// a few other random notes related to the original feedback... this is perhaps a more accurate model for everyday computer interactions, whereby the computer machinery may be designed to function against individuals because it has 'secret functioning' that is protected behind an inaccessible boundary to most... individual <==> dumb PC || A.I. =={secret data}==> surveillance in this way a false perspective could be established for the individual interacting with what appears to be a dumb system, while behind that /facade/ the game-master could have dual-use technology that is advanced yet unrecognized, that automatically monitors or queries data (in the sense of automated assembly line production of data mining, reconnaissance and organized pilfering) for the rogue setup/takedown operation, and yet such functioning could be hidden, a secret within the indecipherable chips themselves in their unknowns or proprietary, protected internal boundary (inversion of privacy to allow unconstrained criminality, in certain contexts, while ignoring or exploiting it in others). note: if the above relational diagram is broken due to arbitrary word-wrap, here it is broken down into parts: individual <==> dumb computer dumb computer || a.i. computer a.i. computer <--{crypto}--> surveillance --- on paracrypto environment --- perhaps an assumption of signal/noise modeling of crypto is a blank slate where programming and code creates structures and it is the interaction in these defined systems where 'the crypto' resides, that is, that the secrets are contained in the cryptographic communication and do not exist or reference something beyond the [signs], which would be a mistaken assumption. paracrypto seemingly is outside of this constraint or does not align in this way, seemingly. in that it is more like a Random Event Generator that begins to sense something emerging from the ~plenum of noise as a pattern or organization with what may otherwise be random background, as if disassociated potential. in this sense *signal* may emerge from noise in a paracrypto context, because the meaning already exists in the world as a pattern, whether or not coded into a given schema contained within a finite set of signs and algorithms. in fact, "the world" could be missing from the programming and code of cryptographic products which require 'drawing inside the lines' for that conventional approach to function, which may limit what world exists within the crypto to begin with- which is why, in terms of language-based communication it seems the more robust modeling of crypto occurs outside of hardware/software implementations, and is far more advanced in terms of intelligence applications as it relates to day to day networks and how things get down outside formal administrative channels, especially when compromised or corrupted. in that, the sudden appearance of a flower pot could signal meaning and provide direction where no computers operate or observe or analyze though it could be implicitly known and understood by certain observers of the shared key, what it signifies. in this way, normal everyday people are dealing with already established cryptosystems as a basis for hidden or secret communication which may remain unsaid or unspoken or unacknowledged, yet could only appear only in the subconscious or unconscious of others. if a person sees the flower pot and understands the correlation, there is no need for a computing infrastructure, digital keys and signatures, binary data streams of code, portable computers and pattern-recognition systems to verify what is observed and match this against a central database model. unless of course that is what is required for lack of capacity to process such information naturally, or that systems are in place for certain populations to point-and-shoot their phones at every passer by for diagnostics, to monitor and thus assess their own perspective of what they are not-seeing-themselves as mediated by technology and remote interpretation, to then validate the event and provide a viewpoint, another data point to the empirical model to calculate and reference experience. in that case 'smart technology' and 'dumb people' and in the other, dumb technology and intelligent people. the books: Invisible Cities by Italo Calvino and Ways of Seeing by John Berger, offer a way of considering the para- or coexisting parallel apsects of observation, as viewpoint may be shifted based on what framework is referenced and navigated within. in that different people see different things. people of different backgrounds or cultures. the works of Edward T. Hall focus on these questions of relation. i tend to think it inherently involves the issue of /perspective/ and especially the role of boundaries or limits that define what is and what cannot be observed. (note: role of research of sociologists, archaeologists, entomologists, zoologists, cultural anthropologists e.g. going to village to decipher customs, learn language, etc. as this applies to codes operating outside the defining crypto parameters yet functions similarly yet far beyond, potentially in terms of what is secured and-or private.) thus to 'really see' you have to deal with errors in seeing within the self, firstly. make altitude adjustments, corrections, etc. else observation could be self-limited to a finite viewpoint that begins and ends with the self as a solitary private individual and seeks to relate everything that exists to the terms of the person, as if at the center, infallible. in this way a person may be considered in terms of an antenna. in that it involves issues of fundamental being and awareness, as it relates to grounding or short-circuiting, and what signals and frequencies can be accessed given its configuration. so if malfunctioning, perhaps only few things are transmitted or received and perhaps much of it is noise-based or incoherent. whereas if well aligned, well grounded, and well adjusted, clarity could result in transmissions