Re: What is the value of the State?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 01:59:32PM -0400, John Newman wrote:
> 
> 
> > On May 13, 2017, at 10:46 AM, Steven Schear  wrote:
> > 
> > Michael Crichton's famous lecture drops the mike on consensus vs. science 
> > and should be required reading for anyone with an open mind on this topic.
> > 
> > 
> > http://www.burtonsys.com/climate/Aliens_Cause_Global_Warming_by_Michael_Crichton.html
> > 
> > 
> 
> A shitty novelist points out that science has been wrong in the
> past,

You highlight Crichton's point perfectly - that shitty science from
the past that he spoke of is not, was not, and never shall be
science, it was merely "science", political social movements dressed
up as "concensus science".

And here you are, once again, smack bang in the trap this has set for
your weak mind - calling past "science" as science, instead of the
politics it is.

And anyway, what the hell has Michael Crichton's novel writing
ability got to do with the clear, succinct and slightly humorous
facts he raises in his essay/talk??


> that predicting the future is hard, and that some equations
> are basically guesses (e.g. the drake equation). Of course,
> everyone has known this, including Drake and the SETI people, from

Did you even read the whole thing?

The problem is that previously 'revered' rags like "Scientific
American" have become the Popes of "concensus science", destroying
actual scientific take downs of their cherished political dogma.


> day one (although there have been remarkable advances in the
> ability to detect exoplanets recently, thanks mainly to the kepler
> space telescope). What deep insight. 
> 
> It's funny how the biggest skeptics on climate science tend to
> either be funded by the petroleum (and related) industry (these are
> the few that publish studies) OR have no real scientific background
> and are generally right-wing/conservatives or massively
> conspiracy-inclined. 

Since you have no basis in science, of course we ought to have
predicted your typical decent into ad-hominen.


> > Warrant Canary creator
> 
> Did not create warrant canary,
> John
> 
> 
> > 
> >> On May 13, 2017 4:51 AM, "Zenaan Harkness"  wrote:
> >> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 08:27:43PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
> >> > If you have read the climategate files, you will know that the new
> >> > scientific method, the method of official science, is to determine
> >> > the truth by consensus, then look for evidence to support that
> >> > official truth, while ignoring or suppressing any contrary
> >> > evidence, and if evidence cannot be found to support official
> >> > truth, to just make the evidence up.
> >> 
> >> This last bit "make the evidence up" is done with "scientific" models
> >> - often retrospective data curve fitting - and this is the problem
> >> they (govt paid "Scientist"s) have at the moment, their nice hockey
> >> stick curves (from the 1980s?) were modelled perfectly for the data,
> >> to fit the desired "scientific" outcome, and now the new data doesn't
> >> fit the desired hockey stick outcome, so ridiculous "scientific"
> >> explanations are trotted out, from "a global pause in global warming"
> >> to "important data points not previously included in the model" and
> >> other hogwash pseudo-"science" designed to regenerate the hockey
> >> stick.
> >> 
> >> It's political bullshit, not science. They know it. We know. Anyone
> >> self respecting adherent to the actual scientific method knows it.
> >> But a lot of propaganda to the contrary of the scientific methods is
> >> identifying religious nuts to the discerning, which from one view is
> >> a public service - just not worth anywhere near the "public"
> >> theft-money spent on such "science" propaganda.

Re: What is the value of the State?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 10:20:11AM -0700, Steven Schear wrote:
> As I mentioned, cosmology is another field whose theories also can never be
> conclusively proven and despite massive consensus will remain just that:
> only opinion.

Well I for one am very s[ck]eptical about this particular assertion -
the Talls might just drop in and make a -public- appearance, and
provide a lot of data about neighbouring galaxies.

I'm sure we'll --never-- travel faster than the speed of sound ..


> Here Hawking et al fume at those opposing one of their
> cherished theories and the unmitigated gaul to play the Scientific Method
> "card".
> 
> https://www.sciencealert.com/stephen-hawking-and-32-top-physicists-just-signed-a-heated-letter-on-the-origin-of-the-universe
> 
> Warrant Canary creator
> 
> On May 13, 2017 7:46 AM, "Steven Schear"  wrote:
> 
> > Michael Crichton's famous lecture drops the mike on consensus vs. science
> > and should be required reading for anyone with an open mind on this topic.
> >
> >
> > http://www.burtonsys.com/climate/Aliens_Cause_Global_Warming
> > _by_Michael_Crichton.html
> >
> >
> > Warrant Canary creator
> >
> > On May 13, 2017 4:51 AM, "Zenaan Harkness"  wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 08:27:43PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
> >> > If you have read the climategate files, you will know that the new
> >> > scientific method, the method of official science, is to determine
> >> > the truth by consensus, then look for evidence to support that
> >> > official truth, while ignoring or suppressing any contrary
> >> > evidence, and if evidence cannot be found to support official
> >> > truth, to just make the evidence up.
> >>
> >> This last bit "make the evidence up" is done with "scientific" models
> >> - often retrospective data curve fitting - and this is the problem
> >> they (govt paid "Scientist"s) have at the moment, their nice hockey
> >> stick curves (from the 1980s?) were modelled perfectly for the data,
> >> to fit the desired "scientific" outcome, and now the new data doesn't
> >> fit the desired hockey stick outcome, so ridiculous "scientific"
> >> explanations are trotted out, from "a global pause in global warming"
> >> to "important data points not previously included in the model" and
> >> other hogwash pseudo-"science" designed to regenerate the hockey
> >> stick.
> >>
> >> It's political bullshit, not science. They know it. We know. Anyone
> >> self respecting adherent to the actual scientific method knows it.
> >> But a lot of propaganda to the contrary of the scientific methods is
> >> identifying religious nuts to the discerning, which from one view is
> >> a public service - just not worth anywhere near the "public"
> >> theft-money spent on such "science" propaganda.
> >>
> >

Re: What is the value of the State?

[juan]

On Sat, 13 May 2017 13:59:32 -0400
John Newman  wrote:

> 
> It's funny how the biggest skeptics on climate science tend to either
> be funded by the petroleum (and related) industry 

ah, a conspiracy theory? ^-^


>(these are the few
> that publish studies) OR have no real scientific background and are
> generally right-wing/conservatives or massively conspiracy-inclined. 

see above. 

And of course the enviros and official 'scientists'
are funded by the state and there's a 'green' lobby lobbying
for 'green' industries.  But that's not something any
anarchist or even rational observer should give a damn about. 

Re: What is the value of the State?

[John Newman]

> On May 13, 2017, at 10:46 AM, Steven Schear  wrote:
> 
> Michael Crichton's famous lecture drops the mike on consensus vs. science and 
> should be required reading for anyone with an open mind on this topic.
> 
> 
> http://www.burtonsys.com/climate/Aliens_Cause_Global_Warming_by_Michael_Crichton.html
> 
> 

A shitty novelist points out that science has been wrong in the past, that 
predicting the future is hard, and that some equations are basically guesses 
(e.g. the drake equation). Of course, everyone has known this, including Drake 
and the SETI people, from day one (although there have been remarkable advances 
in the ability to detect exoplanets recently, thanks mainly to the kepler space 
telescope). What deep insight. 

It's funny how the biggest skeptics on climate science tend to either be funded 
by the petroleum (and related) industry (these are the few that publish 
studies) OR have no real scientific background and are generally 
right-wing/conservatives or massively conspiracy-inclined. 



> Warrant Canary creator

Did not create warrant canary,
John


> 
>> On May 13, 2017 4:51 AM, "Zenaan Harkness"  wrote:
>> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 08:27:43PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
>> > If you have read the climategate files, you will know that the new
>> > scientific method, the method of official science, is to determine
>> > the truth by consensus, then look for evidence to support that
>> > official truth, while ignoring or suppressing any contrary
>> > evidence, and if evidence cannot be found to support official
>> > truth, to just make the evidence up.
>> 
>> This last bit "make the evidence up" is done with "scientific" models
>> - often retrospective data curve fitting - and this is the problem
>> they (govt paid "Scientist"s) have at the moment, their nice hockey
>> stick curves (from the 1980s?) were modelled perfectly for the data,
>> to fit the desired "scientific" outcome, and now the new data doesn't
>> fit the desired hockey stick outcome, so ridiculous "scientific"
>> explanations are trotted out, from "a global pause in global warming"
>> to "important data points not previously included in the model" and
>> other hogwash pseudo-"science" designed to regenerate the hockey
>> stick.
>> 
>> It's political bullshit, not science. They know it. We know. Anyone
>> self respecting adherent to the actual scientific method knows it.
>> But a lot of propaganda to the contrary of the scientific methods is
>> identifying religious nuts to the discerning, which from one view is
>> a public service - just not worth anywhere near the "public"
>> theft-money spent on such "science" propaganda.

Re: What is the value of the State?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 01:16:16AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> imagination. Or something :-Dξꟾ

By the way, this character: ꟾ
should appear as a vertical bar - it does not with X
-misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--10-100-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1
(6x10) font, so perhaps someone will leap in and add this wretched
but simple "classical Latin alphabet character".

:D

Re: What is the value of the State?

