Can We Cut the Crap?

Really, the S/N ratio is approaching all-time lows, even for the Silly
Season of Xmas. A week or so ago there was a massive flame war involving
insults and counter-insults--I returned from my Xmas vacation to find the
list melting down. Now, a week later, a new flamewar has erupted.

There is no point in the back-and-forth of insults, "Dr. Fred is a loon,"
"Alice is Detweiler," and other such nonsense. If you don't want to read
the comments of Fred Cohen, Dimitri Vulis, Alice whatever,
Vlad/Lance/Larry/Pablo, then just don't read them! Filter them out, delete
them immediately, read them briefly, whatever.

At 5:04 PM 12/31/95, deadbeat wrote:

>Regarding Fred Cohen, PhD:
>

[typical personal insults elided]

>Let's also consider the granting institution, a second-rank school.

Well, not quite. I seem to recall that Cohen's advisor at USC was Len
Adleman, known perhaps to some of you as the "A" in RSA and more recently
as the guy doing the "DNA computing" work. He was also working on viruses,
perhaps in conjunction with Cohen, as of 1987-88, and gave an interesting
paper at the 1988 Crypto Conference on "An Abstract Theory of Computer
Viruses." Not surprisingly, Cohen's papers were the main citations.

I recall Adleman describing in the oral talk just how it is that
determining if a given program contains a virus is essentially equivalent
to solving the halting problem, i.e., it may be undecidable whether a
program has a virus, except presumably in some special cases (e.g., for
very small programs).

>Cohen's thesis broke new ground, but how many people have read it, or any of
>his writings, or know anything about his ideas beyond a single word?  How far
>did he carry this work?  Where are the conference and journal papers?  Cohen's
>reputation faded into obscurity long ago.  Now he is building a new reputation
>as a pig-headed loudmouth, threatening his "defamers."  Shades of Sternlight.

I have plenty to disagree with some of what Fred Cohen says, as I do with
many people, but this is just plain ignorant.

"How many people have read it, or any of his writings..." is a ridiculous
argument, even for an ad hominem. Those who want to read it, can read it.
The articles are readily available. I've even seen some of his books on the
bookshelves of my local bookstores (haven't read them, though I flipped
through "It's Alive!" and didn't see much of interest....but how many of us
have written _any_ books?). I'm not convinced there's much more about the
_theory_ of viruses to "push forward," for various reasons. The theory was
laid out, some Bulgarians and others are busily writing viruses, but
there's not likely to be some whole reservoir of new theory to be worked
on. (This is true of a lot of fields, where the work done decades ago
basically was complete....look at how we all cite Garey and Johnson and how
little has changed in the field of NP-completeness.)

Blasting Cohen because you don't think he carried his work far enough is
clearly blasting wildly. Have you asked whether others on this list have
carried the work they did in their early careers far enough? (Did I carry
my work in the 1970s on alpha particle effects on chips far enough, or am I
just a Cohen-like slacker because I moved on to other things?)

Anyway, if you don't like Sternlight, or Cohen, or May, or Detweiler, or
Metzger, or Vulis, *filter* them out!

So why don't I just do this? Well, I do have a filter file in my Eudora Pro
mailer, and I use it. But I still see the crossfire on the list, the
pointless flames and personal attacks. This angers and saddens me. Hence
this message.

While I don't subscribe to the extreme view espoused by some, that the
topics of the list should be exclusively crypto, math, programming, and
Internet standards, I do think people should try to find some relevance to
the larger themes of the list. The recent increase in "one-sentance
repartee" is indicative of late-stage list meltdown. (Some of the posts
here quote a couple of paragraphs, add one or two lines of insults, then
have another screenful of PGP sigs, auto-signing sigs, anonymous IDs, and
then a conventional sig. Jeesh!)

I'm hoping that this is just a Xmas vacation silly season.

--Tim May

We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May) writes:
> There is no point in the back-and-forth of insults, "Dr. Fred is a loon,"
> "Alice is Detweiler," and other such nonsense. If you don't want to read
> the comments of Fred Cohen, Dimitri Vulis, Alice whatever,
> Vlad/Lance/Larry/Pablo, then just don't read them! Filter them out, delete
> them immediately, read them briefly, whatever.

Or Chris Shalutis, or Ed Carp, or Perry Metzger...

Too bad majordomo@toad.com can't be instructed not to send contributions from
certain folks to certain other folks.  I guess I'll have to figure out how
to use procmail with this thing after all.

