Re: Switching gears

[juan]

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 17:01:51 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:


> 
> I ventured the idea that the only way to combat it, is for citizens
> to put web cams in their windows, in their cars, have body cams..
> whatever.. and have a distributed system where we can live stream
> that stuff up. Open source surveillance, if you will.

Surveillance of what?


> 
> The idea scared the hell out of him, and rightly so. My take on
> surveillance tech is that it is like nukes. The only viable strategy
> is deterrence. The genie is out of the bottle, the tech isn't going
> anywhere, and so if we're going to preserve freedom, the technology
> needs to be under our control.

So, once you have everything recorded and available to anyone,
including your enemies, what, exactly is left under your
control? 


> 
> Open source surveillance is a monster, but its a monster that would
> bite police and agents of the state as easily as us.

No it won't?


> Rather than the
> government/media being able to selectively pick-and-choose which
> camera angles, and which clips to release, we'd have to ability to
> check, and disprove.
> 
> I don't like what it means, in terms of enabling stalkers, but perhaps
> that is mitigated by the ability to catch those fucks on camera?
> 
> I'd love to hear reactions and thoughts on this. It's not something
> you're going to catch me truly arguing for, its really more of a
> devil's advocate type thing.. like I say, I just see it mostly as a
> fucked strategy for dealing with a fucked situation.



Surveillance is an intrinsically bad activity. To 'open source'
it is like 'open sourcing' any other facet of the police state.
If your goal is an 'open source' police state, then go for it.
Otherwise...

Also, this seems like an example of why 'competing' with the
state, copying the shitty or outright criminal 'services' that
the state provides isn't a good idea.







 

Re: Switching gears

[Mirimir]

With ubiquitous smartphones, we're getting there. Say what you will
about Facebook, but they seem to have real commitment to sharing. So
far, they've allowed some rather contentious and inflammatory stuff.

Re: In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub [was: Sim Theory]

[Mirimir]

On 09/21/2016 12:26 PM, John Newman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:07:10PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:15 AM, John Newman  wrote:
>> For this small price of love, you could grant it it's freedom,
>> for everyone, forever...
>>
>> http://custodians.online/
> 
> I don't have the apparatus to scan it - and I'm not sure a used
> copy in "very  good" condition would make a decent digital 
> copy :P 
> 
> Also, sci-hub.io seems to be down. 

Try sci-hub.cc :)

> John 
> 

Torgate: Tor’s Branding Pivot is Going to Get Someone Killed

[grarpamp]

Virgil Griffith- Research Scientist in Singapore
Sep 4

Tor’s Branding Pivot is Going to Get Someone Killed
Aka, human rights activism meets the Cobra Effect

Three weeks ago, The Tor Project, Inc. published their Tor Social
Contract. The contract was covered by the media, but the media focused
on the policy not to backdoor software (as though that were
surprising?), and regrettably, missed the real story carefully hidden
in the first bullet:

1. We advance human rights by creating and deploying usable anonymity
and privacy technologies.
...
...
...
Tor’s branding pivot is misguided, damaging for global privacy, and
ironically, harmful to Asian human rights. Anonymity requires not just
company, it requires diverse company, yet Tor has increased the
barrier-to-entry for all non-HR Tor users. This something Tor has
brought upon itself, and they are knowingly throwing their most
vulnerable users under the bus.
After seven years of proud service to Tor including: founding Tor2web,
Roster, and Toroken, as well as writing a Tor Tech Report and running
several high-performance relays, I am resigning because:

•Given my residency in Southeast Asia, Tor’s pivot creates
nonnegligible risk for me personally.
•I do not trust an organization which prefers reaping modest public
relations benefits within comparably cozy jurisdictions over the
security of its neediest users risking imprisonment.

Tor is carefully positioning itself away from the efficacious privacy
promotor it used to be.

Re: "The Tree of Liberty will get its manure..." [Was Re:]

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/21/2016 10:50 PM, Razer wrote:
> On 09/21/2016 06:32 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:

>> rulers out.  That is why the Revolutionary War had the necessary 
>> organization and mass public support to succeed.
> 
> 
> There was no American Revolution. Revolutions are based on
> ideology.
> 
> Greed IS NOT an ideology.

In my view, Religion is about ideology and Politics is about power.
Since Greed is about power, a political revolution has little if
anything to do with ideology, except in that ideological propaganda
(emotionally charged fact-free bullshit) is always employed to
persuade people to support and participate in revolutions - or to
violently oppose them, as the propagandists' employers may direct.

> ("...started refusing to pay taxes and surcharges, ignoring the
> orders of Crown authorities, and constructing their own systems of
> commerce..." That favored ***THEIR*** WHITE RICH MALE interests.)

Well duh.  Before the American Revolution, holders of Crown land
grants were the most wealthy and powerful people in the Colonies.
After the American Revolution, former holders of Crown land grants
were the most wealthy and powerful people in the States.  The U.S.
Constitution was written for the purpose of creating a Federal
authority capable of stomping down popular uprisings against abuses of
power by these same de facto rulers.

American racism was invented by the same fine folks, as a response to
slave uprisings earlier in Colonial history:  By granting White
"indentured" slaves special privileges, they successfully divided the
conquered.  That process has continued uninterrupted, with adaptations
to accommodate changing conditions, until the present day: In Obama's
Amerika, any black person with a Master's Degree or above is as good
as any white person - all others pay in blood.

Which is why we need more revolutions, beginning with establishing
alternative ways of life that reduce or eliminate the role of today's
rulers and the passionately held, completely false Truths they dictate
to our own communities.  Big job?  The biggest.  If not for the
pending collapse of the global material economy, I would call it an
impossible job - vs. one of the most important jobs anyone could be
working on today.




-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX40zpAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqDxAH/0ifQv7+R+SECOqmtuZQzEUD
JjokbXc47u7xPdWVjwmFQNkq63LKbGd08SmKaAeS7CKix4tmAkcjZpHLbMsbR6W5
7ksZbPJrA8AgXysWNcCbbys6ayuo0Rn482F19n1f9mjIj8xJJQNzEhF97/AQJ2LK
MeOdH4dD9pxw/OxhZVl8pU4wmNO7nRFoia1uondkoz8k9QPN4fHVre24W05WAAFj
ljZd6lqLit8pmdIqzPHfcijd99LErntw9MqmN/6jOg8y2wGIm/QX7SqRMheM02kq
gIaYFhVxzPQqRXlC/NwLY37iIWm4A6OKiBWUtLjW2risvhi8lgJBwp5TXXbyVhs=
=N+8q
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[Razer]

On 09/21/2016 06:44 PM, John Newman wrote:


> NLP is widely discredited pseudo-science crap.


It works quite well on simple minded people. AKA "Useful Idiots".

