- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

NSA Purchased VUPEN Subscription
by Rich Jones 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/vupen-contracts-wi… https://muckrock.s3.amazonaws.com/foia_files/9-11-13_MR6593_RES.pdf FOIA by @ramdac Not a massive surprise, but interesting to see it in writing. Looks like this is for the standard subscription, not custom development. Although, the cost is redacted. Chaouki Bekrar is also mentioned by name. ————————————— Rich Jones * OpenWatch <https://openwatch.net>* is a global citizen news network. Download OpenWatch for iOS<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/openwatch-social-muckraking/id642680756?ls=…>and for Android<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.ale.openwatch&hl=en> !

1 0

[5] moar koda
by brian carroll 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

disclaimer: if doing this is illegal then the alphabet is illegal and 'ideas' themselves have been criminalized by the terror state --- (continuing...) --- hint for previous code: _ |v JL 3 p\ w Z 7r : 2 6 perhaps should have made the last character (6) this instead: O J the idea then of a digraph substitution: JL = inverted T, etc. Thus, for instance if someone has a perceptual bias and is only looking at single characters as single units, the diagraph, trigraph, etc approach would be beyond their threshold of observation, beyond the perceptual modeling and thus such bias or limitation in interpretation can allow other information to exist beyond how it is perceived to exist by a given observer, unless they figure it out- so it would involve rules or learning how to determine what schemes are active or not, multiple or none further, the idea of a search of the original string as anagram or other approach, such that the breakage of units into fragments or components or elements thus can defeat brute force meaning unless checking all variables which would tend towards infinity, via probability. thus the secret is in some sense the noise, the more it is looked for the more possibilities arise and fill in the void with additional meaning that may or may not be active -- whether intended or not, which is the spooky aspect of this, if systems or data is somehow entangled whether as information and-or objects; seemingly /metaphysical keys/ even. so a hypothetical example would be, putting the original 15 characters into a structural search in which the original concept cannot be located in the analytical results (in ordinary terms, the 'word' does not exist within the letters/numbers themselves) and in this way, while it was was the basis for creating the 'string' (bit set), it may not be active in its interpretation or its activeness may exist in the permutated results and thus not require a decode by the receiver if already having the key because they know the shared reference yet the structure exists as infrastructure- and it may or may not have relevance though it could be mapped into that structure as if a conceptual root structure that could have calculative or geometric aspects- meaning, there could be many simultaneous structures some related and others not, that may or may not be activated in particular signaling, perhaps similar to neurons and synaptic structures in the brain that fire together yet whyso remains a mystery due to the limits of observation and an accurate model for analysis at the level of activity being observed- thus phrenology or scrying in an ungrounded sense providing security by enhancing warped, skewed, biased, limited interpretations, erecting walls and false rationales by "relativistic frameworks" in a realm of halls of mirrors within halls of mirrors. distortion by unknowing autogenerated, and in some sense 'signal' can be masked as noise also, shell games within the parallelism of infinity and the computational limits of parsing those dynamics accurately, which could easily exist beyond technological means thus also in the realm of literacy, 'reading the signs' or abstract markings can become the limit between those intelligent and those smart yet illiterate and not in service to the conceptual foundation involved, and their perceptual frameworks can be used to construct false perspectives that become labyrinths to control future options, yet while creating the illusion of being in a 'shared awareness' or framework (partial) whereby pseudo-truth, its reliance on error, can allow extra-dynamics to exist while also coexisting within 'some truth' of the shared condition; perhaps this is zoning within a threat containment model, or subversive takedown approach, establishing booby-traps and trap-doors and pyramid defenses so, a letter or number could be de|con-structed and words or concepts or meaning could also be tokenized by a substitute system of relation which is what symbolism also allows, a type of exchange existing with a symbol and its network of conceptual structures aligned with it, an infrastructure of shared meaning and dynamics that also has myth and magic and spiritual dimensions as a potential, these tending towards darkness and light yet also accounted for in a shared universe (U), this richness and depth then perhaps closest to the forces involved and their dynamics, versus its caricaturization that presents its substance mainly in cartoon terms, a popular culture framework as if yet another commoditized ideology, thus the assumption of surface-relations versus actual depth and core functioning --- sidenote: after the expansion --- it should be added that after a 'string' is permutated, say it goes from 15 characters into a million character / word combination space, that is in a precisely bounded model that defines the perimeters and parameters of its expansion and analysis frameworks (if not via infrastructure standards), that it would seem this is a one-way calculation and as impossible as it may be to find something inside the expanded set combinations, it would appear even more impossible (exponentially) to try to put it back into the original pandoric gift package, the originating /bit set/ even if knowing the rules and trying to apply them in reverse, to go from 'many' words to only a 'key string' as exampled here (said: bit set now, as a description of the set relations between characters, not linear string if it is "calculated" and worked-out in its probabilistic interrelations). in other words, could you go from one million characters and various word combinations back to the original 15 characters- and my presumption is no, it would be even more highly variable in reverse if computed this way, in that substitutions could occur at some point that introduce (noise) extra data, such as a S=5 and starts to shift meaning out of the original context, and so many of these shifts could occur, 'recenterings' as part of analysis, that if not having them in their entirety and evaluating a massive set, even if having the majority correct, that small area of error could continually expand as noise and veer interpretations off course and bound the backwards analysis- which could be useful if having a code that generates something yet cannot be worked back, yet still is linked to it or exists within the unpackaged expansion as an entangled conceptual order, which again may or may not be activated- say like streetlights turning on at certain hours, or animal migrations under certain conditions- the data may appear momentarily or in a given context and then be absent the next so in this way a 'noisefield' could be inherent in the expansion and messages could be hidden within it, perhaps even texts or documentation, that would be reliant on the originating bit set yet disconnected from it if not available to analyze, yet it may also have carry any signal or secrets when analysed, such that it is feasibly arbitrary, one of many frameworks, and unless knowing what the perspective is, it could be a false corridor and lead to *answers* that are inaccurate or 'counter' to the actual view yet expand into another parallel stage-set universe (U2) based on error-reliant pseudo-truth believed to be accurate yet moving further into falsity (pT-> A=B). in this way, paradox is the limit, as if logical reasoning and 'shared observation' and if identity is unshared, fiction out of what can be shared facts in a limited model based on other rationales, thus exploiting bias and other false assumptions and their structures perhaps a way of conveying this is those with a human POV versus antihuman perspective and how consciousness would be correlated differently both in observations and interrelations, especially with doubling or imposters for instance someone may perceive a human as 'racist' for an observation because of a potential interpretation that is a particular framework thus bounded reasoning to that viewpoint structure, whereby: humans {ethnicity} in terms of sets, different skin tones and cultures could be secondary to being a human being and thus 'human' would be the superset... human {ethnicity} or human {race} This versus the opposite, determining interpretations locally as if the main basis for primary awareness: race {humanity} or race {ethnicity} In other words, subset {set} if not: subset {superset}, can take on the interpretative 'universal view' (U) and it may have 'some truth' in a certain relative framework yet it may not be the larger or overriding truth of the observation and this ambiguity needs to be taken into account. say with my previous instance of a 'song here song there, here a song there a song, everywhere a song-song' as it may be viewed instead of a common rhyme instead a device to channel bias about 'yellow people' as if the intent. note also several such devices were used, not indicating this viewpoint. it is to say that multiple readings can co-exist, and there can be some partial truth (whatever truth exists is true) yet it may not be the total or overriding truth or even generative truth and instead exist as anomaly or entangled instance that arises out of noise, as with a crystal ball that takes in outside patterns and merges them into a common spheric surface. i think when i wrote that i noticed the potential ambiguity yet the idea was not that and decided to keep typing versus try to edit and invent another device for an ongoing theme (about endless communication in terms of 'linear string' assumptions as if automatically meaningful versus hollow and how a lot of people can be singing and saying *nothing* in terms of how it adds up empirically, versus fragmented relativisms which are basically noise allowing the cultural degradation to continue under that mirage of depth and hand-holding feel good hedonism, as if it is all that simple). though counter to this, it is true that certain cultures have names that align with 'song song' and thus it could be associated with that, even though that was not the interpretive framework and it could have meaning, whether or not true or accurate in the specific context, what is true is true. and thus if a military strategy and its associated ideology involves emigrating vast populations into other areas in order to subvert them, and then holds up a politically correct boundary saying it is discrimination to speak about what is going on in those terms- it probably is going to cause collisions in discourses like these, where such dynamics are mediated outside the "official silence" and politics of the everyday societies. again, humans and antihumans would be my response to this, and humans are in every culture and activity. and so they are in the superset and not viewed as 'subset'- though an antihuman ideology that tries to stop such analysis of human awareness via censoring debate or activities then is seeking to overpower and bias interpretation via unshared identity that is privileged and beyond error-checking or correction, thus requiring and demanding a safe zone of *secure interpretation* that prevents accounting for these dynamics via peer pressure, etc. essentially: antihuman {humanity} as this is institutionalized, effectively: subset {superset} if you give any credence to the higher cosmic order involved in this, such that the earth today is being governed by 'the lower' to which to higher functioning have had to adapt to allow the takeover and takedown to occur. Most excellent in terms of this cross- and intercultural dynamics is the work and ideas of Edward T. Hall, especially in terms of language and cultural systems, how signs are interpreted differently yet also in this variance the richness of truth beyond limited observations of a given view. here is the ~50 words for snow in eskimo and so on, as it relates to this same bit set issue of where someone is interpreting the data from. another possible way of conveying the approximate idea: (humans {ethnicity}) <--> (antihumans {race}) what matters is truth, who serves it and to what extent it is recognized or subverted for another agenda than the shared set, its values, goals, and principles- and this aligns also with coherence and its limits in ideology versus ideas, rigid limits to allowed thought versus freedom and liberty and serve to life or its annihilation by rules to prop up false universes, and the larger context for this being cosmic accountability and the role of crypto and both sides of these issues- that complex /ground/ of operations that could be binary or paradoxical, actually grounded or only virtually... so this gets to a basic idea of 'code' -- what do you trust? -- do you trust some cryptographic