On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, David Honig wrote:
> At 08:39 AM 8/4/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
> >On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, David Honig wrote:
> >
> >> 8 years ago the number who had a net-clue was small, and they were
> >> a more tolerant bunch. Now you have every ditz in Tennessee trying
> >> to shape the ne
At 08:39 AM 8/4/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
>On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, David Honig wrote:
>
>> 8 years ago the number who had a net-clue was small, and they were
>> a more tolerant bunch. Now you have every ditz in Tennessee trying
>> to shape the net to her liking, and getting men with guns to help.
>
On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, David Honig wrote:
> 8 years ago the number who had a net-clue was small, and they were
> a more tolerant bunch. Now you have every ditz in Tennessee trying
> to shape the net to her liking, and getting men with guns to help.
Which is that 'freedom' thing, that is a good th
Declan McCullagh wrote:
> Talking about alleged victimless
> crimes allegedly committed by
> list members is irresponsible.*
> The reason it is arguably
> irresponsible is that you are
> endangering someone else's safety.
> Big difference.
I don't follow your logic. (At least you admit my alleg
At 09:37 AM 8/1/01 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>Exactly so. This list, like so many other lists, is gradually moving
>toward "public politics" and "the law" as the focus of many members.
More public policy than "public politics," but the general point is true.
I'm not sure what the reason is. Perhaps
It may well be irresponsible for Tim to talk about his probable
responses to a situation when unidentified black ninjas invade his
home. The reason it is arguably irresponsible is that Tim is endangering
his safety. But he knows that.
Talking about alleged victimless crimes allegedly committed by
On Thu, 2 Aug -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Use their spy cameras against dem. Learn dem to see ninjas. When dey
Actually, I'm thinking about using webcams streaming frame sequences
offsite (and sending video stills to your PDA via wireless) once the
interframe delta goes over threshold.
And,
>No Tim, what is utterly irresponsible is to make bellicose threats on this
list about what your response will be if masked ninjas invade your home. If
they end up shooting you (and I think their is a significant likelihood that
they will), it will be in large part because of your macho siege men
At 06:42 PM 8/1/01 -0400, Faustine wrote:
> For what it's worth, here
>are the specs on the best California-street-legal defensive knife I've
ever
>seen:
>
>Smith & Wesson Small SWAT Tactical Folder
>
Unfortunately S & W are being boycotted...
On 2 Aug 2001, Dr. Evil wrote:
> > The prosecutors who read this list must be chortling.
>
> Chortling is a form of laughter. Prosecutors, like Ukrainian customs
> agents, have had their sense of humor surgically removed, so I doubt
> they chortle very much.
unless it involves wounded kittens
> The prosecutors who read this list must be chortling.
Chortling is a form of laughter. Prosecutors, like Ukrainian customs
agents, have had their sense of humor surgically removed, so I doubt
they chortle very much.
--
On 1 Aug 2001, at 14:54, John Young wrote:
> The time for confidences is over. Lawyers are considering
> a change in their ethics about ratting on clients (see NY Times
> today); priests are ratting about criminal confessions; reporters
> are ratting on interviewees, psychiatrists are ratti
Eugene Leitl wrote:
> Feds enter houses for whatever
> reasons they deem appropriate
> to invent...
Then my comments won't affect their actions one way or the other.
> Pointing out possible targets
> makes no damn reason at all...
Tim already is a target. My minor comments do nothing to chang
Tim May wrote:
> I know of many arguments that a
> knife can be gotten into a fight
> and used effectively _faster_
> than a gun can, especially in
> very close quarters.
Maybe yes, maybe no, but why not carry both then? A legal knife and a
illegal (misdemeanor) gun rather than just your illega
The time for confidences is over. Lawyers are considering
a change in their ethics about ratting on clients (see NY Times
today); priests are ratting about criminal confessions; reporters
are ratting on interviewees, psychiatrists are ratting patients.
DoJ and the courts are squeezing all the priv
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> 1) "Cypherpunks write code." This metaphorical admonition tells us to make
> the laws irrelevant by outrunning them with technology. I couldn't agree
> more. I don't see much benefit in asking the nice lawmakers to do fuck us
> so badly, please. Be
At 10:17 AM -0700 8/1/01, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>It is on this second point that I had a very disappointing interaction with
>Tim at a physical Cypherpunks meeting some years ago. Tim was carrying a
>concealed knife that did not comply with California's concealed carry laws.
>I mentioned this to
Tim May wrote:
> The "law" part is about the above,
> and exhortations by the lawyers
> here (5, by my count) about what
> one mustn't do, how courts will
> react, the need to be scrupulously
> legal in all of one's actions, etc.
>
> "Laws of mathematics, not men."
>
> We risk becoming just a pal
Tim May wrote:
> It is utterly irresponsible for
> you to discuss this on a list
> frequented by narcs and informants
> and even prosecutors.
No Tim, what is utterly irresponsible is to make bellicose threats on this
list about what your response will be if masked ninjas invade your home. If
th
19 matches
Mail list logo
