October 2013 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

[guardian-dev] How To Generate SSL keys without Backdoor
by Eugen Leitl 04 Oct '13

04 Oct '13

----- Forwarded message from Aaron Lux <a(a)AaronLux.com> ----- Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 23:50:40 -0500 From: Aaron Lux <a(a)AaronLux.com> To: guardian-dev(a)lists.mayfirst.org Subject: [guardian-dev] How To Generate SSL keys without Backdoor Message-ID: <524E4920.7040007(a)AaronLux.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 Reply-To: Aaron Lux <a(a)AaronLux.com> How to generate SSL keys which cannot be compromised. (Courtesy of FBI): > ATTACHMENT B > Lavabit uses 2048?bit Secure Socket Layer (SSL) certificates purchased from GoDaddy to > encrypt communication bet".Veen users and its server. SSL encryption employs public-key > cryptography, in which both the sender and receiver each have two mathematically linked keys: a > "public" key and a "private" key. "Public" keys arc published, but "private" keys are not. In this > circumstance, a Lavabit customer uses Lavabit's published public key to initiate an encrypted > email session with Lavabit over the internet. Lavabit's servers then decrypt this traffic using their > private key. The only way to decrypt this traffic is through the usage of this private key. A SSL > certificate is another name for a published public key. > To obtain a SSL certificate from GoOaddy, a user needs to firs! generate a 2048-bil > private key on hislher computer. Depending on the operating system and web server used, there > are mUltiple ways to generate a private key. One of the more popular methods is to use a freely > available command-line tool called OpenSSL. This generation also creates a certificate signing > request file. The user sends this file to the SSL generation authority (e.g. GoOaddy) and > OoOaddy then sends back the SSL certifi cate. The private key is not sent to GoDaddy and > should be retained by the user. This private key is sto red on the user's web server to permit > decryption of internet traffic, as described above. The FBI's collection system that will be > installed to implement the PRiTT also requires the private key to be stored to decrypt Lavabit > email and internet traffic. This decrypted traffic will then be filtered for the target email address > specified in the PRlTI order. > Depending on how exactly the private key was first generated by the user, it itself may be > encrypted and protected by a password supplied by the user. This additional level of security is > useful if, for example, a backup copy of the private key is stored on a CD. Ifthal CD v.'8S lost or > stolen, the private key would not be compromised because a password would be required to > access it. However, the user that generated the private key would have supplied it at generation > time and would thus have knowledge of it. The OpenSSL tool described above is capable of > decrypting encrypted private keys and converting the keys to a non-encrypted format with a > simple, well -documented command. The FBI's collection system and most web servcrs requ ires > the key to be stored in a non-encrypted format. > > A 2048-bit key is composed of 512 characters. The standard practice of exchanging > private SSL keys between entities is to use some electronic medium (e.g., CD or secure internet > exchange). SSL keys are rarely, if ever, exchanged verbally or through print medium due to their > long length and possibil ity of human error. Mr. Levison has previously stated that Lavabit > actually uses five separate public/private key pairs, one for each type of mail protocol used by > Lavabit. > PEM format is an industry-standard file format for digitally representing SSL keys. PEM > files can easily be created using the OpenSSL tool described above. The preferred medium for > receiving these keys would be on a CO. _______________________________________________ Guardian-dev mailing list Post: Guardian-dev(a)lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To Unsubscribe Send email to: Guardian-dev-unsubscribe(a)lists.mayfirst.org Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/guardian-dev/eugen%40leitl.org You are subscribed as: eugen(a)leitl.org ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://ativel.com http://postbiota.org AC894EC5: 38A5 5F46 A4FF 59B8 336B 47EE F46E 3489 AC89 4EC5

1 0

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Indie web
by Eugen Leitl 04 Oct '13

04 Oct '13

----- Forwarded message from Sandy Harris <sandyinchina(a)gmail.com> ----- Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 06:33:03 -0400 From: Sandy Harris <sandyinchina(a)gmail.com> To: freedombox list <freedombox-discuss(a)lists.alioth.debian.org> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Indie web Message-ID: <CACXcFm=P50gy_g+cK6snH0XeMTciUfPb17_WnGSm1uvg8okKxw(a)mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Rob van der Hoeven <robvanderhoeven(a)ziggo.nl> wrote: >> I've been looking for projects comparable to freedombox .... > > Another FreedomBox-like project is arkOS > > https://arkos.io/ > > Runs on the Raspberry Pi, looks very promising! > Here are some remarks the author of arkOS made about the differences > between his project and the FreedomBox: > > https://arkos.io/2013/04/differences-between-arkos-and-freedombox/ Discussed on Slashdot today: http://www.techworld.com.au/article/528273/arkos_building_anti-cloud_raspbe… _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list Freedombox-discuss(a)lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://ativel.com http://postbiota.org AC894EC5: 38A5 5F46 A4FF 59B8 336B 47EE F46E 3489 AC89 4EC5

1 0

Fwd: USDOJ: Kelley Case Significant Oversight
by Wilfred Guerin 04 Oct '13

04 Oct '13

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wilfred Guerin <wilfred(a)vt.edu> Date: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 12:19 PM Subject: USDOJ: Kelley Case Significant Oversight To: peter.phipps(a)usdoj.gov CIV # 13-cv-825 Jill Kelley, FBI, DOD Jill Kelley's (in-law) father is Gen David Kelley (NCS, DISA) Jill Kelley's uncle is FBI Director of OIC Patrick W. Kelley Jill Kelley's uncle is Gen Zbiginew US Army Poland, responsible for CIA Rendition Torture Base Jill Kelley's cousin is FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce (nephew of Patrick Kelley) Jill Kelley's cousin is DNI Lawyer Alex Joel (nephew of Patrick Kelley) Alex Joel's grandfather is Clarence M. Kelley, FBI Director 1970s Jill Kelley's uncle is DIA Counter-Intelligence Commander Jill Kelley's uncles [are] military [counter] intelligence training and command Jill Kelley's cousins [are] USDOJ covert intelligence and counter-intelligence Jill Kelley's cousin is DOJ/DOD Counter-Intelligence responsible for designing 9/11 (2001) Jill Kelley's cousin Logan provided aircraft flight control systems used 9/11 Gen John Allen's nephew worked on the WTC insurance policy 2001 Jill Kelley's cousin managed WTC insurance policy unit 2001 Jill Kelley's uncle is military propaganda specialist Deforest Kelley Patrick W. Kelley, FBI OIC, is responsible for protocol and compliance for FBI and all 1811s Sean Joyce brought David Petraeus issue to ODNI Clapper with first cousin Alex Joel as advised by mutual uncle Patrick W. Kelley re his niece Jill Kelley. The information you have cited in your filing is erroneous. This is indication of systemic treasonous influence. This is a short list of the 75+ identified parties involved.

1 0

Fwd: USDOJ: Kelley Case Significant Oversight
by Wilfred Guerin 04 Oct '13

04 Oct '13

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wilfred Guerin <wilfred(a)vt.edu> Date: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 12:19 PM Subject: USDOJ: Kelley Case Significant Oversight To: peter.phipps(a)usdoj.gov CIV # 13-cv-825 Jill Kelley, FBI, DOD Jill Kelley's (in-law) father is Gen David Kelley (NCS, DISA) Jill Kelley's uncle is FBI Director of OIC Patrick W. Kelley Jill Kelley's uncle is Gen Zbiginew US Army Poland, responsible for CIA Rendition Torture Base Jill Kelley's cousin is FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce (nephew of Patrick Kelley) Jill Kelley's cousin is DNI Lawyer Alex Joel (nephew of Patrick Kelley) Alex Joel's grandfather is Clarence M. Kelley, FBI Director 1970s Jill Kelley's uncle is DIA Counter-Intelligence Commander Jill Kelley's uncles [are] military [counter] intelligence training and command Jill Kelley's cousins [are] USDOJ covert intelligence and counter-intelligence Jill Kelley's cousin is DOJ/DOD Counter-Intelligence responsible for designing 9/11 (2001) Jill Kelley's cousin Logan provided aircraft flight control systems used 9/11 Gen John Allen's nephew worked on the WTC insurance policy 2001 Jill Kelley's cousin managed WTC insurance policy unit 2001 Jill Kelley's uncle is military propaganda specialist Deforest Kelley Patrick W. Kelley, FBI OIC, is responsible for protocol and compliance for FBI and all 1811s Sean Joyce brought David Petraeus issue to ODNI Clapper with first cousin Alex Joel as advised by mutual uncle Patrick W. Kelley re his niece Jill Kelley. The information you have cited in your filing is erroneous. This is indication of systemic treasonous influence. This is a short list of the 75+ identified parties involved.