standard, do you trust a person or system or machine, do you trust 'ideas' without having parsed them completely and thus rely on 'unknown knowns' determined by others, perhaps of unshared identity and thus exploits- and to me it has become self-evident that only TRUTH can be trusted, that it is the basis for trust, and in combination with logical reasoning allows this trust to be evaluated and accounted for, and anything less is potentially an issue of 'trusting signs' in its place, mimicry or facades or ungrounded connections or relations, such that 'signs of friendship' can substitute for actual friendship, and other types of programmatic techniques whereby truth is not shared as the basis for interactions, and this occurs within 'shallow language' and 'wrong assumptions that are carried onward' within the scaffolding of viewpoints, /errors/ normalized, that devalue and degrade truth- yet become structures for *TRUST* within computing and social systems, again the Binary Crypto Regime as ideology the peak of this institutionalized untrustworthiness made into religion. Faith in crooked code, crooked administration, crooked relations, crooked ideas, and accounting in truth and via logical reasoning nowhere found outside the *protected limits*, thus allowing the antihuman agenda to proceed friction-free in fallen environments that serve this 'mastery'. if you trust in people, it is within their truth, the truth of a person not their falsity or pseudo-truth (unless mistaken) -- it is a critical distinction and of wide-ranging consequence. so too, ideas- the truth of ideas versus their approximations and warping and skew and distortion and biasing- to defend and uphold that is a corruption, a compromise that is a degradation and deteriorates whatever truth exists- thus, compromised code as if secure also compromises the person wrongly believing its integrity without being able to evaluate it in truth themselves or relying on others who are untrusted or of unshared identity to guarantee ideas through trust of technology or 'trust me' models- which if 'shared awareness' is not the same or exploited, leads to exploits. whole OS platforms built upon this and similarly exploited, though in a realm of double/triple schemes, etc. so FAITH in TRUTH and in the truth of people and in the truth of ideas, yet accounting for this truth, understanding it, being able to grapple with it versus make and build assumption upon unreliant assumption that could be built upon a threshold exploit (unknown unknowns) that bound interpretation and yet another could be decrypting everything from the start because it is built that way- just not understood by the users- thus 'trust the algorithm' without dealing with 1:1 truth allows the A:B exploit its tyrannical freedom to overlord and invisible hand events onesided. for instance, if time travel there is a high likelihood the present day would be governed from the future context and its administration over the present and taking this into account would be one approach and ignoring it another and thus 'standing lies' could be seen as part of that SCIFI framework in that actions do not add up in normal terms in day to day policy and why is it that situations are being run off the cliff regularly in parallel if not some 'beyond mainstream' policy decisions making sense of shared madness so if the truth of ideas is not dealt with, and the truth of people and the truth of machines and technology, and the truth of code itself, and not using actual *logic* beyond the binary evaluation, how much truth is there really in these systems and relations by default of ignoring the reality, and how much of the surreality that exists is based on the shared FALSE framework that allows the oppression and oppressors their advantage... thus the role of the logic bomb in taking down the kernel of the corrupt belief that sustains the lie and the code that stands in truth truth as its sign yet ungrounded, an entire standing empire built upon a too simple ideology- now that is a security nightmare waiting to happen, for those on the inside and with vested interest in seeing that it and their lifestyle continues, say versus feedback from the oppressed and exploited... payback time. --- more on bit set dynamics --- here are some additional examples of various approaches; you could use numbers in place of letters or vice versa, perhaps co-existing and thus to flip and unflip sets... A B X 1 2 24 Such that A is the first letter of the alphabet, B is second, and X is twenty-forth. it could be taken further and sent back into letters by a second pass: 1 2 2 4 A B B D Optionally, from these same numbers it could instead be reformatted in that the original 1 2 24 could become: 12 24 L X Another approach could involve flipping the bit set characters prior to or after expanded into massive constellations of data of the interiority, and thus layers of overlapping interpretation could exist from the start which could be part of the symbolic algorithm as it were: h i o x / x o ! y there is a potentiality involved that could result in different expansions and keyspaces and so it is an issue of what these are and how they could be determined or shared- perhaps in the bit sets themselves or other keys or it could be arbitrary and truly crystal ball 'seers' in given instances, altered states that may align or be shared or unshared yet deliver info also: this could occur without software in a massive distributed model yet with software tools it could be something more in-line with crypto systems of today and massive computation that probably could find ways to encode and embed programs or documents via such techniques versus SMS equivalent peer networking. say for instance the following bit set were evaluated: U SI 20 1LL 2Z O X LS Perhaps it expands into a thousand character document, and that 'X' symbol were notation that it should be twisted 45% and read at an angle, dropping out certain symbols as noise and others would be retained by symmetry or having multiple readings (say: N S Z in terms of rotation & reflection). In terms of the mirroring of language, reading upside is a useful skill or being able to have /superposition/ of alphanumbers and those substitutions in mind and parsed in real-time evaluation- perhaps relevant, perhaps not. yet a computer system could likely mine such data very effectively given rules and decipher or encipher and puzzle data back into jack-in-the-boxes that could be reused as structure, or so it is hypothesized continuing with approaches, there is a certain interesting correlation with certain letters and logic notation, such as p q p d that in their relations demonstrate mirroring and so this is part of the structural of numbers and letters that can indicate function or have distinct features as if puzzle pieces that can and cannot fit together in given parameters of co-alignment p q p d b d b q The ambiguity of this, yet also other options... b = |> <| = d etc. perhaps even |> / as a trigraph as 'twist b, thus q'. yet any of this could also be compressed or have multiple meanings depending on perspective and the framework/s for evaluation. the corollary to this is potentially sequencing of data structures though again -- not linearly. multilinearly, nonlinearly, as permutative sets, the total ecology of combined and related dynamics, CERN-level and weather forecast modeling intensities... and still there may be infinite unknowns even within the structural data if not having the keys to unlock it another foundation aspect of this is character overlap and subtractions and additions via their combined state; it is very difficult to convey without images because it can be high resolution in a standardized context (16 segment display, square UNION JACK symbol of the ancient mastercode, HIOX). and it is logic dependent in certain instances to figure out... first hint: b 8 d The numeral '8' essentially can be a character in /superposition/ whereby while the 7-segment is the seeming source for hexadecimal letters, it has a potential substitution of: A, B, C, D, E, F, H, J, L, O, P, S, U. Thus the words: bad, bed, bod, bud, in addition to other acronyms could be seen as a potential, held within the shared overlapping structure of 8. it is thus a *wildcard* bit, in terms of alphanumerics. The HIOX or union jack symbol is 26 letters + 10 numbers for a single bit, by comparison. so imagine the set evaluation of: b88d, in terms of including the hidden 13 other letters and how this may influence anagrams or other permutation combinations. In a similar way, you could have a letter 'm' and break it into two letters 'n' or invert them, 'vv' which could be mirroring 'm' or 'w'. or turned sideways and becoming 3 or E, that is, M or W. or c & c in a given view, depending on the construct. consider another approach to overlap: 3 E = 8 And further, into the larger alphabet... R L = 8 This approach would include retaining the overlapping elements, thus additive, whereas if subtractive- combining the number zero (O) sans null slash (0) and capital letter i (I) assumed having full upper and lower bars at top and bottom of vertical, would equate to an: equal always equal symbol, orientated vertically. what is dissimilar is retained. this abstraction in part required by the tools, unable to communicate most basic information for lack of standard formating and basic display of 'code' as it actually exists and is used. example of subtractive: R L = 3 Perhaps this aspect of superposition is closer to that of /spin/ for certain character features, whereas for a large capacity symbol such as '8' or HIOX it is a much more vast range of set potentials to unpack via these interrelational dynamics. --- messing with HASH --- it is still unknown if the parallel structure of a bit set as the string is comprehended, such that [xyz] could function as a string yet also co-exist in parallelism as [x|y|z] via set recombinations and expansions. [x] could be anything, say 'the internet', [y] could be pi/1.666 and [z] letters A-H. likewise, [x] could be symbol 1, say a purple dinosaur, [y] could be '8' and [z] could be symbol 2. the slot machine really is vastly variable and could involve multiply turning bounded infinities that tally in custom circuits (outerlimits of enigma), and the 'string' could also be infinite, such that both the bits and bit set could move towards infinity, such that: [infinity^1][infinity^2][infinity^3]...[infinity^N] how could any machine possibly rationalize all of that? impossible. and what if most of it is *noise*. it leads to interesting conditions for ideas and algorithms, new territories perhaps, places without any maps or infrastructure within existing _known technology. randomness, yessir. like the Moholy-Nagy painting (ref.typo error) in a previous post, there could be calculative dimensions involved in ordinary language, through its transmutation and reimagining in its 'other variability'. imagine colliding [hash 1] vs. [hash 2] and arriving at some kind of structuring... what if it is the same 'bit set' that is collided with itself, yet transformed from bit set A to bit set A'. thus A x A' = new bit set u x w h ==> y m x u == ? ? ? ? Thus it would matter if it is additive or subtractive for what the new bit set would be and what would be expanded in terms of its interiority. so what if the english alphabet is 26 letters, A-M/N-Z and you run half of these against the other, what kind of structures result. and what if you take half of the alphabet and mirror it above itself then add/substract or flip, or recombine in various ways, or two-letter sets, adjacent and non-adjacent-- suddenly it is off the map, unexplored symbolic territory perhaps, and that is seemingly something else entirely in terms of meaning; and for the naive like myself, how might this relate to various encoding schemes that use character sets and symbols for data transmission, are they substitutable or could they even function as a deep data code (signage going into and through data instead of only across as linear strings), and what kind of access/entry and egress and circulation may this allow, open up or prevent in terms of traditional data models and also processing. it would seem in some way related to a compass with magnetic north and true north, though that could be widely variant and easily polarity could be lost and someone could be heading south or 'up' or 'down' without knowing it, in flatland terms of bounded interdimensionality also, language translation, western european languages, umlauts and other details related to extra-textual cues or clues perhaps venezia & venice what would the different keyspaces expand into if only some of the structure is shared, yet the idea is essentially identical, such that the signage maps onto the same concept, empirically, via translation-- is it an issue of distortion, cultural frameworks of language that format structures and how might these be bridged or is it a limitation to the model, thus can bit set dynamics occur only in A:A frameworks or can A1:A2 also function to a threshold limit, until A:B is reached, or may it also function at A=B, insofar as the structure of A is retained within the structure of B: A <---> B{A} and further, consider if the 'translation' was a particle collision and thus the probing of molecular structuring shared and unshared between the two concepts, attaining higher resolution of their shared dynamics via interrogating their relations, grounding and mapping and testing of assumptions