Been there, done that, etc.
http://www.419eater.com/
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mike.jb/images/trophy_room/joe_eboh1.jpg
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tyler Durden
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 8:59 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
Signal to noise ratio unacceptable even from lne.com (once the only reason
c'punks was bearable).
Between Major Areola's altered and tainted news stories, the slew of
"reformatted" repeats of the AP wire, the return of the three blithering
idiots who started wasting all our time back in 1998 or
As some will remember, we did this at FC98.
I'll look up the supplier.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Mister Heex
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 5:27 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Groucho in bulk
>
>
> >To test their
It is only because people keep quoting him and circumventing my filter
scheme that I know Choate wrote:
> >>> These sorts of laws violate the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and
> >>> 10th.
Annoyed with yet another Choate foray into law (my offer to pay for the LSAT
fee stands- registration f
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Steve Schear
> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 12:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: GAO V. CHENEY IS BIG-TIME STALLING:
>
>
> GAO V. CHENEY IS BIG-TIME STALLING:
> The
I've been quite amused to watch all the wrangling about the "Geneva
Convention" with respect to captives held by the United States in relation
to the events of September 11th- both here and in the media.
First of all, no one seems to bother specifying which "Geneva Convention"
they are referring
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 6:15 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Faustine's paranoia index (or: mindless OT bickering)
>
> You should be glad I've managed to avoid po
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of AARG! Anonymous
> Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 9:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Illusional delusions
>
>
> The solution for money laundering is to remove the "money", as defined
> by the
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 10:04 PM
> To: Ryan Lackey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Black Unicorn
> Subject: Re: Liability, economic realities and self delusion in
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Ryan Lackey
> Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 8:01 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: ecash developer software liability, round 809834
[There isn't much new to talk about so instead...]
> ... just
From:
http://cgi.newcity.com/exitlog/frameset.php?close=http://www.citypaper.net/a
rticles/101801/news.godfrey.shtml&back=http://www.newcity.com
"'When a passenger passes through security, it is under the jurisdiction of
the airline. We dont get involved,' he says, adding that stories like
Godfr
> -Original Message-
> From: Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:31 PM
> To: Black Unicorn; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ACTION: SUCCESS! Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001
>
>
> At 10:04 AM 9/25/01 -0700, Black Unicorn wrote:
&g
Since the only goal in the first place was to delay I repeat:
SUCCESS!
- Original Message -
From: "Declan McCullagh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Black Unicorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 5:37 PM
Subjec
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 12:08 PM
Subject: Lawyers, Guns, and Money
> Since none of the former, current, or larval lawyers have weighed in on
> the issue, I'll give my two bits.
>
> The question is th
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: Products Liability and Innovation.
> On 13 Aug 2001, at 9:42, Black Unicorn wrote:
>
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > Fr
- Original Message -
From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Eugene Leitl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Black Unicorn'"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 10:14 AM
Subject: RE: Prod
- Original Message -
From: "Eugene Leitl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Faustine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 7:49 AM
Subject: RE: Traceable Infrastructure is as vulnerable as traceable messag
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: Secret Warrants and Black Bag Jobs--Questions
> On Wednesday, August 8, 2001, at 04:03 PM, Dr. Evil wrote:
>
> >> I agree with Dr. Evil about the unlikel
clear identification of the intruder as an officer, (verbal or otherwise)
contemporaneous street justice is the only thing that the homeowner needs to
fear. (Note of course the requirement for "retreat to capacity" and such in
your state of residence and other use of deadly force ramificatio
- Original Message -
From: "Sandy Sandfort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 1:56 PM
Subject: RE: Secret Warrants and Black Bag Jobs--Questions
> Tim wrote:
>
> > 2) What happens in these breaking-and-entering raids if the homeowner
> > surpri
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 11:39 AM
Subject: Microsoft Risking "Spoliation" Charges
> Looks like Microsoft is racing to get copies of XP out where they can't
> be retrieved, where the distribution i
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 3:36 PM
Subject: Remailer logs
> On Sunday, August 5, 2001, at 03:01 PM, Aimee Farr wrote:
> > Yes. Unless it is of special relevance. For example:
> >
> > Dear company:
> >
>
I am going to try and be as clear and as slow as possible- knowing full well
that it probably will make no difference and that my words will be twisted,
strawmaned, touted or defamed whatever I do. Regardless:
Hirsch v. General Motors, 628 A.2d 1108 (1993) effectively opens the door for
third p
gt; > official policy to destroy email after N days. As if Ollie et al. wasn't
> > enough.
>
> If Microsoft gets busted for "spoilation" in their current lawsuit, then
> I will take Sandy and Black Unicorn off my loon list. :-)
In keeping with my new theory about
- Original Message -
From: "Black Unicorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 4:08 PM
Subject: Final Words from me about document production requirements and
remailers.
> The trial court
> permits the plaintiffs to s
- Original Message -
From: "Sandy Sandfort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 4:44 PM
Subject: RE: Final Words from me about document production requirements and
remailers.
