The Hacker's Encyclopedia 1998/hackers_encyclopedia.iso/zines/cud/cud1019.txt

Text File | 2003-06-11 | 41.9 KB | 926 lines

Computer underground Digest    Wed  Mar 18, 1998   Volume 10 : Issue 19
                           ISSN  1004-042X

       Editor: Jim Thomas ([e-mail])
       News Editor: Gordon Meyer ([e-mail])
       Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
       Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish
       Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
                          Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
                          Ian Dickinson
       Field Agent Extraordinaire:   David Smith
       Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest

CONTENTS, #10.19 (Wed, Mar 18, 1998)

File 1--Re:  Censorware (Cu Digest, #10.16, Wed 4 Mar 98)
File 2--Re: "Alert Vulnerability" - Cu Digest, #10.17
File 3--Fwd: Does John Q. Public understand software complexity?
File 4--Brian Milburn thread
File 5--Senator plans to ban .gov porn-parodies; new crypto-campaign
File 6--ACM Policy 98 Conference coming in May
File 7--ANNOUNCEMENT: Democratic Renaissance / International Workshop
File 8--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 May, 1997)

CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN
THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 08:38:37 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: File 1--Re:  Censorware (Cu Digest, #10.16, Wed 4 Mar 98)

Date--Thu, 5 Mar 1998 12:15:26 -0500 (EST)
From--"Bill Michaelson" <[e-mail]>

>BTW, I'm not one of "everyone", although I agree that most people seem to
>accept as a basic premise that children should be shielded from certain
>types of information.  We who believe otherwise are in a very tiny minority.

>I suppose this doctrine is firmly embedded in our culture, with
>movie rating schemes and similar filtering/censoring devices all
>around.  It's practically apostasy to suggest that children can
>handle any information with proper guidance.  But having been a child
>who was allowed access to any type of information, I find this
>censorship quite repugnant.

From what I'm reading here, you think that censorship of any kind is
bad. Even the right of a parent to control the information a child
receives. Not the guvmint, not censorware, but the parent. Correct?

>It is comforting to me to believe that we are very concerned with child
>welfare, but I am cynical because of the many who apparently trot
>out the child welfare issue as justification for their political agendas.

My comments have nothing to do with political agendas. No one has the
right to tell me what is best for my children, not the censors not the
anti-censors. They are not raising my kids, I am.

>I think children are far more resilient than we give them credit
>for being.  We only stunt their intellectual growth when we withhold
>information (of any kind) from them.  And when some claim that children
>are not "ready" for information, it is really the *adults* who are not
>ready or willing to discuss the issues with their children.

Wrong, at least in my case. I will discuss any subject they bring up as
honestly and as completely as I am able. I note generalizations in this
paragraph while the whole point of my earlier comments is how I, and no
one else live my life and raise my children.

> If I don't have the right to control and monitor the information my
> children receive, than who does? The guvmint? No one?

>Controlling and monitoring are distinct activities.  I heartily approve
>of monitoring (and editorializing upon) the information children receive.
>I do not approve of controlling it to the extent that any information
>is excluded.

And here is the point of disagreement. While I agree that there is a
great resiliancy is kids, there are also many things they cannot handle
until they have had a chance to grow. I have spent many nights awake,
comforting one of my children because of an image, idea, or occurance
that happened in their life that they were, at the time, unable to
handle. I would protect my kids from that when I can.

>Regardless, I would give you the right to do both with your children,
>just so that I could live in peace with you.  I wouldn't necessarily
>approve, and we might clash at the school board meeting occasionally.

You and I may have.

>In the end, I suppose my child would then have a competitive advantage
>over yours.

That remains to be seen, however it is mere speculation.

>>>We do not allow parents to keep their children from getting an
>>>education. We do not allow this even though that education can lead
>>>to those children learning things that will cause them to disagree
>>>with their parents.
>
>> Parents do not have the right to keep their children from an education
>> but with things like the PTA and school board meetings we do have some
>> control on the content of that education.

