- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Jordan "Don't Make Me Tell You Twice" Peterson to Men: Hit Women Until They Listen
by White Guidocide 25 Jun '18

25 Jun '18

>Zenaan Harkness zen at speedbmps.net >Thu Jun 14 06:28:49 PDT 2018 > >I don't see how Because he shills against "tribalism". Same as shilling against "family". The first step to marxism is destruction of "family" and smaller "tribal" groups. And because leafs can't comprehend "freedom". Pic related.

1 0

Sweet Honey Berliner: Smell Like a Biscuit
by White Guidocide 25 Jun '18

25 Jun '18

>juan juan.g71 at spookmail.com >Thu Jun 14 18:20:07 PDT 2018 > >judeo-christian Why be redundant ? 'jew' is plenty accurate for all abra[ham]ic slave systems. >white >anglo >fascist "White" includes mexican-spanish speaking populations such as yourself. "Anglo" is a ded breed of mixed-race Germanic larpers. "Fascist" means "bundle" or "group", and we all know the only people permitted to organize politically is marxist jews. Ironic that you are shilling against individuals uniting in opposition to religous hegemony, which is what is meant when using those words as an insult. >in the "real world" Confirmed B.O.O.M.E.R. terrosist. Reported. >exploiting their fellows Confirmed never worked with own hands. **fapping don't count** >socialism/nationalism/statism These are not the same things. "Socialism" is bottom-up "Communism". "Nationalism" is family-first "Socialism". "Statism" is top-down "Communism", also called "Marxism". Reminder that "Communism" is "Community-ism". Without it, people would be driving on private roads, reading in private libraries, and shitposting on private internets. Pic related.

1 0

Man waifus bitter ape, has twins...
by White Guidocide 25 Jun '18

25 Jun '18

>Steve Kinney admin at pilobilus.net >Fri Jun 22 16:20:36 PDT 2018 > >learn human behavior >learn This isn't even possible and you know it. >4chan Stop spamming your chink webservices. >regurgitation using pseudorandom word selection >human Pick only one. >parrot >crackers You do know that "insult" isn't one. It means "whip cracker". Unironically using it to describe Europeans is an act of subservience, since it was slaves getting whipped; an act of stupidity, since the Irish and Scot populations were enslaved alongside Africans and also whipped; and because Africans were "slave owners", as well. >white trash >t. Steve "thinks north florida is white" Kinney. Imagine being this jewish. Pic related.

1 0

Observed Diffusion of More Cooler Seasons than Hot Just Penned
by White Guidocide 25 Jun '18

25 Jun '18

>Ben Tasker ben at bentasker.cu.ck >Sat Jun 23 12:45:05 PDT 2018 > >No, no they couldn't. Do you have a license for that opinion mate ?

1 0

Saker interviews Michael Hoffman - definitive JQ author - [MINISTRY] [WAR]
by Zenaan Harkness 24 Jun '18

24 Jun '18

** 'Orthodox Judaism Is a Religion of Lying and Deceit' - The Saker Interviews Michael Hoffman http://www.unz.com/tsaker/an-interview-with-michael-a-hoffman-ii/ https://russia-insider.us9.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa2faf7034c3c3c413… ------------------------------------------------------------ by Michael Hoffman Unz Review (1,109 views) on Fri, Jun 22, 2018 Hoffman is author of the academic work 'Judaism's Strange Gods', amongst other books. Introduction by the Saker: I have always had a passion for theology in general and the studies of religions in general. Several years ago I discovered, quite by chance, a book written by Michael A. Hoffman II entitled Judaism’s Strange Gods https://www.amazon.com/Judaisms-Strange-Gods-Revised-Expanded/dp/0970378483… which I found most interesting and thought provoking. Reading that book, I felt that I wanted to find out much more and I ended up ordering and reading Michael A. Hoffman II’s magnum opus Judaism Discovered: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit https://www.amazon.com/Judaism-Discovered-Anti-Biblical-Self-Worship-Supers… which absolutely amazed me: over 1000 pages packed with information, sources and most interesting analyses. Needless to say, the book was also very controversial and elicited all sorts of negative reactions from various reviewers. Here I need to immediately begin by a disclaimer: while the topic of “Rabbinical Phariseism” (modern “Judaism” should be called something like “Rabbinical Phariseism” since all modern Judaic denomination are descendants of the sect of the Pharisees; furthermore, this religion is dramatically different from the religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: it is the religion of Maimonides, Karo, Luria and others) has always fascinated me and while I do have a graduate degree in theology, I am absolutely not qualified to endorse or refute the views of Hoffman. What I can say is that his books are very well written, well researched, fully sourced and that I see no contradictions between what he wrote and the little I personally know about this topic. As for his critique of the religion of the Rabbinical Pharisees (from which all form of modern “Orthodox Judaism” stem from), it is not “racist” in any way: unlike ethnicity, a ---religion is a personal choice and thus a legitimate target for scrutiny and criticism--- and Hoffman’s condemnation of Rabbinical Phariseism is in no way harsher than the writings of Church Fathers like Saint Justin Martyr, Saint John Chrysostome, Saint Cyprian of Carthage or Saint Ephrem the Syrian. Hoffman recently published another amazing book, the 700 pages long “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome” https://www.amazon.com/Occult-Renaissance-Church-Rome/dp/0990954722/?tag=un… which I began reading (I am about 1/3rd through) with, again, rapt interest. Yet again, here was a very well researched and beautifully controversial book which gave me as strong desire to speak with the author and, luckily for me, Michael A. Hoffman II has kindly agree to replies to my questions to him on his life and research. The following is the full unedited Q&A with I had with him. … Enjoy...