into a common empirical framework- as if language is the basis for conceptual infrastructure --- note on correlations --- having written about this elsewhere and forgotten a specific clarification, pattern recognition itself is about this sign=sign matching, yet assumes that the match itself equals truth and this is not the case, it is a faulty assumption and an ideology that the truth of language is in the sign itself and not what it is referencing. thus an apple would be the word apple versus an apple itself and the 'idea' of what an apple is, its potential superposition of meaning. this is the binary plague of ideas everywhere evident in technology-- the potential of technology now making toys for adolescent adults based on limited viewpoints, goals, and shared purpose. mathematics begins with patterns. understanding and deciphering them. yet it is this recognition that must occur in a A=A framework for it to be actually true (1), and thus the refinement of ideas and removing falsity from pseudo-truth and using hypotheses prior to declaring theories, as is the empirical methodology. and so TRUTH is foundational to mathematics, knowing what is true from what is false, and relating this to an A=A and A=B evaluative context, which is Plato/Aristotle and others of course. and yet if a mathematician arrives at an equation, or a person proposes a universal idea, it is not just that they have found a "pattern" that seems to fit, it is that it must correlate with other structures and patterns in their known integrity, that is "truth". so there is a relation in truth for the evaluation of truth. (thus: binary assumption of truth extends all the way to all subsequent assumptions based upon it). so testing hypotheses and ideas and equations and finding flaws is the vital process and obligation of error-correction and refinement and the changing of the model or hypothesis or pattern conceptualization so as to better align with what is known to be true, verifiably so (1=1) versus relaying on something know false and relying on its structure (1=0) for further such 'ideas' and 'equations' as an error-based structure and viewpoint, which can get religious even, and is hugely invested in the ideological, where questions have long ago been answered and unasked since even when facts and evidence refute the claims. thus limits, boundaries allow even faulty pattern-recognition to persist by keeping out error-correcting observations. and 'empirical' observation is thus limited to only those facts and views that support the claims, ideas, equations. this is why logic is so critical to determining and accounting for truth and evaluating 'structures' that supposedly carry its /momentums/. the trusswork of ideology that may be corroded to such a degree to collapse yet carry the weight of a society, these areas of weakness offlimits for any interpretation, protected by retaliatory violence to allow virtualized viewpoint to continue, while endangering all who rely upon the error-rate. the 'binary logic' that is falsely absolute yet unaccounted for can thus "exist" in a bubble civilization yet only through dictatorial tyranny that is against its evaluation, most especially in logical terms, these also being the most self-evident and only way to actually describe what is occurring as it occurs conceptually, structurally. everyone knows, yet the 'reasoning' itself is made off-limits and thus the incapacity to say for lack of a way of accurately 'recognizing' and accounting for the events. in this way a [sign] could be interpreted one way by a binarist and another by an observer of 3-value or N-value paradoxical logic. the pattern that is encountered may appear identical yet its mapping into structural frameworks of truth could be entirely different, and more accurate than another. so it is an issue of intelligence, how these signs are interpreted, and in a more general sense [patterns]. and thus C.P. Snow and the Two Cultures allows consideration of the mathematical evaluation versus linguistic, or 'literature' as a basis for this interpretation, leading to numbers and equations in the former and alphabets and writing in the latter. though perhaps with mathesis that division related to pattern recognition is of a previous era, and instead 'literacy' has moved closer whereby concepts of "programming" (ala Lewis Mumford) have "symbolic processing" as a skill that present-day once future populations were predicted to need to survive symbolic processing ===> [patterns] (signs & symbols) thus, patterns could involve both mathematics and language, equations and words, and some overlap could occur or exist as it relates to the nature of thinking itself-- such that, while 'binary' views may be easily taken on as a quick route to decision-making, looping probabalistic reasoning via multiple hypotheses autonomic and conscious are the ways the nervous system and brain actually work, in a context of navigating absolute truth and falsity, including constantly refining and add and querying data against contingent models and not simply discarded what is unlike thus 'false'. in this way, an approach to thinking that is ungrounded in experience and natural observation itself can become religious dictate via indoctrinating people into an inaccurate framework and basis for shared awareness and relations that are A=B in terms of pattern recognition, customizing POVs to a warped, skewed pseudotruth that tends to zero, as a compass and guide. The kernel is wrong, faulty, yet cannot be error corrected, power says, government enforces, institutions crushing the facts, observers, denying and censoring and outlawing illegal patterns, universal perspective. Thus there is truth and falsity where A=A and A=/=B reside, and this is the basis for establishing logic. that is, A=A is the pattern match, and A=B is the false match, the errored idea. T/F <--> logic And depending on the 'logic' used for evaluation, that will then influence what is and can be observed, such that: T/F <--> {binary|paradoxical} T/F <--> binary --> 1/0 T/F <--> paradox --> 1/N/0 such that, the logic then influences the observed patterning: T/F <--> logic <--> [patterns] In this situation 'code' could be the patterns that are assumed true and accurate for sake of being operational in a binary framework, whereas with a paradoxical evaluation this truth is not presupposed, instead questioned because it is and always remains contingent- a hypothesis that requires testing, challenging, verification, validation and continual error- correction-- else, via entropy itself, the inherent fallibility of partial observers within limited frameworks would be taken as if truth itself, absolute, even though inaccurate, faulty, by lack of godlike omniscience. logical reasoning is what this testing and error correction are all about yet if it occurs in a binary framework the observational bias continues to see itself as 'correct', infallible observers because they can equate the sign they believe is something with the thing itself apple is the word and not the larger external reference- and thus 'signage' stands in for and begins to mediate truth irrespective of its external validation, within a false empire of signs and symbols-- mathematics and language that becomes and is detached from reality, its own virtual word of anything goes... that is, it may in part connect with truth, yet be assumed 'all true' or absolute, by selective observation based on power dynamics for reasoning, which gets into brute force peer pressure to engineer truth via bullying dynamics, censorship, violence against unshared views, blacklisting, attacks on equipment and tools, etc, to shut down the other observations that error check and correct and *falsify* the believers code, who make their bread on lies and deception, knowingly or not. thus: truth <--> logic <--> [math/lang] <--> [patterns] and in this same way, the observers and perceptual framework could exist in a paradoxical approach, more towards mathesis in terms of higher literacy, whereas the binary is by comparison illiterate to everything outside it limited and controlled framework... truth <--> logic <--> [code] <--> [patterns] And all of this about 'reality' and issues of shared observation and identity, shared and unshared, that allows 'truthful' and false patterns to exist and /represent/ ideas, events, people, accurate or not. mathematics and language are both reliant on logic and truth, and the verification of pattern recognition is in A:A and A:B dynamics, which are evaluated and justified via truth and logic, and a too-simple approach is a basis not only for structural insecurity, it can be a planned exploit of civilization and thus as the "language" or discourse continues in confusing by assuming A=B, many nefarious activities are allowed within that inaccurate context. true evil, and its justification on the normalization of these dynamics and the mediocrity that is allowed and allows for it, as a 'consensus view' that is based in non-truth, only ideologically accurate to a partial view (pT=>0, whereby B>A). that is a context for crypto then, because 'secret communication' and 'hidden writing' can occur both within mathematic and linguistic structure that is in that same context, including an undifferentiated logic, whereby the binary may exist in a bounded realm that the 3-value or N-value could likewise inhabit and move in and through and outside of, via its other dimensionality, yet more accurately account for absolutes (1 and 0) due to a weighted, more accurate evaluative framework for shared empiricism than a rough, coarse, inaccurate all-or-nothing approach that is knowingly false from the start, in that it is unreal, detached from limits of observation and made into a fiction, and thus fictionalizes everything as its result. in other words: [patterns] can be in superposition, yet not in a binary mindset because they can not be evaluated this way, as /ideas/. instead it remains shallow and on the surface of the sign, too simple pattern recognition whereby the belief that A=A is its own confirmation as long as the pattern matches, the image is believed to be what it is, then it is by default correct and true (1), due to the sign itself, not its grounding. truth <--> logic <--> crypto <--> [patterns] Thus if considering ideas in this context, ideas of patterns, ideas of crypto, the models of what are going on _must be accounted for within truth and within an accurate logical evaluation and a binary approach (via logic) is not this-- it is like playing paddy-cake paddy-cake to get the results and seeing the layer cake as an end in itself, its own verification and self-validation, if not narcissism-- i wear the badge, therefore i must be. in other words, as is mentioned many times over a crypto system is not inherently or necessarily a secure system just because it is cryptographic though some may relate to [crypto] as a sign that equates with it without getting into the error checking of ideas, truth of models, and assume or allow models that cannot be tested and thus, limit/exploit scenarios by this approach, where crypto functions against the role of crypto in society and 'the sign' becomes its own antithesis, whereby 'to encrypt' is actually 'to decrypt' in another hidden context-- and that logically, when only partial truth is active, this is probable, beyond 50% likelihood given that several false assumptions may be relied upon that the truth is only minor about what security may exist- say with factoring outside of quantum or other computing architectures, which become dogmatic, faith-based beliefs that everyone knows are bounded observations- thus contingent, unless you have access to the deep underground labs or other galaxies resources. it is the same situation with architecture and anti-architecture or those who look human yet have antihuman agendas (bladerunner-esque), in that the sign of something can be camouflage, a ploy, a substitute or stand-in that is not the thing itself (mimic) and references another unshared grounding (say A-> B) versus what is assumed (A-> A'). so, the signage could be pointing in a given direction, yet going in the opposite, and in this way instead of modeling truth and aligning with it (A=A) it could be subverting and moving away from it (B), yet appear to static or "said to be moving toward it via language and reference to other signs" (A=>A' actually B=>B'). in this way, [crypto] can move towards falsity in a binary framework, yet with paradox this falsity could be multiple, beyond those controlled by the binary approach and its /controlled signage/, beyond the limited threshold and its particular interpretation, thus feasibly invisible, incalculable. this would require reframing thesis-antithesis (and synthesis) in a dueling context of binary and paradoxical logic, which itself would be the compass and basis for a kernel, from my naive view, for the core of the dynamics. another way of saying it: you can have all the code you want, yet if it is not grounded you're fucked. --- conceptualization of hidden interiority -- i found these paintings online that to me indicate a conceptual correlation with visualization of the expanded bit sets in their venn context... # Ordered Chaos 12 & 14 http://www.mnartists.org/work.do?rid=339132 http://www.mnartists.org/work.do?rid=339132&pageIndex=90 # Tao Of Physics, Quantum Space http://www.well.com/~hendrix/TaoOfPhysics.html --- decrypt for feedback --- _ |v JL 3 p\ w Z 7r : 2 6 I N T E R E S T i N G

