cypherpunks
Threads by month
- ----- 2024 -----
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
September 2013
- 75 participants
- 292 discussions
The Institute for Defense Analyses, based in Alexandria, VA,
is a 50-year partner of NSA. It has two Centers for Communications
Research at Princeton, NJ, and La Jolla, CA, both doing cryptological
research for NSA:
http://www.idaccr.org/
http://www.ccrwest.org/
The latter's web site lists only this offering:
[Quote]
La Jolla Covering Repository
A (v,k,t)-covering design is a collection of k-element subsets,
called blocks, of {1,2,...,v}, such that any t-element subset is
contained in at least one block. This site contains a collection of
good (v,k,t)-coverings. Each of these coverings gives an upper bound
for the corresponding C(v,k,t), the smallest possible number of
blocks in such a covering design.
The limit for coverings is v<100, k<=25, and t<=8 just to draw the
line somewhere. Only coverings with at most 100000 blocks are given,
except for some which were grandfathered in. Some Steiner systems
(coverings in which every t-set is covered exactly once) which are
too big for the database will be included in the link below.
[Unquote]
What is "covering" and how does it related to cryptology?
-----
Eyeballs of the two centers:
http://cryptome.org/2013-info/09/nsa-ccr/nsa-ccr.htm
2
1
for twenty years i have been thinking about crypto ideas in the abstract
and at a certain point around Y2K encountered an overview book chock full
of examples of various crypto systems, from earliest days into the
computing present. having a background in architectural study and
independent research, what really captured my interest was the ancient
approach to signaling via what may be called 'communications
infrastructure', in the military sense.
to go once step further into this, it is that a particular physical
structure could be established, a signaling unit [z], which is then
repeated elsewhere at some distance, thus [z2], and that a long chain of
these could be lined up to send a message back and forth through the
connected system: [z1] <--- [z2] --- [z3] ---> [zN]
obviously this could be connected to present-day computers as electronic
devices that route and forward messages. though consider the same concept
without electromagnetic technology as the foundation and slower than
lightspeed transmission, or having gaps and delays between these
interchanges, such that visual observation and physical motion and symbolic
messaging could be employed and transmit and receive messages over long
distances faster than a rider on horse or perhaps even an airplane.
this references 'the semaphore' as a signaling system- and what i want to
add to this is a typological consideration that has architectural precedent
in this same context. in that if there are signaling stations that are
buildings and have adjustable mechanical arms for signals or codes, that it
is this 'unit' could be considered a typical repeatable construction much
like that of a building type -- that has particular programming in its
design, related to its functioning -- and thus moving from flag signaling
to a 18th c. signaling tower, this "signaling infrastructure" is, in some
way, an early indication of what the circuitboard of civilization will
later develop into when electrified and buildings are plug-and-play in a
coordinated and linked environment, where this signaling is ubiquitous if
not pollutive and yet essentially invisible -- except for the artifacts,
and fragments of this hidden system.
and thus, as with these earlier non-electric and non-electronic
~telegraphic systems, so too their evolution into telegraph, telephone,
broadcast radio & television, cellphone, and data and internet networks
where this signaling occurs at many levels simultaneously within
civilization today.
the reason TYPE is mentioned is because it can help make sense of what is
going on, when considering that some artifacts may be buildings or
connected to them, via tools or systems, whereby evaluation and excavation
of these hidden or subconscious artifacts can help make sense of the
environment that is the context for observation and basic relations today.
(Seeing Cyberspace in some basic sense).
thus the 'semaphore tower' in relation to the broadcast or cellphone towers
of today, in terms of extension and their juxtaposition. for instance, a
'public square' aspect within mass or individual media, channels in these
same realms that were absent in previous signaling and involved gatherings
in buildings or courtyards or theaters, versus television studios and
distributed tv sets.
the larger idea is that, understanding these cybernetic systems requires
understanding the building types and artifacts as components on a
circuitboard, and thus how they function, what their code is, how they are
programmed then allows their internal and external actions to be evaluated
in terms of their own and the overall circuitry involved. so this is
another example of empirical evaluation versus ungrounded relativism,
whereby the latter approach could put bad components into the shared
environment, short-circuit things and use all the energy for itself, and as
long as it is not analyzed or error-corrected in this way, can continue to
do so, etc. this can also be a model of the individual or the entire world,
as circuit, and how computers mediate this condition, within their own
limiting frameworks (which is the binary constraint, and related to issues
of language and signs, as to what is real and can be communicated).
so a conceptualization i have used before to map this out in the
(natural/artificial/virtual) environment is "tools/buildings/systems" to
see how the infrastructure and built environment relate, including its
extension into the hidden or unseen realm of 'cyberspace' that appears
dreamlike by comparison to physical objects. thus the question of what
information actually is, or data, or a 'bit' in terms of its physicality,
and the necessity of having literacy move into a realm of physics to be
able to account for everyday experience and observation in the existing
realms. the environment is saturated with invisible signaling, citizens and
environment including wildlife are being massively radiated by this
electromagnetic approach, that is carrying "data".
so while the signaling may exist in an invisible or impermeable realm to
basic experience and appear wholly intangible as abstract information
disconnected from the known world, it is through the artifacts of
infrastructure that this signaling can begin to be understood- through the
aesthetics of wooden poles and metal pylons and broadcast towers and
microwave and satellite dishes, that the system of transmission and
reception of data, in a realm of powerlines and antennae, begins to have
physicality and groundedness, in terms of direct observation. 'the
internet' is in the wires, it is signaling between the transmitter and
receiver as it is then technically and automatically interpreted - via
signaling units. routers, computers, cellphones, televisions, radios,
encryption devices.
and so in some sense, the data stream is the signaling and there is a
surrounding context or environment this transfer of information is
occurring in. and as conceived, 'the binary' ones and zeroes oftentimes
represent this realm or emblemize it, as if technocratic heraldry which
functions as a shield or coat of arms via various protocols and standards.
and yet as a worldview coursing through the veins of society, "the
perspective" captured or constructed in that data framework could be
grossly inaccurate or out of touch with the real world as it exists and
instead promote a false perspective, due to relying on a structure of
pseudo-truth for 'shared awareness'. thus a huge error rate could be the
foundation of this signaling system as information.
it would be equivalent to using flags to send messages where the messages
are flawed or warped perception, and repeatedly communicating on that basis
for the shared connection. and how the game "telephone" indicates over time
how a signal could degrade via lossy transmission, as this may rely to
substandard ideas even within a digital context.
and thus it is to question the existence of such infrastructure and
artifacts, and their use and potential development in new terms as devices
for signaling and shared communication. what if vastly improved systems are
possible, based on other approaches, where what is on the inside of the
system accurately is modeling what is on the outside and it is in service
to truth, not in denial of it. and in this way, so too cryptology and
cipher systems that could signal beyond the existing conceptions, due to
having a more accurate framework to function within, in that these
signaling components of the circuitboard could be more wide-ranging and
useful than expert and corrupted and devolved technical systems of today,
trapped within ideology. that, the existing collapsed system, is nothing
less than an electromagnetic labyrinth. some day it will be fascinating to
learn from those involved the extent of its mysteries and ongoing intrigue.
--- semaphore signals ---
wikipedia has a disambiguation page for [semaphores]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_%28disambiguation%29'
and so there are flag semaphores
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_semaphore
semaphore lines (18th c. semaphore towers)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_line
and these move into remaining infrastructures of today, including rail
signaling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_semaphore_signal
and traffic signals (to perhaps include live highway signage)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_semaphore
so imagine that the earliest instances probably involved state
communications in a security/secrecy context, if not diplomatic and related
to connection with remote territory or a boundary, and that that content
moves into the electronic computer network and is zoned into a particular
realm of intra-state and international state-state communication. and
similar typological units or 'mechanisms' for conveying signals abstract
into stop/go/yield for pedestrians and cars, which can be overridden by
police and emergency vehicles and funeral hearses via special switch. and
thus like a router or some traffic management protocol that is rule-based,
the code of green, yellow, red, is transmitted and received or written and
read as output and used to instruct the data flowing through the system, as
it is accurately interpreted and obliged. and if not, redundancy of
monitoring by police or traffic cameras to mail a ticket and license photo.
and aesthetically it is interesting that 'civilization' the world over
involves these basic infrastructural systems. i have read that colors for
traffic lights may be different in certain countries though am not familiar
with this. and yet, aspects of infrastructure retain a general pattern that
is repeated and 'typical' in terms of systems that repeat and are shared,
even across cultures that can be ideologically apposed yet require similar
technology to function. thus the symbology of the wooden pole, metal tower
as an indication of 'modernization' and in the 1960s, the cobra-head
streetlight as a leading edge of this universal aesthetic of development,
worldwide. so for the electronic signaling system of traffic lights, there
must be a connection to the poles and towers leading back to an electrical
power plant, to complete the circuit. so too, computers the same. wireless
the same. tools, buildings, systems. mapping this out in its functioning.
then it is possible to get a sense of the boundaries involved, the
dimensions, the framework and relations established. including between
componentry itself.
thing is, most traffic signals are probably routed to a central Department
of Transportation that monitors the circuit and involves vast analysis of
traffic flows, timing of schedules and events, and weather, and then
continuously seeks to modify and improve its functioning via small changes
or tweaks that test against hypotheses and modify the system to attempt to
improve it. so imagine there are 2,000 traffic cameras that route into a
traffic monitoring building via network connections and basically this is
the program of the building. its purpose. if it were an external signaling
system those same traffic lights may be sending signals into vehicles and
getting responses back, and reading and writing data in some other
dimensionality and then it would be more like a signaling system of flags
and codes, where it is not just read-only for those vehicles operating
within the system. RFID lane passes and toll booths perhaps. or, in a
disconnected or decentralized realm, GPS dashboard units and satellites as
they feed back to other buildings and monitoring systems which may or may
not be correlated further.
consider a typical home or work computer then, in terms of a signaling
system and cryptography. it is presumed to be able to send data from one
computer to another in any other context, without respect to environment,
and be afforded the right to privacy, secrecy, and security by default. and
the reality is that these [computers] are connected via a power system and
[network] that while they may be interconnected [PC] <--> [PC], also
inherently is connected to other infrastructure within the circuit,
buildings, including powerplant, software companies, network providers, and
in terms of cryptography, the NSA itself as an inherent structural
connection. so like the DoT example above, expecting the NSA to keep on one
side of the windshield no matter the surrounding context may not be
realistic given the environment, if there is compromised circuitry or
short-circuiting by default in the shared/unshared situation. and given
their institutional technical capacity, certainly they have the capacity to
real-time access your dashboard GPS data and vehicle location via
infrastructure, anything in your banking or computer, should that be
legally allowed or required for the vital security of the state, as this
relates to issues of privacy and protection and continuation of the shared
state as an entity. yet what if they were on the other side of this
boundary by ideological default, for most everyone, and leaning so far
forward that all these various infrastructure systems were a means for
doing business and commercialization and populist takeover of state systems
by a particular mindset or aligned group of people. what if the traffic
signal was subverted and you got the wrong color and drive into a
semi-truck and lose your life via such a bizarre glitch, purposive to an
overruling, hostile political agenda that aligns with a hidden
dictatorship. what then.