1 0

Re: anarchy was : Silk Road founder arrested ...
by Juan Garofalo 04 Oct '13

04 Oct '13

--On Thursday, October 03, 2013 1:12 AM +0200 Lodewijk andré de la porte <l(a)odewijk.nl> wrote: > 2013/10/2 Juan Garofalo <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> > > > I think you need to research the ABC of political theory before saying > anything about anarchy. Your belief that anarchy is chaos is as unfounded > as it is laughable. > > > Anarchy as a word does not mean a thing. Right, it doesn't mean one thing, it means *two* different and mutually exclusive things. It is vulgarly used to mean 'chaos', and it's used by advocates of voluntary interactions to describe a social system based on voluntary interactions. You know, voluntary interactions : The opposite of cheering the drug laws of the american state. > It's the people in it that shape > it. This is as much as risk as it is a feature. From chaos men makes > shapes, structures. These structures must, by the very absence of it, > reimplement what otherwise a government does. Of course the extends and > all will depend upon the people. A government is a criminal organization that violates rights to life liberty and property. Those criminal 'functions' of government can't exist in a voluntary society. If 'people' 'reimplement' what government does, then we are not talking about anarchy. > > > Economically I can fairly say that every function will be taken over by > the group that can do the task as financially efficient as possible. > Combining that with the historic fact that kingdoms and empires, due to > people's ignorance, are the easiest structures to conjure. And that ease > makes it have a good return. Not sure what you're getting at... > > So. My thinking is that anarchy that remains anarchy is in fact quite > chaotic, > as no rel leaders are permitted to arise. I don't see the connection between leaders and their sheep on one hand and 'chaos' on the other. It's quite possible to have 'order' without 'leaders'. It's called self-government. Or doing what you like and leaving your neighbor alone. >Of course it's > possible to have discussions together, to rule as a non-forcible > collective. That's a very unstable situation however. Just like chaos. > Individuals can interact as individuals, voluntary and with no 'chaos' in sight. I don't see why it should be 'unstable'. > Now if you'd be so kind to tell me why your tone was so insulting and the > reasons for thinking the way you do, then perhaps this can become an > interesting conversation.

3 3

Re: Injustice: Denial of Disservice Attack - ACCEPT NO BARGAINS!
by coderman 03 Oct '13

03 Oct '13

On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Jim Bell <jamesdbell8(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > ... I thought, what if every > Federal defendant could be motivated to refuse to deal, to refuse to accept > the deal that's usually offered. a great idea, and like jury nullification, sure to be treated harshly. case in point: how much pressure was brought to bear in the Aaron Swartz prosecution to force a plea, and how the mere "disrespect" of taking notes during a proceeding and blogging about them drove a DA to absurd abuses of power in retaliation.

2 1

Pen register request used to force disclosure of SSL private keys - LavaBit hearings
by coderman 03 Oct '13

03 Oct '13

this is perhaps the most interesting aspect of the LavaBit proceedings. See: http://cryptome.org/2013/10/lavabit-orders.pdf in short if you have not designed your system to be amenable to metadata tapping, particularly all the rich metadata requested by a "pen register", they're going to demand the encryption keys to access this metadata. said again for emphasis: SSL private keys are demanded under the smallest of justifications, which need not even show probable cause nor reasonable suspicion!! (they did later go back with an actual warrant for the keys, but only after this initial gambit, made repeatedly, failed.) """ July 16, 2013 TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE CLAUDE M. HILTON ... [ED: James Trump is the fed lawyer, Ladar Levinson the LavaBit operator.] ... THE COURT: So as I understand it, my initial order ordered nothing but that the pen register be put in place. MR . TRUMP : And all technical assistance, information, and facilities necessary to implement the pen register. And it's our position t hat without the encryption keys, the data from the pen register will be meaningless. So to facilitate the actual monitoring required by the pen register, the FBI also requires the encryption keys . THE COURT: Well, that could be, but I don't know that I need - - I don ' t know that I need to reach that because I've issued a search warrant for that . MR. TRUMP : Correct, Your Honor. That the -- to avoid litigating this issue, we asked the Court to enter the seizure warrant. THE COURT : Well, what I ' m saying is if he agrees that the pen register be established, and that the only thing he doesn't want to do in connection with the pen register is to give up the encryption device or code MR. LEVISON : I've always maintained that . THE COURT : -- so we ' ve got no issue here . You're ready to do that? MR. LEVISON : I ' ve been ready to do that since Agent Howard spoke to me the first time . THE COURT: All right . So that ends our -- MR . TRUMP : Well, then we have to inquire of Mr, Levison whether he ... Jill produce the encryption keys pursuant to the search warrant that Your Honor just signed. THE COURT : But I can't deal with that this morning, can I? MR . TRUMP : Well , it ' s the same issue . You could ask him, Your Honor . We can serve him with the warrant and ask him if he' 5 going to comply rather than - - MR. LEVISON : Your Honor I've also been issued a subpoena demanding those same keys, which I brought with me in the event that we would have to address that subpoena . THE COURT : I don't know, Mr . Trump . I don't think I want to get involved in asking him . You can talk with him and see whether he ' s going to produce them or not and let him tell you . But I don ' t think I ought to go asking what he's going to do and what he's not going to do because I can ' t take any action about it anyway . If he does not comply with the subpoena, there are remedies for that one way or another . MR . TRUMP: Well, the original pen register order was followed by a compulsion order from Judge Buchanan . The compulsion order required the encr yption keys to be produced . So , yes, part of the show cause order is to require compliance both with the pen register order and the compulsion order issued by Judge Buchanan . And that order, which was attached to the show cause order, states, "To the extent any information, facilities, or technical assistance are under the control of Lavabit are needed to provide the FBI with the encrypted data, Lavabit shall provide such information, facilities, or technical assistance forthwith ." MR. LEVISON : I would object to that statement . I don't know if I'm wording this correctly, but what was in that order to compel was a statement that was incorrect . Agent Howard seemed to believe that I had the ability to encrypt the e-mail content stored on our servers, which is not the case . I only have the keys that govern communications into and out of the network , and those keys are used to secure the traffic for all users, not just the user in question . So the statement in that order compelling me to decrypt stuff and Agent Howard stating that I have the ability to do that is technically false or incorrect. There was never an explicit demand that I turn over these keys . THE COURT : I don't know what bearing that would have, would it? I mean, I don't have a problem -- Judge Buchanan issued an order in addition to mine, and I'm not sure I ought to be enforcing Judge Buchanan's order . July order, if he says that he will produce or allow the installation of the pen register, and in addition I have issued a search warrant for the codes that you want, which I did this morning, that's been entered, it seems that this issue is over as far as I'm concerned except I need to see that he allows the pen register and complies with the subpoena . MR . TRUMP : Correct . THE COURT: If he doesn't comply -- if he doesn't comply with the subpoena, then that has -- I have to address that. MR . TRUMP : Right . THE COURT: But right now there's nothing for me to address here unless he is not telling me correctly about the pen register . MR. TRUMP: Well , we can -- Your Honor, if we can talk to Mr . Levison for five minutes, we can ask him whether he will honor the warrant that you just issued . MR. LEVISON : Before we do that , can I - - THE COURT : Well, what can I do about it if he doesn't, if he tells you he's not going to? You've got the right to go out and search and get it . MR . TRUMP: Well, we can't get the information without his assistance . He's the only who knows and has possession of it . We can't take it from him involuntarily . MR . LEVISON : If I may, sir, my other THE COURT : Wait just a second . You're trying to get me ahead . You're trying to get me to deal with a contempt before there's any contempt , and I have a problem with that. MR . TRUMP: I'm trying to avoid contempt altogether, Your Honor . THE COURT: I know you are . And I'd love for you-all to get together and do that. I don't want to deal with it either. But I don't think we can sit around and agree that there's going to be a default and I will address it before it occurs. MR . TRUMP: I'm just trying to figure out whether there's going to be a default . We'll take care of that, Judge . THE COURT : You can . I think the way we've got to do this - - and I'll listen to you . I'm cutting you off, I know, but I'll listen to you in a minute. The way we have to do this, the hearing that's before me this morning on this issue of the pen register, that's been resolved, or so he's told me . I don't know whether you want to continue this one week and see if he complies with that, which I guess would be prudent to do, or a few days for him to comply with the pen register. Then we Hill wait and see what happens with the SUbpoena . Because as far as my pen register order is concerned, he says he's going to comply with it . So that issue's over and done with . The next issue will be ... whether or not he complies with the subpoena . And I don't know and I don't want to presume, and I don't want him to represent to me what he intends to do when he can very well go home and decide he's going to do something different. When that warrant is served, we'll know what he's going to do . I think we've got - - I don't see another way to do it . MR . TRUMP : That's fine, Your Honor. We will serve the warrant on him as soon as we conclude this hearing, and we'll find out whether he will provide the keys or not .