1 0

Google knows nearly every Wi-Fi password in the world
by Gutem 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

http://blogs.computerworld.com/android/22806/google-knows-nearly-every-wi-f… - Gutem

1 0

John Gilmore analyzes NSA disclosures to EFF
by John Young 15 Sep '13

15 Sep '13

John Gilmore assesses NSA disclosures to EFF on encryption, security, operations, more: NSA FISA Business Records Offer a Lot to Learn http://cryptome.org/2013/09/nsa-fisa-business-records.htm

1 0

[3] sampling continued
by brian carroll 15 Sep '13

15 Sep '13

// apologies- yet another attempt at error correction of a previous statement and clarification. quote: Subvert logical reasoning, disallow it, including freedom of speech and thinking and censoring and controlling what facts are allowed - controlling POV - then the opposite occurs: A|B ---> B, such that T => pT This is the code exploit of the Binary Crypto Regime, where B(0)=A and pT(0)>T(1) --- clarification on computational approach --- I made an error in description of processing in the context of infinities, stating one infinity to the next is evaluated as if a serial approach when instead this would be nonlinear and require massively parallel processing, along with serial evaluations in a looping evaluative heuristic - testing against a hypothesis or model, 'running code' or living code' as it were, versus a static one-time interaction of data and algorithms, instead more like a situation of intelligent life in a bounded context as if data aquarium or code planetarium. the reason for this parallelization relates to considering all the combined permutations in terms of probabilities, and thus [x][y][z] as variables are not necessarily, seemingly, about an algorithm that reveals a structure that helps move from x->y->z by some mathematical structure, or so that is my naive guess, such that if you use conventional crypto approach #1 something may be revealed between these that matches an equation pattern, provides order within the chaos of variability, until legible, intelligible.* In other words, instead of XYZ being a serial number that could extend linearly onward toward infinity, that is: [xyz] ...[∞], and that "string" is a horizontal number or code, that can in particular be related perhaps to binary on-off processing in a highly efficient manner, processing and computational speed and largest prime numbers as context-- instead, the assumption for this same situation in another crypto framework is that it could be happening 'vertically' like a slot machine that runs to bounded infinities (largest primes or not), within each variable, and thus [xyz] may not have a discernible linear structure or overall equation that makes sense of the resulting 'horizontal' string. such that: [x][y][z] => [n¹][n²][n³]...[nⁿ] whereby [n] is variable and could be anything- a number, a function, a calculation, null, its own computation. And in this way, each variable could tend towards infinity or its own structuring, within the string, whose length is not so much the issue as the difficulty in resolving its total structure, especially linearly, such that [n¹²³] would not be decipherable running algorithms across its horizontal string and instead solving for each variable or say grouped variables in the string, eg. [n¹][n²⁻³][n⁴⁻⁹] Thus, while i have no actual idea of how crypto and binary code relate in terms of encryption methods and decryption, it is assumed this approach remains serial and directly interrogates the serial string to reveal its structure, across various formats of the code (various programming, encoding and other data formatting schemes). Thus, a binary string would be an example, 10100011001010001010101010010101, whereby to solve for [xyz...n] would involve finding the overall linear structure that provides for such linear organization, say assuming it is encrypted code *)S)*S*))SA&*S&**S()S*S)aAUIHNL*0, and therefore the assumption would remain that each variable is related to the next in some 'coherence' and solving one part or layer may reveal another, such as HSKSLLILHSILALSWLWLSDUI and thus the string [xyz] is made intelligible by this coherence within the linear string, across that massive horizontality (very large streams of data that contain data and programs and messaging). Whereas for a paradoxical logic approach, each variable could itself be 'many' in place of a single bit- or the boundary of the single bit could be [N] and move towards a bounded infinity, a mathematical function, or other calculation in that same location. disclaimer, stating the obvious, i have no idea what this is in terms of applied cryptography, there is tremendous gap between these statements and actual code, though to me the approach is much more accurate as "thinking code" that involves human processing via logical reasoning, parallel and serial processing, and thus the very idea of a string of code in that view could also function as signal in noise or even absolute truth, in terms of messaging. and so it is obvious 'binary thinking' is not like everyday evaluation in the sense that there is grey-area to mediating events, a pause to decision- yet within this pause, bounded infinities of hypotheses can be queried (referencing previous instances in stored or external memories) that then influence the tallying of the response, which most likely will be weighted between 1 and 0, unless purely ideological. Thus- *conceptually*- to consider "code" in this human context, of a living breathing idea that is grounded in empirical truth in a shared human viewpoint, that is to be shared as information, via exchange, it is more grayscale than 10110101010100001, in terms of language and how thinking functions, more about looping and weighting of variables than having a *single correct result* when there can be several overlapping or contrasting interpretations *at the same time*. So imagine if the binary string had each bit that was variable instead in a 0-9 scale of weighting the evaluation, such that 10927238292340246. This moves the [binary] string into a fragmented string of variables, more like analog computation [1][0][9]...[6]. In this way it is to consider the 'bit' as N-variable, and thus what if it were the alphabet instead of numbers: 26 letters possible for each bit: USOWHLSELNSQAHBVY the issue being that like a slot machine, those [N] variable bits could tally up any potential letter of 26, or +10 numbers with alphanumerics, or add lower case and punctuation or symbols and suddenly a small 'string' of data could involve huge interrelational structures that may or may not be related across the horizontal span, depending on how it is constructed via algorithms and conceptual formatting. Maybe this already is the way transformed code is achieved with taking a certain sized content- variable [x], and then transmuting its entirety into a string or stream of obfuscated data that must be 'worked at' to decrypt or be translated to make use of. The seeming difference would be computationally, how this relation exists in processing, in terms of hardware and software, though also thinking, programming. Because what if there is a limit to these transmutations that is forced into a binary 1/0 and thus bounds these infinities to only certain algorithmic space, or even computationally, that such numbers cannot be adequately computed and thus *do not exist* as calculations within machines and software approaches, crypto perhaps especially, when the security they would provide would be unfathomable in terms of existing brute force calculations of 'linear' patterns. my speculation is of an unknowing of applied cryptography and computer programming yet knowing of logical reasoning and empirical thinking, awareness, and how the two are ideologically at odds in approach in terms of basic assumptions. thus within my condition of 'illiteracy' there is an attempt to share an idea (pT) about a shared situation from an outsider vantage, with those of highest literacy of applied code, yet within what to my observation is a flawed idea and based on false and inaccurate assumptions, in particular the primacy of binarism for security when this nonlinear/multilinear computation (parallel & serial) would easily defeat it. such that it is not about strings and instead parallel sets: [x|x|x|x]...[n] as the [variable] yet this may not be coherent in a horizontal algorithm to solve, it may not have 'rationality' across, from one digit to the next, revealing its hidden structure. instead, randomness would be inherent instead of woven into the code, it would be more revealing information out of noise structures than putting information into noise that is bounded and can be shaped into structure. in this way also, noise could have structure yet not lead to decryption, it may be a false corridor within the ever expanding maze. it is that [N] variables each are in superposition, not static by default, finite and absolute, and instead 'truly variable', unbounded to a certain extent (infinities within infinities across infinities via nested sets). the conceit or test of the heresy would be 256 'bit' quantum computer that solves 256 AES, though if it were a binary string this could even be trivial, versus say [N]-bit, which seemingly could take *forever* to evaluate, via running, looping code evaluation and a shared empirical model that develops alongside, out of and through the technology as a 'thinking machine'-- which, the more it is like the human brain, the more likely the messaging could be made sensible via existing concepts and structures to test against, evaluating patterns and looking for correlations. in that context, a three bit [N]-variable string of code could probably defeat all computing power today, especially if large expanses were allowed, numbers, letters, symbols-- it would be unsolvable potentially, extremely probable. Largest primes would be a minor detail, another variable seemingly in such a context, due to its potential for incoherence and complexity. likewise, this [N]-bit approach for random number generators, yet why not random outside of 1/0 as a noise field, generating strings via a two [N]-variable string, just let it run and tap that, without or without structure, would it even matter. in other words: take any two ideas, any two signs or symbols or colors or whatever, and relate them and tally and extend this as a process. that is proto-language in a nutshell, this the crazy nut cracked open yet beyond the insanity of my own incapacity to communicate and flaws in understanding-- there is something about this approach and basically observation that has *coherence* that is absent in a binary approach and serial algorithms-- because that is not how people think or communicate, it is N-dimensional, geometrical, looping. and processors and code and software at present cannot model this, allow for it. and that formats reasoning, perception, what options are available to share ideas and evaluate them, and we are stuck in binary because it is enshrined both in technology