HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kking@news.cs.uah.edu (Ken King)
Subject: Re: Latest FBI Wiretap Bill
Summary: what's next? (after the wire tap bill...)
Reply-To: kking@cs.uah.edu (Ken King)
Organization: Computer Science Dept. - Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 19:13:52 GMT
Expires: 17 sept 92

In article <1992Sep2.203514.22239@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:
>I guess it is a case of false accusation.  People have been accusing
>the government of consisting of faceless beaurocrats sitting on their
>behinds.  But, it turns out they have been working on a hilarious comedy
>routine, otherwise known as the FBI Wiretap bill.
>
>In article <1992Sep2.181158.4511@eff.org> rita@eff.org (Rita Marie Rouvalis) writes:
>
>>     This provision also makes it clear that an electronic 
>>communication services provider or private branch exchange operator is 
>>not required to provide for reconversion of the isolated communication 
>>to analog or other form.  The government expects that this process will 
>>be accomplished by the government. 
>
>That's the part I especially liked.  Imagine.  You can give them encrypted
>data with no algorithm and no decription key, and, no matter what, they
>(the government) will reconvert the message to its original form.
>
>Wow!  These guys should start a late night TV comedy show.
>
unfortunately, i don't think there's much humor to it.  if they
get away with binding us with this garbage, the next piece of
crap down the pike is most likely a regulation requiring the
licensing of public keys and their private counterparts (just
like they do for handguns now, and likely to be even less
effective at preventing criminal usage, but i digress...).  it
almost makes me want to make a .sig w/ spook fodder in it, and
start posting encrypted copies of the constitution and the bill
of rights....
or am i just getting cynical as i approach middle age?

later, 
kc
kking@cs.uah.edu
 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: keithf@pacifier.rain.com (Keith Furrow)
Subject: Phrack 40, where is it?
Organization: Pacifier BBS
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:03:40 GMT


Hello, my account died where I was sending phrack to, could someone put it up
on ftp.eff.org?   Thanks alot...
 
Keith
-- 
  _____                                                              _____
 /  o  \  ||Mutants for Nuclear Power||keithf@pacifier.rain.com ||  /  o  \
< \___/ > ||-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_|| < \___/ >
 \_____/  ||   Radioactive waste, Glowing stronger every day!   ||  \_____/
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:5515 alt.allsysop:44 alt.bbs.ads:1274
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads
Subject: Re: Back to ONE vs. IBECC (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Date: 26 Aug 92 02:08:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: cancun.rdippold.714794894
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

thester@nyx.cs.du.edu (Uncle Fester) writes:
>Without repeating everything that's already been said, I only have one
>teeny tiny nit to pick with the debate so far.
>While the Constitution may have been ratified 200+ years ago, I have
>always been under the impression that a real income tax didn't begin until
>the year 1913.  
>Was that voted upon by the people at that time?

Not really.  It was voted on by state governments / general
assemblies, etc. as is done with Constitutional Amendments, and was
never ratified as specified in the conditions of its ratification.
The government, not really giving a flying f*ck what the people
wanted, declared it "ratified" anyhow.  For instance, Kentucky voted
the amendment down 22 to 9, yet Kentucky is listed as one of the
states that ratified the amendment.

Cute racket, huh?  However, given the power to print and steal all the
money it wants, it still can't stay solvent.
-- 
Bachelor:  A guy who is footloose and fiancee-free.
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: rfrenkel@world.std.com (richard frenkel)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:49:59 GMT

I happened upon this area because I was looking for a conference for BBS
sysops.  Does stuff like that ever get considered here?

Now for my 2 cents on this discussion: our founding fathers thought fairly
seriously about the function and form of government from a philosophic 
point of view, something that doesn't seem to be happening here...

It seems clear that they wanted government to be as little intrusive into
the personal lives o citizens as possible, but it is also clear that they
felt government, indeed the whole organization of society, should follow
from common agreement of free individuals for the meeting of their joint 
needs.  When you whine about "your" money, please remember that WE THE 
PEOPLE own this country and ALL the money in it.  If WE THE PEOPLE decide
that WE will grant OURSELVES individual ownership privileges over some of
these common holdings, then those of us so granted these rights should be
gratefull, not arogantly assuming we got this by devine right.  And when
WE THE PEOPLE decide for the good of OUR society that we completely want
to redistribute wealth, THAT IS OUR RIGHT AS A DEMOCRACY.  So there...