5 6

USB Block Erupters as RNG sources?
by d.nix 03 Oct '13

03 Oct '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Curious; anyone know much about what these inexpensive (comparatively, price seems steadily falling) ASIC Block Erupter USB Bitcoin miners can be adapted to doing? Could they be repurposed as RNG sources? I know they are designed / programmed for running the SHA256 hashing employed in mining Bitcoin, but as the difficulty rate goes up, their value in that arena becomes less and less... Just wondering if they might find new life as inexpensive RNGs. Any pointers to the circuit or the code they run? Disclaimer: I have no idea if this is even remotely a valid or good idea... But a cheap hardware thumb drive RNG might be useful, no? DN - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSTTxSAAoJEDMbeBxcUNAeS6cH/2byF7EcXWk6/wFrAzTkNuWE AuL8VEdgPuhZwkN10JCrFcpk7AwwIWZfZq7gUkFaaWS/Zc/X3Fiwj6no/Sr+76ak ste9aIZJ7ZGA6Hkni7JXdvEZi/xyq40UyVl0RGJHCTOrtNirSwgGF5uE8h0WYgom LwrulVWE+QpblBgVWJ/vR8i18kWnK1skrOGwDBg9weqW3nmBRtye3bOcJipiYHXm qdkxrzAYCY6Odr2pI7Fiv1lM4lH9ryZyDbJ6VW3jmsq2sXBMZ/TfZugscjx78m39 AbIk87ubwNUj30B/36pIvQyA9ePX43JZ9Ojpy+y3McbHI0Zg65A+MNpLnLCenCc= =7P4e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

Metadata-killer
by Jim Bell 03 Oct '13

03 Oct '13

From http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/10/lavabit_unsealed/ "In an interesting work-around, Levison complied the next day by turning over the private SSL keys as an 11 page printout in 4-point type. The government, not unreasonably, called the printout “illegible.” “To make use of these keys, the FBI would have to manually input all 2,560 characters, and one incorrect keystroke in this laborious process would render the FBI collection system incapable of collecting decrypted data,” prosecutors wrote. The court ordered Levison to provide a more useful electronic copy. By August 5, Lavabit was still resisting the order, and the judge ordered that Levison would be fined $5,000 a day beginning August 6 until he handed over electronic copies of the keys." Companies like Verizon who are ordered to hand over "electronic copies" of metadata, passwords, and other material the government shouldn't get, should be convinced that they need to hand over that material in "electronic form": In the form of PDF files, of text that has been randomly ordered by line, and 'printed out' in a 'cursive' font, but not one in which each character always appears to be the same. Rather, each character will be pseudorandomly modified in order to simulate the variability of any person's written cursive, with overlapping characters. This will be analogous to the "Captcha" systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha , which is designed to be very difficult for a computer to convert back to ASCII or HTML text. The text will therefore be eminently readable to humans (at least if you're old enough to have been taught cursive in school!), yet virtually impossible to return to the form they'd like to see. (Alternatively, a similarly-variable Gothic script could be used, to add spice to the whole process.) Jim Bell

