Re: revised time quantization package (Unix & WIN32) available

AT&T Spokesman Matt Blaze writes:
blah blah
>There are (basically) no restrictions on the use or distribution
>of the (very simple) code.

This is simply untrue. Read the fine print in the file. Use this code
and you owe them big. They'll "reach out and touch" you big time.
If they were serious, they'd gpl it.

>Get it from:
>	ftp://research.att.com/dist/mab/quantize.shar
>
>The quantize package is also part of Jack Lacy's cryptolib package
>(watch this space for details).

I don't understand why this group continues to tolerate these blatently
commercial messages from att (and netscape.) (The message is
really just an ad for the cryptolib product, as it says). I've also said
this b4 but I'll say it again: why would anyone in their right mind trust
binary code from att after the clipper fiasco.

And why do we tolerate Jeff Weinstein and Mat Blaze calling themselves
cypherpunks, when they are so clearly just working us for their
corporate interests? I wonder how much they get paid to monitor this
list?

ECafe Anonymous Remailer writes:
[Lots of garbage slandering Matt Blaze, who's about as close to being
a dyed-in-the-DNA cypherpunk as you can get.]

What I want to know is, why are you doing this? Are you trying to
start a flame war? Are you just an asshole? Are you Detweiler? Whats
the motive?

.pm

Perry wonders:

> What I want to know is, why are you doing this? Are you trying to
> start a flame war? Are you just an asshole? Are you Detweiler? Whats
> the motive?

I must admit I don't quite get it, although I think there are people
who really can't distinguish between a person and a person's employer, and
who believe that the entire world is a black-and-white battle between
good and evil.

Jeff Weinstein got treated rudely back during the feeding frenzy
where everyone hated Netscape because he works for Netscape.

Brian Davis got treated rudely when he first joined the list because
he works for the government as a federal (?) prosecutor.

I get treated rudely from time to time because I work for AT&T.

It doesn't bother me, especially when it comes from an anonymous source who
for all we know might earn his or her keep by advertising the joys of
smoking cigarettes to small children or by testing the toxic effects of
new cosmetics on cute, furry animals.  I figure it all just comes with
the turf.  At least I don't get blood thrown on my by protestors the way
people who work in animal testing labs do...

-matt

Matt,

It seems that .pm has to be paranoid since he doesn't recognize intergrity. 
May he is the famous net loon LD?

However, keep up the good work.

Dan 

On Tue, 19 Dec 1995, Matt Blaze wrote:

> Perry wonders:
> 
> > What I want to know is, why are you doing this? Are you trying to
> > start a flame war? Are you just an asshole? Are you Detweiler? Whats
> > the motive?
> 
> I must admit I don't quite get it, although I think there are people
> who really can't distinguish between a person and a person's employer, and
> who believe that the entire world is a black-and-white battle between
> good and evil.
> 
> Jeff Weinstein got treated rudely back during the feeding frenzy
> where everyone hated Netscape because he works for Netscape.
> 
> Brian Davis got treated rudely when he first joined the list because
> he works for the government as a federal (?) prosecutor.
> 
> I get treated rudely from time to time because I work for AT&T.
> 
> It doesn't bother me, especially when it comes from an anonymous source who
> for all we know might earn his or her keep by advertising the joys of
> smoking cigarettes to small children or by testing the toxic effects of
> new cosmetics on cute, furry animals.  I figure it all just comes with
> the turf.  At least I don't get blood thrown on my by protestors the way
> people who work in animal testing labs do...
> 
> -matt
> 
>

Perry E. Metzger enscribed thusly:

> ECafe Anonymous Remailer writes:
> [Lots of garbage slandering Matt Blaze, who's about as close to being
> a dyed-in-the-DNA cypherpunk as you can get.]

	Yeah!  Really!  We're talking about Matt "Honey I broke the
chip" Blaze here.  Single handedly did more damage to the clipper
chip than any other individual or group!

> What I want to know is, why are you doing this? Are you trying to
> start a flame war? Are you just an asshole? Are you Detweiler? Whats
> the motive?

	Perry, I liked your reaction to the last chump like this
much better.

	We should find out what drugs they are taking and where we can
buy some!  They are obviously VERY good considering that they no longer
have any connection with reality.

	I'm just impressed that they can manage to find their keyboard
with the halucinations they're having!

> .pm

	Mike
-- 
 Michael H. Warfield    |  (770) 985-6132   |  mhw@WittsEnd.com
  (The Mad Wizard)      |  (770) 925-8248   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9      |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471    |  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

On Tue, 19 Dec 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

> ECafe Anonymous Remailer writes:
> [Lots of garbage slandering Matt Blaze, who's about as close to being
> a dyed-in-the-DNA cypherpunk as you can get.]
> 
> What I want to know is, why are you doing this? Are you trying to
> start a flame war? Are you just an asshole? Are you Detweiler? Whats
> the motive?

