Computer underground Digest Mar 3 1999 Volume 11 : Issue 15

Computer underground Digest    Sun  7 Mar, 1999   Volume 11 : Issue 15
                           ISSN  1004-042X

       Editor: Jim Thomas (
       News Editor: Gordon Meyer (
       Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
       Commie Radiator:   Etaion Shrdlu, Mssr.
       Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
                          Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
                          Ian Dickinson
       Cu Digest Homepage:

CONTENTS, #11.15 (Sun, 7 Mar, 1999)

File 1--Bring back the text based search engine!!!
File 2--"The Great Knowledge Implosion" (Netfuture #84)
File 3--Announcement - "CFP99: The Global Internet"
File 4--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 10 Jan, 1999)


Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 11:25:03 -0600
From: Richard Webb 
Subject: File 1--Bring back the text based search engine!!!

Bring back the text based search engine!!!

                    Searching but not finding

                  It's not a game to many of us

     I am writing this article in hopes it will generate some
thought and be distributed to folks who can make a difference in the future
of the net and search technologies.  If you are such a person, sit
back and relax, I'd like to converse with you about this for a few
moments in a totally nonthreatening way.  you might even be glad I

     LEt's take your typical day, and mine.  WE've gotta get the
kids off to school, during our work day we've got to research for
upcoming projects and network with coworkers to do our daily tasks.
Yes, we've also got to do lots of research, whether it's on which
model of furnace to get for the house or is this a safe toy for
Junior.  The internet was gonna make this easier for us, right?

     At this point you're uttering the great words of modern search
technology, such as yahoo, excite and so on.  WEll, all that's fine
but we're missing the boat.

During one of those average days you want to order a piece of
equipment you need.  YOu want to make that call when you're not on
your boss's dime which limits your available time to do this.  So,
you're going to do some research.  Ah yes, the supplier has a web
site, and somewhere on that web site is a price list for products
they sell, and another of used merchandise they have in stock.
WEll, no big deal, right?  We're gonna go there and grab those two
lists which are common garden variety zip files, download 'em,
unzip 'em and either print 'em out or read them.

     Not so fast!  well, we get there, but we can't quite remember
under which link we found it before.  LEt's wander around for
awhile.  Hmmm, here's a neat one, a midi file downloads and plays
while a dancing bear tells you about something you really don't
want.  THe text scrolls across the screen so fast you couldn't read
it if you tried, but let's back up, our link didn't seem to be
there.  Let's try another.  Still not there.  Where's that darned
file?  A coworker reminds you that you're going to be late for your
lunch appointment with the prospective client if you don't get a
move on, so you log off and grab your coat.  AH well, maybe later
this afternoon.  Oops, can't get outside on the net now, can't
connect, whatevver.  NO luck.

     We had it but we lost it!  Remember when the internet was a
collection of machines in the halls of academia, technology
companies and the military?  My first contacts with the internet
were in the later years of this period, through something called
fidonet.  It was a gateway connection, no binary files could be
transferred, but a guy could get a lot of work done.

     Under the strategies employed in those halcyon days of the
net, I might get the price lists in the above example via ftp.
REmember Ftp?  Simple to use, allowed anonymous log-ins, didn't
care if your browser doesn't have the latest plug-ins.  IT worked
for everybody, worked well too.  I might ftp the file, or I might
use a doccument or database search tool such as wais to narrow down
my search to items I knew I wanted.  I can have a price quote of
those items via email using something akin to wais.  I send out my
email, meanwhile go have my lunch with my coworker and the
prospect, come back and get other work done.  When checking my
email later my request has  made it through the queue, I find.  The
results of my search are now sitting in my email in-box for my
perusal.  No muss, no fuss, no strain, but the gain I sought when
I was playing with my browser like I was channel surfing between
football games.  I don't  want to channel surf I want to get what
I want and leave.  If I'm in the mood for browsing, the web or my
public library both work fine, but if I really want to find it, my
public library has the edge.  It can accomodate me there too with the Dewey
Decimal system and knowledgeable librarians.

