FutureCulture Digest #366
From ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu Sat Apr 17 13:45:25 1993
Return-Path: <ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu>
Received: from nyx.cs.du.edu by ccu.UManitoba.CA
(4.1/25-eef) id AA28774; Sat, 17 Apr 93 13:45:20 CDT
Received: by nyx.cs.du.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA01975; Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:30:46 MDT
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (andy)
Message-Id: <9304171730.AA01975@nyx.cs.du.edu>
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
of Denver. The University has neither control over nor
responsibility for the opinions or correct identity of users.
Subject: FutureCulture Digest #366
To: future-digest@nyx.cs.du.edu
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:30:45 MDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Status: O
______________________________________________________________________
|______________ / |
| / |
| u t u r e <___________ u l t u r e |
_______________________________________________________________________|
Issue #366
Saturday, April 17th 1993
Today's Topics:
---------------
digital microwave link: Lynx Radio
Ok This is gonna sound lame...
Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
Re: A Day in Life of FC Why not
Re: Sterling Silver and Chrome
Re: A Day in Life of FC And How!
Re: anarchy & iNet
Re: Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
Re: the right to eavesdrop..
Re: the right to eavesdrop...
Re: Wax, TV, and the Bees
the right to eavesdrop...
White House Crypto Statemen
White House Crypto Statement (fwd)
__________________________________________________________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: adam fast <adamfast@hardy.u.washington.edu>
Subject: digital microwave link: Lynx Radio
been doing a bit more investigating. have found a company that
manufactures a spread spectrum microwave link for digital communication,
does T1 bandwidth line-of-sight (about 40 mi), no license, no frequency
coordination required. about 1 watt output, can you believe it. designed
specifically for urban areas, but also works good in rural/remote areas too.
cost: about $8k per end. (not including parabolic dish.)
so figure $20-25k per connection (2 Lynx Radios, plus dishes and mountings).
for about 20 people, this works out to approx $40-$50 per person per month
for a period of two years, to pay for the damn thing. almost affordable.
for more folks, less cost. wish i could find a big art-coop to iNet...
(just hope you have line-of-sight to your provider. and that you can put
dishes on your provider's roof or tower-- if you have to build a tower, ugh.)
heres the info:
Lynx Radio (spread spectrum digital communication link)
$7995.00 per end (not including parabolic dish, mounting, etc.)
Western Multiplex Corporation
Belmont, CA
voice 415 592 8832
fax 415 592 4249
contacts: Bob Sherman
Pam Avila
------
adam
______________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:41:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Al Billings <mimir@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: anarchy & iNet
On Fri, 16 Apr 1993, adam fast wrote:
> there is a difference between a huge corporation or the govt providing
> service to you, versusyou and some friends, or a community organization,
> providing the service. who do you trust more?
my community and friends
> if the choice is between large-grained networks (nren, bellcore, etc) and
> fine-grained networks (fido, uucp, RAINet, cruzio, other networking
> collectives and individuals) what do you choose...? if bandwidth,
> reliablility, etc were equal.
collectives and dispersed networks. I choose those structures which would
allow the most individual freedom and the lest amount of imposed control.
______________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: adam fast <adamfast@hardy.u.washington.edu>
Subject: White House Crypto Statement (fwd)
folx,
this is an intesting bit of reading... DES redux, in hardware no less.
who the fuck are they kidding?? grrr. they truly need to retain the right
to eavsdrop, yes?
grrrr.
adam
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:20:19 EST
From: David Sobel <dsobel@washofc.cpsr.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list CPSR <CPSR@GWUVM.BITNET>
Subject: White House Crypto Statemen
White House Crypto Statement
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
____________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 16, 1993
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
The President today announced a new initiative that will bring
the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary
program to improve the security and privacy of telephone
communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law
enforcement.
The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.
For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our
private sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the
tension between economic vitality and the real challenges of
protecting Americans. Rather than use technology to accommodate
the sometimes competing interests of economic growth, privacy and
law enforcement, previous policies have pitted government against
industry and the rights of privacy against law enforcement.
Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to
protect electronic funds transfer. It is now being used to
protect electronic mail and computer files. While encryption
technology can help Americans protect business secrets and the
unauthorized release of personal information, it also can be used
by terrorists, drug dealers, and other criminals.
A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has
been developed by government engineers. The chip represents a
new approach to encryption technology. It can be used in new,
relatively inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to
an ordinary telephone. It scrambles telephone communications
using an encryption algorithm that is more powerful than many in
commercial use today.
This new technology will help companies protect proprietary
information, protect the privacy of personal phone conversations
and prevent unauthorized release of data transmitted
electronically. At the same time this technology preserves the
ability of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to
intercept lawfully the phone conversations of criminals.
A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the
"Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding
Americans. Each device containing the chip will have two unique
2
"keys," numbers that will be needed by authorized government
agencies to decode messages encoded by the device. When the
device is manufactured, the two keys will be deposited separately
in two "key-escrow" data bases that will be established by the
Attorney General. Access to these keys will be limited to
government officials with legal authorization to conduct a
wiretap.
The "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with no
new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of this new technology, the
Attorney General will soon purchase several thousand of the new
devices. In addition, respected experts from outside the
government will be offered access to the confidential details of
the algorithm to assess its capabilities and publicly report
their findings.
