 It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the
 presence of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't
 have the head of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating
 a child for doing things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I
 find it really hard to pass judgement on OHM organizers when
 our own ecosystem is so unbelievably toxic.
>>> 
>>> Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
>>> 
>>> Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an 
>>> opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate
>>> people at a legitimate and exciting event.
>> 
>> Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of
>> people, including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part
>> of the discussion?
>> 
>> Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such
>> a social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be
>> safe for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't
>> changed to take their concerns into account, either.
>> 
>> Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!
>> 
>>> I myself am presenting a talk and a workshop at OHM and
>>> NoisySquare.
>> 
>> Congratulations on your talk and workshop.
>> 
>>> 
>>> If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at
>>> how DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander
>>> to give the keynote!
>>> 
>> 
>> Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching
>> OHM, right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to
>> the previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.
>> 
> 
> Unless the AIVD will cut and splice the fiber somewhere along the way
> or install blackboxes without the NOC knowing at the DC which is NOC 
> controlled (who don't like spooks at all..) I don't see how this
> stands-up.

Did you see the BOUNDLESSINFORMANT map? Did you hear about the
statements by various members of the Dutch government about using PRISM?

Is there a reason to think that OHM is exempt from NSA dragnet
surveillance and that AiVD will never query the NSA database for such
information?

> Next to that, the AIVD/MIVD hasn't deployed a nationwide
> eavesdropping setup for internet unlike the Swedes, Germans and
> Americans.


I find it a bit hard to imagine being so certain about what spy agencies
*aren't* doing.

Did you feel certain that there was also {an or no} NSA program spying
on the Netherlands? Or perhaps just as certain that AiVD used and
continues to use the data gleaned from that system (of systems)?

I wouldn't be so sure about AiVD/MiVD having deployed or not having
deployed a nationwide eavesdropping setup. Furthermore, if they get to
query the NSA database, I'd hardly say that it matters if they deployed
it. Though I'm sure they helped when requested. In any case, what
matters to the Big Picture is that they take what they need, what or are
able to get from such a system.

> 
> GSM is a different story..
> 

I'd say it is essentially the same story at a different scale. Though
with GSM, we've had trouble denying it for quite some time. I suppose it
will take time to come to terms with the latest news.

All the best,
Jacob
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jillian C. York]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:

> Nadim Kobeissi:
> >
> > On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
> >> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations
> >> in the US.
> >>
> >> It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence
> >> of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head
> >> of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing
> >> things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to
> >> pass judgement on OHM organizers when our own ecosystem is so
> >> unbelievably toxic.
> >
> > Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
> >
> > Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an
> > opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate people
> > at a legitimate and exciting event.
>
> Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of people,
> including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part of the
> discussion?
>
> Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such a
> social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be safe
> for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't changed to
> take their concerns into account, either.
>
> Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!
>
> > I myself am presenting a talk and
> > a workshop at OHM and NoisySquare.
>
> Congratulations on your talk and workshop.
>
> >
> > If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how
> > DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give
> > the keynote!
> >
>
> Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching OHM,
> right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to the
> previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.
>
> I suspect that Gen. A won't receive a warm welcome at Defcon or BlackHat
> - though I wager he won't get the customary cream pie prank either.
> Either way - this is a stark contrast to the "lets make a village" and
> "our cops are fine and dandy" dialog I've heard from many people during
> various OHM dialogs.
>

I have to agree with Jake here.  While I am not choosing to boycott the
event myself, I've also been very put off by the excuses made about the
police presence.  I also do not feel comfortable around police, and while I
am pragmatically sympathetic to the fact that Dutch law requires some
presence (correct me if I'm wrong), I do think that the concerns around
this have been handled too lightly.