     Yes, I lament the loss of some of the old standard
     internet search tools, Archie and wais to
name but two.  Consider the FIdonet gateway I spoke of earlier.
SEarch tools such as those I mention could be used from gateway
connections to the net such as Fidonet.  Not so with the newer
breed of search engine and information retrieval which is the www.
Here's another example of the search from hell.  This one was
saved, though, by a knowledgeable librarian who figured out just wasn't getting us where we wanted to go.  Yes, the
web has opened up the internet to the masses, and there
are many web search tools to choose from which offer the same
functionality.  Or do they?

     Sometimes using modern search strategies you just can't get
there from here.  A few months ago, I wanted to look up an alleged
bail bondsman from the Kansas City Missouri area.  He had contacted
me looking for one of my daughters as she'd helped out a boyfriend
once.  I had a phone number and wanted to cross reference it with
listed bail bonding agencies in the area, so off to my local
library I went hoping to browse their cdrom telephone directory.
AS I'm a blind person, I scheduled time with my reader to accomplish this.
Much to my surprise, the Library's telephone directories
cd  had disappeared in favor of an internet
workstation.  (Great!  another one for patrons to use.)  But now,
on with our search.

The librarian  punches up for my reader.  WE try to find a way to
just browse listings for the area, but it wants to know if we want
to buy a computer, we want to find people or whatever.  WE enter
"Bail Bond" as a string but it burps on that.  SO much for or similar strategies.  WHat a joke!
After wasting twenty minutes we're still not finished and we have
other things to do with our afternoon.

An emailable wais server, on the other hand would have given us
just what we need.  With a hardcopy telephone directory or Boolean
logic and the old text search engines we would have been able to
retrieve our information and be on our way.  one can narrow one's
search terms and get the
information sought.  In the phone directory search example, the
librarian finally figured out we couldn't get there from here and offered us
a hardcopy Kansas City area phone directory.  Within its pages was
what we sought, and we verified the legitimacy of the individual
and moved on  It took us exactly three minutes from the
time the physical phone directory was placed at our disposal.  .

SO now I'm to the place where I'm going to ask you to do something.
If you're an average net citizen like me, demand that search
engine providers provide an offline search capability.
which usually would mean an emailable interface.  Offline
searching saves you time.  It also saves other
net citizens trouble.  Sure, your request is queued up behind those
who got there before you, but you're using less resources to
accomplish the job than you would online browsing complex web
pages.    You don't get the seeming instant gratification you get
from a web search, but how many times did you really need the
information you sought right now?  While you were clicking away to
get your search started, wouldn't you rather have sent your request
out over the net and gone to have a cup of coffee or a snack?
Maybe you would have had time to help Junior with that math

     If you're a system administrator or operator in a network such
as Fidonet, demand such services be placed at your disposal by the
companies with whom you do business as an alternative to all the glitz.
.  Your users can benefit from
them as can you yourself.  Value added is a big buzzword today, and
for the bbs operator hobbyist, it isn't gratifying without callers.
Callers will call when they feel they derive a benefit, and these
tools are definitely a benefit when they're understood.  A little
education makes them quite understandable.  Try it, your users will
like it!  Just tell 'em a little bit about how to use it.  They'll
do the rest.
I know, I was such a bbs operator for awhile.   The internet
hadn't yet come to town, and users were using the mail gateway and a few
search tools I made them aware of.
They were quite happy to find they could do this with their
older hardware and software, especially since full net access
had yet to come to my community.

If you're someone in a position to choose what software options
will be available for users of search technologies, consider these
simple options from the earlier days of the net.  They use less
resources but are just as useful.  For your
users who are intimidated, explain to them how these systems work.
YOu'll find converts aplenty when they realize how much faster it
really is for them.
Platform dependency isn't an issue with these search engine
strategies either.  The old apple II, the commodore models,
anything that can use email and a terminal program can access them
if it has a net connection somehow.  SOme still use
email services through gateways from bbs networks and the like.
FOr  those folks and the developing nations' citizens such
strategies give them full access to the resources that make the internet what it

FInally, thanks for taking the time to read this.  YOu are free to
distribute it to any interested party or appropriate usenet forum
or listserv.

Richard WEbb
P.O. Box 614
West Burlington,  ia.  52655
Messages voice phone only:  (319) 758-0427


Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 16:23:24 -0500
From: Stephen Talbott 
Subject: File 2--"The Great Knowledge Implosion" (Netfuture #84)

Source: Issue #84 /  February 9, 1999
Technology and Human Responsibility

             Editor:  Stephen L. Talbott (
           On the Web:
     You may redistribute this newsletter for noncommercial purposes.