The chip is an important step in addressing the problem of
encryption's dual-edge sword: encryption helps to protect the
privacy of individuals and industry, but it also can shield
criminals and terrorists. We need the "Clipper Chip" and other
approaches that can both provide law-abiding citizens with access
to the encryption they need and prevent criminals from using it
to hide their illegal activities. In order to assess technology
trends and explore new approaches (like the key-escrow system),
the President has directed government agencies to develop a
comprehensive policy on encryption that accommodates:
-- the privacy of our citizens, including the need to
employ voice or data encryption for business purposes;
-- the ability of authorized officials to access telephone
calls and data, under proper court or other legal
order, when necessary to protect our citizens;
-- the effective and timely use of the most modern
technology to build the National Information
Infrastructure needed to promote economic growth and
the competitiveness of American industry in the global
marketplace; and
-- the need of U.S. companies to manufacture and export
high technology products.
The President has directed early and frequent consultations with
affected industries, the Congress and groups that advocate the
privacy rights of individuals as policy options are developed.
3
The Administration is committed to working with the private
sector to spur the development of a National Information
Infrastructure which will use new telecommunications and computer
technologies to give Americans unprecedented access to
information. This infrastructure of high-speed networks
("information superhighways") will transmit video, images, HDTV
programming, and huge data files as easily as today's telephone
system transmits voice.
Since encryption technology will play an increasingly important
role in that infrastructure, the Federal Government must act
quickly to develop consistent, comprehensive policies regarding
its use. The Administration is committed to policies that
protect all Americans' right to privacy while also protecting
them from those who break the law.
Further information is provided in an accompanying fact sheet.
The provisions of the President's directive to acquire the new
encryption technology are also available.
For additional details, call Mat Heyman, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, (301) 975-2758.
- - ---------------------------------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE
Q: Does this approach expand the authority of government
agencies to listen in on phone conversations?
A: No. "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with
no new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.
Q: Suppose a law enforcement agency is conducting a wiretap on
a drug smuggling ring and intercepts a conversation
encrypted using the device. What would they have to do to
decipher the message?
A: They would have to obtain legal authorization, normally a
court order, to do the wiretap in the first place. They
would then present documentation of this authorization to
the two entities responsible for safeguarding the keys and
obtain the keys for the device being used by the drug
smugglers. The key is split into two parts, which are
stored separately in order to ensure the security of the key
escrow system.
Q: Who will run the key-escrow data banks?
A: The two key-escrow data banks will be run by two independent
entities. At this point, the Department of Justice and the
Administration have yet to determine which agencies will
oversee the key-escrow data banks.
Q: How strong is the security in the device? How can I be sure
how strong the security is?
A: This system is more secure than many other voice encryption
systems readily available today. While the algorithm will
remain classified to protect the security of the key escrow
system, we are willing to invite an independent panel of
cryptography experts to evaluate the algorithm to assure all
potential users that there are no unrecognized
vulnerabilities.
Q: Whose decision was it to propose this product?
A: The National Security Council, the Justice Department, the
Commerce Department, and other key agencies were involved in
this decision. This approach has been endorsed by the
President, the Vice President, and appropriate Cabinet
officials.
Q: Who was consulted? The Congress? Industry?
A: We have on-going discussions with Congress and industry on
encryption issues, and expect those discussions to intensify
as we carry out our review of encryption policy. We have
briefed members of Congress and industry leaders on the
decisions related to this initiative.
Q: Will the government provide the hardware to manufacturers?
A: The government designed and developed the key access
encryption microcircuits, but it is not providing the
microcircuits to product manufacturers. Product
manufacturers can acquire the microcircuits from the chip
manufacturer that produces them.
Q: Who provides the "Clipper Chip"?
A: Mykotronx programs it at their facility in Torrance,
California, and will sell the chip to encryption device
manufacturers. The programming function could be licensed
to other vendors in the future.
Q: How do I buy one of these encryption devices?
A: We expect several manufacturers to consider incorporating
the "Clipper Chip" into their devices.
Q: If the Administration were unable to find a technological
solution like the one proposed, would the Administration be
willing to use legal remedies to restrict access to more
powerful encryption devices?
A: This is a fundamental policy question which will be
considered during the broad policy review. The key escrow
mechanism will provide Americans with an encryption product
that is more secure, more convenient, and less expensive
than others readily available today, but it is just one
piece of what must be the comprehensive approach to
encryption technology, which the Administration is
developing.
The Administration is not saying, "since encryption
threatens the public safety and effective law enforcement,
we will prohibit it outright" (as some countries have
effectively done); nor is the U.S. saying that "every
American, as a matter of right, is entitled to an
unbreakable commercial encryption product." There is a
false "tension" created in the assessment that this issue is
an "either-or" proposition. Rather, both concerns can be,
and in fact are, harmoniously balanced through a reasoned,
balanced approach such as is proposed with the "Clipper
Chip" and similar encryption techniques.
Q: What does this decision indicate about how the Clinton
Administration's policy toward encryption will differ from
that of the Bush Administration?
A: It indicates that we understand the importance of encryption
technology in telecommunications and computing and are
committed to working with industry and public-interest
groups to find innovative ways to protect Americans'
privacy, help businesses to compete, and ensure that law
enforcement agencies have the tools they need to fight crime
and terrorism.
Q: Will the devices be exportable? Will other devices that use
the government hardware?
A: Voice encryption devices are subject to export control
requirements. Case-by-case review for each export is
required to ensure appropriate use of these devices. The
same is true for other encryption devices. One of the
attractions of this technology is the protection it can give
to U.S. companies operating at home and abroad. With this
in mind, we expect export licenses will be granted on a
case-by-case basis for U.S. companies seeking to use these
devices to secure their own communications abroad. We plan
to review the possibility of permitting wider exportability
of these products.