though also in institutions-- it is the dead static code of shared ideological non-thinking that is pushing decision-making and actions towards its deterministic end game, which is a onesided machine-based value system, devoid of life, nature, and humanity, except insofar as it profits its own continuing automated development and further extension. so the gap between my illiterate views and the actuality of implemented security code by those literate is one aspect, though another is my literacy in thinking code and the illiteracy of thinking within foundational technology, its infrastructure, and the result of this, which requires a world like it is, and relies on bad code and ideas to allow for it. thus an audit or accounting of the situation, an attempt to get across the idea that there is a model of dumb, unintelligent code at the base of this situation, the approach is so flawed as to be the basis for tyranny, and it ties into 'ideology' across platforms, individuals and groups of people to software/hardware and bureaucratic systems, and in that 'combined state' of a false-perspective empire, the kernel is corrupt and the whole thing invalid, including at the constitutional level which itself is ignored, by binary default, the epic loophole of relativistic frameworks allowing the fiction and its virtuality to replace shared logical reasoning, because truth and logic can simply be ignored, 'privatized'. and enclaves can rule over others as if a caste-system via technology and ideological assumptions that function as religion, technologists as priests, gods of this technocratic utopia, the peasants not having the understanding to operate in such a realm, as guaranteed by the originating lie and tradeoff that allows for all of this to continue. that absolute truth is an everyday condition and you get to choose what to believe as if a right or protected mode of operation, no matter how many others must suffer for it, to sustain the illusion and shared delusion. the cloud here in the corrupted model a state filing cabinet, digital bureau for the bureaucracy, citizens organizing info into others invisible folder structures, volunteering the data via handover, designed into the technology itself as a marketing and communications strategy. the sieve of private data is equivalent to entire populations seeking out pickpockets to hand over their contents, incentivized as it is. and so 'security' is as if a kind of institutional transparency in relation to a corrupted, failed, rogue state that can read and see everything you are doing, whether or not encrypted, dumb terminals every computer to the state mainframe, rebranded and rebadged, hidden, 'anonymous'. --- more of this insane ungrounded viewpoint -- it was mentioned a three variable 'string' [x|y|z] would be differently approached if parallel versus serial, in that each bit of a binary string could be N-variable in a parallel approach, or so it is assumed possible, as with probabilities and slot machines, or basic everyday observation of events and what enters and exits consciousness given context. and while not knowing the depth of this in terms of cryptography, completely out of my depth, it would seem the concept of keyspace could relate to how such a 'paradoxical string' could exist, given the boundary for determining what N could be for [x], [y], [z]. For instance if it were binary ones and zeroes, the probabilities could be run and 8 different permutations or combinations: 111, 100, 110, 101, 010, 011, 001, 000. And within that, perhaps there is meaning. Yet if 'the probabilities' are changed via [N]-bit variables, it could go all the way to infinity for a single variable, and thus BIG BANG inflate via probabilities into a huge keyspace, perhaps unpacking structures this way that reference others already developed, as if infrastructure being revealed that connects with others elsewhere, via wormhole-like connectivity and then closing down upon successful messaging, thus encrypting and decrypting via few variables, via inherent yet hidden structural relations within these combinations, which could be infinities related to infinities and then the issue of how to find them or what to look for. Black box yet even moreso, RNG as model for signal, not noise, thus tending toward psychic Random Event Generator as if innate sense of animals before catastrophe, cosmic faults and folds. the idea or difference is paradox- essentially *superposition* of the bit as [N]-variable, no longer finite and static, potentially active and transformative, diagnostic even in a sensor sense of the analogue as queued circuit. What if alignment occurs in the string under certain conditions and not others, what if it tunes in and structures revealed, decrypt, yet out of tune it vanishes, code collapse or changes as with temperature sensing colors, and the variables change, mask into background, returning to mystery. It does not seem that computers today can even adequately allow for infinity, a single bit of this, versus a larger parallel string- and what might that mean about thinking, too. nothing more than finite discreet thoughts, one decision to the next unconnected, unless largest prime, say rogue US terror-state pwns earth as if master discourse, shared POV, even though ungrounded- this the dumbed down unintelligent lowliest shared viewpoint of situations in their depth, instead made shallow, sold as daily headline? the CODE makes it so, in brains and machinery and bureaucracy. binary is the enforced and corrupted 'shared state', conceptually and ideologically, yet it is a false belief. the issue then of shared and unshared identity, belonging or not belonging to this 'master/slave' thinking... shared ID <-----> unshared ID And how this relates to default interpretations, the quickest route for 'feedback' and determining events based on perspective... are you binary or paradoxical? Can you make sense of your own consciousness or must you take on false consciousness to function in society and go about decision-making in its frameworks, taking on its value systems yet which fragment a person from their own 'true' self, taking over and reformatting and reprogramming a life to serve the machine agenda over and against 'shared humanity' -- now an unshared identity, via private relativistic ideology. sell out your ancestors and neighbors for a place in the machine... Quickest route to thinking- *binary* of course, processor speed as if SUPERSMART! --- "look- i can decide things and determine things irrespective of their actual truth, and it works for me and others, everyone else is just lazy!" Like water flowing downhill, 'logical reasoning' turned into Price is Right PLINKO game, quick and easy 'automated reasoning' via path of least resistance aided and abetted by binary ideology, creating friction-free virtual universe, mind detached from body by also flawed historical beliefs, enabling this madness its onesided platform. the trope of largest prime 'uncorrected ideological perspective' the trophy award for the most stupid, greedy, and ignorant. an entire society and civilization built around rewarding those whose activities align with this, against human conscience and its needs, that then is viewed as the enemy. --- major social dynamic --- ideologically there is a differentiation in terms of the process of reasoning, how information is parsed... intelligent <-----> smart also, how shared identity may differ between empirical and relativistic models of truth... truth <-----> partial truth and the difference in conceptualization, reliance on how frameworks are constructed, tested... ideas <-----> facts and this directly relates to issues of observation and cybernetics (looping circuitry)... fallible observer <-----> infallible observer error-correction <-----> no error correction In this way 'inflated' or 'bubble' views can rely on warping, skew, distortion for their truth which is verified by conforming to a false or inaccurate model reliant on a limited *protected* or SECURED version of pseudo-truth (pT), as if shared empirical reality (T) removed of error, because it is believed to be, via ideology. grounded empiricism <-----> ungrounded relativism In this way a 'private worldview' can replace 'the public' view as if a shared domain, and become the basis for one-sided 'reasoning' depending on authoritative beliefs, where facts can be chosen to fit the model, others discarded, to uphold the perimeter, basically privatizing perspective to a finite inaccurate view as the exploit. reality (1) <-----> false-perspective (0) humanity <-----> the state (?) There is always the possibility that this was planned in advance as a cosmic setup from the beginning, and therefore the state could be doubled, paradoxical, existing both in the shared truth of humans and in the lies of the false viewpoint... humanity <-----> state (T|F) In this way the two state solution could be moving those 'false' on the side of humanity over to the false state, and the true state over to side with humanity, via reversal of dynamics, trapping the exploiters within their own rigged game... human state (1) <-----> rogue state (0) And thus doubled or backdoor crypto could be vital to this process, itself constituting the trap while transcending this context of surveillance and putting it to use for human goals and values, working-through this hell into the birth of new cosmic civilization, of shared identity, as this relates to eco|soc|pol-issues, shared set evaluations for money and taxes and policy and direction slash governance, versus the corrupt code and its circuits etched into the world and minds today as pain, suffering, terror, horror, insanity. // * the following repeated text in case superscript numbers do not translate, for reference: In other words, instead of XYZ being a serial number that could extend linearly onward toward infinity, that is: [xyz] ...[infinity], and that "string" is a horizontal number or code, that can in particular be related perhaps to binary on-off processing in a highly efficient manner, processing and computational speed and largest prime numbers as context-- instead, the assumption for this same situation in another crypto framework is that it could be happening 'vertically' like a slot machine that runs to bounded infinities (largest primes or not), within each variable, and thus [xyz] may not have a discernible linear structure or overall equation that makes sense of the resulting 'horizontal' string. such that: [x][y][z] => [n^1][n^2][n^3]...[n^n] whereby [n] is variable and could be anything- a number, a function, a calculation, null, its own computation. And in this way, each variable could tend towards infinity or its own structuring, within the string, whose length is not so much the issue as the difficulty in resolving its total structure, especially linearly, such that [n^123] would not be decipherable running algorithms across its horizontal string and instead solving for each variable or say grouped variables in the string, eg. [n^1][n^2-3][n^4-9] ⚔