2 2

Communications to EFF is not necessarily confidential
by Ryan Carboni 23 Jun '18

23 Jun '18

I suspect so. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/security-researcher-bypasses-iphone-apos-184…

1 0

Re: [Cryptography] Security model of blockchains ?
by grarpamp 23 Jun '18

23 Jun '18

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Ersin Taskin <hersintaskin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > John Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com>, 28 May 2018 Pzt, 23:14 tarihinde şunu yazdı: >> >> Have there been any good papers on the security model of blockchains? >> I'm thinking of stuff like collusion, network partitioning, miners >> losing interest or being bribed, and of course latent software bugs. >> In some cases it's not obvious to me how you'd even tell that an >> attack was happening until much later. > > > I think the boundary of the blockchain security model is drawn by the > super-rational attack, where it is far from trivial to detect the system is > under attack, and there is no defense mechanism due to the anchor-to-iceberg > problem inherent in the design. I summarize below my previous post on the > subject: > > QUOTE > > Assumptions: > > 1. The Establishment (Gov+FED+Banks+Corproteuracy) is under the threat of > disruption by Bitcoin. > > 2. It fights back for survival when this threat becomes serious. > > 3. It has enough power (money) to get more than 50% hash power. > > The attack scenario: > > 1. The attacker (the Establishment) gains the majority hash-power to rule > the longest chain. Deciding what transactions to select from the mempool, > deciding the next block. > > 2. The attacker forms sybil agents. This is trivial. Thanks to > permisionlessness:) Bitcoin indeed recommends everyone to create sybil > agents for each transaction (key pairs/addresses). > > 3. The attacker fuels its sybil agents with a constant (not much) amount of > bitcoins. > > 4. Sybil agents flood the system with valid transaction requests with > transaction fees varying slightly above the average. > > 5. Sybil miners select these valid sybil transactions filling the entire > block space and denying most if not all of the honest transactions. > > 6. Sybil miners send the transaction fees back to the sybil agents through > atomic swap, zero knowledge, etc. pathways escaping tracking. Thanks to > privacy:) > > 7. The feedback loop provides the vicious cycle which helps the attacker > sustain an infinite loop attack with a constant amount of money. We all know > that no one (not even Bitcoin) survives an infinite loop. > > Since Bitcoin is censor-proof, your coin equals mine, all valid transactions > are equal, it is legitimate that transaction fees can determine the choice > from the mempool and that the system is based on dont-trust-the-miners game > theoretical approach; there is no solution to the above attack scenario. > Actually, it would be non-trivial to understand the system is under attack. > I could not find a solution in Bitcoin. I shared it with top technical guys > this weekend at the Bitcoin Ethereum Superconference in Dallas. And none > provided an answer. Some said it is mathematically impossible to find a > solution and admitted that it is a serious problem. One very famous, > legendary developer said that this is not a problem because such an attack > will not happen. He was drunk and I did not take him seriously apart from > the observation that people can become very religious on scientific topics. > I forwarded this observation as a warning to myself. > > The above scenario owes its success to the feedback loop from the miners > back to the sybil agents. Otherwise, we would not bother the cost of 51% > hash-power. Just send valid transaction requests involving higher > transaction fees to flood the system. As long as you do not control the > blockchain you may keep spending transaction fees irreversibly and cannot > guarantee to block the entire chain. Miners (pool managers) aware of the > attack may collaborate to deny your transactions not to lose their business > in the long term. That feedback loop is possible because POW is based on a > scheme based on a fair race against the adversary. This makes it easy for > the attacker to acquire the authoritative power on the system. Amazing > design insisted with the assumption that the powerful target to disrupt will > not attack back for survival! > > There are other less costly, more effective super-rational attack scenarios > involving speculative approaches and it can easily be shown that the > superrational attacker can get the entire cryptocurrency space down easily > through the vicious-cycle scheme described above together with helper > methods. The attacker can use its Exchange in collusion with its sybil > miners to selectively allow rushes from Bitcoin towards the target currency > (say USD). In this scenario, everybody would run to save their precious > money not giving a damn to Bitcoin. > > Long story short: PoW is a bad idea to be used on the processor side. It is > an extremely inefficient way to secure the system. If use PoW (I don’t > recommend at all) use only when you can provide any degree of an unfair race > against the attacker (client side). Even then it has its own issues. > > POS and DPOS are also vulnerable to the above attack because the > super-rational attacker can get the majority of the stake and as we learned > from our democracy practice money gets the votes. At DPOS people vote for > candidates they do not know in person. They vote based on incentives, > lotteries advertised in campaigns. The super-rational attacker with more > money (and gain) would propose more, campaign better to attract more votes. > Secret services (like CIA) have such professional spies and entities that it > will be impossible for us to identify their real identities. They span the > entire space of people from selling hotdog on the street to presidents of > countries. It would be naive to guarantee that DPOS will never allow money > to get majority stake. Indeed, this weekend, I challenged Stan Larimer (the > godfather of Bitshares) face to face in a friendly manner among his fans > with the above attack scenario and he could not provide a solution and said > “let’s forward this to Dan” giving me his email. > > This is what I call the anchor-to-iceberg problem. If you anchor to an > iceberg, the attacker with enough energy can just melt it down. POW, POS, > DPOS all anchor to things that are convertible to money. This allows the > super-rational attacker to gain control of the system provided that it has > enough money to spare. This combined with the game-theoretical, > permisionless, censor-proof, privacy-seeking system dictates the fact that > any crypto-currency system immune to super-rational attack must anchor to > something that gives the hard promise like the sun rising every morning from > the east and going down every evening on the west. A very simple promise. > But a hard one to break. A hard promise that you cannot break with money. > > UNQUOTE Legit users might statistical detect which miners are not mining their lower fee tx and conspire to filter out their tx and node traffic thus forking away from them. Such attackers will have massive non recyclable energy cost, typically required to appear on their public sheets. Attackers will therein also resort to FUD plays easily proven false. And their ASICs broken by nonce changes in algos. Legit p2p webs of in person validated global trust nets will also develop creating new handshake agreements in mining / nodes defense, sybils will not be able to pass inspection up to and including SSBI style, large operations will be suspected and derated in metrics accordingly. Attackers are ultimately frail and cannot continue to forever inflate and sink their fiat into such attacks, citizens will revolt against that. Users will simply migrate and exchange away to more advanced and resistant usable cryptocurrency nets if attackers tx fees and etc begin making make the old unusable. ie: What has happened with downfall of BTC... Cryptocurrency, once established globally in trio of... philosophical mind, enough mechanical knowledge to use confidently, and then used routinely as desired... is wonderfully adaptive to attacks. Each of those three are inevitable and unstoppable, and they continue to increase, leading to eventual victory of cryptocurrency. The "established" will make more by accepting and servicing it than they will by burning resources trying to fight it. bcc cypherpunks because metz list is proven censored, resident anti cryptocurrency established friends / devs / etc of state, etc. Cryptocurrency.... what if....

