December 2021 - cypherpunks@lists.ogf.org

Morons money
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

JIM Dumbell, sorry, Steve Bannon just announced creation of a new MAGA cryptocurrency called " Associated Press", sorry, ‘FJB.’ “This is eventually going to be used as a means of transactions, you’re going to have an alternate currency .. You’re going to very quickly have no reliance on their financial system.”

1 0

JIM Bell - Dead Man Walking
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

MORON Craig Jarvis, wouldn't know anarchy from a cunt on the throne cypherpunks - The Mail Archive https://www.mail-archive.com › thrd2 Bitcoin Magazine lies about cypherpunks professor rat ... MORON Craig Jarvis, wouldn't know anarchy from a cunt on the throne. JIM BELL LIES ABOUT CYPHERPUNKS! CRIME!

1 0

Militarist scumbag hates anarchism - GOOD!
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Rid

1 0

Religious nut hates anarchism - GOOD!
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/24701475.2020.1731249 Enrico Beltramini Enrico Beltramini is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Notre Dame de Namur University in Belmont, California. He holds doctoral degrees in Theology (Vidyajyoti College of Theology)

1 0

Blockchain assassination markets Digital economy news The Shift Media.
by jim bell 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

Blockchain assassination markets | digital economy news | The Shift Media | | | | | | | | | | | Blockchain assassination markets | digital economy news | The Shift Media A decentralised blockchain platform for betting on real world outcomes – including the assassination of politica... | | | Augur: Blockchain assassination markets? A decentralised blockchain platform for betting on real world outcomes – including the assassination of political leaders – is being traded on a Nasdaq crypto-related index and is open to everyday investors. Exante, a global brokerage brand opened the decentralised finance index – Defix, which includes the controversial prediction market platform, Augur, as well as Amoveo and 0x. “Consumers will have the ability to invest in the index through a Defix fund, granting exposure to decentralised finance blockchain projects through a secure, financially accredited agency,” says Defix. Augur is described as a set of open source smart contracts that can be deployed to the Ethereum blockchain, enabling users to create their own prediction markets. Wisdom of the crowd? The platform used the wisdom of the crowd principle, which posits that a large group of aggregated answers are often superior to those given by individuals. And while the platform has the potential for social benefit – such as fact-checking and holding politicians accountable – it’s the more nefarious applications that have made headlines. While most markets on the platform are more benign, it’s also hosted bets on the deaths of people ranging from Donald Trump to Betty White. “While some of the pools merely ask users to predict whether or not an older prominent public figure (e.g., Warren Buffet) will die of natural causes, others explicitly focus on targeted killings,” writes Jacob Zionts for ConsenSys Media. Commentators point-out, this could potentially lead to people orchestrating events to ensure their prediction eventuates – whether the result of a cricket match or the death of a politician. No control The decentralised and trustless nature of blockchain means neither government, the law nor even the developers can shut down nefarious prediction markets on the platform. Developer, the Forecast Foundation says it does not control how markets resolve or are created, does not approve or reject trades or other transactions on the network and does not have the ability to modify, cancel, undo, or interact with orders on the network. “The Forecast Foundation has no power to censor, restrict, or curate markets, orders, trades, positions or resolutions on the Augur protocol contracts,” it says. “The Forecast Foundation has no more control over the Augur protocol than anyone else using Ethereum.” It has some tech commentators suggesting the technology has opened up a Pandora’s Box – heralding in the dystopian world of Assassination Politics, imagined by crypto-anarchist Jim Bell in the mid-90s. Both speculators and spectators can view Augur on the Defix index, archived by NASDAQ under the ticker DEFX.

