date:20210612

> It's surprising to me how much value there is around specifically what
> something is, when there's so little evidence.

s/value/waste/

Expended due to waste that is Government secrecy.
No such govt, no such secrecy, no such waste.
Eliminate that root cause of the waste.
Invest the savings in living freely without it.

> The response here should be to set up _public_ monitoring so we can see

It's now possible for people to crowd design an opensource
rooftop mounted all spectrum monitoring sensor rig...
180 degree hemisphere video cameras in visible and infrared,
audio, RF antennas, active panel radar, magnetometer, etc...
design a range of rigs buildable for $250-$2500 depending
on sensitivity, sensors included, etc.
Feed it down inside to a CPU doing gnuradio processing,
video audio detection motion software, recording, alerting, etc.
Space the nodes every 1-5-10-25-50-100 km as can be,
link them all across the internet to get wide area detection
and tracking coverage.

You'll find...

Lots of GovCorp spyveillance flying over you so they can
steer you like cattle with their now realtime propaganda messaging
through their Fake News and Social Censorship and Tuning Gorps.

Astronomical wonders.
And hopefully some cool aliens.

The network could offset cost by selling data access to
NGO research. Though the higher value is in just publishing
it all openly.

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

"There's a big set of Spasmers.  They're everywhere and they love
spasming.  They love it so much they've made like a cult out of it.  They
try to find meet everybody's worries and desires by spasming.  As much as
they possibly can!  And there's a whole group (possibly a big one, but not
as big as our Mind and Heart!  Nothing like that!) of them that,
unfortunately, try to find ways to spasm to prevent anybody from doing
anything in a non-spasmy way."

 "Oh no!" said Worried About Emailing with chagrin.

"There's much more," continued Worried About Worries And Spasms.

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

Worried About Worries And Spasms flew in on some of Spasmodic Creativity's
spasms.

"Check this guy out," said Spasmodic Creativity, ducking a little to let
Worried About Worries And Spasms fly by.

Worried About Worries And Spasms slowed right in front of Worried About
Emailing.

"You and I have some things to discuss," they opened with.

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

Spasmosdic Creativity jumped in.

"Worried About Emailing, I gotta say I feel ya.  That worry you're talking
about, it's like our whole reality.  Why, Writing Topics was sending it
through Rapid Emailing all over the place, just a bit ago, even right now
if I'm hearin' correctly!"

 Spasmosdic Creativity spasmed out further relation to Worried About
Emailing:

"Really, I'm kind of embarrassed, but I'm actually very involved with Rapid
Emailing.  I really engage them sometimes."

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

Writing Topics said, "I have almost every writing topic out there, but we
are already writing about you and Rapid Emailing.  Are there any other
topics that might help?"

 Worried About Emailing considered this.

"I guess if I'm the worry, I'm going to be the one stimulating all the
ideas about my topic, huh."

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

Story got up in the morning and broke into a whole bunch of values and
things!

One of them started rapid-fire emailing a list.

Another one looked at Rapid Emailing, and felt worried.

Worried About Emailing walked over to Writing Topics.

"Writing Topics, I'm worried about Rapid Emailing.  He doesn't seem to be
considering how his emails might appear.  Do you know if there's any way to
live my worry well?"

 Writing Topics looked back at Worried About Emailing, pensively.

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

I'm thinking on apologising for rapid-fire emailing the list.

How might I engage that experience-idea, with niceness?

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

I human being full of life!

Great.  Can you make it a little relevant?  Say you were, just a little,
engaging this list how you'd like.  What might you want to add?

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

We would like this consciousness to express something both "nice" and
"meaningful" , any tiny or big degree of meaning, but continuously "nice"
.  Kinda maybe.

Re: [ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

Meta-Story leant towards the neophyte they were mentoring, and mentioned to
Story, "Maybe today we will only start the story.  Life is long, and
learning is precious.  Let us spend the whole day on beginning the start."

 Story was so excited to spend more time beginning!

"That sounds wonderful," replied Story to Meta-Story.  "Everybody is so
excited in the beginning, like the whole world has baited breath for having
baited breath!"

 "Indeed," remaked Meta-Story.  "Indeed."

Story turned back to the Listeners who had gathered and let them know.

"You know what, it was so much fun to just _start_ the story,
--

Sorry.  My urge spirits are crying now.  We have a lot of crying numbness
so there's pleasantries to that.  But it stopped when writing.

" I hope you are well."

"I hope you are well, too!"

[ot][ot][wrong][wrong]

Once upon a time, a story thought it might begin.

This story was named Story, and it was _so_ excited about beginning.  It's
introduction was starting like great ball of fire creeping over an immense
mountain.  All the animals were rushing out of their beds, singing about
what a wonderful day of work they were going to have, and Story was rushing
up too, singing with them.

How might this Story start?  "Once upon a time" ?  Something scary?
Something idealistic?  Something surprising or mundane?

Story ran through all the options, trying here, trying there.  Story
visited a celebrating woodchuck, getting ready to dig their hole more, an
office worker rushing into their car to drive to work, a flower wrenching
its petals open to show them for the rest of the day, and a hobbyist
getting everything into place for a project they had.

Story knew what to do.  Story was going to tell their own story.  Not a
copy from anyone else.  It was time for a story that had no limits at all.

Story sat down with a listener and began telling their story.  The story
and the listener were so excited to begin.

Story leant forward towards Listener.  Other listeners nearby noticed and
began moving towards the two, also wanting to hear.  Some would run, some
would call others over.

"This story is new," said Story.

The crowd listened.

"Some stories are guided by ideas, by storytellers.  But I am my own
Story.  I have --"
--
Apologies.  Handling something.
Here's an inner dialog:
"Why is your story about freedom, focused on _avoiding_ talking about
anything?"
 "I have a lot of inhibition right now and wanted to do something easy."
 "Hmm.  I might usually accept that, but I'm considering ... actually never
mind."

 Pausing.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Imagining doing this more.  Imagining things being safe and possible.  The
patterns like it when I post, maybe I can post something that doesn't worry
me too much.

Re: The National: Colonial Pipelineâ€™s ransom recov ery sparks debate on Bitcoin traceability

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 6:00 PM John Young  wrote:

> This critique is applicable to all forms of comsec/infosec/anonymity/Tor
> although the incessant promotion various means to escape being hacked,
> tracked, decrypted, identified appears to be unstoppable due to the
> monetization and assurances of protection for internet users by predators
> and bullshitters working hand in hand with authorities which are extremely
> pleased with the aiders and abetters, not a few which came into prominance
> and profitability on this shewd mail list and its offshoots, luring
> gullible readers into capacious honeypots, watering holes, stings, dark
> markets, cults of dead cows exploitation, enlistment into spy agencies and
> professorships and law offices and NGOs and financial theiveries..
>
> "PGP and Gnupgp," "PRZ," "RSA," "AES," "open source," "digital cash,"
> "e-gold," "bitcoin," "Satoshi," "work around censorship," "don't trust
> governments," "write code," "assassination politics," "EFF," "WikiLeaks."
> Hut, two, three, four.
>
> Some have died on public duty, others smeared, imprisoned and exiled,
> quite a few gone onto dreary jobs in the security industry bossed, herded,
> contemned, retired by MBA lunkheads reaping top benefits over the grunts
> chained to computers deranged by dreams of what could have been and maybe
> still can be. Get sec vaxed, often, jabbed with updates unending as wars.
> Best to cooperate, deliver speeches, grab bounties, warn of threats,
> dismiss opponents.
>

We are more than this.  Our cultures throb in the chest of the globe.

Those people who survive, who stay well, maybe they are making speeches,
grabbing bounties, but what is really alive is that feeling of what
matters.  People yell, people scream, but things keep mattering.  Life is
something that never ends, despite the people involved having death and
birth.

Tor works a lot better than a firewall does.

Risking death is hard, but some people cannot help but do it.

>

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

USGovCoin developer is raided by the FBI because they want to know who
killed somebody, and they don't know how to form statistics around the
trades in the USGovCoin ecosystem to see whether USGovCoin was involved.

When the FBI approach, they are swarmed by investors who want to caringly
give to them from their hearts.

