HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com
Subject: Hackers and Pagans and Phre
Originator: daemon@eff.org
Organization: EFF mail-news gateway
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:16:42 GMT

Date: 8/26/92   9:50 AM
Subj: Hackers and Pagans and Phreaks, Oh My!
 
> I'm not a Pagan... if I have any religion it's Science... but if I were
a
> Pagan and someone had just compared me to a bunch of phreaks I'd be
mighty
> pissed off.
 
Peter, you're missing my point ... and probably Chris's, as well.
 
Chris was reminding me that, like him, I've been a victim of unfair
harrassment, albeit for different reasons.  (It's slightly off topic and
old news, but remind me some time to tell you the MagickNet/Tex Burke
story, the one he was referring to.)  He thought it would make me
sympathize with him, and asked me what I would do if the people harrassing
me had been a small "freelance" group of nuts instead of police officers
and reporters.
 
I told the story I did to show Chris that in addition to police officers
and the media harrassing me, there were small freelance groups of nuts
harrassing me, so my situation in the late '80s is more closely analogous
to his situation than he thought.
 
But Pagans in the late 80s and hackers/phreaks in the early 90s do have
something in common, though: a lot of unfounded hysteria among the public,
fed mostly by ignorance and bad news reporting, is whipping government in
general and law enforcement in particular to trample the Constitution
underfoot.  As a result, I think it would behoove current and former
hackers and phreaks to behave in a way that doesn't pour gasoline on a
raging fire.  And when there's a McCarthy-style witch-hunt going on, it is
just not right to cooperate with it just to punish people you don't like.
 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Brad Hicks                 | Do What Thou Wilt shall be the Whole of
mhs!mc!Brad_Hicks@attmail.com | the Law. Love is the Law, Love under Will.
 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.misc,alt.bbs.allsysop,comp.bbs.misc,du.misc
From: kadie@dante.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.censorship,rec.audio
Subject: The Stamp Act and the DAT tax
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:03:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: m.1992Aug25.170349.2740
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL

The U.S. DAT tax is a proposed so-called royality on blank Digital
Audio Tapes. 

I dislike the proposed tax because
   1) it would establish a double standard between traditional media (blank
      paper) and computer media (blank DATs)
   2) it would establish a special tax on media.

Opposition to special taxes on media date back to colonial times
and the Stamp Act:

(Excerpt from _Visions of Libery_ by Ira Glasser and Bob Adelman,
1991, Arcade Publishing, p. 30.)

========= begin excerpt ==========
The flames of resentment were fanned still more by the Stamp Act's
imposition of taxes on newspapers, books, and pamphlets. John Adams,
later to become the second president of the United States, was
particularly concerned about this. The thought that "by loading the
press, the colleges, and even an almanac and a newspaper with
restraints and duties," the Stamp Act was stripping the colonists of
their means of acquiring knowledge, and paving the way for deposition.
Nearly two centuries later, echoes of John Adams's concern would be
heard in a decision of the United States Supreme Court, which in 1936
struck down as unconstitutional a Louisiana tax of two percent of
gross receipts on all newspapers with circulation exceeding twenty
thousand copies weekly. ...  The Court cited English history, found
the tax to be an illegal burden on freedom of the press, and called it
a "tax on knowledge."
========= end excerpt ===============

Just because the media has changed doesn't mean that the principles
are different.

- Carl

p.s. Anybody know the name of the 1936 case?
p.p.s. What is the status of the DAT bill?







--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From: Brian.Lane@p0.f162.n138.z1.fidonet.org (Brian Lane)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Taxes
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:20:52 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:138/162.0 - Callahan's Place, Ashford WA

In a message of 25 Aug 92  22:36:50, Andrew Burt wrote:

AB> I'm saying the founding fathers built us a nation based on taxation.
AB> We have a society funded by taxes, and whether voluntary or not, we
AB> need funding.  I'm pretty convinced voluntary taxes would flop, so it's
AB> more a matter of debating (a) what kind of taxes are fair and (b) how
AB> those taxes get spent.

  NO!  The founding fathers did NOT build a nation based on taxes.  Up until the early 1900's the Federal government ran off of import/export tarifs(I believe, I could be wrong).  The way I understand it there was a 1% tax imposed to pay for WW I, the governemnt liked it so much that they decided to amend the constitution.

   -Brian

"If the principle were to prevail of a common law [i.e. a single government]
 being in force in the United States...it would become the most corrupt  governament on the earth."
                      -Thomas Jefferson 13 Aug. 1800


--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!138!162.0!Brian.Lane
Internet: Brian.Lane@p0.f162.n138.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
From: dougg@kbsw1.uucp (Doug Gerecht 806 1031)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Date: 3 Sep 92 09:44:11
	<1992Sep2.170606.25858@wdl.loral.com>
Organization: Kentek Information Systems

In article <1992Sep2.170606.25858@wdl.loral.com> mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar) writes:

   Be happy
   the US isn't a large corporation.  IF a large corporation had the Debt
   to assect ratio of the US it would be much more worried about defending
   itself from the take-over artists then about a little 20% debt.