What _I_ want to know is, is this a troll from the same person who posted 
the RSA patch for the cryptolib, and is now slandering it.

(Re: the patch... it seemed to work on my copy, it passed the test... but 
NOTHING uses the damn library that I can just test it with)

More 'anonymous' persons should choose to be pseudonymous...

Jon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lasser                <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu>            (410)494-3072 
          Visit my home page at http://www.goucher.edu/~jlasser/
  You have a friend at the NSA: Big Brother is watching. Finger for PGP key.

I don't normally like to respond to anonymous kooks, but...

cpunk@remail.ecafe.org (ECafe Anonymous Remailer) writes:
> AT&T Spokesman Matt Blaze writes:
> blah blah
> >There are (basically) no restrictions on the use or distribution
> >of the (very simple) code.
> 
> This is simply untrue. Read the fine print in the file. Use this code
> and you owe them big. They'll "reach out and touch" you big time.
> If they were serious, they'd gpl it.
> 

Since I don't understand what you're talking about, I can't really
respond to it.  The only restrictions on the use of this code are that
you have to acknowledge where it came from and that it comes with no
waranty.  You also have to keep the notice in place on any copies you give
to anyone else.  Just like the GPL, only without the nutty requirement
that you also give away your own source code.

> >Get it from:
> >	ftp://research.att.com/dist/mab/quantize.shar
> >
> >The quantize package is also part of Jack Lacy's cryptolib package
> >(watch this space for details).
> 
> I don't understand why this group continues to tolerate these blatently
> commercial messages from att (and netscape.) (The message is
> really just an ad for the cryptolib product, as it says). I've also said
> this b4 but I'll say it again: why would anyone in their right mind trust
> binary code from att after the clipper fiasco.

I think you're confused.  AT&T Bell Labs Research (which is soon to be
split into two parts, Bell Labs and AT&T Labs, owned by two different
companies starting next year) is a research laboratory.  A lot of very
good cryptology and security people work here.  While AT&T (the
parent company) is in the products and services business, AT&T Bell Labs
doesn't sell any products or services itself.  Like most of the
computer science researchers in Bell labs (and like those in universities
and elsewhere), I publish the results of most the work that I do (modulo
some consulting I do for the moneymaking part of the company in order
to "pay the rent").  I (like many other researchers) also sometimes create
software in the course of my work.  When this might be of use to others,
I prefer to give it away rather than let it sit idle on my disk.  The
quantization code (like CFS, swIPe and others) is an example.  CryptoLib
is another example; it was created by my colleague Jack Lacy.  We give that
away, too.  Bell Labs doesn't advertise anything.  We don't have retail 
customers.  Our research software is unconnected with AT&T's commercial
activities.  We make it available because that's what members of the research 
community do.  Its distribution is neither purely altruistic nor especially
mercenary.  If you really like our research software, I guess you can switch
your long distance service to AT&T or buy an AT&T answering machine or
something.  But that part of the company is very remote from my food chain.
I'm from the part of the company that _spends_ money.  Other parts _make_
the money.

> And why do we tolerate Jeff Weinstein and Mat Blaze calling themselves
> cypherpunks, when they are so clearly just working us for their
> corporate interests?

Again, I think you're confused.  Jeff Weinstein works for Netscape, not
AT&T.  I think there's a connection between AT&T and Netscape somewhere
(like we bundle netscape with worldnet service), but I don't really
know the details.

> I wonder how much they get paid to monitor this list?

I can't speak for Jeff Weinstein, but in my case, not nearly enough.

-matt
"I'm from The Phone Company and I'm here to help you."

On Tue, 19 Dec 1995, ECafe Anonymous Remailer wrote:

> I don't understand why this group continues to tolerate these blatently
> commercial messages from att (and netscape.) (The message is
> really just an ad for the cryptolib product, as it says). I've also said
> this b4 but I'll say it again: why would anyone in their right mind trust
> binary code from att after the clipper fiasco.
> 

I don't understand why this group continues to tolerate these compleatly
stupid messages from Mr. Anonymous (and other nuts.) (The message is
really just a llame by Detweller (sp?), as it indicates). I've also said
this b4 but I'll say it again: why would anyone in their right mind pay any
attention to an anonymous idiot without enough face to get a nym.

> And why do we tolerate Jeff Weinstein and Mat Blaze calling themselves
> cypherpunks, when they are so clearly just working us for their
> corporate interests? I wonder how much they get paid to monitor this
> list?
> 
> 

You might want to have a doctor help you take your head out of your ass.

Aleph One / aleph1@dfw.net
http://underground.org/
KeyID 1024/948FD6B5 
Fingerprint EE C9 E8 AA CB AF 09 61  8C 39 EA 47 A8 6A B8 01