in other words- what if the NSA has gone political, and so too,
infrastructural systems, tools, buildings and their programming,
functioning against the civilian, human population. where are the
boundaries, limits, what is expected of government, how is it accounted
for, error checked and corrected, what oversight or review of activity, or
is it essentially all off the books now. the potential exists for total
control of civilization by manipulating the local and global infrastructure
against ideological opponents. what is to prevent this if it cannot even be
communicated about or 'observed' due to oppressive actions to shut down
relaying of messages and conditions of mass illiteracy, and thus an
incapacity to relate in the environment that exists.
and so a question may be, to what extent such an infrastructural signaling
system could feasibly be detached from its foundation in military
operations and state security, firstly, such that the NSA or CIA or FBI as
building types with programmatic functioning -would not- be accessing
telecom buildings and their functioning, ISPs, data centers and server
farms, switches and relays, as part of their data monitoring and oversight
of this activity- when or if applicable. that in certain cases it would be
assumed part of the core mission of intelligence, as it relates to
security, secrecy, and privacy. in this way, an archeological excavation of
these systems would seem to indicate that a 'cryptographic software' and
its computing hardware is thoroughly embedded and reliant upon its
monitoring and power providing infrastructure in order to operate- legally,
within a safe and protected domain of appropriate use. though if this is
subverted, then the boundary could seemingly be legitimately crossed by
legalizing covert access and monitoring, if not take-down operations in a
cyberwar scenario, against state enemies. or, in the corrupted version, a
political enemies list of a hidden dictator. such as smashing their
equipment via computer bugs and malware and surveilling everything they do,
to exploit and harass and seek to bring about their demise, using these
same institutions in a short-circuited scenario, where the state itself is
attacking citizens who are operating in an appropriate realm and yet exist
unprotected from aggressions of subverted institutions, revealing a secret
agenda.
thus, if enough drivers notice the timing is off at traffic lights and have
had their equipment corrupted or data exploited, and have seen strange
accidents or injuries, they may begin to wonder what is "governing" the
inside actions and modeling of infrastructural system-- who is it serving,
or is it trying to harm people via its subversion. and they may lose trust
in using the system because it could be against them, it is only a matter
of time before the wrong-color light is sent to their vehicle, etc. the
integrity of these state operations then relies upon what [ideas] are
governing their functioning, and how they are accounted for, in truth or
pseudo-truth, or some twisted version reliant upon lies, where deception is
now out in the open.
--- on HIOX and signaling ---
long ago discovered the master symbol i refer to as HIOX which is
equivalent to the Union Jack flag and the 16 segment electronic display.
and it was through Plato's Republic that the idea was realized to start
rotating and mirroring alphanumerics and this symbol allows all letters and
numbers to co-exist as a potential, within a single unit or 'bit' as it
were, whereby the set exists: {0-9,A-Z} in a single character. such that if
HIOX were tokenized as an asterisk, the word: b**, would then allow any
combination of those potential letters and numbers as wildcards. this
related to sets and probabilities and language that is not just linear,
moving from left to right and instead, in other dimensionality, (boo, big,
bad, bye, bit, bot, &c).
so i had this idea, get a 16 segment display...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteen-segment_display
and then a microcontroller board, for me, Parallax BoE
http://www.parallax.com/catalog/microcontrollers/basic-stamp/kits
and program the sequence of this alphabetic change as an animation. very
basic yet doable for an electronics illiterate like myself. i think i may
have tried a dual 16 segment display as well. yet could not get to the next
level beyond this, to do larger transformational changes, such as flipping
letters vertical and horizontal across a wider area, retaining original
letters and juxtaposing them in various ways, such as:
b d
p
This approach would require more display area, and the goal was to get at a
word or sentence level and be able to explore these transmutative aspects
of alphanumerics as language. so there are dot matrix LED displays yet my
skills and limited understanding were not capable of getting there, at the
higher pin-out counts required and with other custom IC controllers to make
it work. thus it bounded further exploration.
for me the larger purpose of this was related to cryptography and the
exploration of language broken down into its elemental patterns, as these
form a kind of calculus. and as this could further become the basis for
analysis, and hardware and software development in terms of signaling. for
instance, running b against d may result in o, or II.
since that time 10 years ago, the microcontroller market has taken off and
now there are many options to choose from, including Arduino which I have
no experience with and do not know if it is as ease-of-use as the Parallax
system was for an absolute beginner. though there are tremendous resources
and options for these microcontrollers or "custom programmable" integrated
circuits (basically transistors and resistors in centipede-looking chips)
that have interfaces to computers, and various modules that can be modified
via existing codes and tutorials to get in the vicinity of project goals.
here are a few examples of this...
SparkFun Electronics- Arduino microcontrollers
https://www.sparkfun.com/categories/242
if you know what you are doing, and where to start, perhaps it is fairly
doable. especially if you have others to ask for assistance if a dead-end
is encountered. otherwise it could seem daunting for the beginner who has
no electronics background. and yet it seems step-by-step, beginners
resources are available to begin this exploration process.
the thing is, with a microcontroller platform, it is then possible to
further explore this HIOX signaling via electronic LED displays... and yet
again the format of the displays becomes an issue, for what is required
versus what exists, and the level of complexity to do simplest, most manual
transformations via writing code bit by bit to change 'graphics'.
tutorial example: Controlling RGB Matrices with Arduino
https://www.sparkfun.com/tutorials/201
so what this amounts to is a bounded realm of LED display technologies
driven by custom-programmed microcontrollers that could potentially be used
for rudimentary explorations of HIOX signaling as basic cryptographic
research, in its potential versus incapacity to make any headway along
these lines given personal, resource, and technology limits. so while for
me this is all about proving ideas of 3-value and N-value logic via
experimental demonstrations, it turns out not possible to pursue. and thus
these words versus artifacts, a working signaling system in its more
developed conception, where computation, mathesis, and signage is involved.
even beyond a realm of software-based encryption. something else, beyond.
thus for an LED matrix, hand coding each alphanumeric letter and number and
their transformation is basically endless bureaucracy and total friction to
such experimentation, and the size of the arrays is off (displays need odd
number of pixels for centering of master symbol, and spacing of array of
multiple symbols). and, also, LCD just is not as cool as LED in this realm,
so really wanted to keep it in this semaphore context, versus that of a
'screen', more an external sign or transformable "electronic flag"
mechanism.
8x8 RGB LED Matrix Display Module
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANmZZx8HnMc
Two 8x8 RGB LED Matrix - Fire Effect (new version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz_HT-FqEOE
How to drive an led display matrix.
http://www.best-microcontroller-projects.com/led-dot-matrix-display.html
Adafruit RGB LED Matrix
http://www.adafruit.com/category/63_100
http://www.rayslogic.com/propeller/programming/AdafruitRGB/AdafruitRGB.htm
24x16 RGB LED Matrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0E9o32j8EM
so the thing is, if there was already software that mapped out letters and
calculations to transform them or establish and 'compute' relations, then
it could be plug and play exploration and things could go beyond talking
about letters and numbers on a display-- except this is not possible in the
given frameworks- and it scales up to larger store displays and mega
displays likewise-- it is coded within a certain relation to language that
removes the [sign] of its graphic information and instead each alphanumeric
needs to be reconstructed individually as a graphic bitmap, seemingly, in
order to start this process. language is not conceptualized in a way to
allow it to be explored as a signal itself, only as a representation of
signaling. thus everything is from scratch and the bigger you think, the
more impossible it is to do because it is like trying to build a pyramid
from individual pieces of sand. it is not a viable approach.
and yet the potential is quite extraordinary, for instance if a 3D array of
LED lights could model a letter 3-dimensionally within its matrix, and
allow letters to be twisted or mirrored, if only software could allow for
this, and displays were built around this functionality... thus,
eventually, such novelties could also have a signaling dimension,
conceptually, even if only as artwork that takes code and makes patterned
permutations-- basically the same thing this device may be programmed to
do, though with alphanumerics or its de|con-struction...
LED Cube 8x8x8 running on an Arduino
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUcX41pokZY
(in that, what if i want to spin the letters A and X and G at different
speeds in a word, and then letters H and W vertically, while rotating the
letter N)
--- conceptual backgrounder ---
so visiting the Walker Art Center about 30+ years ago, encountered
paintings of Jasper Johns that were a 7-segment LED display (0-9 plus hex)
in painted form, which got me thinking... and then years later at the same
museum, artist Jenny Holzer had a mind-blowing exhibit of LED displays
running streams of scrolling and blinking red illuminated text, statements
and ideas, that tied into this fascination with language in its other
functioning, as if conceptual data or running code. and the idea of
programming language was involved with this idea of HIOX, to be able to
create equations and algorithms to transform alphanumerics in a context of
display. i just did not know you could not do it, that it was not modeled
or conceived this way. yet the boundary kept me from exploring it any
further, beyond serial writing of perspective, trapped in the code-limits,
as i remain here. note the electronic context for linguistics... in that
ideas of code and programming could exist outside the computer, firstly,
and in a realm of signs and signage and their interplay in signaling
systems, more as traditional data relay. also, the primacy of aesthetics in
this, electromagnetic yet tangibly grounded in the world in a most familiar
way, using read/write systems in various contexts (truisms in stone, LED
signs) though also that there is a poetic dimension inherent in this
approach, and likewise could exist within code and programming and
signaling likewise...