>And the PTA and the school board, et al, battle it out, and the kids are
>taught the resulting curriculum over some parents' objections.  That
>was the original poster's point.

True, what a child learns in grade school differs enormously from high
school, but then so does the child's worldview and maturity.

>> War is a fact and cannot be hidden, however are you going to show photos
>> of Aushwitz to a 3rd grade class or pictures of liberated villages whose
>> people are glad that some one stood up to fight when it was necessary.

>Is that how you choose to introduce the concept of war to children?  Show
>them the glory before you show them the horror?  I'm getting a fresh
>perspective on why war has persisted through the ages.

You betcha. It has persisted because someone will always try to
subjegate another. Someone will always want to take what another has.
And when it reaches a point where it affects nations, war is inevitable.
Hoping it will go away is just wishful thinking.

>> Showing a little child pictures of horror will not end wars
>Not by itself it won't.
>> in the future but it will frighted, shock, and disturb him. Is this
>> the way we want our small children to feel?
>Yes.  That is exactly how I want our small children to feel about war.
>Frightened, shocked and confused.  That's how I feel about war.  What
>about you?

No I don't. Instead I want them to feel confident, knowlegable, and
aware. War is horrible, the premature death of any individual should be
considered the greatest outrage against mankind. This is a feeling that
should be instilled in all people, children and adults alike. But to
live in such fear of fighting that not to fight if and when it becomes
necessary goes against everything I believe in.

>> I don't and will do everything I can to
>> block such sights from them until I think they're ready.
>"Ready", how?  Ready to accept such sights unemotionally?

No, not unemotionally but instead mature enough to see them as the
horrors they are, not the horrors a small child can imaging them to be.
Little children take most everything they see, hear, and learn very
personally. They do not see it as history but as immediate and now. They
see these things as something that could happen to them that very day.
They do not see it as something that has happened and good people
everywhere are trying to prevent from happening again.

>Interesting to me that you use Aushwitz and third grade as an example.
>That's when I first learned about the Holocaust.  I was about 7 or 8 years
>old when I pulled a history book off my aunt's shelf while looking for
>entertainment and found graphic descriptions of what man does to man in the
>photos of liberated Nazi concentration camps.  Yeah, I was disturbed and
>confused.  It was the weirdest shit I'd ever seen, and it took me years
>to digest it.  But I was old enough to go seeking information in history
>books, so I found history, in a dosage exactly proportional to my
>perceptual abilities at the time.  Later, when I heard about this
>guy called Hitler, it really meant something to me.

I was also disturbed and confused when I learned about the camps. The
pictures and movies I saw still haunt me at times. I still cannot
understand the motivation for such atrocities. It is completely alien to
my thinking.

>I disagree with the notion that showing a child pictures of horror will
>not end war.  It will require a lot of factors to end war, but at the
>core of our motivation will be a visceral revulsion of it.  Short of
>first-hand experience (which would be self-defeating), how are people
>to acquire such revulsion through sanitized presentations at only
>"appropriate" times?

I have no idea when I first saw such things, but I must have been at an
age when the emotions they generated were not revulsion so much as rage
that this could happen. And that is the emotion I want my kids to feel,
not revulsion so great that they hide from it but rage that it could
happen and should never happen again.

>Through a picture is the best way for a child to see a war, and it should
>be seen, as early as possible, as far as I'm concerned.  A child can
>then contrast it with the reality of the decent civilized community within
>which (hopefully) they live.  They need to see the possibilities while
>they're young and it will make the most lasting impression.  This is
>important stuff to learn while young.

True, we only disagree on the extent and at what age a child should be
shown the images of war.

>>Violence is a fact of life but it is my job as a parent to protect my
>>children from violence as long as I can. I fail to see how teaching

>So protect them from violence.  Don't "protect" them from knowledge.

