On Sat, Jun 03, 2017 at 07:03:42PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote: ...

And similarly, when Flash Gordon travels to the far stars, it turns out that an evil corporation run by white heterosexual patriarchal males is oppressing blue skinned tree living aliens to steal their natural resources ... bad, and extremely harmful to all other kinds of creatures.

This endless insulting, ignorant, stupid, and offensive hectoring happens all the time, everywhere, on every topic, in every medium, on every platform, from Facebook to Twitter, from Scientific American to Marvel comics, from romance novels to first person shooter games, and if you complain, you are racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and a denier and you get banned. Observe for example that the only people allowed to be good fathers on television or the comics are blacks, and even black males are still required to have broken families. Evidently the depiction of a good father ruling over a happy family is homophobic, bastardphobic, sexist, racist, whatever.

Recall that the movie "Man in a high castle" used a happy intact family on its poster as a symbol of Nazism. https://www.cinematerial.com/tv/the-man-in-the-high-castle-i1740299/p/iyn0ja...

We are so accustomed to being lectured, shouted at, and spat upon that the shouting is felt to be normal and non political, and any easing up of the shouting and the spitting, as for example a science fiction writer who gives us a science fiction story rather than a lecture, is deemed to be extreme right wing politics. If you hoist an umbrella against the spit, you are a Nazi and you are planning to murder the Jews. And you probably really are a Nazi and probably really are planning to murder the Jews, because only really hard cases like actual Nazis planning to murder actual Jews are willing to defy public opinion by hoisting an umbrella against being spat upon.

Holy firetruck!!! Speak it brother. Please don't stop. Thank you. (Let's dance around the camp fire as we wait for 3 seconds for the shouts of "check your privilege, you nasty white heterosexual Privileged male!" :D :D )

To deal with this problem, people are developing alt tech, for example gab.ai, which is Twitter without mandatory left wing propaganda all the time on every topic. Similarly 8chan is a reaction to the endless tedious left wing agitation and fierce censorship of 4chan

The most interesting conversations are happening on secretive invitation only sites, because it is only safe to say true things on a secretive invitation only site.

So, what I am thinking of is a way to integrate secretive invitation only sites in a messaging network of public sites.

It would be nice if when you clicked on a commenters id, you got a link to his posts, and to his comments on other people's posts - but if some of these posts and comments were on invitation only sites, you would only see those comments and posts if you were able to browse those sites, if you could have seen those comments and posts without necessarily following the link, and, more importantly, only be able to detect the existence of such comments and posts if you were able to browse those sites. Even if you were using special software, not the regular client but a hostile client, you should not be able to detect that the commenter posts to secretive websites, or that such websites exist.

Once you link public ID to private ID, the imposters, CIA, NSA and the rest of the TLAs who actually want to connect you, will fake being "right wing" or "pro white" or whatever it is required to get your secret handshake invite to your secret "darknet" forum, and thereafter expose you. Another obvious and common attack/ connection vector is the turncoat, the "yellow dog" who rats on any and all to save some irrelevant part of his own "skin". There can never be no silver bullet! If you cannot or will not speak publicly that which you wish to say, then you must strictly separate your non-public ID (or have multiple for different purposes...) That which you could possibly speak publicly, you ought speak publicly. It is in the interests of sanity that we encourage one another in the art of speaking more on those things we wish to see publicly spoken, to speak closer to the razer's edge, in ways which compel adult conversations publicly. "If not me, then who?" Good luck fellow humans,

Top-post. James, You're looking for a quick and easy way to discover all persons' political and ideological compatibility based on all public and private communications - of course, facilitated by some membership-based secret escrow scheme (backdoor.) In fact, a lot of different groups have this same problem - how do you discover which populations belong to which ideological groupings; why not employ some handy algorithms to make a judgement for you? Quite the idea, the good people at Palantir might be able to help you out. -Travis On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 2:03 AM, James A. Donald wrote:

I have asked this question, how to do a secret handshake that reveals common membership of the group without giving away your membership to non members, several times before, and not been happy with the answers, so I guess I am asking it badly.

I will try to be clearer about the problem I am trying to solve.

These days, people no longer communicate on Usenet and email lists. Rather they use something for which we have not formed a word. I will call it a social blogging platform, unless someone has a better word.

Twitter, Facebook, and to a lesser extent WordPress, and such are all examples of this.

In a blogging platform, you post and people comment on your post. WordPress is the classic example

Plus, it is a communication medium, you can chat privately to people and groups, like viber.