--------------end-------------------------
______________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:56:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: adam fast <adamfast@hardy.u.washington.edu>
Subject: the right to eavesdrop...
i guess that is the view of many people: that the government has the right
to eavesdrop on you. if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you be
afraid.
in an editorial i read yesterday, Frank Ogden, the editor of Electronics
World + Wireless World (an english eletronics magazine), concluded:
"...official surveillance systems, are on balance, a good thing in a
democracy."
ahh, fucxk.
time to look into pgp.
adam
______________________________
From: Meng Weng Wong <mengwong@pobox.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: the right to eavesdrop...
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 2:35:58 EDT
adam fast pounds randomly on the keyboard and comes up with
|
| time to look into pgp.
speaking of PGP - even though it's fashionable and all, I'd like to
know if any mailing lists or mass media actually *use* it as a standard
part of communication.
fs
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 2:35:41 EDT
> There's a place in Chicago called BattleTech. It's a realtime VR arcade. Teams
> of 4-6 people go at in a VirtWorld in StarWars-ish WalkerTanks. It costs either
>
> Michael (Unscene)
>
This is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of- I've heard about the
BattleTech VR arcade, but I haven't been there yet...6 hours is a long drive
to play a video game, no matter _how_ good. :) A cafenet setting would
probably need something with lower-cost hardware, but anyway...
Have you been to this thing? Opinions?
-Eric
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 18:35:45 +1000
From: Kenneth McKenzie Wark <mwark@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Sterling Silver and Chrome
The other thing i'd say about Bruce Sterling that is commendable is
"Literary freeware." He doesn't shove his stuff at you, but you can
get it free if you intend to give it for free. That's a rare attitiude
for a professional writer.
Willard
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 18:38:28 +1000
From: Kenneth McKenzie Wark <mwark@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Re: A Day in Life of FC Why not
michael_maier says:
"if we shot our own "Day in the Life of..." type Video documentary of the Future
Culture list."
cool.
Willard
Now here's what's happening in your world
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: Wax, TV, and the Bees
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 3:47:08 EDT
In reference to the review posted by nalandau about Daavid Blair's
film, _WAX, or the discovery of Television among the Bees_:
I got a copy of the videotape a month or so ago, and enjoyed it very much...
Among my reasons:
1)It was not very linear, and as was mentioned previously, contained a
large deal of very personal symbolism, and yet...somehow came together
and made a coherent picture in my mind. It provided, maybe not a clear
"plot"-this is the good guy, the bad guy, and so on, that sort of thing,
but it did provide a very well constructed invitation in someone's own
world view and mythology.
2)It made a great deal of use out of various types of technology, in the
form of computer graphics and manipulation of images. Some of it was
fairly "low-scale" graphics (it was not done, fairly obviously, with
any sort of multi-million $ budget..), but I thought that this was, in
many ways BETTER than if it had be approached with a Hollywood style
budget and approach....It added to the story (was not "Gee-whiz-look-
at-the-neato-pictures-I-bet-it-cost-a-hell-of-lot-to-do-that" type
of gratitous approach..not that that doesn't have it's place, in a
spectacle sort of way, but anyway..), it made it more personal and
more "homey" in way, and it fit the overall feel of the film.
[Personal note: I love it when people take "small things" and make
something wonderful out of them...cheap tech can do amazing things
as well as the big expensive toys, it's simply a matter of finding
what that little kluge-box can do well, and putting it in a setting
where, for whatever reason, it FITS. I love music where things
are being used "wrong", where things are about to fall apart, but
never do and sound better that way anyway. Where incongrous things
are slapped together, seemingly at random, and yet are somehow
made not only to fit, but to WORK, and make you say - "Damn! I
wouldn't have it any other way!" Ween does some of this, Tom
Waits does some og this, the Caroliners do some of this, Omoidai
Hatova (sp?) and a bunch of other japanese bands whose records
I can't seem to track down except for really bad Nth generation
cassette dupes do some of this....and they all do it wonderfully,
and create something beautiful out of things that others may
not have even considered using. My girlfriend just taped an old
Sebadoh cd for me, Weed Forestin', and this album is a little
lo-fi slab of God. It's a wonderful feeling not only to take
something out of the little dark nooks and cranies, and use it,
but to make something of beauty out of it. But I digress...
Actually, that last burst probably comes closer to a "personal
statement of purpose" than anything I've ever wrote. Anyway.]
3)The "historical perspective" of the film really stood out for me
as being a one of it's strongest points. Both the history within
the film, the history of the main character, and his relatives,
but also the historical allusions that I saw to earlier 20th
century art, some of the early Surrealist films...Can't put
my finger on a specific example, tho, so that might be me just
reading more into it than was actually there.
Anyone else see it?
-Eric
zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 04:24:44 -0500
From: Jeff Bilicki <bonglong@camelot.bradley.edu>
> i guess that is the view of many people: that the government has the right
>to eavesdrop on you. if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you be
>afraid.
> in an editorial i read yesterday, Frank Ogden, the editor of Electronics
>World + Wireless World (an english eletronics magazine), concluded:
>
> "...official surveillance systems, are on balance, a good thing in a
>democracy."
>
> ahh, fucxk.
^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree...............
We are living in a police state..........
If they have reason they can do anyrhing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If we have nothing to hide it is still A VOILATION of our human rights....
Let me build a cabin somewhere where no one willl shadow me!
Burn Washington....................
Sorry about the spelling............
--
Bong Long Die High
bonglong@camelot.bradley.edu bonglong@bucs1.bradley.edu
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: the right to eavesdrop..