Jenny Holzer - artist info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Holzer
Sounding the Alarm, in Words and Light (2009)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/13/arts/design/13holz.html
Jenny Holzer: "Projection for Chicago" (amazing video of her work)
http://blip.tv/art21-exclusive/jenny-holzer-projection-for-chicago-1701427
google image search: various examples of her LED signage
https://www.google.com/search?q=jenny+holzer+led+signs&safe=off&client=fire…
so the situation that exists at this/that point is that i myself can
operate a 16 segment LED display via a Parallax microcontroller, yet cannot
get beyond this limit. and then the options that exist for larger signage,
towards the scale of displays that Jenny Holzer uses, is likewise limited
by its conception or protection of language as a pre-defined graphic
element that cannot be broken down into its constituent parts or elements
(like individual segments of a 16 segment display) and instead forces these
considerations into an enormous bitmap animation scenario, making
electronic pointillism unto madness. so in terms of software-- it is all
dumb, in terms of [signs] as the language elements exist as concepts- as if
INVIOLABLE. meaning, beyond questioning. a rigid limit or assumption or
threshold that locks-down interpretation and requires letters, words, and
numbers be that and not some aspect of them. and thus a typo is only and
ever an error, never an insight into the deeper structuring. nothing
conceptual allowed about language as a metaphysical system of symbolic
communication. nothing of numbers and their symbolism. nothing of signs in
relation to calculation as this equates with establishing logic. mirroring,
none of it. tools would need to be re-conceived and programmed this way.
and so for awhile i investigated these signs and realized the limits
involved, and would have attempted an art project to reinterpret the
display yet do not have the programming skills needed to explore ideas
beyond the existing context, and it would likely take significant
programming effort to allow the type of HIOX exploration imagined,
developing various approaches and techniques and routines for such
dimensional transformation of language as code. the initial question begins
with 3|E and its relation between number and letter as this relates to
paradox and logic, and then moves far beyond this into calculations, and
exploring the calculus of various set combinations and permutations. yet
software tools and models do not exist to do this. though an issue like
color display could be added, as with a traffic light, and further bring
out relations amongst patterns embedded in a given linguistic and
mathematic context... again, as this relates to signaling. ways of
perceiving 'wave function' of data that collapses into one framework or
another, based on superposition and observer relations.
Electro E Programmable Tri-Color LED Sign Display 11.5 x 41
http://www.neon-das.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=LEDEM-4U4…
M1000 Large Alphanumeric Display 2" to 4.5"
http://www.vorne.com/led-displays-m1000.htm
the graphic-based Vorne display (url directly above) seemed to have the
most potential in terms of programmability, perhaps defining a letter as a
graphic object that could then be flipped or turned, as an image, yet it
seemed infeasible to pursue without the programming ability to shape the
code which may be more difficult than an educational microcontroller in
defining what happens or how, and reliant upon technical support that
probably is bounded to words and sentences versus artistic or pure
research, into display systems, for conceptual communication.
so while Jenny Holzer is working at a wild scale within this
(light-emitting diode) electronic display as an artistic medium, the medium
itself in its technical configuration does not allow a questioning of the
language that inhabits the display nor its [sign]=[sign] assumption, that
limits what the language can say, bounded to a finite construct that while
traditional is also linear and rigid, whereas stock market number displays
could be constantly transforming or updating numbers or scheduling displays
could change one city to another, and yet letters and words themselves have
no such 'higher functionality' than being static objects, unrelated to
anything else structurally or conceptually- yet linguistically this is a
false perspective. they are highly related, letters and numbers and signs
are connected via common structures and emerge out of them, such as an M
and W or 3 and E, or all of these in a single instance. and yet that
turning or rotation or flipping is off-limits in the display model-- yet it
is where the code begins, and programming of other language interactions in
calculus-like trans transformative relations.
the thing is: this is a semaphore! display this on a wall in your
apartment or home, program it for messaging, and point it out the window
and you have a relay-based visual system for sharing data that can be
encrypted within a shared key cipher system. not for nefarious purposes,
potentially as artistic display of the beauty of alphanumerics, such as
tessellation patterns that are based on these geometric dynamics, as well
as typographic tessellations... (note: my research work preceded this)
Hypnopaedia
By Zuzana Licko
http://www.emigre.com/EFfeature.php?di=98
in any case, a potential exists for structures and patterns of language and
number, mathematics even, to be recontextualized via electronic displays
and reconceptualized as language and in turn, cipher systems. in that the
~idea of code and programming could be different than existing approaches
to mediating [signs] within a linear single perspective framework. it could
be a situation involving /superposition/ within language, and 3-value and
N-value logic, versus only binary interpretations; correct display versus
alternative forms of communicative display. and this taken into an
environment of ubiquitous commercial signage, networked 'electronic
billboards' of a given ideological disposition to semiotics and fixed ideas
about image-based POVs, versus breaking it down, investigating it as data,
considering its potentials and dimensionality in terms of signaling,
patterns, data, symbols, calculation, perception, perspective, limits,
thresholds, boundary, skew, meaning, relativism, parallel observation,
zoning, secrecy, infrastructure, covert communication, networks, literacy,
translation, ciphers, etc.
--- tangible examples ---
so imagine you have an electronic display like the Vorne signage above and
it can hold and display a bit string, that another observer can relate to.
and they hold their phone up to the display and software evaluates it and
outputs some transformed version based on its expansion and-or a shared
key. else, that certain letters or numbers or patterns emerge from the
noise based on an algorithm. or that it is infrared or UV and looked at a
display in those frequencies reveals other data, say with a digital camera.
and thus a QR-code like potential to convey information though abstracted
or embedded in what appears to be or is a noisefield.
else, it could be a sign on a house, and used as an encryption system to
allow a courier to leave a message or open a e-commerce delivery portal and
leave a package, via scanning data and verifying identity against matched
network records. or, it could be data on a building, viewed as if by
microwaves or laser miles distant, or telescope, whose encryption can be
unlocked in a given perspective though not in others, via line of sight
communications. in the sense the signaling can be changed and altered, it
is as if a flag based signaling system of N-potential flags in an unknown
library of a bounded infinity, more ocean than fishbowl, even for an 8x8
display, versus 3,000 by 300, etc.
the code potential in this, the ability to program and explore alphanumeric
and patterned structure, is extraordinary, perhaps even unprecedented as a
communications medium, beyond or outside of the framework of a computer and
into questions of signs and signage and symbols themselves. like in some
cases the metaphysics of charcoal, pencils, and pens need to be worked-out
in terms of language, before having a sense of what laser printing is
really capable of and how it is different and yet extends other principles
further along, yet remains connected to what preceded it in a shared realm
of language. so too, electronic displays as signage ("Great White Way"
lighting and advertising of electrification; ~Learning from Las Vegas
analysis of signage infrastructure), that their may be more to it than the
default interpretation inside computers, when formatted by binary ideology
that has pretty much everything wrong, conceptually.
what if the signage and cellphones were an encryption platform. what if
signaling occurred between signage and vehicles and allowed zoned
interactions with regard to information though also secrecy and security
issues. what if such signage and display was a type of chalkboard for
calculation or modeling of ideas or learning about logic or other
conceptualization. what if it even connects with rituals, such as holiday
lights or decorations and could exist as a subsystem of a dwelling,
mediating an interior and exterior relation, threshold or boundary. in that
it functions as a traffic light in some instances, an electronic relay of
information in others, a house address in others, or electronic dropbox.
this is infrastructure, tools, building, systems.
yet it has a vital functional role matched into its aesthetics. it is not
just a dumb display screen to transmit dumb data. it has deeper and more
imaginative purpose.
--- where its at today ---
thus as stated nothing occurred to develop this HIOX approach into a
signaling system. it would need to be collaborative and supported as basic
research. manufacturers would likely have to be involved to potentially
change circuitry to allow for new functionality even, in that this could be
more an issue of computation than it is at present, where it is more that
of display alone. and so the gap between the idea and the existing reality
is that the tools are themselves limited in what can happen, and available
techniques are bounded to only certain interpretations that are biased to
particular tried-and-true display outputs. and so even a larger scale more
capable electronic display is locked-down in its capacity to ask and
explore these questions. and the pointillist condition establishes an
impossible barrier that cannot be surpassed within the given framework,
without conceiving of a better way to develop a prototype display, a
proof-of-concept that demonstrates and can validate the approach via
experiments open to peer-review and extension by involved others, as a new
platform of pattern-based signaling.
instead of the large LED display, the large electronic canvas needed for
the scale of the inquiry (bit set at sentence or paragraph length, versus
letters and word), its lack of computability then offers no benefit to a
smaller and equally incapable mini 32 x 32 LED matrix, in that the problems
are only compounded at the larger scale and remain daunting, infeasible,
no-go.
and yet -- it is the very same underlying concept taken back into the
original 16 segment LED display (aka HIOX), that if combined in a larger
array or display format, does allow this segment-based breakdown of the
numbers and letters to occur and could be used in a realm of computation,
just not at an integrated scale. consider this pinball LED display...
Data East Dual 16 Digit Alphanumeric LED Display
http://bayareaamusements.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Cod…
this to me, in a context of bit sets and bit strings, has a computational
potential built-into the display itself, given how the software processes
the code, and how well the code can map into the various structures and
retain readability, even though not effectively aligned due to vertical
distance. those 32 digits each have a potential for at least 26 letters and
10 numerals, which makes it a multiset with 2-level potential of:
[36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36]
[36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36][36]
this is far beyond trillions of set combinations and permutations. there
are likely incomputable numbers here, not even considering the alphabet
dimensions, in terms of probabilities. what this really is, in terms of
N-value logic is an array of 32 wildcard variables that could be anything...
[ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ *
][ * ]
[ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ * ][ *
][ * ]
and thus, in a larger consideration of display potential (not limited by
size of the 'pixel' or bit), infinity upon infinity could be nested within
these interset relations, one variable in relation to others, in various
nonlinear patterns. and this could occur graphically, as if glyphs or
symbols or various emergent proto-signage.
whereas, for a digital, binary viewpoint, in 2-values, the same potential
for display as literal number, could be entirely finite and bounded:
[0][1][0][0][1][0][1][1][0][1][0][1][0][0][0][1]
[1][0][0][1][0][1][1][0][1][0][1][0][0][0][1][0]
and thus, once adding in 'neutral' or unknown (n) of 3-value logic into
this fixed idea of binary language, strange dynamics and possibilities are
opened up within these limited sign systems, and the processing becomes
indeterminate and can be paused or begin to loop, remaining in an undecided
or questioning state....
[0][1][0][0][1][0][n][1][0][1][0][1][0][n][0][1]
[1][n][0][1][0][1][1][0][1][0][n][0][0][0][1][0]
and then with N-value logic, the wildcards transform everything, and the
one and zero absolutes are the exception, a contingency assumption, always
looping to test against the model and its assessment, versus a forgone
conclusion. and in this way, the signs of language and mathematics.
--- Tenori-on ---
in my explorations i discovered one tool that had the potential of a
HIOX-based signaling system, the Yamaha Tenori-on electronic music
instrument....