Viber and skype are messenger with very little blogging, WordPress is blogging with very little messenger, Facebook is the two integrated. Viber is currently the best messaging system, WordPress the best blogging, Facebook the best integrated messaging and blogging system, but the world is moving to tighter integration. Every messaging platform is adding some blog like features, every blogging system is adding some messaging type features.

Facebook consists largely of chicks posting "look at me, I am hot", boys commenting, "yes, you are hot", and then they go into Facebook messenger, communicate privately, and make an assignation to have sex. It was designed from the beginning for the purpose, hence the excellent integration between the posting and commenting, which is analogous to WordPress, and the private messaging, which is analogous to skype. Facebook is pretty much Skype+WordPress, and all the others are competing for the same market niche, though Facebook totally dominates the sexual assignation and booty call niche by far.

Specialist systems, for example the Cupid system for international dating have the same basic architecture - posts plus tightly integrated private messaging.

The trouble is that the major systems, especially twitter, are heavily politicized and censored, and so people are forming alt-tech, such as Gab, to escape from politics and censorship.

If you want to read a science paper about the nut gathering activities of the gray squirrel, or an adventure comic about the Mighty Thor, or a science fiction story about flash Gordon traveling to the far stars, you instead get politics.

You think you are reading about the nut gathering activities of the gray squirrel, and it turns into the effect of global warming on the gray squirrel, which effect we are told is extremely bad, though no concrete evidence of this is provided, the evils of global warming upon the squirrel being asserted but not actually shown.

But it is not actually about the effect of global warming on the gray squirrel, rather it is about global warming itself. We are told that global warming is even worse than we thought, though how bad we used to think it was is never precisely specified, and how bad now we think it is not specified either, and the evidence that we should now think it even worse is alluded to rather than given.

But it is not actually about global warming itself, rather it is that the industrial civilization that white people created is destroying the earth.

But it is not actually about the destruction of the earth by white civilization, rather it is that heterosexual white males are horribly bad, and extremely harmful to all other kinds of creatures.

Similarly, when one read the adventures of Thor, one encounters female Thor. But it is not actually about female Thor, it is that gender binary is false and evil. But it is not actually about gender binary, it is that ... heterosexual white males are horribly bad, and extremely harmful to all other kinds of creatures.

And similarly, when Flash Gordon travels to the far stars, it turns out that an evil corporation run by white heterosexual patriarchal males is oppressing blue skinned tree living aliens to steal their natural resources ... bad, and extremely harmful to all other kinds of creatures.

This endless insulting, ignorant, stupid, and offensive hectoring happens all the time, everywhere, on every topic, in every medium, on every platform, from Facebook to Twitter, from Scientific American to Marvel comics, from romance novels to first person shooter games, and if you complain, you are racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and a denier and you get banned. Observe for example that the only people allowed to be good fathers on television or the comics are blacks, and even black males are still required to have broken families. Evidently the depiction of a good father ruling over a happy family is homophobic, bastardphobic, sexist, racist, whatever.

Recall that the movie "Man in a high castle" used a happy intact family on its poster as a symbol of Nazism. https://www.cinematerial.com/t v/the-man-in-the-high-castle-i1740299/p/iyn0japz

We are so accustomed to being lectured, shouted at, and spat upon that the shouting is felt to be normal and non political, and any easing up of the shouting and the spitting, as for example a science fiction writer who gives us a science fiction story rather than a lecture, is deemed to be extreme right wing politics. If you hoist an umbrella against the spit, you are a Nazi and you are planning to murder the Jews. And you probably really are a Nazi and probably really are planning to murder the Jews, because only really hard cases like actual Nazis planning to murder actual Jews are willing to defy public opinion by hoisting an umbrella against being spat upon.

To deal with this problem, people are developing alt tech, for example gab.ai, which is Twitter without mandatory left wing propaganda all the time on every topic. Similarly 8chan is a reaction to the endless tedious left wing agitation and fierce censorship of 4chan

The most interesting conversations are happening on secretive invitation only sites, because it is only safe to say true things on a secretive invitation only site.

So, what I am thinking of is a way to integrate secretive invitation only sites in a messaging network of public sites.

It would be nice if when you clicked on a commenters id, you got a link to his posts, and to his comments on other people's posts - but if some of these posts and comments were on invitation only sites, you would only see those comments and posts if you were able to browse those sites, if you could have seen those comments and posts without necessarily following the link, and, more importantly, only be able to detect the existence of such comments and posts if you were able to browse those sites. Even if you were using special software, not the regular client but a hostile client, you should not be able to detect that the commenter posts to secretive websites, or that such websites exist.