                    Steve Talbott (


                    Steve Talbott (

I'm now looking at an advertisement proclaiming the "explosion of
information and knowledge".  During the 150 years from 1750-1900, the ad
tells its readers, knowledge doubled.  During the next 50 years it doubled
again.  Today the cycle is just one year long.  And, we are assured,
"knowledge will double every 73 days by the year 2020."

You've heard this sort of thing many times before.  What you're much less
likely to hear is the more fateful truth:  we live in the midst of a
knowledge *im*plosion, unprecedented in scale and threatening to suck our
entire culture into the vacuum at the center of an accelerating vortex of
flotsam and jetsam.

How Does Knowledge Disappear?

Actually, I think we've at least vaguely sensed this implosion for a long
time.  Certainly the familiar idea that "we're getting to know more and
more about less and less" suggests that the purported knowledge explosion
might have a negative correlate.

I'm not speaking primarily of the much-discussed loss of digital data,
although this loss is certainly relevant to the implosion.  As Stewart
Brand summarizes the situation:

   Paper at least degrades gracefully.  Digital files are utterly brittle;
   they're complexly immersed in a temporary collusion of a certain
   version of a certain application running on a certain version of a
   certain operating system in a certain generation of a certain box, and
   kept on a certain passing medium such as a five-inch floppy.  (Quoted
   in James Gleick, "Fast Forward", *New York Times Magazine*, Apr. 12,

The upshot of this, according to Brand, is that "there has never been a
time of such drastic and irretrievable information loss.  We've turned
into a total amnesiac.  We do short-term memory, period."  But this
doesn't seem quite the main point to me.  And, in any case, certainly the
gaseous, suffocating smog of data does go on compounding itself daily,
however short-term the life-expectancy of an individual datum.

Perhaps more serious in its implications is the disappearance of huge
tracts of human knowledge into computer code.  Ellen Ullman tells how IBM
advised the Federal Aviation Administration to replace its entire air-
traffic control system, because it would stop functioning reliably at the
turn of the millennium, and there is "no one left who understands the
inner workings of the host computer".  Ullman goes on:

   No one left who understands.  Air-traffic control systems, bookkeeping,
   drafting, circuit design, spelling, differential equations, assembly
   lines, ordering systems, network object communications, rocket
   launchers, atom-bomb silos, electric generators, operating systems,
   fuel injectors, CAT scans, air conditioners -- an exploding list of
   subjects, objects and processes rushing into code, which eventually
   will be left running without anyone left who understands them.
   (*Salon*, May 13, 1998)

But I am not sure this is altogether convincing either.  Or, rather, it
looks to me like the final stage of a much more significant loss.
Knowledge that can be transferred to a computer and forgotten is knowledge
that has already come close to disappearing into thin abstraction -- and
*that* disappearance is the root of the problem.

Abandonment of the World

The biologist and conservationist, David Ehrenfeld, chronicles our
disturbing loss of knowledge about the natural world.  "We are on the
verge of losing our ability to tell one plant or animal from another and
of forgetting how the known species interact among themselves and with
their environments" (*Beginning Again: People and Nature in the New
Millennium*).  He tells us that almost no one is left who can recognize
and distinguish the various species of earthworms -- one of the creatures
most essential for the survival of the human race.  The problem is
repeated in one field after another.

For example, Ehrenfeld ticks off the subjects for which universities are
having a harder and harder time finding teachers:  "Classification of
Higher Plants", "Marine Invertebrates", "Ornithology", "Mammalogy",
"Biogeography", "Comparative Physiology", "Entomology".

In other words, subjects where you actually have to get to know part of
the world.  Subjects where qualitative observation, and not merely
measuring, still counts for something.  Not that teachers in these fields
are always needed.  Many of the young turn instead to molecular genetics
and other glamorous disciplines of the Information Age, where mastering
the technical procedures of the laboratory and the abstractions that drive
them is more important than understanding very much about the world.