Now while you greedy whiney Republicans have been whining about "Your"
money, places like Western Europe where a 50% tax rate is commonplace have
been all overtaking us in productivity and standard of living.  Why?
Because the poor are educated and money is invested in both human and
productive capital.  The poor don't work here not because of the tax 
structure or hadn't you figured that out?  Carrying a large underclass is a 
moral AND financial drain on the country.   I personally would be quite
willing to pay higher taxes for higher productivity gains, as it is we
are all (except the rich of course) sliding into 3rd world status.
Now if you want specifics as to how to do this, please send $20 for the
complete program...
From: david.brooks@yob.sccsi.com (David Brooks) 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: RE: BACK TO TAXES AGAIN (
Date: 30 Aug 92 22:25:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: david.brooks@yob.sccsi.com (David Brooks) 

BT> Newsgroups:
BT> comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
BT> Path: nuchat!menudo.uh.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-
BT> state.edu!wupost!uunet!looking!brad
BT> From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
BT> Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
BT> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 08:44:57 GMT

BT> In article <1992Aug28.232954.28765#ncar.ucar.edu> woods@ncar.ucar.edu
BT> (Greg Woods) writes:
BT> >The tax rate was not what provoked the revolution; it was the refusal
BT> >of the British government to grant the American colonies representation
BT> in
BT> >Parliament. "No taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION".

BT> Well, I pay taxes, but as a non-citizen, I am not allowed to vote.
BT> I guess you must have lost that revolution.
BT> --
BT> Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-
BT> 0366

        Not really, you COULD become a citizen if you really wanted
to! Not that you would get much representation as a citizen either!
The revoulution was co-opted long ago. (I'd say around 1787 if pressed
for a date. Others would probably disagree.)

        David Brooks

 * Q-Blue v0.7 [NR] *                                                                                                                              
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
From: aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 01:36:31 GMT

In <1992Aug31.220110.9515@unixland.natick.ma.us> bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser) writes:

>I missed the beginning of this threat.  Could someone summarize 
>what "back to taxes again" has to do with alt.bbs.ads?

It was a very tenuous connection, and doesn't belong in alt.bbs*...
The connection was that I was griping how the "ONE" bbs con was put on
by a bunch of ethically corrupt people, and said I had nothing against
capitalism (among my arguments), but that network access to me should be
viewed as a "necessity" for all, and that I was willing to see it be
"protected" (in the economic sense), i.e., subsidized with tax money.

Someone took "protected" all wrong, and started talking about taking things
by force, namely taxes... and I foolishly replied that it wasn't what I
meant, and that I felt taxes were a useful evil anyway... so off it went.

Let's move it elsewhere!  And talk about what to do with ethically
empties like those at Boardwatch & e-soft (who put on 'ONE' with the
intent to kill off the IBECC con, to jog your memory).
-- 

Andrew Burt 		   					  aburt@du.edu

      "And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped"
From: cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Re- Legion of Doom
Date: 31 Aug 92 13:52:20 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications

In article <1992Aug31.032052.3819@sfu.ca> guay@fraser.sfu.ca (Tim Guay) writes:
>In article <MTPIYTI@taronga.com> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>
>>Right now I'm still ticked off at not being able to call myself a Hacker
>>any more. People get the wrong idea. Sigh...
>>-- 
>I for one still call myself a hacker and frankly I don't give a damn what people
>think! I am what I am and that's what I am...

Damn straight, Tim!  I hack *constantly*.  not just on my computer, but
just through my daily wanderings.  If I find something that I don't know
how it works & it catches my fancy, I hack that thing until I either get
what I want or a warning to cease & desist.  Even after some warnings, I
have been known to keep on keepin' on if the warnings seem to be "silly"
IMO.
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Latest FBI Wiretap Bill
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:35:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: mp.1992Sep2.203514.22239
Organization: Northern Illinois University

I guess it is a case of false accusation.  People have been accusing
the government of consisting of faceless beaurocrats sitting on their
behinds.  But, it turns out they have been working on a hilarious comedy
routine, otherwise known as the FBI Wiretap bill.

In article <1992Sep2.181158.4511@eff.org> rita@eff.org (Rita Marie Rouvalis) writes:

>     This provision also makes it clear that an electronic 
>communication services provider or private branch exchange operator is 
>not required to provide for reconversion of the isolated communication 
>to analog or other form.  The government expects that this process will 
>be accomplished by the government. 