Tenori-on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenori-on
TENORI-ON Product Demo Performance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SGwDhKTrwU
Yamaha website - software version
http://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical-instruments/entertainment/tenori-on/
what intrigued me about this platform was that it was conceived as a visual
instrument in addition to musical, so that the LEDs and the sequencing of
sound were matched, and patterns could be programmed into the device and
shared as a visual display. the fact that it is a sequencer is very
important, in terms of looped permutation of data, if considering the
display. and yet it remains in a linear time framework by default and
limited capacity to explore anything related to HIOX beyond the given
context, yet exists a potential tool likewise. such that it feasibly could
be used for signaling, as a semaphore.
if attaching it a radio-controlled plane or drone, it could send
alphanumeric display messages via persistence of vision, spelling out data
across the sky via electronic sky writing. or it could be held up at a
distance and burst a message that is captured via video recording and
spotting scope, and when the recording is played back, its message could be
spelled out frame by frame or perhaps exists in an encrypted or hidden
format, say UV or other LEDs that make it look inert and in a state of
non-display, when instead transmitting information or data.
to me this is a semaphore system. and its additional uniqueness was that it
was designed to be connected at a distance to another Tenori-on via network
connection, as if a telegraph, and the music on one device would appear on
the other and each would be able to manipulate the common screen and light
patterns in real-time. how amazing is that? amazing enough to discontinue
develop the product unfortunately. it is perfect for music therapy at a
distance, musical education, if it had more capacity for experimentation
(versus being limited in what is allowed to occur, musically) and thus it
was of limited use as an instrument for those who make music, too
constrained in operation. and yet, idea-wise, it has tremendous potential
as a platform for communication, whether musical or pattern based; and
taken into the above context, signaling, code, programming, semaphore.
tablet software is not the same idea.
--- today ---
thus, when writing emails about logic, it is trapped within this
inescapable coded and programmed context of binary ideology. what can
happen is only what is allowable or possible within the existing
constraints and frameworks, and thus this description of the idea is more
than can be done within the technology itself, as it is ideologically
formatted. in terms of tool use. to enter into a cryptographic context,
computation of bit sets and relaying signals would require developing new
circuits based on 3-value and N-value logic, computer architectures that
allow the code to exist and be processed as it exists, as information in a
grounded model of contingent truth. perhaps even establishing a means for
entanglement between such systems. until then, it seems description and
representation within existing systems would be bounded to a prototype
condition, showing the idea, conceptualizing it, rather than actualizing it.
dim sum, banh mi, sashimi
℻
1
0
// a few other random notes related to the original feedback...
this is perhaps a more accurate model for everyday computer interactions,
whereby the computer machinery may be designed to function against
individuals because it has 'secret functioning' that is protected behind an
inaccessible boundary to most...
individual <==> dumb PC || A.I. =={secret data}==> surveillance
in this way a false perspective could be established for the individual
interacting with what appears to be a dumb system, while behind that
/facade/ the game-master could have dual-use technology that is advanced
yet unrecognized, that automatically monitors or queries data (in the sense
of automated assembly line production of data mining, reconnaissance and
organized pilfering) for the rogue setup/takedown operation, and yet such
functioning could be hidden, a secret within the indecipherable chips
themselves in their unknowns or proprietary, protected internal boundary
(inversion of privacy to allow unconstrained criminality, in certain
contexts, while ignoring or exploiting it in others).
note: if the above relational diagram is broken due to arbitrary word-wrap,
here it is broken down into parts:
individual <==> dumb computer
dumb computer || a.i. computer
a.i. computer <--{crypto}--> surveillance
--- on paracrypto environment ---
perhaps an assumption of signal/noise modeling of crypto is a blank slate
where programming and code creates structures and it is the interaction in
these defined systems where 'the crypto' resides, that is, that the secrets
are contained in the cryptographic communication and do not exist or
reference something beyond the [signs], which would be a mistaken
assumption. paracrypto seemingly is outside of this constraint or does not
align in this way, seemingly. in that it is more like a Random Event
Generator that begins to sense something emerging from the ~plenum of noise
as a pattern or organization with what may otherwise be random background,
as if disassociated potential. in this sense *signal* may emerge from noise
in a paracrypto context, because the meaning already exists in the world as
a pattern, whether or not coded into a given schema contained within a
finite set of signs and algorithms. in fact, "the world" could be missing
from the programming and code of cryptographic products which require
'drawing inside the lines' for that conventional approach to function,
which may limit what world exists within the crypto to begin with- which is
why, in terms of language-based communication it seems the more robust
modeling of crypto occurs outside of hardware/software implementations, and
is far more advanced in terms of intelligence applications as it relates to
day to day networks and how things get down outside formal administrative
channels, especially when compromised or corrupted. in that, the sudden
appearance of a flower pot could signal meaning and provide direction where
no computers operate or observe or analyze though it could be implicitly
known and understood by certain observers of the shared key, what it
signifies. in this way, normal everyday people are dealing with already
established cryptosystems as a basis for hidden or secret communication
which may remain unsaid or unspoken or unacknowledged, yet could only
appear only in the subconscious or unconscious of others.
if a person sees the flower pot and understands the correlation, there is
no need for a computing infrastructure, digital keys and signatures, binary
data streams of code, portable computers and pattern-recognition systems to
verify what is observed and match this against a central database model.
unless of course that is what is required for lack of capacity to process
such information naturally, or that systems are in place for certain
populations to point-and-shoot their phones at every passer by for
diagnostics, to monitor and thus assess their own perspective of what they
are not-seeing-themselves as mediated by technology and remote
interpretation, to then validate the event and provide a viewpoint, another
data point to the empirical model to calculate and reference experience. in
that case 'smart technology' and 'dumb people' and in the other, dumb
technology and intelligent people.
the books: Invisible Cities by Italo Calvino and Ways of Seeing by John
Berger, offer a way of considering the para- or coexisting parallel apsects
of observation, as viewpoint may be shifted based on what framework is
referenced and navigated within. in that different people see different
things. people of different backgrounds or cultures. the works of Edward T.
Hall focus on these questions of relation. i tend to think it inherently
involves the issue of /perspective/ and especially the role of boundaries
or limits that define what is and what cannot be observed.
(note: role of research of sociologists, archaeologists, entomologists,
zoologists, cultural anthropologists e.g. going to village to decipher
customs, learn language, etc. as this applies to codes operating outside
the defining crypto parameters yet functions similarly yet far beyond,
potentially in terms of what is secured and-or private.)
thus to 'really see' you have to deal with errors in seeing within the
self, firstly. make altitude adjustments, corrections, etc. else
observation could be self-limited to a finite viewpoint that begins and
ends with the self as a solitary private individual and seeks to relate
everything that exists to the terms of the person, as if at the center,
infallible.
in this way a person may be considered in terms of an antenna. in that it
involves issues of fundamental being and awareness, as it relates to
grounding or short-circuiting, and what signals and frequencies can be
accessed given its configuration. so if malfunctioning, perhaps only few
things are transmitted or received and perhaps much of it is noise-based or
incoherent. whereas if well aligned, well grounded, and well adjusted,
clarity could result in transmissions and reception of signaling. this as
it relates to literacy and illiteracy. people utilizing their bandwidth for
regressive, backwards activity versus others whose work taps into cosmic
channels of shared truth, finding their place within its masterplan.
clarity versus confusion. deep meaning versus triviality. coherence versus
decoherence. and perhaps signal/noise ratios and embodiment, how much does
the mental/physical correspond within a life, or is it short circuited and
shut off for entire populations, trapped in bodies without governing
ability over its destiny.
the issue of tuning, as it relates to logic. what you tune into as data. as
this corresponds with truth or pseudo-truth or falsity. and then the active
and passive channels, where the data is relayed within a context of self-
what dimensions are functioning within a given person (as antenna) versus
another, and how do they relate or what are the shared and unshared
dynamics between them- as this relates to limits, boundaries, 'shared
awareness', logic, and truth. though especially, of ideology versus ideas.
passive thought versus active questioning, which can be the difference
between faith-based ~theorization and feedback-based hypotheses, requiring
logical foundation for reasoning ideas.
person 1 <===> person 2
antenna 1 <===> antenna 2
so paracrypto functions in this realm by default of nature, at least for
humans and animals, in terms of consciousness and shared awareness. 'truth'
does not reside within a being and instead is referenced or mapped into the
surrounding world. the truth of a table is not its calculation in the brain
corresponding to a sign [table], because it must be verified externally in
its existence to validate this truth, the sign maps into the world where it
finds its grounding, closing the circuit of signification. whereas
disembodied truth or signage freed of this need for external evaluation or
proof, can be whatever it is believed to be irrespective of other facts
outside a given personal framework of relativism. and this is the
thought-killer, the nasty bug that replaces thinking with binary
processing, making a fractional truth into 'whole truth' and ignoring any
external truth or ability to falsify the viewpoint. perhaps in some way
this is a countermeasure equivalent to jamming an antenna to protect
another signal.
very easy to move into extra-sensory perception or astral projection or
remote viewing in this electromagnetic antenna context, if the truth of
information is 'shared' by default and involves referencing a shared
sensory domain where the truth of information could reside in the
noisefield, as patterns. and that perhaps these /forms/ or hidden yet
emergent molecules - as ideas and concepts and connections and correlations
- are the real codebase of humanity and nature, yet it remains encrypted
due to an incapacity to engage this realm in an insufficient,
non-electromagnetic modeling of existence, that binary computing instead
seeks to define and determine, becoming the future.
so paracrypto relations could exist in ubiquitous and meaningful ways,
except have no place within the domain of computation except for monitoring
and controlling and constraining its development, to keep the
non-electromagnetic false worldview in tact and in power. in other words
"crypto" and code and programming for computers does not have the capacity
to deal with this realm, and by comparison computing languages -are-
[signage] detached from actual physical reality, fundamentally ungrounded
and unreliant on observable truth outside their finite and skewed
boundaries.
this is why a programming language based on 'circuits', from the individual
to nature, to concepts and ideas, would be closest that of nature and the
brain and mind itself, and developing this from N-value logic, so that
"programming" a device is no different than "people thinking" or logically
reasoning via hypothesis, trial and error, feedback, and empirical
evaluation against a universal model based in grounded truth (1). anything
else tends towards absolute falsity, the further it computes partial truth
against partial truth in a binary framework, where a false and uncorrected
absolutist foundation and error-reliant structures hold up the fantasy as a
schizophrenic state of awareness.
--- analogy ---
the frame of view, or perspective of a given observer can be considered in
terms of a literal picture frame that defines what is inside from what is
outside the captured view, as this relates to a boundary condition.