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 4:43:45 EDT
>
> > i guess that is the view of many people: that the government has the right
> >to eavesdrop on you. if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you be
> >afraid.
> > in an editorial i read yesterday, Frank Ogden, the editor of Electronics
> >World + Wireless World (an english eletronics magazine), concluded:
> >
> > "...official surveillance systems, are on balance, a good thing in a
> >democracy."
> >
> > ahh, fucxk.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
> I agree...............
> We are living in a police state..........
> If they have reason they can do anyrhing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> If we have nothing to hide it is still A VOILATION of our human rights....
>
> --
>
> Bong Long Die High
> bonglong@camelot.bradley.edu bonglong@bucs1.bradley.edu
>
And yet...and yet...
This whole scenario brings out the pessimist in me..
The "We need you to purposely leave holes in your encryption scheme so
we can crack it when we want" arguement is, well, limp to say the least,
and defeats the whole purpose of the scheme in the first place..
And yet,
as you said, "If they have reason, they can do anything!"
--This IS the situation as it stands now. With reason, they CAN tap
your phone. As unappealing as it sounds to us, from the Government's
point of view, why should they give up a "right" that they currently
have? It seems...unrealistic, to expect the government to just sort of
flip over on their collective belly and say "Geez! We're stumped!
Guess we can't do THAT anymore. Darn."
If you want to be sneaky, the time is now to find a sneakier way of
doing it. Maybe a different approach entirely- I am told that the
"unbreakable" code of WWII by the americans was the use of the
Cherokee native tongue for transmission of messages. Supposedly, it
drove the Japanese nuts trying to figure out the "system" behind
that one -- they were looking for the wrong thing. I do not claim
to know a rats ass about cryptography, but....that general mind-set
seems like it would be the most effective. (Just have everyone looking
at the wrong thing..) Maybe something like wrapping it all up in
your fancy-schmancy Nth-prime-root-double-blind-whathaveyou system,
and then when it is cracked, they wind up with....garbage. Just binary
garbage. No formula makes any sense of it. Well, of course not,
because it wasn't an encoded Ascii file, it was a uLaw compressed
audio file of your message, or Gif file of the text, or whathaveyou.
Doesn't do much good for large scale, open to the public sort of
encryption schemes, but for private things...I dunno, just a thought.
Hopeing that his total ignorance of the topic isn't
causing him to speak _too_ foolishly,
-Eric
zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: A Day in Life of FC And How!
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 5:02:06 EDT
To add my voice to Gregory Winer's:
>
> "I hereby invite any musical members of FC to provide the soundtrack.
>
> Ed Stastny | OTIS Project, END PROCESS, SOUND News and Arts"
>
"I'd be willing to give it a shot."
Or rather,
Who do I send tapes to, and how many do you want?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Oh, and:---------------------------
|
---------------------------------
|
\/
My little piece of shameless promotion:
A band that I am no longer in has a song on the soon to be released
MUSENET compilation CD. Still a nice song, even if the band is
no more. MUSENET is another little slice o' internet life...this one
musical, rather than filmic. Info on it is posted evey couple of weeks
to rec.music.makers, comp.music, and other Usenety places. Or you
can mail musenet-request@xcf.berkeley.edu ,with a subject: request for info
and that should give you a big file about it.
[insert happy jingle music here]
-Eric
zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:50:02 EDT
From: majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu (Murali)
Subject: Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
:This is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of- I've heard about the
:BattleTech VR arcade, but I haven't been there yet...6 hours is a long drive
:to play a video game, no matter _how_ good. :)
No..._eleven_ hours is a long drive, to play a _very_ good
game or two! Actually, we had additional motives, but we did make the
trip all the way from Buffalo to Chicago, mainly to check out the
Battletech and Virtuality setups there...Battletech beats out
Virtuality in a second, IMHO. If you ever get the chance, do it.
Murali
majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu "It doesn't matter how much
Filmore Neurological Organization | eye makeup you wear, all
P.O. Box 156, Amherst, NY 14226 | acts of love and pleasure
Voice: (716) 834-1648 are Her rituals."
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:51:23 EDT
From: majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu (Murali)
Subject: White House Crypto Statement (fwd)
[cryptofascist statement elided]
So - what say someone cranks out a Dr. Fish that appends the
PGP docs to the end of every copy of this that goes out, hm?
Murali
majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu "It doesn't matter how much
Filmore Neurological Organization | eye makeup you wear, all
P.O. Box 156, Amherst, NY 14226 | acts of love and pleasure
Voice: (716) 834-1648 are Her rituals."
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 12:22:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: mindy gardberg <mgardbe@andy.bgsu.edu>
Subject: Ok This is gonna sound lame...
I'm a graduate student attempting to emphasize in cyber-culture.
With all this talk of the IRC in here my interest has been peaked.
The only exposure so far that I have had to what is called IRC
is on the Freenets, and those don't seem to be connected to the
one you have allbeen discussing.
I know what IRC is but not how to get there.
Someone tell me please, please, please. <-- does begging work in here?
P.S: I've only been on the Net for a few months
(lame attempt at an excuse)
_________________________________________________________________________
| |
| That's all for today! |
| To send a message to the list: future@nyx.cs.du.edu |
| To subscribe/unsubscribe/change format: future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu |
| All other requests: future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu |
| List Maintainer is: (andy [aka hawkeye]) ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu |
|_________________________________________________________________________|
| |
| The opinions expressed in FutureCulture are those of the individual |
| author only. |
|_________________________________________________________________________|
Return-Path: <ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu>
Received: from nyx.cs.du.edu by ccu.UManitoba.CA
(4.1/25-eef) id AA28774; Sat, 17 Apr 93 13:45:20 CDT
Received: by nyx.cs.du.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA01975; Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:30:46 MDT
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (andy)
Message-Id: <9304171730.AA01975@nyx.cs.du.edu>
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
of Denver. The University has neither control over nor
responsibility for the opinions or correct identity of users.