2 2

Re: FLYINGPIG // Tor
by John Young 14 Sep '13

14 Sep '13

May it be true the spies admit defeat. But not likely, more likely a ruse, for they are highly trained liars and tricksters. Feints are commonplace to disarm and delude opponents. Pardons of Manning and Snowden, shutdown investigating of Assange, and several other intimidating and chilling operations would be persuasive. Hearings on abuse would help air the stench. But will not eliminate the rot of secrecy. These formulaic conciliatory gestures would be cheap discounts of giant budgets for ancient practices of extorting money from the public, for, what else, protection, protection against government defined threats, identified by secret means. The spying apparatus will re-surge as it has forever, governments cannot survive without spying on its taxpayers. IRS and global revenue agencies the main data collectors on citizens and subjects from birth to death for everyone everywhere, even spies. SSN the ubiquitous UID. Got a problem with that, go to jail. Tax refusers and evaders more stigmatized and loathed than terrorists. Joint Terrorism Task Forces around the world spend more time chasing and prosecuting voluminous tax cheats then the tiny number of terrorists. With their contractors this produces handsome tax revenue, confiscations and fines. Prison populations too. Spying was invented to catch tax cheats and assure revenue for government operation and rule, and nothing unites the world's governments more than that essential transfusion of money to sustain government beneficiares, in the US the three branches, state and local. Military merely cops to control obedient payment. In NYC, the racket of Wall Street is to pay NYPD to stay away from finance through the Police Foundation. The recently published "Enemies Within," by two AP reporters recount how this has come about through the services of David Cohen, formerly CIA Director of Operations, who has set a completely unaccountable spying operation. Prior to setting this up, Ray Kelly, NYPD chief, and Cohen worked for Wall Street firms. Mayor Bloomberg happily endorsing the 1% bribery methodology. Nobody should believe this will change without a lot more than hopeful dreaming. At 08:08 AM 9/14/2013, you wrote: >On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:43 AM, John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> wrote: > > ... (now even Clapper is applauding > > the Snowden campaign, which stinks of the fix is in on > > what to release and when). > >MI6 also downplaying. > >but if you read between the lines, this is signalling defeat. > >they're fucked; the docs will leak, ongoing, in a tight fisted drip of >insufficient and insufferable dribble... perhaps this is their zen >state - nothing to do but see how much is burned, and continues to be >burned, for months and years ahead. > >watch for indications of political fights and influence, lobbying, >persuasion, LOVEINT blackmail? > cut part or much funding and they've really got a problem!

