August 2017 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

tough love - how Trump handled GOP opposition to Drain the Swamp legislation, turncoats put in their place
by Zenaan Harkness 31 Jan '18

31 Jan '18

------------ Policy / strategy #1 for Donald Trump, his big ticket top shelf #1 item (besides build the wall) is Drain the Swamp There be a very slight wee chance that a few GOP partisans will cross the floor, oppose Trump's Drain the Swamp legislation, and thereby demonstrate on the public record their utter contempt for the people and their completely selfish, self centred, self interested selves to the world. Fortunately this particular problem has a ready and simple solution (if you feel this be worthwhile and appropriate, please pass it on if you have any Team Trump contacts). a) Put all his KEY Drain the Swamp legislations / changes up for parliamentary vote, as early as possible in his first 100 days of presidency. b) Collect ALL those Drain the Swamp provisions that FAIL to pass, and put each of them into a REFERENDUM of and for the people. Simple. That just put the Republiturnies AND the Demosluts in their place! ------------ Those who have followed my views will recognise this position as one I wholeheartedly support: " Back before our civilization despised itself, we applauded tough men. But you can’t produce tough men – or honorable women – without tough love. If you want to keep civilization, you better start by insisting that boys grow up " http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/11/04/full-text-milo-ohio-state-universi… It is awesome that this message is getting some pretty serious public exposure. In the immortal words - "Hell yeah!" ------------ And an update from the Ministry ... the Ministry of Winning, that is :) What Trump Means http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/11/16/what-trump-means/ " It happened. We won! We now live in the Age of Daddy! Leftists, of course — even those who aren’t still crying in the shower or looking for a razor blade — remain clueless about what it all signifies and how it happened. " " Protesters - Just when you think the Left has done everything in its power to drive typical American voters to the right, they reach into their bag of tricks and pull out a surprise. The kicker is that for the most part, these protesters don’t even vote. " " Hoaxers - Do you have any idea how poor your hate crime hoax story has to be for an increasingly partisan Snopes.com to say it’s untrue? " " Establishment Republicans have a clear future: tough primary elections against Trump-like opponents intent on draining the swamp. " " The Democrat Party - followed Hillary’s lead in labelling everyone who didn’t agree with them racist, sexist, Islamophobic, and every other identity politic epithet they could think of. Some of us knew this meant the “basket of deplorables” would grow to include essentially everybody in America, but many were shocked to eventually see themselves lumped in with the worst offenders, as decided by the extremists who run the Democrat party. " " Celebrities - Meanwhile, Sir Patrick Stewart set phasers to hyperbole, arguing that Trump is “one of the worst things to happen in the last 100 years,” apparently forgetting individuals like Stalin, Mao and Hitler. " " The media - Or browse the Twitter timeline of Michael Tracey, a former Vice reporter who refused to back Hillary after she defeated Bernie Sanders, and spent the rest of the election highlighting the media’s failure to fully grasp the Trump phenomenon. Despite being one of the only lefties to get it right, Vice fired him shortly after the election — for being too mean to Lena Dunham! " " The Deplorables - Trump will take a $1 salary as President, and in his first week as President-elect has Canada and Mexico agreeing to revisit NAFTA and Russia agreeing to not stage a nuclear war. Not bad for a first week on the job. " -- Certified (R) Deplorable (TM) Fake News (TM) Which Hunter (C) Executive Vice Secretary, The Ministry of Winning Shilling for buxom Russian swastika clad minxes (C) 1988

1 1

"Razer", the biggest / intensest fascist on the cypherpunks list
by Zenaan Harkness 05 Jan '18

