[3] sampling continued

[Lee Azzarello]

This class blew my mind

https://www.coursera.org/course/crypto

Helped understand how much logic is subverted.

-lee

On Saturday, September 14, 2013, brian carroll wrote:

>
> // 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 ex
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 21120 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20130914/da35574e/attachment-0001.txt>