Happy New Year,

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May) writes:
> > There is no point in the back-and-forth of insults, "Dr. Fred is a loon,"
> > "Alice is Detweiler," and other such nonsense. If you don't want to read
> > the comments of Fred Cohen, Dimitri Vulis, Alice whatever,
> > Vlad/Lance/Larry/Pablo, then just don't read them! Filter them out, delete
> > them immediately, read them briefly, whatever.
> 
> Or Chris Shalutis, or Ed Carp, or Perry Metzger...
> 
> Too bad majordomo@toad.com can't be instructed not to send contributions from
> certain folks to certain other folks.  I guess I'll have to figure out how
> to use procmail with this thing after all.

Hey, Dimitri?  That's what it's *for*!  This is not about censorship, or 
is it?  Is that what you're suggesting?

No one is forcing you to read anything I, or anyone else, says.  If you 
don't like it, the 'd' key is somewhere on your keyboard.  Or is that too 
much manual labor for you?  Grrr...
- --
Ed Carp, N7EKG    			Ed.Carp@linux.org, ecarp@netcom.com
					214/993-3935 voicemail/digital pager
					800/558-3408 SkyPager
Finger ecarp@netcom.com for PGP 2.5 public key		an88744@anon.penet.fi

"Past the wounds of childhood, past the fallen dreams and the broken families,
through the hurt and the loss and the agony only the night ever hears, is a
waiting soul.  Patient, permanent, abundant, it opens its infinite heart and
asks only one thing of you ... 'Remember who it is you really are.'"

                    -- "Losing Your Mind", Karen Alexander and Rick Boyes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMOeBFCS9AwzY9LDxAQHDxwQApbzrRLJQTcLshlPGx5qCUNYNfFBeloYY
7o0ULL3+dGs+bjE+VsGy+taEBnWp1L1i5BK4NGo44dEV9SwkndnE5bCalS3vCIsd
YidfhM8nfDa9+e93Uh7VM63ZLVxi6F2SBvN6vcfnmxC7V9LN/b+jrvUPbJG2tVMx
D64Dg2Zd5Jk=
=lIHF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Ed Carp [khijol SysAdmin]" <erc@dal1820.computek.net> writes:
> No one is forcing you to read anything I, or anyone else, says.  If you
> don't like it, the 'd' key is somewhere on your keyboard.  Or is that too
> much manual labor for you?  Grrr...

Ed, no one forced you (or anyone else) to read Fred Cohen while he was posting
to this mailing list.  I happen to be interested in his point of view. I may
or may not agree with it, but I want to know it and I'm grateful to Fred for
having taken his time to write.

There are people on this mailing list who appear to have very little technical
expertise (e.g., can't figure out how an anonymous remailer works), contribute
nothing but silly puerile flames to the discussion, and whose harassment has
caused Fred to stop contributing. They've deprived Fred of his right to spreak
and readers like me of our right to listen. This is censorship by bullying.

There exists, AFAIK, no procmail for the weird setup I have on this box. As soon
as I get something working, I'll start junking the flamers from my mail feed.

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> There are people on this mailing list who appear to have very little technical
> expertise (e.g., can't figure out how an anonymous remailer works), contribute
> nothing but silly puerile flames to the discussion, and whose harassment has
> caused Fred to stop contributing. They've deprived Fred of his right to spreak
> and readers like me of our right to listen. This is censorship by bullying.

Now there you are wrong.  No one forced Fred to stop posting to the list
(I noticed that I just got a posting from him just yesterday, so he may
have stopped since then), but no one deprived Fred of his right to speak. 
I don't see Eric Hughes standing up and saying "Fed, stop posting to the
list", and I certainly note that his postings are getting through to the
list.  So, your statements regarding people harassing Fred, causing him to
stop posting, etc., are just eyewash and an attempt to emotionally
manipulate your audience by calling it "censorship". 
- --
Ed Carp, N7EKG    			Ed.Carp@linux.org, ecarp@netcom.com
					214/993-3935 voicemail/digital pager
					800/558-3408 SkyPager
Finger ecarp@netcom.com for PGP 2.5 public key		an88744@anon.penet.fi

"Past the wounds of childhood, past the fallen dreams and the broken families,
through the hurt and the loss and the agony only the night ever hears, is a
waiting soul.  Patient, permanent, abundant, it opens its infinite heart and
asks only one thing of you ... 'Remember who it is you really are.'"