> Black Unicorn wrote:
>
> [masterful
of a gag
> > order and preemptively gag myslef in case one might be issued
> > at a later date.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] replies:
> Judges have never attempted such crap, and if they do, lawyers will
irrelevant, and will have been irrelevant for a long time before the such
anyone attempts
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Harmon Seaver
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 7:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Spoliation cites
>
>
> I think you're getting a little off-track here --- the original
> discussion w
ith logging
> >capabilities but with those capabilities selectively disabled is in
> >itself an act of spoliation? These are acts done without any specific
> >knowledge of people, places, things or events likely to be of interest
> >to a court. General knowledge of th
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 7:52 PM
Subject: RE: Spoliation, escrows, courts, pigs.
> Seeing all you high-power lawyers here humbles me.
Even when your grumpy, Mr. May, sometimes you just make me smile des
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: Spoilation, escrows, courts, pigs.
> At 12:22 PM -0700 7/31/01, Black Unicorn wrote:
>
> >Not being intimately familia
Oh great.
Now every news story on this thing will be echoed by Mr. Choate directly to
the list without any introductory commentary.
Don't you see how this stuff backfires?
Ugh.
- Original Message -
From: "Faustine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 20
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 9:55 AM
Subject: Re: DOJ jails reporter, Ashcroft allows more journalist subpoenas
> On 30 Jul 2001, at 14:38, Black Unicorn wrote:
>
> > Prosecutor: You retained
- Original Message -
From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Black Unicorn'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 7:53 AM
Subject: RE: Forced disclosures, document seizures, Right and Wrong.
&
- Original Message -
From: "Petro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: Ashcroft Targets U.S. Cybercrime
> At 10:29 AM -0700 7/30/01, Black Unicorn wrote:
> >- Original Message -
> &
> >Oops! "Accidentally" hit Tim May's house!"
Probably not an accident.
- Original Message -
From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
"'Black Unicorn'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:54 PM
Subject: RE: DOJ jails
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Black Unicorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: DOJ jails reporter, Ashcroft allows more journalist subpoenas
> Black
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: DOJ jails reporter, Ashcroft allows more journalist subpoenas
> Declan,
>
> The larger problem notwithstanding there's at least one little bit of
Maybe we should form [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 10:28 AM
Subject: Pointers to news sources and other mailing lists
> I've noticed that about 90% of traffic to the
- Original Message -
From: "Petro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: Ashcroft Targets U.S. Cybercrime
> At 7:20 AM -0500 7/26/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Petro
Cite to the photo please?
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ray Dillinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers & self defence
> --
> On 27 Jul 2001, at 8:26,
Perhaps we should just designate the funds, payable monthly, for every month
Choate doesn't post anything to the list?
- Original Message -
From: "Riad S. Wahby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: THE INCHOATE LAWYER
> Declan McC
- Original Message -
From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Black Unicorn'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:17 AM
Subject: RE: Adobe's Teeth. (Was: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Rallies on Mo
I'm not interested in funding your legal education, I'm interested in seeing
your LSAT score.
I will refund your registration fee in exchange for your valid ETS score
report.
What you do with it after that is up to you.
No cost to you. Put up or shut up.
- Original Message -
From: "Ji
I will personally refund the money to Mr. Choate when he presents a valid ETS
score report for the test to me or Mr. Sandfort.
- Original Message -
From: "Sandy Sandfort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Cypherpunks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 9:07 PM
Subject: THE INCHOATE LA
- Original Message -
From: "Declan McCullagh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Black Unicorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Subcommander Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: Adobe&#x
- Original Message -
From: "Subcommander Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Rallies on Monday
Black Unicorn Scribed:
> >> > > Adobe- owing to the kidnap
> On 20 Jul, Black Unicorn wrote:
> > Note:
> >
> > Adobe- owing to the kidnapping of its big wig some time ago- is very
> > paranoid.
> >
> > Please be aware and be cautious as they may be prone to overreact to
> > taunting.
> >
> >
Note:
Adobe- owing to the kidnapping of its big wig some time ago- is very
paranoid.
Please be aware and be cautious as they may be prone to overreact to
taunting.
(Do not taunt happy-fun-acrobat).
- Original Message -
From: "Len Sassaman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <
nd subject only
to an (expensive and normally futile) appeal to the U.S. Tax Court.
Bad move.
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: Who can tax a satellite?
> >At
Ok. That's pretty much my limit.
When a foreign national can be arrested for a bit of coding which was
developed (I assume) outside the US and never, by his actions (I assume)
hit US soil well it really is time for the DMCA to go.
I'd be interested in talking to cypherpunks who actually would l
No, the real question is who can knock down or render inoperable the OWNER
of the satellite.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 8:58 AM
Subject: Who can tax a satellite?
> > ``I'm neutral on the whole thing,'' he said. ``
>
> Hi,
>
> Could I please have the contact information for the person in charge of
> strategic alliances?
Sure.
You want to contact William McPhee in the Chicago office. He is Vice President of
Business Development. He can be reached at 312-543-5431.
54 matches
Mail list logo