1 0

[=] boundaries and thresholds
by brian carroll 03 Oct '13

03 Oct '13

--- intro --- cryptography in a computer context, tied down into particular mindsets and frameworks, limited and private approaches to programming, addressing issue of secrecy and security, as if it is all inside the existing observation, contained within a particular viewpoint and set of variables as interpreted. and then, how to convey another parallel world that also involves itself in the same conceptual structure, though differently... and even precedent to what is rigidly occurring inside the electronic boxes and technologies, yet in comparison appearing only low-tech if no-tech, even while precedent if not philosophically more pure. grounded by default of its physicality as it relates to ideas placed into action. how to make the case 'this happened before that' and yet to address a default detestation or conceit that may also exist, culturally, via a detachment between ideas, how things work, their relevance and trajectory and importance as knowledge, while inside an illiterate world. a question of meaning, though also inherent bias, presumption of 'knowing' and having answers instead of not knowing and asking questions, learning from other realms of inquiry. thus are minds and mentalities closed or are they capable of seeing beyond themselves and their finite assumptions, especially if shared, solidified into the dogma of ideology. "science" without art is no longer science. it is technique removed of its human purpose and capacity and becomes and functions for another antihuman agenda. it can become a distortion or false viewpoint to develop hostile policies within. the *insight* of art, of inquiry, of questioning, of the realm of risk and of peak functioning and imagination, of optimization within a limited context and challenging constraints - of knowing, of being, of choices and actions - creates or opens or allows access, willing or not, into another realm beyond the normal and everyday, new territory or old territory reconsidered and reconceived. turning answers into questions again and presenting new views into existing questions and ideas. so for instance, 'the context' for crypto could be assumed to be computers by default of this being the present situation, in a confined digital, binary technological development. for some the relevance or questions of crypto may be bounded within assumptions of this context, perhaps never having been experienced or considered beyond this computer model and its particular emphasis on certain algorithmic approaches, as if previous questions have been answered correctly and now it is just an issue of extending the model indefinitely, tweaking it within the given parameters and upgrading the model into newer technologies. in this sense a certain 'faith in technology' could even exist, where blind faith replaces the role of questioning fundamental truth, which has already been decided upon, and is assumed "known" and therefore someone can just pick up the or join in the parade and security and secrecy are effectively deemed guaranteed as long as staying within the ideological lines. and yet an entire world of experience exists outside of this view and some if it can have profound relation both to the ideas of crypto and the falsification of existing models that seek to bound and limit its interpretation, thereby to control it within a given domain, while actual crypto could be occurring outside this, without realization by some "experts" who wholly believe in a limited finite hardware/software model as the limit of questioning or the basis for relations in a realm of intelligence or human communications of ideas in a realm of secrecy, privacy, and security, including issues of the state as decentralized. as if "where there is no computer encryption- there is no cryptography". in the realm of ideas this view is beyond laughable and truly ignorant of the domain cryptology operates within. for instance, the role of crossword puzzles or suduko as it relates to puzzle solving, as these skills may be applied outside a realm of computer encryption yet decipher meaning. not necessarily within those puzzles though others. and that this is basic and should be assumed relevant to ideas of cryptography and not seen as separate in terms of what it involves. an algorithm is only a minor part of a much larger realm of questioning that may involve other multiple approaches brought into a shared evaluation. it is not just a technical response that can be easily resolved in software/hardware models if it exists beyond their boundary. and thus how a situation is modeled or observed would influence what can be evaluated, and thus if there is no consideration of crypto outside of computation, none seeming exists. and yet this could be entirely false, an illusion or delusion of those so trapped in their POVs. and to some degree or other everyone is trapped within individual frameworks in some way, it is an issue of how it is dealt with, must everything occur within that limit in interactions and thus a bubble reality and bubble-relations are required, or can a person transcend their own limits through realizing and acknowledging truth beyond themselves and their limits and humble themselves before the larger world of ideas and other people, to learn and interact with others and ideas, and develop shared frameworks that are self-correcting, including requiring a person to correct their flawed assumptions as part of this empirical condition. in a sense, being freed of the burdens of upholding a false private finite view, letting go of the need to rationalize everything in a single correct view that is theirs (onesided) and see what is beyond the limit of a particular person, via shared identity that maps into a larger realm of the many, via the shared set of human awareness. where /perspective/ itself changes, transforms, becoming multiple while resolving itself in a single modeling of truth. so a situation exists, a condition begging the question: can you freely observe, can you freely think about what cryptography is, or are you bound to certain interpretations that restrict and limit because those frameworks are required for degrees or careers or papers for conferences, even if or while they may be inaccurate or limiting the examination and exploration of the issues involved. and so in some sense this seeks to present a realm that is closely paralleled with crypto in the abstract, yet also thoroughly material, tangible, in a way that this information in software or encoded into electrons may not readily be. and thus the purpose here is not to break the model of crypto considerations for its own sake, it is to break it open so that it can relate to other events and be reconsidered within the larger context it exists within, so that it can breathe again as an idea. and be removed of the carapace of ideological and its sterilization of the questions so important to the discipline, whose purposes ultimately involves protecting and securing truth, not lies. --- cultural precedent --- for a moment assume we are considering the multimedia networked computers of today including cellphones in this domain, as a platform in which 'ideas' and relations occur. that it is a technological environment we partly inhabit to establish and maintain relations, with other people and with institutions and with news and information; education, entertainment, the weather report and so on. and in this inquiry, how someone defines [multimedia] could be important to where the boundaries or limits are for how the shared situation is interpreted, including in what categories and what variables or dimensions it will be mapped out within. and thus if someone considers that 'multimedia' began with the Macintosh computer in the 1980s that would be one context for evaluating the situation and making assumptions. Yet another may believe it was established with Macromedia Shockwave software that allowed interactive cd-roms and eventually websites to be developed as a platform. And at some point these views may be resolved into one or another framework that may bias the interpretation and also the possibilities when asking questions and developing viable or usable solutions. i once had the pleasure of taking courses at SF Multimedia Studies Program in San Francisco in the mid-90s in the early multimedia boom when there was still a cultural dimension to the questions of internet development, before it become a de facto technical framework related to issues of canned software systems, data mechanics and constant upgrades and repair versus about ideas, organization of information, knowledge, education, models of truth, culture. the issues of its commercialization -- like a Tsunami -- basically destroyed the internet as a cultural platform, and this went hand-in-hand with greed, the desire for money and profit, and not valuing the traditional goals of society because it could be edited out of equations in self-serving ideologies of exploitation, as a standardized institutionalized practice. sound familiar to anyone? in any case in an overview class prior to this cultural meltdown, Randall Packer taught a class entitled From Wagner to Virtual Reality that set the stage for considering what the potential could be for multimedia computers within the larger society, and this from a view of the arts, what it offers as a context for technological development, its larger purpose. and so with that experience in mind, back to questioning [multimedia] then could feasibly lead, in the just stated framework, back to the Lascaux cave paintings, with realistic depictions of animals estimated to have been created approximately 17,000 years ago. thus the question of multimedia could be an issue of first markings in a next realm of communication, contrasting a pre-multimedia realm of newspapers with an interactive realm, or assumably hand signaling with diagrammatic animated-like depictions via cave artists. formal systems of written language begin over 5,000 years ago by comparison. moving from much earlier abstract marks, firstly, to eventual representation by alphabets, allowing for shared communications in an archival format, as this also relates to number, counting. and managing both information and ideas (grain deposits, governance, stories, law, culture). so if a person questions [multimedia] in that context, of first marks and new formal systems of communication and relation, yet still other dimensionality and frameworks could exist that help define and consider how, say, new markup languages or codes function in this realm compared to those previous, or how it may evolve over time in a systematic way, given what has happened many many many times before, over a period of millennia. absent this, it is reinventing the wheel though perhaps with less knowledge, repeatedly, and thus devolving the cultural standard to less than what preceded it, due to ignorance, ignoring lessons learned. so the internet ends up absent coherent knowledge at a larger scale, absent education or ideas beyond the limited framework, and entirely within a big-box highway advertising model of commercialization, as if an exercise in ancient roman road building to every end of the empire with direct connections back to the bank vaults at the core of the entire enterprise. culture here being money. commodification of information, exchange, data, the status quo. financialization perhaps high theology in its speculative sense, escape velocity beliefs. and yet another person may observe (and these latter two examples are from Randall Packers scholarship) that like with Lascaux, that [multimedia] was developed within art and that the work and ideas of electronic sculptor Nam June Paik created frameworks for its evaluation and relation that essentially are part of an overall empirical review, and it is important both to consider and retain truth of these observations in newer frameworks as applicable, because that is the source of knowledge in terms of innovation and imagination, that it can and does function across shared frameworks, scaffolding, between various structural systems. you could just evaluate birds without considering anything else, yet without trees, wind, leaves, sky, clouds, song, the fullness and wholeness of the bird is missing. so too, the issues and ideas of code, encryption, or in this case networked [multimedia]. and so the issue becomes one of including context, the foreground and the background events in an ecological and ecosystem-like review or survey, and i think diagramming and mapping and other 'first marks' are closer at accessing these connections than written alphabetic sentences that must R A T I O N A L I Z E them within a pre-existing viewpoint in order for the views to make sense or be valid, given existing interpretations, versus exploring questions and ideas at a conceptual level of ideation (fancy word). thus, instead of staying within the existing limited views of ideas, breaking them open again to question and test assumptions- that ideas are hypotheses that can and need to be challenged to retain their integrity, otherwise they can become ungrounded and detached from actual reality and substitute for it, as a lesser version of events and experience- as agreed to exist. thus, just like not being able to modify the segments within letters which become inviolable by the limits of their modeling, so too ideas become rigid by boundaries which protect them yet which could be based on errored assumptions or viewpoints. /history/ is effectively this. it could be a warped skewed series of shared observations that becomes the platform to develop future actions and ideas, and if unchallenged or not corrected, can function against the very goals and ideas sought, due to this internal corruption or internal rotting that is deemed off-limits from further consideration, especially in terms of structure, foundation. so too, systems of language, code, programming as this effects hardware, software, technical and cultural development. what can and cannot happen as a result of established framework and their normalization, standing-in for truth, yet potentially not accurately representing it and instead this can become religion, following certain beliefs beyond the evidence, and especially when in denial of external truth, via disregard or denial of its falsification. which then establishes an inside and outside condition, which is an ideological compound that can occupy communities, governments, education institutions, and bureaucracies. and software and hardware tools, entire technological platforms that support this ~behavior. so then devolution is in full swing, and it becomes a Planet of the Apes scenario. caged humans treated as if apes, needing to conform to the false worldview, poisoned