05 Jan '18

Razer, you are the most fascist "idiot" (I'd prefer to say worse things, but I'm currently convinced you're just a marijuana fucked brain with legs) on this list. On the other hand, you've had very interesting contributions - also in the area of historical protests/ punch ups etc. So one might be forgiven for being somewhat conflicted about you. Bong on I guess... like, duuuuuuuuude! * Citation i Call to murder on the spot. Justification that "they don't debate your position", whilst of course Razer fails his own mass debate principle. Unfortunately there's no second option from hypocritical fascists like Razer, including no option to actually debate (see examples below). Subject: Re: Why Fascists Have No Right To Free Speech Whatsoever [was - Re: free speech 'marches on' as they say] On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 06:06:46PM -0800, Razer wrote: > Because they don't debate your position. > > They threaten your life instead. > > They have no interest in your position. You have no rights. > > Kill them when you find them. > > They are the human societal cancer they accuse others of being. > > It's always 'those other people'. Then one day you're 'those other > people'. > > Rr * Citation 0 Razer supports murder of those whose political ideology disagrees with his own (in this case, what he terms "fascists") - see last sentence in the quoted email: Subject: #RichardSpencerPunchingBag [Was: Re: The (Western) Empire: free speech, holocaust denial, jail in 14 countries] On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 04:52:11PM -0800, Razer wrote: > On 01/23/2017 12:15 PM, John Newman wrote: > > > The onus is not on Razer to disprove your ahistorical nonsense. I > > didn't mention the curious fact about the jewish finns and the > > nazis to bolster your bullshit. > > > > Have a horrible fucking day :) > > > > > > John > > > > Wouldn't have even seen this but you responded to 'it'. > > It isn't worth the response except to say the Hashtags > #RIchardSpencer and #RichardSpencerPunchingBag are being suppressed > by Twitter and FB because either A> They'd overtake #JustinBieber, > B> some safe space neonazis and their liberal friends complained it > would promote violence. > I can tell by the failure of 'dropdown recommendations'. to > materialize. Even on the name. > > I want to point out that all the liberals tsk tsked Richard Spencer > being used as Punching Bag but the crickets chirped in their good > german brains when a union organizer in Seattle got shot by one of > those scumbuckets while trying to deescalate a fight... I KNOW > which side liberals are on, and they're perhaps even an easier kill > than neonazis, but I digress... > > I also want to point out it's NOT just a fine old American > Tradition to kill fascists... * Citation 1 "Razer" celebrates the public beating and later murder of a man so convicted of his beliefs that he speaks publicly about those beliefs, and starts a political party in support of those beliefs: > ----- Forwarded message from Razer <g2s(a)riseup.net> ----- > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 09:49:10 -0800 > From: Razer <g2s(a)riseup.net> > To: "cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org" <cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org> > Subject: [TriggerWarning: #NaziPunching] Great Nazi punchers in history... > yy > SDSU student Ed Cherry smacked the shit out of George Lincoln Rockwell > in the middle of a speech at San Diego State in 1962. > > > Self-styled American Nazi party leader George Lincoln Rockwell was > > slugged, hissed and booed when he spoke in the Greek Bowl March 8, as > > he hurled verbal blasts at minority groups to a crowd of about 3,000. > > > > Rockwell said that he had no intention of causing trouble. "If I had > > wanted trouble I could have worn my uniform with my armbands and the > > whole works. Believe me, I know how to stir people up if I want to," > > he said. > > > > > > Rockwell was slugged in the face by Ed Cherry, a SDS (San Diego State) > > senior physical education major, when Rockwell said that "the Jews are > > engaged in a great conspiracy." > > > > A press conference followed in the Aztec office. Rockwell predicted > > that he will be in political power in Virginia within five years > > ROTF He was a DEAD NAZI five years later! > > Archival info @ SDSU > > https://digital.sdsu.edu/index.php?a=ViewItem&i=90684&WINID=1485279750430

1 1

Do you have predictions about 2017?
by Georgi Guninski 01 Jan '18

01 Jan '18

Niels Bohr allegedly said "Predictions are difficult, especially about the future". Do you have predictions about 2017? Being certified optimist, I predict fuckups, fuckups and more fuckups.

13 132

[from offlist] Re: Juan-fap go bye-bye now...
by Ashkenazi 26 Dec '17

26 Dec '17

> Razer g2s at riseup.net > Thu Aug 31 10:58:06 PDT 2017 > > you can't show me any 'scripture' > Talmud: archive.org/details/TheBabylonianTalmudcompleteSoncinoEnglishTranslation TL;DR: 8ch.net/pol/res/10455342.html Though Juan might prefer: 8ch.net/islam/ > I KNOW YOU'RE IGNORANT > Because Rr is a fascist authoritarian who has decided for all of us what is known. > "Old Testament" is christchan > Lol. The first five books are from the Jewish Torah. I know you are not religious but fuck, you should know at least this. 8ch.net/pol/res/10511347.html > I'm not interested in arguing > Only asserting your beliefs as truths. This is not our way.

