Re: IRS sending warning notes, violating ECPA?

(I think Tim is doing a lot more for the cypherpunks cause by not being
in jail than he would being locked up in jail pending trial for 5 months..
but that's not really an issue anyway -- one's life is one's own, do as thou
wilt and all)

Something which I think would be more interesting would be if someone set up
a fairly aggressive legal fund and technical assay organization to use
the civil courts to try to challenge silly crypto laws, using some of the
proceeds from evaluating and certifying vendor security products.  Something
like a "contribute $1 by electronic cash system of your choice" to a variety
of "charities" (things where you gain some tangible benefit by their success,
like the repeal of crypto export legislation, etc.) -- perhaps some kind of
silly web server which collected deposits, automatically did the paperwork
for tax purposes, forwarded money to the organizations, etc., either 
anonymously or not.

Perhaps this is a bad example, but I think there are a lot more things people
could do outside of jail than in it.  It might be stylish to have a martyr
locked up in jail who we could all invoke at random times, but I'd much 
prefer to actually win.  'Cypherpunks write code' is nicer than 'Cypherpunks
get locked up in jail for doing not so creative things, rather than having
others do them, and not even doing them terribly effaciously'.

I think I'll go back to setting up my little os9 network and toying with
novel security concepts (twas a good suggestion, whoever mentioned it here.
i'd always ignored os9...it turns out it's quite a fun toy, and a useful
building block).

At 9:16 AM -0700 7/23/97, Ryan Lackey wrote:
>(I think Tim is doing a lot more for the cypherpunks cause by not being
>in jail than he would being locked up in jail pending trial for 5 months..
>but that's not really an issue anyway -- one's life is one's own, do as thou
>wilt and all)

Thanks.

I gather from the quoted comments in Ray A.'s and William G.'s messages
that Kent Crispin is arguing that I'm one of the sheeple because I have not
blown up any buildings or committed other felonies. (Actually, how does he
know I haven't? Perhaps my public personna is not the full story... Hmmhhh.)

(And Crispin was not around, on this list or anywhere in cyberspace I ever
noticed, a few years ago when I anonymously launched Blacknet, a
clearinghouse for military and other secrets. Consult the archives,
including the investigations launched by several agencies in D.C. I did it
as a technology demonstration, though I did get some weird offers of
information about how the CIA was targetting African diplomats for
compromise in Georgetown.)

Crispin also has a very poor understanding of what CPs have done,
apparently thinking the postings on this list in the short time he's been
here represent the sum total output.


>Something which I think would be more interesting would be if someone set up
>a fairly aggressive legal fund and technical assay organization to use
>the civil courts to try to challenge silly crypto laws, using some of the
>proceeds from evaluating and certifying vendor security products.  Something
>like a "contribute $1 by electronic cash system of your choice" to a variety
>of "charities" (things where you gain some tangible benefit by their success,
>like the repeal of crypto export legislation, etc.) -- perhaps some kind of
>silly web server which collected deposits, automatically did the paperwork
>for tax purposes, forwarded money to the organizations, etc., either
>anonymously or not.

Well, organizations like the EFF are active in exactly this way, handling
the Bernstein case, and with (I think) other involvements in other cases
(Karns, Junger?).  And of course the recent CDA victory is such an effort.

The courts are our best hope in striking down repressive legislation.
Congress is not a viable hope...they exist solely to generate more laws.

The only thing keeping the U.S. from falling headlong into a
cradle-to-grave total state is the Constitution. Not suprising, but let me
make a few points to show more precisely what I mean:

* Even with the First, which is clearly stated, there are constant attempts
to control and regulate speech. Imagine the explosion of legislation we'd
have without a clearcut First?

(Though the phrase has become puerilely hackneyed, I still like to use it:
"Just which part of "Congress shall make no law" do you not understand?")

* The Supremes recentlly struck down provisions of the Brady Bill, and
Clarence Thomas, in his written opinion, indicated that it may be time for
the Court to take a case involving the various attempts to short circuit
the Second. (We may see in the next several years a striking down of many
of the recent gun control laws.)

* The Court threw out the CDA and essentially made the same hackneyed point
I made above. The Court did what no amount of Congressional porkbarrelling
could ever do.