Subject: FutureCulture Digest #366
To: future-digest@nyx.cs.du.edu
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:30:45 MDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Status: O
______________________________________________________________________
|______________ / |
| / |
| u t u r e <___________ u l t u r e |
_______________________________________________________________________|
Issue #366
Saturday, April 17th 1993
Today's Topics:
---------------
digital microwave link: Lynx Radio
Ok This is gonna sound lame...
Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
Re: A Day in Life of FC Why not
Re: Sterling Silver and Chrome
Re: A Day in Life of FC And How!
Re: anarchy & iNet
Re: Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
Re: the right to eavesdrop..
Re: the right to eavesdrop...
Re: Wax, TV, and the Bees
the right to eavesdrop...
White House Crypto Statemen
White House Crypto Statement (fwd)
__________________________________________________________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: adam fast <adamfast@hardy.u.washington.edu>
Subject: digital microwave link: Lynx Radio
been doing a bit more investigating. have found a company that
manufactures a spread spectrum microwave link for digital communication,
does T1 bandwidth line-of-sight (about 40 mi), no license, no frequency
coordination required. about 1 watt output, can you believe it. designed
specifically for urban areas, but also works good in rural/remote areas too.
cost: about $8k per end. (not including parabolic dish.)
so figure $20-25k per connection (2 Lynx Radios, plus dishes and mountings).
for about 20 people, this works out to approx $40-$50 per person per month
for a period of two years, to pay for the damn thing. almost affordable.
for more folks, less cost. wish i could find a big art-coop to iNet...
(just hope you have line-of-sight to your provider. and that you can put
dishes on your provider's roof or tower-- if you have to build a tower, ugh.)
heres the info:
Lynx Radio (spread spectrum digital communication link)
$7995.00 per end (not including parabolic dish, mounting, etc.)
Western Multiplex Corporation
Belmont, CA
voice 415 592 8832
fax 415 592 4249
contacts: Bob Sherman
Pam Avila
------
adam
______________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:41:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Al Billings <mimir@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: anarchy & iNet
On Fri, 16 Apr 1993, adam fast wrote:
> there is a difference between a huge corporation or the govt providing
> service to you, versusyou and some friends, or a community organization,
> providing the service. who do you trust more?
my community and friends
> if the choice is between large-grained networks (nren, bellcore, etc) and
> fine-grained networks (fido, uucp, RAINet, cruzio, other networking
> collectives and individuals) what do you choose...? if bandwidth,
> reliablility, etc were equal.
collectives and dispersed networks. I choose those structures which would
allow the most individual freedom and the lest amount of imposed control.
______________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: adam fast <adamfast@hardy.u.washington.edu>
Subject: White House Crypto Statement (fwd)
folx,
this is an intesting bit of reading... DES redux, in hardware no less.
who the fuck are they kidding?? grrr. they truly need to retain the right
to eavsdrop, yes?
grrrr.
adam
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:20:19 EST
From: David Sobel <dsobel@washofc.cpsr.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list CPSR <CPSR@GWUVM.BITNET>
Subject: White House Crypto Statemen
White House Crypto Statement
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
____________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 16, 1993
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
The President today announced a new initiative that will bring
the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary
program to improve the security and privacy of telephone
communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law
enforcement.
The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.
For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our
private sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the
tension between economic vitality and the real challenges of
protecting Americans. Rather than use technology to accommodate
the sometimes competing interests of economic growth, privacy and
law enforcement, previous policies have pitted government against
industry and the rights of privacy against law enforcement.
Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to
protect electronic funds transfer. It is now being used to
protect electronic mail and computer files. While encryption
technology can help Americans protect business secrets and the
unauthorized release of personal information, it also can be used
by terrorists, drug dealers, and other criminals.
A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has
been developed by government engineers. The chip represents a
new approach to encryption technology. It can be used in new,
relatively inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to
an ordinary telephone. It scrambles telephone communications
using an encryption algorithm that is more powerful than many in
commercial use today.
This new technology will help companies protect proprietary
information, protect the privacy of personal phone conversations
and prevent unauthorized release of data transmitted
electronically. At the same time this technology preserves the
ability of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to
intercept lawfully the phone conversations of criminals.
A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the
"Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding
Americans. Each device containing the chip will have two unique
2
"keys," numbers that will be needed by authorized government
agencies to decode messages encoded by the device. When the
device is manufactured, the two keys will be deposited separately
in two "key-escrow" data bases that will be established by the
Attorney General. Access to these keys will be limited to
government officials with legal authorization to conduct a
wiretap.
The "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with no
new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of this new technology, the
Attorney General will soon purchase several thousand of the new
devices. In addition, respected experts from outside the
government will be offered access to the confidential details of
the algorithm to assess its capabilities and publicly report
their findings.