...|v|...
if a digital camera is used to take a photograph -- as a basis and
corollary for observation -- a boundary condition is delineated and
demarcated (outside...|inside|...outside) and in this way, the realm that
is captured (v) can be detached from its surroundings, as a finite
instance, or still be tied into it via its inherent connectivity outside or
beyond the arbitrary boundary or view of the whole. thus a partial view of
the cosmos is not the cosmos in its entirety. yet, oftentimes such
infintesimal viewpoints can replace the larger realm of observation, and
stand-in for this universal view by default of binary observation and
'sharing of viewpoint'. what is true is |v| and nothing else is true, as
long as everything outside the frame is ignored, whether true or not, and
anything inside the frame is considered true, by default of some aspect of
it being true, yet allowing errors to compensate as truth, because they
hold up the perspective of a given distorted, ungrounded observer.
this is the basic model of binary computers, where the cosmos is on the
outside, and only what fits into the tiny box is allowed 'reality' in the
false perspective, and thus everything is made to serve that distorted,
error-reliant viewpoint in order to be allowed in a realm of 'shared
perspective' in the "common programmatic language", where [signs] stand-in
for truth, and become their own self-signification (?), such that
[sign]=[sign] is the pattern match, in language, versus in evaluation of
ideas themselves or the truth they reference. it has become detached,
"virtual", an issue of _processing of data streams, reasoning turned into
this via binary short-cuts for rote call & response as if intelligence
versus "the speed of smartness" which can relay disembodied facts into a
context of ever larger prime discoveries, as if by default of observation:
true. because it is observed and believed true, and corresponds with the
accepted framework that sees no error in itself, because it essentially
holds the position of infallibility via god-status.
paracrypto ...|crypto|... paracrypto
likewise for cryptographic hardware/software based on computers and their
programmatic finite modeling of reality, devoid of actual grounding in
external truth outside the context of [signs], which tokenize truth into
something arbitrary and malleable-- a fundamental corruption of the highest
and lowest order. it simply must be deception. as these same critical
systems of intelligence always have and always will operate in the larger
realm of language, mapped into the cosmic context, not limited by the
finite frames of a given viewpoint or framework that seeks to stop or
constrict what can be communicated.
circuits ...|bits|... circuits
the universe is a bit only in the sense that truth and falsity can
correspond with a 1/0 state computationally- it could be a simulation and
presented digitally, yet it is an emulation and exists in a larger context
that is not so defined or limited or impoverished in meaning. the 'bit' is
a false perspective of experience. it is of a false nature and detached
from actual experience, unless warped and unimaginative. certainly 'ideas'
can be processed as bits, yet they are not only this nor is this their
height or greatest capacity. in so far as ideas are 'true' and map into
reality, they tend towards 1, yet remain bounded and contingent. insofar as
they are false, they tend towards zero. yet if assuming all ideas could be
grounded in truth, it is in their modeling and observation this way that
their structures (as molecules) would be constructed and anchored to the
shared foundation of universal truth (1) yet this does not equate with a
digital worldview or its verification. it makes no sense in the larger
context of the cosmos and in this reductionist approach disallows
consideration of the actual nature of connection within minds and
environments, in terms of shared truth, beyond that of the ideological.
circuits ...|circuits|... circuits
a computer architecture that is based on circuits would not reinforce a
boundary and twist and warp things to fit inside its false modeling, and
declare it 'universal truth', and instead would be able to move beyond the
boundary via interconnectivity within structures of truth that can be
mapped beyond a given observational boundary, the weaving together of
various empirical views of grounded observers... and this accesses the
ancient geometrical approach, of the self with self, self with another, and
others, which moves from a point to a line, to a triangle, to a square, and
onward to an atmospheric whole, as ideas and events and observations align
in a shared framework of truth.
... |v1| |v2| |v3|...|v^n| ...
wherein ultimately the correlated observation can tend towards
N-dimensional observation of events and extend into infinities that
ungrounded relativism does not allow as its 'wholeness' is dependent on
protecting skew within a given boundary and equating it with absolute truth
because it is shared, validated by others, as a false consciousness and
this could be exploited, where the boundary condition it provides is cover
for deception which exploits this, keeps ideas trapped in a false
worldview, while other things are happening outside this framework yet
cannot be accessed or identified inside of it, due to the enforced limits
and constraints on observation. thus, those who pursue the truth of ideas
can easily be deemed insane, and given disorienting pills, put into
psychiatric hospitals, and forced to suicide, to keep the political agenda
secure, secret.
the potential then of shared observation, is that if humans were combined
into a single observer, then:
... |humans^N] ...
and that a computer that can 'reason' like a person, in N-value
considerations of circuits, would then not be unnaturally bounded and set
apart from nature, where only some truth is allowed, that which can be
accommodated within the technological framework and its errant ideology.
humans ...|antihumans|... humans
in terms of paracrypto, human communication that is secret if not secure
could exist in dimensions outside the limiting framework of those who
censor and edit-out truth from their skewed worldviews and seek to create
technology to reinforce this false view, to maintain control over the
illusion. a computer that breaks this observational dictate then would
provide tools for humans who are on the outside of technology today, not
being served by it, and would allow technology to be in service to humans
and nature and not their enemy in a win-lose relationship. insofar as this
truth cannot be acknowledged or identified, it could function as
extra-dimensions that can be referenced while also not being relayed in
explicit terms understandable by the hidden surveillers, or their
computers. if the code is unable to be deciphered accurately or put
together as a whole. instead it would develop as a noisefield. more and
more noise. and this likewise could be an aspect of the surrealism it
involves. for those on the inside, it may appear only warped or distorted
or skewed or false via inaccuracy or error-rate in [sign]=[sign] pattern
matched relations, breaking this interpretative framework, limiting its
resolution via the boundary, inverting the false-perspective with another
that actually involves a siege, as truth surrounds and further and further
constricts the finite, false point of view.
it is also an issue of limited numbers of observers, and their incapacity
to accurately 'process' or accurately interpret such data, at speed,
previous and in addition to the incapacity of similar computer modeling to
~rationalize the irrational data into a coherent framework, without forcing
and amplifying skew, distortion, warping, and errors based on false
assumptions and lies-- to the absolute extreme.
the primary idea again is there is a -gap- between the [model] & [reality].
and in certain conditions this is where paracrypto occurs, or so it is
proposed. such that an antihuman agenda set into binary computing regime
cannot parse or process data outside this framework without forcing it back
into its biased logical structuring, which only tenatively grounds via
pseudo-truth. and that is a security flaw and no secret anymore.
the difference with a human model would be that it establishes and serves
this connection with reality as closely as possible, that it must be
aligned accurately as that is the basis for its accountings, its
verification, validation as observation. whereas for ungrounded relativism,
it is the separation from larger reality that presupposes 'universality'
and seeks to replace it, rather than serve the larger truth- it is to serve
that which is contained as if equated with this, a substitute worldview and
illusion based on a shared lie.
--- other notes ---
self as antenna, yet also machines as antennas and their dimensional
aspects. this in terms of logic and relations, such that, for example:
N-value observer <---> N-value machine
N-value observer <---> binary machine
what 'shared awareness' is possible or not, based on the boundary of
observation and its reliance on truth or pseudo-truth. to recontextualize
this question in terms of ~being and A.I. then could allow a shared
circuit-based code and programming language to have advanced 'chess'
communications based in 'shared reasoning' beyond the limiting framework of
binary ideology, interfacing with a computer such that:
individual <-- N-value reasoning ---> A.I. machine
if verifiable-yet-contingent truth were the basis for this relation, then
cryptography could instead involve a defense of truth at the base of this
model, where error-correction and oversight could occur to compare against
false-modeling or fake-ideas or agendas, potentially. in that, a
traditional route would appear to view security as based on breaking a
model so to make it more secure-- yet to do this with 'truth' itself, would
be to degrade a conceptual model from truth to pseudo-truth, in order to
'secure it' within greater falsity, making it less secure and allowing for
errors that would otherwise not be allowed. thus the traditional approach
could be backwards in a circuit-based context, though perhaps an extra
diagnostic layer or protocol would exist that is crypto-based in terms of
security, to validate truth against its modeling and make sure it cannot be
tampered with or that there is a secure realm that monitors itself, at
least in such a framework. seemingly opposite of computers today.
--- on errored observation ---
i have various kinds of brain blips and malfunctioning of nervous system
and sometimes will look at text and see the wrong words or have my brain
substitute other words automatically or misspell yet when i read it i
sometimes cannot see the error due to processing. there can be an aspect of
satire involved in this, as misinterpretation sometimes allows a surreal
parallel interpretation, much like the satire of the Onion news articles
and headlines with other, many times more real, events. many occasions
especially when fatigued will read a sentence in error, and this a [world]
will become multiset and reframe a sentence or paragraph, relation or idea,
as a result. i wonder if there is a way to annotate this as an experience,
such that these moments of accidental insight could be captured or shared.
almost attempted to do this by détourning coderman's reply with this
alteration:
key exchange, just synchronized symmetric cigars and readers digests)
>
in that a misreading or altered reading can change the context and meaning
of the original statement, as this relates to the interpretive aspect of
evaluation in its fractal and multidimensional (if noise-based subconscious
connection to patterns, as they may exist betwixt-and-between various
frameworks of truth). original:
was: key exchange, just synchronized symmetric [ciphers] and [digests])
>
in the first instance, a skewed eyeball capture for some reason warped
cipher into cigar, adn then a different approach evaluation 'digest' in a
larger iconic context, in that given the observer you ask about locating
the digest, may respond in crypto computer terms or from another era, of a
magazine on the coffee table by the television. this is the reality of
language in its complexity and subtltey that goes unmapped by the
assumption that it is neither active nor relavant in a binary ideological
framework and 'shared awareness' which is assumed by default correct and
finite, contained in the frame it determines. whereas for other observers
it could extend beyond this, into elsewhere, which is where paracrypto may
better be said to exist, in this bit set interaction, within and between
and beyond the [signage] that makes up the code, yet also validates and
invalidates its premise in terms of inherent security or secrecy in the
realm of ideas and concepts, assigned and referenced in a realm as
technical infrastructure, yet in error and inaccuracy as it relates to the
larger environment which is also encrypted, also communicating; computer
hardware and software the subset here, potentially even, compared with the
code of nature and secured subsystems for transmitting data that remains
unobserved on other levels. if actually dealing in realism versus forcing
the false perspective and thus the surrealism is all there is to make sense
of the larger context as the code is ungrounded as observation.
malmodeling. incomplete, infinitely so.
☳
1
0
for crypto model...
individual <--- [x] ----> individual
where x is medium, such as one-time pad or computers, whereby:
individual <--- machine --{crypto}-- machine ---> individual
to a potential artificial intelligence context of machine borne crypto...
