Oh NO! Not BOOK TAG!

I knew it was bound to catch up with me sooner or later after I saw Tom Knapp get hit with it. Book tag is rapidly spreading through the libertarian blogosphere like an intellectual version of venereal disease. I’ve caught it from Kevin Carson. I’ll try to answer the questions.

Total Number of Books I Own: I’ve owned several hundreds over the years, but it always seems like every time I move that I have to give up a number of them just for the sake of coping with the logistical burden imposed by my packrat tendencies. Currently my collection numbers around a mere 35 or so.

Last Book I Bought: That would be, I believe, “Learning Python” by Mark Lutz and David Ascher.

Last Book I Read: Peter J. Carroll’s slim but fun text on Chaos Magick: “Liber Kaos”

And, okay, I was actually re-reading it. I did say it’s a fun book.

Five Books That Mean a Lot to Me: Damnably, this question seems to disqualify most of the tech books I own or have read. A good tech book is notable for not standing out in retrospect — as you read the book, the book as literature recedes from your overt consciousness and you just learn. At the moment, after some thought, these are the five books that come to mind when asking myself which books have had a capital “I” Impact on me.

For a New Liberty” by Murray Rothbard — This is the book that introduced me to the modern libertarian movement. While previously cynical and having an anti-authoritarian bent, this one book made me consciously libertarian. It shook me to my foundations and altered the course of my life.

Anthem” by Ayn Rand — True, Rand had her flaws, but I found this book very emotionally moving. Reading it about a year and a half prior to picking up Rothbard’s book above primed me for it.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” by Robert A. Heinlein — Heinlein’s books filled my teenage years. It fails to do justice to his influence on me to name only one of his books here — yet it wouldn’t be an accurate picture of who I am to only name my five favorite Heinlein books, either. While my own father passed away when I was very young, I found what fatherly guidance I could glean from Heinlein’s wisdom.

Magick Without Tears” by Aleister Crowley.

The Probability Broach” by L. Neil Smith — If Rand primed me for Rothbard — the works of L. Neil Smith, of which this is only a sample — were the final, fixative agent that set certain patterns permanently in my soul.

I still feel cheated by being restricted to only five, though. There’s so much worth mentioning. Science-fiction by Spider Robinson and Poul Anderson. Innumerable great libertarian works. So MANY Heinlein books. So many tech books! At the very least, I ought to at least mention Robert Anton Wilson and Timothy Leary as well as “Modern Magick” by Donald Michael Kraig. “The Complete Idiots Guide to Starting Your Own Business” by Edward Paulson and Marcia Layton. Lest I incur the wrath of Eris, I simply must mention “Principia Discordia,” of course.

The list just goes on and on and on. Complicating matters much further, of course, is the fact that I do the vast bulk of my reading online these days.

Tag five people and have them do this on their blogs: This is problematic in that so many have already been infected. Of the people whose blogs and blogging I like, for several I don’t necessarily have email addresses to give them a courtesy “heads up”. Likewise, several people that I’d want to run this by don’t even have blogs. Even so, here are my picks.

Roderick Long
Ali Hassan Massoud
Mike Renzulli
Yazad Jal
Mike

OpenPrivacy.org

Now this is interesting:

The OpenPrivacy initiative is an Open Source collection of software frameworks, protocols and services providing a cryptographically secure and distributed platform for creating, maintaining, and selectively sharing user profile information.

In effect, OpenPrivacy is the first open platform that enables user control over personal data while simultaneously - and at user discretion - providing marketers with access to higher quality profile segments. The resulting marketplace for anonymous demographic profiles will create opportunities for a new breed of personalized services that provide people and businesses with timely and relevant information. Throughout the system, information may be shared with guaranteed personal privacy, creating at last a level playing field for the user, marketer and infomediaries.

OpenPrivacy Initiative

“The War Prayer” by Mark Twain

Mark Twain wrote some choice satire for the armchair generals of that era to mull over. His words are an enduring reproach to the phenomenon of those who would have others kill for their own sport.

THE WAR PRAYER by Mark Twain

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and spluttering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spread of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts, and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country, and invoked the God of Battles beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpourings of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety’s sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came – next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their young faces alight with martial dreams – visions of the stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender! Then home from the war, bronzed heroes, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag, or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation

God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest! Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!