                    -- "Losing Your Mind", Karen Alexander and Rick Boyes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMOgP1yS9AwzY9LDxAQG2tgQAqpoTneK0dSqK7VKWBUZZcS710KOnWLlC
j1opYymkAzc4dhNUw7NSqwrEm51+lty7xxrXuqDSBrBJp5fkI5sn81Bg3SIN2JFx
iIKyvo57oOe/jOoJp7ONmqCpnPvsJbar0T+q7eHXdZCGM4VRSLVrqDxwMg4NnYE4
JFxgqp2qBDo=
=09VD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Ed Carp [khijol SysAdmin]" <erc@dal1820.computek.net> writes:
> > There are people on this mailing list who appear to have very little techni
> > expertise (e.g., can't figure out how an anonymous remailer works), contrib
> > nothing but silly puerile flames to the discussion, and whose harassment ha
> > caused Fred to stop contributing. They've deprived Fred of his right to spr
> > and readers like me of our right to listen. This is censorship by bullying.
>
> Now there you are wrong.  No one forced Fred to stop posting to the list
> (I noticed that I just got a posting from him just yesterday, so he may
> have stopped since then), but no one deprived Fred of his right to speak.
> I don't see Eric Hughes standing up and saying "Fed, stop posting to the
> list", and I certainly note that his postings are getting through to the
> list.  So, your statements regarding people harassing Fred, causing him to
> stop posting, etc., are just eyewash and an attempt to emotionally
> manipulate your audience by calling it "censorship".

Ed, I've met Eric Hughes.  You're no Eric Hughes.

The crypto people on this mailing list have asked people repeatedly to
curtail non-crypto-related postings (most recently, Tim May, who started
this thread). This is not censorship. The sliencing of Fred Cohen by a lynch
mob of non-technicals (who, e.g., send e-mail twice) is a disturbing example
of censorship.

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> 
> "Ed Carp [khijol SysAdmin]" <erc@dal1820.computek.net> writes:
> > > There are people on this mailing list who appear to have very little techni
> > > expertise (e.g., can't figure out how an anonymous remailer works), contrib
> > > nothing but silly puerile flames to the discussion, and whose harassment ha
> > > caused Fred to stop contributing. They've deprived Fred of his right to spr
> > > and readers like me of our right to listen. This is censorship by bullying.
> >
> > Now there you are wrong.  No one forced Fred to stop posting to the list
> > (I noticed that I just got a posting from him just yesterday, so he may
> > have stopped since then), but no one deprived Fred of his right to speak.
> > I don't see Eric Hughes standing up and saying "Fed, stop posting to the
> > list", and I certainly note that his postings are getting through to the
> > list.  So, your statements regarding people harassing Fred, causing him to
> > stop posting, etc., are just eyewash and an attempt to emotionally
> > manipulate your audience by calling it "censorship".
> 
> Ed, I've met Eric Hughes.  You're no Eric Hughes.

So?  How do you know?  Your comment made absolutely no sense at all.

> The crypto people on this mailing list have asked people repeatedly to
> curtail non-crypto-related postings (most recently, Tim May, who started
> this thread). This is not censorship. The sliencing of Fred Cohen by a lynch
> mob of non-technicals (who, e.g., send e-mail twice) is a disturbing example
> of censorship.

Crap.  If Fred doesn't want to post, that's his choice (as he has 
indicated in private mail to me), but it's not your call to conclude that 
he is being "censored".
- --
Ed Carp, N7EKG    			Ed.Carp@linux.org, ecarp@netcom.com
					214/993-3935 voicemail/digital pager
					800/558-3408 SkyPager
Finger ecarp@netcom.com for PGP 2.5 public key		an88744@anon.penet.fi

"Past the wounds of childhood, past the fallen dreams and the broken families,
through the hurt and the loss and the agony only the night ever hears, is a
waiting soul.  Patient, permanent, abundant, it opens its infinite heart and
asks only one thing of you ... 'Remember who it is you really are.'"

                    -- "Losing Your Mind", Karen Alexander and Rick Boyes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMOgfCCS9AwzY9LDxAQEIHwP/QBvrw/2ePyPqPzs8UcZ3COomXwtYpgBz
8RWnIIdNbEqkf0U/v+OWoeb1cMAPdvyo4CmYLfRlaroSaCGGzfcCDRp3GOtq6zEO
njk1QPAoSb5pxT6zABGPO3ogeBbGB3E5a5AKy+yQrc2MpmzFN0r8EOQ1CPReF3c0
YmOgPbn/b5o=
=EJk4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

TCM:
>There is no point in the back-and-forth of insults, "Dr. Fred is a loon,"
>"Alice is Detweiler," and other such nonsense. If you don't want to read
>the comments of Fred Cohen, Dimitri Vulis, Alice whatever,
>Vlad/Lance/Larry/Pablo, then just don't read them! Filter them out, delete
>them immediately, read them briefly, whatever.

this of course would be obvious to anyone without an ego. however because
this list is really "war of the egos", it escapes everyone here (and has
for the entire existence of the list). far more fun to yell at someone 
publicly, esp. through a pseudonym.

interesting too how some people who use pseudonyms still cannot avoid
defending themselves when attacked. it appears that pseudonyms do not
dissociate ego-based psychology from communication. in fact to the contrary
they appear to make it more prevalent.

this would be an interesting area to study. ripe with lots of seething,
semi-conscious feelings and attitudes deep within the psyche. Freud would
have a field day with flamewars, trolls, and pseudonyms.