3 3

Is a BTC - BCC flippening in the offing?
by Steven Schear 16 Nov '17

16 Nov '17

[Disclosure: I am a strong supporter of L1 (Blockchain scaling) occurring before any L2 (e.g., Segwit, Blockstream, Lightening Network, etc.) is attempted. And even then all L2 must be thoroughly examined not only for technical flaws but for possible misuses that affects the value and utility of the underlying blockchain assets.] Due to the economic and technical nature of Bitcoin and its blockchain its more than possible that the new fork, widely being called Bitcoin Cash, BCH or BCC, will overtake its rival fork now commonly called Bitcoin Core. The effect of this "flippening" could be nothing short of disastrous for those holding Bitcoin Core. Since the recent Bitcoin hard fork we now have two Bitcoins: Core (the original) and Cash. When the fork happened those holding BTC (in their own wallets) were also able to claim an equal amount of BCC (for free). This created a huge supply of BCC. However, many or most people rarely keep their BTC in their wallets, preferring instead to keep them in online exchange accounts. As a result, even though the exchanges warned people they needed to withdraw their BTC to claim the BCC, most of those people will never get that BCC. Instead it became a windfall for the exchanges. When the fork occurred the Cash chain inherited the then current difficulty factor of the original. When operating nominally both chains should have new blocks discovered by miners about every 10 minutes. Because at the outset the mining effort for Cash was only a small fraction of the Core's. the rate new blocks were found (and therefore the transaction capacity) initially was hobbled. This was anticipated and the developers included a means to detect when the hashing power on this Cash chain was too low and to quickly adjust, in 20% increments, the difficulty factor. By far the main driver for miners is revenue. In general they will go to whatever blockchain they earn the most. Analysis of the hash power being expended on both chains versus the difficulties and value of each coin showed that the two were converging insofar as mining profitability. There is also an anomalous aspect to the sources of the BCC mining power. Unlike that of BTC, where most of the hashing power is associated with known large mining cartels, the majority of BCC mining is by unknown parties.There has been significant variation of mining power over relatively short intervals on both blockchains. The timing of this variation very much indicates that the miners were attempting to beneficially manipulate both the value of BCC vs. BTC and quickly decrease the mining effort for BCC. BTC BCH TOT BTC BCH BTC BCH BTC ( Hash Power ) ( Difficulty) ( Block Time ) (mempool) 11 August 6600 338 6938 923 115 10.00 21 55 12 August 6199 416 6615 923 115 10.66 20 15 13 August 6808 440 7248 923 115 9.73 18.46 27 14 August 5951 522 6473 923 115 11.07 15.82 47 15 August 6966 647 7591 923 115 9.47 12.85 53 16 August 5984 484 6468 923 115 11.07 17.14 50 - Since 11 August Hash Power on the BCH chain has increased daily. - Hash power on BTC chain on the other hand fluctuates from day to day, by up to 1000 PH and the mempool continues to grow. The table above are snapshots taken at a point in time each day. Their individual states can be monitored in real time here <https://bitinfocharts.com/>*. Scroll down to the hash rate. BTC hash rate is down to 4853 PH. This is more than 2000 PH below the table above and the mempool <https://blockchain.info/charts> has now exceeded 65MB. A Death Chain Spiral may have set in but is being "managed". This large fluctuation of BTC hash rate could be the miners preventing difficulty from adjusting downwards, and at the same time growing the mempool. It is also possible that with over 1000 blocks to the next difficulty recalculation, we may not see another difficulty adjustment on BTC anytime soon. It is uncanny that we see very little discussion and debate at the very top. It is as though the NYA agreement have settled everything. However make no mistake. What seem calm belies what is happening in the background. Like a duck on the water paddling furiously underneath. Over at r/bitcoin talk seems to center around price and technology. Nothing about any negativity, usability or the growing mempool. Censorship of robust discussions is just downright deceitful. Especially if it is the de facto forum. It must quit being a propaganda organ. There will be consequences. The people around Segwit may be frantically on the phone, fax and email arguing and pleading with the miners. They can see the writing on the wall. Only 124 blocks were found in the last 24 hours. Block time have increased to 11 minutes and the mempool is in excess of 70MB. It is "too little too late". For many of the miners "Revenge is a dish best eaten cold". Steve

9 32

dark web briefest intro - was Re: educate me Please
by Zenaan Harkness 09 Oct '17