Then came the “long” prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was, that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers, and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in the day of battle and the hour of peril, bear them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory –

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher’s side and stood there waiting. With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued with his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal, “Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!”

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside – which the startled minister did – and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes, in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

“I come from the Throne – bearing a message from Almighty God!” The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. “He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import – that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of – except he pause and think.

“God’s servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two – one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him Who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this – keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor’s crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

“You have heard your servant’s prayer – the uttered part of it. I am commissioned of God to put into words the other part of it – that part which the pastor – and also you in your hearts – fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: ‘Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!’ That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory – must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

“O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle – be Thou near them! With them – in spirit – we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it – for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause.) “Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits!”

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

Why did the chicken cross the road?

Why did the chicken cross the road?

Because he wanted to inspire chickens everywhere as a heroic revolutionary martyr attempting to cast off the chains of oppression !

RIDGECREST, Calif. - A chicken that got a ticket for crossing the road has clawed his way out of it. The $54 citation for impeding traffic was dismissed Friday after Linc and Helena Moore’s attorney argued that the fowl was domesticated and could not be charged as livestock.

State law restricts livestock on highways, but not domestic animals.

Whoo-hooo! GO CHICKEN!

It’s STILL bullshit

The other day I posted about news via Bruce Schneier’s blog that:

An appeals court in Minnesota has ruled that the presence of encryption software on a computer may be viewed as evidence of criminal intent.

For this I got metaphorically spanked by a member of the Volokh Conspiracy, Orin Kerr, who posted a piece called “The Myth of Crypto As A Crime” — and whose argument is actually best summarized by this excerpt from a mea culpa issued by Dr. Dave Jansing in response to the Volokh piece:

The Minnesota Court Of Appeals did not rule that having encryption software on one’s computer was an indication of criminal activity, but instead ruled that in the case State vs. Levie, the software, along with other supporting evidence, indicated criminal activity and therefore the appellant was not eligible for a new trial.

Yet, this line of reasoning ignores the fact that two seperate courts ruled on this particular evidentiary matter — the district court first and then the appellate court. This only hit the media after the appellate court ruling.

The district court that initially heard the case was free to allow or disallow any pieces of purported evidence — and the district court indeed did rule that the presence of encryption software was “evidence of criminal intent”. The district court did not have the burden of having to accept or reject the whole bundle of challenges to the conviction that the appellate court had.

As the appellate court ruling notes:

Rulings involving the relevancy of evidence are generally left to the sound discretion of the district court. State v. Swain, 269 N.W.2d 707, 714 (Minn. 1978). And rulings on relevancy will only be reversed when that discretion has been clearly abused. Johnson v. Washington County, 518 N.W.2d 594, 601 (Minn. 1994).

The appellate court went on to decide:

Evidence of appellant’s computer usage and the presence of an encryption program on his computer was relevant to the state’s case. We affirm the district court’s evidentiary rulings.

So, we see here that the appellants challenges to that particular district court ruling did not rise to the level where an appellate court would overcome its institutional inertia to overrule the district court.

That’s utterly irrelevant, though, to the concerns that this set of rulings is bad for civil liberties.

Note carefully, also, that if even one of the appellants challenges to his conviction were affirmed, he would have been granted a new trial, which one may suppose the appellate court might have privately been loath to grant him.

A district court made, in my opinion, a bad decision — ruling that the presence of encryption software was evidence, even though encryption itself is not a crime and no encrypted illegal data was found. The appellate court decided that it had little choice but to uphold the ruling of the district court. The argument that this particular evidentiary matter was part of a larger, unified, holistic bundle is true only of the appellate court ruling, not the district court ruling.

So, yes, a court did rule that the presence of encryption software may be viewed as evidence of criminal intent. There’s no mythology there, Mr. Kerr.

And, yes, I’ll still say the ruling that the presence of encryption software may be viewed as evidence of criminal intent is this: bullshit.

If I used a bit of hyperbole in merely titling my post “When privacy is a crime”, I don’t feel that’s particularly out of place — given that any bad evidentiary ruling sets a bad precedent in terms of civil liberties and that these are dark days for civil liberties, which are rapidly getting darker.

Some people never learn

Rob Shurbet seems to think atrocities on one side excuse those on the other. They don’t. Below are my first comments posted there.

Berg shouldn’t have been killed and he wouldn’t have been if the US government hadn’t invaded a country that had not attacked the US.