Corporations have a plan on how to pay off their debts before they
borrow in the first place.  I don't think "take-over artists" would be
much interested in a company which responds to the question "How are
you going to pay it off?" with "Duuuuuuh, I don't know."

Of course, the take-over artists might consider buying the company
anyway, firing ALL of the management, and totally restructuring the
way the company is run.  Wait . . . I think there's an idea there
somewhere!?

-- 

		dougg@kentek.com	Doug Gerecht
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: erikb@tic.com (Chris Goggins)
Subject: Re: Re- Legion of Doom
Organization: Texas Internet Consulting
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 18:10:08 GMT

Peter:

You can call yourself whatever you want.  I call myself a hacker.  You
may or may not think that "I" should have the right, but you don't
know anything about me or what I do other than my known association 
with LOD.  For you, that association alone seems to bristle the hairs
on your neck.  Most people don't realize that quite a number
of people from that group have accomplished a lot.  Many are working
on PhD's, one was on the design team that wrote UNIX for amiga, 
others have ended up working for software design houses and telcos.

I personally have a somewhat menial job at a very large computer
company, and am trying to find out whose apple to polish so I can
get into the UNIX support & development group.  

I will always reserve the right to call myself a hacker since everything
I know I've taught myself.  That is what the word means to me, and I will never
let someone's else interpretation of what that means hinder my
self-definition.  I can understand your and others of your
genre zeal to distance yourself from the actions of those who use
their skills to make a quick buck or to harass others.  So do
most from my background.  Anyone who breaks into a computer system
isn't necessarily a hacker.  It's what they do onec inside that
makes that decision.

You should keep on hacking away at your system and at your source code
constantly trying to make things more efficient.  If you call yourself
a hacker and someone says "Gee, you break into other people's computers?"
Just say, "Of course not" and dismiss that person as clueless.

(I hope that this doesn't start a long thread of hacker v. cracker v. phreak
 v. criminal etc..)

->ME
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: alex@otis (The Console DJ)
Subject: Re: Taxes
Organization: Novell Inc
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 18:48:00 GMT

In article <21201.2AA7342E@puddle.fidonet.org> Brian.Lane@p0.f162.n138.z1.fidonet.org (Brian Lane) writes:
>In a message of 25 Aug 92  22:36:50, Andrew Burt wrote:
>
>  NO!  The founding fathers did NOT build a nation based on taxes.  Up until the early 1900's the Federal government ran off of import/export tarifs(I believe, I could be wrong).  The way I understand it there was a 1% tax imposed to pay for WW I, the governemnt liked it so much that they decided to amend the constitution.
>
>   -Brian
>
>"If the principle were to prevail of a common law [i.e. a single government]
> being in force in the United States...it would become the most corrupt  governament on the earth."
>                      -Thomas Jefferson 13 Aug. 1800
>
>
>--  
>uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!138!162.0!Brian.Lane
>Internet: Brian.Lane@p0.f162.n138.z1.fidonet.org


Suppose we take personal income tax out of the federal budget, this would
reduce it to a level of X years ago right? OK trivia question, what is X ??

budget + income tax = Y (in the year 92 , not relevant)
budget = Z   (notice to income tax included)
budget + income tax = Z (what year would this be correct for ???)
From: Joe.Francis@dartmouth.edu (Joe Francis)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: EFF & Voting Records
Date: 1 Sep 92 05:52:44 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0d56@newshost.dartmouth.edu

Does the EFF keep voting records of US Senators and Reps on bills of
concern to EFF?  Election season is upon us, and I would appreciate
access to good summaries of bills along with voting records.

If no one at EFF is is doing this, than let me suggest it. 

Any pointers to such info is appreciated.
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:23:15 GMT

In article <1VkcqB1w165w@entropy.mcds.com> morpheus@entropy.mcds.com (morpheus) writes:
>> Me too, but I don't consider most of what is done with our "defense"
>> budget to have much to do with common defense.  How does it "defend"
>> us to be over there attacking Iraq? Even if Hussein is a slimeball,
>> you can't call this 'defense'.

>It was defense of [rich] people who have money invested in Kuwait...

Not exactly: The idea is to defend the country _before_ we get invaded.
(Ask the Europeans how good an idea it is to fight a modern war in your
own home...)

>Now why the fuck can't we get the rich to pay for that?

Take a real close look at the tax structure: The rick _already_ pay
for the defence budget, as well as everything else the government does.