[Zenaan Harkness]

Perfectly apropos. Really enjoyed this link (or rather, the text
behind the link). Grazios!

(Indeed, it's as apropos as your top posting is uselessly contrary
to the thread as it was and to our general expectations for
this list which are thus heedlessly, needlessly, a rapping and
a tappingly dashed on the rockingly unrocklike rocks of our
imagination. Or something :-Dξꟾ

Regards,
ξ


On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 07:46:58AM -0700, Steven Schear wrote:
> Michael Crichton's famous lecture drops the mike on consensus vs. science
> and should be required reading for anyone with an open mind on this topic.
> 
> 
> http://www.burtonsys.com/climate/Aliens_Cause_Global_
> Warming_by_Michael_Crichton.html
> 
> 
> Warrant Canary creator
> 
> On May 13, 2017 4:51 AM, "Zenaan Harkness"  wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 08:27:43PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
> > > If you have read the climategate files, you will know that the new
> > > scientific method, the method of official science, is to determine
> > > the truth by consensus, then look for evidence to support that
> > > official truth, while ignoring or suppressing any contrary
> > > evidence, and if evidence cannot be found to support official
> > > truth, to just make the evidence up.
> >
> > This last bit "make the evidence up" is done with "scientific" models
> > - often retrospective data curve fitting - and this is the problem
> > they (govt paid "Scientist"s) have at the moment, their nice hockey
> > stick curves (from the 1980s?) were modelled perfectly for the data,
> > to fit the desired "scientific" outcome, and now the new data doesn't
> > fit the desired hockey stick outcome, so ridiculous "scientific"
> > explanations are trotted out, from "a global pause in global warming"
> > to "important data points not previously included in the model" and
> > other hogwash pseudo-"science" designed to regenerate the hockey
> > stick.
> >
> > It's political bullshit, not science. They know it. We know. Anyone
> > self respecting adherent to the actual scientific method knows it.
> > But a lot of propaganda to the contrary of the scientific methods is
> > identifying religious nuts to the discerning, which from one view is
> > a public service - just not worth anywhere near the "public"
> > theft-money spent on such "science" propaganda.
> >

Re: What is the value of the State?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 08:27:43PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
> If you have read the climategate files, you will know that the new
> scientific method, the method of official science, is to determine
> the truth by consensus, then look for evidence to support that
> official truth, while ignoring or suppressing any contrary
> evidence, and if evidence cannot be found to support official
> truth, to just make the evidence up.

This last bit "make the evidence up" is done with "scientific" models
- often retrospective data curve fitting - and this is the problem
they (govt paid "Scientist"s) have at the moment, their nice hockey
stick curves (from the 1980s?) were modelled perfectly for the data,
to fit the desired "scientific" outcome, and now the new data doesn't
fit the desired hockey stick outcome, so ridiculous "scientific"
explanations are trotted out, from "a global pause in global warming"
to "important data points not previously included in the model" and
other hogwash pseudo-"science" designed to regenerate the hockey
stick.

It's political bullshit, not science. They know it. We know. Anyone
self respecting adherent to the actual scientific method knows it.
But a lot of propaganda to the contrary of the scientific methods is
identifying religious nuts to the discerning, which from one view is
a public service - just not worth anywhere near the "public"
theft-money spent on such "science" propaganda.

Re: What is the value of the State?

[James A. Donald]

If you have read the climategate files, you will know that the new 
scientific method, the method of official science, is to determine the 
truth by consensus, then look for evidence to support that official 
truth, while ignoring or suppressing any contrary evidence, and if 
evidence cannot be found to support official truth, to just make the 
evidence up.

Re: Alleged Wannacrypt priv key

[b0z0]

Turns out this is probably just the private key used to decrypt the DLL. 
The public key is probably what's used to encrypt the AES key.



hmm.




https://twitter.com/Zenexer/status/863189259821428738


Can anyone confirm?



b...@sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org



b...@sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

Wannacrypt0r-FACTSHEET.md

[b0z0]

https://gist.github.com/rain-1/989428fa5504f378b993ee6efbc0b168


b...@sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

Re: Keylogger Found in Audio Driver of HP Laptops

[Georgi Guninski]

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 07:09:36PM -0700, Razer wrote:
> H/t @Liberationtech @twitter
> https://twitter.com/Liberationtech/status/862849917806661634
> >
> > The audio driver installed on some HP laptops includes a feature that
> > could best be described as a keylogger, which records all the user's
> > keystrokes and saves the information to a local file, accessible to
> > anyone or any third-party software or malware that knows where to look.
> >

Someone should audit the other direction:  does the keyboard driver logs
the microphone?