09 Oct '17

----- Forwarded message from Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> ----- > Hi Zee, What is the reality of this dark web? If it doesn't show > on Google, then how can you find it? ... As to the dark web - it certainly exists. As we see on the news, every 2 or 4 years the authorities take down one or other of the largest dark web "market place" websites - so evidently these places attract a lot of people. And then there are the smaller sites they take down which usually don't hit the front page of the news. There are all sorts of dark web sites - market places, forums, simple websites, ssh gateways (apparently a lot of people access their normal web servers over ssh), and apparently a lot of ways to slip up for those doing something illegal - and Tor is designed so that the large state-level authorities can pretty much always uncover someone if that's what they want to do; Tor is not secure against GPAs (Global Passive Adversaries), and is absolutely not secure against an active adversary. One of the key features that the Tor company/group has never implemented is chaff-filled network - that is, you specify "I want to allocate 100 KB/s to my node, and I want that divided equally amongst my outward connections, and any peer node that "randomly drops" packets, becomes less trusted by me. I asked the devs directly (or someone else did, can't remember for sure), and the reason came back "our funding proposals for this feature have never been approved" - which makes sense, since the CIA, DIA, DOD and NSA fund the creation of the Tor network, they don't want to fund features which make it much harder for them to uncloak users they are targetting. A volunteer could also try to implement this feature, but it's a lot of work, and even the I2P folks have not yet even tried to implement it. So, even if you were researching data/info for a book you are writing, you really need to spend a lot of time reading about the security aspects, to find out what can give you even a small modicum of "reasonable plausible deniability" for your research activities. For example: - run an exit node (carries its own risks, but one of the better ways to achieve plausible deniabililty) at home - alternatively, or in addition, configure your node as a bridge/ Tor-network entry node, and invite a handful of friends to use it as their gateway to the Tor network (the alternative, if you don't run your own node, is that Tor browser picks a random node to use to enter the Tor network, and there's a damn good chance the CIA or FBI are running that node) - don't run Tor browser on Windows - don't run Windows of any version - learn Qubes OS or Tails OS and use that - experiement for a few months with something completely innocuous - running a website promoting information about Marijuana or something, and once you're comfortable, then move on to something more innocuous - if you choose to run a Tor node (can increase the security, can reduce it if you stuff up the config) there are plenty of folks on the Tor mailing lists who will answer questions, and plenty of links to read to Stay Safe (C)(R) - if you intend to run a dark web website that some authorities really would not like - say e.g. promoting homosexuality to the Saudi's - then you should really be running your own ISP with multiple internet links (e.g. Telstra and Optus), so that any virtual servers you link into the dark web are relatively robust; then, never allow your website to get too popular - keep it to a very manageable number of invitees - never make your invites over the clear net (normal internet) only invite truly trusted friends in person, face to face, with mobile phones turned off and out of reach of all recording devices (including of course, all phones); to invite random people, do so on a dark web forum only. - if you're going to run a dark web website, you really, really, really need to know how to configure firewalling, web server, https certificates, ssh for admin access etc etc, in such a way as to be truly, actually, secure, if there's any chance your website is going to be targetted by the local authorities from your own jurisdiction, you need to not make even 1 single mistake - that mistake will bring you undone! Good luck :) Zen ----- End forwarded message -----

7 15

[POLITICS] [RUS] God Praise America ! Russian Paralympians banned
by Zenaan Harkness 03 Oct '17