> I'm not convinced there's much more about the
>_theory_ of viruses to "push forward," for various reasons. The theory was
>laid out, some Bulgarians and others are busily writing viruses, but
>there's not likely to be some whole reservoir of new theory to be worked
>on.

I object. this sounds like the 1890 patent worker who suggested the patent
office be shut down because, after all, all the important inventions had
already been invented. you are careful to attribute your opinion only
to yourself, but you must recognize how dangerous speculation about the
future is, if you wish to preserve your credibility in the long run. 
especially sentences that sound like, "there is not much more to be
uncovered in so-and-so area" tend to sound especially foolish from future
perspectives.

the Virus area is in fact ripe with study. Java is actually a language 
designed to prevent viruses. many have proposed operating systems for
computers that may work like the way computer viruses spread. I predict
that virus study is really going to blossom even more once Java or other
similar languages become more entrenched and "distributed computing"
really comes to the fore.

>(This is true of a lot of fields, where the work done decades ago
>basically was complete....look at how we all cite Garey and Johnson and how
>little has changed in the field of NP-completeness.)

whoa, you are way off here. NP vs. P is a field *ripe* with new studies.
what these pioneers did was map out the terrain. but there are still many
*unresolved* areas of research here. P vs. NP is *entirely* unresolved.
that doesn't mean that someone has come up with an answer and everyone
says, "the field is basically complete". what it means is that a bazillion
researchers are dying to know the answers to tough questions posed by
the pioneers decades ago. it is true there is little progress in some
key areas, but only because the problems are so insanely difficult.

 the work is only "complete" in the sense that
it has posed questions that have not required any modification-- they
are still the hardest in all of mathematics and computer science, and
still not solved.

are you aware of how critical the P vs. NP question is to cryptography?
theoretically public key cryptography and many other forms in common use
today would be "impossible" if P= NP. I've met some very good cryptographers
who don't understand this basic point of computer theory. they think one
can always just create more ingenious algorithms.

>Blasting Cohen because you don't think he carried his work far enough is
>clearly blasting wildly. Have you asked whether others on this list have
>carried the work they did in their early careers far enough? (Did I carry
>my work in the 1970s on alpha particle effects on chips far enough, or am I
>just a Cohen-like slacker because I moved on to other things?)

uhm, I have to side with PM on this one -- I vote for 40-something slacker. <g>

>So why don't I just do this? Well, I do have a filter file in my Eudora Pro
>mailer, and I use it. But I still see the crossfire on the list, the
>pointless flames and personal attacks. This angers and saddens me. Hence
>this message.

the noise is a periodic reoccurence because of the basic list architecture.
personally I enjoy it immensely. it's all the grandeur and muck of
seething human psychology in digital form.  no amount of continual 
concerned messages will ever change the basic fact that the list architecture
by design is highly conducive to noise. to complain about this is like
complaining that cars emit exhaust. well, yes, but that's the basic design.
you can't get rid of the exhaust until you experiment with a new design.

I'm actually not necessarily in favor of a new design here either, even
though I have suggested variations/alternatives frequently. as I say, I
enjoy it here a lot.

> The recent increase in "one-sentance
>repartee" is indicative of late-stage list meltdown. (Some of the posts
>here quote a couple of paragraphs, add one or two lines of insults, then
> have another screenful of PGP sigs, auto-signing sigs, anonymous IDs, and
>then a conventional sig. Jeesh!)

hee, hee. "meltdown". love that term. but again you mix big egos and
a totally open list (throw in a little cryptoanarchy for more explosive
force), and this is the inevitable result. there's nothing
perplexing or mystifying why this happens. its the basic conclusion 
reaffirmed zillions of times by many years of this list activity.

to complain about this reminds me of person who murdered his parents
and then pleads to the court that he was an orphan who deserves relief.
that is, this situation here is the creation of everyone who participates,
and those who suffer are precisely those that created it. cyberspatial
karma if you will.

>I'm hoping that this is just a Xmas vacation silly season.

well you can always post a exasperated message in which you declare you've
had it with the list, period, and are not going to hang out here any more.
there is a precedent for that kind of thing.