2 1

[4] hash funktion
by brian carroll 14 Sep '13

14 Sep '13

// attempt at a basic comparative example here... --- code play --- first to reference the previous transparent ziplock with letters (ACID) to provide conceptual framework for what follows... and how the *interpretive* aspect of the code, its encoding/decoding and encrypting/decrypting, may likewise relate in some way as a transformative, calculative process (if not phase-change). not going theory, just abstraction into a realm of N-dimensions and probability versus linear equation exegesis... here are some online resources then for examining the letters [A,C,I,D], as recombinational variables: #Internet Anagram Server mentioned two solutions: http://wordsmith.org/anagram/index.html CAD I, and ACID #Scrabble Word Finder lists 8 word solutions: http://www.scrabblefinder.com/solver/ 4 letters: acid, cadi, caid 3 letters: aid, cad 2 letters: ad, ai, id And other scrabble word searches find additional, including 'da' and 'i' So there are these permutative interactions that can occur within and between signs (letters and their arrangement, though also symbols) and this is mapped out to some degree with anagrams, palindromes, ambigrams, rebus', kangaroo words (word within a word), and so on. #Palindromes, anagrams, and 9 other names for alphabetical antics http://theweek.com/article/index/244111/palindromes-anagrams-and-9-other-na… In terms of language, this is a zone of paradox where multiple meanings could exist in a 'string' that could have more than one interpretation, say the word 'top' and 'top', one indicating 'the upper part of something' and the other 'a child's toy' via dictionary reference. yet without context how can you determine which viewpoint is correct: is there actually a 1:1 meaning or is it one to many? Thus, in some sense, weighted given the environment it occupies for observation. Thus paradox, though also superposition, and an aspect of the unknown or mystery within the ordinary and everyday that in a binary worldview would seek to determine a 1:1 answer and discard the other 'variables', and linearly "progress" in such computations down a particular _unique path that then is equated with _the correct path, analytically, even though potentially arbitrary or flawed. Any such search engines for 'words' can be broken via substitutions, as mentioned before, and doing so would limit or bound the interpretation to a smaller set. Thus using a number one instead of capital 'i' causes the library reference to ignore the variable, discard it from consideration, and only analyze ACD; returning only 3 sets: cad, ad, da. So it moves from 8 words to 3 words due to illiteracy or incapacity to translate or substitute, as mentioned previously. Yet once again consider the ACID letters, in particular the letter 'I' again as it may be hypothetically or conceptually connected to the letter D and result in new letter potentials: P, d, q, b --- likewise the letter 'C' could be turned sideways into the letters U and n. Note the transgression of upper and lowercase alphabets, opening up a much wider range of letter combinations via allowing multiple scales to co-exist in the evaluative framework. Further, the letters C and I can be combined into a second letter D. Thus A,C,I,D, can become [A,C,I,D,D,U,n,p,d,q,b] as a potential string, if 'suspending judgement' and allowing time to configure and reconfigured *in a probability space* these co-existing parallel potentials. inputting the string (aciddunpdqb) at the Scrabble Word Finder leads to 110 words, with six letters the highest word count of eleven total. A question being, is the 'string' ACID really only ACID, as if 1:1 in terms of code and its meaning, and if 'decrypted' perhaps CAD I would be a result; and likewise, what if this could range to 110 words, without considering two or more letter acronyms and abbreviations, and then, each of these unpacked "variables" could potentially be related to one another as a structural framework from which to further reveal or construct code, such as via the subset words: candid, baud, pin. Perhaps keys or a bermuda triangle zone that submerges or reveals purposefully scuttled content. This location related to another inside the same hash function: cab, pain, quid; or yet another: cabin, cupid, id. Essentially sets related if not collided and run against other sets, one against many, symmetries or asymmetrical dynamics, spins, planes, fields, layers, levels, zones of meaning shared and unshared. Perhaps someone could even have the key and yet get lost in the ever expanding forest of never ending choices, thus: the labyrinth is constructed by each interaction and decision and without the correct context, variables in their superposition could remain hidden in their correct interpretation (A=A) how could you know without an observer of shared identity and same model of empirical truth to reference, given N-possibilities for each choice and evaluation, potentially, as this is bounded by whatever the keyspace may be: only capital letters, alphanumeric plus symbols, whatever. and likewise, in terms of computation and equipment, could this same HASH function be recreated _without identical equipment, due to the floating point aspect (if it were to still exist) in computating irrational numbers, given a necessary boundary to stop and round up or down at that limit, thus forcing alphabets or equations into one hash scenario or another-- and could enough of this be controlled to even allow two machines to function identically or may there inherently be noise (chaos) between them, and so it is an issue of approximation, creating the same structures via unpacking a superposition ~bit-string and yet having variability still within these parallel models It just reminds so much of enigma and patch cords that perhaps the the RNG with patch-cord like custom circuit wiring could tweak machines to a shared match or 'entangled parallelism' that technology may be limited in allowing due to limits to standardization at the level of unique processors with slightly different characteristics, processor temperatures or working transistors that could somehow effect computation, speed, rounding, at what boundary the evaluation is bounded. perhaps different bounding could provide different codes or access: abc^10 opening up one hash and abc^2 opening up another entirely different subset universe in terms of what appears in its relational structuring. different tech, different hashspace (?) given how much infinity can be modeled and to what extent -- And thus what might keys be. what if the starting variable was used multiple times, such as opened at one level and then reopened at another, and these compared, or some mathematical computation occurring to parse each against the other, and using that derivation for the keyspace. The idea of custom wiring in addition just unpacking then potentially allowing one version of crypto-signage to be used many times and in many different ways, as if signpost even or relay or storage device, as if such crypto could be infrastructure, if not alive like a sensor network in terms of feeding and routing information through such matrices it is curious if perhaps this is opposite the idea of the hash, in that it is an inversion or reverse hash function or something such, due to its exponentiality of parallelism and superposition versus linearity that appears standard to the naive outside observer of this. Just to provide a different example entirely, for consideration- imagine a two variable string, [v][w], in this superposition context. Despite the known transmutations such as the letters being flipped and turned, such that two letters v = w, or when flipped could equate to acronym 'mn', it is more than a single letter as the variable and instead, say, the signs S and O that are overlapped for a single variable [v], such that their layering appears as if the number 8 or letter B. and likewise, a second variable as letters F and L traced atop one another, resulting in the combined letter E, much like a Jasper Johns painting or 7 segment or 16 segment display. In this approach, [B][E] then could, as a 'string' carry these other letter potentials within it or could no longer be decipherable as a standard alphabet letter and instead as a structural pattern, and then computation could occur via breaking down these patterns in that abstraction, mapped to potential letters and numbers and their recombination. For instance the letter B is equivalent to number 8 and via 7-segment displays, encompasses all numbers 0-9 in its geometry. Thus what if [3][E] were suddenly evaluated in a context of letters [S,O,B,E,L,F] and its 47 words unpacked from this starting point; say 'fobs' <=> 'lobes', as a subset universe within which, via another key, may match to a circuit elsewhere or provide meaning and thus 'shared framework for interpretation' whether intentional or unintentional. likewise, lesbo and sol, fe, Io, os & so -- leading into potential transcendent oblivion... or other dimensionality beyond what can be determined, predicted or controlled even- the RNG as REG, tapping cosmic circuitry as if interdimensional tendrils of noosphere --- another aspect --- in terms of superposition variables, the length of [x] in the string [x,y,z] could be _anything. the bit as container could hold a bounded infinity, it could hold a mathematical function, it could hold five numbers or a hundred million trillion, or could nest or subset other variables in chained relations, such that x = xz. and thus a larger string could generate more complex entry code or certain structures, yet it may be unrelated to solving the interior of the hashing package because its inside is larger than its outside symbols especially relevant here, HIOX, fractal codes, ciphers within signage so that it is beyond ordinary language to begin with, such an approach could be two variable and encompass a vast universe of relations, say as a partial HIOX symbol (16 segment) or fractal-based sign of letters embedded one inside the next, say a Y being letters I and V combined, yet far beyond this and into a keyword written inside a starting letter, at scale, and moving downward or across, and having that be a variable that unpacks certain letters and characters and not others, thus potentially relating this outside with inside via the starting string, thus providing context via its superposition options that may be more complex "structurally", all of this requiring a standard approach that is shared, grounded in truth and logical reasoning, to allow 'the language as code' to be useful for shared communication, carrying ideas, or being the idea- seemingly about providing context, creating the conditions allowing for such interpretation to exist also, it should be noted that this could easily involve numbers and so alphanumerics could exist in a state of superposition between their mathematical and linguistic meaning, again 'variable' in terms of interpretive framework; for instance, a number 4 may be missing its hypotenuse or upper-left bracket -- given character style or typographic standard -- and thus it may look instead like a sideways letter T, in some sense. And thus the glyph representing sideways-T could *potentially* occupy both the realm of the letter T and-or the number 4 in terms of superposition, given that it is somewhat corrupted or incomplete or has extra information (such as Q and O similarly). thus a starting bit-string could have strange symbols that could map into letters and numbers via transformation (its de|con-struction via constructions and destructions) of subset relations and dynamics, unpacking particular characters and relations, creating a particular type of noise field for other content, perhaps framing it for interpretation. And thus language itself, tending towards noise if not illegible, may look like actual hash code to start the string, then unpack its contained information based on these variables that may normalize within certain parameters and not others, providing both signal and noise- and perhaps having multiple keys or no keys and to be accessed or referenced via temporary tunings or harmonizations, as if emergent data, or a particular correlated state of shared mind, et cetera --- example --- so i could provide a ~bit-string (do not know the correct word so that is a conceptual placeholder until someone those knows what this is define the concepts accurately) such as the following and it could be assumed to operate and function within these stated dynamics... [nv+x!] in other words: [n][v][+][x][!] And here is what i think is peculiarly interesting- is that i could shared with you 'the key' that created this string, for a subsequent parallel hash function, via superposition, yet it may or may not be relevant to what is unpacked on the inside unless it were activated, and thus it is like an on/off switch that may not be in the interpretative context and so can be routed around if compromised, or used as ruse and trap to set up alternative interior corridors and pathways to checkmate mimics via false perspectives. so, running through the example... potentials: n, c, u, v, n, >, <, +, t, j, r, x, +, v, y, ., l, i, ! Note duplications are added for combination potentials, especially useful for acronyms or symbolic 'compressed' meaning, mirroring of palindromes, etc. likewise, punctuation is allowed for its dual-use language capacity, the exclamation point rotated into the lowercase letter i, and period useful perhaps in other ways as well. As with plus sign and the lowercase t. the issue of archetypal transference alongside transformative mutation, as if organization, allowing for entropic reversal or coherence gains even via losses, such is the "calculus" of the signage, as if moving from concept 1 (speed) to concept 2 (acceleration) yet within a different conceptual realm, wide ranging if not arbitrary and thus the issue of *potential*, as with potential energy- *potential meaning* and potential interpretation, framework, structure, that may exist momentarily or collapse given shared or unshared identity, referent, whatnot. so it would be possible to say 'cat' is what generated the original string, the upside-down caret (^) removed of the crossbar a hint or clue to the uppercase A at another scale (uppercase versus lower), and the plus sign functioning as a category-crossing letter t. and that could be the basis for generating the hash funktion, via this string-- and it may or may not be relevant, it may or may not be used beyond this threshold, it may or may not be the framework once the interior is unpacked, and this depends on the keyspace and how many variables will be referenced on the inside, though could also be on the outside as well, and only [n,v,+] could be used in their permutations and nested recombinations- meaning different hashes could be referenced and made active depending either on generating key, as a partial string (thus secret) or it could be entirely open and yet of an unshared POV, bounded and limited in observation via threshold of eavesdropper, and thus their biasing could force only some variables and not others, which it is proposed may make it nearly impossible to decipher externally without knowing what is being communicated in a given framework or context that is only partially observed and evaluated. such that it may not add up the same, just as unpacking the string with different hardware capabilities may generate different random interrelations as noise though also structure, if somehow calculations are not tuned A:A and instead it is closer to A1=A2, though compensated for. it is as if relativism itself is the encryption envelope, its warping skew distortion where the data can hide within and between and the revealed structures *whatever they may be* could be one-time pad connections or stable grids or force fields spanning multiple such hash universes that interconnect or feed data one into another again perhaps like wormholes further, phonetics could be used for substitutions such that the original lowercase letter 'c' and its subset [v, ^, c, n] could be replaced by 'k' such that kat=cat in terms of pronunciation yet has no trace of a c from which to decipher via a dictionary search, unless phonetic. in this way the original string [nv+x!] could instead be: [kv+x!] and generate an entirely different inferiority to reference, which may or may not be keyed to 'cat' in any given instance, unless it were to be, yet may not reveal anything even if the key is known, given perspective and variable timing and interpretations. it could be throwaway or only active on occasion or a divining method such as organizing cards out of a Tarot deck for reading, a process that establishes interpretation though in a magical context, and thus perhaps more ritual or procedural yet still an important vital step. i.e. if everything is in tune, because the arbitrary could cut either way if not 'literate' and capable of handling this kind of code and interpretation as it were- it could drive you crazy of all the myriad possibilities, this is a infinitesimal example and it would be in the collection of all various techniques and approaches and evaluation and surveying their coherence and decoherence dynamics and related functionality that perhaps a new approach to coding could be developed in this alphanumeric and symbolic parallelism where sign=sign is essentially outside of the language as it operates in consciousness, unless brought into a realm of shared truth (1) and shared perspectives for exchange. thus creating or *revealing* that realm, essentially navigable infinity and issues of markers, lighthouses, obelisks, waypoints, ecosystems and ecologies, mazes, traps, that mapping data or mining, storing, conveying, relaying information within preexisting contexts, frameworks, could be utilized- made infrastructural, another paradigm entirely that aligns with consciousness, not the deadzone of the silicon wasteland as if final destiny of life with the singularity, leading to death and nothingness as ideal future. current and currency. a realm for those literate and of shared awareness. keeping the lies and the liars and their falsehood out of the equations, trapping them in their own false perspectives and thus bounding the interaction while the false perspective is dismantled, freezing everything binary in its place while the word keeping spinning. this, perhaps a reverse-vertigo effect of the nonsensibility of the perceived world, though from another point of view. the oppressive ideology extinguished, no longer capable of sustaining the lies and controlling events from an external position, losing power of 'shared awareness' by dissimilar or dismantled structures-- sitting ducks. quack,quack.