03 Oct '17

Hoo yah! We LOVE America. God bless America!!! Belarus Athletes Carry Russia Flag in Support of Unjustly Banned Paralympians http://russia-insider.com/en/belarus-athletes-carry-russia-flag-support-unj… (Alt: https://www.rt.com/sport/358613-belarus-russian-flag-paralympics/ ) Nope, no dirty American laundry here folks - move along now! On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 02:08:38PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 5:11 AM Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> wrote: > > > If anyone wanted an example of propaganda and political bullying: > > > > > > "The IAAF and now the sports bodies of the US and Canada are not only > > > demanding that Russian athletes prove their innocence before they can > > > take part in the Games. They also demand that even if athletes prove > > > their innocence, they should only be allowed to take part in the Games > > > as “neutrals” and not as Russians. Thus even if proved innocent Russian > > > athletes would have to deny their nation and their country – foregoing > > > the right to wear its colours or hear its anthem if they win." > > > > > > http://theduran.com/stalinist-witch-hunt-russian-athletes/ > > > > > > > > > (I'm not sure anyone takes seriously the assertion that USA basically > > > does not use propaganda, only speaks truth and righteousness - I find it > > > quite amazing that such an assertion was even put in this mailing list > > > but I guess it's possible -some- people do believe that...) > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 06:07:05PM +0000, Sean Lynch wrote: > > Participate as a country, dope as a country, get banned as a country. Maybe > > Russia should clean its house if it wants representation at the games. Or > > if the institution itself is illegitimate, why do Russians want to > > represent their country so badly at the games? > > > > Oh well, the IOC refused to ban "the entire Russian Olympic team, > regardless", but ultimately "justice" is served - with the banning of, > wait for it, > > the entire Russian --Paralympic-- team. > > > YEAH! > > > Now -that-'s "justice", right Sean? Punish those paraplegic bastards! > Every last one of them, whether guilty or not!!! > > YEAH! U! S! A! Delivering JUSTICE to THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > God -damn- we need to be greatful to America! > > And what a wonderful world we live in... so much empathy, harmony and > justice. > > > > God Praise America!!! > > > (Yes, AND you, CIA, you snivelling grovelling sluts! Thank you SO much > for this effective, decisive and ultimately just and righteous, psyops > campaign. Fucken A!) > > > > > > ** Vladimir Putin slams Paralympic ban; Congratulates Russian athletes > (http://theduran.com/putin-slams-paralympic-ban-congratulates-russian-athlet…) > ------------------------------------------------------------ > By Alexander Mercouris on Aug 26, 2016 02:00 pm > russia paralympics > > Russian President Putin has just given a scathing assessment > (http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/52765) of the collective ban > on Russia’s Paralympic Team. > > In doing so he has made it quite clear that he – like most Russians – > sees the ban as purely political and completely rejects the reasoning > behind it… > > “The decision to disqualify our Paralympic athletes goes beyond law, > morality and humanity. It is quite simply cynical to take out one’s > revenge and frustration on people for whom sport has become their life > purpose and whose example gives hope and self-confidence to millions of > people with disabilities. I even feel pity for those who take decisions > of this kind because they do not understand just how degrading this is > for them.” > > (Bold italics added) > > The words “revenge and frustration” quite clearly show that Putin sees > the campaign to ban the Russian Paralympic team as an act of spite and > revenge for the failure to achieve a collective ban of the Russian > Olympic team. > > The Russians have made it clear that they do not agree with the legal > reasoning of the CAS decision upholding the ban, > (http://theduran.com/court-arbitration-sport-upholds-ban-russian-paralympic-…) > and that they will continue to contest it in the civil courts and in the > European Court of Human Rights. > > As I have said previously, there is no doubt the Russians will pursue > legal action to its conclusion in this affair > (http://theduran.com/trying-ban-team-russia-olympics-big-mistake/) . > With the International Paralympic Committee looking at a disastrous > failure of the Paralympic Games in Rio and apparently short of money, it > may not be in good shape to contest whatever court cases the Russians > bring, or to pay any court awards the Russians might win. > > In addition to his comments about the Paralympic ban, Putin also made > some very interesting comments about the Russian athletes who competed > in the Rio Olympic Games > > “We know what a difficult time our athletes had in Rio. The team was cut > by nearly a third just before competition was about to start and lost > the chance to show its ability in the sports in which Russia has > traditionally been one of the recognised favourites. But you measured up > to all of these challenges, showed great unity and proved that victory > can be won not just by numbers, though numbers were important too, but > perhaps more importantly, victory is also won through skill. You > displayed a true fighting spirit, did not melt down or bend under the > pressure, but fought and won.” > > (Bold italics added) > > The words “showed great unity” surely refer to the point I have made > previously (http://theduran.com/russian-olympians-defy-odds-rio/) : that > not a single Russian athlete has succumbed to the pressure to turn > informer in return for the reward of a guaranteed place in the Rio > Olympic Games and a lucrative sports career in the West. > > What that means is that the entirety of the evidence that there is or > was a state-sponsored system of doping in Russia is that contained in > the McLaren report, which CAS has already said is “incomplete” and > cannot be used as evidence in deciding the fate of individual athletes. > That puts the IAAF, WADA, the IPC and potentially McLaren himself, in a > very fragile position in light of the pending court cases. > > The post Vladimir Putin slams Paralympic ban; Congratulates Russian > athletes > (http://theduran.com/putin-slams-paralympic-ban-congratulates-russian-athlet…) > appeared first on The Duran (http://theduran.com) .