-- Twitter https://twitter.com/tbiehn | LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn | GitHub http://github.com/tbiehn | TravisBiehn.com http://www.travisbiehn.com | Google Plus https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn

On 06/03/2017 08:14 AM, John Newman wrote: [SNIP]

...

...

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 2:03 AM, [some asshole] wrote:

[SNIP]

...

...

Similarly, when one read the adventures of Thor, one encounters female Thor. But it is not actually about female Thor, it is that gender binary is false and evil. But it is not actually about gender binary, it is that ... heterosexual white males are horribly bad, and extremely harmful to all other kinds of creatures.

Dude, you are obsessed with the stupid female Thor stunt marvel comics pulled. They are constantly killing characters off, bringing them back to life, passing the mantle from one secret identity to another, etc, etc. Your fucking disgusting reactionary ideas on the "patriarchy" have blown the Thor thing way out of proportion to its actual significance.

I suppose you know the mystery of female Thor's identity was solved (Jane Foster, big surprise marvel!), and man-Thor is returning (or maybe already has, im not totally current..). Actually, he never even really left, he just went through a period where he couldn't pick up Mjolnir, and female Thor could. He still fought with a sword or axe or something and his metal arm throughout this period in all sorts of comics.... i know you think it was Trump that made "man Thor" return, thus correcting the universe... but you are an idiot ;)

Thor is a fucking god. Why expect such human gender limitations? [SNIP]

On 06/03/2017 02:48 PM, Travis Biehn wrote:

Top-post.

James, You're looking for a quick and easy way to discover all persons' political and ideological compatibility based on all public and private communications - of course, facilitated by some membership-based secret escrow scheme (backdoor.)

In fact, a lot of different groups have this same problem - how do you discover which populations belong to which ideological groupings; why not employ some handy algorithms to make a judgement for you?

Quite the idea, the good people at Palantir might be able to help you out.

That's very much a done deal already: Search bubbles, egocasting, etc. Google's search engine, for instance, delivers results biased to comply with the known interests and beliefs of individual users. The profiles used for this process are developed from very extensive user surveillance; over 90% of a typical user's network activity is visible to Google through these vectors: - Google Analytics ("free" traffic analysis for website owners) - Google Ads (plus DoubleClick and others Google has absorbed) - GMail (including traffic to and from GMail users by non-users) - Ubiquitous G+ "Like This Page" buttons on 3rd party websites The Facebook is in the same business, continually updating its profiles of all account holders, which are used to target advertising /and/ to build user engagement by presenting a mixture of both bias confirming and offensive content from "friends" and "friends of friends." From time to time I have had access to other users' Facebook accounts and what I have seen is somewhat disconcerting: A completely different "world" is presented to users with significantly different personal histories, interests and biases. In addition to every mouse click and keystroke entered on The Facebook's own site, their "Like This Page" buttons infest 3rd party websites, each a surveillance beacon phoning home to report the arrival time, identity and (probably) departure time of every visitor who does not use countermeasures to prevent it. I have not reviewed The Facebook's terms of service lately, but initially this document asserted the users' consent for intelligence gathering against them via 3rd party sources including press notices, public records, data swaps with "partners" and etc., and the users' consent to have any or all of this data sold or given away to anyone in the world at The Facebook's sole discretion. I have occasionally created social media accounts for propaganda purposes, presenting as an engaged user with the interests and biases of the audience I aim to reach. A little bit of conventional attention whoring and "added value" via links to new and relevant 3rd party content builds an audience pretty quickly. When I do start broadcasting the content I joined up to distribute - baited by my best efforts to manipulate uptake via linguistic tricks, deceptive tagging or etc. as applicable - distribution of my materials promptly crashes, along with the size of the audience. This happens much faster than "all those people" are likely to be opting out of receiving my bullshit. Social media operators do not appreciate users actively gaming their systems without paying their standard advertising rates, and it appears that their content distribution algorithms have been trained to spot and stop it. So the networks are already doing all they reasonably can to protect True Believers from content that contradicts their neurosis-enforced ignorance of data and models contradicting their pseudo-religious faiths. On a more sinister note, the same mechanisms actively reinforce any belief system the user is considered likely to adopt if it is presented: Engagement is engagement, and crack-brained delusional nonsense moves product for advertising clients working those markets. So if you want to live in a world where the Earth is flat, north-central Europeans are inherently superior to all other humans, overpopulation is physically impossible, global warming is a hoax, gigatons of toxic metals are being discharged from airliners monthly, and the Jew Bankers who control the whole world are about to deliberately kill off the entire market that makes "rich people" like themselves possible, welcome to the Internet: It will automagically customize itself to present exactly that world to you. The Internet will also present just enough factual content to give you something to whine, whimper and snivel about, because you also need to feel persecuted to maintain your illusion of superiority in the absence of any performance based evidence for that. :o/

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 01:49:11PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:

On 2017-06-04 06:22, Steve Kinney wrote:

...