Rr

> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 09:36:53PM -0300, juan wrote:
>>> The skills of illusion, and "mentalism" are quite real.. and if you
>>> watch more of his stuff, especially the longer videos or full
>>> episodes where he breaks down the hows and whys of it working,
>>> perhaps you'll be less likely to say its fake. It's easy to dismiss a
>>> magic trick as "camera edits" when you just have a 3 minute video.
>>> It's a bit harder when the magician explains the whole thing to you.
>>
>>
>>  Magic tricks don't have much to do with this. Magic tricks rely
>>  on exploiting shortcomings of perception, "the hand is quicker
>>  than the eye", that sort of thing. But indeed nobody believes
>>  that those magic tricks are 'real' magic. If anything they prove
>>  that people are rational and know that magicians can't make
>>  rabbits dissapear - they know it's 'illusion'.
>>  
>>
>>  If on the other hand Derren is 'staging' the jewelry store
>>  video, that means he and the guy at the shop are playing a
>>  part and the video isn't even 'illusion', it's outright fake.
>>
> 
> This guy had a show in the UK for a while.. on one of his specials
> he "programmed" 4 people to perform armed robberies without being
> directly told to, supposedly using visual cues and a whole bunch
> of other total NLP bullshit. Suffice it to say I think the thing
> is a total fucking fake. I would have no problem with Darren if he
> just claimed to be an illusionist like David Copperfield and performed
> tricks, but he tries to act like James Randi, and like all his shit
> is on the level - he really convinced X to do Y using psychological
> methods...
> 
> The heist episode I mentioned is particularly preposterous.
> 
> Link to the full episode for anyone who wants to waste 45mins:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaHbACoYNSA
> 
> 
>>> He uses a lot of techniques, but "neuro-linguistic programming" (NLP)
>>> is the bread-and-butter.
> 
> NLP is widely discredited pseudo-science crap. 
> 
> http://skepdic.com/neurolin.html
> 
> "..It seems that NLP develops models which can't be verified,
> from which it develops techniques which may have nothing to do with
> either the models or the sources of the models. NLP makes claims
> about thinking and perception which do not seem to be supported by
> neuroscience.."
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming
> 
> "..There is no scientific evidence supporting the claims made by
> NLP advocates and it has been discredited as a pseudoscience by
> experts.."
> 
> 
> John
> 

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[John Newman]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 09:36:53PM -0300, juan wrote:
> > The skills of illusion, and "mentalism" are quite real.. and if you
> > watch more of his stuff, especially the longer videos or full
> > episodes where he breaks down the hows and whys of it working,
> > perhaps you'll be less likely to say its fake. It's easy to dismiss a
> > magic trick as "camera edits" when you just have a 3 minute video.
> > It's a bit harder when the magician explains the whole thing to you.
> 
> 
>   Magic tricks don't have much to do with this. Magic tricks rely
>   on exploiting shortcomings of perception, "the hand is quicker
>   than the eye", that sort of thing. But indeed nobody believes
>   that those magic tricks are 'real' magic. If anything they prove
>   that people are rational and know that magicians can't make
>   rabbits dissapear - they know it's 'illusion'.
>   
> 
>   If on the other hand Derren is 'staging' the jewelry store
>   video, that means he and the guy at the shop are playing a
>   part and the video isn't even 'illusion', it's outright fake.
> 

This guy had a show in the UK for a while.. on one of his specials
he "programmed" 4 people to perform armed robberies without being
directly told to, supposedly using visual cues and a whole bunch
of other total NLP bullshit. Suffice it to say I think the thing
is a total fucking fake. I would have no problem with Darren if he
just claimed to be an illusionist like David Copperfield and performed
tricks, but he tries to act like James Randi, and like all his shit
is on the level - he really convinced X to do Y using psychological
methods...

The heist episode I mentioned is particularly preposterous.

Link to the full episode for anyone who wants to waste 45mins:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaHbACoYNSA


> > He uses a lot of techniques, but "neuro-linguistic programming" (NLP)
> > is the bread-and-butter.

NLP is widely discredited pseudo-science crap. 

http://skepdic.com/neurolin.html

"..It seems that NLP develops models which can't be verified,
from which it develops techniques which may have nothing to do with
either the models or the sources of the models. NLP makes claims
about thinking and perception which do not seem to be supported by
neuroscience.."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming

"..There is no scientific evidence supporting the claims made by
NLP advocates and it has been discredited as a pseudoscience by
experts.."


John


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: "The Tree of Liberty will get its manure..." [Was Re:]

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/21/2016 08:34 PM, Razer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 09/21/2016 12:03 PM, Xer0Dynamite wrote:
>> Show me the Law(s) that makes it so.
>> 
>> \0x
> 
> Guns make it so. Law enforcement owns about 99.9% of all the
> military style weaponry.

Collusion between Legislators, Judges, Prosecutors and other attorneys
make it so.  Software code is interpreted by machines without
conflicts of interest or hands out for bribes.  Legal code is
interpreted by semi-humans who chose "power over others" as their
career path and invested a lot of energy and money in gaining that power
.

> We managed to preserve our right to keep military grade rifles and 
> machine guns, so we all muster down on the Town Common with our
> guns.
> 
> We tried voting.
> 
> We tried protesting.
> 
> This is a reasonable time to start with the armed insurrection
> stuff.

A reasonable time to demonstrate the painful ignorance and delusional
beliefs our rulers have given us, to assure that we stay ruled.  Armed
insurrection, before the revolution process has even started, is a
gesture of suicide/surrender we have been taught to perform.  Think of
it as the ultimate act of obedience to established authority.

A revolution is won or lost before the first publicly acknowledged
shot is fired.  The shooting war is the last phase, its purpose to pry
the fingers of a stubborn ruling class off the levers of power /after/
their rule has already been rendered obsolete and irrelevant by
changes in the actual economic and social behavior of their subjects.
 Otherwise it's a coup, not a revolution.  A revolution is "the world
turned upside down."  A coup just changes out the old bastards for a
new set of bastards, usually worse ones.

The people in those Crown Colonies that became United States started
refusing to pay taxes and surcharges, ignoring the orders of Crown
authorities, and constructing their own systems of commerce and
governance long before that "shot heard 'round the world."  The
Revolutionary War was more a response to a campaign by the Crown to
take the Colonies back over, than a struggle to kick established
rulers out.  That is why the Revolutionary War had the necessary
organization and mass public support to succeed.

I found the bits of this essay addressing the Revolutionary War very
interesting, largely because I had not previously seen anything
similar in print anywhere:

http://www.fragmentsweb.org/fourtx/dishist.pdf

:o)





-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4zSVAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqN6IH/RifFG7NWYgFXD0oe9Yf+r2+
/9bmd4gF3o3avZFgraSdGBhBgQO9Ogc15nuysUdJP6qmxSZw9Y195sP0xA/aH9ms
FbnrFcYcHZnHNJqfKrmyUIrkYzCNkppsOmlvDtqTBzabqwJRyLxWvlUL79LJlVeX
CkMomQvJajsyorbUneJ1N32mY8zOeyNoEFLQsaLgPBb7r64Iyf0hOvPuj1A6fhz+
vm4kyqnNEXG0lkQedPA/WbNcOr8pZQQ7VlAfVUu82E3eAc2EIs1WWV9o9kBqFcEs
hIRIiTr3+3905AI4sZQl4ncNweSreM375zigehZ6WVxzfxqIv2FGHfROGA05AiQ=
=hkPc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: "The Tree of Liberty will get its manure..." [Was Re:]

[Razer]

On 09/21/2016 12:03 PM, Xer0Dynamite wrote:
> Show me the Law(s) that makes it so.
> 
> \0x

Guns make it so. Law enforcement owns about 99.9% of all the military
style weaponry.