A.I. machine <--- {crypto} ---> A.I. machine
computers themselves developing secrets, privacy, securing POV.
individual <--- A.I. machine <--{crypto}--> hidden attacker
perhaps zoning humans out of machines, parasite/host relations
x0
1
0
fascinating Tomas, well said and it captures what is hard to describe
otherwise in its wide-ranging dynamics, co-existing with yet seemingly
outside of existing crypto conceptualization in terms of hardware and
software systems. i was thinking of a future cryptographic exchange system
in terms of a MMORPG though your ideas made me reconsider the present in
this framework which provides an interesting corollaries in terms of a more
realistic context for cryptology in its known metaphysical dynamics -- the
possibilities of advanced technologies that can read brain waves or tap
optic nerves and how these figure into realistic questions of securing and
transmitting data.
in this sense, the world could be viewed in terms of a game, as you state,
and of a game-master which could define a security situation for those
inside. this environment could be considered a 'world' then, with the
game-master having god status or root access, whereas the chmod settings of
various players or other hierarchical access could limit or allow access to
game data and control over its environment. seemingly, those most aligned
with the game-master (and their god-status) could have more priveleges or
support the game framework, while others may seek to function beyond it yet
remain trapped inside, where the rules are too limiting to change the
rigged outcome.
consider then 'cryptographic tools' in such a closed environment, where the
game-master has total control over the crypto and can read anything
encrypted though this is not known to other players or is assumed benign,
whereby omniscient-like awareness exists or is even shared by a certain
group within the game which could benefit from the secrets supposedly
hidden within the crypto, while other less connected players may naively
assume there is security and secrecy and be taken down as a result of this.
in that, perhaps the 'god' is fake and has a selfish or cruel and has an
evil agenda and is trying to destroy those not aligned with their (truly
hidden) agenda, because it is out of the boundary of available or allowed
perception. and thus people in the game could be cultivated into a realm of
stupidity, illiteracy, and ignorance by the game-master while those aligned
with this ideology would benefit the most and function against other
players, perhaps with the goal of killing all of them off so to win the
game, and world.
the big tell or discovery would be that the 'game-master' who has
god-status is not allied with truth, and instead bases all their power on
manipulations via lies and cheating and corrupting events and causing pain,
injury, and suffering to gain control and guide things for the worse, for
the human players. and thus when challenged, this agenda becomes clear in
ignoring truth, dismantling systems of accounting and feedback, and
replacing it with an ideology behavior-based belief system that is onesided
to a partial viewpoint that serves the devolved condition as if ideal. thus
"god" in this scenario would be functioning against higher truth, and
whatever truth would function in this domain would defer to 'lower truth'
or partial truth of the ideology of the game-master and cohorts.
'official crypto' then, saying it is to serve and protect freedom could
instead be meant to prevent and exploit it for a hidden agenda functioning
against populations, only to benefit the group aligned with the
game-master, and there could be a 'religious basis' in that 'true belief'
or assumption of correctness could equate with absolute truth (T), even
while the partial views could tend towards total falsity when accounted for
beyond the warped framework (pT=>0). and thus reasoning would not be
possible because 'truth' would be denied by binary onesidedness and a
correct view chosen based on hierarchical privilege, which could rule
institutions and society within the game.
what para-crypto potentially defines or suggests is that 'other crypto'
could exist beyond the logical or observational boundary of the game-master
and minions, such that data could be transferred between humans both
in-world and beyond the game-world barrier, without being subverted by
'game-master' designed cryptographic systems which are inherently corrupted
and a victim of 'partial omniscient' which serves itself as its goal, and
thus 'validated truth' must benefit the game-master or else it is wrong,
false, and threatens control over unified perception of what amounts to
evil dictatorial control over the shared ~game environment.
[note: this fits very well with a view of the earth being taken over and
exploited by a private, limited, evil agenda, whereby the leader assumes a
position of 'god' yet whose omniscience is limited only to the game-world
under their control. much like the devil masquerading as god yet not
recognizing or allowing truth beyond their own pov.]
for me this could be interpreted in either traditional terms of theology,
where it has relevance, as it relates to geopolitics and security and
secret agendas today, even, though further- it could involve issues of
simulation atop this, whereby a Matrix-like environment could exist, and
the game-master could have computational control over events in this world
and thus also have omniscient awareness - yet which is biased and
self-serving, warped by a twisted agenda which seeks to subvert human
development, etc.
either way- omniscience and cryptography should be the default scenario for
considering issues of security, secrecy, privacy, and rights today.
anything else is just using a corrupted framework that is essentially
'anti' by default of ignoring such a complex, SCIFI environment in terms of
advanced technology and tools available and how data and ideas are
functioning in an electromagnetic (and beyond) realm, which remains
unaccounted for in the society, within education, and peer communications.
thus illiteracy.
for instance, it could be metaphysics of higher dimensionality that the
game-master is allowed to access 'thoughts' before encrypting them, and
then alter tools to access anything that is encrypted. how do you deal with
secret communication in a context like this? the only security or secrecy
seemingly possible would be that which is outside the threshold of
observation for the game-master and in-game spies who are monitoring
everything. and thus, their ideology is the programming and contains errors
and corrupt code that creates a gap or distance between what is real and
actual (truth) and what they believe exists, (partial truth).
pT <={x}=> T
if some observers observation of truth is bounded and more limited than
another, even if operating in higher dimensionality, say 'aliens' are
game-master minions, (obs.1), it is still possible for humans of lower
status (obs.2) in the game-world hierarchy to observe and function within a
truth that is beyond their awareness or observance, including the 'false
god' of the game, who seeks to control and limit this interpretation of
truth to only a particular version of truth, reliant on skew, bias,
warping, distortion, normalizing this.
0 ---> pT.1 ---> pT.2 ---> 1 such that,
0 <--- 'god' <--- pT.1 <---> pT.2 ==> 1
and this could become a context of the human and antihuman agenda, as it
relates to truth...
0 <--- 'fake-god' <--- antihumans <---> humans ---> 1
in this way, commercial and retail cryptography that is subverted and used
against constitutional rights and freedoms via the corrupted state could,
in its subversion, be used for the power politics and game-management of
the game-master (or dictator) whose partial and finite truth, unchecked
relativism, would tend towards zero or nothingness, death and shared 'false
consciousness' as it relates to an ideological framework that becomes the
common state structure and basis for relation. and humans could be confused
into serving this agenda, or have their data pilfered by surveillance, to
support and extend it via its exploitation. whereas humans may seek to
serve truth (1) and in doing so, life and all that is true in its integrity
and purpose, and yet attempting to communicate securely or convey truth
beyond the allowed boundary, could make these individuals or groups into
the enemy of the existing environment. off-the-shelf crypto use could tend
towards zero and not one, by default of its hidden agenda, and could
support the tyranny over the population rather than its liberation. note:
the human context for omniscience would be knowing all that is true in its
empirical wholeness, and thus absolute knowing (1), which would involve
access to all events and all sensors and circuitry, including spiders eyes
and birds ears. not just technology and not lacking in understanding of its
truth -- whereas the false-god would be in error in their interpretation
due to not having observation grounded in absolute truth for their biased
reasoning.
in a doubled condition then, with backdoors yet perhaps secret hidden
'other code', the same crypto product could co-exist at either end of this
entire range, that which has the compromised code sending pilfered
encrypted information onward to the dictator and crew ("these are the
secrets!") whereas other code could exist beyond or outside this boundary
at the same time, and not be compromised and thus remain hidden or secret
and in service to shared, higher truth.
the lack of logical accounting for truth then would have that kind of
crypto tending towards falsity (0) in terms of its groundedness, as
accurate empirical observation and instead could be feeding a false
perspective or viewpoint or sustaining a 'virtual world' for the dictator
to believe they are actually in charge and not being gamed. whereas a
shared observance of empirical truth, error-corrected- removed of bias,
warping, skew, distortion, would enable grounded circuitry between people
and nature, even while trapped within a game world that could be
functioning against them and their existence.
in such a way, 'crypto' as an idea would be important to review for its
substance in terms of logic and its accounting in truth or reliance on
partial truth and thus the errors that allow falsity to become a foundation
and structure for relations and shared interactions, including those most
secret, private, or in need of protection against enemies.
human cryptographic products that function beyond the observational and
reasoning limits of the game-master ('god'-status and pT.1) in a realm of
greater truth (towards 1) then are afforded their first security by being
hidden by the boundary or threshold that cannot be observed by those unable
to consider the parameters of reality it exists within; such as paradox
that is 'undecided' and does not allow forced bias to attain "absolute
truth" which is a false view and actually tends towards absolute falsity
the more and more it is relied upon in error, especially empirically, as a
total shared viewpoint. in this way, at some point, 3-value and N-value
logic and truth observed based upon this framework of logical reasoning
then establishes a common basis for shared observation, an empirical
perspective of 'many into one', leveraging panoptics and removing the
errors by 'bugs and eyeballs' potential, the core methodology required to
ground views of a shared human identity into a coherent, accurate,
multifaceted awareness.
thus [human identity] as a set tends towards a certain kind of
consciousness if it is grounded in truth (1) and reasons towards it,
whereas those who do not do this (antihumans) have a different
consciousness and purpose, which relies upon and serves falsity (0) in
terms of the absolute context, beyond the game-world itself. in that it
could be a simulation of earth or earth itself, and while it or certain
dimensions of existence could be under such hostile control - there
evidence that certain truth is not allowed or is denied establishes that
threshold where truth is unshared, people are unlike one another, and serve
different agendas. and thus what is natural and known for humans may not be
conceptualized or comprehended the same by outside observers of a mindset
that favors a given interpretation that may be flawed or distorted, and in
forcing data and observation into that framework, creates an ideological
boundary, an inside framework that humans are outside of. much like
computer systems today that serve an agenda apart from human development,
people serving machines and base motivations of exploitation and
enslavement. assuming that many believe this is the shared and correct
framework, and the issue of compliance is the 'error-checking' routine, a
false relation could be established and yet in its differance, allow a
secondary or parallel realm of interaction, the unstated interconnectivity
of humans, to exist yet beyond the known threshold, as voiced or actively
sensed in game-god parameters.
it is all about signs, eventually, identity and language and perception as
these ground to truth via logic, or exist in an ungrounded unstable
condition, which is where the animal training aspect of society develops
around dictators, forcing compliance via pain and brutality, as a way of
having power determine what is true, or 'highest truth' (0).
as you mention, chaos and magic, and this could coexist in both realms as
well, as metaphysical code. hidden hand interactions. accidents, good
fortune, injury. death. and thus 'code' and 'programming' and 'crypto'
exist in this context and likewise could serve forces of evil (0) where
shared lies function as if universal truth, or be aligned with truth (1).
and this dualism could be institutionalized, much like da Vinci Code
dark/light dynamics at every turn as the forces move out of balance and
return to equilibrium..
so the binary logic, in its onesidedness and ungrounded error-reliant
ideological state, is essentially a broken cypher system, in that both as a
concept and idea it is flawed and even false in modeling events accurately
in that too-simple and too-easy framework. the crypto reliant upon its is
weak because the ideas they are built upon are weak, not only weak- they
are corrupt. false assumptions, error-reliant, and function in a realm of
'true belief' detached from external accounting, even beyond
falsifiability. this is not only 'bad security' or a realm of false secrets
(in more ways than backdooring equipment- the ideas are backdoored!) -- it
is unreal, a false perspective as 'shared reality'. that is what the
game-master cannot acknowledge because it is the worldview of their control
over their minions and 'reasoning' needed to sustain their stolen world
empire.