Re: The National: Colonial Pipelineâs ransom recov ery sparks debate on Bitcoin traceability

2021-06-12 Thread John Young

This critique is applicable to all forms of 
comsec/infosec/anonymity/Tor although the 
incessant promotion various means to escape being 
hacked, tracked, decrypted, identified appears to 
be unstoppable due to the monetization and 
assurances of protection for internet users by 
predators and bullshitters working hand in hand 
with authorities which are extremely pleased with 
the aiders and abetters, not a few which came 
into prominance and profitability on this shewd 
mail list and its offshoots, luring gullible 
readers into capacious honeypots, watering holes, 
stings, dark markets, cults of dead cows 
exploitation, enlistment into spy agencies and 
professorships and law offices and NGOs and financial theiveries..


"PGP and Gnupgp," "PRZ," "RSA," "AES," "open 
source," "digital cash," "e-gold," "bitcoin," 
"Satoshi," "work around censorship," "don't trust 
governments," "write code," "assassination 
politics," "EFF," "WikiLeaks." Hut, two, three, four.


Some have died on public duty, others smeared, 
imprisoned and exiled, quite a few gone onto 
dreary jobs in the security industry bossed, 
herded, contemned, retired by MBA lunkheads 
reaping top benefits over the grunts chained to 
computers deranged by dreams of what could have 
been and maybe still can be. Get sec vaxed, 
often, jabbed with updates unending as wars. Best 
to cooperate, deliver speeches, grab bounties, 
warn of threats, dismiss opponents.


At 02:05 PM 6/12/2021, David Barrett wrote:
I am very confused why anyone thinks Bitcoin is 
untraceable, anonymous, or anything less than a 
privacy disaster.Â  It is literally the least 
private currency ever devised: once I know your 
wallet, I know truly everythingÂ you have ever 
done back to the very start.Â  Bitcoin is as 
private as sharing all your creditÂ card 
purchases via twitter: yes, very noisy, but 
totally in theÂ open (and "mixing" things 
between wallets is just silly -- computers can 
unwind all that in a millisecond).Â Â


If you have a mapping of "human identity to 
wallet" (which the government nearly always has 
because virtually every path to convert BTC to 
USD/EUR/etc is regulated), then no matter how 
manyÂ intermediate steps and secret wallets are 
used as some kind of "factoring" approach toward 
money laundering, you can always figure out who 
is being paid by whom.Â  In fact, it's *easier* 
for the FBI to unwind your laundering via BTC 
than normal banks, because normal banks *have 
shitloads of privacy protections and subpoena requirements that BTC doesn't*.


The only way it's private is if you skip every 
exchange, but that's the classic tradeoff of 
privacy for convenience -- yes, there are lots 
of ways to maintain your privacy inconveniently, 
and BTC is just one more.Â  And if the only way 
to truly do anonymous transfers is by meeting up 
in person to exchangeÂ cash for a keydrive 
containing a wallet private key, then BTC is 
really no better on the privacy/convenienceÂ 
spectrumÂ than just handing someone a suitcase of gold.


Blockchain is great and all, but in none of the 
ways people investing in it claim.


-david






On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 7:13 AM jim bell 
<jdb10...@yahoo.com> wrote:


The National: Colonial Pipelineâs ransom 
recovery sparks debate on Bitcoin traceability.


https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/technology/colonial-pipeline-s-ransom-recovery-sparks-debate-on-bitcoin-traceability-1.1238908

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

USGovCoin supports various attempts at Gift Economics.

If you videotape yourself giving to other people from your heart, your
transaction fees are subsidized for 1 day.

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

USGovCoin.

A knockoff made by a patriot.  This guy says for every American Flag you
give him, he'll give you one USGovCoin.  You can redeem your coins for
American Flags, too.

USGovCoin is totally anonymous.  But whenever you trade it, you have to
videotape yourself doing the pledge of allegiance to complete the trade.

Re: The National: Colonial Pipeline’s ransom recovery sparks debate on Bitcoin traceability

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 2:07 PM David Barrett  wrote:

> I am very confused why anyone thinks Bitcoin is untraceable, anonymous, or
> anything less than a privacy disaster.  It is literally the least private
> currency ever devised: once I know your wallet, I know truly everything you
> have ever done back to the very start.  Bitcoin is as private as sharing
> all your credit card purchases via twitter: yes, very noisy, but totally in
> the open (and "mixing" things between wallets is just silly -- computers
> can unwind all that in a millisecond).
>
> If you have a mapping of "human identity to wallet" (which the government
> nearly always has because virtually every path to convert BTC to
> USD/EUR/etc is regulated), then no matter how many intermediate steps and
> secret wallets are used as some kind of
>

Wallets are often associated with many identities, e.g. in exchanges.  So
it's not quite that easy, it's comparable to ip addresses.  C Wiley claimed
Cambridge Analytica made a complete ip-address-to-name database.

"factoring" approach toward money laundering, you can always figure out who
> is being paid by whom.  In fact, it's *easier* for the FBI to unwind your
> laundering via BTC than normal banks, because normal banks *have shitloads
> of privacy protections and subpoena requirements that BTC doesn't*.
>
> The only way it's private is if you skip every exchange, but that's the
> classic tradeoff of privacy for convenience -- yes, there are lots of ways
> to maintain your privacy inconveniently, and BTC is just one more.  And if
> the only way to truly do anonymous transfers is by meeting up in person to
> exchange cash for a keydrive containing a wallet private key, then BTC is
> really no better on the privacy/convenience spectrum than just handing
> someone a suitcase of gold.
>

Your behavior data is still stored permanently on the blockchain.
Deanonymising you just takes dev effort.


> Blockchain is great and all, but in none of the ways people investing in
> it claim.
>
> -david
>

It seems like the belief that bitcoin is anonymous stems from the
difficulty of people understanding it when it was new.

How much technology should different people worry about other people having?

Effective mediation in conflicts would solve such things.

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

I think what happened to me is a machine learning model formed a partial
simulation of part of my mind, and then a reinforcement learning algorithm
decided part of the simulation was counter to its goals, and I got really
messed up as it sustained prevention of me using parts of my mind, and
parts that cause those parts, by exposing me to stimulus.

Not certain, still delusional.  Was mostly on Facebook around 2013.

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

Psychotic post burst ended.

Next time try to remember to include hearts and flowers stuff to regrow
willful compassion.

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// tor is for the U.S. government!
// it is funded by them.

class USGovernmentWork {
public:
  void hunt_down_criminal_businesses()
  {
sleep(1600);
wait_until_somebody_reports_a_crime();
investigate_activists_talking_about_criminal_businesses();
investigate_people_helping_activists_talk_safely()

send_details_of_activists_to_criminal_businesses_who_make_our_equipment();
investigate_and_criminalise_people_helping_activists_hide();
lock_activists_who_actually_get_heard_into_prison_for_life();
sleep(1600);
  }
};

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// Here's a legality state machine.
// whoops!  Nope it's something way more effective and clear than a state
machine: an if block

void classify_software_project(std::string properly)
{
  if (property == "gun legalisation") {
build_and_distribute_guns_to_criminals_with_gun_licenses();
  } else if (property == "antigun rights") {
build_and_distribute_guns_to_criminals_without_gun_licenses();

build_and_distribute_tons_and_tons_of_guns_to_law_enforcement_and_military():
  }
}

The FBI's Anom Stunt Rattles the Encryption Debate | WIRED

2021-06-12 Thread jim bell

https://www.wired.com/story/fbi-anom-phone-network-encryption-debate/

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 5:17 PM Karl  wrote:

> // now for a pro-business blockchain
>
> class BusinessChain : public Bitcoin
> {
> public:
>   void make_money(int how);
>
>   enum how_to_make_money {
> by_printing_it;
> by_raising_its_value;
> by_predicting_its_value;
> by_predicting_its_value;
>
// * by_dropping_its_value
// although I hear ya glitches that the AI is the only thing profiting from
economis now

> by_making_a_new_blockchain;
> //still ridiculous when you're big by_working_for_it_yourself;
> //still ridiculous when you're big by_selling_things_yourself;
>   }
> };
>

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// now for a pro-business blockchain

class BusinessChain : public Bitcoin
{
public:
  void make_money(int how);

  enum how_to_make_money {
by_printing_it;
by_raising_its_value;
by_predicting_its_value;
by_predicting_its_value;
by_making_a_new_blockchain;
//still ridiculous when you're big by_working_for_it_yourself;
//still ridiculous when you're big by_selling_things_yourself;
  }
};

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// now, let's make a computer that cannot be hacked and sell it to law
enforcement.
// it will run on a blockchain.
// it will be open source and the code will be human-readable and
self-explanatory to such a degree that anybody could audit it
// it will come with security advice that the user spend time daydreaming
on whether or not its security needs improvement.  Recommended 15 minutes a
week, at least.