The chip is an important step in addressing the problem of
encryption's dual-edge sword: encryption helps to protect the
privacy of individuals and industry, but it also can shield
criminals and terrorists. We need the "Clipper Chip" and other
approaches that can both provide law-abiding citizens with access
to the encryption they need and prevent criminals from using it
to hide their illegal activities. In order to assess technology
trends and explore new approaches (like the key-escrow system),
the President has directed government agencies to develop a
comprehensive policy on encryption that accommodates:
-- the privacy of our citizens, including the need to
employ voice or data encryption for business purposes;
-- the ability of authorized officials to access telephone
calls and data, under proper court or other legal
order, when necessary to protect our citizens;
-- the effective and timely use of the most modern
technology to build the National Information
Infrastructure needed to promote economic growth and
the competitiveness of American industry in the global
marketplace; and
-- the need of U.S. companies to manufacture and export
high technology products.
The President has directed early and frequent consultations with
affected industries, the Congress and groups that advocate the
privacy rights of individuals as policy options are developed.
3
The Administration is committed to working with the private
sector to spur the development of a National Information
Infrastructure which will use new telecommunications and computer
technologies to give Americans unprecedented access to
information. This infrastructure of high-speed networks
("information superhighways") will transmit video, images, HDTV
programming, and huge data files as easily as today's telephone
system transmits voice.
Since encryption technology will play an increasingly important
role in that infrastructure, the Federal Government must act
quickly to develop consistent, comprehensive policies regarding
its use. The Administration is committed to policies that
protect all Americans' right to privacy while also protecting
them from those who break the law.
Further information is provided in an accompanying fact sheet.
The provisions of the President's directive to acquire the new
encryption technology are also available.
For additional details, call Mat Heyman, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, (301) 975-2758.
- - ---------------------------------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE
Q: Does this approach expand the authority of government
agencies to listen in on phone conversations?
A: No. "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with
no new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.
Q: Suppose a law enforcement agency is conducting a wiretap on
a drug smuggling ring and intercepts a conversation
encrypted using the device. What would they have to do to
decipher the message?
A: They would have to obtain legal authorization, normally a
court order, to do the wiretap in the first place. They
would then present documentation of this authorization to
the two entities responsible for safeguarding the keys and
obtain the keys for the device being used by the drug
smugglers. The key is split into two parts, which are
stored separately in order to ensure the security of the key
escrow system.
Q: Who will run the key-escrow data banks?
A: The two key-escrow data banks will be run by two independent
entities. At this point, the Department of Justice and the
Administration have yet to determine which agencies will
oversee the key-escrow data banks.
Q: How strong is the security in the device? How can I be sure
how strong the security is?
A: This system is more secure than many other voice encryption
systems readily available today. While the algorithm will
remain classified to protect the security of the key escrow
system, we are willing to invite an independent panel of
cryptography experts to evaluate the algorithm to assure all
potential users that there are no unrecognized
vulnerabilities.
Q: Whose decision was it to propose this product?
A: The National Security Council, the Justice Department, the
Commerce Department, and other key agencies were involved in
this decision. This approach has been endorsed by the
President, the Vice President, and appropriate Cabinet
officials.
Q: Who was consulted? The Congress? Industry?
A: We have on-going discussions with Congress and industry on
encryption issues, and expect those discussions to intensify
as we carry out our review of encryption policy. We have
briefed members of Congress and industry leaders on the
decisions related to this initiative.
Q: Will the government provide the hardware to manufacturers?
A: The government designed and developed the key access
encryption microcircuits, but it is not providing the
microcircuits to product manufacturers. Product
manufacturers can acquire the microcircuits from the chip
manufacturer that produces them.
Q: Who provides the "Clipper Chip"?
A: Mykotronx programs it at their facility in Torrance,
California, and will sell the chip to encryption device
manufacturers. The programming function could be licensed
to other vendors in the future.
Q: How do I buy one of these encryption devices?
A: We expect several manufacturers to consider incorporating
the "Clipper Chip" into their devices.
Q: If the Administration were unable to find a technological
solution like the one proposed, would the Administration be
willing to use legal remedies to restrict access to more
powerful encryption devices?
A: This is a fundamental policy question which will be
considered during the broad policy review. The key escrow
mechanism will provide Americans with an encryption product
that is more secure, more convenient, and less expensive
than others readily available today, but it is just one
piece of what must be the comprehensive approach to
encryption technology, which the Administration is
developing.
The Administration is not saying, "since encryption
threatens the public safety and effective law enforcement,
we will prohibit it outright" (as some countries have
effectively done); nor is the U.S. saying that "every
American, as a matter of right, is entitled to an
unbreakable commercial encryption product." There is a
false "tension" created in the assessment that this issue is
an "either-or" proposition. Rather, both concerns can be,
and in fact are, harmoniously balanced through a reasoned,
balanced approach such as is proposed with the "Clipper
Chip" and similar encryption techniques.
Q: What does this decision indicate about how the Clinton
Administration's policy toward encryption will differ from
that of the Bush Administration?
A: It indicates that we understand the importance of encryption
technology in telecommunications and computing and are
committed to working with industry and public-interest
groups to find innovative ways to protect Americans'
privacy, help businesses to compete, and ensure that law
enforcement agencies have the tools they need to fight crime
and terrorism.
Q: Will the devices be exportable? Will other devices that use
the government hardware?
A: Voice encryption devices are subject to export control
requirements. Case-by-case review for each export is
required to ensure appropriate use of these devices. The
same is true for other encryption devices. One of the
attractions of this technology is the protection it can give
to U.S. companies operating at home and abroad. With this
in mind, we expect export licenses will be granted on a
case-by-case basis for U.S. companies seeking to use these
devices to secure their own communications abroad. We plan
to review the possibility of permitting wider exportability
of these products.