>
> All the best,
> Jacob
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088
site:  jilliancyork.com * | *
twitter: @jilliancyork* *

"We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the
seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel*
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

2013/6/25 Jacob Appelbaum 

> Nadim Kobeissi:
> >
> > On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
> >> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations
> >> in the US.
> >>
> >> It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence
> >> of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head
> >> of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing
> >> things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to
> >> pass judgement on OHM organizers when our own ecosystem is so
> >> unbelievably toxic.
> >
> > Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
> >
> > Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an
> > opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate people
> > at a legitimate and exciting event.
>
> Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of people,
> including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part of the
> discussion?
>
> Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such a
> social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be safe
> for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't changed to
> take their concerns into account, either.
>
> Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!
>
> > I myself am presenting a talk and
> > a workshop at OHM and NoisySquare.
>
> Congratulations on your talk and workshop.
>
> >
> > If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how
> > DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give
> > the keynote!
> >
>
> Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching OHM,
> right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to the
> previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.
>

Unless the AIVD will cut and splice the fiber somewhere along the way or
install blackboxes without the NOC knowing at the DC which is NOC
controlled (who don't like spooks at all..) I don't see how this stands-up.
Next to that, the AIVD/MIVD hasn't deployed a nationwide eavesdropping
setup for internet unlike the Swedes, Germans and Americans.

GSM is a different story..


-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Jurre andmore:
> Sorry, but why would 30c3 be this place and not any other venue in the
> world? Without context this sounds silly.
> 

It was merely a suggestion and it is hardly without context.

Any event or space that is willing to create an explicitly safe space
for an open dialog is probably in a good position to host such a discussion.

All the best,
Jacob

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Nadim Kobeissi:
> 
> On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce 
> wrote:
> 
>> Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
>> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations
>> in the US.
>> 
>> It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence
>> of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head
>> of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing
>> things an adult could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to
>> pass judgement on OHM organizers when our own ecosystem is so
>> unbelievably toxic.
> 
> Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points.
> 
> Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an
> opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate people
> at a legitimate and exciting event.

Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of people,
including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part of the
discussion?

Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such a
social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be safe
for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't changed to
take their concerns into account, either.

Pretty illegitimate if you ask me!

> I myself am presenting a talk and
> a workshop at OHM and NoisySquare.

Congratulations on your talk and workshop.

> 
> If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how
> DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give
> the keynote!
> 

Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching OHM,
right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to the
previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin.

I suspect that Gen. A won't receive a warm welcome at Defcon or BlackHat
- though I wager he won't get the customary cream pie prank either.
Either way - this is a stark contrast to the "lets make a village" and
"our cops are fine and dandy" dialog I've heard from many people during
various OHM dialogs.

All the best,
Jacob
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

Sorry, but why would 30c3 be this place and not any other venue in the
world? Without context this sounds silly.

2013/6/25 Jacob Appelbaum 

> phryk:
> > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 21:17:16 +
> > Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:
> >
> >> This is a false dichotomy of an argument if ever I've heard one. I
> >> keep hearing it too. It bums me out to no end.
> >>
> >> I understand that removing ourselves from specific discussions removes
> >> our voices from those discussions. However, I see no reason why the
> >> greater discussion itself is confined to that specific space at that
> >> specific time. Who decided that? At best, we do when we engage with it
> >> despite very serious and very reasonable misgivings.
> >
> > Of course the greater discussion isn't confined to the OHM Camp but my
> > understanding is that the mentioned discussion is specific to that
> > event. And at least for me it will be also the next chance to meet any
> > of the people here.
> >
>
> A lot of the context is related but not entirely specific.
>
> >> We should work to create a space that is on level footing; we should
> >> not engage seriously with spaces that demonstrate otherwise so
> >> blatantly.
> >>
> >> I'm sure that OHM will be worth attending but let us not have the
> >> illusion that it presents an ideal safe space for such discussions.
> >> Let us also be clear that OHM is not the only place for such
> >> discussions nor is by any means the only place that the community is
> >> able to hold such discussions.
> >
> > Personally, I'm not aware of any place that would fit that description,
> > but it is at least a place where a bunch of the people here will be
> > able to meet in person.
>
> The 30th CCC Congress is likely to be such a space. Alternatively, we
> could create a new space that talks about the issues at hand.
>
> All the best,
> Jacob
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[coderman]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
> ...
> If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how DEFCON and 
> BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give the keynote!


they bring great exploit kit; make yourself a target and get world
class "auditing" for free...
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[phryk]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 23:02:00 +
Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:

> The 30th CCC Congress is likely to be such a space. Alternatively, we
> could create a new space that talks about the issues at hand.