Have you ever seen this bit @Popehat:

In 1776, when the height of military technology was a musket and a
cannon, both of which you could make by melting down church bells, there
might have been something to it. When the contest was little more than
numbers of guns you could drag through the woods, and how to play the
weather, the government probably did need to worry a bit about
insurrection – and that might have kept them a bit more honest.

However, the first time someone tried that kind of thing, it didn't work
out so well. In fact, Shays' Rebellion just led to Constitutional tweaks
to make the federal government that much stronger. The Civil War led to
even more, with harsher consequences.

If 13 states, with the assistance of at least one superpower, didn't
manage to get their way through armed insurrection, what the hell makes
anyone think that armed insurgency is going to preserve our right to …
whatever … not have affordable health care, or to coffee cups that say
"Happy Birthday Jesus" on them?

Ok, fine… lets come up with a cause worth fighting for.

Lets say that Obama refuses to step down in 2016, and he not only
declares himself dictator-for-life, but he also starts dressing like
Ghadaffi, decrees that the national religion shall be Islam, the
national language will be Klingon, there will be an efficient rail
network in the United States, the writ of Prima Noctae is now in effect,
and there shall be martial law to enforce all of the above, as well as
any other laws that the President invents, on a daily basis.

We managed to preserve our right to keep military grade rifles and
machine guns, so we all muster down on the Town Common with our guns.

We tried voting.

We tried protesting.

This is a reasonable time to start with the armed insurrection stuff.

So, you, me, all our neighbors, hell our entire city builds a perimeter
around it. We fill sandbags, we all have ammunition, we all have food,
water, supplies, and most importantly, we are all unified and in
complete solidarity.

And we stand there, resisting whatever it is the government was going to
do to us.

And then they fly over with one jet, dropping one FAE bomb, and roll in
with three tanks, and in about 12 hours, our "resistance" is reduced to
a few smoking holes.

The Tree of Liberty will get its manure all right, but it will be the
manure that you shat out as you ran for cover, as long range artillery
rains down on our town, as we get carpet bombed from 35,000 feet, and as
the sky goes black with drones and cruise missiles.

We're screwed.

So… if the 2nd Amendment's "right to revolution" implication is real,
both practically and legally, it must also include a right to possess
tanks, jets, rocket launchers, etc.

Your puny AK-47 is useless. So, we need to have at least some of our
volunteer resistance show up with Stinger missiles, some anti-aircraft
batteries, maybe a submarine or two?

Oh, you can't afford that?

That's ok, we have some patriotic citizens who can.

Who?

The same billionaires who already own the government, that's who.

So what do they want to "resist?"

I could only see them wanting to resist checks on their own power.

So, if the Second Amendment implies a right to resist the government,
then that would mean that we need our billionaire friends to start
stockpiling these weapons now. We need a Koch brothers airfield with a
few fighters and bombers, and Adelson should have a fleet of tanks
somewhere, and I guess that George Soros would bring his collection of
nuke-armed submarines up to date, right?

So lets drop the crazy scenario of Obama-cum-Ghadaffi, and just think
about something we were really likely to see upset us. Do you think for
a moment that you, living in some apartment in Salt Lake City, or a
house in Wyoming, or a condo in Boca Raton, would be ready to go to war
with the Federal Government over the same shit that would get the Koch
Brothers to fuel up their private stock of A10 Warthogs? Really?

Because you know what the billionaires want the government to stop doing?

They want it to get out of the way of their becoming trillionaires.

If you think that the Second Amendment means what the Supreme Court said
in Heller, and you believe that is a good thing, because it gives you
the ability to resist the government, you might want to play out the
long game in your head.

The long game here is this interpretation leads to private armies,
raised by limitless wealth, all of which looks at our quaint little
republican form of government as nothing more than a paper justification
to have a flag waving over a few national parks."


Yes... There's more:
https://popehat.com/2015/12/07/you-are-not-going-to-resist-the-government-with-your-guns/


> 
> On 9/21/16, Razer  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 09/21/2016 11:20 

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[juan]

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 23:10:27 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > However the idea that a professional seller of jewelry is
> > going to make a big sale like that, without even COUNTING the bills
> > because he had been chatted up with some nonsense about the
> > subway system is...not plausible.
> 
> It's all about misdirection, and subtle cues. 


Yes, but there isn't anything extraordinary about it. He's
simply trying to distract his target. There isn't any profound
scientific principle or insight behind that. Or, the insight
may be that you better double check  facts and evidence. That
would be a useful teaching, but not a sound case against
rationalism.


> I haven't seen Derren's
> explanation of this particular example, but from what I know of the
> subject, here is my take:
> 
> The chat about the subway is misdirection. 
> ...etc
> It's conceivable he stages some things, too. Like any magician.


In that same video he fails to scam a guy who sells hotdogs -
as a matter of fact the hotdog guy is rather pissed off. But
then he sucessfuly steals $4500 from a jewelry store? Not
believable at all, not even as staged entertainment. 


> 
> > I do think that Darren is socially engineering people. The
> > people who watch their videos, IF they think are real...
> 
> But if you believe a talented magician never manages to fool people
> successfully, you're naive. Yes, they'll stage stuff too, but that is
> hardly the point.


The point is that you are advancing an anti rationalistic view
of human nature, and apparently presenting as evidence stuff
that...isn't convincing.


 
> The skills of illusion, and "mentalism" are quite real.. and if you
> watch more of his stuff, especially the longer videos or full
> episodes where he breaks down the hows and whys of it working,
> perhaps you'll be less likely to say its fake. It's easy to dismiss a
> magic trick as "camera edits" when you just have a 3 minute video.
> It's a bit harder when the magician explains the whole thing to you.


Magic tricks don't have much to do with this. Magic tricks rely
on exploiting shortcomings of perception, "the hand is quicker
than the eye", that sort of thing. But indeed nobody believes
that those magic tricks are 'real' magic. If anything they prove
that people are rational and know that magicians can't make
rabbits dissapear - they know it's 'illusion'.


If on the other hand Derren is 'staging' the jewelry store
video, that means he and the guy at the shop are playing a
part and the video isn't even 'illusion', it's outright fake.



> 
> In the videos I linked to, he uses a lot of body language mirroring.
> Whatever movements the subject makes, he mirrors with his own body
> language. Then, when he feels like he has the person, he'll move away
> as a test and do other movements to see if they have begun mirroring
> him, in return.
> 
> Then he handed them the water bottle, while asking for something in
> return. They continue to mirror, they have received, so they'll give.
> This is doubly effective, since there is a subconscious desire for
> reciprocity.


OK, so maybe handing the bottle of water makes it more likely
that they other guy would hand something in return. A neat
trick, which might work. Sometimes. Still, this is no sound
philosophical principle. 


> 
> And then yes, they realize it. Their rational mind kicks back in, and
> they'll realize it. But the fact that the rational mind can be so
> easily subverted, should give one pause.


So he failed 50 times and then tricked one guy for 10 seconds.
Is that evidence against rationalism? 



> 
> He uses a lot of techniques, but "neuro-linguistic programming" (NLP)
> is the bread-and-butter.
> 
> I have some familiarity with the techniques.. book learning,
> basically. I've never employed them, at least not consciously, but I
> can say that I see a lot of this stuff in advertisements and
> politicians speeches.
> 
> Seems to me there is something to it, 


As in you can trick some people under some special
circumstances for a short period? Yes. But I don't think there
are wider implications.



> whether Derren is 100% above
> board, or not.
> 

Re:

[Zenaan Harkness]

Very fine response actually.