and reception of signaling. this as it relates to literacy and illiteracy. people utilizing their bandwidth for regressive, backwards activity versus others whose work taps into cosmic channels of shared truth, finding their place within its masterplan. clarity versus confusion. deep meaning versus triviality. coherence versus decoherence. and perhaps signal/noise ratios and embodiment, how much does the mental/physical correspond within a life, or is it short circuited and shut off for entire populations, trapped in bodies without governing ability over its destiny. the issue of tuning, as it relates to logic. what you tune into as data. as this corresponds with truth or pseudo-truth or falsity. and then the active and passive channels, where the data is relayed within a context of self- what dimensions are functioning within a given person (as antenna) versus another, and how do they relate or what are the shared and unshared dynamics between them- as this relates to limits, boundaries, 'shared awareness', logic, and truth. though especially, of ideology versus ideas. passive thought versus active questioning, which can be the difference between faith-based ~theorization and feedback-based hypotheses, requiring logical foundation for reasoning ideas. person 1 <===> person 2 antenna 1 <===> antenna 2 so paracrypto functions in this realm by default of nature, at least for humans and animals, in terms of consciousness and shared awareness. 'truth' does not reside within a being and instead is referenced or mapped into the surrounding world. the truth of a table is not its calculation in the brain corresponding to a sign [table], because it must be verified externally in its existence to validate this truth, the sign maps into the world where it finds its grounding, closing the circuit of signification. whereas disembodied truth or signage freed of this need for external evaluation or proof, can be whatever it is believed to be irrespective of other facts outside a given personal framework of relativism. and this is the thought-killer, the nasty bug that replaces thinking with binary processing, making a fractional truth into 'whole truth' and ignoring any external truth or ability to falsify the viewpoint. perhaps in some way this is a countermeasure equivalent to jamming an antenna to protect another signal. very easy to move into extra-sensory perception or astral projection or remote viewing in this electromagnetic antenna context, if the truth of information is 'shared' by default and involves referencing a shared sensory domain where the truth of information could reside in the noisefield, as patterns. and that perhaps these /forms/ or hidden yet emergent molecules - as ideas and concepts and connections and correlations - are the real codebase of humanity and nature, yet it remains encrypted due to an incapacity to engage this realm in an insufficient, non-electromagnetic modeling of existence, that binary computing instead seeks to define and determine, becoming the future. so paracrypto relations could exist in ubiquitous and meaningful ways, except have no place within the domain of computation except for monitoring and controlling and constraining its development, to keep the non-electromagnetic false worldview in tact and in power. in other words "crypto" and code and programming for computers does not have the capacity to deal with this realm, and by comparison computing languages -are- [signage] detached from actual physical reality, fundamentally ungrounded and unreliant on observable truth outside their finite and skewed boundaries. this is why a programming language based on 'circuits', from the individual to nature, to concepts and ideas, would be closest that of nature and the brain and mind itself, and developing this from N-value logic, so that "programming" a device is no different than "people thinking" or logically reasoning via hypothesis, trial and error, feedback, and empirical evaluation against a universal model based in grounded truth (1). anything else tends towards absolute falsity, the further it computes partial truth against partial truth in a binary framework, where a false and uncorrected absolutist foundation and error-reliant structures hold up the fantasy as a schizophrenic state of awareness. --- analogy --- the frame of view, or perspective of a given observer can be considered in terms of a literal picture frame that defines what is inside from what is outside the captured view, as this relates to a boundary condition. ...|v|... if a digital camera is used to take a photograph -- as a basis and corollary for observation -- a boundary condition is delineated and demarcated (outside...|inside|...outside) and in this way, the realm that is captured (v) can be detached from its surroundings, as a finite instance, or still be tied into it via its inherent connectivity outside or beyond the arbitrary boundary or view of the whole. thus a partial view of the cosmos is not the cosmos in its entirety. yet, oftentimes such infintesimal viewpoints can replace the larger realm of observation, and stand-in for this universal view by default of binary observation and 'sharing of viewpoint'. what is true is |v| and nothing else is true, as long as everything outside the frame is ignored, whether true or not, and anything inside the frame is considered true, by default of some aspect of it being true, yet allowing errors to compensate as truth, because they hold up the perspective of a given distorted, ungrounded observer. this is the basic model of binary computers, where the cosmos is on the outside, and only what fits into the tiny box is allowed 'reality' in the false perspective, and thus everything is made to serve that distorted, error-reliant viewpoint in order to be allowed in a realm of 'shared perspective' in the "common programmatic language", where [signs] stand-in for truth, and become their own self-signification (?), such that [sign]=[sign] is the pattern match, in language, versus in evaluation of ideas themselves or the truth they reference. it has become detached, "virtual", an issue of _processing of data streams, reasoning turned into this via binary short-cuts for rote call & response as if intelligence versus "the speed of smartness" which can relay disembodied facts into a context of ever larger prime discoveries, as if by default of observation: true. because it is observed and believed true, and corresponds with the accepted framework that sees no error in itself, because it essentially holds the position of infallibility via god-status. paracrypto ...