Works for me. The only thought I'd have about that is if the timeframe
is okay; But then again the problem isn't exactly new either, so I
guess a few months won't lead to the sudden death of our culture…
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Nadim Kobeissi]

On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce  wrote:

>   Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be 
> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations in the 
> US.  
> 
>   It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence of 
> police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head of the NSA 
> presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing things an adult 
> could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to pass judgement on OHM 
> organizers when our own ecosystem is so unbelievably toxic.

Hear hear, Griffin.
Also, Micah made some good points.

Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an opportunity for 
those discussions to happen between legitimate people at a legitimate and 
exciting event. I myself am presenting a talk and a workshop at OHM and 
NoisySquare.

If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how DEFCON and 
BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give the keynote!

NK

> 
>   I guess it's different when the cops are Dutch.
> 
> ~Griffin
> 
> -- 
> Just another hacker in the City of Spies.
> #Foucault / PGP: 0xAE792C97 / OTR: sa...@jabber.ccc.de
> 
> My posts, while frequently amusing, are not representative of the thoughts of 
> my employer. --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

phryk:
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 21:17:16 +
> Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:
> 
>> This is a false dichotomy of an argument if ever I've heard one. I
>> keep hearing it too. It bums me out to no end.
>>
>> I understand that removing ourselves from specific discussions removes
>> our voices from those discussions. However, I see no reason why the
>> greater discussion itself is confined to that specific space at that
>> specific time. Who decided that? At best, we do when we engage with it
>> despite very serious and very reasonable misgivings.
> 
> Of course the greater discussion isn't confined to the OHM Camp but my
> understanding is that the mentioned discussion is specific to that
> event. And at least for me it will be also the next chance to meet any
> of the people here.
> 

A lot of the context is related but not entirely specific.

>> We should work to create a space that is on level footing; we should
>> not engage seriously with spaces that demonstrate otherwise so
>> blatantly.
>>
>> I'm sure that OHM will be worth attending but let us not have the
>> illusion that it presents an ideal safe space for such discussions.
>> Let us also be clear that OHM is not the only place for such
>> discussions nor is by any means the only place that the community is
>> able to hold such discussions.
> 
> Personally, I'm not aware of any place that would fit that description,
> but it is at least a place where a bunch of the people here will be
> able to meet in person.

The 30th CCC Congress is likely to be such a space. Alternatively, we
could create a new space that talks about the issues at hand.

All the best,
Jacob
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[phryk]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 21:17:16 +
Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:

> This is a false dichotomy of an argument if ever I've heard one. I
> keep hearing it too. It bums me out to no end.
> 
> I understand that removing ourselves from specific discussions removes
> our voices from those discussions. However, I see no reason why the
> greater discussion itself is confined to that specific space at that
> specific time. Who decided that? At best, we do when we engage with it
> despite very serious and very reasonable misgivings.

Of course the greater discussion isn't confined to the OHM Camp but my
understanding is that the mentioned discussion is specific to that
event. And at least for me it will be also the next chance to meet any
of the people here.

> We should work to create a space that is on level footing; we should
> not engage seriously with spaces that demonstrate otherwise so
> blatantly.
> 
> I'm sure that OHM will be worth attending but let us not have the
> illusion that it presents an ideal safe space for such discussions.
> Let us also be clear that OHM is not the only place for such
> discussions nor is by any means the only place that the community is
> able to hold such discussions.

Personally, I'm not aware of any place that would fit that description,
but it is at least a place where a bunch of the people here will be
able to meet in person.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Griffin Boyce:
>   Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
> presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations in the
> US.
> 

Congratulations. I look forward to seeing them, probably on a remote
stream but also perhaps in person.

>   It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence of
> police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head of the NSA
> presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing things an adult
> could be prosecuted for. 

The debate centers around people in the community working with the
police, with the police being openly welcome, with those same police
being pushed with false arguments about how "undercover cops" will be
there anyway and so on. They are "required" by law to arrest people in
some unknown set of conditions - you know, except when you download
movies or other things where they are able to look the other way.