That's the part I especially liked.  Imagine.  You can give them encrypted
data with no algorithm and no decription key, and, no matter what, they
(the government) will reconvert the message to its original form.

Wow!  These guys should start a late night TV comedy show.
From: vpcsc11@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (student)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Info Request: Caller ID
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:56:24 GMT
Distribution: comp.org.eff.talk
Organization: San Francisco State University

Tomorrow afternoon, I will be participating in a
discussion section focusing on philosophical and
practical issues involved in "caller ID."  I am
looking for articles that have been published to
the Internet which discuss this topic.

If you can suggest any archives or can recommend
any articles about the topic, please e-mail your
comments to: vpcsc11@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu.

Thanks!

Aaron
vpcsc11@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
From: brendan@cygnus.com (Brendan Kehoe)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Phrack 40, where is it?
Date: 26 Aug 92 04:12:24 GMT
Reply-To: cudarch@cygnus.com
Organization: Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, CA
In-reply-to: keithf@pacifier.rain.com's message of Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:03:40 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.200340.12255@pacifier.rain.com> keithf@pacifier.rain.com (Keith Furrow) writes:

   Hello, my account died where I was sending phrack to, could someone
   put it up on ftp.eff.org?  Thanks alot...

It'll be there tonight.  Sorry about the delay, I've just moved 5000 miles
and started a new job.  I've been kinda occupied.

--
Brendan Kehoe                                               brendan@cygnus.com
Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, CA                                  +1 415 322 3811
                       Oooh! A handsome stranger! And me, without my shoes on.
                                     --The Princess, The Emperor's New Clothes
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:5631 alt.allsysop:72 alt.bbs.ads:1328 co.general:1230
From: mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:06:06 GMT
Organization: Loral Western Development Labs

In article <1992Sep2.120227.21765@tijc02.uucp> pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt) writes:
>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!)

Don't worry about your savings bonds yet.  That $4T debt can be made a
non-problem by the feds any time they wanted to.  Given that the estimated
value of federaly owned land in the US is about $25T  the government obviously
has sufficiant hard assects to cover that debt easily.  Yes in absolute
dollars the US is the biggest debtor nation but is you look at it in terms of
percentage of GNP, the US is about 3/4 of the way down the list.  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.

--
Mark Biggar
mab@wdl1.wdl.loral.com
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:5548 alt.allsysop:48 alt.bbs.ads:1283
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
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 16:36:14 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

rfrenkel@world.std.com (richard frenkel) writes:


>needs.  When you whine about "your" money, please remember that WE THE 
>PEOPLE own this country and ALL the money in it.  If WE THE PEOPLE decide

Oh good, start out with communism (everyone owns everything) and argue
from there.  Big surprise when your conclusions follow from your
erroneous assumptions.
-- 
Labor: One of the processes by which A acquires property for B.
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Re- Legion of Doom
Date: 1 Sep 92 02:52:49 GMT
Organization: Taronga Park BBS

In article <1992Aug31.135220.29630@wixer.cactus.org> cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha) writes:
>Damn straight, Tim!  I hack *constantly*.  not just on my computer, but
>just through my daily wanderings.  If I find something that I don't know
>how it works & it catches my fancy, I hack that thing until I either get
>what I want or a warning to cease & desist.  Even after some warnings, I
>have been known to keep on keepin' on if the warnings seem to be "silly"
>IMO.

This is why we *have* this problem.

I suggest you try quote-hacking-unquote the next police car you see.

I hope you get the point.
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:46:55 GMT

In article <DOUGG.92Sep3103943@kbsw3.kbsw1.uucp> dougg@kbsw1.uucp (Doug Gerecht 806 1031) writes:
>   Bush wants line-item vetos so he can pass all military taxes
>   and kill all civil aid and educational ones.

You might want to read the United States Constitution someday: The
federal government a few legitimate powers (for the most part
listed in Article One, Section Eight). Technically, they are not
allowed to do anything else (on the assumption that we can't trust
them with any more powers than we absolutely have to. Reasonable
given Congress' behavior recently...) If you bother to look, military
spending _is_ a legitimate power, but for the most part "civil aid"
and education aren't on the list.