Google's search engine, for instance, delivers results biased to comply with the known interests and beliefs of individual users. The profiles used for this process are developed from very extensive user surveillance; over 90% of a typical user's network activity is visible to Google through these vectors:

The major use of this technology by google and the government is to deny people government employment and academic advancement on the basis of their political associations, so this is pretty much the opposite of the solution that I am looking for.

Steve's point, as shared with those who investigate and learn about the tech, is that the tech you are looking for is the same as Google has developed. You might use a gun to defend your family from home invasions, whilst the mafia uses the gun to shoot you: Same tool, different outcome. This is the point - the outcome you are seeking, is "slightly" different to the outcome Google achieves, but the tool you are asking for is the same tool Google already is. But it's actually worse than this in that Google's gun is a biometric finger print restricted gun that will cause the mafia to literally chop your finger off in order to have future use of your gun after they've stolen it from you. I.e., you don't want more auto connection between your public and private IDs, between your gun and your (~biometric) identifiers. Look into history and who and how they changed the world - there are a few examples like Gandhi, and rarely did they change the world with the gun - of course the (((Bolsheviks))) changed Russia by exterminating Russians by the 20 to 40 million, and so perhaps there's a lesson there for us about the different approaches to systemic change? Good luck to us all,

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 03:26:19PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:

On 2017-06-04 14:15, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

Steve's point, as shared with those who investigate and learn about the tech, is that the tech you are looking for is the same as Google has developed.

You might use a gun to defend your family from home invasions, whilst the mafia uses the gun to shoot you:

Same tool, different outcome.

Fundamentally different, indeed directly opposite, tools. One to reveal, one to conceal.

Your tool, the one you are --hoping-- exists, does not exist, cannot exist. Different folks keep trying to say this to you in different ways. Logically, what you want, cannot exist. You can't proceduralize trust. Your hope to the contrary is completely ill founded. If you can conceive of your secret handshake, go implement it, and folks here will gladly game it (along with every TLA agency in existence).

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 18:42:53 +1000 "James A. Donald" wrote:

We, in fact, already have numerous secret chat rooms and blogs. They work. We have in fact proceduralized trust.

The problem is that they need to integrate with with non secret chat rooms and blogs without leaking their existence to outsiders.

I can't believe james is that stupid. Such level of stupidity is almost shocking. Then again, people who are good at math but retarded at basic logical reasoning are common. Or perhaps his real name is o'brien.

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 18:48:30 +1000 "James A. Donald" wrote:

On 2017-06-04 16:40, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

Logically, what you want, cannot exist. You can't proceduralize trust. Your hope to the contrary is completely ill founded.

Secret handshakes - members of groups advertising their membership of an ingroup to potential ingroup members

the potential 'ingroup' members don't know the 'secret handshake'. If they did they would be actual members. fail at identity principle

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 16:18:55 +1000 "James A. Donald" wrote:

They are "potential" in that person A does not know that person B is actual fellow member of the ingroup.

so to make this a bit more clear, person A is a 'newbie' and person B is a grand wizard...

Thus, for person B, person B is an actual member of the ingroup, and person A is a potential member

but for person A, person B is a potential member of the ingroup and person A is a potential member.

ok

The problem is that we want person A to be able to find out that person B is a member of the ingroup, without person C finding out that person B is a member of the ingroup.

that's just a matter of A and B using a 'secure' channel. Like...tor!! Apart from that, I'm not seeing anything novel about the problem or the solution. And of course the other age old problem is that A, or B, or both may indeed be spies, so their knowing a 'secret' handshake wouldn't necessarily prove that they are bona fide actors instead of spies.

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 18:43:28 +1000 "James A. Donald" wrote:

...

...

They are "potential" in that person A does not know that person B is actual fellow member of the ingroup.

On 2017-06-05 16:54, juan wrote:

...

so to make this a bit more clear, person A is a 'newbie' and person B is a grand wizard...

No.

You are a moron, or else you are willfully misunderstanding my entirely plain words.

Funny - if there's a misunderstanding it's not willfull on my part. So, from my point of view, you are a moron who can't coherently explain whatever he's trying to explain.