No one has said that the cops shouldn't submit a talk - many have even
called for debate panels and for the cops to join up. What is the status
on that? Did any of those high tech police or intelligence agencies
actually offer to join as a peer? Are they coming to share their new
forensics techniques with the community?

To arrest someone against their will is to commit an act of violence
against them. If one is required by law to perform such arrests, one
should avoid such an event - it puts the community in danger. The event
should ban anyone who is "required" to commit such acts of violence -
people should come as peers, as equal. Exceptions are required under
Dutch law, those are unfortunate - though they can stay exceptions if
the community makes a commitment to creating a safe space by explicitly
banning anyone who is required to commit such acts of violence. OHM
hasn't, sadly. Rather, suggestions of such have been looked at as
laughable, much to the surprise of many.

> I find it really hard to pass judgement on OHM
> organizers when our own ecosystem is so unbelievably toxic.
> 

I don't pass judgment on OHM orga independent of the US ecosystem. I
pass judgment specifically because of the dialog and those very same
people saying that they're not the US ecosystem. Yet we know very well
that AiVD now says that they use PRISM data - talk about a distinction
without a difference!

>   I guess it's different when the cops are Dutch.
> 

The Dutch police have FBI agents embedded in their offices. AiVD shares
data with the NSA and vice versa. The difference is that many
nationalists in the Dutch hacker scene don't see that any scenes with
such ties is possibly toxic; differently toxic but certainly
subserviently! To compare the Dutch legal system to the US in light of
the PRISM scandal makes it all the more ridiculous.

All the best,
Jacob

P.S. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjMLZuuXDRQ
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Griffin Boyce]

  Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be
presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations in the
US.

  It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence of
police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head of the NSA
presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing things an adult
could be prosecuted for.  I find it really hard to pass judgement on OHM
organizers when our own ecosystem is so unbelievably toxic.

  I guess it's different when the cops are Dutch.

~Griffin

-- 
Just another hacker in the City of Spies.
#Foucault / PGP: 0xAE792C97 / OTR: sa...@jabber.ccc.de

My posts, while frequently amusing, are not representative of the thoughts
of my employer.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jacob Appelbaum]

micah:
> Eleanor Saitta  writes:
> 
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> On 2013.06.24 07.19, Douwe Schmidt wrote:
>>> Dear LibTech Readers,
>>>
>>> In a little bit over a month OHM2013 is happening in The
>>> Netherlands. There has been a lot of controversy in the run-up to
>>> this gathering. There was criticism of the involvement of tech
>>> security company Fox-IT, then there was a heated debate on the
>>> presence of Dutch High-tech Crime Unit in a village of their own.
>>> Both discussions have calmed down. But the relevance of these
>>> topics was clarified and reinforced.
>>
>> It's very sad that the organizing team has not actually taken any
>> meaningful steps to address either their complicity with the
>> manufacture of surveillance equipment, their acceptance of the
>> promotion of a fascist police force, or the way they treated people
>> who had previously been part of their own team during the "discussion"
>> that ensued.  In fact, as far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has
>> happened on their end, they've just out-waited any discussion.
>>
>> A lot of people are asking me to change my mind on attending, and it
>> sounds like you guys are going to have a lot of fun, but I'm finding
>> myself pretty unmotivated to change my mind given that much of the
>> organizing team doesn't seem to care at all about human rights.
> 
> I felt the same way as you, but someone convinced me that boycotting
> just removes my voice from this conversation, and that attending gives a
> chance to have this well needed discussion with the community.

This is a false dichotomy of an argument if ever I've heard one. I keep
hearing it too. It bums me out to no end.

I understand that removing ourselves from specific discussions removes
our voices from those discussions. However, I see no reason why the
greater discussion itself is confined to that specific space at that
specific time. Who decided that? At best, we do when we engage with it
despite very serious and very reasonable misgivings.

We should work to create a space that is on level footing; we should not
engage seriously with spaces that demonstrate otherwise so blatantly.

I'm sure that OHM will be worth attending but let us not have the
illusion that it presents an ideal safe space for such discussions. Let
us also be clear that OHM is not the only place for such discussions nor
is by any means the only place that the community is able to hold such
discussions.