out of existence. so there are these strange dynamics in the everyday that must be encountered and dealt with and they involve pressures that like force fields align with ideological frameworks that are mediated in certain ways, in particular realms, and they can be known and identified yet may also be unspoken or not talked about due to limits in communications with other people, in regard to what can be said versus what it is known. and the political danger in speaking, such that you may be attacked or killed for speaking 'wrongly' or 'falsely' in that context, of the ideological. next thing you know- no school for you, no career, no friends, etc. thus following the ideological lead, the party line is important when truth is managed by power and the facts can be chosen and edited to fit the finite shared viewpoint, whereby broken society and broken equipment and tools and broken relations are really all about evolution, and not driving civilization into the ground, and making people dig their own graves. this is the result of bad ideas. those that go uncorrected in their errors and assumptions. the consequences are very real and add up. each lapse or reinforcement of error promoting and extending an inhuman agenda, and this can be codified and solidified within processes, within tools, within relations, within language itself which functions against greater truth and relies upon this fallen state of mediocrity in some faith-based sense- that simply going along with the flow and following is going to lead to emancipation and not extinction. as if the automated technocratic system - driven by antihuman values - has our best interests at heart, when the heart -- its virtues and its truth -- is not modeled within the machinery. it is viewed as non-existant, a falsehood, sentiment by those detached from its grounding. and so crypto, likewise, may be perceived only as a manly man's sport- no girly stuff here. no warm fuzzy relations or questioning. nothing soft. all bits and sharp edges and speed, equations! algos! macho macho stuff. mathematics as rigid thought system, non-metaphysical. and yet that is not where its creativity arises from, in many instances. it is within ideas firstly, ingenuity, not canned approaches. not answered questions repeatedly incrementally upgraded. it does not glorify or harbor partial truths as if good enough. weak ideas have no place in crypto, they are more than a security risk. they are an unacceptable unallowable weakness and should not retain employment, and those who serve them should be isolated. here is why... how do you discuss the direct relevance of fiber and textile arts with cryptographers? what if this consideration involves a vital realm of questioning and reconsidering the existing interpretation of cryptology yet it is deemed off-limits by existing ideology? what if the too-simple binary approach seeks to govern or determine what can be true or included within its controlled framework- and in doing so ignores evidence and itself is the security risk? what if there are cryptographers whose principles are not aligned with serving truth and instead mimic this, and yet the illusion of this imitation is broken by wrong choices, in that a lesser approach is believed superior, ignoring or disregarded its falsification. and what if to get into a larger framework, of [crypto] beyond its existing ideological limits, involves cracking open the concept and seeing it in the larger cultural context it exists within yet also has become detached from, potentially, thus to consider it anew and test and challenge and extend its modeling beyond existing limits and boundaries, thresholds and frameworks, to see what crypto really involves as an idea, versus a given implementation in a particular medium at a place in time, such as within networked [multimedia] computers. my first instinct is to not heed preconceived ideological limits of those who simply think it is ~profane (to their crypto-religion) to break "their rules" for crypto corruption, as they need the existing model to retain coherence and governance of its next self-same iteration, that the sign of crypto equals itself and not something beyond their control (that is: crypto=crypto, versus its truth beyond the signage as packaged, commoditized). so if people are trying to limit evaluation of an idea, core to a discipline, it is fairly easy to see the political dimension and lines of force that need certain questioning to remain *answered* and out-of-bounds, to limit interpretation, keep it within a given perspective so to control what can happen, and to protect a border between what is inside and outside, or what if valid and invalidated by default of enforced convention, if not standardization. thus it is not only to forget them, it is to not include or allow them in considerations if truth is and has been secondary to their inquiries, for bad faith is their foundation for relations and interactions result in automatic exploits via onesided agendas. keep out. they are bad for crypto and these relations should be short-circuited, not allowed to continue. especially as to influencing what can or cannot happen in their limited, finite viewpoints. the exploring and questioning of ideas requires thinkers and should not defer to ideologues. so if suddenly it is proposed that yarn and thread and fabric have a lot to do with crypto and computers and someone from a networked multimedia computer context cries that it is off limits and wrong, perhaps they are unable to consider such things or consider cryptological considerations beyond a binary technical enterprise, and therefore are stuck and will remain stuck in that given framework while other things happen around them, eventually surpassing the broken model and its adherents who remain stuck if not captured inside a sinking ship. woe are they, unknowing of their descent into the unfathomable, the pressures that await. and so at this juncture the connection with the Jacquard loom can be introduced, of new technical automation within textile manufacture (c.1801) involving a mechanical process of weaving guided or programmed by coded punch cards instructions, resulting in the creation of woven patterns. abstract input related to machine functionality, holes in the card mapped to and representing hooks, leading to output in another medium. perhaps similar to metal tines protruding from a wind-up music box, as to what notes are played, though involving a more complex instrument and its orchestrated movement of warp and weft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquard_loom note that also around this time, Ada Lovelace composed the first algorithm for the Analytical Engine computer of Charles Babbage, thus recognized as the first computer programmer. These observations originating from a course taught by Mr. Packer on 'multimedia history'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace what is important to consider is that the platforms for crypto systems in use today were experimented with and explored across a wider range of consideration in terms of mechanical systems and how code and programming developed into a single monocultural binarist system. and at some point the relation between thinking of some task and putting it into a set of instructions to be parsed by machinery retained coherence that may have been lost today, where writing such code appears even lost to its own interpretation or unknown effects within the automated machinery. and at some point choices could have become limited, from the control over this interaction and the dimensions it is mapped and proceeds within, to those that are not related to experienced or actions that need or should be dealt with. and this could be an issue of programming models, though also of ideas; especially "economics" as a discipline, where equations do not adequately map to the reality they seek to describe in order to determine profit-loss and gears by which civilization grinds into existence. so i am one of the weirdos who appreciates sewing, due to an artistic background, and this is a skill that is nearly wholly of a female domain today, at least in the US, in that to seek classes a male will be faced with class exercises for making dress patterns, etc. it is an interesting conundrum or limit that certainly reflects what females must face in most every context in terms of the dimensions allowed due to constricting bias of interpretation. awhile ago i went to a sewing expo at the nearby convention center to look at equipment and was completely surprised at the level of correspondence between advanced tools today and the earliest programmable equipment 200+ years ago. whether an individual sewing machine that can be programmed via bitmap graphic files or via stitch patterns or larger equipment, the role of embroidery done automatically by sewing machine (in that it is itself a computer) is the extension of this earliest programmatic development, a merging of Lovelace and loom. yet perhaps a step or more removed from ready or immediate analysis, and more of a plug-and-play scriptability of equipment. it remains unknown to what degree it is possible, though mirrors similarly the issues of scale, from very large industrial color printing into the desktop context of inkjet and laser home printers, whereby something occurring at one scale is suddenly available in another and what does it mean or indicate. and thus, in seeing the larger machinery, not factory-level though home-factory level, say 8' x 4' dimensions for equipment, including LASERS, these advanced sewing machine-computers can basically map out anything in thread as if a painting on a canvas and this has been automated, expertised, such that what may once have been zoned in a particular area of town, requiring certain square footage, could instead occupy the basement of a house in a newly zoned live-work neighborhood that involves both e-commerce and retail dimensions, thus potentially like with 3D printing alongside paper/data copy services, could bring the village and its [signage] back into a realm of city planning, where such districts foster these services both locally and for remote online or business orders, via courier and bulk shipments. in other words, the nature of industry, craft, trade, skill, is changing alongside the development of computation and this changes and challenges the context of these tools and the relations they involve. and in this approach, a certain segment of the population could develop their work or business within their home, especially if it is symbolic processing, which is the basis for telework and telecommunications today, reliant upon infrastructure. this is not the idea that will be explored here. it involves something else, something more fundamental and basic and vital and of a seemingly entirely other approach and application. the difficulty is that for me it exists beyond words, and thus like a programmer trying to find a way to convey the necessary instructions to allow particular computation to occur, it is to try to access a realm that already exists and to not limit it by my own incapacity, yet to bring it into question as a framework for considering the ideas of cryptography. today, yesterday and tomorrow. --- deep culture --- to precede this investigation, it was to recontextualize the idea of code and programming outside the limits of the electronic box of the digital computer, and consider that it may have some connection to the surrounding background of other existing or previous events and their structures and frameworks. as with cryptology and cryptography in general, as further relations within this domain, reliant upon it though also seemingly limited, constrained if modeling does not or cannot take into account information existing beyond its threshold. and so it gets into a realm of observation and action, open minds that are aware and questioning and those that may be closed and reliant upon rigid structures for security and secrecy that in a larger consideration are invalid, yet not accounted for or accountable in this realm. so perhaps this is an ideological audit of sorts, a litmus test, of crypto & intelligence... the importance and value of art within development and sustenance of culture can at times be hard to decipher, especially when retrograde or functioning against the necessary direction. while some appreciation may be given or afforded, it may also appear as a luxury, and a vast quantity of its production may be ungrounded and not offer greater insight beyond extremely limited or copyist approaches, yet which represent it and "culture" likewise, via artifacts and trends and social hierarchy that both validates and is validated by this relationship. and then there are the exceptions- where the *insight* occurs. not just the production. and this is a rare and ephemeral thing, and appears to occupy its own zone, where its truth is transmitted and received within dimensions similar and-or different and challenge or call into question or further expand upon observations and discoveries, shared or unshared, in such a way as ideas in a particle collider, or raindrops from a storm becoming rivers that return to oceans and return to the sky. that a transformational event or relation happens and alignment occurs within a range of experience, that provides grounding, heightened or new awareness, and essentially helps establish and defined an empirical model of relation held outside or alongside the current technological construct as an ideological framework, art and artistry active both in its preparation, continuing development, and dismantling. in this sense, technologists may be artists, as with others, yet unrecognized this way, or if so equated, likely corrupting its validity due to the role of commerce, exploiting or marketing this when subverted by other agendas. which is perhaps covered by the fake money that artworks can represent, symbolic commerce, the realm of celebrity now mass culture, everyone having a potentially valuable signature, everyone a Warhol Portrait in waiting. and so it is to say again that this inquiry is not about that, in itself, and yet about its substance, the truth it involves yet is caught within, via collapse of culture, illiteracy and evaluating things only in their most immediate limited sense via particularized views, which the binary mindset provides as a basis for relation. in this way, the contributions of artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude could be evaluated in terms of artistic opinion in some canon of art history- yea or nea? like or no-like in terms of an artistic project or experiential relation-- especially in terms of aesthetics. and as this relates to ideas, how the various artwork is interpreted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo_and_Jeanne-Claude