* Domestic restrictions on crypto are coming. Only the Court can strike
down these laws. Violations of the First (speech), Fourth (secure in one's
papers, search warrants needed), Fifth (self-incrimination), and other
provisions would seem likely points of attack.

Maybe I need to revise my views about nuking D.C.

Is there any way to have a shaped nuclear charge which would take out
Congress and the White House but leave the Supreme Court standing?

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Wed, 23 Jul 1997, Tim May wrote:

> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 09:53:09 -0700
> From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
> To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
> Subject: Re: IRS sending warning notes, violating ECPA?
> 
> 
> At 9:16 AM -0700 7/23/97, Ryan Lackey wrote:
> >(I think Tim is doing a lot more for the cypherpunks cause by not being
> >in jail than he would being locked up in jail pending trial for 5 months..
> >but that's not really an issue anyway -- one's life is one's own, do as thou
> >wilt and all)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I gather from the quoted comments in Ray A.'s and William G.'s messages
> that Kent Crispin is arguing that I'm one of the sheeple because I have not
> blown up any buildings or committed other felonies. (Actually, how does he
> know I haven't? Perhaps my public personna is not the full story... Hmmhhh.)

I believe the proper term for this is "Agent Provoceteur".

> (And Crispin was not around, on this list or anywhere in cyberspace I ever
> noticed, a few years ago when I anonymously launched Blacknet, a
> clearinghouse for military and other secrets. Consult the archives,
> including the investigations launched by several agencies in D.C. I did it
> as a technology demonstration, though I did get some weird offers of
> information about how the CIA was targetting African diplomats for
> compromise in Georgetown.)

Kent has missed most of the fun on this list.  The RC4 and RC2 postings,
the Clipper revelations via dumpster diving at Micronix (sp?), and lots
more.

> Crispin also has a very poor understanding of what CPs have done,
> apparently thinking the postings on this list in the short time he's been
> here represent the sum total output.

Actually the list had been in quite a bit of decline (almost typed
"Declan" ]:> ) for a while before he showed up.  He needs to go back and
review the archives.  (Maybe someone needs to do a "Historical Review of
the Achievements and Pontifications of the Cypherpunks(tm)" as a doctoral
thesis.)

[snip]

> The courts are our best hope in striking down repressive legislation.
> Congress is not a viable hope...they exist solely to generate more laws.

>From the recient decisions I have seen, it appears that the courts are
starting to reject the Control Freak attitude and roughshod trampling of
the constitution by the Clinton administration.  The Reno "justice"
department keeps coming back with cases saying "we don't have enough
powers to do our job".  The first few times they cut them some slack, but
the more they give Reno and her cohorts, the more they seem to want.
(Nothing less than a complete and total police state seems to satisfy
her.)  I think they are starting to get the point that the DOJ seems to
believe they are above the constitution or that it is no longer relevant.

(I seem to remember a quote that was proported to be from some program
Clinton did for MTV that made similar claims about the first amendment no
longer being relevant these days.  I am not certain if the quote is
correct though, as the source was not very reliable.)

Maybe their is hope via the Supreme Court.  But considering that Clinton
has the ability to "rig the court" with judges that support his ideology,
that may not last.  (Why do I have a feeling that we may see more judges
"retiring" before Clinton/Gore are out of power?)

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.

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

I'm new here but:
>I think I'll go back to setting up my little os9 network and toying with
>novel security concepts (twas a good suggestion, whoever mentioned it here.
>i'd always ignored os9...it turns out it's quite a fun toy, and a useful
>building block).

Is this the child of Microware's OS9 that I used ten years ago?

Thanks
David Yaffe

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

iQCVAwUBM9ZHYzoM1b3tdf0JAQEa8wP8CAvBu7LVqpKoAsuk+wI+bdHgmyp7CAJy
E0rqr9964Vge2+yeqLVC3R7y7sXj2oMWUyAf0tyoj+7ajn8Lj1ZnXHu/BcXPZNOD
uF2n/PLYugLdW8oprogOGvPtv/ZtTIYTCzSt7X33u6+v+OvErrFvZh8Mvn02m7FU
fZaiiulGTRE=
=xSrF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----