2 2

Re: new idea for random number generation
by \0xDynamite 27 Sep '17

27 Sep '17

On 8/4/17, Randydandy <randydandy(a)randydandy.de> wrote: >> Would not a coin flip with the exact same initial parameters (height, >> force, deterministic air currents, and striking surface) have the same >> result? >[...] > The problem with your algorithm is that there are no parameters that > would be unknown. Only if you get randomness from another source as > parameters which makes this pseudo random. Okay, I should know this, but who came up with the idea of using random-number generators for ciphers anyway? Most XOR ciphers (which is unbreakable if, for example, you use a key as long as the text) use a key as a source, AFAIK. Anyone have a reference? Now, chaotic functions are known mathematically to be "topologically complete" (I believe that's the term I learned) -- that means they will cover every number in the range. An amazing feat: consider if you're using 2^63 (which will fit in ONE world) to express your real number in the logistic function. Your chance of landing on a already visited number is 9.22^308 -- beyond the scale of indexing every atom in the universe. So, in theory you have both an UNBREAKABLE and PRACTICAL cipher method: use the logistic function to make a pseudo-random number generator, think of unique words that you can transform into your seed values, and communicate those "humane" keys to your recipient. How can you possibly break this (apart from psychological tactics of guessing the words used to create the seed values)? Marxos

8 20

Re: new idea for random number generation
by Ryan Carboni 24 Sep '17

24 Sep '17

I am reminded of an anecdote (of which, our entire history books are made up of): https://unicornjelly.com/urulesmystories.html I have played a lot of Dungeons and Dragons, and related, games in my life. Rolling dice are an intrinsic part of such games, because they allow unusual things to happen, unusual results that surprise and amaze. Dice also give people the illusion of control over Fate...dice are random, yet people often feel like they are able to 'control' the probabilities, in a kind of real magick, some unexplained ability. When highly improbable events with dice occur, it is easy to believe such nonsense. Or perhaps we humans can affect probability...I will let you be the judge, for yourself. One time, during my days as a paid, professional DM, I had been running a free game for some people I was involved with at the time, and the brother of the person I was most involved with at the time came up to me and made a rather incredible statement. His friend was visiting, had heard of what fame I had back in those days, and wanted to meet me...and by the way, this friend could ALWAYS roll within one number of any target on a 20 sided die. Without fail. On any die. Any time. Sheah, my ass! Still, since the fellow was visiting, and since it really would not take any time to see for myself, and since he was a big fan of mine, I agreed to put up with whatever farce would be tossed to me. The first five or six rolls, each on a different die from my personal collection were all perfect and exact. The value '20', time after time. Then I borrowed the dice collection of an observing friend, doubting my own dice, despite the fact that I had painted them myself (you had to in those days) and knew my own dice inside and out (I have an enormous collection of polyhedral dice). The next five or six rolled I called at random....just picking numbers out of the blue. Whether it was an 18, or a 3, or a 12, or 20 again....this young man always, and without fail, on any die I gave him, (so long as it was a twenty-sided die, he could not do it on any other die) he could roll within one number. When I called 18, as I remember, he rolled 17, for instance. He never missed, not even once, and I must have tested him several dozen times. I wanted more, but he was getting bored, besides, I had run out of fresh, new d20's to use. We used every d20 anyone had. I would not repeat using the same die, trying to see if somehow the dice were rigged. He did not know how he did this trick. He just noticed, one day, that he could do it. He was not that amazed by it anymore. He had been doing it for several years. Adults could not care less, or refused to even bother to look. I was almost so skeptical myself, that I nearly shunned him as well. I am glad I did not, in retrospect. To this day I have no explanation whatsoever for what I saw. I tested the lads claim as carefully as I could, given the situation, and there was no shortage of witnesses from every angle. He did not palm the die, or do anything odd....several times I asked him to simply hold out his hand, palm up, where I deposited a d20, and had him just roll the die off of his palm, without closing his fingers. Just let the die fall off and hit the table. It made no difference. I have no idea what ever became of the boy, but I will always remember whatever it was that he could do.

3 2

new idea for random number generation
by \0xDynamite 24 Sep '17

24 Sep '17

Speaking of cryptography (harhar), I was contemplating an idea to generate random streams of random numbers using chaos theory (not the first), specifically the logistic equation [3.5x(1-x)], when I came across the argument (http://www.cs.utsa.edu/~wagner/laws/chaos.html) that such generators are "psuedo-random", but I don't think is true. The equation is capable of producing an infinite stream of numbers that get more random as you continue to use the equation. The amount of true randomness approaches the depth of your word size, but in theory you can create an implementation with arbitrary depth (say 10000 bits). Is this interesting to anyone? Marxos

11 22