The question that is open for me and many others is clear - what is that
space? Where is that space?

I suspect that it will not be found at OHM or probably even at Noisy
Square. I'd love to be surprised but I don't expect to see the OHM
social contract amended to ensure equality and freedom from violence; I
suggested it to a few people online and was basically scoffed at in no
uncertain terms.

All the best,
Jacob
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[phryk]

> After much discussion on the OHM mailinglist and social media storms,
> the police backed of and decided not to have a village. Instead, like
> all the previous conferences before, they will be undercover! Just
> like CCCamp, EMFcamp and all the other hacker conferences. At least
> we can play spot the fed again, hooray!

Yaaay. I remember two guys coming to our village at the CCCamp11 and
going like "Err, uh do you guys know where we can get some err, *cough*
illegal music *cough* ?" It was hilarious. :P

> Further, I agree with micah, would we not participate in a discussion
> like we're having on this list with policymakers that things needs to
> be radically changed? We can let our voice heard for a change and
> explain the police and other surveillance vendors that what they do
> is an awful thing and explain they are not welcome at our party.

Agreed. If we don't speak up we can't honestly expect things to change.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Jurre andmore]

I'm one of the noisysquare organizers, I replied inline.

2013/6/24 phryk 

> On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:52:01 -0400
> Eleanor Saitta  wrote:
>
> > A lot of people are asking me to change my mind on attending, and it
> > sounds like you guys are going to have a lot of fun, but I'm finding
> > myself pretty unmotivated to change my mind given that much of the
> > organizing team doesn't seem to care at all about human rights.
>
> Wouldn't that be all the more reason to go and mitigate the negative
> effects? It'd also give you a chance to go meet the organizers in
> person and tell them what you think of it, which is harder to dismiss
> than someone querying them over IRC.
>
> @Douwe, could you point me to the Village of that dutch crime unit?
> My hope would be that this is the instant target for all kinds of
> pranks that people might or might not come up with. I have high hopes
> for hilarity to ensue and keep me merry.
>

After much discussion on the OHM mailinglist and social media storms, the
police backed of and decided not to have a village. Instead, like all the
previous conferences before, they will be undercover! Just like CCCamp,
EMFcamp and all the other hacker conferences. At least we can play spot the
fed again, hooray!

Further, I agree with micah, would we not participate in a discussion like
we're having on this list with policymakers that things needs to be
radically changed? We can let our voice heard for a change and explain the
police and other surveillance vendors that what they do is an awful thing
and explain they are not welcome at our party.

My 0,02.

-- 
With kind regards,

Jurre van Bergen
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[micah]

Eleanor Saitta  writes:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 2013.06.24 07.19, Douwe Schmidt wrote:
>> Dear LibTech Readers,
>> 
>> In a little bit over a month OHM2013 is happening in The
>> Netherlands. There has been a lot of controversy in the run-up to
>> this gathering. There was criticism of the involvement of tech
>> security company Fox-IT, then there was a heated debate on the
>> presence of Dutch High-tech Crime Unit in a village of their own.
>> Both discussions have calmed down. But the relevance of these
>> topics was clarified and reinforced.
>
> It's very sad that the organizing team has not actually taken any
> meaningful steps to address either their complicity with the
> manufacture of surveillance equipment, their acceptance of the
> promotion of a fascist police force, or the way they treated people
> who had previously been part of their own team during the "discussion"
> that ensued.  In fact, as far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has
> happened on their end, they've just out-waited any discussion.
>
> A lot of people are asking me to change my mind on attending, and it
> sounds like you guys are going to have a lot of fun, but I'm finding
> myself pretty unmotivated to change my mind given that much of the
> organizing team doesn't seem to care at all about human rights.

I felt the same way as you, but someone convinced me that boycotting
just removes my voice from this conversation, and that attending gives a
chance to have this well needed discussion with the community.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[phryk]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:52:01 -0400
Eleanor Saitta  wrote:

> A lot of people are asking me to change my mind on attending, and it
> sounds like you guys are going to have a lot of fun, but I'm finding
> myself pretty unmotivated to change my mind given that much of the
> organizing team doesn't seem to care at all about human rights.