>> self-defence to an eight year old can protect them from violence from an
>> adult. I must and do teach my kids what they can do in a bad situation,
>> but I also try to teach them that in many instances violence is not as
>> ubiquitious as the media portrays. I don't hide the fact of violence and
>> hate from them but if I left it up to them to learn on their own, would
>> they not learn that it is unavoidable, everyone is evil, and they can do
>> nothing to escape it? Wouldn't it be more traumatic for my kids to live
>> paranoid and afraid? Because of the sensational nature of the really
>> heinous crimes, might they not think they are more prevelant then they
>> actually are? Of course I'm going to keep some of this from my kids
>> until I, no one else, decide that they are ready to handle it.

>So you are seeking a sense of balance in how media portrays life for your
>child.  That's sensible.  Supervise and mediate, advise and consult.  Help
>them think critically.  Don't let them live in a fantasy world shaped by
>television and video games.  You sound like a concerned, well-meaning and
>loving parent.

>But don't prohibit them from learning about ANYTHING.  You can't stop it,
>and if you try, you'll lose some of their trust.  They're very smart, and
>if you think you are keeping information from them, then it's almost
>certain that THEY are or will be keeping information from YOU.  Believe it.

I won't prohibit my children from learning anything. I will try to
protect them from things I don't think they are ready to handle. But if
they do find out about a subject, I won't prevent them. In fact, it
means that I miss-judged their ability and maturity and will encourage
them. But at the same time, the whole point of my original post is that
I AM the judge, not some faceless guvmint or software publisher. I do
not, and will not use any type of screening software. I don't rely on
movie rating or other nonsense that this country tries to use to protect
us from ourselves. I will not surrender to anyone my right to raise my
children the way I believe they should be raised. And when I have to do
that by censorship, I do.

>>>Yes, as a previous poster said, a 10-year-old searching for
>>>information under "American Girl" may see things that will remain
>>>with that child for the rest of his or her life. But there is no
>>>evidence that this harms the child; there are a _lot_ of things that
>>>remain with people throughout their lives. Parents have the
>>>opportunity to do a lot of things that have this characteristic;
>>>should they be able to shut children off from others doing the same,
>>>if no harm is done to the child?
>
>> Maybe this stuff will do no permanent harm but they can be confusing to
>> a child without the maturity to handle it. The little folks have enough
>That's how maturity is acquired.
>> problems living in the big folks world as it is. So I will keep things
>> from my kids that I don't think they are ready for.

>Like the military draft was something my mother thought I wasn't ready
>to handle at the tender age of 18, I'm sure.

But you learned about the draft in other ways. The point here is that
your mother was exercising her right and duty to raise her son the way
she saw best.  Right or wrong, I do not fault her for trying.

>Events march on, and you can't stop them.
>You're not helping the kids.  I suspect that it is you who are not ready
>to face these issues with your kids.  It's tough to explain to a child why
>someone would hang a person from their skull on a meathook.  In fact, I
>don't really know how to explain it, or whether it merits explanation so
>much as it calls for introspection.  But if you have kids, you're stuck with
>this sort of problem, if you accept the responsibility.  Your kids will
>know when you are hiding something, or are too squeamish to talk to them
>about it.  That does not foster trust.  Get over it before the gulf gets >wide.

You are reading much more into my words than I wrote. It is not
abrogation of responsibility but the exercise of responsiblitly that I
am talking about. Censorship plays only a small part in my raising of my
kids, but it does play a part and I will not give up my right to use it.

>> It boils down to a matter of values, not the PC "Family Values" that are
>> being touted but the values that I've learned over the years and have
>> put into my own life. I will try to instill those values in my children
>> until such time as they are ready to develop their own. And I will do it
>> by "censorship" if I think that is the way it should be done.

>You lead by example.  Regardless of your motives, the value you are
>instilling is to control people by limiting their access to information.

Again, no. Just to the point I feel they are ready to handle it. I do
not keep things from a 13 year old, I think they are on the path to
adulthood and probably ready for whatever they encounter. But I would
from a 7 year old.

>Perhaps they will learn this lesson well, and use it on you.  Watch out
>for the teen years.