There are many most intriguing fine details and aspects which can be
used in legal hackerspaces.

Most want to tech hack, not law hack though ... there be a primary
block.

That don't stop some amazing and enjoyable hacks very possible, some
even easy, though :)



On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:03:58PM -0500, Xer0Dynamite wrote:
> Show me the Law(s) that makes it so.
> 
> \0x
> 
> On 9/21/16, Razer  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 09/21/2016 11:20 AM, Xer0Dynamite wrote:
> >> Like Lessig's "Code is Law".   LAW is also CODE:  it's the Operating
> >> System for your Government.  Presently:  bloated and with a few design
> >> flaws.   Fortunately, it's Open Source.  Muhahhhwhahaaa
> >>
> >> \0x
> >>
> >
> >
> > But the hardware it runs on, the the Judicial-Industrial complex and
> > it's activating mechanism the Law Enforcement-Industrial Complex, are
> > closed source.
> >
> > "Muhahhhwhahaaa"
> >
> > Rr

[Fwd: Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF]

[xorcist]

Ooops.

Sent this to Juan offlist, but meant to copy the list on it too.

>   However the idea that a professional seller of jewelry is going
>   to make a big sale like that, without even COUNTING the bills
>   because he had been chatted up with some nonsense about the
>   subway system is...not plausible.

It's all about misdirection, and subtle cues. I haven't seen Derren's
explanation of this particular example, but from what I know of the
subject, here is my take:

The chat about the subway is misdirection. He makes it a point to start
moving his hands, point this way and that about "directions" .. that gets
the cashier looking away from what they're doing and subtly distracted,
looking at him, and away from what they are supposed to be doing.

Then he mentions being uneasy about the subway. This is an important part.
Because it will tend to make the listener remember a time they were uneasy
or had a bad experience on the subway. This memory, and any associated
emotional impact, puts them entirely "within their head" for just a
moment.

Then comes pay off. "Go ahead, just take it. It's fine." while handing him
the paper.. overtly referring to his friend, telling him to take the
subway, but covertly a command to accept the "money."

The jewelry store guy DID realize it, shortly after, as well as did the
guys with the wallets. That is to be expected. The suggestible state
doesn't last indefinitely.

If you look into his work, he has admitted that he has more failures than
successes depending on the complexity of the trick, and that his show is
about entertainment, primarily, and so only the successes are shown.

It's conceivable he stages some things, too. Like any magician.

>   I do think that Darren is socially engineering people. The
>   people who watch their videos, IF they think are real...

But if you believe a talented magician never manages to fool people
successfully, you're naive. Yes, they'll stage stuff too, but that is
hardly the point.

The skills of illusion, and "mentalism" are quite real.. and if you watch
more of his stuff, especially the longer videos or full episodes where he
breaks down the hows and whys of it working, perhaps you'll be less likely
to say its fake. It's easy to dismiss a magic trick as "camera edits" when
you just have a 3 minute video. It's a bit harder when the magician
explains the whole thing to you.

In the videos I linked to, he uses a lot of body language mirroring.
Whatever movements the subject makes, he mirrors with his own body
language. Then, when he feels like he has the person, he'll move away as a
test and do other movements to see if they have begun mirroring him, in
return.

Then he handed them the water bottle, while asking for something in
return. They continue to mirror, they have received, so they'll give. This
is doubly effective, since there is a subconscious desire for reciprocity.

And then yes, they realize it. Their rational mind kicks back in, and
they'll realize it. But the fact that the rational mind can be so easily
subverted, should give one pause.

He uses a lot of techniques, but "neuro-linguistic programming" (NLP) is
the bread-and-butter.

I have some familiarity with the techniques.. book learning, basically.
I've never employed them, at least not consciously, but I can say that I
see a lot of this stuff in advertisements and politicians speeches.

Seems to me there is something to it, whether Derren is 100% above board,
or not.

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[juan]

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 04:59:14 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:40:09PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> > Now, here's your fallacy. Because we humans are of course acting
> > rationally under pressure. Take Juan's give-me-your-money example:
> > in order to actually hand out your money you need to understand my
> > intentions, you need to know that I know what you might know etc,
> > and then act accordingly.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdYgEDSm7E
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0q2KGGMc1EM
> 

Here's a second video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy75GtKsOAw


In that second video apparently he tricks a guy at a jewelry
store (a goldsmith?) into selling him a $4500 ring for a stack
of white paper. Needless to say, I think the video is fake. 

The first video you linked might be plausible, especially
taking into account that the people he tricks do realize they
were tricked after a short while. 

However the idea that a professional seller of jewelry is going
to make a big sale like that, without even COUNTING the bills
because he had been chatted up with some nonsense about the
subway system is...not plausible.

I do think that Darren is socially engineering people. The
people who watch their videos, IF they think are real...



> Don't be so sure.
> 
> >
> > This is rationality at work.
> 
> > THAT is free will.
> 
> Poke around on Youtube and watch a bunch of Derren's stuff.


I don't mean this in a confrontational tone, but it seems you
are being tricked by Derren...



 Watch how
> he MAKES people make choices that, to them, feel entirely free.
> 
> Listen to him, as he teaches you how it works, WHY it works, and get
> an understanding of the limits of rational, conscious free will.
> 
> 

Re: Volunteers

[Dan White]

I'll note in the headers for the forged message:

Received: from pglaf.org ([127.0.0.1])
   by localhost (mail.pglaf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
   with ESMTP id q3dJbRQr1ULg for ;
   Wed, 21 Sep 2016 03:57:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Greylist: delayed 905 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at mail;
   Wed, 21 Sep 2016 03:57:33 PDT
Received-SPF: Softfail (domain owner discourages use of this host)
   identity=mailfrom; client-ip=195.128.120.25; helo=mail05.parking.ru;
   envelope-from=juan@gmail.com; receiver=cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org
Received: from mail05.parking.ru (mail05.parking.ru [195.128.120.25])
   by pglaf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35D611C0539
   for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 03:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web38 [195.128.121.111] by mail05.parking.ru with SMTP;
   Wed, 21 Sep 2016 13:41:59 +0300

The originating smtp relay server was apparently mail05.parking.ru. The
Received-SPF (presumably from pglaf.org, the cypherpunks list host) grey listed
the message due to an SPF fail, instead of rejecting the message, which would
have prevented this message from being distributed to the list.

On 09/21/16 16:10 -0300, juan wrote:

I didn't send the message quoted below, so I'm wondering how
the spoofing was done this time...


> Sean Lynch: > Of course, this is all unglamorous work > that's hard
to get volunteers to do > unless they're really passionate Or getting
paid, fucker.




This email was sent via Anonymous email service for free.
YOU CAN REMOVE THIS TEXT MESSAGE BY BEING A PAID MEMBER FOR $19/year.

CLICK HERE => 
Message ID= 315861





--
Dan White

Re: Sim Theory

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/21/2016 10:36 AM, John Newman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:04:25PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:

>> For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian 
>> phenomenon Baba Vanga ( ??), who allegedly could
>> predict future with high accuracy and see in the past. She
>> survived practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling
>> ill people they will die soon. I can't figure out how this
>> doesn't break causality, neither care.
>> 
>> Call me a crazy nut for the above.
>> 
>> The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of
>> disinformation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga
> 
> Hmm... I am pretty (extremely) cynical about such things, but,
> really, who fucking knows There is no doubt the "standard
> model" changes, but I like to think these "advances" are based on
> slightly harder science than Baba Vanga :P

I tell people that anyone who has ever kept a dream journal for a
substantial length of time will learn that time is not what we think
it is.  In my case, I was rather shocked to find descriptions of
several people I had not /yet/ met in real life, and how we would
interact some months later.