http://www.christojeanneclaude.net/artworks/realized-projects i am no expert and art scholars have vast amounts of knowledge and insight to share on these questions, though offered here is a potential way of considering such artistic works in the larger context they inhabit- which remains open to interpretation. in the realm of fabric, Running Fence at least in part could involve seeing what otherwise is unseen as a boundary or limit, a line on a map that otherwise goes unnoticed, yet may establish an inside and outside. today, GPS maps may be correlated with this, as a rode that is driven on is a line, while others may appear, like that for a state park whose trees can only be viewed in the distance from the freeway, that establish various boundaries, inside and outside relations as it is mapped or correlated via direction observation. informational structure that is represented and then its representation encounters what it is mapped onto. metaphysics is a difficult word and easily diluted in its placeholder meaning, yet what it attempts to define is something that is difficult otherwise to capture in ordinary terms, as if it operates at another level than that of mundane, dull, and disconnected experience. as if suddenly everything makes sense and has inherent alignment, yet which can be unrecognized or hard to grasp because it is beyond a threshold of awareness or understanding, unless it is encountered, experienced, and can be revealed. thus there is an *invisibleness* to it. so the thing about ideas that relates to this, perhaps especially as linguistic constructs or models that take on the form of an idea as a sign, symbol, or word, is that it is linked to CATEGORY and categorization, that the meaning of words and concepts map into frameworks, structures, that each upon another build upon themselves the larger language development. foundation of this would seemingly be truth, yet not inherently so. and thus [category] could be related to truth yet not equated with it. it is as if an idea in superposition that has the potential to tend towards truth, or towards greater falsity, given its accounting. and so if there are two concepts, [concept1] and [concept2], they could be of different categories that challenge or extend one another or be based on different truths altogether or one could be largely inaccurate as an idea whereas another more accurate, in a particular context. in other words there are limits to meaning, it has boundaries, and concepts relate to one another as with people, within certain dimensions and not others. and connections are reliant upon structures or scaffolding between them, to establish or allow their relation in whatever truth may exist, or falsity may be allowed if this connection relies upon errors. if really cutting to the chase, this issue of language could be an issue of "original sin" as it relates to the SIGN and its misconception of equating with truth itself, versus as a reference to it. thus the [sign] could refer only to itself, within a corruption of language or outside or beyond itself to truth that validates it beyond a programmatic assumption. so when a [building] is covered entirely in fabric, what was once a building that is seen within its surrounding context is suddenly transformed, "disappeaered" or made invisible by its being covered and in doing so, its surface is removed from the common visual realm and hidden within an opaque interiority that can only be accessed by observational imagination, as if virtual. in that, if remaining on the outside of this boundary, it is discontinuous to all previous experience, where a building is removed or masked out of the framework, placed into some liminal realm, betwixt and between, neither here nor there. and in this abstract condition, the form of the building represents the building itself in its greater detail, yet lacks the 1:1 recognition that was known relation before this. in this way a given observation of a particular building could then have a limit or barrier created that limits or changes this observation, and provides a more abstract view in place of what was presumably of greater fidelity to the thing-in-itself. the volumetric massing of the building may instead become prominent, and in this, the covered building could exist as if a wrapped present even, its unveiling and return to itself part of the great delight. and yet beyond this, what could be involved is informational, related to the SIGN itself, as if the cover is what written or representational language functions as, when referring to something else it seeks to contain within its meaning. such that to cover something in this way is to contain it likewise, potentially, as a category. in other words, the fabric could demarcate the boundary between concepts, as with between different words and their meaning, and challenge the notion of this capacity to do so. when the building is covered or limited by this fabric veil, how has its existence changed and the relation of observers to it. it is tremendously difficult to write of, it is many layered and my approach inadequate to seek to convey that this directly involves the issues of data modeling within computers. that when seeking to map a SIGN onto something else, it presumes certain boundaries or limits yet may remain only partial to a given observation-- abstracting the very thing that is to be modeled, instead of allowing it to exist in its totality, and thus could involve an issue of removal of reality or reductionist "development" by default of this presumption that the sign represents the thing in itself, versus references and gains its value from it. in other words, you could take the fabric off the wrapped building and claim it is actually the building in itself-- which is what those invested in binary language do with signs, they believe the truth is within being able to put brackets and limits on perception and control and categorize things, as if doing so makes it true. such that there is only one version of an [event] and it is theirs and it is correct. and computers and institutions and minds are programmed this way ~likewise. and in essence this could be the empty set [ ] [ ] [ ], whereby truth is arbitrary insofar as it exists to serve a given ruling perspective. because the way things are covering it can be manipulated, and hide other details, or make limits appear that are not really there, and thus guide in the wrong direction. and perhaps there really is no building under the fabric- perhaps it is hollow inside, and who would know if no one is allowed to check inside anymore. the very idea of questioning theories- heresy. when Christo and Jeanne-Claude covered a stretch of coastline, the issue of scale again is relevant and involves what level of detail is possible to achieve, and thus a rough sketch like covering of the form occurs yet only to the most general aspects of given landscape and its geologic features. 'measuring the coastline' is a famous example of fractal mathematics whereby the rule for measurement changes the length of the coastline. if you map things at one-inch scale a different coastline will result than at one-foot scale, as features and micro-features are accounted for. and so too with fabric coverings, and so too, computer modeling and data representations of objects and ideas and events in the 'external world'. this is to suggest that the generality of the covered stretch of coastline is somewhat of a proof of the limits of representation to potentially accurately or entirely 'categorize' or cover or stand-for something else, and yet the very power of language and SIGNs to do so, to be able to map some event onto another, via a word or symbol or phrase. and that, like a primal marking or delineation of territory, this artistic intervention is establishing a boundary condition, in some cases an inside-outside correlation, though also of thresholds of observation and awareness and relation, that allows it to be considered anew-- yet also, the draping of the event may be low-resolution to the event itself, in certain dimensions. the ability of a computer to take the language of economics and automate it into software systems for diagnosing ills and benefits of society within its computational framework may pale in comparison to the coastline it seeks to measure and its covering via its SIGNAGE. it may not only be limited or reliant upon boundaries, it may be inaccurate and false in its assumptions that become solidified and related to as if by default true, as concepts. as if data that correlates to the conception validates the conception itself; covering = truth. it is the very problem of binary pattern recognition, its ideology and the corruption of ideas at the core of civilization and wrong-minded and -guided technological development today: take half of everything or anything including errors and wrong assumptions call it truth, ignore everything else so what if in the data modeling of the world, various data tarps are being placed over all that exists, yet this is an ideological mapping that is not serving human interests in the way the data is being processed and used, in terms of automated reasoning and decision making that seeks to benefit its modus operandi and not have this serve human values or needs anymore, especially in terms of representational governance. what does it mean that the Whitehouse or various seats of government may be data modeled likewise, "mediated" in this same abstract modeling that tends to exploit falsity to move in a particular direction and in doing so, plays the SIGNS and shuffles the limits and categories [ [ ] [ ] ] and creates a viewpoint that is supposedly shared, yet does not map into truth accurately and has no legal obligation to do so, while humans and their society collapse into nothingness. moving the abstraction (goalposts of meaning) around, the signage to create false perspective stagesets for oratory and political theatre, as if truth itself -- this gaming of language and perception -- versus the requirement and obligation to address [ideas] in their truth, within the world that exists, not only that which can be allowed to exist within the computerized worldview. (signs do not need to be accounted for in their whole truth, only partial truth. the category or sign is detached from truth, becomes its own truth via relativization) maybe this question of abstraction, naming, categorization, and language are inherent in the human condition, yet it is also possible some may exploit these dynamics, through dishonesty and seek to misalign and misdirect development via the /appearances/ of things, versus to account for things in themselves. and thus again [signage] can replace truth, stand-in for it and mediate existence yet it is entirely shallow and self-contained, systematic, as if an issue of sustaining an illusion within the given boundary, of an inside and outside, such that some may be kept on the outside, and not understand the threshold that is engineered, and thus be disenfranchised by watching and following the stage play, to their own demise. how do you know that GPS misdirection is only an error and not seeking to cause an accident, is this an issue of faith in the goodness of technocratic, biased political technology? what if the demarcation of events in history are warped to a biased viewpoint and thus staying within those lines serves a certain agenda set against your own existence- is observance of that boundary by default validated via its institutionalization, and what if educational systems no longer allow questioning of these views within their walls- what does it mean? what is versus what is represented. what exists versus what is represented, modeled, and believed to exist. authenticity versus the requirement of masquerade. people hiding views beyond certain limits or boundaries. "reason" contained within binary parameters, etc. then Plan B, psychiatric 'medicine' for those who do not comply with the insane master narrative. they refer to the [model] and not to the reality they defer to inaccurate and false modeling and not to more accurate truth and reality they do not question their secured model and instead question the very sanity of the perceiver of more accurate reality (goto: psychiatric routine; loop) // sidenote: in this way, those observers who can ignore larger reality for a partial viewpoint stand against natural observational powers and the need to correlate their understanding with it, for survival. this could indicate either a simulation exists, thereby explaining how some people seem to treat life as a game without consequence; else also an invading or occupying population that aligns its reality at a distance and must correspond views via a centralizing query and response, say via cellphones. both scenarios could also exist simultaneously, existing beside the human population. i think in some way, some artwork of Christo and Jeanne-Claude opens up questioning of the categorization of elements of existence in a linguistic if not geometric framework, as this relates to form and topology, and boundaries. pattern yet at a holistic level or totality, in terms of creating an inside/outside with a wrapped building. versus Running Fence that may involve other conceptions of boundaries and limits via scale, distance, and other geographic and geologic considerations, including accessible temporal and spatial experience of observers. in some sense the various events seem to question 'the fabric of space-time' via relation. as if made out of whole cloth. the enigma of information in this realm of category, where does the wrapped entity reside in its truth- its it contained only within the boundary or does it exist beyond this, outside of it, uncontainable in its conceptualization within finite dimension. is it instead of a realm of typology, tending toward the iconic, of stereotype and the archetype, the symbol that is temporarily accessed, made visible, tangible, this gift. the terror of this covering process would be that what becomes covered is removed and replaced by a false framework, literally dismantling what once appeared and could be assumed still present (and represented) by the sign-based covering. in this way the exterior could be presented and presumed as if an integrated whole while subverted in this same dimensions internally, and thus while appearing as an icon or representative concept, such as [economy], could replace the very meaning of this with its anti-thesis in terms of reliance on falsehood or other exploitations that are ungrounded yet also unchecked, allowed to be this way due to language -- its signage if not CODE -- being equated with truth itself. in this way the cover of a concept or ideas by SIGNS that inaccurately represent or subvert its