My kids are teens, and raised using the methods I've tried to describe.
Two have graduated high school already, one is a senior. My son is
heavily into computers and is now apprenticed to a computer graphics
firm to learn the business. My oldest daughter is saving money for her
schooling (a value instilled), and the youngest wants to be a writer and
artist. I am proud of my kids.

>But that's your privilege.  Keep your kids off the 'net until you think
>they're "ready".  Or supervise them.  But don't surrender your parental
>responsibilities to someone else with their own social agenda, like a
>censorware software maker.

Again, I DO NOT surrender my responsibilities, not to the censors, not
to the others who think differently from me.

>I'm willing to pay the school tax for your kids, and to subsidize your
>extra tax write-offs.  No problem.  But don't ask me to pay the cost of
>your parenting responsibilities with my freedom of speech, or the freedom
>to seek information of *any* sort.  Don't lend support to cockamamie rating
>systems that will sterilize the 'net.

You are free to say anything you wish and learn anything you wish, I
support that wholeheartedly. But then so am I. And if you say something
that I would see as detrimental to my children I would block it from
them. I don't lend support to cockamamie rating systems, nor do I want
to see anything like mandatory censorship of the net or anything else. I
only want to make it clear that I will not give up my duties as a parent
and the tools I have available, including censorship, to anyone.

I am curious about the tax writeoffs you mention, I can't remember ever
getting a break.:^)

>I don't mind too much if some parents choose to keep their kids ignorant,
>but not anyone else's, and certainly not the world at large.

It is not ignorance I support, but what as I see as responsible
parenting. My methods have worked for me. My kids are the proof. My
biggest objection is ANYONE telling me that what I do with and for my
family is wrong because it does not agree with what they think is right.
I don't do it to others, do not do it to me.

Peace.

Michael W. Moore

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 13:36:13 -0500 (EST)
From: "John S. Cronin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 2--Re: "Alert Vulnerability" - Cu Digest, #10.17

> [e-mail](Leonard Erickson)
>
> In Cu Digest, #10.16, Wed 4 Mar 98, "Richard K. Moore" <[e-mail]>
> writes:
>
> > The next step is to contact those people NOW - while you still can
> > conveniently - and exchange with them your phone numbers, fax numbers, and
> > postal addresses.  You might even go so far as to make preliminary
> > arrangements for "phone-tree" or "photocopy-tree" protocols for
> > distributing information, but most of us probably won't get around to that,
> > life being what it is.   The important thing is to have the necessary data
> > on hand well in advance of need.
>
> I suggest checking out Fidonet. Unlike the Internet, Fidonet is *based*
> on a "phone directory" (the nodelist) that permits *direct* exchange of
> email and files between sites. It also has some elementary security
> provisions, such as pre-arranged session passwords.

I am surprised that nobody mentioned another old standard, UUCP.  It
was passing news and email long before the Internet.  It works via direct
connections over the phone lines.  It is not a great replacement for
"the Internet", but in a pinch, it is would certainly be much better
than nothing at all.  So the trick is, prepare now to bring up a UUCP
network in a crisis, if you are concerned about this.  Virtually all
Unix systems have UUCP support, and I have seen UUCP on DOS systems
as well.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Mar 98 16:24:23 -0800
From:  Tommy Anderberg, [e-mail]
Subject: File 3--Fwd: Does John Q. Public understand software complexity?

I dare say he does not. If the general public understood the realities of
software design, development, testing, documentation and maintenance -
simply
put, what an incredible amount of work it all is - we wouldn't be having
problems like a "sudden" 2YK crisis ("what do you mean there isn't enough
time to fix all systems, there are almost two years left and it's just a
few 0s!") and even software piracy would probably not be as widespread as
it is ("hey, it's not stealing - besides, it's absurd what those lazy, fat
cat programmers would have you pay for a few lines of code").

That's why I came up with the idea for the contest at

http://www.polyhedric.com/software/acid/contest.html

Taking part is very simple: all you have to do is guess the size of the
source code for a new, moderately complex program (available for download
at the same site). Get it right to within ten lines and you win a free
user
license. More importantly, you will have given some thought to the
complexity of a minuscule part of "cyberspace", hopefully gaining some
insight in the process. At least, that's the idea.