--------------end-------------------------
______________________________
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 22:56:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: adam fast <adamfast@hardy.u.washington.edu>
Subject: the right to eavesdrop...
i guess that is the view of many people: that the government has the right
to eavesdrop on you. if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you be
afraid.
in an editorial i read yesterday, Frank Ogden, the editor of Electronics
World + Wireless World (an english eletronics magazine), concluded:
"...official surveillance systems, are on balance, a good thing in a
democracy."
ahh, fucxk.
time to look into pgp.
adam
______________________________
From: Meng Weng Wong <mengwong@pobox.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: the right to eavesdrop...
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 2:35:58 EDT
adam fast pounds randomly on the keyboard and comes up with
|
| time to look into pgp.
speaking of PGP - even though it's fashionable and all, I'd like to
know if any mailing lists or mass media actually *use* it as a standard
part of communication.
fs
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 2:35:41 EDT
> There's a place in Chicago called BattleTech. It's a realtime VR arcade. Teams
> of 4-6 people go at in a VirtWorld in StarWars-ish WalkerTanks. It costs either
>
> Michael (Unscene)
>
This is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of- I've heard about the
BattleTech VR arcade, but I haven't been there yet...6 hours is a long drive
to play a video game, no matter _how_ good. :) A cafenet setting would
probably need something with lower-cost hardware, but anyway...
Have you been to this thing? Opinions?
-Eric
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 18:35:45 +1000
From: Kenneth McKenzie Wark <mwark@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Sterling Silver and Chrome
The other thing i'd say about Bruce Sterling that is commendable is
"Literary freeware." He doesn't shove his stuff at you, but you can
get it free if you intend to give it for free. That's a rare attitiude
for a professional writer.
Willard
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 18:38:28 +1000
From: Kenneth McKenzie Wark <mwark@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Re: A Day in Life of FC Why not
michael_maier says:
"if we shot our own "Day in the Life of..." type Video documentary of the Future
Culture list."
cool.
Willard
Now here's what's happening in your world
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: Wax, TV, and the Bees
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 3:47:08 EDT
In reference to the review posted by nalandau about Daavid Blair's
film, _WAX, or the discovery of Television among the Bees_:
I got a copy of the videotape a month or so ago, and enjoyed it very much...
Among my reasons:
1)It was not very linear, and as was mentioned previously, contained a
large deal of very personal symbolism, and yet...somehow came together
and made a coherent picture in my mind. It provided, maybe not a clear
"plot"-this is the good guy, the bad guy, and so on, that sort of thing,
but it did provide a very well constructed invitation in someone's own
world view and mythology.
2)It made a great deal of use out of various types of technology, in the
form of computer graphics and manipulation of images. Some of it was
fairly "low-scale" graphics (it was not done, fairly obviously, with
any sort of multi-million $ budget..), but I thought that this was, in
many ways BETTER than if it had be approached with a Hollywood style
budget and approach....It added to the story (was not "Gee-whiz-look-
at-the-neato-pictures-I-bet-it-cost-a-hell-of-lot-to-do-that" type
of gratitous approach..not that that doesn't have it's place, in a
spectacle sort of way, but anyway..), it made it more personal and
more "homey" in way, and it fit the overall feel of the film.
[Personal note: I love it when people take "small things" and make
something wonderful out of them...cheap tech can do amazing things
as well as the big expensive toys, it's simply a matter of finding
what that little kluge-box can do well, and putting it in a setting
where, for whatever reason, it FITS. I love music where things
are being used "wrong", where things are about to fall apart, but
never do and sound better that way anyway. Where incongrous things
are slapped together, seemingly at random, and yet are somehow
made not only to fit, but to WORK, and make you say - "Damn! I
wouldn't have it any other way!" Ween does some of this, Tom
Waits does some og this, the Caroliners do some of this, Omoidai
Hatova (sp?) and a bunch of other japanese bands whose records
I can't seem to track down except for really bad Nth generation
cassette dupes do some of this....and they all do it wonderfully,
and create something beautiful out of things that others may
not have even considered using. My girlfriend just taped an old
Sebadoh cd for me, Weed Forestin', and this album is a little
lo-fi slab of God. It's a wonderful feeling not only to take
something out of the little dark nooks and cranies, and use it,
but to make something of beauty out of it. But I digress...
Actually, that last burst probably comes closer to a "personal
statement of purpose" than anything I've ever wrote. Anyway.]
3)The "historical perspective" of the film really stood out for me
as being a one of it's strongest points. Both the history within
the film, the history of the main character, and his relatives,
but also the historical allusions that I saw to earlier 20th
century art, some of the early Surrealist films...Can't put
my finger on a specific example, tho, so that might be me just
reading more into it than was actually there.
Anyone else see it?
-Eric
zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 04:24:44 -0500
From: Jeff Bilicki <bonglong@camelot.bradley.edu>
> i guess that is the view of many people: that the government has the right
>to eavesdrop on you. if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you be
>afraid.
> in an editorial i read yesterday, Frank Ogden, the editor of Electronics
>World + Wireless World (an english eletronics magazine), concluded:
>
> "...official surveillance systems, are on balance, a good thing in a
>democracy."
>
> ahh, fucxk.
^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree...............
We are living in a police state..........
If they have reason they can do anyrhing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If we have nothing to hide it is still A VOILATION of our human rights....
Let me build a cabin somewhere where no one willl shadow me!
Burn Washington....................
Sorry about the spelling............
--
Bong Long Die High
bonglong@camelot.bradley.edu bonglong@bucs1.bradley.edu
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: the right to eavesdrop..
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 4:43:45 EDT
>
> > i guess that is the view of many people: that the government has the right
> >to eavesdrop on you. if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you be
> >afraid.