so it is proposed that use of 3-value and N-value logic by default
functions beyond the capacity of these people to correlate into their
antihuman observational framework and modeling because it does not parse
into the binary warped self-serving ideological agenda and instead appears
/irrational/ and arbitrary and is a chaotic dynamic that instead of
reinforcing the binary belief and shared observation, fragments it and
destabilizes it and continually recenters via non-compliance to the 'finite
reasoning' of the false POV.
in this way, what occurs in these extra-dimensional realms as observation
could inherently remain hidden or secret or have some level of security in
that it cannot be easily accessed or understood as it exists, beyond the
ideological framework and its formatting of meaning to fit into its
partial, constrained viewpoint of events. and thus 'crypto' could exist in
this condition, in which there is a gap in observation or a boundary or
threshold condition, which cannot be accurately accounted for in the given
terms.
the big issue of 'understandability' and its untethering from false- and
controlling- limitations and constraint (thus issue of freedom) then allows
"ideas" and truth to exist beyond the realm of the false viewpoint
controlled by the game-master slash false-god and their minions who enforce
and extend and develop the status quo.
so here is the next aspect you introduce- the computer... what if the world
either was a simulation and run by a computer that enabled a partial yet
flawed omniscience so that god-status had an uncanny ability to surveil
those in-game, or that the game-master relied upon a computer for
surveillance of humans to manage the game world and retain control over
populations by being able to predict or control events, say having the
ability to shape peoples destiny, having the power to manipulate time &
space, etc. this is right out of Lewis Mumford Myth of the Machine, of a
godless computer at the heart of the MEGAMACHINE, the state as an automated
feedback-based machine that is set against human values and ultimately
functioning against humanity. and guess what its greatest weakness is-- it
is all binary! thus entire classes of people who are in service to the
machinery, taking on its values, serving its pseudo-truth (tending towards
0) and "believing" that things really are absolute yes/no for each & every
observation. how absolutely fucking insane and - insanely stupid.
unthinkably stupid. impossibly ignorant. it simply must be a setup, a
conspiracy. it is fundamentally unnatural.
and yet the computer may have space-time and omniscience to a degree of the
binary ideologist and could blacklist or control events and disenfranchise
entire peoples and enslave humanity all the while nothing discussing this
because it is beyond the boundary of communication for these events --
electromagnetism is not even in a historical context within scholarship of
technological or social events (the last 300 years of electrification
even), to provide observational grounding for these 'digital' ideological
events. instead they are just believed wholesale by the populations - as
the NEW RELIGION brought about be technocrats with a hidden agenda.
crypto-politics, yet backdoored from the beginning, where: pT(T), such that:
0 <--- pT (T-->1) whereby
1 (0 <--- pT (T))
if you consider 'infinity' in this bounded context: partial-truth (infinite
truth), then something is seeking to limit the limitlessness and that is
how it gains its power, much like a hydro-event where pressure from a
waterfall is harnessed via turbines that are forced to rotate and do work
and this 'natural energy' can provide power. in this way:
antihuman (humanity)
yet this is a subset(set) relation, upside-down, and essentially equates
with: 0(1)
and thus in terms of dueling logics, whether machine or human- or
other-processing...
binary (N-value) or 2-value (3-value) &or
2-value (N-value)
the important thing to distinguish in terms of 'reality' of this modeling
is that both sets have '1' for a value, such that everything modeled as
'true' would relate to 1-value which is 'truth', though for binary this is
the only choice and it is assumed ABSOLUTE, via ideology. it is a
precondition for the worldview. and nothing is this simple, to start with.
it is to theorize truth from the first to the last calculation and never
question or suspend judgement-- everything must be aligned with a
deterministic evaluation of absolute truth that is detached from actual
accounting in truth, via logic that corrects for errors --or-- can be
falsified. this cannot be. it is tautology taken to the extreme: dictating
truth.
a normalized condition then is: false-truth (truth), or false-truth
(N-observations), which then must be aligned with its structures and
frameworks- as with crypto equipment and its mathematics that may likewise
be 'faith-based' in terms of trust systems, and thus tend towards falsity
by default of their incapacity to account for greater truth beyond the
observational limits established and sustained in their relation. which is
why enforced illiteracy is so important to this 'covert' takeover or global
terror coup. it secures the false view, within the false dynamics, and
everything relies upon strengthening and propping up the false system and
prioritizing its values and functioning. truth is the enemy here, it should
be obvious. any error correction or feedback that threatens the goals and
agenda and self-serving viewpoint of the populism (vote) it involves. and
it is ~feeling based, as belief, if it feels bad it is wrong. wrong
thoughts and bad thoughts that hurt these idiots, make them feel unsafe,
less powerful, privileged or superior.
it relates also to supercomputing and the Deep Blue chess match is of this
paradigmatic change in relations between limits of 'human reasoning' and
that of computational machines, especially binary-based AI. the
supercomputer or even networked supercomputers have speed of thought and
action, and accuracy and depth, to call upon, well beyond the capacity of
any encyclopedic human. i have never related to chess in its game play, due
to my own processing limits, though understand the rules of the game. so i
tried out a computer chess game and was immediately beaten again and again
by what amounts to very low computer processing power, what amounts to a
microchip or microcontroller with game instructions versus peak performance
of global computing capacity. and what it indicated to me, loss after loss,
is that the game is solved at its expert level and if it was feasible or
possible, a chess computer could take a game and be a million moves ahead,
potentially, than a individual's 5 moves or 50 moves. and it could probably
calculate these in the same amount of time, though perhaps far more, in the
realm of trillions of calculations as a start, by comparison to a human
being.
individual <---> individual
machine <---> individual
machine <---> machine
so people still play chess against one another, as they may also send
crypto messages sans software/hardware equipment. and likewise, individuals
can play chess against a machine, a chess computer or chess program, and as
corollary, crypto between people and machines, whether having crypto
created or challenged and deciphered this way, perhaps where AI computers
create their own crypto algorithms someday that humans cannot crack and
thus 'machines have secrets' and a 'hidden private truth', much like HAL.
and then there is an issue of machines 'playing chess' against one another,
state computers functioning against other state computers, and so on.
and what i realized in my perpetual defeat by the chess computer was that
the traditional rules of chess favor a binary, serial mindset and thus are
easily resolved by the chess computer, and thus there is a ~finiteness or
controlled-realm the interactions are happening within, which can be
accurately modeled and improved heuristically, via looped evaluation and
feedback to refine or adjust the model. yet each choice is quite minimal,
the realm of 'infinity' is not readily at work, and with each move, the
speed of calculation is further and further able to refine and project a
winning scenario -- and whatever might happen or may occur would be because
of a gap or ambiguity where the boundary remains 'unknown' or neutral or
may even be perceived as false by the machine. that would be the opening
for the human, to do something unexpected for beyond the known
interpretation and yet upon doing so, the machine learns and that option
like others becomes closed down immediately, so it is no longer available,
if it can be accurately incorporated into the existing game model and
framework; ie grounded.
decades ago i envisioned an electromagnetic chess set with electric power
plant (king) and skyscraper (queen), satellite dishes (rooks), transmission
pylons (knights), radio and TV broadcast towers (bishops), and electrical
distribution pole streetlights (pawns). the board itself consisted of
wooden cubes where each side was a different color, as an informational
terrain, green for grass, black for oil, blue for ocean, that could be
randomly setup or changed during the game to reprogram interaction based on
new rules. and similar to this idea, if suddenly a black square cannot be
moved on or provides a double-move or special quality, it changes the
probabilities involved in game play into a more multilinear or nonlinear
framework, where [square] could become [6 squares] potentially, with new
additional moves or characteristics based on each. and this in turn would
effect 'processing' of the event by a computer, where such ~variables could
tip the scales in humans favor, in that a square color could be changed
mid-game and pivot what is occurring into another perspective, thus adding
more unknowns though also unlocking what could amount to a dead game, on a
conceptual level, in terms of serial logic that limits its potential as a
multidimensional game. oftentimes intelligence compared to multidimensional
chess, even.
so too with a godless network of supercomputers that stand-in for 'shared
awareness' and seek to determine it, within their finite unbounded modeling
in a false framework. if the game-board they evaluate is already "known"
then it is a serial calculation that is snap-to-fit and categorization
figures itself out and allows prime-number-ideologies to extend themselves
further and further on ungrounded and uncorrected assumptions, and yet
function as 'the sign' of truth. computer output, resolution in binary
terms.
these same 'networked chess computers' are thusly biased, and have warped
skewed distorted error-reliant code and programming that determines their
output and how they evaluate input and search and categorize- and this is
used to legimate tyranny, as B=B stands in for A, whereby pT = 1, yet in
its limited view tends to 0, nothingness.
when these machines are evaluating and censusing humanity, especially in
antihuman frames of reference, such that: sign=inaccurate is 'good', if it
serves the ideology; then correlating and corresponding input and output
can "prove" the bias as a matched pattern, albeit falsely or in ungrounded
terms, reliant on errors in process and observation, and yet as if
self-evident, there is no error-correction process that can establish
oversight on its conclusions, especially mathematical, especially
technical, scientific, because it is concluded a priori correct due to
onesidedness of binary ideology, common to the entire false-enterprise and
its soulless trajectory towards nothingness as if the cosmic centre of
being (removed of humanity, replaced by cyborg-based entities) aligned with
the shared ideology. essentially and effectively, a population of mindless
robots and human slaves.
and yet there is a gap between this computer perception -- even in its
seeming omniscience -- and actual reality. that which does not fit into the
binary model or cannot be computed in the serial, linear equations. this
sentence based language can be, it is perfect for computers to figure out,
just like a chess board. to brute force meaning via linguistic structures
and determine via probabilistic weighting 'truth' yet in a context of
2-value assumptions, themselves fundamentally inaccurate and ungrounded and
of an inaccurate worldview that is the basis for computational models and
'computer architectures', along with the cryptographic products this
extends into and becomes.
that gap is where the multi bitset parallel consideration and fractal
reading/writing of texts and ideas and models cannot be readily
accommodated without forcing a limit to its computability by binary models
of evaluation, throughout the analysis, including equipment itself and
forced decision-making and prioritization (deterministic skew), to
evaluation of data that exists beyond its categorization and thus functions
as a field of the data subconscious, unaccounted for yet still connected
with the observation unknowingly, and also group analysis of data and
decision-making based in binary thinking and reliance on this viewpoint as
next steps and governance over its actions.