So how is it working out? Well, I've just had the first answers sent over
-
both the contest and the software are brand new - and it's even worse than
I thought. So bad in fact that the deadline for submissions may have to be
extended beyond the originally planned date of April 6. If not, we may not
even have somebody land in the right ballpark.

We already have the terms "illiteracy" and (semi-officially) "innumeracy",
but I think the time has come to coin a counterpart for the information
age.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 09:28:54 GMT
From: Randy Simpson <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 4--Brian Milburn thread

Re: the CyberSitter issue - I have 2 daughters who are now both in
college so I might be able to provide an additional perspective on this
issue.

At some point, usually in high school but certainly by college, even the
most vigilant parent has to trust that what they've taught their child
is sufficient preparation for them to go it on their own.

If all that a parent has taught a child is to obey the dictates set
down, then they've done a poor job of preparing that child to make
decisions on their own. The child might make a good soldier or prison
guard but certainly not anyone creative.

As far as limiting access on the net, at some age it might be wise to
involve the child in making decisions about what to block. Of course,
this would require that reasons be given to the child for such
censorship and a parent should be aware that the reasons given now will
be re-examined by the child at an older age - relying on trickery or
poor logic is unwise.

As for parental discretion within software that limits children's
access: if I were the author of such a product, my goal would be to have
a default setting that would reflect my standards for children  or
possibly what I perceived to be the standards of the parents likely to
use my product with the option for parents to easily adjust the default
settings.

I suspect that many parents think they can take software like
CyberSitter and plug it in to relieve themselves of the responsibility
of participating in their child's usage of the net.

While I think that a child should be allowed the chance to explore the
net on their own, I also think that a parent who truly cares about a
child would want to be part of his/her net experience just as they would
want to be part of other aspects of a child's life. No one would expect
a parent to take a test for a child or to be at bat for them in a little
league game. Why expect a parent to act in place of a child's discretion
on the net?

IMHO, a child is a person with qualities to be discovered and brought
out, not some piece of material to be hammered into something you wish
you could have been.

If you *must* force some dogma on your children, at least make it
something that you've thought out rather than some "conventional wisdom"
that you've unthinkingly accepted.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:21:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Declan McCullagh <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 5--Senator plans to ban .gov porn-parodies; new crypto-campaign

Source -  [e-mail]

Y'all should subscribe to politech.I rarely forward stuff to f-c
http://www.well.com/~declan/politech

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date--Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:15:35 -0800 (PST)
[e-mail]
Subject--Senator plans to ban .gov porn-parodies; new crypto-campaign

More on Gates in NYC and the FBI's antihacker crusade is at
the URL below. --Declan

===========

http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/afternoon/0,1012,1782,00.html

The Netly News / Afternoon Line
March 4, 1998

Loin-cloth

   One lawmaker who doesn't seem to have much of a sense of humor about
   titillating web sites is Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.). When his
   presumably technology-impaired staffer stumbled across whitehouse.com
   and found not Hillary Clinton's child care proposals but a doctored
   photo of Hillary in leather, Faircloth decided to take action. "I plan
   to introduce legislation that would ban the assignment of popular
   government agency names to anyone," he told The Netly News after
   speaking at an Internet child safety seminar this afternoon. "Can you
   imagine how many people have thought they were contacting the White
   House only to see that?" A better question might be which site is the
   more popular one. --By Declan McCullagh/Washington

Might Makes Right

       Congress rarely does the right thing for the right reason.Instead,
   lobbyists vie to make voting the wrong way too politically costly for
   legislators.

       Now a new coalition, called Americans for Computer Privacy, is
   trying out this strategy on encryption legislation. The group of high
   tech firms and nonprofit groups aims to convince lawmakers that
   supporting restrictions on either the domestic use or overseas
   shipment of encryption productions is too politically painful.

       "We would not turn the keys to our front doors over the
   government. Why should we have to turn over the keys to our
   computers?" asked ACP counsel and former White House lawyer Jack
   Quinn.