On another occasion, I found a detailed description of events - the
date confirmed as correct per the a note that the moon was full - that
one week later neither I nor anyone else involved remembered, in a
regular journal.  Mind = blown.

None of this can or should persuade anyone but me that something
damned strange is going on with this "reality" thing.  But I was and
remain so persuaded.  Now the question is, what does it mean and what
can I do with/to/about it?  So far the only answer I get is "just be
aware that you don't know what you think you know about how reality
works."  And worse - maybe Phil Dick was right.

:o/


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4txcAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqMDAH/jxReYDZO5JssTmINwrcnhUE
JXfpJ7lBcn2wVP8Lz5i3LA2QS6R07uD/7oDvCWTZDfePc8qyOuYuvUgOsaVoXMEK
RUJsayFbVCyzQG7dS0kdalTlinfo5fxZp4ZS0X18je+Rrq/YPQ/M1zANDkqg8UV9
9vWZzCzEWnIEQjcH94yx+fYgeBdzddialfAxaxWovM0sKh7vXUmw/eFpNrSBKaIg
ZtA5231xvAowc2gi0D9goF4hvbBL6mAk6lObumSSpjA8OouIsnzYT4v2yXIQWYdj
2R6LjeuVZ5WceD7HuhmE//rcG7nBrzbyem+twZY4F3rJvX2HUo0xV54HZjfRZ/o=
=kx2c
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re:

[Xer0Dynamite]

Show me the Law(s) that makes it so.

\0x

On 9/21/16, Razer  wrote:
>
>
> On 09/21/2016 11:20 AM, Xer0Dynamite wrote:
>> Like Lessig's "Code is Law".   LAW is also CODE:  it's the Operating
>> System for your Government.  Presently:  bloated and with a few design
>> flaws.   Fortunately, it's Open Source.  Muhahhhwhahaaa
>>
>> \0x
>>
>
>
> But the hardware it runs on, the the Judicial-Industrial complex and
> it's activating mechanism the Law Enforcement-Industrial Complex, are
> closed source.
>
> "Muhahhhwhahaaa"
>
> Rr
>

Re:

[Razer]

On 09/21/2016 11:20 AM, Xer0Dynamite wrote:
> Like Lessig's "Code is Law".   LAW is also CODE:  it's the Operating
> System for your Government.  Presently:  bloated and with a few design
> flaws.   Fortunately, it's Open Source.  Muhahhhwhahaaa
> 
> \0x
> 


But the hardware it runs on, the the Judicial-Industrial complex and
it's activating mechanism the Law Enforcement-Industrial Complex, are
closed source.

"Muhahhhwhahaaa"

Rr

Re: In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub [was: Sim Theory]

[John Newman]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:07:10PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:15 AM, John Newman  wrote:
> For this small price of love, you could grant it it's freedom,
> for everyone, forever...
> 
> http://custodians.online/

I don't have the apparatus to scan it - and I'm not sure a used
copy in "very  good" condition would make a decent digital 
copy :P 

Also, sci-hub.io seems to be down. 


John 

[no subject]

[Xer0Dynamite]

Like Lessig's "Code is Law".   LAW is also CODE:  it's the Operating
System for your Government.  Presently:  bloated and with a few design
flaws.   Fortunately, it's Open Source.  Muhahhhwhahaaa

\0x

Re: Little Brother, Re: Switching gears

[Stephen D. Williams]

On 9/21/16 10:59 AM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>> That's called "Little Brother"; we (for various forms of "we") have talked
>> about it a lot.
> Heh. Kinda funny. I called it "Little Sister" when I mentioned it to my
> buddy.

I like that.  Perhaps the well-designed incarnation should be "Little Sister" 
to be more opposite and less threatening than "Big
Brother".

>
> Yeah, those are good points you make. A voting system that could
> downvote/purge irrelevant/private clips would be good. It should be motion
> captured, to preserve storage/bandwidth.
>
> Of course you're right that there are implications for misuse. I'm not
> sure thats a deal-breaker for me, exactly, criminal types will use their
> own tech to case a joint anyhow. Sure, maybe it lowers the bar, but there
> seem to be adequate payoffs.
>
> My main concern is the privacy implications, and the social implications,
> of people who get accustomed to always being on cam. I see it evolving to
> a type of super-amped up example of the Japanese concepts of honne (true
> sound)/ tatemae (facade). Honne being "how one truly is" and tatemae "how
> one presents themself in society." All cultures have such concepts, but
> for the Japanese, they were, and are, very deeply ingrained and felt,
> including nuance for different levels, and things one never says even to
> their closest associates.

In the US, we've essentially decided that a wide range of things that used to 
be private are more or less fine to be public. 
Generally, at least in certain areas, it isn't a negative and can even be 
positive in some ways sometimes.  The fact that some laws
are changing and the broader public is becoming more sophisticated helps a lot. 
 A few obvious examples: sexuality (now legal), soft
drugs (more legal), not being religious, 50 Shades et al, porn, nudity, sex 
tapes.  All of those required strict privacy and
partitioning in the past.

> I don't know that those are trades I'm willing to make.
>
> The black bloc tactic of smashing cameras isn't bad, except like most of
> their tactics, it just won't scale. It's great for young adults with
> plenty of piss and vinegar in their veins, but its not going to attract
> the masses. I'm not worried about attracting the anarchist kids willing to
> get facial ink to make sure they can't get a proper job and "sell out" or
> willing to do a stint in the clink. They're going to be alright.
>
> I'm more concerned with getting to the critical mass of mainstream folks.
> Your points about providing a free type of security monitoring solution
> for their homes might help attract them, with the side-benefits being that
> it can undermine a state monopoly on surveillance.
>
> Still.. the social costs scare me. But those costs may very well get paid
> whether an open system exists, or not.
>
>

sdw

Re: Switching gears

[xorcist]

> I disagree.

> Therefore, the one and only effective way to get back freedom is to
> shutdown the tyranny. Maybe weapons are required, like in the US
> independence war, maybe a massive amount of people is required, like we
> east germans did in 1989.
>
> Anything else are illusions.

Valid points.

I don't pin much hope on violence, though. Violent revolution has never
produced any type of long-lasting freedom. At best, a short respite from
tyranny.. like lancing an infection to let out just enough pus to relieve
the pain, but no antibiotics for a cure.

US independence is a great example. Their declaration of independence
lists charges against the King of England. Today, it strongly parallels
the US government's lesser infractions.

All violence does is to transfer power to a new group, and perhaps
consolidate it further. It does nothing to dissipate it.

Mass scale strikes or protests might have a better chance. At least that
sets a foundation not predicated on violence, and therefore coercion,
which is the premise of all government and all tyrannies.

I don't see insurrection as a real way forward, just an outlet for
inevitable frustration before we start the cycle over again. Maybe that is
inevitable, but I don't like to believe that.