> > in an editorial i read yesterday, Frank Ogden, the editor of Electronics
> >World + Wireless World (an english eletronics magazine), concluded:
> >
> > "...official surveillance systems, are on balance, a good thing in a
> >democracy."
> >
> > ahh, fucxk.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
> I agree...............
> We are living in a police state..........
> If they have reason they can do anyrhing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> If we have nothing to hide it is still A VOILATION of our human rights....
>
> --
>
> Bong Long Die High
> bonglong@camelot.bradley.edu bonglong@bucs1.bradley.edu
>
And yet...and yet...
This whole scenario brings out the pessimist in me..
The "We need you to purposely leave holes in your encryption scheme so
we can crack it when we want" arguement is, well, limp to say the least,
and defeats the whole purpose of the scheme in the first place..
And yet,
as you said, "If they have reason, they can do anything!"
--This IS the situation as it stands now. With reason, they CAN tap
your phone. As unappealing as it sounds to us, from the Government's
point of view, why should they give up a "right" that they currently
have? It seems...unrealistic, to expect the government to just sort of
flip over on their collective belly and say "Geez! We're stumped!
Guess we can't do THAT anymore. Darn."
If you want to be sneaky, the time is now to find a sneakier way of
doing it. Maybe a different approach entirely- I am told that the
"unbreakable" code of WWII by the americans was the use of the
Cherokee native tongue for transmission of messages. Supposedly, it
drove the Japanese nuts trying to figure out the "system" behind
that one -- they were looking for the wrong thing. I do not claim
to know a rats ass about cryptography, but....that general mind-set
seems like it would be the most effective. (Just have everyone looking
at the wrong thing..) Maybe something like wrapping it all up in
your fancy-schmancy Nth-prime-root-double-blind-whathaveyou system,
and then when it is cracked, they wind up with....garbage. Just binary
garbage. No formula makes any sense of it. Well, of course not,
because it wasn't an encoded Ascii file, it was a uLaw compressed
audio file of your message, or Gif file of the text, or whathaveyou.
Doesn't do much good for large scale, open to the public sort of
encryption schemes, but for private things...I dunno, just a thought.
Hopeing that his total ignorance of the topic isn't
causing him to speak _too_ foolishly,
-Eric
zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu
______________________________
From: zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu (happy zamboni)
Subject: Re: A Day in Life of FC And How!
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 5:02:06 EDT
To add my voice to Gregory Winer's:
>
> "I hereby invite any musical members of FC to provide the soundtrack.
>
> Ed Stastny | OTIS Project, END PROCESS, SOUND News and Arts"
>
"I'd be willing to give it a shot."
Or rather,
Who do I send tapes to, and how many do you want?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Oh, and:---------------------------
|
---------------------------------
|
\/
My little piece of shameless promotion:
A band that I am no longer in has a song on the soon to be released
MUSENET compilation CD. Still a nice song, even if the band is
no more. MUSENET is another little slice o' internet life...this one
musical, rather than filmic. Info on it is posted evey couple of weeks
to rec.music.makers, comp.music, and other Usenety places. Or you
can mail musenet-request@xcf.berkeley.edu ,with a subject: request for info
and that should give you a big file about it.
[insert happy jingle music here]
-Eric
zamboni@ap.cl.msu.edu
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:50:02 EDT
From: majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu (Murali)
Subject: Re- Cafe Net(Battletech)
:This is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of- I've heard about the
:BattleTech VR arcade, but I haven't been there yet...6 hours is a long drive
:to play a video game, no matter _how_ good. :)
No..._eleven_ hours is a long drive, to play a _very_ good
game or two! Actually, we had additional motives, but we did make the
trip all the way from Buffalo to Chicago, mainly to check out the
Battletech and Virtuality setups there...Battletech beats out
Virtuality in a second, IMHO. If you ever get the chance, do it.
Murali
majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu "It doesn't matter how much
Filmore Neurological Organization | eye makeup you wear, all
P.O. Box 156, Amherst, NY 14226 | acts of love and pleasure
Voice: (716) 834-1648 are Her rituals."
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 11:51:23 EDT
From: majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu (Murali)
Subject: White House Crypto Statement (fwd)
[cryptofascist statement elided]
So - what say someone cranks out a Dr. Fish that appends the
PGP docs to the end of every copy of this that goes out, hm?
Murali
majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu "It doesn't matter how much
Filmore Neurological Organization | eye makeup you wear, all
P.O. Box 156, Amherst, NY 14226 | acts of love and pleasure
Voice: (716) 834-1648 are Her rituals."
______________________________
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 12:22:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: mindy gardberg <mgardbe@andy.bgsu.edu>
Subject: Ok This is gonna sound lame...
I'm a graduate student attempting to emphasize in cyber-culture.
With all this talk of the IRC in here my interest has been peaked.
The only exposure so far that I have had to what is called IRC
is on the Freenets, and those don't seem to be connected to the
one you have allbeen discussing.
I know what IRC is but not how to get there.
Someone tell me please, please, please. <-- does begging work in here?
P.S: I've only been on the Net for a few months
(lame attempt at an excuse)
_________________________________________________________________________
| |
| That's all for today! |
| To send a message to the list: future@nyx.cs.du.edu |
| To subscribe/unsubscribe/change format: future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu |
| All other requests: future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu |
| List Maintainer is: (andy [aka hawkeye]) ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu |
|_________________________________________________________________________|
| |
| The opinions expressed in FutureCulture are those of the individual |
| author only. |
|_________________________________________________________________________|
Comments
Post a Comment