This, I think, hints at what is really going on.  It's the loss of our
qualitative experience of the world, the disappearance of concrete
knowledge into abstraction.  Just consider a few of the symptoms:

** I've previously written (NF #74) about the loss of farmers' knowledge
of their land:  they no longer select their own seeds based on knowledge
of local climate, soil, diseases, pests, and so on; there is currently a
conversion to satellite-driven fertilization schemes; as Craig Holdrege
remarked in NF #80, the farmer receives, along with his seed, a kind of
universal, artificial environment designed to render local conditions
irrelevant; and, in general, the manufacturing mindset at work in "factory
farming" discourages any sense of stewardship for the land.

** Thanks in part to elements of chip-making technology, the individual
chemist -- who not long ago could synthesize maybe fifty or a hundred new
compounds per year -- can now synthesize tens of thousands of compounds.
The amounts may be too small to see, but they're quite adequate for the
new testing and screening techniques.  Long gone is any need for the
chemist to smell or taste the new substances he brings into being, to feel
their texture or note their subtleties of color.  He need not *know* them
in any intimate or substantial sense.  What knowledge there is, is
abstract and embedded in the effective procedures of the laboratory and
its computers, not in the chemist's direct, qualitative experience of

** Much the same could be said about the genetic engineer who devises new
animal breeds in petri dishes without the messy bother of having to
cohabit with and understand the living creatures -- or sometimes the
monsters -- whose destinies he manipulates.

** Some time ago the *Economist* described the noisy, chaotic, spark-
filled, bone-jarring reality of most automobile manufacturing plants, such
as the one in Sao Paulo where giant presses stamp out body panels with
300-ton blows -- the power of a jumbo jet taking off.  But now, the
article continues, some of the newest plants are a different story:

   Twenty years ago you could not see across the welding hall of the plant
   in Aurora, Illinois, because of the smoke.  Today the welding hall is
   completely clear; the giant slabs of thick sheet steel are quietly cut
   into shape by high-voltage plasma guns, which produce a much more
   precise cut and no smoke.  (*Economist*, June 20, 1998)

So even our working with brute material is less brutely material today.
We don't need to gain the first-hand knowledge that comes from wrestling
with things.  The abstract patterns in the computer program activate the
plasma gun, which in turn reproduces the patterns in the metal itself, all
without anyone -- or even any machine -- having to bang away in an
unseemly manner.  We manipulate a few abstractions on a screen, and then
hidden, precisely guided forces automatically reconfigure the stuff of the
world.  It's a long way from the anvil of strong-armed Hephaestus.

Atoms and Bits

But enough of examples.  You can find this abandonment of the world in
favor of abstraction wherever you care to look.  The problem is not that
abstraction as such is evil.  The problem, rather, is our extreme
imbalance, which cuts us off from the meaning and wisdom shining through
the world.

If you have read the preceding articles in this Special Issue, you will
recognize that we are again talking about the polarity of accuracy versus
meaning, of abstraction versus qualitative content.  And here, as
throughout our culture, we are witnessing the same, destructive drive
toward a "one-pole magnet", where our precise and effective abstractions
are no longer *about* anything we know.  Their manipulative effectiveness
*is* our knowledge.  We seek blind power, but blind power is always
dangerous.  We think we are wise when we are really only fearsome.

The information glut and the knowledge implosion, it turns out, are
complementary sides of the same development.  It requires an attention to
the qualitative side of things -- it requires a pictorial or imaginative
thinking -- to hold the world's phenomena together in any meaningful way.
Submit these phenomena to our reigning habits of abstraction in complete
forgetfulness of the counter-movement by which the phenomena were
recognized in the first place, and it is no wonder that things begin to
fall apart.  Having spent a few hundred years analyzing things to "bits",
we find ourselves with nothing but bits.  What both the information glut
and the knowledge implosion represent is our loss of synthesizing and
imaginative powers.

The world of atoms, according to the exultations of our more wired
contemporaries, is giving way to the world of bits.  But, no, the world of
atoms *is* the world of bits -- and neither of them is the world we
actually live in.  The lie of the atom -- "a-tomos", "indivisible" -- is
that the world comes in tiny bits, side by side, perfectly well-defined
and therefore utterly incapable of interpenetration.  More and more these
supposedly physical bits just *are* bits in software -- abstractions
within a purely formal system -- and the lie we tell about them is the
same lie we tell about bits of information when we believe they are not
only precisely transferable, but also meaningful.