Re: Switching gears

[Stephen D. Williams]

I can identify with that view somewhat.  What used to be the case was that 
people would heavily scrutinize, gossip, report, etc.
what others were doing.  That was a tyranny of sorts too.  By having more 
photos, video, and social sharing of all kinds, a much
wider range of life was exposed as being normal, harmless, tolerated, etc.  
That trend is only going to continue.

The privacy laws in Europe seem good-hearted.  Hopefully they will turn out 
well.  Not sure that could work in the US, except by
convention.

I've been a bit of a photographer for a long time.  There is a lot of 
psychology about things, and it has been evolving.  And there
have been some funny missteps: Google Glass created a backlash while nobody 
cares at all if you have a GoPro running.  There is
etiquette about taking someone's picture, with reactions varying widely.  One 
interesting detail is that if you aren't looking at
someone, they generally don't care if you take their picture.  I have a few 
spherical cameras that I use as a tourist or in races.


On 9/21/16 10:42 AM, Tom wrote:
> I disagree.
>
> One cannot fight a tyranny (let's face it: a surveillance state is
> indeed a tyranny) this way. For example, in the EU this kind of stuff is
> just forbidden. And with whatever you might come up with, they'll criminalize
> it, 0.1% of the "offenders" will be punished and the rest of the
> populace will surrender.
>
> Therefore, the one and only effective way to get back freedom is to
> shutdown the tyranny. Maybe weapons are required, like in the US
> independence war, maybe a massive amount of people is required, like we
> east germans did in 1989.
>
> Anything else are illusions.
>
>
>
> Tom

sdw

Re: Little Brother, Re: Switching gears

[xorcist]

> That's called "Little Brother"; we (for various forms of "we") have talked
> about it a lot.

Heh. Kinda funny. I called it "Little Sister" when I mentioned it to my
buddy.

Yeah, those are good points you make. A voting system that could
downvote/purge irrelevant/private clips would be good. It should be motion
captured, to preserve storage/bandwidth.

Of course you're right that there are implications for misuse. I'm not
sure thats a deal-breaker for me, exactly, criminal types will use their
own tech to case a joint anyhow. Sure, maybe it lowers the bar, but there
seem to be adequate payoffs.

My main concern is the privacy implications, and the social implications,
of people who get accustomed to always being on cam. I see it evolving to
a type of super-amped up example of the Japanese concepts of honne (true
sound)/ tatemae (facade). Honne being "how one truly is" and tatemae "how
one presents themself in society." All cultures have such concepts, but
for the Japanese, they were, and are, very deeply ingrained and felt,
including nuance for different levels, and things one never says even to
their closest associates.

I don't know that those are trades I'm willing to make.

The black bloc tactic of smashing cameras isn't bad, except like most of
their tactics, it just won't scale. It's great for young adults with
plenty of piss and vinegar in their veins, but its not going to attract
the masses. I'm not worried about attracting the anarchist kids willing to
get facial ink to make sure they can't get a proper job and "sell out" or
willing to do a stint in the clink. They're going to be alright.

I'm more concerned with getting to the critical mass of mainstream folks.
Your points about providing a free type of security monitoring solution
for their homes might help attract them, with the side-benefits being that
it can undermine a state monopoly on surveillance.

Still.. the social costs scare me. But those costs may very well get paid
whether an open system exists, or not.

Switching gears

[xorcist]

I'd like to bounce an idea around. At the outset, I'm going to say that I
don't really like the idea. Like getting a root canal, I'd rather not have
a some guy drilling around in my jaw, but what can you do?

Some years back, maybe 8 years ago now, prior to the Snowden revelations,
a Kiwi buddy and I were discussing the arising surveillance state.

I ventured the idea that the only way to combat it, is for citizens to put
web cams in their windows, in their cars, have body cams.. whatever.. and
have a distributed system where we can live stream that stuff up. Open
source surveillance, if you will.

The idea scared the hell out of him, and rightly so. My take on
surveillance tech is that it is like nukes. The only viable strategy is
deterrence. The genie is out of the bottle, the tech isn't going anywhere,
and so if we're going to preserve freedom, the technology needs to be
under our control.

Open source surveillance is a monster, but its a monster that would bite
police and agents of the state as easily as us. Rather than the
government/media being able to selectively pick-and-choose which camera
angles, and which clips to release, we'd have to ability to check, and
disprove.

I don't like what it means, in terms of enabling stalkers, but perhaps
that is mitigated by the ability to catch those fucks on camera?

I'd love to hear reactions and thoughts on this. It's not something you're
going to catch me truly arguing for, its really more of a devil's advocate
type thing.. like I say, I just see it mostly as a fucked strategy for
dealing with a fucked situation.

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Sep 21, 2016 2:29 AM, "Александр"  wrote:
>
> oh oh oh... so much private information and WHAT an information
we should start LAving you, xorcist. Just lAving you!!! What a holy man we
got on the list... on day three he opens his hErt in front of all of us.

I was lurking for a long, long time on tor-talk list, but when I decided to
break my silence because of that disgusting JakeGate, I told about rapes,
ménage a trois and bullying in a hackerspace in my first public days...  Am
I a fake persona too?  Or just an indiscreet person trying to explain some
hard subjects using my own past as example?  ;)

>  There are Invincible GUARDS here on the list for suckers like you.
Zenaan and Juan are their names.

Please, Alex, flirt with Zen and Juan in private.  I am very cheesy, but
this kind of thing is pretty embarrassing in some moments...  :-/

Kisses, take care!  :*

Ceci

Re: Sim Theory

[John Newman]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:04:25PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA512
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski 
> >  wrote:
> > >The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of
> > >the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before
> > >the big bang?".
> > 
> > It's turtles all the way down Actually, I like to think
> > that the universe is infinite and forever, except current
> > models predict heat death once entropy is reached in
> > some enormous amount of time...
> > 
> > But who fucking knows, really?
> >
> 
> Didn't Terry Pratchett claim in Disc World that the world is run on
> top of giant turtle? And depicted the big bang as "In the beginning 
> there was nothing, and it exploded"?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down


> 
> As for the "standard model" of "real reality", it changes often.
> 
> For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian
> phenomenon Baba Vanga ( ??), who allegedly could predict
> future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived 
> practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people 
> they will die soon. 
> I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care.
> 
> Call me a crazy nut for the above.
> 
> The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga

Hmm... I am pretty (extremely) cynical about such things, but, really,
who fucking knows There is no doubt the "standard model" changes, 
but I like to think these "advances" are based on slightly harder
science than Baba Vanga :P  


John 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Even spookier entangled particles.

[John Newman]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 05:13:18AM +, jim bell wrote:
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/entangled-particles-reveal-even-spookier-action-thought-125723794.html
> 
> [partial quote]
> Sorry, Einstein: It looks like the world is spooky ??? even when your most 
> famous theory is tossed out.This finding comes from a close look at quantum 
> entanglement, in which two particles that are "entangled" affect each other 
> even when separated by a large distance. Einstein found that his theory of 
> special relativity meant that this weird behavior was impossible, calling it 
> "spooky."Now, researchers have found that even if they were to scrap this 
> theory, allowing entangled particles to communicate with each other faster 
> than the??speed of light??or even instantaneously, that couldn't explain the 
> odd behavior. The findings rule out certain "realist" interpretations of 
> spooky quantum behavior. [Infographic: How Quantum Entanglement Works]"What 
> that tells us is that we have to look a little bit deeper," said study 
> co-author Martin Ringbauer, a doctoral candidate in physics at the University 
> of Queensland in Australia. "This kind of action-at-a-distance is not enough 
> to explain quantum correlations" seen between entangled particles, Ringbauer 
> said.
> Action at a distance
> Most of the time, the world seems ??? if not precisely orderly ??? then at 
> least governed by fixed rules. At the macroscale, cause-and-effect rules the 
> behavior of the universe,??time always marches forward??and objects in the 
> universe have objective, measurable properties. ??But zoom in enough, and 
> those common-sense notions seem to evaporate. At the subatomic scale, 
> particles can become entangled, meaning their fates are bizarrely linked. For 
> instance, if two photons are sent from a laser through a crystal, after they 
> fly off in separate directions, their spin will be linked the moment one of 
> the particles is measured. Several studies have now confirmed that, no matter 
> how far apart entangled particles are, how fast one particle is measured, or 
> how many times particles are measured, their states become inextricably 
> linked once they are measured.For nearly a century, physicists have tried to 
> understand what this means about the universe. The dominant interpretation 
> was that entangled particles have no fixed position or orientation until they 
> are measured. Instead, both particles travel as the sum of the probability of 
> all their potential positions, and both only "choose" one state at the moment 
> of measurement. This behavior seems to defy notions of Einstein's theory 
> ofspecial relativity, which argues that no information can be transmitted 
> faster than the speed of light. It was so frustrating to Einstein that he 
> famously called it "spooky action at a distance."??To get around this notion, 
> in 1935, Einstein and colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen laid out a 
> paradox that could test the alternate hypothesis that some hidden variable 
> affected the fate of both objects as they traveled. If the hidden variable 
> model were true, that would mean "there's some description of reality which 
> is objective," Ringbauer told Live Science. [Spooky! The Top 10 Unexplained 
> Phenomena]Then in 1964, Irish physicist John Stewart Bell came up with a 
> mathematical expression, now known as Bell's Inequality, that 
> could??experimenta

Interesting experiment shows "Quantum teleportation was just achieved
over more than 7 km of city fibre"..  Independent teams in China
and Canada just showed... something interesting, "sending" quantum
information over existing fiber networks in Calgary and Hefei
(China)...

Still parsing the story, but it seems to have definite implications
for crypto.

sources:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/16/09/20/32/quantum-teleportation-achieved-over-7km-of-cable
http://www.sciencealert.com/quantum-teleportation-was-just-achieved-over-7-km-of-cable
http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphoton.2016.180.html
http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphoton.2016.179.html


John


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Sim Theory

[Georgi Guninski]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> 
> 
> On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski  
> wrote:
> >The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of
> >the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before
> >the big bang?".
> 
> It's turtles all the way down Actually, I like to think
> that the universe is infinite and forever, except current
> models predict heat death once entropy is reached in
> some enormous amount of time...
> 
> But who fucking knows, really?
>

Didn't Terry Pratchett claim in Disc World that the world is run on
top of giant turtle? And depicted the big bang as "In the beginning 
there was nothing, and it exploded"?

As for the "standard model" of "real reality", it changes often.

For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian
phenomenon Baba Vanga (Баба Ванга), who allegedly could predict
future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived 
practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people 
they will die soon. 
I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care.

Call me a crazy nut for the above.

The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga

Member Berries

[skankhunt42]

> xorcist:
> I remember when this list had posts from Assange and others
> on actual cryptographic techniques and tools,
> where real information was shared.

Sounds like you've been eating them member berries [0].

The episode [1] pokes at trolls and the US elections.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndI9vkgw_1Y
[1]: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:7b5fd54d7f69f6bb68b1af7be3fbfa2a4489786f

Re: Sim Theory

[John Newman]

> On Sep 20, 2016, at 11:39 PM, Mirimir  wrote:
> 
>> On 09/20/2016 09:22 PM, Tom wrote:
>> btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this
>> book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among
>> a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read.
> 
> There's The Killing Star by Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski.
> Death by relativistic bombardment.
> 

I was trying to get a copy of this book a
while back but it's out of print and used
prices were high (like $30) I don't 
suppose anyone has an ePub they could
shoot me?  Or is it worth $30 for a 1995
paperback, maybe so...

BTW Mirmir I've read and enjoyed Accelerando
and Diaspora... I'll have to check out the
Jean le Flambeur stuff

John


> https://www.reddit.com/r/Frisson/comments/1j08oq/text_excerpt_from_the_killing_star_by_charles/
> 
>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM,   wrote:
 I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big
 Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses.
 Like breathing.
 But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold,
 undefinable soup.
>>> 
>>> Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity
>>> is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to
>>> escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse
>>> forces, is the required result.
>>> 
>>> It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly
>>> diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we
>>> will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
>> 

Re: on communication - gpg's el gamal and debian's openssl

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/21/2016 03:56 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:57:59PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
>>> search the interwebz for references.
>> 
>> TL;DR
>> 
> 
> Here are some links of the more important screwups IMHO.


Below:  The kind of content people bitch about CPunks not having near
enough of.  Really annoying stuff, in the sense that now I have to
look at the whole thing of this happy horse shit.

Gee thanks.

;o)

> 
> Suspect zero or more of (spec) backdoors, social engineering,
> gross incompetence:
> 
> https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2003q4/000160.html
>
> 
gpg
> GnuPG's ElGamal signing keys compromised Thu Nov 27 09:29:51 CET
> 2003
> 
> 
> https://www.debian.org/security/2008/dsa-1571 13 May 2008 Debian It
> is strongly recommended that all cryptographic key material which
> has been generated by OpenSSL versions starting with 0.9.8c-1 on
> Debian systems is recreated from scratch. Furthermore, all DSA keys
> ever used on affected Debian systems for signing or authentication
> purposes should be considered compromised; the Digital Signature
> Algorithm relies on a secret random value used during signature
> generation.
> 
> [1] http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2011/Sep/221 Thu, 22 Sep
> 2011 Ubuntu Importing trusted apt gpg keys uses "--list-sigs",
> which doesn't check the signatures. Also trivial keyid collisions.
> 
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1013128 
> 2012-06-14 Ubuntu Trivial import of trusted apt gpg keys via easy
> collision of the long keyid (probably spec backdoor). Circumvents
> the pseudo fix for [1].
> 
> https://lwn.net/Articles/22991/ (not crypto), Debian, micq February
> 18, 2003 Mr. Kuhlmann decided that enough was enough, and he was
> going to take some action. As of mICQ 0.4.10.1, the code will, when
> built for the Debian distribution, print out a message which says
> some unflattering things about Mr. Loschwitz and encourages use of
> a different version; the program then exits. In other words, when
> built for Debian, mICQ thumbs its nose at the user and refuses to
> run. To help ensure that this code got into the official Debian
> version, it was written in an obfuscated manner, set to trigger
> only after February 11, and only if it was not being run by Mr.
> Loschwitz. For the curious, here is a posting containing the code
> in question.