1 0

Re: FLYINGPIG // Tor
by John Young 14 Sep '13

14 Sep '13

It continues to mystify why Greenwald and others crop and redact documents and slides but show them to staff at O Globo, Guardian, Der Spiegel, New York Times, ProPublica, Washington Post and perhaps others yet to be disclosed with bombshell releases (now even Clapper is applauding the Snowden campaign, which stinks of the fix is in on what to release and when). O Globo videos show glimpses of slides which are then further redacted or cropped for release as slides alone. Schneier claims to be working with Greenwald so he is presumably seeing full views of docs and slides. Yet he sustains a steady beat of surprise and outrage, almost as if overly defensive about who knows what. Greenwald has tweeted that there are legal reasons to not show full views nor "distribute" document instead only "report" on them. No answer to a tweet to GG about who set those legal boundaries. This seems to be game the Snowden manipulators are playing with authorities, or at least lawyers are playing with the gov, to toy with and tease the public by hoarding documents, maintaining insider privileges of "journalists" against outsiders, their readers, and experts who could deconstruct the journo's pallid intepretation. This is a game played also by secret-hoarding governments against their citizens, aided and abetted by duplicitous laws and lawyers. MITM exploitation is what it is whatever they chose to call their privilege protection racket. And not to overlook the singular role of Tor in MITM exploitation. The same distinctive rhetoic is deployed by all of them to wave off suspicions as as if tradecraft.

2 1

Musings...
by Juan Garofalo 14 Sep '13

14 Sep '13

So, the washington-london-jerusalem axis of infinite goodness and boundless moral perfection uses the internet to keep close tabs on their subjects. Western cattle is free to use google, facebook, wikipedia and similar technological wonders so that the all-loving state can freely spy on them. Now, what happens when a country is ruled by an evil power that prevents people from connecting to the 'free' internet? Seems to me that the morally perfect western governemnts are denied the opportunity of spying on people living in those countries. Say, I don't know, China. What is the axis of goodness to do now, I wonder...? What about helping all those oppressed people, especially the ones unhappy about their government and so likely to be useful in further spreading western imperialism? What kind of tools could the US military develop to be able to influence those foreign yellow assets and to collect internet usage information from yellow cattle? J.

1 0

[2] error correction
by brian carroll 14 Sep '13

14 Sep '13

quote: Subvert logical reasoning, disallow it, including freedom of speech and thinking and censoring and controlling what facts are allowed - controlling POV - then the opposite occurs: B ---> A, such that pT => T --- Subvert logical reasoning, disallow it, including freedom of speech and thinking, censoring and controlling what facts are allowed - controlling POV - then the opposite occurs: the viewpoint of B 'overtakes' A such that an error-reliant pseudo-truth (0) = truth (1) This is critical to establishing the false perspective, basically a hack by removing logic from reasoning via faith-based binary ideology as a means to control 'programming' populations, institutions, the state and world itself via what amounts to submission and servitude to lies and the grand deception. Note: this relies on B=A which leads to B>A and pT=T, which leads to pT(0) > T(1)

1 0