Developments in physics may have overturned the lie, but this has yet to
transform either physics or popular conceptions.  It has not led to a
qualitative physics.  But the only way physical entities can gain
cognitive substance, the only way they can have anything to *do* with each
other -- the only way they can interpenetrate in creative ways to produce
the phenomena of the world -- is by means of their qualities.  Only in the
qualities of things do we gain the possibility of synthesis, or of
meaning.  Without qualities, we are left with the multiplying shards of
our analyses.

The qualitative is the imagistic, and what Owen Barfield says about images
in relation to logic is also true of images in relation to atoms and any
other entities whose existence is largely circumscribed by logic or

   It is characteristic of images that they interpenetrate one another.
   Indeed, more than half the art of poetry consists in helping them to do
   so.  That is just what the terms of logic, and the notions we employ in
   logical or would-be logical thinking, must *not* do.  *There*,
   interpenetration becomes the slovenly confusion of one determinate
   meaning with another determinate meaning, and there, its proper name is
   not interpenetration, but equivocation.... ("Lewis, Truth, and
   Imagination" in *Owen Barfield on C. S. Lewis*)

Here is our polarity, starkly sketched.  Can we marry the poles in a
productive quest for understanding?  Certainly we have carried logic and
mathematics to a glorious degree of perfection today.  But we have hardly
begun to learn what it means to approach the world as image in an equally
devoted and disciplined manner.  Indeed, the very idea of discipline in
this context rings false in many ears.  As long as that is the case, our
world will continue to disintegrate into pixels, bits, and atoms, giving
us a "knowledge explosion" that testifies to our loss of understanding.


                          ABOUT THIS NEWSLETTER

NETFUTURE is a freely distributed newsletter dealing with technology and
human responsibility.  It is published by The Nature Institute, 169 Route
21C, Ghent NY 12075 (tel: 518-672-0116).  The list server is hosted by the
UDT Core Programme of the International Federation of Library
Associations.  Postings occur roughly every couple of weeks.  The editor
is Steve Talbott, author of *The Future Does Not Compute: Transcending the
Machines in Our Midst*.

Copyright 1999 by The Nature Institute.

You may redistribute this newsletter for noncommercial purposes.  You may
also redistribute individual articles in their entirety, provided the
NETFUTURE url and this paragraph are attached.

NETFUTURE is supported by user contributions.  For details, see

Current and past issues of NETFUTURE are available on the Web:          (mirror site)        (mirror site)

To subscribe to NETFUTURE send the message, "subscribe netfuture
yourfirstname yourlastname", to .  No subject
line is needed.  To unsubscribe, send the message, "signoff netfuture".

Send comments or material for publication to Steve Talbott

If you have problems subscribing or unsubscribing, send mail to:


Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 14:05:31 -0500
From: Marc Rotenberg 
Subject: File 3--Announcement - "CFP99: The Global Internet"

Please note that there are reduced rates for academics
and ACM members. The deadline for early registration is
March 15. Apologies for cross-posting.

Marc Rotenberg.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

April 5-8, 1999  Omni Shoreham Hotel  Washington, DC

-> Early Registration Deadline: * March 15, 1999 *

 Information and Online Registration:



Monday, April 5, 1999

2:00-5:00 pm

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Tuesday, April 6, 1999

Continental breakfast
7:00-8:00 am

Registration / Tutorials
8:00-10:30 am

	 "The Electronic Communications Privacy Act: A Primer"
	 Mark Eckenweiler

	 "Cryptography: Basic Overview & Nontraditional Uses"
	 Matt Blaze and Phil Zimmerman

	 "Free Speech, The Constitution, and Privacy in Cyberspace"
	 Mike Godwin

	 "Techniques for Circumventing Internet Censorship"
	 Bennett Haselton and Brian Ristuccia

Working Groups - A

	1 - NGO [Akdeniz/Hurley]

	2 - T/B/A

	3 - T/B/A

	4 - T/B/A

Opening Plenary "Freedom and Privacy and the Global Internet I"
1:30-3:00 pm

	Deborah Hurley, Harvard Information Infrastructure

	Simon Davies, Fellow, London School of Economics, United Kingdom
	Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary, US Department of Commerce *
    Stephen Lau, Privacy Commissioner, Hong Kong
	John Mogg, DGXIII, European Commission *
	Aryeh Neier, President, Open Society Institute
	Barbara Simons, President, Association for Computing Machinery
	George Vrandenburg, Senior Vice President, America Online