connection with truth can be camouflage that enables truth to be hidden, kept away due to such boundaries and observational limits. { a note here on the iconic, regarding large scale sculptures of Claes Oldenburg and Coosje van Bruggen, also encountered locally at the once great Walker Art Center prior to its ideological fall and reconstruction. while the wrapped building if not [SIGN] could be evaluated in terms of its boundaries or limits, and in this difference between normal perception and its altered condition may appear abstractly singular in some new or different way, and perhaps iconic, as if a more pure manifestation or realization of what is observed in this abstraction-- and thus clarity by simplicity perhaps- this would seem different than an item changed and seen anew via a different technique, say a change in scale and materials, such as the soft sculptures or various juxtaposed objects, such as giant binoculars or paperclip or gigantic power outlet. that would seem to be an issue more of A1=A2 and challenging the parameters of what makes something what it is as an entity, such that if you change this and that element will the original entity remain the same, how does its essence change when its model of itself is modified, and to evaluate this surreal process. http://wpmedia.life.nationalpost.com/2013/08/philly-pics-4.jpg?w=940 http://www.artsconnected.org/media/c0/43/957633fca0a87cc093ab78addbeb/1024/… it is thus to distinguish between the iconic aspects of wrapped works by Christo and Jeanne-Claude in their potentially iconic aspects with those of Claes Oldenburg and Coosje van Bruggen, yet both could be considered to function in a similar linguistic and conceptual realm involving sculpture, geometries, limits, and observation. } there are millions of people who have more accurate language for these events and more effective analysis to consider as it relates to these issues, scholarship of everyday observation as well as scholarly investigations and contemplations of aesthetics via appreciation of such ideas. so this is meant to offer connection between these realms and provide example, should, say, code and programming function similarly, yet also involve security issues that exploit similar parameters. alot can be learned from the structural frameworks of information that correlate across and between disciplines and thus the interdisciplinary is that integrative perspective of shared empirical truth. it is the natural tendency of truth to be correlated with itself in the terms it exists and not to falsely limit this, which unfortunately appears to be the default state in ways large and small, between people to between nations, unless it is not allowed. and thus illiteracy mapped onto these coverings, inaccurate data models and representations that ignore and do not acknowledge truth beyond an interior condition, can function both to protect whatever is going on inside, outside of observational view, protected or guarded by this condition, and keep those on the outside bounded and limited and reliant upon it, if everything is similarly designed, into a giant false perspective. whereas literacy would enable to coverings or [signs] to be tested, evaluated, error-corrected, and to verify what is on the inside corresponds with what is on the outside and not base this in blind faith and religious adherence to private inhuman ideology, as a means for survival or profit, a society of insiders the slaves outside sustain. and yet there is no way to get past this without requiring this [signage] be validated in truth, firstly, via logic. not binary "true belief" reliant on falsity and opinion. --- code and programming --- and then there is Olek... the category-defying space goddess time traveler whose artwork i fear to write about due to its magical dimensions which for me function beyond words, yet accesses a vital and core truth via aesthetic activity that my words can only fail to describe or capture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olek http://oleknyc.com/ http://instagram.com/oleknyc# and in some way, if sheets of fabric pieced together correlate with the wrappings and coverings of Christo and Jeanne-Claude, as if perhaps a data representation, category or [sign] as variable (x), or data object of an event, then it is with the crochet artworks of Olek that the yarn itself enters into a code-like situation, via different structural stitches and patterns, that can overtake another [sign] as if a program that seeks to replace it via another version, a secondary layer of colored patterned yarn. in terms of code, it is known there are routines and ways of establishing structure and as with stitches, they have different purposes and qualities. an edge stitch versus an interior stitch that covers distance. as the beginning and end of a program may have different functional requirements in terms of code, than then interior. the work of Olek is vast. awe-inspiring. like i said, i am scared to write about it because my broken language cannot approximate its dimensions, it is beyond this and my capacity to convey and yet for me singularly stands out as important work in its depth of imagination and creative purpose, its tapping into and revealing hidden truth, and its performative social aspect that everyday people can relate to, via changing what is 'known' if not unseen, subconscious, or forgotten and looking and considering it anew. and yet to look at a finished or completed piece or 'yarn-complete' artwork is almost not the event in itself, as if time-lapse somehow is required to comprehend an aspect of it that is beyond a finished iconic relation. instead it is the insane challenges that Olek and her knitting crew taken on that genuinely defy belief -- in that it was never before imagined in my finite awareness that somehow could do what Olek does with yarn -- because it is beyond the ordinary limit yet also part of its unique capacity. yarn sculpture, yarn muralist, yet more than this- yarn topologist, yarn symbologist. and still it does not access the totality, which others have much more competence at defining in terms of the conceptualization and practices involved, and precedents. http://according2g.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Olek-Levine.jpg http://happyfamousartists.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/olek01.j… http://happyfamousartists.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/olek07.j… http://365artists.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/newinterests_olek_01of24.jpg http://gjprojectdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/oleknc_gjproject.jpg http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/05/olek-crocheted-locomotive_n_370846… http://cdn01.boweryboogie.com/content/uploads/2012/06/olek-samsung-2-560x31… http://instagram.com/p/Y9tcJIBR79/# who would figure you could cover an entire locomotive train in yarn and that doing so is not just an issue of getting it covered, thought also of additional aesthetic detail and meaning in the patterning. and this is what sets artists apart from others, in that they can see beyond and somehow ground such events in a realm of greater insight and awareness. and what is it? why is it fascinating or for others potentially without the requirement to be a legitimate investigation. what truth is being revealed and how.' and i do not know myself, though i can sense it. it is as if the inaccessible is made accessible yet per-language or pre-definition or something that exists in language and functions as a symbol or a sign is dematerialized yet held together by crocheted yarn and somehow a childlike fascination and pure joy overwhelms at the excitement it brings into the world, like light breaking through decades of dreary clouds and seeing a smile radiate outward or a strange glance that then winks, securing a shared known relation. and its also sexy. wild. libidinal. its potent if illicit energies flowing throughout. and perhaps this relates to its tangibleness, of knit fabrics that have textures that can be soothing to the touch, comforting and familiar. they also have information, in terms of touch, very much like the second skin of clothing. something very close to the realm of everyday feeling and issues of relation, in particular self-with-self as a person is clothed, and as others are likewise clothed or covered. and thus, what if suddenly the [sign] you walk by everyday is covered in yarn and becomes [sign2], and in its difference and similarities a world of consideration and insight is made available. i tend to believe the artists and artworks mentioned are involved in recontextualizing a situation and thus allow it to be perceived anew, within these different dimensions, to question frameworks of knowledge, relation, and issues of observation via aesthetic interventions. and the wrappings and presumably the crochet works are seemingly also temporary conditions, at least in the sense of outdoor installations. it would seem yarn would quickly deteriorate (though that may be very interesting as well to learn from, going from vibrant color to twine-like monotone decay and how meaning shifts). while for Christo and Jeanne-Claude the artworks likely involve massive planning and preparation of fabric, its manufacture, Olek and team do this crocheting onsite, as a collaborative endeavor, involving a social aspect that occurs outside the gallery or museum and instead on the street itself, where the artwork is mediated, as it is made. in other words, Olek and her team presumably have algorithms, code, programs and routines they use, the various kinds of stitches and patterns, guided by planning, by which they approach their challenge and transform it via aesthetic intervention of crochet. it is as if knitting is an intuitive approach to mathematical, geometrical situations that may function similarly in approximating certain parameters, as encountered, versus being able to know ahead how many stitches will be required, in that specificity. or so it is imagined. and perhaps like computer programming, creating software for a task that is encompassed within a set of concepts and refined in its functionality though perhaps this remains in a realm of code, another layer over what it seeks to describe and thus various threads and stitching of information and relations may occur in order to define such a territory and establish such functioning, albeit in a realm of signs that may never be grounded within linear language beyond this representational issue, and thus approximation could be part of this process. knowing it versus being unaware. writing of crochet artworks that cover or create other symbols or signs, including people turned into yarn people, has a close connection to data representation and the modeling of existence via CAD-like parameters that seek to define real life objects as data entities, if not substitute for them in computational models, simulations, and in algorithms used for processing (or "machine reasoning") that can become deterministic worldviews and rationalizations, to which people must align in their local relations, at their jobs, and in schools- a basis for a binary ideology that overtakes everything. there is one instance more than any other i could find that captures this process of data that overtakes the reality, on the instagram site of Olek there is a short video of a small vodka bottle that is slowly captured the code of yarn or ribbon that envelopes it, and yet with a string attached, as if likewise it could be unraveled. Olek has mentioned elsewhere (if memory serves) that cutting one string of a crocheted work can cause the entire piece to fall apart. http://instagram.com/p/d21b1rBR54/# [so too i propose a similar condition exists for 'reason' when based on a faulty and inaccurate modeling of representational data, [signs] that when evaluated via logical reasoning fall apart due to errors involved, relied on. and in this way, data that is insecure could jeopardize a much larger connected framework and cause it to fail, just as "concepts" wrongly modeled or evaluated could unravel an entire security approach. and perhaps this is age-old military knowledge, where a strength becomes a weakness, a place of refuge and hiding once revealed can become a trap that cannot be escaped from. when the cover is blown, the camouflage ineffective, the stealth lose their advantage. the situation changes, and its their turn to adjust to a reality that is beyond them. their code no longer will work. their security made insecure. unwanted transparency.] when watching rain fall on a section of concrete sidewalk, going to a dry condition to a series of raindrops dotting its surface, and then eventually filling in entirely with water saturating its surface, it is to see a progression take place bit by bit that then overwhelms a previous condition, as if a phase-change. dry to wet. and in this same way the small bottle that is encompassed by this yarn of code is like that of data that is taking over the actual bottle as a digital representation, bit by bit of code, until the program works its way to completion: this is the yarn bottle. this is the data model of the bottle, written in code, used and reference in other programs as its sign, as if [yarn-bottle minus bottle] = [bottle] in the everyday binary analysis. in that the data representation of the bottle is equated with the bottle itself. as if the data statistic is the more real reality than anything existing beyond its onesided and biased framework of evaluation, because that is what binary relativism requires and allows as a privileged viewpoint. inside the covering, versus being on the outside. seemingly. the data burka as it were, of civilization as represented digitally. in taking a series of threads and uniting them in a larger chain of connective stitches and relations, and establishing surfaces and mapping out complex topologies with these, various edge and surface and pattern and structural conditions are encountered and dealt with, and so too, likely various limits and thresholds and boundaries as it exists within particular approaches and circumstance. real-time calculation that mediates these conditions, thinks-through and works-through these conditions and gains knowledge by encounters with repeated features, whether flat or round or spherical or edges, and increases knowledge via new challenges not encountered the same before. and so what if code and programming and crypto were similarly involved in a situation involving such boundaries, limits, and assumptions mapped onto an underlying structure. in some sense, it could be assumed the structure itself is true, and that everything in its being able to cover and represent this situation is accurate, in and of itself, for being able to