         To convince Americans that ACP's answer is the right one, the
   coalition has gathered together an advisory panel of former spooks and
   law enforcement agents.

       Quinn told the Netly News that his strategy has already won
   results--"Senior officials at the National Security Council and the
   vice president's office" this morning signaled they're willing to sit
   down at the table for a friendly chat about crypto-laws. --By Declan
   McCullagh/Washington

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 08:35:49 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: File 6--ACM Policy 98 Conference coming in May

We hope you can join us for this exciting conferrence!

For more press information, please contact Tina Angelone at
[e-mail]
or visit http://www.acm.org/policy98/

-- Chris Morgan

+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
  ACM Information Alert
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

        ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
            * * *  POLICY '98 CONFERENCE  * * *
               http://www.acm.org/policy98/

         "Shaping Policy in the Information Age"
            Washington, DC, Renaissance Hotel
                    May 10-12, 1998

Register now for the one computing policy conference you don't
want to miss...featuring:
  - Senator Orrin Hatch (invited): Future of Intellectual Property
  - Special Advisor to the President Ira Magaziner: White House Report
  - Representative Vern Ehlers (invited): Reformulating US Science Policy
  - Representative Constance Morella: The Role of the Federal Government
      in Computing
  - Assistant Director Juris Hartmanis: The Role of the National Science
      Foundation in Computing Policy
  - Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information
      Larry Irving: Universal Service
  - Debate: Esther Dyson and Gary Chapman
  - ACM Presidential Award for founding NetDay: John Gage, Sun
Microsystems
  - Making Science Policy: Roundtable with NPR Correspondent Dan Charles

The ACM Policy '98 Conference will focus on public policy issues
affecting future applications of computing.  Our goal is to
forge stronger links between computing professionals and policy
makers.  Attendees will interact with prominent leaders from
academia, industry, Congress, and Executive agencies, and
participate in debates on policy issues including:

  - Universal Access         - Electronic Commerce
  - Intellectual Property    - Education Online

All Policy '98 attendees are invited to the Annual ACM Awards
Banquet on Sunday evening May 10th, and a conference reception
on Monday evening May 11th at the new headquarters of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Register online at

http://www.acm.org/policy98/

or write to [e-mail].  Early registrants and
ACM members receive discounts.  A limited number of
low-priced student registrations are available.

  Conference Chairs - Ben Shneiderman, Dianne Martin
  Program Chairs - Marc Rotenberg, Keith Miller
  Panel Moderators - Jim Horning, Pamela Samuelson,
    Charles Brownstein, Oliver Smoot
  USACM Chair - Barbara Simons

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 22:03:35 GMT
From: "Richard K. Moore" <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 7--ANNOUNCEMENT: Democratic Renaissance / International Workshop

                      * Workshop Announcement *

                    - please distribute globally -

       ~-===================================================-~
                   Seeking an Effective Democratic
                      Response to Globalization
                        and Corporate Power

           an international workshop for activist leaders

           Summer 1998, Canada -- details available soon

         Organized by: Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance
       ~-===================================================-~


WHO WE ARE...
We are an informal association of concerned citizens from around the
world who are dedicated to overcoming corporate domination through the
revitalization of constitutional democracy.

OUR MISSION...
is to work with people and organizations everywhere to help
bring about an historic transition from this "Era of Corporate Hegemony"
to a new "Era of Democratic Renaissance".

WHY WE ARE SPONSORING THIS WORKSHOP...
The purpose of the workshop is to begin a global consensus-building
process among diverse activist groups -- to develop a shared perspective
on globalization and a common strategy for effective democratic counter-
measures. This process will be continued in larger follow-on conferences
and in other ways, aiming toward the the creation of a potent political
movement...

         The Global Coalition for a Democratic Renaissance


    ~-===============================================================-~
                              Manifesto for a
                          Democratic Renaissance

      (1) Corporate globalization is leading the world to disaster and
      something MUST be done about it. Corporate influence has corrupted
      our democracies, undermined our sovereignties, bankrupted our govern-
      ments and is destroying the very earth our survival depends upon.