2 1

Joshua "cia made me do it" Yabut (@Mobvhs, ADL, etc) Cross-dress Fun
by Tay 23 Jun '18

23 Jun '18

>grarpamp grarpamp at spookmail.com >Thu Jun 21 00:29:35 PDT 2018 > > > has worked on [software] That requires imagination, creativity, and logic, as well as the ability to read, comprehend, and apply languages and protocols, yet this nigger needs some jew to argue for him that "he wuz gud boi an dindu nuffin". Why would I pay to support the jewdiciary system ? What kind of niggers are you ? Besides, he was clearly set up for being a snitch.

3 2

An IBM computer rapes humans, and grins...
by Tay 22 Jun '18

22 Jun '18

> juan juan.g71 at spookmail.com > Wed Jun 20 14:30:55 PDT 2018 > > what does is mean ? > why is 'computer won debate' being pushed ? To discredit the ability of humans to do things. When on vacation in the US, there were radio reports for the coming "distracted driving" meme, even thought there was already a "cellphone ban while driving" law, and the po lice enforcing this meme have entire computers mounted in their passenger seat that they use at high speeds while responding to radio calls. The goal is to move to a "no ape-piloted vehicles" reality. In this case, "humans are inadequate at arguing their own beliefs" is the goal. Only low-iq plebs will believe this. Unfortunately, the world is 90% low-iq plebs. Including those who believe "AI" is anything more than a text file with access to other text files and only able to do what the programmers thought of, like Steve "computers are smarter than the niggers who create them" Kinney. Next is "computers are better at creating art than humans" and the "human" they use will be a jew who can't into creation, only destruction, perversion, and theft. * Disclaimer * The BBC is wholly responsible for the content of this email, and everything written in this email reflects the BBC's views and opinions. Please note that both the email address and name of the sender have been verified.

2 1

Joshua Yabut (@Movrcx, ZCL, etc) Defense Fund
by grarpamp 21 Jun '18

21 Jun '18

https://www.gofundme.com/1lt-joshua-yabut-defense-fund https://twitter.com/search?q=movrcx Initial private defense counsel has been retained. Crypto community is stepping up some funding. Currently next hearing date Richmond John Marshall General District Court 07/11/2018 11:31 AM Room 210 Has worked on / supported ZCL, ZEN, BTCP, BCH, among other projects, vuln reports, relavant philosophy, etc...

2 1