                                               Frank Crary
                                               CU Boulder

Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:5539 alt.censorship:7203 rec.audio:11879
From: yeidel@tomar.accs.wsu.edu (Joshua Yeidel)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.censorship,rec.audio
Subject: Re: The Stamp Act and the DAT tax
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:54:40 GMT
Reply-To: yeidel@tomar.accs.wsu.edu (Joshua Yeidel)
Organization: Academic Computing Services, Washington State University


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.  

IS there somebody who understands this side of it?

(This is not a request for arguments for or against the tax, just
a political analysis of the consequences for Congresspeople of supporting or opposing it.)

--
Joshua Yeidel               | yeidel@tomar.accs.wsu.edu
Academic Computing Services | All standard disclaimers apply
Washington State University |   "Believe it if you need it, 
Pullman, WA 99164-1226      |     or leave it if you dare..."
509/335-0441                |         -- Robert Hunter
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: REWOICC@ERENJ.BITNET (Rob Woiccak)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Latest FBI Wiretap Bill
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:10:11 GMT

This has probably been discussed before, but what the heck...

Do the same provisions that this bill makes for government access to
electronic communications already apply to government access to postal
mail? Is that even a fair analogy to make?
--
rob woiccak - rewoicc@erenj.bitnet - exxon zengineering - disclaim datclaim!
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:5615 alt.allsysop:68 alt.bbs.ads:1320 co.general:1224
From: morpheus@entropy.mcds.com (morpheus)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 21:34:23 EDT
Organization: Whoever you vote for, the government still gets elected.

woods@ncar.ucar.edu (Greg Woods) writes:

> >I'll gladly pay for the common defense of the country
> 
> 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...

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



--
Big Brother is watching.  So are the Illuminati.  Maybe even your mother.
morpheus@entropy.mcds.com  /\/\/\/  f208.n2606.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.censorship,rec.audio
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: The Stamp Act and the DAT tax
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 19:53:47 GMT


Actually, the Stamp Act was imposed as a means of having the colonists
pay for the expense that the British government went through in defending
them during the French and Indian War.  Such an excise tax, while new in
the Colonies, had existed for years in England.  It was not an unfair tax
under English law.  The secessionist movements in the Colonies siezed upon it
as a useful political and propaganda tool for whipping up opposition to
British rule.  Their legal arguments were relly pretty bogus.


The big reason why one should opposed the proposed tax on blank DATs is the
purpose behind the tax.  The two main reasons for having a tax on something are
(1) to collect revenue to pay for general government services (e.g., federal
income tax) or (2) to pay for a specific service related to the item being
taxed (e.g., federal and state taxes on gasoline).  This proposed DAT tax is
neither.  Rather, it is a use of the government's taxing powers to collect
royalty fees for private individuals and organizations.  That is not what taxes
are supposed to be for.

--PSW
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.allsysop,alt.bbs.ads,co.general,nyx.mis
From: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Back to Taxes again (was Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too
Summary: We ARE paying 50% taxes these days
Organization: VideOcart Inc.
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:14:16 GMT

In article <BtpAnB.3t0@world.std.com> rfrenkel@world.std.com (richard frenkel) writes:
>
>Now while you greedy whiney Republicans have been whining about "Your"
>money, places like Western Europe where a 50% tax rate is commonplace have
>been all overtaking us in productivity and standard of living.  

We are, by and large, paying in excess of 50% of our earnings in taxes.
That is, unless you're rich, or in government, or one of the government's
cronies.

The 20-35% you pay in federal income taxes doesn't even begin to cover it.
Add to that:

15% social security tax (of which only half is visible, the other half is
	"silent" since your employer pays it -- but you still pay it in 
	reality as it is considered in your salary computation).
2-5% state income tax
0-10% sales tax on what you buy
Excise taxes of many percent on some products, including gasoline.
Vehicle taxes (registration fees, tolls, etc)
Utility taxes (buy any electricity or phone service today?)

These are all cumulative, as the "external" taxes after income tax and FICA
are all taken from your AFTER-TAX income.

Add it all up and we're one of the highest-taxed nations in the world.  We
are also taxed today at over THREE TIMES that rate which was sufficient to 
provoke revolution 200 years ago.

Yet we still can't get high school students which can read.

I don't think I'm getting my money's worth.

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).

--
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
VideOcart Inc.		Voice: (312) 987-5022
From: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks) 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Re- Legion of Doom
Date: 30 Aug 92 21:41:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525
Reply-To: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks) 


 * Q-Blue v0.7 [NR] *                                                                                                          
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk