The Unbreakable Cipher (2)

[brian carroll]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:11 AM, John Young <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:

>
> Is this conclusion still valid? If so, what could be done to restrict
> traffic
> volume to assure unbreakablility? And how to sufficiently test that.
> Presuming that NSA and cohorts have investigated this effect.
>

 no- not for a multilinear/nonlinear bit set approach. voluminous data
exchange
 and not censoring throughput (given ability to correlate elsewhere, delayed
 or real-time; thus store+forward)  and allowing inaccurate modeling of data
 via ideological rationalizations turns that limited analysis back against
itself
 as truth is secure, folding the framework via collapsing pseudo-truth and
falsity,
 recontextualizing the shared situation, establishing new zones of
interaction
 and unmapped boundaries that do not coherently correlate within existing
 models of analysis, instead breaking them. versus propping them up via
 following their rules and dictates that seek to limit and censor
interactions
 as a basis for secrets or sustaining false-perspectives, seemingly often
for
 self-preservation of legacy systems versus allowing collapse, deterioration
 or loss of control over what occurs- freedom in relation to governance
versus
 its constriction, choking what can happen, to keep it finite, bound, gagged

 hypothetical, the massive influx of data (in truth) that is wrongly
assessed
 (as pT) via limited observer established zone of secure interaction by
default
 of its own false framework and incapacity to account for what does not
exist
 in its categorization- any move toward accommodation is ideological
weakness
 and falsifies belief system. it is to overwhelm with data that cannot be
grounded
 in the false framework and its ungrounded evaluation undermines the
existing
 inaccurate view because it yields less and less in the limited perspective.
 flooding the corrupt oversight with what amounts to pseudo-truth, allowing
 any and all correlations to fever circuits- it breaks the rationalization
model
 by forcing decision-making that tends towards falsity, as it is ungrounded
 and the more it decides, the more it persists and expands itself in error.

 transparency in truth, a shared domain, remains a secret and a secure
 realm insofar as it cannot be accessed, perceived, or altered in the
 dimensions it exists- seemingly only censored, stopped, or attacked
 which forces polarization, ramps up potential dynamics, and creates
 conditions for extreme actions that can force or break hidden systems
 via operating beyond their known boundary or losing stealth advantage

 in some ways it may be like reverse radar, what they see is the entire
 radar field as the signal, potentially, unable to distinguish its value or
 meaning or interpret what is happening in vast many different frames
 simultaneously, keying in and out, leading to massa confusa...

 (perhaps equivalent to big bang inflation of a paralleled universe)

 ♃ ♃
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20130925/b70e28ef/attachment.html>