http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1522
The State Was a Mistake
By Walter Block
[Posted May 25, 2004]
Once upon a time, long, long ago, in a faraway place (actually, a
contrary-to-fact made-up one), there lived a group of human beings without
benefit of government. Any government at all.
From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
3) One for plausible real data, BUT when this one's used, it also destroys
the real data as it opens the plausible real data.
For Windows, look up Strong Disk Pro, they're quite paranoid - it can be
used like this.
Mark
From: Thomas Shaddack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is it possible to have a system where nyms can share reputation without
divulging the links between them? That would allow the possibility of eg.
publishing as a new identity while still having the weight of an
already established seasoned professional.
From: PaweÅ, Krawczyk (IPSec.PL) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This case should teaches us a lot, indeed...
First, subscribe to RISKS.
= SUBSCRIPTIONS: PLEASE read RISKS as a newsgroup (comp.risks or
equivalent)
if possible and convenient for you. Alternatively, via majordomo,
send e-mail requests to
From: Brian C. Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Clay Shirky has some good thoughts on this in his essay 'The Group Is
Its Own Worst Enemy', found at
http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
So we're back, and we're taking wizardly fiat back, and we're going to do
things to run the system. We are
From: Vincent Penquerc'h [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disney doesn't have the power to tell me what I may eat or smoke,
except in their parks and on their property.
[snip]
Now, imagine a Disney owning the whole of the land of the USA,
and having armed forces the size of the USA.
At least, the govt
From: Shawn Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
While I disagree with the phrase revenge only becomes justice if
carried out by the State and I certainly don't agree with everything
ever written in a Crypto-Gram, I must disagree with your evaluation of
Mr. Schneier's editorial. Specifically, the phrase why
From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isn't this what I said?
Yes, I agreed with you with regard to the law as it is in the UK. I
corrected my mistake.
Mark
From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark cited the Bank of England, not U.S. law. I don't know what British
law is in this regard.
It does appear that the law in England is not as demanding as I believed:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/legaltender.htm
The concept of legal tender is
Security is a commons. Like air and water and radio spectrum, any
individual's use of it affects us all. The way to prevent people from
abusing a commons is to regulate it. Companies didn't stop dumping
toxic wastes into rivers because the government asked them
nicely. Companies stopped
From: Sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
None of those things work. Most spammers don't give a shit if you don't
receive email. I can attest to this by the slew of spam going to
hostmaster, webmaster, and the like on many networks. What they're really
selling is ten million addresses and spam
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Solution is obvious and has been known for a long time
Integrate payment with email. If anyone not on your approved
list wants to send you mail, they have to pay you x, where x is
a trivial sum, say a cent or two.
Spammers wind up sending huge
From: AARG! Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Think about it: this one innocuous little box holding the TPME key could
ultimately be the root of trust for the entire world. IMO we should
spare no expense in guarding it and making sure it is used properly.
With enough different interest groups
From: Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Even libertarian
monetarists such as Milton Friedman agree that this is the proper approach
when dealing with a depression.
Murray Rothbard's law number 17: all economists specialize in the field they
suck most. Friedman is good in many areas, but he sucks
From: Sampo Syreeni [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But when the yield does not go to the one who created
the master copy, why should anyone create anything, anymore? (Or, more
realistically, why should people create at an efficient level?)
There's no such thing as efficient level, except in the tautology
From: Sampo Syreeni [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There's no such thing as efficient level, except in the tautology the
market outcome is always efficient.
Only if you take as granted a market based on some fixed set of property
rights and other rules of exchange. If you do this, there is no reason to
From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have half a dozen computers, all usable in various ways. Not even in a
Chinese-type police state could these legally-acquired computers,
acquired for a lot of money, be declared outlawed.
Now, I love hyperbole as much as the next guy, but you have no idea
From: gfgs pedo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One solution suggested against the man in the middle
attack is using the interlock protocol
This is the one I vaguely recalled, thank you.
All mallory would have to do is send the half of the
(n th) packet when he receives the half of (n+1)th
packet since
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a side note, it seems that a corporation would actually have to
demonstrate that I had seen and agreed to the thing and clicked
acceptance. Prior to that point, I could reverse engineer, since
there is no statement that I cannot reverse engineer agreed to. So
From: Adam Back [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Consider during periods of high inflation people don't like holding
money, as it devalues too fast. They will hold interest bearing
deposits instead.
Agreed.
During periods of high deflation, they will hold cash if it is the
most attractive investment.
From: Curt Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am developing a free program and simple
specification - http://www.opencrypto.com
Hmm... Delphi programmer. That's a plus :) The minus is in these lines
(nevermind the typos, although this is your presentation page, so you could
have used a spellchecker):
21 matches
Mail list logo