|crypto|... paracrypto likewise for cryptographic hardware/software based on computers and their programmatic finite modeling of reality, devoid of actual grounding in external truth outside the context of [signs], which tokenize truth into something arbitrary and malleable-- a fundamental corruption of the highest and lowest order. it simply must be deception. as these same critical systems of intelligence always have and always will operate in the larger realm of language, mapped into the cosmic context, not limited by the finite frames of a given viewpoint or framework that seeks to stop or constrict what can be communicated. circuits ...|bits|... circuits the universe is a bit only in the sense that truth and falsity can correspond with a 1/0 state computationally- it could be a simulation and presented digitally, yet it is an emulation and exists in a larger context that is not so defined or limited or impoverished in meaning. the 'bit' is a false perspective of experience. it is of a false nature and detached from actual experience, unless warped and unimaginative. certainly 'ideas' can be processed as bits, yet they are not only this nor is this their height or greatest capacity. in so far as ideas are 'true' and map into reality, they tend towards 1, yet remain bounded and contingent. insofar as they are false, they tend towards zero. yet if assuming all ideas could be grounded in truth, it is in their modeling and observation this way that their structures (as molecules) would be constructed and anchored to the shared foundation of universal truth (1) yet this does not equate with a digital worldview or its verification. it makes no sense in the larger context of the cosmos and in this reductionist approach disallows consideration of the actual nature of connection within minds and environments, in terms of shared truth, beyond that of the ideological. circuits ...|circuits|... circuits a computer architecture that is based on circuits would not reinforce a boundary and twist and warp things to fit inside its false modeling, and declare it 'universal truth', and instead would be able to move beyond the boundary via interconnectivity within structures of truth that can be mapped beyond a given observational boundary, the weaving together of various empirical views of grounded observers... and this accesses the ancient geometrical approach, of the self with self, self with another, and others, which moves from a point to a line, to a triangle, to a square, and onward to an atmospheric whole, as ideas and events and observations align in a shared framework of truth. ... |v1| |v2| |v3|...|v^n| ... wherein ultimately the correlated observation can tend towards N-dimensional observation of events and extend into infinities that ungrounded relativism does not allow as its 'wholeness' is dependent on protecting skew within a given boundary and equating it with absolute truth because it is shared, validated by others, as a false consciousness and this could be exploited, where the boundary condition it provides is cover for deception which exploits this, keeps ideas trapped in a false worldview, while other things are happening outside this framework yet cannot be accessed or identified inside of it, due to the enforced limits and constraints on observation. thus, those who pursue the truth of ideas can easily be deemed insane, and given disorienting pills, put into psychiatric hospitals, and forced to suicide, to keep the political agenda secure, secret. the potential then of shared observation, is that if humans were combined into a single observer, then: ... |humans^N] ... and that a computer that can 'reason' like a person, in N-value considerations of circuits, would then not be unnaturally bounded and set apart from nature, where only some truth is allowed, that which can be accommodated within the technological framework and its errant ideology. humans ...|antihumans|... humans in terms of paracrypto, human communication that is secret if not secure could exist in dimensions outside the limiting framework of those who censor and edit-out truth from their skewed worldviews and seek to create technology to reinforce this false view, to maintain control over the illusion. a computer that breaks this observational dictate then would provide tools for humans who are on the outside of technology today, not being served by it, and would allow technology to be in service to humans and nature and not their enemy in a win-lose relationship. insofar as this truth cannot be acknowledged or identified, it could function as extra-dimensions that can be referenced while also not being relayed in explicit terms understandable by the hidden surveillers, or their computers. if the code is unable to be deciphered accurately or put together as a whole. instead it would develop as a noisefield. more and more noise. and this likewise could be an aspect of the surrealism it involves. for those on the inside, it may appear only warped or distorted or skewed or false via inaccuracy or error-rate in [sign]=[sign] pattern matched relations, breaking this interpretative framework, limiting its resolution via the boundary, inverting the false-perspective with another that actually involves a siege, as truth surrounds and further and further constricts the finite, false point of view. it is also an issue of limited numbers