      (2) The very success of corporate globalism in subjugating everyone
      to its agenda has created the potential for a massive counter-movement,
      a peaceful democratic counter-revolution on a global scale.

      (3) Political activists must rise to the challenge of this strategic
      opportunity -- it is time to move beyond our special-interest
      causes and find a path to solidarity and the collaborative pursuit
      of shared objectives. Foremost among our tasks is to build bridges
      across the gulfs dividing factions such as liberals & conservatives,
      believers & non-believers, labor & environmentalists, etc.

                     We are all in this together!

      (4) Overcoming corporate globalism calls for more than protest or
      resistance -- it requires a different vision for the world, a
      coherent agenda which can provide sustainable prosperity and
      which avoids chaos during the historic transition.

      (5) That vision and agenda must be based on the establishment of
      healthy democratic processes in our individual nations and on
      the realization that sustainable economics and respect for the
      environment are not just good ideas, but are rather necessities
      for human survival.
    ~-===============================================================-~

About the workshop..

This initial workshop will be very small, limited to approximately
fifty invited delegates. We are seeking a "representative sample"
of activist leaders from every corner of the world, representing
diverse constituencies and all walks of life. This workshop will be
held in English, but we are developing the capability to support
multiple languages in future events.

The reason for the small size is to ensure that everyone will be heard
and to encourage an atmosphere of comradarie and focused endeavor.
Workshop deliberations will be based on the principle of consensus,
ensuring that no one is coerced and that no viewpoints are ignored.

The workshop will be one week in duration. Meals and accommodations
will be provided on-site and local volunteers will enable us to keep
workshop fees to a minimum. Staff and other locals, including indigenous
tribal members, will join us for evening activities, which will emphasize
sharing of cultural traditions through conversation, music, dance, and
story telling.

A web page on our server will be dedicated to the workshop, and daily
bulletins will be published, including session reports and delegate
interviews. An email list will be dedicated to discussion of the
workshop, and netizens everywhere are invited to participate remotely
via these facilities.

A professional and unobtrusive film crew will be in attendance to record
selected workshop activities and to interview delegates and others.
A broadcast-quality documentary will be produced to promote the coalition
and will be made available at a nominal fee for non-commercial use. We
will also seek broadcast, cable, and video distribution worldwide.

The workshop process will begin before the workshop actually convenes.
As delegates are recruited, email and fax will be used to introduce
delegates to one another and to begin substantive discussions.
Session details will be settled in this way and a draft manifesto
will be developed on a collaborative basis.

Sessions will generally begin with a panel presentation and then open
up to general discussion. We will break up into smaller groups fre-
quently to enable all delegates to contribute and to facilitate the
consensus process. Session descriptions may change depending on
delegate interest and willingness to participate on panels.
________________________________________________

Provisional session descriptions...

     * OPENING CEREMONY - traditional spiritual-alignment
     ceremony led by local indigenous tribal leaders

     * GETTING ACQUAINTED - delegate self-intros, description
     of activities and organizations, statement of intentions
     regarding workshop and coalition; discussion of workshop
     process and agenda

     * GLOBALIZATION AND CORPORATE POWER - presentation:
     capsule history of corporate power and the rise of globalization,
     with an emphasis on sovereignty and democracy; discussion of
     globalization and its consequences; special presentation by anti-
     MAI activist delegates

     * POLITICS AND DEMOCRACY - comparison of political and
     electoral systems in delegates' countries; discussion of reform
     agendas; discussion of media propaganda and the growth of
     factionalism; special presentation on Cuban system by Cuban
     delegate(s)

     * INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - presentation: capsule history
     of imperialism, the postwar pax-americana regime, and hi-tech
     neo-interventionism; discussion of the linkage between these
     developments and globalization generally, especially in light
     of (elite strategist) Samuel P. Huntington's KulturKampf agenda;
     special focus on Middle East, including delegates from that
     region