-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4kllAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqIuwH/0MCyoCkcjXa50TDb1jbQ/lV
3muyhnnFjhEWwyzNg89ECrv/KQ2tcXljebc1c0nH3LA8lQZsl6kuJ//ki7mSsvDx
yCp44/gbPh5cSOgI0+LH+4HWpKtzPn9httiaOhCnQGE3qpqSX/fKoSu6XOKoyL2a
ZBNypCEdITugcUsIgW1k2GdVzZ7pV8BpV/bEAZHeAhWJC/6JYnjN2nPyvYidVkbB
FmQuz1DC4il4+OLqI0xfgGuFS3FM/MGnfrG8oEvgq7zREWwXWW9/riOBoNEHgEew
s5DL0uVt7i2Zdoj0GD1Bipu9XEvPKfcMQ5vsaa9ZUSSWUouWt5itKWyW+LgE280=
=LU1x
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: on communication - gpg's el gamal and debian's openssl

[Georgi Guninski]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:57:59PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
> > search the interwebz for references.
> 
> TL;DR
>

Here are some links of the more important screwups IMHO.

Suspect zero or more of (spec) backdoors, social engineering, gross
incompetence:

https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2003q4/000160.html
gpg
GnuPG's ElGamal signing keys compromised 
Thu Nov 27 09:29:51 CET 2003


https://www.debian.org/security/2008/dsa-1571
13 May 2008
Debian
It is strongly recommended that all cryptographic key material 
which has been generated by OpenSSL versions starting with 0.9.8c-1
on Debian systems is recreated from scratch. Furthermore, all DSA
keys ever used on affected Debian systems for signing or 
authentication purposes should be considered compromised; 
the Digital Signature Algorithm relies on a secret random value used during 
signature generation.

[1] http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2011/Sep/221
Thu, 22 Sep 2011
Ubuntu
Importing trusted apt gpg keys uses "--list-sigs", which doesn't
check the signatures. Also trivial keyid collisions.


https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1013128
2012-06-14
Ubuntu
Trivial import of trusted apt gpg keys via easy collision of the
long keyid (probably spec backdoor). Circumvents the pseudo fix for
[1].

https://lwn.net/Articles/22991/
(not crypto), Debian, micq
February 18, 2003
Mr. Kuhlmann decided that enough was enough, and he was going to take 
some action. As of mICQ 0.4.10.1, the code will, when built for the Debian 
distribution, print out a message which says some unflattering things about 
Mr. Loschwitz and encourages use of a different version; the program then 
exits. 
In other words, when built for Debian, mICQ thumbs its nose at the user and 
refuses to run. To help ensure that this code got into the official Debian 
version, 
it was written in an obfuscated manner, set to trigger only after February 11, 
and 
only if it was not being run by Mr. Loschwitz. For the curious, here is a 
posting 
containing the code in question. 

 

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[juan]

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 04:55:03 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> >> You're like autistic or something.
> >
> >
> > Sure. And being gay is a disease that is cured with
> > electroshocks and lobotomies.
> 
> 
> Hit a nerve, did I? Sorry. No judgments. 

You hit a nerve only in a general sense. Psychiatry is a
especially vicious tool for political manipulation and
oppresion.

I didn't mention the 'cure' of homosexuality for personal
reasons but just because it's a great (and horrid) illustration
of what kind of very bad joke the field is.



> If its correct, it just
> means you just think differently. It's not even a big deal. For the
> purposes here, it just means you'll tend to take discussions in a
> more literal way.
> 
> > "Autistic" - you just keep polishing your pseudo scientific
> > garbage eh. Now you are firmly in the grounds of fascist
> > 'psychiatric' 'science'.
> 
> lol. Dude, my niece has Asperger's. She's brilliant, talented, and I
> love her - and there is no 'fascist psychiatry' involved. Her life,
> and her relationships with her parents and others all benefited when
> the diagnosis was realized, and appropriate communications techniques
> used.


Your niece is shy. But now being shy has been turned into a
'mental disorder' a 'syndrome' or whatever. We should be glad
that science is fixing the world...


> 
> >> You focus on the words, but seem to
> >> have difficulty actually relating to the underlying scenarios or
> >> seeing the dynamics of human relationships within those scenarios.
> >> It's all this bullshit about "the logic" of morality. Bugger off
> >> with that nonsense.
> >
> > Sure. If such an alpha master of intelectual thought like
> > you says so, I will obey.
> 
> Oh come now. Now you're just being butt-hurt. You've called what I've
> written bullshit numerous times and I didn't get all shitty about it.


I'm not really butthurt. If anything I'm slightly frustrated. 



> 
> But, when I disagree, I say so. And I defend my position and state
> things how I see it. You are, of course, free to disagree and that's
> fine.

...and so we have a discussion...of sorts. You can call it a
pissing match, but I think it remains a more or less rational
discussion. And I'm not arguing just for fun.


> 
> Like I said, I don't have enemies.
> 
> >> But they are still a representation social in-group/out-group
> >> dynamics
> >
> > I bow to your superior wisdom, massa
> 
> Well stand the fuck up then.

=)


> 
> >
> > Sure. Violence is wrong according to pacifists, but allowing
> > people to be killed, including oneself, is 'right' - I
> > laugh my ass off at the STUPIDITY of it.
> >
> > Feel free to lecture me again with that kind of stupidity
> > as if it wasn't sheer stupidity...
> 
> Don't misrepresent me. I never said I thought it was right. I never
> said I was a pacifist to that level.


> 
> We're talking about morality, and the ways it gets interpreted.
> Specifically, how morality can be objective, or at least not relative
> -- and yet still get interpreted differently by different cultures and
> people.

Yes, to some extent.

> 
> There are pacifists which interpret it that way however, and I'm just
> acknowledging an interpretation that is different my own, without
> denigrating it. Something you seem unwilling to do.


I'm not denigrating it, but pointing out that it's open to some
degree of rational criticism. 


> 
> > So, first you bring up a topic. Then you accuse ME of
> > bringing up the topic...YOU brought up. And now the problem is that
> > I 'zeroed in' on it.
> >
> > Oh, and if I mention that YOU brought the topic up, since,
> > you know, you accused me of doing it, then "This is all about some
> > mental dick-measuring contest"
> 
> No. The mental dick measuring comment was because you specifically
> made a comment about "quitting while I'm ahead" which would be fine
> as an idiom, except you also made it a point to parenthesize (but I
> never was) .. indicating you see this as a contest.


 I see it as a discussion. Just like you said above, you are
 stating a position, and I disagree with it. 

I specifically disagree with putting too much emphasis on the
fact that some 'majority' of people have 'mainstream' views.

Although at first sight that indeed seems to be the case,
treating it as some kind of biologically determined outcome
doesn't strike me as either correct or useful.




> You could have engaged me with "Well, that's interesting. I never
> thought it of that way. I think this way, for these reasons."
> 
> Instead, you've advanced no real ideas of your own, and only
> proceeded in attacking mine. 


At this point I'm not sure how the topic of social conformity
was started, but the 

Re: on communication - gpg's el gamal and debian's openssl

[Georgi Guninski]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:57:59PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
> > and to debian, who memset() what they read from /dev/random.
> 
> Sounds like a personal issue to me...
>

I deny this and actually use debian. Their disclaimer cover their asses.
Still criticizing publicly OS vendors for major screwups (say for
ditching Appelbaum because of allegations) and other major technical
nonsense.
 

Re: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 05:10:24AM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> In fact, I'm not EVEN CIA, and I have a lot better things to do. I'm burnt
> out lately, so I've been slacking.

Wanna pony up some other TLA's? There's plenty of 'em :)