                                               Frank Crary
                                               CU Boulder

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu (Jim Lick)
Subject: Re: LOD T-shirts HELP WANTED!
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:35:39 GMT

Guys, please remember that he was collecting orders until the end of July.
He probably didn't place the order for printing the shirts until early this
month.  I'm waiting on my shirt too, but I'm gonna give them some more time.
They aren't doing this as a business, so don't expect them to act like one.

                            Jim Lick		       
Work: University of California	| Play: 1236 Camino Meleno
      Santa Barbara		|       Santa Barbara, CA 93111-1007
      Dept. of Mechanical Engr. |	(805) 964-2088 voice/msg
      2311 Engr II Building     |	(805) MUD-SPY1 data
      (805) 893-4113            |       jim@tcp.com
      jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu	| This space intentionally left blank
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
From: IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU (macphil)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Organization: IUPUI
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:18:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.084457.15663@clarinet.com>
brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
 
>In article <1992Aug28.232954.28765@ncar.ucar.edu> woods@ncar.ucar.edu (Greg Woods) writes:
>>The tax rate was not what provoked the revolution; it was the refusal
>>of the British government to grant the American colonies representation in
>>Parliament. "No taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION".
>
>Well, I pay taxes, but as a non-citizen, I am not allowed to vote.
>I guess you must have lost that revolution.
>--
 
this is a case of taking something out of context. depending upon
the state (because of which crimes have been commited), all US citizens
may vote.  now if you don't want to pay taxes because you can't vote,
you can always go home...
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
From: avery@netcom.com (Avery Ray Colter)
Subject: Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too?
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 20:30:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt) writes:

>I think that it is legitimate to use force when a private contract is
>broken and one party owes another party.  This is not similar to
>taxation where those being taxed are not legally or morally responsible
>for paying another person, and have not given the choice of whether they
>voluntarily choose to make these payments.

So all those ballot measures in which it is said there will be additional
taxes for it, we do not have at least a collective choice? All these ones
who vote in the legislature for taxes "on our behalf", we have no choice?
Want them out, fine, then take your chances with Republican oppression of
the soul, or hope that the Libertarians will carry any weight
any time soon.

This is exactly what other countries watching us laugh about. We have
all this structure for voting people into powerful positions, and then
whine about not having any choice about what happens.

If enough of us want more specific, line-item taxation, it will become
reality. Bush wants line-item vetos so he can pass all military taxes
and kill all civil aid and educational ones. If he wins that, so be it,
but when a Democrat gets in the white house, the militarists' own weapon
will be used against them. Maybe then we will have the day when schools
get all they want and the Air Force has to have a bake sale.

Something to think about, all you Republican line-item-heads.

-- 
Avery Ray Colter ("Elfcat") - 	avery@netcom.netcom.com (IP 192.100.81.100)
(510) 656-1902          	{elfcat|arcolter}@aol.com
"Heaviness is the root of lightness; calmness is the controller of haste"
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher)
Subject: Re: Re- Legion of Doom
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:23:25 GMT

Oh.....Now *I* remember you from summercon as well..you were the loudmouth
jerk that everybody hated...Ok, I was trying to put the name with the face.
Just my two cents, but you didn't seem to make many friends with your very
abrasive and obnoxious attitude...


Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt)
Subject: Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too?
Organization: Advocates for Self-Government - Davy Crockett Chapter
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 12:38:05 GMT

weiner@bnlls1.nsls.bnl.gov (Gary Weiner) writes:
: 
: God, you "taxes are theft" people are so thick it's just incredible. Let
: me clue you in on something, without the government you would not have any
: money for them to "steal" from you. Don't think so?  Okay, how do you get
: to work in the morning, you drive on a road paid for with tax dollars. Why
: can't I just walk into your house, put a gun in your face, and take what
: I like with impunity, because tax dollars pay for police to protect you.
: Why is there even money for you to buy things with, because there is
: a government to stand behind  the money so you don't have to lug a bushel
: of wheat around to barter to get shoes for your kids.

I want good roads and police protection.  A government that stuck to
only protecting rights of life, liberty, and property, instead of try to
be a conglomerate of service organizations, would be very inexpensive to
run and we would experience far better service at much lower costs for
the services you talk about.  In fact we would probably see a rise in
the standard-of-living at about 4% and see slight deflation on goods
sold, according to some economists.
: 
: As a matter of fact, without government funded schools and universitys, we
: would still be a backward agrarian people.