3:00-3:15 pm

Panel Discussion "The Creation of a Global Surveillance Network"
3:15-4:30 pm

	Barry Steinhardt, American Civil Liberties Union

	Scott Charney, US Department of Justice
	Ken Cukier, CommunicationsWeek International, France
	Lisa Dean, Free Congress Foundation
    Erich Moechel, quintessenz, Austria
    Sergei Smirnov, Human Rights Online, Moscow, Russia
	Steve Wright, Omega Foundation, United Kingdom

Panel Discussion "Anonymity and Identity in Cyberspace"
4:30-6:00 pm

	Lorrie Faith Cranor, ATT-Labs Research

	Kaye Caldwell, CommerceNet
	Lance Cottrell, Anonymizer, Inc.
	Austin Hill, Zero Knowledge Systems
	Andrew Niccoll, Truman Show, Gattica *
	Mike Reiter, Lucent, Co-creator of Crowds
	Paul A. Strassmann, Senior Advisor, SAIC *
	Paul F. Syversor, Dept. of Defense, Onion Routing project

Reception The National Press Club
7:00 - 9:00 pm

Working Groups - B
9:00 - 11:00 pm

	1 - NGO [Yaman Akdeniz/Deborah Hurley]

	2 - Internet advocacy [Ari Schwartz]

	3 - Big Brother Awards

	4 - T/B/A

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Wednesday, April 7, 1999

Continental breakfast
7:00-8:00 am

Congressman Ron Paul
Sponsor of "The Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act"
8:00-8:30 am

Attorney General Janet Reno *
US Department of Justice
8:30-9:00 am

Panel Discussion "Free Speech and Cyber-Censorship I"
9:00-10:30 am

	Paul McMasters, Freedom Forum

	Ann Beeson, Legal Counsel, ACLU
	Joan Bertin, Director, National Coalition Against Censorship
	David Crane, Office of Senator McCain, sponsor of
	   Child Online Protection Act
    David Sobel, General Counsel, EPIC
	Bruce Taylor, President, National Law Center for Children
	   and Families
	Daniel J. Weitzner, Domain Leader, World Wide Web Consortium *

10:30-10:45 am

Panel Discussion "Copyright on the Line: Blame it on Rio? Or Title 17"

	Jonathan Zittrain, Berkman Center

	Chuck D, Public Enemy
	Julian Dibble
	Scott Moskowitz, Bluepike *
	Michael Robertson, President,
	Hilary Rosen, Recording Industry Assoc of America *
	Howie Singer, a2bmusic *

Lunch / Keynote address Vint Cerf,
President of the Internet Society
12:00-1:30 pm

Public Policy Scenario "Chemical Databases On the Internet:
Risk to Public Safety or Government Accountability?"


3:00-3:15 pm

Panel Discussion "Privacy and Profiling"
3:15-4:30 pm

	Jason Catlett, CEO, Junkbusters

	Andrew Braunberg, Data Mining News
	Professor Mark E. Budnitz, Georgia State University
	   College of Law
	Professor Walter A. Effross, Washington College of Law
	Stephen Kroll, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
	Steve Lucas, Founder, Privaseek
	Professor Latanya Sweeney, Carnegie Mellon University

Panel Discussion "Free Speech and Cyber-Censorship II"
4:30-6:00 pm

	Yaman Akdeniz, Centre For Criminal Justice Studies,
	University of Leeds

	Margarita Lacabe, Derechos Human Rights
	Jagdesh Parikh, Human Rights Watch
	Fadi al-Qadi, Arabic Media Internet Network, Jordan *
	David Phillips, General Counsel, Europe, AOL
	Richard Swetenham, European Commission DG XIII
	Professor Zehao Zhou, York College

6:00-7:00 pm

Banquet Dinner / Speaker Henrikas Yushkiavitshus,
Communications, Information and Informatics
Associate Director, UNESCO
7:00-9:00 pm

Working Groups - C
9:00-11:00 pm

	1 - NGO [Jean Ann Fox/Jamie Love/Ed Merzwinksi]