     * TOWARD A SENSIBLE WORLD - panel reports and general dis-
     cussion of ecosystems, economics, technology, sustainability, and
     prosperity; discussion of reform agendas and priorities;
     discussion
     of how to implement reform incrementally, without causing chaos
     in the process; discussion of international relations based on
     the
     paradigm of collaboration

     * ADOPTION OF CONSENSUS MANIFESTO - discussion,
     amendment, and adoption of documents which have been
     previously developed via email, fax, etc. by delegates

     * COALITION LAUNCH - for those delegates who are ready to
     commit, there will be a ceremonial declaration of collaborative
     solidarity in pursuit of the goals of the manifesto. These
     delegates will then be the charter members of:

          The Global Coalition for a Democratic Renaissance

     * GETTING ON WITH THE REVOLUTION - discussion of
     coalition-building and of movement strategy; identification
     of initial constituencies to be recruited to the coalition;
     break up into affinity groups to discuss joint endeavors and
     to commit to initial joint objectives; reconvene and discuss
     reports of affinity groups; closing discussion

     * CLOSING CEREMONY - traditional endeavor-blessing
     ceremony led by local indigenous tribal leaders

     * farewell "rebel-rousing" party in honor of staff

________________________________________________

If you are interested...

If you are an activist leader who is interested in being a delegate, if
you want to recommend a candidate, or if you want to be kept in the
loop on developments -- please contact us at [e-mail].

And please visit our our website "cj/cadre", more formally known as
        http://cyberjournal.org/cadre


Sincerely Yours,
Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance (CADRE)

     Richard K. Moore [e-mail]
     Freelance writer & political analyst
     US citizen residing in Ireland
     Editor, [e-mail]
     Chair, CADRE
     Co-author, cj/cadre

          "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful
          committed citizens can change the world,
          indeed it's the only thing that ever has."

               - Margaret Mead

     Carolyn Ballard [e-mail]
     Freelance writer, South Carolina, USA
     Co-author & editor, cj/cadre

          "You write in order to change the world. The world
          changes according to the way people see it, and if you
          can alter, even by a millimeter, the way...people look
          at
          reality, then you can change it."

               - James Baldwin

     Jan Slakov [e-mail]
     Peace and environmental activist, Nova Scotia, Canada
     Liaison to organizations affiliated with CADRE

          "Returning violence for violence multiplies violence,
          adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of
          stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light
          can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can
          do that."

               -Martin Luther King

     Chris Thorman [e-mail]
     Administrator, cyberjournal.org

          "Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it;
          Boldness has genius, power and magic in it."

               - Goethe

________________________________________________________________

        ~-==============================================-~
                 Restore democratic sovereignty.
                 Create a sane and livable world.
            Bring corporate globalization under control.

               Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance
                  http://cyberjournal.org/cadre
                  mailto:[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 May 1997 22:51:01 CST
From: CuD Moderators <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 8--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 May, 1997)

Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
available at no cost electronically.

CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest

Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line:

     SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST
Send the message to:   [e-mail]

DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS.

The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax [phone])
or U.S. mail at:  Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
60115, USA.

To UNSUB, send a one-line message:   UNSUB CU-DIGEST
Send it to  [e-mail]
(NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line)

Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
on RIPCO BBS [phone] (and via Ripco on  internet);
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.

         In ITALY: ZERO! BBS: [phone]

  UNITED STATES: ftp.etext.org (206.252.8.100) in /pub/CuD/CuD
    Web-accessible from: http://www.etext.org/CuD/CuD/
                  ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/
                  aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
                  world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
                  wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
  EUROPE:         nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/CuD/CuD/ (Finland)
                  ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)


The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
Cu Digest WWW site at:
  URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/

COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
diverse views.  CuD material may  be reprinted for non-profit as long
as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
they should be contacted for reprint permission.  It is assumed that
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
specified.  Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
relating to computer culture and communication.  Articles are
preferred to short responses.  Please avoid quoting previous posts
unless absolutely necessary.

DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
            the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
            responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
            violate copyright protections.

------------------------------

End of Computer Underground Digest #10.19
************************************