1 0

Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998)
by jim bell 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998) Craig JarvisReceived 26 Dec 2020, Accepted 21 May 2021, Published online: 26 Jun 2021 - Download citation - https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2021.1935547 Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998) | | | | | | | | | | | Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998) Craig Jarvis (2021). Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998). Internet Histories. Ahead of Print. | | | Abstract The cypherpunks were 1990s digital activists who challenged White House policies aiming to prevent the emergence of unregulated digital cryptography, an online privacy technology capable of frustrating government surveillance. Whilst the cypherpunk’s ideology, which is predominantly the output of Timothy C. May, is well understood, less is known about the composition of the cypherpunk’s community. This article builds on past studies by Rid and Beltramini by using the cypherpunk’s mail list archive to profile the most active and influential cypherpunks. This study confirms the May-derived ideology is broadly, though not entirely, representative of the cypherpunk community. This article assesses the cypherpunks were a highly educated, mostly libertarian community permeated by aspects of anarchism which arose from a societal disaffiliation inherited from the counterculture. This article further argues that the cypherpunks were also influenced by the hacker ethic and dystopian science fiction. Keywords: Cypherpunkscryptographycyberspacepolicydigital privacydigital surveillancecrypto warsPrevious articleView latest articlesNext article Introduction The cypherpunks were a group of privacy activists who in the 1990s helped establish the use of unregulated digital cryptography within the United States. Digital privacy, better phrased as privacy in the digital age given the inexorable digital-physical convergence, is achieved principally via digital security. When considering the base elements of digital security, Professor Keith Martin comments that, “cryptography is pretty much the only game in town” (Martin, 2020, p. 2). Cryptography allows not only for a host of vital applications within our everyday lives, such as secure financial transactions, but also for capabilities the cypherpunks hoped would undermine the State (May, 1988). Such encryption-dependent technologies include: block-chains, which can place financial transactions beyond the government’s ability to monitor and tax; whistleblowing platforms, capable of facilitating leaks whilst protecting the whistleblower; and anonymity networks, which can obfuscate a citizen’s physical location. The cypherpunks helped shape our Internet. Beltramini comments they were, “perhaps the single most effective grassroots organization in history dedicated to protecting freedom in cyberspace” (Beltramini, 2020, p. 1). However, Dahlberg argues that cyber-libertarian visions of the future, such as those held by the cypherpunks, had mostly dissipated by 2000, he comments that by then the Internet was, “seen as part and parcel of “everyday life” – simply an extension of existing social systems, rather than being a revolutionary medium transcending offline political and economic constraints” (2010, p. 333). However, Dahlberg’s assessment fails to account for the significant 1990s cryptographic advances made by the citizenry, which included weakening export controls, defeating the Clinton administration’s attempts to further regulate cryptography, and establishing the foundation for current technologies such as crypto-currencies. Today, law enforcement does not consider unregulated encryption as a tolerable status quo as its use hinders their access to suspect’s data.1 In 2020 alone, two bills were introduced in Congress which could outlaw encryption not containing a government access method (commonly referred to as a “back door”) (United States Congress, 2020; United States Senate, 2020). When the Clinton administration sought to include a back door within encryption technologies in the 1990s, the cypherpunks led the successful battle to defeat government policy, thus helping to establish unregulated cryptography. The cypherpunk ideology now influences a new generation of digital privacy activists.2 These new activists are responsible for challenging today’s government policies to mandate encryption back doors. It is important we understand the community which last successfully challenged the State’s attempt to regulate cryptography so that ongoing debates are informed by an accurate characterization of those who established today’s status quo. This article builds on the cypherpunk studies of Rid (2016) and Beltramini (2020 | | | | | | | | | | | Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998) Craig Jarvis (2021). Cypherpunk ideology: objectives, profiles, and influences (1992–1998). Internet Histories. Ahead of Print. | | | ) by using the cypherpunk mail list archive to profile the broader cypherpunk community. This profiling indicates that the cypherpunks were a highly educated, primarily libertarian community permeated by aspects of anarchism which arose from a societal disaffiliation inherited from the counterculture. The profiling further indicates that the cypherpunks objectives were directed to minimize, or even remove the State from public life, and that they were influenced by the hacker ethic and dystopian science fiction.

1 0

Donald Dumbfuck was against vaccines before he was for them
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

>>> then came Trump’s cash grab of a “victory tour” with fellow washout Bill O’Reilly, and that’s when Trump decided to publicly stake himself to a strong pro-vaccine and pro-booster stance. This has created such a mess, pro-Trump surrogates like Candace Owens are now throwing up their hands in frustration. After all, they’ve spent all year helping him sell anti-vaccine stances, and now they’re stuck trying to explain why Trump has switched sides. <<< If Gramps had any shame he'd drink bleach and die.

4 4

Jim Bell falsely asserts we have conceded rights
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

Jim Bell is dead . . . wrong. He's wrong to come here quoting Qanon type morons as fact witnesses. He's wrong about assassination markets hallowed by time and consecrated by useage. He's wrong about chemistry. He's wrong about law. And his insulting suggestion we have given away any of our inalienable human and civil rights may be treated with the contempt it so richly deserves. The last self-described cryptoanarchist that went this haywire in public got himself shot dead. And that's Jim Bells present trajectory - as I said - if he had any friends they would have staged an intervention for him by now. Its sad - but certain - he will be remembered for his last few years as a complete shambles since a fool and his precious reputation-capital are soon parted. Good riddance to bad FOX news rubbish.

2 1

Re: Donald Dumbfuck was against vaccines before he was for them
by professor rat 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

So the " Jim Bell " shilling for Horse Dewormer here was an identity thief? But the real Jim Bell likes THIEVES! Julian Assmange Jeff Berwick That Antistate dotcom slumlord I'm confused. Bring back the pre-2018 Jim Bell.

1 0

Right we have bargained away
by jim bell 25 Dec '21

25 Dec '21

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/right-to-jury-trial-penal… The Bill of Rights exists to protect individuals. It protects the right to free speech, the right to due process, the right to counsel, and the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, just to name a few. If a government official tries to deprive an individual of one of those constitutional rights, then the courts are supposed to intervene. But that’s not what happens when it comes to one of the most important rights for criminal defendants—the right to a jury trial. Instead of protecting defendants’ right to have their guilt or innocence decided by their peers, judges routinely punish defendants for exercising that right. Specifically, judges regularly impose longer sentences on those defendants who insist on going to trial than on those defendants who plead guilty. A 2018 report shows that, on average, defendants who insist on a trial receive sentences three times longer than those of defendants who plead guilty. This practice is so common that it even has a name: the “trial penalty.” The executive branch of government has followed the courts’ lead; many prosecutors pressure defendants to bargain away their right to a jury. They will offer defendants concessions—such as dropping some criminal charges or recommending leniency at sentencing—in return for a guilty plea. Plea bargains dominate the system. Only 3 percent of convictions are the result of a trial—the rest come from guilty pleas. As the Supreme Court put it, “Criminal justice today is for the most part a system of pleas, not a system of trials.”

1 0