	2 - DES Cracking [John Gilmore]

	3 - Government Y2K Report [Ross Stapleton-Gray]

	4 - T/B/A

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Thursday, April 8, 1999

Continental breakfast
7:00-8:00 am

Congressman Ed Markey
Sponsor of "The Electronic Bill of Rights Act"
8:00-8:30 am

Tim Berners-Lee
Director of the World Wide Web Consortium
8:30-9:00 am

Panel Discussion "Access and Equity and the Global Internet"
9:00-10:30 am

	Jonathan Peizer, Open Society Institute

	Tracey Cohen, Telecommunications Regulatory Authority,
	    South Africa
	Eric Goldstein, Human Rights Watch Middle East
	Professor Jerry Kang, UCLA Law School
	Philippa Lawson, Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Canada
	Drazen Pantic, OpenNet, Belgrade, Yugoslavia
    Bobson Wong, Director, Digital Freedom Network

10:30-10:45 am

Panel Discussion "Is Escrow Dead? And what is Wassenaar?"

	Dave Banisar, Policy Director, EPIC

	Michael Baker, Electronic Frontiers Australia
	Jim Lewis US Department of Commerce *
	Bruce Schneier, Author, Applied Cryptography
	Glenn Sibbitt, Wassenaar Secretariat
	Jeff Smith, Americans for Computer Privacy
	Francois Xavier Testard Vaillant, Science attache,
	    French Embassy *

Lunch / Working Groups - D
12:00-1:30 pm

	1 - NGO [Yaman Akdeniz/Deborah Hurley]

	2 - WIPO RFC [Michale Froomkin]

	3 - T/B/A

	4 - T/B/A

Mock Trial "Judging Privacy: What is the Verdict?"
1:30-3:00 pm

	Hon. David Flaherty, Information and Privacy Commissioner

	Elizabeth France, Data Protection Registrar, United Kingdom
	Peter Hustinx, Registratiekamer, Netherlands
	Stephanie Perrin, Industry Canada, Canada
	Peter Swire, Office of Management and Budget, United States

	Professor Colin Bennett, University of Victoria, Canada
	Roger Clarke, Australian National University, Australia
	Robert Gellman, Information and Privacy Consultant
	Christine Varney, Coordinator, Online Privacy Alliance
	Robert Vastine, President, Coalition of Service Industries

3:00-3:15 pm

Panel Discussion "Self Regulation Reconsidered"
3:15-4:30 pm

	William J. Drake, Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for
	   International Peace

	Laina Raveendran Greene, Asia Pacific Policy and Legal Forum
 	Professor Lawrence Lessig, Harvard Law School
 	Elliot Maxwell, Special Advisor, Department of Commerce
	Michael R. Nelson, Program Director, Internet Technology, IBM
	Andrew L. Shapiro, Brennan Center for Justice
	Solveig Singleton, Director of Information Studies, Cato Institute

Closing Plenary "Freedom and Privacy and the Global Internet II"
4:30-6:00 pm

	Professor Oscar Gandy, Annenburg School of Communication

	David Beier, Chief Domestic Policy Advisor, Vice President *
	Joichi Ito, Digital Garage, Japan
	Jim Murray, Director, Bureau Europen des Unions de
	Andile Nogaba, Director General, Department of Communications,
	    South Africa
	Peter Neumann, Moderator, RISKS Digest
	Adam Clayton Powell, Freedom Forum
	Nadine Strossen, President, American Civil Liberties Union
	Peter Yip, President, China Internet Corporation

   *: Invited speaker
Note: Program subject to change

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

       "Computers, Freedom and Privacy: The Global Internet"
                          April 6-8, 1999
                Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, DC


Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:51:01 CST
From: CuD Moderators 
Subject: File 4--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 10 Jan, 1999)

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

CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup:

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

Send the message to:


The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax (815-753-6302)
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
(NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line)

CuD is readily accessible from the Net:
  UNITED STATES: ( in /pub/CuD/CuD
    Web-accessible from:
         ( in /pub/Publications/CuD/
         in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
  EUROPE: in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)

The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
Cu Digest WWW site at:

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 #11.15

<--">Return to the Cu Digest homepage

Page maintained by: Jim Thomas -