I want our children to be well educated.  Government schools do a poor
job of educating and costs at least twice as much as it should.  It
costs an average of $7,000/year/student to graduate high school students
who can't read.  John Taylor Gatto, NY State teacher of the year in 1991,
wrote a stinging criticism of the government school system in the book
"Dumbing Us Down."  After working with the school system, he is
convinced that the government schools are more concerned with conformity
than with the education of children.  (But we do have teachers in the
system who do do a good job, like Mr. Gatto, but they do this despite
the system, not because of it.)
-- 
Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government, Davy Crockett Chapter President
706 Judith Drive, Johnson City, TN 37604, (615)283-0084, uunet!tijc02!pjs269
"Freedom seems to have unleashed the  creative energies of the people -- and
leads to ever higher levels of income and social progress."  --  U.N. report
From: hhll@milton.u.washington.edu (Steven Hodas)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: C.F.P.-2 Tapes?
Date: 25 Aug 92 21:22:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: milton.hhll.714777724
Organization: University of Washington

learn@speedy.acns.nwu.edu (William J. Vajk) writes:

>Released through Video Library Project (by a couple of names we know
>well on the net), P.O. Box 912, Topanga, CA, 90290. Phone them at
>(213) 455-3915.

I should have been more clear; I meant audio tapes.

Steven
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
From: pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Organization: Advocates for Self-Government - Davy Crockett Chapter
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 12:02:27 GMT

woods@ncar.ucar.edu (Greg Woods) writes:
: In article <1992Aug28.171416.28262@portal.hq.videocart.com> kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
: >We are also taxed today at over THREE TIMES that rate which was sufficient to 
: >provoke revolution 200 years ago.
: 
: The tax rate was not what provoked the revolution; it was the refusal
: of the British government to grant the American colonies representation in
: Parliament. "No taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION".

Our current system here in the U.S. uses taxation without
representation.  With more than a $4,000,000,000,000 debt, people that
have not even been born will be paying this off in years to come.  They
had no vote when this debt was run up and will be forced to pay taxes in
the future to cover it.  (Unless the U.S. reneges.  Sell your U.S.
Savings Bonds now, before they become worthless!)
-- 
Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government, Davy Crockett Chapter President
706 Judith Drive, Johnson City, TN 37604, (615)283-0084, uunet!tijc02!pjs269
"Freedom seems to have unleashed the  creative energies of the people -- and
leads to ever higher levels of income and social progress."  --  U.N. report
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:5554 alt.allsysop:51 alt.bbs.ads:1287
From: engberg@raven.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (daVe)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Date: 28 Aug 92 23:02:46 GMT
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk

In article <1992Aug28.171416.28262@portal.hq.videocart.com>, kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
|> I'd love to get an itemized bill for my taxes with the places it goes broken
|> down and be able to opt out of that which I don't want to use or pay for.
|> I'll gladly pay for the common defense of the country, but I would love to
|> opt out of that 15% FICA boondoggle (which won't be there when I retire
|> anyway; see any manual on Ponzi schemes for the explanation).

hmmm... actually, i was thinking more the other way around.  of course the money
i pay into FICA won't be there when i retire -- it's a pay-as-you-go system
and only the most naive taxpayers think there is a special account waiting
for them somewhere.  when i retire, i will be paid for by future taxpayers.
(there are more intricate details about deficit funding through FICA
baby-boom surplus, etc... but the basic point is the same)

the money that goes to 'the common defense of the country', however, will
not.  government money that goes into the military is an econonic dead-end...
It's the equivalent to paying someone to sit and cut out paper dolls.  hence
the stag-flation of the 1970's and early 80's from the drawn-out war in
Viet-Nam... all of that money going to absolutely nothing of economic
value... a complete loss of potential infrastructure investment.

daVe "just another whiney liberal" engberg
--
SLAC would probably disagree.
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Hackers and Pagans and Phreaks, Oh My!
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 00:54:14 GMT

In article <199208281715.AA01947@eff.org> mc/G=J._Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205295@mhs.attmail.com writes:
>maybe even all of them.  Without exception that I know of, the crimes would be
>victimless, at least by my standards ... but in some cases, still felonies.

A victimless crime is one in which no-one is hurt but the individuals
voluntarily engaging in the activity. Phreaking does not constitute such
an activity. Even if there is excess capacity now, excersizing it does
put some wear on components, even those (like solid state ones) that have
a statistical failure mode. Pagan ceremonies and possibly violations of what
I guess to be vice laws do.

I apologise for possibly mispeling Chris's surname.
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.censorship,rec.audio
From: jacob@max.cc.brandeis.edu ( )
Subject: Re: The Stamp Act and the DAT tax
Organization: Brandeis University Math Department
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 23:49:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.175440.21504@serval.net.wsu.edu> yeidel@tomar.accs.wsu.edu (Joshua Yeidel) writes:
>
>What I don't understand is, why there's any political benefit
>in the DAT tax.  I would think that the arguments against it
>would be good electoral medicine, and the arguments against 
>would make the pro-taxers vulnerable.  

In the past, when major record companies were American
this could be seen as an effort to protect them against
a "threat" made possible by technology produced you know
where. Part of the larger protectionist thing, or something.


Now that major record companies are owned by you know
who, I'm not so sure...
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk