December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Stylometry
by Dana W. Albrecht 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I recently came across an interesting book. Detailed information follows. It would seem (to me) to have interesting implications for anonymous remailers. Does anyone on the list have any knowledge of this subject? I've seen it hinted at, but never systematically explored. In particular, does anyone know how it has advanced since the book was written (1978)? Additional references? Dana W. Albrecht dwa(a)corsair.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Morton, A. Q. (Andrew Queen) Literary detection : how to prove authorship and fraud in literature and doc uments / A. Q. Morton. [Epping, Eng.] : Bowker, c1978. xiii, 221 p. ; 25 cm. LC CALL NUMBER: PN171.F6 M64 SUBJECTS: Authorship, Disputed. Language and languages--Style. Linguistics--Statistical methods. DEWEY DEC: 801/.959 NOTES: Includes index. Bibliography: p. 221. ISBN: 0859350622 : L10.50 LCCN: 79-310591 r85 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Contents List of Tables vii List of Figures xi Preface xiii SECTION I THE THEORY OF STYLOMETRY 1. The Problems of Identification and Recognition 3 2. The First Steps 19 3. Statistics and Stylometry 29 4. Statistics as Description 40 5. The Second Stage in Statistical Description 51 6. Like or Unlike? The Statistics of Comparisons 71 7. The Rules of the Game 75 SECTION II THE FEATURES OF LANGUAGE WHICH ARE OF PARTICULAR INTEREST IN STYLOMETRY 8. The Writer in his Works 95 9. The Inflected Language 108 (i) Positional Measurements and Word Mobility 109 (ii) Isotropic Distributions 114 (iii) Anistropic Distributions 121 10. The Uninflected Language 130 11. The Occurrence of Proportional Word Pairs 147 SECTION III APPLICATIONS 12. Introductory 153 13. The Homeric Problem 158 14. The Authorship of the Pauline Epistles 165 15. The Shakespeare Problems 184 16. The Inimitable Jane 189 17. A Word from Baker Street 192 18. Let Justice be Done 195 CONCLUSION 208 Appendix 211 Glossary 215 Bibliography 221 Index 223 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (From page 7) The main subject of this book is one special aspect of identification, the determination of the authorship of texts. Since the development of photography it has been a simple matter to determine who wrote or who typed out a text. It is even possible to demonstrate which instrument was used in the writing or typing. But such physical comparisons do not indicate who composed the text or altered it from its original form. To enable this to be done a descriptive science known as stylometry is needed. Stylometry is the science which describes and measures the personal elements in literary or extempore utterances, so that it can be said that one particular person is responsible for the composition rather than any other person who might have been speaking or writing at that time on the same subject for similar reasons. Stylometry deals not with the meaning of what is said or written but how it is being said or written. Stylometry does not deal with the evidential value of statements. It does not asked whether this or that particular statement is true or reasonable, but applies itself to the question, 'In whose words are these sentiments expressed?' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Conclusion Looking back, the development of stylometry is easy to see. De Morgan was the first to point out the pattern of argument which should be used in stylometry, statistics would describe samples and sampling differences would become the measure of similarity or difference. But to suggest that something might well be true and to show that is is true are two different propositions and it was a long time before anyone actually developed a statistical test of authorship. It should have been done by Udny Yule in his book, _The Statistical Study of Literary Vocabulary_, but he made an unfortunate error in calculating the standard errors of sentence length distributions with the result that it was not until W.C. Wake corrected the error and continued his study of sentence length distributions of Greek authors in 1946 and 1957 that a reliable test was established. With the pattern of argument confirmed, attention then turned to what should be counted and analysed. Like all his colleagues, the author spent some time looking at those features of style which literary critics had noted and used as the basis for their judgements. This was making stylometry the conversion of stylistic description into quantitative terms; it was using the accumulated experience of scholars as it had been expressed in traditional forms. This proved to be an unexciting quest. In some cases, for example the suggestion of Sir Kenneth Dover that the number of finite verbs used by a writer of Greek prose might be an indicator of authorship, it turned out to be valid but required samples impracticably large for any New Testament application, and in others it soon became clear that the observations had no firm foundation in any objective data. It was the realisation that in Greek writing position was of prime importance that gave stylometry its first general theory. That such a theory was justified was confirmed when a dramatic plea for help with a police statement written in modern English posed a problem which was rapidly solved by an adaptation of positional methods to the constraints of an uninflected language. In Greek where word movement is free, look at word movement and position; in English where word movement is restricted, look at immediate context. There is so much material available that routine applications of stylometry will present few problems. What remain intractable are problems of mixed tests where one writer has been revised by another or other situations in which the homogeneity of the text is in doubt. Immediate progress seems likely to be made in two directions. Both concern the efficiency of methods rather than the further development of methods. A simple way to increase the separation of two authors is to combine a number of tests in multi-variate statistics. Properly done this will generate figures which show vast differences where such exist, although the differences are diffused throughout a number of statistics and are nowhere to be seen as clearly as the measure of their combined effect. The difficulty is that multi-variate statistics can conceal the underlying features and in some instances lead to confusion or misapprehension. One such set of statistics showed the differences between brands of cigarettes and showed very large differences. But a study of the statistics which were combined in the analysis revealed that the largest differences concerned the packing and the printing on the packets. While this might be useful for anyone designing a machine to select brands and sort them automatically, it was much less useful for any smoker who wanted to know about the quality of the cigarette. The other development which is easy to forecast is the formation of profiles of individual writers so that quick reference and resolution of problems will be possible. One way of doing this is to start with a set of collocations. It might be that after "and" a writer is very fond of using "the" and hardly ever uses "so." This can be made a test of how often "the" after "and" occurs compared to "so" after "and". The combination of a few such tests based upon the personal maxima and minima of an author will soon provide a measure by which he can be detected in a large number of candidates. The ultimate aim has been set by the information theory experts who, many years ago, calculated that in any 200 words, written or spoken, there was enough information to enable their author to be picked out of the human race. This is like saying that every cubic mile of sea water contains twenty tons of gold; it may be there but getting it out is not easy. But the aim must be to be able to say of any couple of hundred words, it is or is not the sole production of the person who produced this other sample. It may seem that we are a long way from being able to do so, but how much nearer we have come in the last twenty years. Who will say that the next twenty years will not produce the desired result? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

NSA Frisbee [EXTREMELY FRIVOLOUS]
by cman＠communities.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Bakkes, who is on the EC board, recently brought in an NSA flying disk. A .gif of it is available at: http://www.communities.com/foo/NSAfris.gif We are currently looking for a source of these; we will be calling the number listed on the disk itself tomorrow during normal office hours in MD.

1 0

Re: Meeting notes from ANSI X.9 Meeting on Electronic Payment
by Pat Farrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

rah(a)shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) writes: >> It doesn't appear that these people seem to care about >> cash-like anonymous token-based payment schemes. Is that a valid >> assesment? What is needed to make these people start caring about >> that? > My guess is, they won't. Ever. > > <Elmer Gantry [snip]> Reality check. Accountants _know_ how to do books that deal with cash. Most small business keep their books on a cash basis. Cash was how the world worked until recently. Accountants know how to meet acceptable auditing standards when transactions are in cash. I learned this from the CPA I live with. Seems to me this list doesn't have enough folks with a grounding in non-technical issues. Until the last 30+ years, the world lived on cash. I like cash. I assume I'll like electronic cash once people remember what cash is and model it correctly. Got to to get my beauty sleep before tomorrow's GAK export meeting... Pat Pat Farrell Grad Student http://www.isse.gmu.edu/students/pfarrell Info. Systems & Software Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA PGP key available on homepage #include <standard.disclaimer>

1 0

Re: Do the Right Thing
by Ed Carp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 01:42:25 -0800 > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > From: anonymous-remailer(a)shell.portal.com > Subject: Re: Do the Right Thing > On Sun, 3 Dec 1995, Timothy C. May wrote: > > > > Netscape, being the dominant browser company, and Microsoft, being the > > dominant OS company, are in special positions to "build in Big Brother." > > I'm not claiming they are, just that they are clearly in a position to make > > it technologically more feasible to make non-GAK illegal. They both need to > > carefully think about the role that's been "given" to them (whether by > > fortune, hard work, or being in the right place at the right time) and do > > what's right. > > That's always a tough position to be in. If Netscape or Microsoft > knew what was the "right" thing to do, I don't doubt that they'd be > doing it. That's one of the most politically and socially naive statements I've ever heard. Corporations *never* do the "right thing" unless it will increase their profits. Remember, corporations are in business to make money by providing a product or service that people will pay money for. Whatever gets in the way of that will fall by the wayside. That's an economic fact of life.

1 0

Re: Do the Right Thing
by cactus＠hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199512050326.VAA30525@khijol>, Ed Carp <ecarp(a)netcom.com> wrote: >That's one of the most politically and socially naive statements I've >ever heard. Corporations *never* do the "right thing" unless it will >increase their profits. I just *love* hearing statments like this from people who have probably never started their own businesses. Corporations are no more or less than their component people. If the people running a corporation care about an issue, the corporation will act upon it -- bounded by the interaction of their survival instinct with their assessment of reality. How could it be otherwise? The literature out there abounds with counterexamples to the "corporations are automata" idea (for some reason, they love to harp on Ben & Jerry's). - -- Todd Masco | "life without caution/ the only worth living / love for a man/ cactus(a)hks.net | love for a woman/ love for the facts/ protectless" - A Rich Cactus' Homepage - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMMPFSSoZzwIn1bdtAQG1FAGAsXRzDAFRmZWvyKt8AlkGvHfWgCth9izE Ibj/E41hbgSTvppJot/OWcFpa00B46PD =d6+o -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

New version of SSL 3.0
by Phil Karlton 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SSL 3.0 protocol has been substantially changed from earlier drafts to fix a number of performance and cyrptographic issues. The latest version can be found as PostScript in a compressed tar file on ftp://ftp<N>.netscape.com/pub/review/ssl-spec.tar.Z where <N> is a digit in the range [2-8]. An HTML version should be available in a day or two. I will post the URL when that happens. Netscape is also in the process of submitting this draft to IETF. Questions and comments about this specification should all be directed to ssl-talk(a)netscape.com. Answers and replies will be posted there. We are quite interested in your feedback. As new eyes see the spec for the first time, I suspect that we will be notified about typos and areas that are not as clear as they should be. As a result, there will probably be an update in 2 weeks or so. PK -- Philip L. Karlton karlton(a)netscape.com Principal Curmudgeon http://www.netscape.com/people/karlton Netscape Communications

1 0

Re: GAK Flap Happening at a Good Time--Journalists Read!
by blancw＠accessone.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Uni, if you're so overwhelmingly and absolutely incensed with Netscape, why don't you write to Jim Clark yourself and tell him about his spinelessness and all your other opinions of him, his unaccceptable attitude, and his worthless company, instead of getting granular with Jim and Dan here on the list? After all, Jim Clark is the one who made the unpleasant statements. .. Blanc

3 2

Crypto stuff
by Bob Johnson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Could you send me some info on crypto stuff. I need to secure some files and as yet havent figured out how to do it. If you can help I would appreciate it.

1 0

Re: Do the Right Thing
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 4 Dec 1995, Ed Carp wrote: > > > Netscape, being the dominant browser company, and Microsoft, > > > being the dominant OS company, are in special positions to > > > "build in Big Brother." I'm not claiming they are, just that > > > they are clearly in a position to make it technologically more > > > feasible to make non-GAK illegal. They both need to carefully > > > think about the role that's been "given" to them (whether by > > > fortune, hard work, or being in the right place at the right > > > time) and do what's right. > > > > That's always a tough position to be in. If Netscape or Microsoft > > knew what was the "right" thing to do, I don't doubt that they'd be > > doing it. > > That's one of the most politically and socially naive statements I've > ever heard. Corporations *never* do the "right thing" unless it will > increase their profits. Sure, I realize this. I'm very aware of it in fact. The art of persuasion is the science of selfish self-interest. Once a company realizes that their "profits" are in jeopardy, or that individual corporate officers are liable to face prison time, then they generally do the "right" thing, what's in their interest. It's just like asking questions. You never ask a question to which you don't already have the answer. > Remember, corporations are in business to > make money by providing a product or service that people will pay > money for. Whatever gets in the way of that will fall by the > wayside. That's an economic fact of life. Sure. This is true. Facts of Life. Stiff upper-lip and such. Alice de 'nonymous ... <an455120(a)anon.penet.fi> ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

1 0

Re: GAK_hit
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:25 AM 12/4/95 -0500, John Young wrote: > 12-4-95. W$Jabber: > > "Microsoft Probe Spurs Subpoenas Tied to Internet. > Antitrust Effort Appears Focused on Windows 95 Disabled > Rival Software." > The subpoena issued to Netscape may be of particular > significance. In the estimate of Netscape and industry > observers, I regularly use netscape on windows 95, and I conclude that this subpoena is pure, 100% harassment. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

2 1