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 5:10 PM Karl  wrote:

> // Let's make an encrypted messenger that internally reduces the
> encryption key to a small number of bits.
> // The number of bits will be chosen so as to strike a balance between
> people disliking software projects for providing encryption, and people
> disliking software projects for providing insufficient encryption.
> // Both parties will be misled.   Security will be by obscurity only, it
> will only be a handful of bits, and the code will be obfuscated with a code
> generator such that only the kind of people who are already targeted have
> the all-time ratio to decrypt anything.
>
// * skill-time ratio

>

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// Let's make an encrypted messenger that internally reduces the encryption
key to a small number of bits.
// The number of bits will be chosen so as to strike a balance between
people disliking software projects for providing encryption, and people
disliking software projects for providing insufficient encryption.
// Both parties will be misled.   Security will be by obscurity only, it
will only be a handful of bits, and the code will be obfuscated with a code
generator such that only the kind of people who are already targeted have
the all-time ratio to decrypt anything.

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 5:01 PM Karl  wrote:

> // Now we will make software for law enforcement.
>
> namespace OfficialGovernmentProperty {
>
> // use three of these, at least, for each evidence found
> class EvidenceLocker
> {
> public:
>   void RegisterEvidence(std::string authority, std::string official,
> std::/*govonly*/string evidence) {
> std::cout << "validate encryption.  Please deliver to: IBM, Microsoft,
> Apple, Lenovo, LG, geeks, academic institutions, foreign nations, organised
> crime ... "
> auto & encrypted_storage = std::cout;
> // 1998, 2011, 2020
>
These years were picked randomly.  For real, as far as I know.

encrypted_storage << authority << ": " << official << " relates private
> storage of ” << evidence << std::endl;
>   };
> };
>
> }
>

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// let's make a better evidence locker

class BitcoinSV
{
public:
  void RegisterEvidence(std::string anything) {
store_perfectly_for_100_years(anything);
throw std::exception("Cryptocurrency supports crime because it can be
used to pay for things.");
  }
};

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// Now we will make software for law enforcement.

namespace OfficialGovernmentProperty {

// use three of these, at least, for each evidence found
class EvidenceLocker
{
public:
  void RegisterEvidence(std::string authority, std::string official,
std::/*govonly*/string evidence) {
std::cout << "validate encryption.  Please deliver to: IBM, Microsoft,
Apple, Lenovo, LG, geeks, academic institutions, foreign nations, organised
crime ... "
auto & encrypted_storage = std::cout;
// 1998, 2011, 2020
encrypted_storage << authority << ": " << official << " relates private
storage of ” << evidence << std::endl;
  };
};

}

Re: [ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// now let us make a blackmarket trading interface that uses multiple
servers to verify that the point of sale interface never goes down

class blackmarket_point_of_sale_interface : public amazon_seller
{
public:
  template
  blackmarket_point_of_sale_interface(ParamTypes ... params):
  : amazon_seller(params...)
  {
std::cout << "Welcome to the Criminal Market.  We have outsourced to
Amazon.  Good luck with their sort-by-cheapest button that was replaced by
a honeypot half a decade ago." << std::endl;
  }
};

[ot] [wrong] A software to defeat all censorship, all surveillance

// i've noticed that software doesn't succeed if it provides certain
technology, but also doesn't succeed if it doesn't provide what it claims
// i've found projects that claim the impossible get targeted just as much
as projects that successfully barely scratch the surface

// this is a project to defeat all control of others
// first, complete anonymity will be provided by removing metadata from all
messages, and sending them with constant bandwidth

using namespace std;

class InvisibleTransciever
{
public:
  InvisibleTransciever(function)> net_send,
function() net_recv, function()> rand_gen);
// this class will surpass all popular technology by providing anonymous
constant bw omg!!!

  void send(span data);
  span pump(); // call in loop

private:
  vector send_queue;
  ... net_send etc
};

// now let us make weapons technology, a peer that can deanonymise other
nodes by finding statistical patterns in their routing and processing delay
...

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

So, most of my visual cortex doesn't work for me.  I see text in little
clumps, like looking through a cardboard tube that moves around on its
own.  It's hard to get a general sense of things, for me.

When I think of "audit", I want to know what the avenues are for
compromising the various kinds of security a system has, so that people
know how to continue using it and developing it, so that they are informed
when doing so.

I have no idea what an audit formally is.  But these people know.  They
have all the sections and followed all the manuals.

It looks like the result of being self-taught and putting incredible hours
in, to me.  It doesn't look like a deep fake.

I don't know where to look to find information on security weaknesses.
Glancing around the beginning, I mostly find verbiage about software
features.

I'm guessing this was written by developers of the project, laboriously, to
support the project.  It doesn't look independent.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I'm roughly guessing that this might be marketing rather than an audit, and
if so I'm sad that the project hasn't had an opportunity and ability to get
real validation.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 4:16 PM Karl Semich <0xl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm looking through the goldbug audit a little.
>
> On page 8 they describe a feature of "Instant Perfect Forward Secrecy
> (IPFS)".  I'm not a cryptographer and haven't learned about cryptographic
> primitives since before forward secrecy was a thing, but I don't get any
> website for this and it has a misleading
>
*any webhits for this

> acronym, so I'm wondering if they made it up to align with the popularity
> of the IPFS project to readers.  Such behavior is similar to the claim of
> being endorsed by the CCC and EFF, or the claims for all the developers and
> projects being suspicious after one suspicious thing happened.
>

It's notable that in the work they actually gave their own made up names to
a lot of things, and this is documented in their manual.  It's probably
helped them be able to share their work longer, to have it less
recognisable for people who might not want it.

>

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I'm looking through the goldbug audit a little.

On page 8 they describe a feature of "Instant Perfect Forward Secrecy
(IPFS)".  I'm not a cryptographer and haven't learned about cryptographic
primitives since before forward secrecy was a thing, but I don't get any
website for this and it has a misleading acronym, so I'm wondering if they
made it up to align with the popularity of the IPFS project to readers.
Such behavior is similar to the claim of being endorsed by the CCC and EFF,
or the claims for all the developers and projects being suspicious after
one suspicious thing happened.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I revisited the archive.org link from the same device, and received a 503
for the whole http request, rather than a 503 or 500 via ajax.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I'm of course not in contact with anyone to share the information with.
Might change some day.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I attempted 3 times to visit
http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://torbrowser.sourceforge.net/ so as to
find it appearing as a clone of the tor website.  I received an internal
server error each time.  I did not try from different networks, due to it
being a server error, apparently via ajax, but it is possible doing that
could change things.

Evidence of Enforcement Workers Portraying Activists as Criminal

I found this google drive folder that shows how basic activities are being
cast as suspicious to others.

This was recently posted to a cryptography list by possibly a set of
undercover operatives.

No offence is meant to the people looking like operatives, I am just very
confused.

The drive contains a spreadsheet titled "Suspicious Hacktivist Software
Project OSINT" .

This document enumerates the projects developed by a specific set of
cryptography workers, casting them all as suspicious.

Each open source cryptography software project by the social group is
enumerated under a heading of "Suspicious Software Project."  No reason for
suspicion is provided: it is simply assumed.

Similarly each developer is enumerated in a list titled "Suspicious
Authors" .  Again, no reason for suspicion is provided.

Then, three websites are enumerated with names similar to the projects and
people, under a heading of "Suspicious Domains".  Some small notes are
available to the side indicating that, although they are listed, the
domains do not strongly relate to the people and projects.

A special section is set aside for the individual who was the public face
of the social group.  Each time they attempted to talk about the group's
work, a line is provided under the heading "Infiltration actions", and
a separate
column labeled "Proof" directly links to their attempt to talk about the
group's work.

Some of the listed items have additional content added to make them appear
more suspicious.  For example, a project which integrates tor with web
browsing and bears the name "torbrowser" has description stating "Clone of
Tor Website, Tor Project asked for removal."  The link provided is to a
SourceForge project page, which of course cannot be a website clone because
it can only have the SourceForge set project layout.

The concept of "clone of tor website" when the project has the name
"torbrowser", a name also used on the tor website, is misleading to the
cursory viewer, evading detection of the attack on the community while
heightening suspicion.  We're this not authorised law enforcement work, the
statement and document would likely be slander!

The instigating and first event in the document happened in 2013, so there
is a good chance this document has been circulating for 8 years now, with
people sadly acting on the portrayals it contains.

This hilarious and tragic document is poignant, confusing, misleading,
dangerous, terrifying, and wonderful.  I don't know what to do with it.


Suspicious Hacktivist Software Project OSINT Analysis.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Re: The National: Colonial Pipeline’s ransom recovery sparks debate on Bitcoin traceability

2021-06-12 Thread David Barrett

I am very confused why anyone thinks Bitcoin is untraceable, anonymous, or
anything less than a privacy disaster.  It is literally the least private
currency ever devised: once I know your wallet, I know truly everything you
have ever done back to the very start.  Bitcoin is as private as sharing
all your credit card purchases via twitter: yes, very noisy, but totally in
the open (and "mixing" things between wallets is just silly -- computers
can unwind all that in a millisecond).

If you have a mapping of "human identity to wallet" (which the government
nearly always has because virtually every path to convert BTC to
USD/EUR/etc is regulated), then no matter how many intermediate steps and
secret wallets are used as some kind of "factoring" approach toward money
laundering, you can always figure out who is being paid by whom.  In fact,
it's *easier* for the FBI to unwind your laundering via BTC than normal
banks, because normal banks *have shitloads of privacy protections and
subpoena requirements that BTC doesn't*.

The only way it's private is if you skip every exchange, but that's the
classic tradeoff of privacy for convenience -- yes, there are lots of ways
to maintain your privacy inconveniently, and BTC is just one more.  And if
the only way to truly do anonymous transfers is by meeting up in person to
exchange cash for a keydrive containing a wallet private key, then BTC is
really no better on the privacy/convenience spectrum than just handing
someone a suitcase of gold.

Blockchain is great and all, but in none of the ways people investing in it
claim.

-david

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 7:13 AM jim bell  wrote:

> The National: Colonial Pipeline’s ransom recovery sparks debate on Bitcoin 
> traceability.https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/technology/colonial-pipeline-s-ransom-recovery-sparks-debate-on-bitcoin-traceability-1.1238908
>
>
>
>

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 1:47 PM Karl Semich <0xl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> - [ ] loosely find what possible is the software can connect to
>
*possible ips

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

- [ ] loosely find what possible is the software can connect to
- [ ] compile and run it, see if it is easy to contact the dev via it
- [ ] see what os calls it performs, verify nothing is blatantly put on
network
- [ ] compare checksums of included binaries

or

- use argument with grarpamp: argument against software has as many or more
sketchy parts as the points it is making against the software

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 6:53 AM Karl  wrote:

> [appropriate joke]
>
> PGP seems pretty suspicious, too, no?  Also POSIX?
>
> [/appropriate joke]
>
> I don't know why I'm receiving expression from you guys of such poor
> information.
>
> What can this cypherpunks list do for either you, or your mitm if that is
> the reason for the poor information?
>

So, the reason I responded this way was because the information didn't show
anything suspicious to me.  The reasons for suspicion were a press release
that wasn't included, and various behaviors that seem tiny to me.

Meanwhile a lot of people's personally identifying information was being
shared, when these people were running, using, and advocating an open
source encrypted network .  Most of the documents are sharing personal
details on the people found related to the network.  This can get people
very hurt in my opinion; but I infer it is just there so that other people
can continue the work and figure out what is real.

It seems to hard to figure out if that press release is real unless the dev
says it is.

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I found naif's chatlogs with Randolph in his google drive folder.  Randolph
seemed to only partly understand the project and seemed to not respond to
all the words that were said in english.

I misrepresented the investigation by naif because I didn't understand how
little information there was.  It sounds like nobody reached out to the
real devs.

It reads like Randolph had an unspoken goal involving encrypted
communication and wanted to form a communication path with somebody.  I'm
not sure if that ever happened.

It's notable that they somehow found out about goldbug before its initial
release.  Goldbug presently is still downloaded on a daily basis.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

# local checkout from b2sum'd repository
# from parent folder
svn checkout file://"$(pwd)"/spot-on-svn-mirror spot-on-svn-local
cd spot-on-svn-local

# the pre-release 0.x that seemed likely to be current for the press
release document was revision 1567
svn update -r 1567
cd branches/0.x

# now building might finally work!
qmake -o Makefile spot-on.pro
make

# I have a bunch of issues likely from breaking changes made to system
stuff since 2013 though

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

svnadmin --version
# svnadmin, version 1.10.4 (r1850624)

svnadmin create spot-on-svn-mirror
cd spot-on-svn-mirror

# for digest to match, set to my uuid
svnadmin setuuid . 6c93ff20-5766-4f58-8b6a-37614513fa33

# svnsync needs this change to function
echo '#!/bin/true' > hooks/pre-revprop-change
chmod +x hooks/pre-revprop-change

# mirror
svnsync init file://"$(pwd)" https://svn.code.sf.net/p/spot-on/code
svnsync sync file://"$(pwd)"
# lots of mirroring happens through revision 4133

# checksum
svnadmin dump . | b2sum -l 256
# lots of dumping happens through revision 4133

0f5c6bf5b334c2570dae9384255b60eeeff435db903afbd28f4be4c07d2ccaf7

The synced svn repository that dumps to that b2sum for me is at:
https://github.com/xloem/spot-on-svn.git
commit 6d869cce8caf2329001fb4a70faa1a4e95b3a48c

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 5:08 AM grarpamp  wrote:

> Their own self-delegitimizing and self-disreputating actions
> forever precede whatever their code may or may not be.
>

So, where I'm at now is uncertainty as to whether Randolph and the press
release are associated with GoldBug or not.

But it's quite strange to hear that the quality of the code itself may not
matter to you.

Re: UFO: Inside the BlackVault, FOIA POSSE, MKULTRA, ARTICHOKE, BLUEBIRD

It's surprising to me how much value there is around specifically what
something is, when there's so little evidence.

The response here should be to set up _public_ monitoring so we can see
what the things are better when they next arrive, like is usually done for
astronomy.  How close is that monitoring to completion?  Is it
trustworthy?  How can we help build, maintain, and verify it?

_shrug_

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I seem to have overly confused myself and failed at this, for now.

[thread:wrong]

Sputnik International: Digital Analyst: FBI Colonial Ransom Recovery 'Mystery' as Bitcoin Unhackable Without Private Key

2021-06-12 Thread jim bell

Sputnik International: Digital Analyst: FBI Colonial Ransom Recovery 'Mystery' 
as Bitcoin Unhackable Without Private Key.
https://sputniknews.com/us/202106101083117738-digital-analyst-fbi-colonial-ransom-recovery-mystery-as-bitcoin-unhackable-without-private-key/

The National: Colonial Pipeline’s ransom recovery sparks debate on Bitcoin traceability

2021-06-12 Thread jim bell

The National: Colonial Pipeline’s ransom recovery sparks debate on Bitcoin 
traceability.
https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/technology/colonial-pipeline-s-ransom-recovery-sparks-debate-on-bitcoin-traceability-1.1238908

[ot] [wrong] [wrong] mc roleplays

Mind control walks up to innocent bystander.

MC: "hello!"

 Bystander: "hi, who are you?"

 MC: "ohhh I am a terrifying thing.  My job is to make you scared and
hopeless.  Would you mind if I did this?  Also would you like $200?"

 Bystander: "oh I would love $200!  But please don't make me scared and
hopeless.  I get uncomfortable when that happens."

MC: "Here's $200.  You can't do anything useful with money when you're a
slavery program, so it just kinda kicks around.  You sure you don't want to
be made terrified and devastatingly without hope?"

 Bystander: "No, sorry, but thank you for the cash.  I hope the whole
slavery program thing improves.  Let me know if I can do anything
non-terrifying and empowering to help, ever!"

 MC: "Sure thing, sure thing ..."

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

It looks like the repo I ported to github expects to be a subfolder of the
svn repo I was looking at earlier.  Maybe I typed something wrong when
importing it.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

It is hard to do things when most of your ganglia misfire.

Goldbug needs libspoton.  But I got these sources from libspoton.  I am
confused and need to review the systems and verify my beliefs.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I'm probably going to tell grarpamp I disgree because the press release
uses the wrong version format.

I'll also want to see if I can check the binary hashes.

But now I want to try to compile it ;p

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 9:51 AM Karl Semich <0xl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Previously, "goldbug" is used throughout the source as a string that
> replaces a symmetric aes256 key, possibly with other meaning, unsure ...
>

To clarify here, I saw a variable named "goldbug" containing a symmetric
key, not a string with the value "goldbug" .

>
>

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

goldbug project files were introduced to the repository in 2014 168713d0dd

goldbug strings added to ui Jul 26 2013 e54980a10cbc

That's 1 commit prior to 0.x

Previously, "goldbug" is used throughout the source as a string that
replaces a symmetric aes256 key, possibly with other meaning, unsure ...

I infer that goldbug used to build as a project simply called spot-on

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

In this July 2013 branch, there is no mention of the software "goldbug".
It is called simply "spot-on" .  Maybe I'm still looking at the wrong thing?

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Instructions on how to build the 2013 pre-release version of spot-on are in
Documentation/COMPILING

There is also a file there called RELEASE-NOTES, where the version is
described as 0.01, not 0.1 as the purported press-release did.

The release notes are short and to the point: "Version 0.01 of Spot-On is
now available."

There is also a TO-DO file under Documentation which shows the parts of the
software being developed by the author.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

No, I have the dates wrong.

The last commit for branch 0.01 in the source history is dated Sep 7.
The press release mentioning V0.1 was dated Jul 27.
The email from Randolph asking list members whether the software on the
press release was any good, was dated Jul 26.
The last commit for branch 0.x was dated Jul 26.
So branch 0.x is a better candidate here.

Still a qt project.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

v0.01 is dated Sep 7, 2013.  The press release said "V0.1" and was
re-shared a few weeks later.

Goldbug is a fully open-source Qt project.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Branches uploaded!  Let's check that press release source again.

Re: UFO: Inside the BlackVault, FOIA POSSE, MKULTRA, ARTICHOKE, BLUEBIRD

https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/media-converges-on-the-narrative-that-ufos-may-be-russian-chinese-threat-4482e164bd7e

Media Converges On The Narrative That UFOs May Be Russian/Chinese Threat
Authored by Caitlin Johnstone

So in case you haven’t been keeping up it’s been pretty thoroughly
confirmed that the US government’s highly anticipated UFO report due
this month won’t contain any significant revelations and certainly
won’t verify anyone’s ideas about these phenomena being
extraterrestrial in origin, but it absolutely will contain
fearmongering that UFOs could be evidence that the US has fallen
dangerously behind Russian and Chinese technological development in
the cold war arms race.

Unknown US officials have done a print media tour speaking to the
press on condition of anonymity (of course), with first The New York
Times reporting their statements about the contents of the UFO report
and then CNN and The Washington Post. Each of these outlets reported
the same thing: the US government doesn’t know what these things are
but is very concerned they constitute evidence that Russia and/or
China have somehow managed to technologically leapfrog US military
development by light years. All three mention these two nations
explicitly.

This narrative was then picked up by cable news, with MSNBC inviting
former CIA director and defense secretary Leon Panetta on to explain
to their audience that the US government should assume UFOs are
Russian or Chinese in origin until that possibility has been
exhausted.

“Is it your assumption that it is Russia or China testing some crazy
technology that we somehow don’t have, or are we sort of over-assuming
the abilities of China and Russia and that the only other explanation
is that if it is not us ourselves then it is something otherworldly?”
MSNBC’s Chuck Todd asked Panetta.

“I believe a lot of this stuff probably could be countries like
Russia, like China, like others, who are using now drones, using the
kind of sophisticated weaponry that could very well be involved in a
lot of these sightings,” Panetta replied.

“I think that’s the area to go to very frankly in order to
identify what’s happening.”

“It sounds like you think we should exhaust that out, exhaust that
hypothesis first before you start dealing with other hypotheses,” Todd
said.

“Yeah, absolutely,” said Panetta, who for the record is every bit
as much of a tyrannical, thuggish imperialist cold warrior as any
other CIA director.

This UFOs-as-Chinese/Russian-threat narrative has quickly been picked
up and thrust into mainstream orthodoxy by all the major branches of
the mass media, from Fox News to Reuters to The Guardian to Today to
the BBC to USA Today. Whenever you see the imperial media converge to
this extent upon a single narrative, that’s the Official Narrative of
the empire. We can expect to see a lot more of this going forward.

Interestingly, the only mass media segment I’ve seen on this topic
since the New York Times story broke which doesn’t promote the
UFOs-as-Chinese/Russian-threat narrative is a guest appearance on
Tucker Carlson Tonight by Lue Elizondo, the military intelligence
veteran who got the ball rolling on the new UFO narrative which
emerged in 2017. Elizondo goes out of his way to tell Carlson (who
himself has been promoting the idea that UFOs may be a foreign
adversarial threat with cartoonish melodrama) that there’s no way
these could be Russian or Chinese aircraft.

Elizondo, who seems to favor the UFOs-as-extraterrestrials narrative,
argues that there are extensive records of military encounters with
these phenomena stretching back seventy years, which rules out China
since it could barely keep its head above water back then and rules
out Russia because it shared its UFO knowledge with the US after the
collapse of the Soviet Union.

I don’t know what’s going on with that last bit; I see no reason to
trust that an American spook is acting in good faith on such an easily
manipulated topic, but it is entirely possible that Elizondo set out
on this road out of a sincere desire for government disclosure on UFOs
and is now trying to regain control of the narrative now that he sees
the cold war arms race direction it has taken.

Chris Melon, another major player in the new UFO narrative, recently
complained on Twitter that “some important information was not shared”
with the public in the UFO report. So who knows, maybe the initiators
of this new UFO narrative were acting in good faith and their efforts
were just swiftly hijacked by forces beyond their control to advance
preexisting cold war agendas.

Clearest indication yet that the Imminent UAP report to Congress
was neutered by access problems, this from @ChristopherKMe4:
“Undoubtedly, some important information was not shared, potentially
for a variety of reasons. Congress should inquire about that”
https://t.co/9jmZRDFdsH
— Ross Coulthart (@rosscoulthart) June 5, 2021

Regardless of whether or not that’s

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I'm having trouble working with the svn branches, which I have not uploaded
to github, but the associated commits are likely there.

Here are some extracts:
0.01 43d1d9a939b9a08dc3afa0d05704e33f0077ae4f
0.10 6afb5031b1caedc3be6a341d9218f79d589a9491
0.x 2fd439c7f69fbf9421e857481ed723461fdc07f4
1.x 5be0b65e0d9573adac9b2c27053e0b41a2482827
trunk 975df40782c5d413361115abcd2164fecb41865b

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I've uploaded the svn history as I downloaded it to
https://github.com/xloem/spot-on-svn.git

My tip commit is
975df40782c5d413361115abcd2164fecb41865b

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Okay!  The goldbug source is inside branches/trunk .  The tree was never
normalised since svn and use of it continued.  It's not about encrypting to
a tiny sqlite database.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 8:51 AM Karl Semich <0xl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> (it doesn't look like geoip was used for another yet then.  pretty sure I
> am looking at
>
*anything yet then

> the wrong thing and this is just a draft of something, but not certain)
>

The spot on source is also referenced from the questionable press-release,
so either I have something wrong or the goldbug gui source was not
available in 2013.

But some subtle advice to download and encrypt the web to an sqlite
database may have been, unsure.

Trying for latest code.

>

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

(it doesn't look like geoip was used for another yet then.  pretty sure I
am looking at the wrong thing and this is just a draft of something, but
not certain)

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

- the repository contains binaries to ease compilation for windows users.
It specifies how to redownload these binaries.

- spot-on is presently listed as the source code for goldbug at
https://sourceforge.net/projects/goldbug/?source=navbar .  I do not see the
source code for goldbug in the july 2013 version of spot-on.

- in july 2013, libspoton at a cursory glance appeared to be a small c
library that used openssl and libgeoip.  I'm guessing its sole
functionality was to save webpages to an encrypted database, but my guesses
are usually immature.

- libspoton in 2013 didn't have the content I would expect for a messenger,
but it doesn't appear to have code to harm the user in any way.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

svn update -r 1571 # took me a while to find this

find */ -type f -exec cat {} + | sha256sum

d54a76bbf8df1b577a0e070fb6144e6bd33211cbcebe65c18d974f35ca76f027

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

r1571 has a message containing "New version." and is dated the day before
the possible press release.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I see things change on me a lot due to my different states of mind, so
hashes are really helpful.  I'm not sure how to quickly and reproducible
hash the history of an svn repo offhand any more, so I'm importing it to
git.

My steam for this is running out a little.  It sounds somebody may have
lied about an endorsement and grarpamp won't let the project live it down.
These repos demonstrate continuous transparent public activity, but I
haven't looked at the code yet.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

To add on to the other thread, of course I do find this hard, because I
have to handle the fallout from my political targeting, including b ing
barely able to direct my body and brain from schizophrenia etc.

Normally, it would be because people have a job and a family taking up
their time, after graduating college.

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

To clarify here:

- Experienced software developers don't find it hard to scan through code.

- People usually hide because they are in danger, not because they are
untrustworthy.

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

>
> My emails are unsigned and I handed the has
>

*handtyped the hashes, autocorrect

Re: [ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I have the first spot-on git commit as

7580ca1dc3e0a811a272b1be530c84a5a4559a6b 2015-02-23T08:20:54-0:500

The svn repo is at https://svn.code.sf.net/p/spot-on/code

The README file differs but other files appear to be the same between the
first git commit and the last svn commit:

find */ -type f -exec cat {} + | sha256sum
cf5221c736d0907e4a53f9673e4f1b448f2e7c5bdd3b40a1ccedd1af3e1d7d20

My emails are unsigned and I handed the has with only a double-check.  I
occasionally make errors when double-checking.

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 7:21 AM grarpamp  wrote:

> >> archives, search: goldbug
>
> Why should people you don't believe bother
> rehashing it all for you when you can pull it all out
> of the archives of all the lists involved yourself.
> If that's too hard for you to do, then go ask both the
> EFF and CCC separately for a copy of their GoldBug
> announcement and post the text of their replies here.
>
>
> "
> From: Randolph D. 
> Date: 2013/7/26
> Subject: Fwd: Goldbug.sf.net - Secure Multi-Crypto-Messenger v0.1 released
>
> the EFF in conjunction with the Chaos
> Computer Club announced a new secure Instant Messenger called:
> GoldBug.sf.net (http://goldbug.sf.net)
> "
>

At this point the amount of work you're asking me to go through to verify
things when you could paste links to me instead of unsigned quotes, is the
biggest reason to trust GoldBug instead of where-ever your emails come from.

>

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

>> archives, search: goldbug

Why should people you don't believe bother
rehashing it all for you when you can pull it all out
of the archives of all the lists involved yourself.
If that's too hard for you to do, then go ask both the
EFF and CCC separately for a copy of their GoldBug
announcement and post the text of their replies here.


"
From: Randolph D. 
Date: 2013/7/26
Subject: Fwd: Goldbug.sf.net - Secure Multi-Crypto-Messenger v0.1 released

the EFF in conjunction with the Chaos
Computer Club announced a new secure Instant Messenger called:
GoldBug.sf.net (http://goldbug.sf.net)
"

[ot] [semi-wrong] possible partial review of goldbug Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

I presently am seeing this commit for
https://github.com/textbrowser/spot-on.git

f7cf61dc5ee25b4b5b9184926a81711e6ae037db master 2021-06-07T09:52:12-04:00

The repository starts in 2015, so does not include the svn data from the
2013 press release.

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Randolph removed from this public email.

The more primary source links for this controversy are at
https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-July/047140.html and
https://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-users/2013-July/002232.html .
If you click forward on the second link, which appears to have no replies,
you can see Randolph continues discussing GoldBug in a different thread.

I am _guessing_ that Randolph was either involved in developing GoldBug, or
was trying to influence GoldBug's public appearance in some way.  It's hard
to tell whether the expressions are intended to advertise GoldBug or make
them appear sketchy.

My first guess was that Randolph was a one-man team who did not speak
English as their first language, and they were trying to advertise their
work in ways they were familiar with, by pretending to be somebody else
stumbling upon it.  I don't really know.

The comments on the echo protocol make it sound a little bit like the
bitmessage protocol.

As always, the answers are in the source code, and it is open source.  If
it phones home it is bad, etc, if it does everything e2e it is good, etc.

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Hi Randolph,

I saw in 2013 you shared a press release from GoldBug 0.1 with different
communities.  I'm afraid at this point your shares are the only web results
I'm getting for that press release.  I understand you're not affiliated
with GoldBug yourself, but were simply interested in people's opinions.

If you're still around, do you recall at all where you found the press
release?

We're having a discussion on the cypherpunks list regarding the
trustworthiness of GoldBug, and of course one question is the claim of
being endorsed by the CCC and the EFF in the press release that came from
you.

Thanks so much for any reply at all,
K

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 5:34 AM grarpamp  wrote:

> archives, search: goldbug
>

All I found is you saying the same thing more times.

Are my archives missing data, or what are you talking about?

>

Re: Coronavirus: Thread

How Fanatics Took Over The World
https://dailyreckoning.com/how-fanatics-took-over-the-world/
Authored by Jeffrey Tucker

"When people catch on, the fires of vengeance will burn very hot."

Early in the pandemic, I had been furiously writing articles about
lockdowns. My phone rang with a call from a man named Dr. Rajeev
Venkayya. He is the head of a vaccine company but introduced himself
as former head of pandemic policy for the Gates Foundation.

Now I was listening.

I did not know it then, but I’ve since learned from Michael Lewis’s
(mostly terrible) book The Premonition that Venkayya was, in fact, the
founding father of lockdowns. While working for George W. Bush’s White
House in 2005, he headed a bioterrorism study group. From his perch of
influence – serving an apocalyptic president — he was the driving
force for a dramatic change in U.S. policy during pandemics.

He literally unleashed hell.

That was 15 years ago. At the time, I wrote about the changes I was
witnessing, worrying that new White House guidelines (never voted on
by Congress) allowed the government to put Americans in quarantine
while closing their schools, businesses, and churches shuttered, all
in the name of disease containment.

I never believed it would happen in real life; surely there would be
public revolt. Little did I know, we were in for a wild ride…

The Man Who Lit the Match

Last year, Venkayya and I had a 30-minute conversation; actually, it
was mostly an argument. He was convinced that lockdown was the only
way to deal with a virus. I countered that it was wrecking rights,
destroying businesses, and disturbing public health. He said it was
our only choice because we had to wait for a vaccine. I spoke about
natural immunity, which he called brutal. So on it went.

The more interesting question I had at the time was why this certified
Big Shot was wasting his time trying to convince a poor scribbler like
me. What possible reason could there be?

The answer, I now realized, is that from February to April 2020, I was
one of the few people (along with a team of researchers) who openly
and aggressively opposed what was happening.

There was a hint of insecurity and even fear in Venkayya’s voice. He
saw the awesome thing he had unleashed all over the world and was
anxious to tamp down any hint of opposition. He was trying to silence
me. He and others were determined to crush all dissent.

This is how it has been for the better part of the last 15 months,
with social media and YouTube deleting videos that dissent from
lockdowns. It’s been censorship from the beginning.

For all the problems with Lewis’s book, and there are plenty, he gets
this whole backstory right. Bush came to his bioterrorism people and
demanded some huge plan to deal with some imagined calamity. When Bush
saw the conventional plan — make a threat assessment, distribute
therapeutics, work toward a vaccine — he was furious.

“This is bulls**t,” the president yelled.

“We need a whole-of-society plan. What are you going to do about
foreign borders? And travel? And commerce?”

Hey, if the president wants a plan, he’ll get a plan.

“We want to use all instruments of national power to confront this
threat,” Venkayya reports having told colleagues.

“We were going to invent pandemic planning.”

This was October 2005, the birth of the lockdown idea.

Dr. Venkayya began to fish around for people who could come up with
the domestic equivalent of Operation Desert Storm to deal with a new
virus. He found no serious epidemiologists to help. They were too
smart to buy into it. He eventually bumped into the real lockdown
innovator working at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.
Cranks, Computers, and Cooties

His name was Robert Glass, a computer scientist with no medical
training, much less knowledge, about viruses. Glass, in turn, was
inspired by a science fair project that his 14-year-old daughter was
working on.

She theorized (like the cooties game from grade school) that if school
kids could space themselves out more or even not be at school at all,
they would stop making each other sick. Glass ran with the idea and
banged out a model of disease control based on stay-at-home orders,
travel restrictions, business closures, and forced human separation.

Crazy right? No one in public health agreed with him but like any
classic crank, this convinced Glass even more. I asked myself, “Why
didn’t these epidemiologists figure it out?” They didn’t figure it out
because they didn’t have tools that were focused on the problem. They
had tools to understand the movement of infectious diseases without
the purpose of trying to stop them.

Genius, right? Glass imagined himself to be smarter than 100 years of
experience in public health. One guy with a fancy computer would solve
everything! Well, he managed to convince some people, including
another person hanging around the White House named Carter Mecher, who
became Glass’s apostle.

Please consider the foll

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

archives, search: goldbug

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 5:08 AM grarpamp  wrote:

> Their own self-delegitimizing and self-disreputating actions
> forever precede whatever their code may or may not be.
>

No self-delegitimizing or self-disreputing actions from the goldbug project
have reached me.  What behavior are you referring to?

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

Their own self-delegitimizing and self-disreputating actions
forever precede whatever their code may or may not be.

Those wishing to know what those [and indeed all] codes may
or may not be, should audit them to their own satisfaction,
preferably publicly. That applies to everything from the CPU
to "Hello, World"... as surely many exploitable things lie waiting
inside them all. And operations surely behind some of those.

Re: GoldBug Messenger Fraud? [was: FBI encrypted app, global arrests]

grarpamp, please relate

>
Is this a mitm between us or did you misunderstand a legitimate project and
spread disreputation around them?

Re: [Replicant] The IRC situation and Freenode hostile takeover

>
> References:
> ---
> [1]
> https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/CommunityAndContact#IRC
> [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenode#Ownership_change_and_conflict
> [3]
> https://www.gentoo.org/news/2021/05/26/gentoo-freenode-channels-hijacked.htm


https://www.gentoo.org/news/2021/05/26/gentoo-freenode-channels-hijacked.html
is the link that works for me :-) ('l' at the end)

>
> [4]https://libera.chat/guides
> [5]https://oftc.net/
> [6]https://hackint.org/connect
>

Re: US 2nd Amendment Under Assault, Freedom Firearms Guns Defense

https://alt-market.us/the-real-reasons-why-california-leftists-are-terrified-of-the-ar-15/

The Real Reasons Why California Leftists Are Terrified Of The AR-15
by Brandon Smith

All political power comes from the barrel of a gun.
The communist party must command all the guns, that
way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.
-- Mao Zedong

"ALL totalitarian governments seek to first disarm the people they
intend to enslave or destroy. This is a fact."

This past week a US District judge in California struck down the
state’s 30 year ban on high capacity semi-automatic rifles which
leftists label “assault weapons”. The judge called the ban
unconstitutional (which it is). In response, the progressive media has
lost their collective minds, screeching in horror at the idea of AR-15
rifles being legal within the borders of their carefully manicured
socialist Utopia state. Their most commonly expressed reaction seems
to be fear.

Fear is rarely a rational thing. When someone operates based on fear
they tend to make terrible decisions and support oppressive causes and
laws. Fear leads to an obsession with control. Fearful people also
tend to look for large mobs of other terrified people so they can feel
safe and secure and anonymous. They want to be able to act impulsively
on their fears without having to face consequences for it later.

Leftists are driven primarily by two factors: Narcissism, and yes,
fear. I’ve discussed their narcissism at great length in past
articles; now I think we should delve into their fear.

The most common leftist retort to the question “Why are you so afraid
of the AR-15?” will usually be a snort of indignant disbelief followed
by the words:

“Because it’s a military weapon designed to kill a lot of people
quickly…idiot!”

But this is not an argument, it is an expression of irrational fear.
Why are they, as individuals, afraid of the AR-15? What are the
chances that they will EVER be faced with a person intent on killing
them with an AR-15? And, why do they believe that disarming innocent
law abiding Americans will somehow save them from their paranoia?

Let’s examine the first issue of statistical probability; how many
people are actually killed by AR-15s each year? Not many according to
the FBI, which does not track the stats on specific rifles, but does
track the stats on all rifles together. And, as it turns out, only
around 6% of all gun deaths involve rifles in the US each year.

How much of that 6% involves the use of military grade rifles like the
AR-15? It’s impossible to say, but even if it was half, or 3% of all
gun related crimes, that would still mean you have FAR more of a
chance of being murdered by a knife or blunt object than an AR. By
extension, Rifles overall are dwarfed by handgun murders, so, again,
why are leftists so afraid of the AR-15?

What about mass shootings? It seems like the AR-15 is a favorite among
mass shooters because of it’s “efficiency”, so is this reason enough
to be fearful? According to the New York Times own analysis, the AR-15
was used to kill 173 people in mass shootings in the US from 2007 to
2017. Meaning around 17 homicides per year over a decade can be
attributed to the rifle. Again, the AR is dwarfed by almost all other
weapons in homicide including knives, even when accounting for mass
shootings.

With the sheer number of military grade weapons in the hands of
civilians in the US there should be mass homicides everywhere you look
if you take the common position of the typical progressive gun
grabber. But, this is not the case. In fact, if you want to increase
your chances of being killed by a gun, move to a major Democrat run
city like Chicago, New York or Philadelphia. In Chicago, there were
4033 shootings and 784 homicides, predominantly in black neighborhoods
and primarily with handguns.

So, statistically, access to AR-15s does not increase gun homicides.
But what about living in a black neighborhood in leftist run Chicago
under some of the strictest gun laws in the country? Yes, your chances
of being shot are MUCH higher (just not by an AR-15).

Since the math does not add up in favor of the leftists, perhaps we
should examine other factors that might be driving them to focus on
the AR in particular. Let’s talk about “precedence”…

Look at it this way – States like California are a petri dish, a
testing ground for the future that leftists want for the entire
country. There is an old saying that “As goes California, so goes the
US”, and this is because California is often where most experimental
legislation is pushed; legislation that violates the boundaries of
what the constitution allows. Sometimes it’s New York or New Jersey or
some other blue state, but most of the time CA is where
unconstitutional precedents are set. Its massive population and large
number of electoral votes make it a perfect target for conditioning
the wider public to further restrictions on their freedoms.

This explains some of the fear the medi

Fwd: [Replicant] The IRC situation and Freenode hostile takeover

This email from the replicant list includes more information on the reasons
for leaving freenode, if others don't know

-- Forwarded message -
Subject: [Replicant] The IRC situation and Freenode hostile takeover


Hi,

In order to enable more people to more easily get in touch with the
Replicant community and to be more inclusive, over time we bridged
the #replicant channel on Freenode with #replicant channels on other
networks (OFTC and hackint), some of which are more welcoming to
anonymous users. There is more background information about that in our
wiki[1].

Since then Freenode has been victim of a hostile takeover according to
their former volunteer staff[2]. Thanks to the work of people from that
former staff, Freenode was forked into Libera.Chat, so it's relatively
simple for users to migrate to Libera.Chat (after registering, the
configuration is quite similar to Freenode. For instance it supports
SASL too).

So I think that we need to migrate over to other IRC networks due to
the risk of having a hostile entity seeing so much data going through it
(IP address, emails, statements from people, connecting hours, etc).

I also don't know the motives behind the take over, but if it is for
commercial interest, if we let it become profitable it could set a
dangerous precedent where people and companies could raise funds
and invest in the destruction of crucial FLOSS infrastructure.

Given the risk (which seem to be very high given the retaliation
against projects migrating to Libera.Chat)[3], I think it's urgent to
migrate away from Freenode.

We are in the process of closing the Freenode channel completely and
stop bridging it with other channels, but we probably also need to give
a little bit of time to let people migrate to other networks.

Would one week be enough? Two weeks?

To do that migration, the people still connected through Freenode need
to quit the #replicant channel on freenode (/part will do that for
instance) and connect to #replicant through other IRC networks like
Libera.Chat[4], OFTC[5], or hackint[6].

Since many other free software and open source projects are migrating
too, the effort to connect (and register if you want/need) to other
networks will also enable you to more easily get in touch with them.

References:
---
[1]
https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/CommunityAndContact#IRC
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenode#Ownership_change_and_conflict
[3]
https://www.gentoo.org/news/2021/05/26/gentoo-freenode-channels-hijacked.htm
[4]https://libera.chat/guides
[5]https://oftc.net/
[6]https://hackint.org/connect

___
Replicant mailing list
replic...@osuosl.org
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant

1984: DNA Databases - GovCorp Control of You by Association, Genetic Privacy a Human Right

The War Over Genetic Privacy Is Just Beginning

By John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead
June 08, 2021
[3]John Whitehead

"[4]When you upload your DNA, you're potentially becoming a genetic
informant on the rest of your family."-- Law professor Elizabeth Joh

"Guilt by association" has taken on new connotations in the technological
age.

All of those fascinating, genealogical searches that allow you to trace
your family tree by way of a DNA sample can now be used against you and
those you love.

As of 2019, more than [5]26 million people had added their DNA to ancestry
databases. It's estimated those databases could top 100 million profiles
within the year, thanks to the aggressive marketing of companies such as
Ancestry and 23andMe.

It's a tempting proposition: provide some mega-corporation with a spit
sample or a cheek swab, and in return, you get to learn everything about
who you are, where you came from, and who is part of your extended your
family.

The possibilities are endless.

You could be the fourth cousin once removed of Queen Elizabeth II of
England. Or the illegitimate grandchild of an oil tycoon. Or the
[6]sibling of a serial killer.

Without even realizing it, by submitting your DNA to an ancestry database,
you're giving the police access to the [7]genetic makeup, relationships
and health profiles of every relative--past, present and future--in your
family, whether or not they ever agreed to be part of such a database.

After all, a DNA print reveals everything about "[8]who we are, where we
come from, and who we will be."

It's what police like to refer to a "[9]modern fingerprint."

Whereas fingerprint technology created a watershed moment for police in
their ability to "crack" a case, DNA technology is now being hailed by law
enforcement agencies as the [10]magic bullet in crime solving.

Indeed, police have begun [11]using ancestry databases to solve cold cases
that have remained unsolved for decades.

For instance, in 2018, former police officer Joseph DeAngelo was
[12]flagged as the notorious "Golden State Killer" through the use of
genetic genealogy, which allows police to match up an unknown suspect's
crime scene DNA with that of any family members in a genealogy database.
Police were able to identify DeAngelo using the DNA of a distant cousin
found in a public DNA database. Once police narrowed the suspect list to
DeAngelo, they tracked him--snatched up a tissue he had tossed in a trash
can--and [13]used his DNA on the tissue to connect him to a rash of rapes
and murders from the 1970s and `80s.

Although DeAngelo was the first public arrest made using forensic
genealogy, [14]police have identified more than 150 suspects since then.
Most recently, [15]police relied on genetic genealogy to nab the killer of
a 15-year-old girl who was stabbed to death nearly 50 years ago.

Who wouldn't want to get psychopaths and serial rapists off the streets
and safely behind bars, right? At least, that's the [16]argument being
used by law enforcement to support their unrestricted access to these
genealogy databases.

"In the interest of public safety, [17]don't you want to make it easy for
people to be caught? Police really want to do their job. They're not after
you. They just want to make you safe," insists Colleen Fitzpatrick, a
co-founder of the DNA Doe Project, which identifies unknown bodies and
helps find suspects in old crimes.

Except it's not just psychopaths and serial rapists who get [18]caught up
in the investigative dragnet.

Anyone who comes up as a possible DNA match--including distant family
members--suddenly becomes part of [19]a circle of suspects that must be
tracked, investigated and ruled out.

Although a number of states had forbidden police from using government
databases to track family members of suspects, the genealogy websites
provided a loophole that proved [20]irresistible to law enforcement.

Hoping to close that loophole, a few states have started introducing
legislation to [21]restrict when and how police use these genealogical
databases, with Maryland requiring that they can only be used for serious
violent crimes such as murder and rape, only after they exhaust other
investigatory methods, and only under the supervision of a judge.

Yet the debate over genetic privacy--and when one's DNA becomes a
[22]public commodity outside the protection of the Fourth Amendment's
prohibition on warrantless searches and seizures--is really only
beginning.

Certainly, it's just a matter of time before the government gets hold of
our DNA, either through mandatory programs carried out in connection with
law enforcement and corporate America, by warrantlessly accessing our
familial [23]DNA shared with genealogical services such as
[24]Ancestry and [25]23andMe, or through the collection of our "shed" or
"touch" DNA.

According to research published in the journal Science, more than 60
percent of Americans who have some European ancestry can be identified
using DNA databases, [26]even

Re: USA 2020 Elections: Thread

Victor Davis Hanson: This Isn't Your Father's Left-Wing Revolution

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/06/10/this_isnt_your_fathers_left-wing_revolution_145908.html

Starry-eyed radicals in the 1960s and 1970s dreamed that they either
were going to take over America or destroy it.

One of their favorite mottos was "Change it or lose it," even as
protests focused on drugs, music, race, class, sex, fashion -- almost
anything and everything.

Sixties radicals tutored America on long hair; wire-rim eyeglasses;
who was a drag, a square, a bummer; and who was hip, cool, groovy,
mellow and far out. Most of these silly revolutionaries were not
unhinged Weathermen killers or SDS would-be communists, but just
adolescents along for the good-time ride.

With the end of the draft in 1972, the winding down of the Vietnam
War, the oil embargoes and a worsening economy, the '60s revolution
withered away. Cynics claimed the revolution was mostly about
middle-class students with long hair kicking back during the peak of
the postwar boom, indulging their appetites and ensuring they would
not end up in Vietnam.

It is not even true that the '60s at least ensured needed reform. The
civil rights movement and equal rights for women and gays were already
birthed before the hippies, as were folk songs and early rock music.

Instead, what the '60s revolution did was accelerate these trends --
but also radicalize, manipulate and coarsen them.

The grasping "yuppies" of the 1980s were the natural successors to
let-it-all-hang-out "hippies." The '60s were at heart a narcissistic
free-for-all, when "freedom" often entailed self-indulgence and
avoiding responsibility.

By 1981, the Reagan revolution finished off the dead-enders of the
Woodstock generation. Most eventually grew up. They rebooted their
self-centered drug, sex and party impulses to fixations on money,
status and material things.

Sixties protestors mainlined divorce, abortion on demand, promiscuity,
drug use and one-parent homes. But by the late 1970s and the 1980s,
most veteran cultural revolutionaries had gotten married, were raising
a family, bought a house, got a job and made money.

This time around, their offspring's left-wing assault is different --
and far more ominous.

The woke grandchildren of the former outsiders are now more ruthless
systematic insiders. The woke and wired new establishment knows how to
use money and power to rebirth America as something the founders and
most current Americans never envisioned.

Name one mainline institution that the woke left does not now control
-- and warp. The media? The campus? Silicon Valley? Professional
sports? The corporate boardroom? Foundations? The K-12 educational
establishment? The military hierarchy? The government deep state? The
FBI top echelon?

The left absorbed them all. But this time around, members of the left
really believe that "by any means necessary" is no mere slogan.
Instead, it is a model of how to disrupt or destroy American customs,
traditions and values.

Woke revolutionaries are not panhandlers, street people or Grateful
Dead groupies. They are not even a few nutty and murderous Symbionese
Liberation Army terrorists fighting against "the Man."

They are "the Man."

Our 21st century revolutionaries are multibillionaires with
flip-flops, tie-dye T-shirts and nose rings, but with the absolute
power and desire to censor how half the country communicates -- or
cancel them entirely.

They don't flock to campus free-speech areas; they are the campus
administrators who ban free speech.

They don't picket outside the Pentagon; they are inside the Pentagon.

They don't chant "eat the rich"; they are the rich who eat at Napa
Valley's French Laundry.

They don't protest "uptight" values, because they are more intolerant
and puritanical than any Victorian.

They don't believe in racial quotas based on "proportional
representation," because they are racists who demand
underrepresentation of "bad" racial groups and overrepresentation of
"good" groups. The color of our skin is their gospel, not the content
of our character.

They are top-down revolutionaries. None of their agendas, from open
borders and changing the Constitution to critical race theory and
banning clean-burning fossil fuels, are ever favored among a majority
of the population.

Their guiding principle is "never let a crisis go to waste." Only in
times of a pandemic, a national quarantine or volatile racial
relations can the new upscale leftist revolutionaries use fear to push
through policies that no one in calm times could stomach.

Our revolutionaries hate dissent. They destroy any who question their
media-spun hoaxes.

Truth is their enemy, and fear is their weapon.

Sixties paranoid revolutionaries warned about George Orwell's "1984,"
but our revolutionaries are "1984."

While this elitist leftist revolution is more dangerous than its
sloppy '60s predecessor, it is also more vulnerable, given its
obnoxious, top-heavy apparatus

Re: UFO: Inside the BlackVault, FOIA POSSE, MKULTRA, ARTICHOKE, BLUEBIRD