[the] [abelity] [2] [pring] [th*s] [in-to] [a-other] [r3a1w] [.is] [wot]
[UPS] [th3] [comp.ut.ab.il.it.y]
to try to figure out the meaning of the preceding paragraph (prior to the
structured breakdown sentence) is an issue of coherence within an existing
computational model that is a 'historical framework' that could become
expert and game-winning in terms of a rigged human-machine scenario that
functions in antihuman dynamics, where /signs/ themselves automatically
subsist and move toward a realm of falsity by their default biased
interpretation that has been normalized, via biased privileged onesidedness
that serves a hostile agenda hidden behind a false framework and encrypted
within a false perspective. whereas, going beyond this limit to
recontextualize the game-board, is to establish infinities where a pattern
match once was presumed to exist by default, and the computation require to
solve these same domains becomes intangible, beyond the boundaries and
known borders - it breaks the algorithms and requires additional
interpretation yet that is also limited in comprehension, and must guess or
decide what is true about it, and only partial truth could be accessed, and
thus limited by 2-value logic and flawed assumptions. and so 'meaning'
would remain bounded to only what can be computed and arranged - which may
force incoherence and chaos and fragmentation of modeling due to its
unlikeness, or it may provide arbitrariness and unknowns to such a degree
to appear meaningless or gibberish. and yet encoded within its mystery
could be multiple meanings or messages, essentially encrypted via this
unshared POV. the substance remains hidden or beyond observation, if it
existed- and who is to say it is the sentence as a sentence, and not some
correlation of meaning with its subset relations and dynamics, as variables
may align. the above example is arbitrary and yet it is nuance or subtlety
or insight, could operate beyond the 'known realm' of other observers, as
plain text even. this is nonlinear language, it is not just a serial
reading word to word -----> and instead can function vertically, in
'imaginary time' (Hawking), in the sense of conceptual connections as
constellations, and the ability to read and understand the signs, and for
each person their language may be particular and unique. and thus literacy
remains relativistic in fragmented views yet can be shared, from this
distributed condition, as peer-routing of grounded observations: [variable]
[variables]. and as these may or may not relate in set theory dynamics,
permutations that easily move towards infinity, toward greater truth if
grounded, greater falsity if not. infinitely so.
so imagine each person is playing a parallel chess match with the devil, as
in the The Seventh Seal. and yet this is an automated event, machine-driven
and -reliant interaction and logic-based - and thus the programming and
code that is running, the processing of person and computer would exist in
some relational dynamic, such that:
binary machine <---> binary individual
binary machine <---> N-value individual
binary machine <---> binary machine
...
binary individual <---> binary individual
binary individual <---> N-value individual
N-value individual <---> N-value individual
...
2-value individual <---> N-value individual
2-value individual <---> 3-value individual
3-value individual <---> 3-value individual
3-value individual <---> N-value individual
what is proposed here is that the 2-value individual or 2-value machine are
fundamentally flawed and in the 3-value or N-value paradoxical interaction,
this 'status quo' condition of 'shared binary relations' can be overturned
by switching over to a grounded model of error-correcting, shared empirical
observation, accounted for in truth. at this level of ones and zeros. and
insofar as machines and people cannot do this, it becomes a realm of
hacking, cracking, and exploits- programming dynamics that can take down
the false frameworks via their own internal weaknesses as ideologies and
ideas, based on uncorrected or implausibly deniable errors that establish
and sustain tyranny as an exploit of and against truth itself, and its
accounting. this is potentially related to the Turing Test likewise, in
terms of a litmus for reasoning, discerning a barrier or realm of
behavioral or programmatic skew, beholden to ideology.
2-value crypto <---> N-value crypto
the idea of paracrypto then can operate outside the limits of the 2-value
constraints because the latter is itself a subset of truth that the N-value
references and aligns with in its verification and accounting. the falsity
of 2-value, the gap between pT <=> T, then is the realm beyond god-status
observation even while remaining trapped within its unideal context, the
false perspective.
2-value (N-value) whereby:
T (2-value (N-value) such that: 1 (.0000001 {99.9999999})
paracrypto in its paradoxical dimensions, could tend towards nine-nines
reliability in terms of grounded observation, small finite accurate
observations removed of falsity, even while contained or held captive in a
largely false environment, yet which itself is embedded in a larger
surrounding truth, outside the game world and control of the false god. in
this way, the resonance of like with like or paired-truth could have
properties of entanglement and circuit-related connectione (cosmic
connectome) as parallel worlds align.
xⁿ
1
0
On 9/27/13, Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 01:12:19PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
>>
>> The mentioned tech has nothing to do with traditional 'ham'.
>> And without the crypto key they can't see it and can't disrupt
>
> HamNet/AMPRNet ...
> Of course they can see it, it's a TCP/IP network routed
Again, I'm not talking about encrypting packets and stuffing
them over some simple carrier centered at n-MHz. That's old
tech, and possibly dangerous to the well being of users
noted in the OP before me.
1
0
27 Sep '13
----- Forwarded message from Christian Weisgerber <naddy(a)mips.inka.de> -----
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 16:11:47 +0000 (UTC)
From: Christian Weisgerber <naddy(a)mips.inka.de>
To: tt(a)postbiota.org
Subject: Re: [tt] How a Crypto ‘Backdoor’ Pitted the Tech World Against the NSA
Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org> wrote:
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/09/nsa-backdoor/all/
These articles from Matthew Green's Blog offer a better understanding
instead of cutesy writing and soundbites:
The Many Flaws of Dual_EC_DRBG
http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2013/09/the-many-flaws-of-dualecdrb…
RSA warns developers not to use RSA products
http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2013/09/rsa-warns-developers-agains…
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy(a)mips.inka.de
_______________________________________________
tt mailing list
tt(a)postbiota.org
http://postbiota.org/mailman/listinfo/tt
----- 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
2
1
On 9/27/13, Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org> wrote:
> I don't see how a ham running a repeater backbone can
> prevent end to end encryption other than sniffing for
> traffic and actively disrupting it. I'm not sure tampering
> with transport is within ham ethics, though they definitely
> don't understand the actual uses for encryption, at
> least the old hands (are there even new hands?).
The mentioned tech has nothing to do with traditional 'ham'.
And without the crypto key they can't see it and can't disrupt
it, it's background/spectrum noise/power to them.
Traditionally, presumably hams might discover non-in-the-clear
on a specific channel, perhaps triangulate, and report it to some
regulatory body (or DoS it). That's not applicable, by design.
1
0
27 Sep '13
----- Forwarded message from michael gurstein <gurstein(a)gmail.com> -----
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:55:16 -0700
From: michael gurstein <gurstein(a)gmail.com>
To: liberationtech <liberationtech(a)lists.stanford.edu>
Subject: [liberationtech] FW: What the IETF is thinking about Prism these days..
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Reply-To: liberationtech <liberationtech(a)lists.stanford.edu>
Title : Prismatic Reflections
Author(s) : Brian Carpenter
Filename :
draft-carpenter-prismatic-reflections-00.txt
Pages : 9
Date : 2013-09-19
Abstract:
Recent public disclosure of allegedly pervasive surveillance of
Internet traffic has led to calls for action by the IETF. This draft
exists solely to collect together a number of possible actions that
were mentioned in a vigorous discussion on the IETF mailing list.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-prismatic-reflections
There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-prismatic-reflections-00
--
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at companys(a)stanford.edu.
----- 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
27 Sep '13
----- Forwarded message from Jerry Leichter <leichter(a)lrw.com> -----
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:12:25 -0400
From: Jerry Leichter <leichter(a)lrw.com>
To: ianG <iang(a)iang.org>
Cc: cryptography(a)metzdowd.com
Subject: Re: [Cryptography] RSA recommends against use of its own products.
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
On Sep 25, 2013, at 12:31 PM, ianG <iang(a)iang.org> wrote:
> Hi Jerry,
>
> I appreciate the devil's advocate approach here, it has helped to get my thoughts in order! Thanks!
:-)
> My conclusion is: avoid all USA, Inc, providers of cryptographic products.
In favor off ... who?
We already know that GCHQ is at least as heavily into this monitoring business as NSA, so British providers are out. The French have been playing the "oh, we're shocked, shocked that there's spying going on" game - but they have a long history of their own. It's been reported for many years that all Air France seats are bugged by the French security services and the information recorded has been used to help French economic interests. And even if you don't think a particular security service has been going after in-country suppliers, recall decades of US spiking of the Swiss Crypto AG machines.
It's a really, really difficult problem. For deterministic algorithms, in principle, you can sandbox the implementation (both physically and in software) and compare inputs and outputs to a specification. That leaves you to worry about (a) holes in the specification itself; (b) physical leakage of extra information (Tempest-like). Both of these can be dealt with and you can gain any degree of assurance you consider necessary, at least in principle. Sure, someone can spike your hardware - but if it only does what the spec says it's supposed to do, what does that gain them? (Storing some of your secrets within the sandboxed system does them no good if they can't get the information out. Of course, physical security is essential, or your attacker will just walk the system, with all its contained information, out the door!)
For probabilistic algorithms - choosing a random number is, of course, the simplest example - it's much, much harder. You're pretty much forced to rely on some mathematics and other analysis - testing can't help you much.
There are really no absolutes; you really have to think about who you want to protect yourself from and how much you are willing to spend, because there's no limit on how much you *could* do. Build your own foundry? Create your own circuit synthesis code? You very quickly get yourself into a domain where only a handful of companies or countries can even begin to go.
My take on this: I don't much worry about attacks against general-purpose hardware. The difficulty of modifying a processor so that you can tell when it's implementing a cipher and then do something useful about it seems insurmountable. The exception is when the hardware actually gets into the crypto game - e.g., the Intel AES extensions and the random number generator. If you're going to use these, you need to do so in a way that's secure even if those features are spiked - e.g., use the random number generator only as one of a couple of sources.
Still, *much* more worrisome are the badly implemented, insecure extensions to allow remote control of the hardware, which are being discussed in a separate thread here. These are really scary - there's no protection against an attacker who can send a magic packet to your network interface and execute code with full privileges.
Code, at least for symmetric cryptography primitives and modes, is simple enough that you can find it all over the place. Realistically, the worst attacks against implementations these days are timing attacks. Bernstein's ciphers have the advantage of being inherently secure against these, showing that this is possible (even if you don't necessarily trust his particular constructions).
Denker's ideas about how to get random numbers whose safety is based on physical principles are great. You do have to be careful of the hardware and software you use, but since the hardware is designed for entirely different purposes (A/D sound converters) it's unlikely anyone has, or really could, spike them all.
It's the asymmetric algorithms and implementations that seem to be the most vulnerable. They are complex and difficult to get right, much less to get both efficient *and* right, and protocols that use them generally need to be probabilistic - so "black box testing" isn't feasible. At the same time, they have rich mathematical structures in which we know things can be hidden. (In the symmetric case, the algorithms are generally have little mathematical structure, and we *assume* nothing can be hidden in there - but who can really say with absolute confidence.) I had a long debate here earlier on this subject, and my own conclusions remain: Use symmetric crypto as little as you possibly can. (What would be really, really nice is something like DH key exchange without all the mathematical structure.)
-- Jerry
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography(a)metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
----- 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
3
2