I have a question. When are the supporters of this war going to realize that supporting war crimes (an unprovoked war of aggression is itself a war crime) is precisely the opposite of patriotism?

Civilians die in wars and Bush is the one who chose this war. That means the blood of every civilian and soldier who has or will die in this war, including Berg, is on the hands of Bush and the people who voted for him.

You want America to be protected? Quit picking fights the US doesn’t belong in.

Get ready…

A federal judge has ruled that the government will have to release all of the Abu Ghraib torture photos that were witheld because the government didn’t want the public to see them.

Listen up, freedom activists. We know this is coming. We need to get ready to leverage this politically as much as possible, because trends never stand still. This is our own potential future that will be seen documented in the photos from this 21st century Gulag — unless we can slow it, stop it and turn it around. This may be one of our last chances.

Remember, the biggest “reform” that we have so far seen after the original breaking of the Abu Ghraib story was this — the military banned cameras there. Think about it.

You will hear cover stories about how the soldiers who carried this out are being “punished”. The policy makers who created this horror have been rewarded, though. Unless they are made to pay a price through the judicial system, you will see more of this. You will, ultimately, experience this and worse — because they can.

Don’t meekly call for “investigations” and “reform”.

Demand that high-ranking, roughly Cabinet level and above, heads roll.

Demand the impeachment of the President and Vice-President.

Write letters to the leadership of other countries asking them to indict these monsters.

Get ready to start confronting the masses they hide behind.

Get ready to show them these photos and say “Take a look in the mirror, mother-fucker! This is YOU! You did this by putting these bastards in power! You’re not Americans. You’re ‘Good Germans’ that Der Fuehrer would have been proud of!”

Good music

If you like Techno / House / Trance music, you might be as pleased as I was to catch this guys music.

“I’m a war-rior,
for love and peace,
and the ri-ight to be free.”

DJ MARAUDER, In da Mix

He was on the streamcast from PureDJ.com just a few minutes ago.

We don’t need your stinkin’ New World Order

I’ve noted very appreciatively and very much endorse the call by Amnesty International for prosecution for war crimes of leading figures in the Bush administration — Pinochet style.

I do recognize that, while not an optimal solution, limited government is preferable to unlimited government, so long as you have any government at all. That’s why I oppose all of several initiatives for instituting some form of over-arching global regime, even in the name of human rights. It is the nature of political institutions that they will be corrupted and used in ways you never envisaged — and Liberty will suffer. Quite simply, we already have way to much government already.

However, this does not mean there is no legitimate role for international law per se. Indeed, a rational anarchist could point out that there is, essentially, anarchy already amongst nations — yet international law was a thriving body of work long before the rise of the globalists with their desire for ever more powerful political institutions.

Furthermore, one could describe anarchism in terms of a desire to let all people be recognized as sovereign over their own individual selves. Viewed in that light, one could say that what we seek is itself foreshadowed in some of the best traditions of international law and that our goal is global hyper-sovereignty — each individual their own king.

This offers the beginnings of a standard to evaluate international law — how multilateral is it?

Global political institutions serve to undermine and subordinate the sovereignty of nations. They are government — a monopoly of law maintained by force or the threat of it — writ large.

The prosecution of Pinochet, and hopefully Bush, is the other way. Without unequal privilege being vested in a global institution with sole authority to prosecute and punish, any state on Earth could (with the nerve) arrest and punish mass murderers of the Bush-Pinochet sort.

We don’t need your stinkin’ New World Order.

When privacy is a crime

You may not have noticed, but courts now regard the presence of encryption software on your computer as evidence of a crime.

The reaction of noted security expert Bruce Schneier:

“I am speechless.”

Well, I’m not. This ruling is bullshit.

Other reactions from around the web…

Thrashor:

“If you use PGP, you may be a pervert. A disturbing ruling…”

Sean Bonner:

“Bruce is speechless, so am I.”

melo:

“Too sad to even think about. This is beyond my most wildest dreams.”


Digital Detritus
:

“Now these are activist judges! … Campers, this is some really scary shit!”

Adam Fields:

“…I worry for the situation where there isn’t any other evidence of a crime…”

Dr. Dave Jansing:

“If you aren’t outraged, you aren’t paying attention.”

Sunni Maravillosa:

“Another notch in the criminalization of privacy-enabling tools.”

Close
E-mail It
Socialized through Gregarious 42