of observers, and their incapacity to accurately 'process' or accurately interpret such data, at speed, previous and in addition to the incapacity of similar computer modeling to ~rationalize the irrational data into a coherent framework, without forcing and amplifying skew, distortion, warping, and errors based on false assumptions and lies-- to the absolute extreme. the primary idea again is there is a -gap- between the [model] & [reality]. and in certain conditions this is where paracrypto occurs, or so it is proposed. such that an antihuman agenda set into binary computing regime cannot parse or process data outside this framework without forcing it back into its biased logical structuring, which only tenatively grounds via pseudo-truth. and that is a security flaw and no secret anymore. the difference with a human model would be that it establishes and serves this connection with reality as closely as possible, that it must be aligned accurately as that is the basis for its accountings, its verification, validation as observation. whereas for ungrounded relativism, it is the separation from larger reality that presupposes 'universality' and seeks to replace it, rather than serve the larger truth- it is to serve that which is contained as if equated with this, a substitute worldview and illusion based on a shared lie. --- other notes --- self as antenna, yet also machines as antennas and their dimensional aspects. this in terms of logic and relations, such that, for example: N-value observer <---> N-value machine N-value observer <---> binary machine what 'shared awareness' is possible or not, based on the boundary of observation and its reliance on truth or pseudo-truth. to recontextualize this question in terms of ~being and A.I. then could allow a shared circuit-based code and programming language to have advanced 'chess' communications based in 'shared reasoning' beyond the limiting framework of binary ideology, interfacing with a computer such that: individual <-- N-value reasoning ---> A.I. machine if verifiable-yet-contingent truth were the basis for this relation, then cryptography could instead involve a defense of truth at the base of this model, where error-correction and oversight could occur to compare against false-modeling or fake-ideas or agendas, potentially. in that, a traditional route would appear to view security as based on breaking a model so to make it more secure-- yet to do this with 'truth' itself, would be to degrade a conceptual model from truth to pseudo-truth, in order to 'secure it' within greater falsity, making it less secure and allowing for errors that would otherwise not be allowed. thus the traditional approach could be backwards in a circuit-based context, though perhaps an extra diagnostic layer or protocol would exist that is crypto-based in terms of security, to validate truth against its modeling and make sure it cannot be tampered with or that there is a secure realm that monitors itself, at least in such a framework. seemingly opposite of computers today. --- on errored observation --- i have various kinds of brain blips and malfunctioning of nervous system and sometimes will look at text and see the wrong words or have my brain substitute other words automatically or misspell yet when i read it i sometimes cannot see the error due to processing. there can be an aspect of satire involved in this, as misinterpretation sometimes allows a surreal parallel interpretation, much like the satire of the Onion news articles and headlines with other, many times more real, events. many occasions especially when fatigued will read a sentence in error, and this a [world] will become multiset and reframe a sentence or paragraph, relation or idea, as a result. i wonder if there is a way to annotate this as an experience, such that these moments of accidental insight could be captured or shared. almost attempted to do this by détourning coderman's reply with this alteration: key exchange, just synchronized symmetric cigars and readers digests)
in that a misreading or altered reading can change the context and meaning of the original statement, as this relates to the interpretive aspect of evaluation in its fractal and multidimensional (if noise-based subconscious connection to patterns, as they may exist betwixt-and-between various frameworks of truth). original: was: key exchange, just synchronized symmetric [ciphers] and [digests])
in the first instance, a skewed eyeball capture for some reason warped cipher into cigar, adn then a different approach evaluation 'digest' in a larger iconic context, in that given the observer you ask about locating the digest, may respond in crypto computer terms or from another era, of a magazine on the coffee table by the television. this is the reality of language in its complexity and subtltey that goes unmapped by the assumption that it is neither active nor relavant in a binary ideological framework and 'shared awareness' which is assumed by default correct and finite, contained in the frame it determines. whereas for other observers it could extend beyond this, into elsewhere, which is where paracrypto may better be said to exist, in this bit set interaction, within and between and beyond the [signage] that makes up the code, yet also validates and invalidates its premise in terms of inherent security or secrecy in the realm of ideas and concepts, assigned and referenced in a realm as technical infrastructure, yet in error and inaccuracy as it relates to the larger environment which is also encrypted, also communicating; computer hardware and software the subset here, potentially even, compared with the code of nature and secured subsystems for transmitting data that remains unobserved on other levels. if actually dealing in realism versus forcing the false perspective and thus the surrealism is all there is to make sense of the larger context as the code is ungrounded as observation. malmodeling. incomplete, infinitely so. ☳