assign functions and define parameters and assign variables in a given situation, and have a seemingly accurate outcome based on some predictable input. and yet what if the very situation that is covered, and the [signs] that reference and rely upon it are themselves held beyond a security audit, for their own integrity as ideas. such that what is covered may not actually be there, in the way it is believed to be, or assumed to be, or said to be, even though it appears this way as an IMAGE. what if it is only on the surface, a threshold condition, and is instead hollow on the inside and has been replaced by a subverted model of events, which instead hide within and behind this technical development, via the very code meant to prevent and protect against such subversion. or has that never been the idea within the programming itself as idea- and instead of protecting and securing truth- protecting secrecy and privacy and security which could instead be a realm of harboring lies and grand deceptions. it is to wonder if the collective programming of technological civilization actually audits truth at the level of the [signs] themselves used as ideas and for shared awareness or if this is simply believed because it has been institutionalized and validated within an ideological framework and thus is assumed and presumed 'true' by default of its existence in and as code, as programming, as software and hardware, and as cryptographic communications that serve- what, exactly? if they are not grounded in truth in the ideas that establish the code, how can the program function towards this or serve it. if the concepts are ungrounded, how is this loose yarn or security flaw not able to be thoroughly exploited and unravel all security by design of such flaws into every last dual-use item and object. so what if it is the world that has been so covered in yarn or wrapped and covered in code, and people have put their lives into this, and yet it is not actually serving them or the human population in its actions and instead defaults to a realm of exploitation and subversion via its known errors that cannot be corrected, and instead it is defended against any such correction. artistic investigations can offer a glimpse into situations that otherwise may not be readily accessible or realizable within existing limits of particular observation. what Olek and her team function as, at least in this tentative estimation, is somewhere between the analytical programming of Ada Lovelace and the capacity of a customizable crotchet-loom consisting of a human knitting crew (compiler or not, unknown), and that in this personal relation with what is to become covered, it is seemingly similar in challenge to the daunting and original challenges a programmer can face when taking on a new area or developing new skills or approaching new problems beyond previous limit, and thus building a vocabulary and skills and competence via further such development. and that, over time, massive time and effort is put into a project or goals that can transform a situation and model it within certain parameters, and provide functionality that is new or optimized, and that such efforts and accomplishments cover a wide range of activity, including from creating basic computing utilities or programming languages to internet and telecom software, to content management systems (CMS) and other social and retail software, to explorations of data organization and computer modeling, and into financial and e-commerce and banking software, to include the role of cryptography software and hardware both online and offline in a similar context. and perhaps many people have dealt with endless thread or lines of code that are woven into complicated structures or must investigate convoluted software to figure out how something is fit together, and all such investigations occur in a given domain or in a given limit or parameters where the code and programming and computation reside, as it aligns with textbooks and classes and conversations and conferences about what exists and what is going on. that it is occurring within certain frameworks and dimensions. and yet in the same way, as a shared model of computation and data representation, it is proposed that what is underneath this has not been accounted for accurately and is not lining up with these efforts in a way that works, especially in terms of security issues and the state, as this becomes detached from truth and in doing so can allow a dictatorship to be hidden within a democracy yet beyond any outside accounting. as it is protected by ideological code, beliefs, political agendas, thugs and activists who in turn have control of the surveillance state via this interior difference, à la coup. and thus it is to review the assumption of this data modeling, the way the language and perception and observation works, pre-computer, to more accurately account for what is going on within the secrete and hidden technological enterprise of the rogue state. and what it indicates is that the [signs] are not mapped accurately or checked against truth beyond a given boundary or limit, which is based nearly entirely on the IMAGE of a thing replacing the thing itself; the image of a bottle replacing the bottle. though the 'data image' even moreso. and this in terms of boundary and threshold observation yet also its iconic aspect, that like modular programming, it can be assumed to exist as itself by default of its being perceived this way, inside the limited framework, and no external reference is needed, nor is it even allowed if contradicting the viewpoint. and that is the ideological environment that software and hardware are being developed within today in terms of economic, social, political tools that result in devolved and antihuman culture which seeks to stop external feedback from having a voice anymore. and there are loose strings everywhere. pull one and the false frameworks collapse, when evaluated in terms of paradoxical logic, actual reasoning of events instead of simply real-time processing them, via binary assessments that can self-contain truth yet only within an increasingly disconnected bubble, relativism unto itself, falsity. how can something that brings so much joy and beauty find itself compared in relation to such a dismal situation. i think it is through seeing the situation through other eyes that perhaps HOPE exists in recognizing what is true about this condition and then reorganizing and redeveloping code within that shared framework, and that taking into example the transformative power of, instead of functioning from within "the inside" of the situation, whether museum or standards institution, it could instead involve the gathering of individuals of shared purpose, to accomplish something larger that none by themselves could do alone, and taking on the bigger challenges and projects likewise, with the combined skillsets as part of this customizable equipment to call upon. so for instance, if new approaches to crypto were considered- it would not be to gather a group of algorithm-centric thinkers within a confined set of parameters to question what incremental technique may further the existing broken model and its assumptions, including hardware and software platforms-- instead, the beginning question could and likely should exist beyond this limit, beyond this threshold of ideological viewpoint, and gather together linguists, artists, thinkers, and those involved in patterns and structure and logic, physicists and others in addition to cryptologists, to consider the core ideas of security and secrecy and privacy in the terms they actually exist, before their institutionalization and normalization in the existing corrupt scenario. a computational linguist could have 1,000 approaches to encryption schemes by how they model language in terms of various relations, as might a graphic designer, and these could then be related to establishing algorithms, not just mathematic structures. an innovative technologist may understand infrastructures better than others and may know of new techniques or possibilities that may others be unconsidered. say electromagnets in a shoe that allows a drop or pickup of electronic data, or leaving a data print as a sign. and certainly this type of prototypical engineering of intelligence apparatus exists in the deep state, yet what about its application towards everyday scenarios such as house keys or e-commerce portals on home dwellings, synced with courier services for data updates and threshold access. infrastructures, zoned crypto, etc. and the question here attempts to ask: what if the form that has been covered is not the form that exists anymore. and what if what is actually required is to locate the ideas that need to be accurately modeled in data, and that this data representation needs to be secured, as an issue of integrity for systems built upon it, including most vitally, cryptography. and thus the issue is securing truth within a realm of lies and unaccountable deceit, and active hostilities against citizens trying to exist within a constitutional framework, yet aggressively denied their rights, via abuse and torture and retaliation for the attempts to recover what has been lost. and that many people exist in this condition, and yet 'reason' itself is broken within the state, feedback in terms of citizen representation and control over governance of the shared state, which is out-of-control and functioning against the population by default. and until this is accounted for, every further action within the false framework further allows its legitimation to continue in this criminal offensive, against the greater truth. in this way, securing this truth, aligning with it, relying upon it, requiring it to be addressed by relativistic viewpoints and ideology, within a shared logical framework- it then becomes a showdown of truth against power: whether law will be observed or if power will seek to destroy it, as with most recent dictatorship that have fallen. the data model is wrong, based on lies. a false perspective. the role of leaks, threads that when cut break the support structure needed to sustain the illusion. yet, when will documents provide direct evidence of crimes against citizens, mass surveillance of daily activities, ubiquitous paid informants of a private police state monitoring other citizens, covert programs to control what occurs in institutions, organizations and schools that aligns only with certain beliefs and demographics. will anyone even dare do anything if the documents are revealed. or is even that too much to expect, that someone may risk their life for the larger issues involved and take a stand against tyranny. never before has a nation been more full of hypocrites than the USA today. when are people going to take on the fight and take the necessary risks to change the underlying dynamics and shift the situation to a more realistic framework that piece by piece can be configured and established in a common model, and programmed likewise, to an agenda which serves people and traps the traitors within their deception, isolating and separating and constricting their actions until there are no longer any moves left. it saddens my heart because the artwork here is tremendous and full of life, yet exists in contrast to the world as if aberration, a beautiful exotic flower in a civilization brought to ruin, a reminder of what living is about, its potential, the true potential of the artist, of individuals with insight who strive to use their talents to shared their observations, and improve awareness of what exists as it exists, and beyond, into what could be, as a basis for consciousness, relation, value. grounding of belief. of action. the role of inspiration and play, the fantastical, of boundary breaking and paradigm shifting realization and revelations. even through something so humble and seemingly so commonplace as yarn, to see through the imagination of other its potential and perhaps consider other observations anew, based on the truth it helps reveal. in itself this is insufficient for evaluating the depth of any of the artworks above. especially so for the magic that is Olek, because interpretation of her work as code or programming or involving boundaries may not be accurate other than a correlation with the dynamics involved... another interpretation of which there are many, likely many more suitable to this consideration than my limited awareness allows. yet consider the power of artwork that can bring into consideration these questions and that aligns in such a way to offer a conceptualization of the existing situation within computational modeling of civilization in accurate and inaccurate terms. it does not exist the same within textbooks of the involved disciplines-- though it does exists outside them in the realm of the interdisciplinary. the real grounded value of critical theory and literature of the Two Cultures, the electromagnetic reconnection across the short-circuited institutional and ideological divide, to balance knowledge via the empirical modeling of truth (1:1) and shared observation around common, structurally related events. addressing this situation is entirely possible, if dealing with it head-on. --- last notes --- artwork of Olek extends into ballooning, where relations also exist with weaving and patterns... http://oleknyc.com/gallery/inflatables/9 http://oleknyc.com/gallery/inflatables/25 http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9WEtVeZyuy4/T2TiJQs33qI/AAAAAAAABvE/SBo4Qmb7T-Q/s… http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BKMa8l4EXQE/T2TiNn_hseI/AAAAAAAABvk/fgsLb-bRQrU/s… http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8GGiGr-cOQQ/T2TiUGmkMYI/AAAAAAAABwU/xALX6-c2_LI/s… balloon sculptures of Jason Hackenwerth: http://iay.org.uk/files/blog/image/pisces.jpg http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/089/0/c/pisces_by_jason_hackenwerth_… also, 'mathematical knitting' is another realm of inquiry into mathematical concepts and topological forms via fiber arts and textiles: http://www.toroidalsnark.net/mathknit.html http://www.yasminnair.net/content/looking-math-and-science-everything-and-f… the purpose of such examples being- what if security and cryptographic concepts and ideas were brought outside of the existing framework and explored in other mediums, involving issues of language and code and programming outside the electronic context. perhaps there is something still valuable and unknown in that ancient pottery or in that abstract marking no one notices, or the missed stitch or oddly arranged pattern. in this way, so too, why not origami crypto for self-folding or collapsing patterns or creating code that can reconfigure or rearrange itself, as the basis for algorithms. ᴍ ᴎ

1 0