Wouldn't that be all the more reason to go and mitigate the negative
effects? It'd also give you a chance to go meet the organizers in
person and tell them what you think of it, which is harder to dismiss
than someone querying them over IRC.

@Douwe, could you point me to the Village of that dutch crime unit?
My hope would be that this is the instant target for all kinds of
pranks that people might or might not come up with. I have high hopes
for hilarity to ensue and keep me merry.

Whatever the case, I'll be there. I won't be staying in the
Noisy Square Village, but I'll be around.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Eleanor Saitta]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 2013.06.24 07.19, Douwe Schmidt wrote:
> Dear LibTech Readers,
> 
> In a little bit over a month OHM2013 is happening in The
> Netherlands. There has been a lot of controversy in the run-up to
> this gathering. There was criticism of the involvement of tech
> security company Fox-IT, then there was a heated debate on the
> presence of Dutch High-tech Crime Unit in a village of their own.
> Both discussions have calmed down. But the relevance of these
> topics was clarified and reinforced.

It's very sad that the organizing team has not actually taken any
meaningful steps to address either their complicity with the
manufacture of surveillance equipment, their acceptance of the
promotion of a fascist police force, or the way they treated people
who had previously been part of their own team during the "discussion"
that ensued.  In fact, as far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has
happened on their end, they've just out-waited any discussion.

A lot of people are asking me to change my mind on attending, and it
sounds like you guys are going to have a lot of fun, but I'm finding
myself pretty unmotivated to change my mind given that much of the
organizing team doesn't seem to care at all about human rights.

E.

- -- 
Ideas are my favorite toys.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlHIayEACgkQQwkE2RkM0wpEqwD/b0/oaJEcff0Dwj0ELR4CByiR
ZDTh75L6HCSoXRxBoyQBAJn9e29RAuXFzA+ohaRVtRu/hwmD5PezbKXBFxaNMhFu
=gbiw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

[liberationtech] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM

[Douwe Schmidt]

Dear LibTech Readers,

In a little bit over a month OHM2013 is happening in The Netherlands. There has 
been a lot of controversy in the run-up to this gathering. There was criticism 
of the involvement of tech security company Fox-IT, then there was a heated 
debate on the presence of Dutch High-tech Crime Unit in a village of their own. 
Both discussions have calmed down. But the relevance of these topics was 
clarified and reinforced.

The Noisy Square Village will be the centre at OHM for discussing these and 
many more topics revolving around netpolitics, liberation technologies and 
surveillance. We want to be the place for connecting techno-activists, 
hacktivists, people involved with circumvention tools, and everyone interested 
in anti-censorship and anti-surveillance technology. We will connect the NGO's 
which work in the field to the hackers and programmers who work  on machines. 
We believe that all technology is political, and that we need to discuss and 
question its development and usage as critically as possible.

This call for participation is meant to ask the community which topics must be 
addressed -- especially those which might go unnoticed or undiscussed . So if 
you would like to: present recent work, hold a discussion, do a demonstration, 
organize the largest key signing party ever, co-create a hackathon or 
booksprint, or something radically different:

Go to: https://cfp.ohm2013.org/

There you can make an account and submit your proposal. Please make sure to tag 
your proposal in the title with 'Noisy Square' so we can find it easily! 

If you already submitted content to OHM, but would like to present it with us 
at Noisy Square, just send us the title of your proposal.

Looking forward to the richness of you ideas!

Douwe Schmidt, Jurre van Bergen, and Sacha van Geffen,

The Noisy Square Village Team - "Because Revolutions don't happen in Silent 
Circles"
https://ohm2013.org/wiki/Village:Noisy_Square

Organizations supporting the Noisy Square are:
- AccessNow
- Associated Whistle-Blowing Press
- Bits of Freedom
- Cryptocat
- Fairphone/Waag
- Free Press Unlimited
- Greenhost
- Hermes Center for Transparency and Digital Human Rights
- Hivos
- IMMI
- ISOC
- The Internet Protection Lab
- Torservers.net
- Vrijschrift

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech