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

2019-11-04 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 03:46:11PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On communication ...

For those who use the cp archives, the original thread continues
here:
https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2016-September/062006.html



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

2019-11-04 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On communication ...


On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 05:50:00AM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:35:31 - Juan wrote:
...
> > Fine, So what's the cause/source of statism? =)
> 
> Social mammals have a herd instinct, and more specifically humans
> naturally select leaders at a subconscious level in social situations.
> 
> Because we're in some sense pre-disposed to selecting leaders, we're
> exploitable to people who would seize power. To many, it seems just
> natural and comfortable that there should be someone, with authority, that
> they can look to in order to find out what they should do.
> 
> You can see this in early teen children, where kids start to select
> "popular" kids, and others try to emulate them. It's no coincidence that
> the "king" and "queen" of the prom will be the most popular pair of kids
> in school. In fact, the king and queen as selected years before the prom.
> It's no coincidence that the jocks in high school go on to become the cops
> as adults.
> 
> At a deep level, that is the mechanism. Primates, humans included, have an
> ingrained alpha/beta dynamic that makes us select leaders. That is the
> core psychological hook that the whole thing rides on. And it trickles all
> the way down, individual sub-groups will have their own leaders, and so
> on. A hierarchy .. a pecking order.. arises rather spontaneously.
> 
> For people deeply attached to the state, when you call into question the
> state, in an emotional way, you're sort of insulting their father, or
> maybe "big brother" would be more apropros, and you're calling into
> question the entire structure of what they know. They find it difficult to
> believe a world without the state is possible, because at some unconscious
> level, they've always felt the presence of that hierarchy. It lets them
> know their station in life, and that is comforting to people.. at least
> people in the middle, and certainly at the top.
> 
> So, what do we do about all this? Well, it should be immediately obvious
> that we're up against something much larger than a mere principality. It
> may seem daunting to consider, but it's really not that big of a deal.
> Humans have organized in fantastically diverse ways in history. We can
> recapture some of that, and finally dispense with the authoritarian
> nonsense.
> 
> First though, taking the emotional/social side into account, I'd like to
> highlight a few things that are important in order to grow a base of
> people large enough to do away with the state, and to survive without a
> state (that is, the types of social changes we'd need to have in place in
> order to not re-create a state after their downfall).
> 
> The emotional ties people have are important to consider, when trying to
> "win a convert" to an anti-authoritarian view, make your arguments against
> the state .. "gentle" .. couch it with "I wonder if people could organize
> without it.." when they object, AGREE, but continue with the "wondering."
> We should feel compassion for people so enamored with authoritarianism,
> and be gentle with them. Many anarchist writers of the past have looked at
> them as some sort of debased beast who is content to lick their chains,
> and this view is why we don't have more people. Be compassionate: the
> statist is one that is weary, and feels weak. They get brow-beat with
> orders from superiors regularly. Our job is to give them respite. Don't
> brow-beat them with arguments designed to make them feel inferior. Gently
> encourage new thoughts. Make them feel strong. Ask for their opinions, and
> don't be quick to dismiss. If you disagree, nudge them towards your view.
> 
> It is more effective, persuasion wise today, and one day, without a state,
> those would need to be social norms so that the "betas" get uplifted, and
> feel like they too can lead, in some areas.
> 
> Take note when people are being deferential towards you, and putting you
> in a subtle position of social power, and ABDICATE that power. Ask for
> their opinions, and defer to them. When someone comes to you, for advice,
> or a solution.. Be content to say you don't know, and encourage them to
> use their own understanding. Encourage them to see that you aren't their
> superior.
> 
> With those types of norms in place, the roots of power have less surface
> to take hold, and in the absence of a state (either self-made collapse, or
> insurrection) we're more likely to be able to fill the power vacuum with
> something better than the current notion of the state.
> 
> 
> > Well, to some extent that must have been true? Granted, the
> > fact that they agreed with whatever you said is suspicious. But
> > the solution seems a bit ad hoc. Maybe confusing them worked,
> > but you must have confused other people who were listening too?
> 
> At first, yeah.. but like all social circles "word gets around."
> 
> And yeah.. it was a bit ad hoc, but that is kind of the whole thing..
> people 

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

2016-09-25 Thread Razer


On 09/25/2016 04:25 PM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 10:32:22 -
>>>
>>> Does this mean we're breaking up?
>>
>>  Life is terribly tragic sometimes.
> 
> No, not a tragedy, just life. I find the best way to deal with a painful
> breakup is to remember that if not for the lows, the highs would not be as
> sweet; and that, with the right type of eyes, one can fall madly in love
> for span of hours, and then move along, alone again. How long one is in
> love for is not important, what is important is to experience it.
> 
>>

How long you're involved with someone isn't important. What you get out
of it is.

Right?

Psychopath.

Rr


Yes massa O'Brien @ xorcist @ sigaint - I bow to your alpha
>>  intellect.
> 
> There you go with that bowing again. Have you tried a chiropractor?
> 
> For me, I would say its obvious that I have no superior intellect. While I
> do endeavor to hold complementary ideas in mind, I often find it
> difficult. Just when I think I have it, I'm prone to hives.
> 
> Not to mention, here I am, trying to understand the ways people think in a
> variety of ways and perspectives, ranging from the coldly rational, to the
> exotically playful, and yet I find myself time and again, in all manner of
> confusion when seeing peoples responses to the simplest of things.
> 
> I never attacked your views. I never offered the slightest argument
> against classical libertarianism, nor even objectivism. Other than
> clarifying your stance, I did not address them at all, that I can recall.
> My main focus was to simply state some ideas that I have, and why they
> lead me to conclude that anarchism is a worthwhile endeavor.
> 
> But because I would not bow to you, nor your objections, this causes you,
> to bow to me?
> 
> The world truly is ripe with irrationality.
> 


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

2016-09-25 Thread xorcist
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 10:32:22 -
>>
>> Does this mean we're breaking up?
>
>   Life is terribly tragic sometimes.

No, not a tragedy, just life. I find the best way to deal with a painful
breakup is to remember that if not for the lows, the highs would not be as
sweet; and that, with the right type of eyes, one can fall madly in love
for span of hours, and then move along, alone again. How long one is in
love for is not important, what is important is to experience it.

>   Yes massa O'Brien @ xorcist @ sigaint - I bow to your alpha
>   intellect.

There you go with that bowing again. Have you tried a chiropractor?

For me, I would say its obvious that I have no superior intellect. While I
do endeavor to hold complementary ideas in mind, I often find it
difficult. Just when I think I have it, I'm prone to hives.

Not to mention, here I am, trying to understand the ways people think in a
variety of ways and perspectives, ranging from the coldly rational, to the
exotically playful, and yet I find myself time and again, in all manner of
confusion when seeing peoples responses to the simplest of things.

I never attacked your views. I never offered the slightest argument
against classical libertarianism, nor even objectivism. Other than
clarifying your stance, I did not address them at all, that I can recall.
My main focus was to simply state some ideas that I have, and why they
lead me to conclude that anarchism is a worthwhile endeavor.

But because I would not bow to you, nor your objections, this causes you,
to bow to me?

The world truly is ripe with irrationality.



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

2016-09-25 Thread juan
On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 10:32:22 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 03:24:06 -
> > I'm really fed up with you now =)
> 
> Does this mean we're breaking up?

Life is terribly tragic sometimes.


> "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two
> opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability
> to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald


Yes massa O'Brien @ xorcist @ sigaint - I bow to your alpha
intellect. 




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

2016-09-25 Thread xorcist
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 03:24:06 -
>   I'm really fed up with you now =)

Does this mean we're breaking up?

>> Oh, I disagree. You're at a computer, so you're sitting. And you most
>> certainly are a baby.
>
>   Ha ha ha. So funny.

I thought so too. I notice that you clipped the part about 7+10=5.

There might be hope for you after all, assuming you understood it.

>> I doubt that.
>
>   Wait and see.

So we are breaking up?!


>
>   And you are the kind of retard who reply to 'nothing' =)

Of course! It's a high point of meditative experience, in fact, to focus
on nothingness for extended periods of time.

Rumor has it only the deeply enlightened can manage it.

>   Right. You are pretty much an inconsistent retard. So why would
>   your actions be consistent.

Why thank you, but this is too much praise. I do try, however. At any
rate, thank you. I'm certain a little hobgoblin like you has never read
'Self-Reliance' by Emerson, so you won't understand why its a compliment.
But that is ok. That makes it genuine, and so is even better.

But Emerson was by no means alone.

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed
ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function."
F. Scott Fitzgerald

>   So this is it xorcist.

Stop, you're going to make me blush.

This is a bunch of stuff that happened as I tapped on weird little chiclet
keys. Then, by some process of transmorgrification, an electric heart beat
pounded out into the airwaves, and was sucked into a byzantine complex of
copper conduit. It was compressed, quickened, and reflected off this
surface and that, getting lassoed by loops of magnetic hystersis on
whirling platters and setting off sparks in glowing crystals. Whereupon it
set off a chain reaction; spilling rays of light on the eye of another,
wandering through a labyrinth of nerves and neurons, colliding with
concepts and finally as it came to rest, adding just the right amount of
energy inside the brain of an oddly shaped, glorified chimpanzee, to cause
similarly shaped chiclet keys to be tapped in response.

While I have been told I'm magical, I'm no where near as magical as all that.

But again, thanks for the praise.



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

2016-09-25 Thread Mirimir
On 09/25/2016 12:05 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:



I'm not particularly interested in discussing the definition of "good"
or the value of rationality, but this is interesting.

> Here's a hint to everyone on still reading:
> 
>  Every sentence beginning with "if" (or similar, or that implicitly
>  begins with an 'if' etc) is quite likely suspect from the get go.
> 
> "If" begins a proposition, or assertion, etc.
> 
> Such propositional sentences are easy to slip past those who are not
> familiar with this communication tactic.
> 
> 
> And in this particular example courtesy 'xorcist', we have a classic
> case of a proposition implying an absolute, but in fact is not true,
> yet tends to lead the reader into the fallacy. (Forgot the name of this
> particular 'logical reversal', but it's a fallacy nonetheless.)

Yes! More generally, hypotheticals are very dangerous in debate. Or when
under deposition. It's all too easy to get trapped, especially when the
stakes are high, and you're stressed.

> Second hint: the "more honest" or "leading the reader in critical
> thinking rather than blind agreement" approach is to instead of
> beginning such a sentence with "if", to begin your sentence with "I
> assert that..." or "I assume it is true that..." or even "In many cases,
> we can fairly assume that ...".

Also yes! I do my best to write that way. My favorite is "arguably", and
arguably I use it too much ;)

But then, are we debating here? I like to think that we're collectively
working through stuff. Or just sharing casually. Not that I don't get on
it about being right, from time to time ;)





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

2016-09-25 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 08:51:18PM -0300, juan wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 12:01:39 -
> xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > >   Because there are well organized 'minorities' who are able
> > > to impose their views on the rest.
> > 
> > But it isn't rational to allow a minority to impress its will on the
> > majority.
> > 
> > So we're back to square one.
> 
> 
>   No. It's true that if people were completely rational they
>   would be fighting back in a rational way, but their enemy is
>   more specialized and motivated.
> 
> 
> 
> > >   Even if we were cleverer than the rest, it doesn't follow
> > >   we should be in charge. And a group of stupid people
> > > controlled by a minority of marginally less stupid people is a
> > > recipe for tyranny and disaster.
> > 
> > Why not? If rational is the metric for good, then

OK, this one's gotta be nipped in the bud so to speak!

1) Rational is not the metric for good, although good may often be
   rational.

Your proposition is some sort of logical reversal which does not follow
as an absolute, at all!

2) Your propositional sentence (starting "If...") is an often times
   effective but sly tool. Nutha one for the troll tools list...



Here's a hint to everyone on still reading:

 Every sentence beginning with "if" (or similar, or that implicitly
 begins with an 'if' etc) is quite likely suspect from the get go.

"If" begins a proposition, or assertion, etc.

Such propositional sentences are easy to slip past those who are not
familiar with this communication tactic.


And in this particular example courtesy 'xorcist', we have a classic
case of a proposition implying an absolute, but in fact is not true,
yet tends to lead the reader into the fallacy. (Forgot the name of this
particular 'logical reversal', but it's a fallacy nonetheless.)


Second hint: the "more honest" or "leading the reader in critical
thinking rather than blind agreement" approach is to instead of
beginning such a sentence with "if", to begin your sentence with "I
assert that..." or "I assume it is true that..." or even "In many cases,
we can fairly assume that ...".




> > the most rational people can do the most good.
> > They'll seek to do the most good.

And here we see the logical fallacy flowing from the false
generalisation / proposition.







Alright then, carry on ...


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

2016-09-24 Thread xorcist
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 12:01:39 -
>   Well, I don't. And what hat are you wearing now? The
>   manipulative emotionalist, or the cold 'scientific' thinker?

I don't really care if you do, or don't. I have no vested interest in
changing your mind. I'm simply stating my views, and responding to your
questions, and assertions, about them.

I don't wear hats.

>   OK. You want to believe that your niece has 'autism'. I think
>   she should be left the fuck alone. Notice also how a couple of
>   days ago you apparently thought that conformity to 'social
>   norms' was a problem, but you've been taking the exact opposite
>   side here. You made excuses for the psychiatric mafia, and
>   ultimately you just believe in their nonsense.

I don't give a shit if she wears shoes or not, or wants to bolt when the
lawnmower comes around. I don't care if she throws 'tantrums' or gets
loud, or whatever. I took her to a museum once, and on the train ride home
she was talking a bit loud (normal for her). It wasn't particularly that
late at night, around maybe 8pm, on an otherwise noisy, rumbling train --
so speaking a bit loud was to be expected of anyone, anyhow. Some cunt
tried to "shush" her while she was talking. She got embarrassed, and
immediately started talking in a lower tone. My response was to motion to
her to hold on, and then loudly said "We're on a rumbling loud train,
lady, and the quiet car is two up. If you interrupt again, you'll have me
in your face."

I'm not taking any "exact opposite side" .. you seem to really be unable
to separate, as I'm mentioned before, idealistic principles from pragmatic
practice.

IDEALLY, I would like it if people treated her differently. I would like
very much if her parents and others saw her the way I do. An individual,
with tastes, needs, and challenges that are unique to her. Like everyone.

But that isn't REALITY. It doesn't fucking matter what people in the IDEAL
world would do, we don't live there.

So, PRAGMATICALLY speaking, I offer her advice on how to cope with, deal
with, and adapt to society around her, always emphasizing that to do so
should always be in her best interests, for things she wants or feels is
important, and not because of the expectations or desires of others.

Ideally, you don't want to pay taxes, but you do. It's no different.
You'll give me some line of bullshit about coercion, but in point of fact
you COULD simply steal goods, and not pay sales tax, and not pay other
taxes. You don't want the ramifications. So you deal, and cope.

No different.

>> I wouldn't consider it a problem.. and my understanding is that
>> because its biologically based,
>
>   I'm done with (your) pseudo science, sorry.

Go look it up, dude.


>> >In this case, it's the family. Which I think is some sort of
>> >model for the state...As in paternalistic governments, nanny
>> >states, founding fathers, the pope, patriotism (from
>> >pater)...that kind of thing...
>>
>> Ok, so we're talking models of the state, and not THE totalitarian
>> state.
>
>   Huh? All states are totalitarian, by definition.

Read. "IN THIS CASE ITS THE FAMILY WHICH IS ___SOME_SORT_OF_MODEL__ .."

You started out by saying that kids are forced into comformity by THE
TOTALITARIAN STATE. I said no, kids are forced into conformity by peer
pressure from other kids. To which you are said that ok, its the parents
that fail to suppress peer pressure and bullying, and that is somehow a
model for the state.

I'm not gonna bother with it.. because the point is simply, first.. you're
back-peddling here, and that's fine. And second, my point has been
affirmed.

The STATE. The functioning body of government does not, through law and
state officials, have much to do with the behavior patterns encouraged
upon children. As you said, that is ultimately the family, who fail to
raise proper kids, and those kids might be bullies or engage in peer
pressure.

Fine, good.


>> Greedy state-outlawed drug dealers, working as salesmen for out-lawed
>> cartels, selling outlawed, unpatentable freely reproduced and copied
>> products and other shit. Furthermore, they drug up children who are
>> just looking for an escape from the 'normal' savagery.
>
>   What point are you trying to make?

Nope. The point was that using your reasoning you can apply it to things
that government has no direct bearing on. That regardless of whether or
not it is legalized, and state-regulated, or unregulated and black market,
in either case -- greed comes to bear.

The state doesn't make people greedy. Greedy people don't necessarily,
even, make up the state.

The state IS. Greed IS. There is overlap.

Hey, state officials breathe too, I hear.

>   Unpatentable yes, freely reproduced, obviously not at all. The
>   products still need to be manufactured in a highly regulated
>   enviroment. That's why there's a black market...

Freely reproducible in the sense that customers 

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

2016-09-24 Thread xorcist
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 05:50:00 -
>   Psychiatry is radically different. Being 'mentally healthy'
>   simply means being 'well adapted' to a society of crazies.

I get where you are coming from. I've often said, "Being well-adapted to a
sick culture is no sign of health."

>   The fact that psychiatrists and the like may sometimes say some
>   sensible things doesn't counter this other fact : they also
>   say very crazy things. And do very criminal things.

Agreed.

I see. So, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds to me more like your main
criticism is of the establishment of psychiatry, and not so much with the
study of the mind, personality, and so on as such?

I can agree with this. I think a great deal of psychiatry, as a discipline,
is half-assed, and generally speaking am critical of institutions generally.

But in terms of explaining common aspects of human behavior, I find
psychological models fairly accurate.

>   Maybe she doesn't like gym class. And maybe the tantrums are
>   caused by some other reason.

No, she won't wear shoes if she can help it. "Pathologically" prefers bare
feet, or socks.. and can accept sandals. She really does get a
panic-attack type response to it.

Some autism is characterized by tactile response things like that. She
used to flinch at touch very easily too. As in, she could be sitting on
the couch, ask you to come over, see you coming over and you could gesture
out your hands to indicate touch.. but she would still jump a little if
you touched her shoulder or whatever. She's basically over that, now
though.

That example is like a weird "two-fer" .. Aspies (affectionate name for
those with Asperger's) tend to not understand body language well, so the
gesture of oncoming touch wouldn't necessarily be interpreted correctly.

>   So, the issue is not any mental problem on her part, but
>   having to deal with less than fully civilized people...

I wouldn't consider it a problem.. and my understanding is that because
its biologically based, its not considered mental illness, or a disease of
the mind. It's a condition. Like being quite short.. a "little person"
it's no disease, it's just them. CAN that condition be a problem to deal
with? Of course.

She has real issues coping with things that 'normal' people tend to have
zero issue with. She's different.. very much like being quite short, and
having issues coping in the world with average sized people.

How "normal" people treat her causes far more problems than her condition
causes her on its own, by far. I imagine that is true for little people as
well.

>   In this case, it's the family. Which I think is some sort of
>   model for the state...As in paternalistic governments, nanny
>   states, founding fathers, the pope, patriotism (from
>   pater)...that kind of thing...

Ok, so we're talking models of the state, and not THE totalitarian state.
Yeah, authoritarianism has bad effects, for sure.

>
>   Exactly. Greedy STATE LICENSED doctors working as salesmen for
>   the greedy pharmaceutical mafia that exists only thanks to
>   STATE GRANTED patents and other IP shit. Furthermore, they drug
>   up children who are not 'normal', i.e. they are actually
>   healthy children who don't get along with 'normal' savagery.
>
>   So the state seems to play some sort of role in all that...

Greedy state-outlawed drug dealers, working as salesmen for out-lawed
cartels, selling outlawed, unpatentable freely reproduced and copied
products and other shit. Furthermore, they drug up children who are just
looking for an escape from the 'normal' savagery.

So the state seems to have little role, in all of that...

Greed will always be around, man. Greed will infect any system you have,
or don't have. Greed infected monarchies, modern nation-states, churches,
personal relationships.. I mean.. name it, and if it involves humans,
greed has been a problem for it somehow, somewhere I'd wager.

>> If people were so fundamentally, at their core, rational -- why does
>> this irrational thing exist?
>
>
>   Because there are well organized 'minorities' who are able to
>   impose their views on the rest.

But it isn't rational to allow a minority to impress its will on the
majority.

So we're back to square one.


>   Even if we were cleverer than the rest, it doesn't follow
>   we should be in charge. And a group of stupid people controlled
>   by a minority of marginally less stupid people is a recipe for
>   tyranny and disaster.

Why not? If rational is the metric for good, then the most rational people
can do the most good. They'll seek to do the most good.

It may still be a recipe for disaster, but it would seem to be a smaller
disaster, or take a longer time, or SOMETHING positive compared to those
that can't reason to the same level of complexity.

Society is complex. There are a lot of moving parts. Irrational people
running the show 

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

2016-09-24 Thread juan
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 05:50:00 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:35:31 -
> > Yes indeed. But there are very important differences between
> > physics - a 'hard science', medicine which could be
> > 'scientific' but since it deals with incredibly complex systems it
> > is mostly a joke (and fraud) at the moment, and then psychiatry
> > which is just...an attemtp to give a 'scientific' veneer to
> > witch-burning.
> 
> In my experience, the people who are so rabidly anti-medicine, and
> anti-psychiatry are usually ridiculously religious, or fearful they
> are mentally ill. 

Medicine and psychiatry are conceptually different. The problem
with medicine is that knowledge in the field is very limited,
but at least in theory, knowledge is possible. Also, not much
debate is needed regarding what being healthy means - it's a
physical condition. 

Psychiatry is radically different. Being 'mentally healthy'
simply means being 'well adapted' to a society of crazies. For
instance, so called western 'civilization' is choke full with
religious lunatics who think that blowing brown children up is
their sacred duty. And those people are not locked up in a
nuthouse. They are the ones running the show. 



> You don't strike me as either, so this seems really
> odd to me. Obviously, psychiatry is mis-used by the state, but I just
> cannot fathom this idea of a "scientific veneer" .. certainly, there
> is a great amount to question in what the doc's say.. but.. certain
> things seem obvious?
> 
> Like the idea that people tend to operate from a position of
> protecting the ego. That just seems so.. obvious.. I don't know, I
> just don't know what else to say.


The fact that psychiatrists and the like may sometimes say some
sensible things doesn't counter this other fact : they also
say very crazy things. And do very criminal things. 


> 
> > Treating shy people taking into account their shyness seems
> > like common sense and decency to me. You don't need the
> > psycho-charlatans to teach you that.
> 
> You obviously know shit about autism. She is.. oddly sensitive to
> certain things, and prone to emotionally crippling "tantrums" because
> of it. Certain smells, the smell of freshly cut grass, makes her
> slightly ill feeling. She doesn't like things around her feet, like
> normal shoes or sneakers, and its genuinely distressing, not just a
> matter of preference. Consequently, the sight of lawnmowers, and the
> need to wear sneakers for gym glass, can cause her to get panic
> attacks, basically, which result in those tantrums.


Maybe she doesn't like gym class. And maybe the tantrums are
caused by some other reason. 


> 
> It isn't just a matter of her being shy, and needing to take shyness
> into account. Those differences, and people looking at her like she's
> all fucked up, made her shy. When she was much younger, she was very
> curious and outgoing. People treating her like a weirdo because she
> IS different, made her shy.

So, the issue is not any mental problem on her part, but
having to deal with less than fully civilized people...

> 
> She really does have different neurology.

...whatever that means.


> 
> > And that's what really should be called fucking crazy.
> > Poisoning people because they are not comfortable with their
> > 'peers' who do conform to totalitarian 'social' 'norms'.
> 
> Sorry, but this is idiotic. It's not about fucking "totalitarian"
> norms. When a kid freaks out about the smell of grass, its normal for
> other kids to tease, thinks she's weird, and so on. This is +not
> impressed on them by the fucking state.


It is impressed by parents not really caring for their
children, sorry to break it to you. Some children may tease of
bully other children sometimes but one would expect their
parents to teach them not to.


> 
> It's how primate humans treat people who they see as different and
> not in their in-group.
> 
> But since that's all bullshit, sure.. it's the government.

In this case, it's the family. Which I think is some sort of
model for the state...As in paternalistic governments, nanny
states, founding fathers, the pope, patriotism (from
pater)...that kind of thing...

> 
> C'mon. Granted, we agree on the silver-bullet drug thing. Drugs are
> over prescribed. I don't see that as state totalitarianism, and the
> "veneer" of science on a sham discipline.
> 
> That's economic corruption. Doctors getting kick-backs from drug
> companies, and shit. That's just good old fashion greed at work.


Exactly. Greedy STATE LICENSED doctors working as salesmen for
the greedy pharmaceutical mafia that exists only thanks to
STATE GRANTED patents and other IP shit. Furthermore, they drug
up 

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

2016-09-21 Thread 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

2016-09-21 Thread 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: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-21 Thread 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.
> 



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

2016-09-21 Thread 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

2016-09-21 Thread 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: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-21 Thread 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: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-21 Thread 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: [From xorcist offlist] Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-21 Thread 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 :)


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

2016-09-20 Thread xorcist
>
> 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

Private? Fuck you're paranoid.

I don't consider what I do for a living, or otherwise, private. My name,
location, who I date.. those things are private.

I didn't offer the info. In fact, I tried to ignore the question. But I
was asked. So I answered.

Within reason I'm an open book. I'm no holy man, either.

I'm neither am I a petulant child.

> Yeah, xorcist! Yeah! That's why you are on this list - hitting the
> "nerves" and trying to brainwash people.

Yup, that's what I'm doing. Trying to brainwash people.

Let me tell you something. If I were trying to brainwash people, I
wouldn't be fucking around on an internet list. I'd probably try starting
some type of religious cult. But it would have to face to face.. person to
person.. brainwashing is fundamentally about person-to-person interaction,
cult of personality type shit.

Text communication, but its nature, isn't really susceptible to that.

> So you are not gonna succeed. There are Invincible GUARDS here on the list
> for suckers like you. Zenaan and Juan are their names.

This is quite interesting to me. So, if I disagree with the Invincible
Guard Juan on some things, then I'm a CIA enemy.

That sounds quite like some of the most unbelievable brainwashing I've
ever heard. I mean, it fits the bill.

Disagree with the all-powerful, invincible leader, and you're the enemy. A
shadowy enemy, who can't be trusted at all. Satan's henchman, and such.

Fuck maybe I'm wrong about the brainwashing with text. Juan, I know you're
good at dissecting text, but I didn't realize you were THAT good.

Kudos. Keep these nutters on list and distracted with cross-posted news
sources. Better than letting them roam the streets.

Razer, Juan.. I sincerely apologize. I thought you guys were just posting
bullshit. I had no idea you were performing a public service.

My bad, dudes.

> However, i know that you won't (in the near future), 'cause your masters
> won't let you. So, we will enjoy a few more knockouts for you.

Riight. More self-supporting paranoia. Here's the beauty of your delusion:

If I chose to leave the list, then I'd have done so because I got found
out as CIA.

If I don't choose to leave, then its because my CIA masters won't let me.

lol.

You know, there is a principle of logic -- one that Juan would probably be
able to tell you about, if you care to listen -- that a position that has
no criteria which COULD refute it, is necessarily illogical.

Meh.. whatever.. you're out of the depth, guy.



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

2016-09-20 Thread Александр
2016-09-21 7:55 GMT+03:00 :

> 1. I act as mentor for some cognitively disabled adults. Mostly in the way
> of
> helping them find coping strategies for their difficulties. Providing a
> measure of friendship and companionship
>
> 2. I do this on top of my day job, which is in cloud infrastructure type
> shit.
>
> 3. As a hobby, try to find time to program, keep my skills up somewhat.
> In the past, I've designed deniable encryption protocols, and implemented
> tools to do it.
>

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.
Come on, cia dude. Cut of your bullshit. You are not gonna buy followers by
acting like that.
___

xorcist to Juan:
> i hit the nerv
>

Yeah, xorcist! Yeah! That's why you are on this list - hitting the "nerves"
and trying to brainwash people. Well, there were much better attempts
before you, fucker. We got a vast experience and great Hearts and Minds. So
you are not gonna succeed. There are Invincible GUARDS here on the list for
suckers like you. Zenaan and Juan are their names.
So just DIS-appear exactly the way you appeared here.
that's the only way for you.

However, i know that you won't (in the near future), 'cause your masters
won't let you. So, we will enjoy a few more knockouts for you.


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

2016-09-20 Thread xorcist
>
> Now, here's your fallacy.

And, let me also say.. your description of the human thought process is
all wrong. :)

Consider it this way. When someone walks up to you, and sticks out their
hand to shake hands.. you respond by reaching out and shaking hands.

You're not processing it all the way you described. You don't think "Oh,
this person wants to greet me, I should respond accordingly."

That doesn't happen. At all.

What actually happens is, their body language communicates to you that
they want to shake hands, and the learned response kicks in..
automatically.. and you reach out your hand, before you've thought much of
anything.

That is why Derren's "interrupt" mechanism works. You watch for a person
on the street who is in deep thought, probably remembering something ..
memory is an activity that engages the subconscious. Then you interrupt
them, and get them to shake hands.. they'll respond, also subconsciously..
and then instead of going with the normal routine of letting go of the
hand and letting them run their "normal hand shake routine" you do
something different, and you quite literally inject a new thought into
their minds.

The programming techniques Derren demonstrates, and explains are used
widely in sales, in public speaking, and so on. Not everyone is
susceptible to them. But many are.









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

2016-09-20 Thread xorcist
> 2016-09-21 3:33 GMT+03:00 juan :
>
> Oh... what a deadly punch/es, Juan! (one of)
> The poor new CIA troll xorcist (substituting the SDW guy) starts to
> understand why his fellow man (SDW) failed on the list with his cheap
> US/antihuman pseudophilosophical propaganda.
> :P
>
> Lets see whom they will send next.
>

I absolutely love it when you nutters call me CIA or some shit. Fucking
hilarious.

See, now THIS is what I mean when I said I'm here for the lulz..

Let me guess, whenever you see a black van on the highway you think 'they'
are following you, right?

Wait wait.. no, no.. they only use black vans in the movies, right? In
real life they use WHITE vans. Yeah, thats the ticket.

Right.

fucken hell..

Dude, if I was CIA, I'm sure I'd have a lot better things to do than argue
with you fucking assholes. And if they dont, then that sure as hell
explains the recent god damn bombings and shit for the last few decades,
don't it?

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.



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

2016-09-20 Thread xorcist
> 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

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

2016-09-20 Thread xorcist
>> 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. 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.

>> 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.

And I don't "alpha" towards anyone. If I did, I wouldn't be so quick to
insult myself, say you have the bigger dick, and so on.

I don't play those games. I just recognize them.

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.

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.

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.

>   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 also already addressed the other point, trying to indicate how I meant
my comment, but I'll do so more clearly.

YOU'RE RIGHT. I PHRASED THAT PISS-POORLY AND WAS MISTAKEN.


>
>   Why would I bother 'thinking' about it when such a great
>   philosopher like you has it all figured out and is teaching us
>   poor betas?

Poor betas? I never referred to you like that. I don't claim to have all
the answers, either. I'm just giving my opinion on stuff, and the way I
see things.

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. It's a good tactic for a debate on your part, and I'll
engage. This sort of thing is helpful to me, because it gives me an
opportunity to focus on minutia and clarify.


>> That's why indentured servants rebelled. They had HOPE,
>
>
>   I'm glad they voted for obama!

Heh. That's actually kind of funny. They probably would have.

>>
>> A true slave, born into it? There is no hope. No one ever gets free.
>> It isn't even a concept to freely think about.
>
>
>   Nope it isn't. Now I get it. Thank you massa!
>
>   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_slaves_in_the_United_States
>
>   In xorcist's Real Reality there are no fugitive slaves.

Of course there were fugitive slaves.

I already said in another message that there were a few strong-minded
types that could resist the fear, think freely, and so on.

Again just because something is possible for the FEW doesn't mean its
possible for EVERYONE.

I'm not interested, particularly, in tailoring a political theory to what
favors the intellectual, physical, or other 

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

2016-09-20 Thread Tom
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:40:09PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> But for real life, when you get beaten as a slave all day, it AFFECTS YOUR
> THOUGHTS.
> 
> When you work a dreary ass job, barely get enough sleep, having your very
> dreams filled up with visions of monotonous days at work.. it AFFECTS YOUR
> MIND.
> 
> And when life and death are on the line, when hormones and adrenaline
> dump, YOU DON'T FUCKING THINK.

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.

This is rationality at work. It works fast, so fast that we don't notice
it. In fact, what most people (and I suspect yourself as well) think is
THINKING when they decide something is wrong. A human being always
decides all things almost instantly. What follows, and what we
misinterpret as "thinking", is that we a) try to understand our decision
or b) try to find arguments why we decided as we did.

At this point you might counter that other mammals brains work similar,
like lions or dogs or whatever. Yes. But there's a difference: we humans
are able to revise that decision. That is, we decide on something (e.g.
kill that slow grandma on the lane in front of me), then reason about
this decision and come to the conclusion that we won't do it.

THAT is free will.


Tom

PS: and forgive me my bad english, I hope it was understandable.



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

2016-09-20 Thread juan
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 02:33:10 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:40:09 -
> > xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> >
> > Dude, that has nothing to do with any 'group'. If you are an
> > attacker, then your victims have every right to defend
> > themselves. That's the basic logic of morality.
> 
> Ya know, after I hit send on that last message, I knew you'd start off
> with this.
> 
> You're like autistic or something. 


Sure. And being gay is a disease that is cured with
electroshocks and lobotomies. Oh and you are a master of
'biological' political 'theory'. No, not just ivory tower
theory. What you say is REAL REALITY (TM)

"Autistic" - you just keep polishing your pseudo scientific
garbage eh. Now you are firmly in the grounds of fascist
'psychiatric' 'science'.



> 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. 


> 
> If I'm walking down the street, and see some strapping
> brick-shit-house sized dude chase after you, pin you the ground, beat
> the ever living shit out of you for a few moments, then pull out a
> knife and raise it above his head to kill you..
> 
> Well, I am not a victim. I'm no danger at all. I'm 20 yards away,
> smoking a cigarette, with my .45 in my waist band.
> 
> And I still have the right, and some would argue, the moral
> responsibility, to draw down on him and order him to stop, and if he
> won't to cork that fucker square between eyes.
> 
> And the REASON why I am able to do that. To make a judgment call
> valuing your life over his, IS because of GROUPING. Namely, the
> grouping of victim and grouping of aggressor, and the social
> valuation of one over the other.
> 
> I happen to agree with that valuation. But I'm not arrogant enough to
> say it isn't a grouping, and in that respect is not different than
> other groupings.
> 
> It is simply a grouping that I firmly believe. Others firmly believe
> in groupings based on religion, or race. Those I firmly despise.
> 
> But they are still a representation social in-group/out-group dynamics



I bow to your superior wisdom, massa




> 
> >
> >>
> >> A deeply pacifistic person might disagree,
> >
> > Fine. If somebody doesn't mind being attacked, that's his
> > choice which he CANNOT FORCE on other people, both because of logic
> > and his own pacifist principles.

> 
> It isn't because a pacifist doesn't mind being attacked. It's because
> their morality dictates that using force is wrong. And they won't
> stoop to the level of someone who does, even to defend themselves. It
> is akin to someone putting a gun to your head and trying to force you
> to rape a child. Hopefully you don't. Hopefully your morality is such
> that you'd rather die than do that. Even though someone forcing you
> to do so absolves you of responsibility. You choose to TAKE
> responsibility, and die. Same for the pacifist. He says "I will take
> responsibility for my actions, and not do violence, because violence
> is wrong. Whatever it costs, I won't do wrong."


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...




> > Yesterday YOU WROTE
> >
> > "A white male living in 1740 quite literally was not AS
> > FREE as you or I in terms of his beliefs about race, SLAVERY,
> > God,..."
> 
> Yeah, I mentioned it as an example of the types of social institutions
> that many people are not really in a position to question very
> easily. I thought it would be obvious, and easily accepted.
> 
> You were the one that zeroed in on it, and made a discussion of it.
> Perhaps I should have clarified more.


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" 

Any more self-parody you'd like to share? 




> 
> >> Indeed, even after they were
> >> FREED, many slaves stayed with their former masters, and worked as
> >> paid laborers. That's a fact. So they certainly wanted to be there,
> >> probably even AS SLAVES.
> >
> > lol...Not only a moral relativist, also a slavery apologist.
> 
> Oh fuck that nonsense. I'm not an apologist for shit. But it is true
> that some freed slaves stayed on the 

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

2016-09-20 Thread juan
On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:40:09 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > I don't want to put words in your mouth, but, are you
> > 'implicitly' saying that slavery being right or wrong is a
> > matter of 'cultural interpretation'? Or mostly a matter of
> > 'interpretation'?
> 
> Look, I'm not arguing for moral relativity, which is basically what
> you're asking.

Yes, that's what I'm asking. And are you sure you aren't
arguing for it? 


> 
> But I am trying to indicate that morality - even if it is soundly
> objective - is nevertheless interpreted differently, by different
> cultures and different people. 

There certainly is room for interpreting some 'details' but not
for the overall principles. 


> When you think on it, morality,
> fundamentally, has as much to do with "right" and "wrong" as it does
> with "in group" and "out group." In many ways, the concepts are
> inseparable.

Sorry, no, that's just more bullshit on your part. 

 
> Murder (killing a member of the in-group) is always wrong. What
> changes is who the "in group" is, and who the "out group" is. And
> likewise for slavery. Nowadays, progressive types make "in group" all
> of humanity, mostly


Not sure what you mean by 'progressive types'? To me
progressive  means : left-wing, fascist piece-of-shit. 


> but we reserve the right to kill members of the
> out-group, with that out-group being defined as those that attack us
> first. Killing in self-defense is OK, 

Killing in self-defense is certainly OK, as a last,
proportional* recourse, at the individual level, and it has
nothing to do with 'groups' or 'progressive types'.

*i.e. you can't kill people because they stole a candy from
you, etc.


> because we're killing a member
> of the out group: i.e. those that resort to violence first.

Dude, that has nothing to do with any 'group'. If you are an
attacker, then your victims have every right to defend
themselves. That's the basic logic of morality. 

> 
> A deeply pacifistic person might disagree, 

Fine. If somebody doesn't mind being attacked, that's his choice
which he CANNOT FORCE on other people, both because of logic
and his own pacifist principles.


> and not fight back even in
> self-defense on moral grounds. Their in-group is even larger than
> yours.

Bullshit. Their view is stupid, but if they enjoy being
attacked...I'd actually argue that by not countering attackers
they are actually doing a disservice to their fellow men. 
 

> 
> >> Could they still do so? Yes, at a cost. Fuck, for that matter, the
> >> slave could refuse to do his work and not BE a slave too. There
> >> would be a cost: beatings, or death. But he has the CHOICE, right?
> >> THAT is your free will?
> >
> >
> > So you don't know what free will means, and you are
> > confusing free will with political freedom.
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> You are the one that brought up slavery, 

Maybe you should quit while you are still ahead? (OK you never
were)

Yesterday YOU WROTE 

"A white male living in 1740 quite literally was not AS FREE as
you or I in terms of his beliefs about race, SLAVERY,
God,..." 



> and asked me if I thought the
> slaves WANTED to be slaves. Of course not. But, now we have you saying
> this:
> 
> >
> > Indeed the slave had free will and could CHOOSE to disobey.
> > What he didn't have was POLITICAL FREEDOM.
> 
> So let me ask you. IF slaves could choose to disobey, why didn't they
> rebel? 

Because they didn't want to get killed. 


> Why wasn't there widespread slave rebellion? And if this
> really was a choice, then they CHOSE not to rebel, and one might
> argue that they wanted to be slaves. 

Your 'type' might argue that...



> Indeed, even after they were
> FREED, many slaves stayed with their former masters, and worked as
> paid laborers. That's a fact. So they certainly wanted to be there,
> probably even AS SLAVES.

lol...Not only a moral relativist, also a slavery apologist.
You know, the moment you started whining about off topic
posts and how people in this list were such experts on 
"abuses of power" I knew what to expect from the likes of you...


> 
> Why was it the Abolishionist movement among whites that got the ball
> rolling on getting rid of slavery?
> 
> What is your take on that?
> 
> My take is that the slaves didn't fucking KNOW any other life.
> Slavery is all they knew. Period. 


You are the worse kind of enemy freedom can have. 



> It's not that they WANTED to be
> slaves. Most couldn't fucking THINK about rebelling, or disobeying,
> because there was NEVER an example in their lives of anyone really
> doing so. Even as freed men, they stayed on the same plantation ..
> for the same reason that many free people 

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

2016-09-20 Thread xorcist
>   I don't want to put words in your mouth, but, are you
>   'implicitly' saying that slavery being right or wrong is a
>   matter of 'cultural interpretation'? Or mostly a matter of
>   'interpretation'?

Look, I'm not arguing for moral relativity, which is basically what you're
asking.

But I am trying to indicate that morality - even if it is soundly
objective - is nevertheless interpreted differently, by different cultures
and different people. When you think on it, morality, fundamentally, has
as much to do with "right" and "wrong" as it does with "in group" and "out
group." In many ways, the concepts are inseparable.

Murder (killing a member of the in-group) is always wrong. What changes is
who the "in group" is, and who the "out group" is. And likewise for
slavery. Nowadays, progressive types make "in group" all of humanity,
mostly.. but we reserve the right to kill members of the out-group, with
that out-group being defined as those that attack us first. Killing in
self-defense is OK, because we're killing a member of the out group: i.e.
those that resort to violence first.

A deeply pacifistic person might disagree, and not fight back even in
self-defense on moral grounds. Their in-group is even larger than yours.

>> Could they still do so? Yes, at a cost. Fuck, for that matter, the
>> slave could refuse to do his work and not BE a slave too. There would
>> be a cost: beatings, or death. But he has the CHOICE, right? THAT is
>> your free will?
>
>
>   So you don't know what free will means, and you are
>   confusing free will with political freedom.

Nonsense.

You are the one that brought up slavery, and asked me if I thought the
slaves WANTED to be slaves. Of course not. But, now we have you saying
this:

>
>   Indeed the slave had free will and could CHOOSE to disobey.
>   What he didn't have was POLITICAL FREEDOM.

So let me ask you. IF slaves could choose to disobey, why didn't they
rebel? Why wasn't there widespread slave rebellion? And if this really was
a choice, then they CHOSE not to rebel, and one might argue that they
wanted to be slaves. Indeed, even after they were FREED, many slaves
stayed with their former masters, and worked as paid laborers. That's a
fact. So they certainly wanted to be there, probably even AS SLAVES.

Why was it the Abolishionist movement among whites that got the ball
rolling on getting rid of slavery?

What is your take on that?

My take is that the slaves didn't fucking KNOW any other life. Slavery is
all they knew. Period. It's not that they WANTED to be slaves. Most
couldn't fucking THINK about rebelling, or disobeying, because there was
NEVER an example in their lives of anyone really doing so. Even as freed
men, they stayed on the same plantation .. for the same reason that many
free people today never leave their small little home towns: FEAR. It
CONTROLS the mind and the thoughts.

A few very strong minded souls could do so, of course, and had the heart
to take the beatings as a badge of honor, of sorts. A very few, were free
from fear.

But to their fellow slave onlookers? They would appear insane.

I hate to break it to you, friend. But you don't have free will. Not quite
like you want, at any rate. You're free, yes. But you're constrained.
Controlled. By what you know, and what you fear. The more you know, and
the less you fear, the freer you can think. But for the uneducated masses,
and the slaves of the world.. things aren't exactly as simple as you'd
like them to be.

>
>   If I point a gun at you and say your money or your life, you
>   are free to decide for yourself what you want.

LOL. Oh my, what an armchair warrior. I'd love to get you around a few of
the folks I know. They'd be able to prove to you that in those moments,
you're not thinking or deciding SHIT except, at best, how to keep your
bladder in check. You'll be handing over your wallet before you even fully
understand whats going on.


>> Sure, from a hard-assed use of the terminology "free will" and an
>> inflexible way of looking at it, that can be claimed.
>
>   You mean, from a correct usage of the terminolgy and sticking
>   to logical thinking.

Frankly, from that last comment of yours. It seems to me more that your
"logical thinking" is really code for "woefully sheltered." You talk about
what, or how you'll think and decide if you look down the barrel of gun?
Give me a break. Brother, I'll bet you've never been in a REAL fight, let
alone one that had it escalated to weapons.

The simplifying assumptions your "logic" requires go out the fucking
window when 9 little millimeters appear about 3 meters wide.

>   You can compare us humans to our primate relatives or to our
>   dogs and cats relatives or any other relatives. Ultimately the
>   whole animal kingdom is related. Or, you can go even farther to
>   plants. And? You can find similarities and differences. But you
>   can't make a political philosophy 

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

2016-09-20 Thread juan
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 21:55:09 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 02:43:08 -
> > Do you think that slaves wanted to be slaves? And do you
> > think that the people who enslaved them were not responsible for the
> > enslavement? THAT is free wiil at work.
> >
> > "There are limits free will" is just a vague, irrelevant
> > comment.
> 
> Whatever. This is just hard-ass, inflexible thinking. The point of the
> matter is that right and wrong are largely a matter of interpretation
> through cultural norms.


I don't want to put words in your mouth, but, are you
'implicitly' saying that slavery being right or wrong is a
matter of 'cultural interpretation'? Or mostly a matter of
'interpretation'? 

 
> It was socially reinforced to be racist back then. It was socially
> reinforced to not be homosexual. Hence, it was MORE DIFFICULT to be
> racially egalitarian, or homosexual. This, it would seem to me, shows
> that FREE WILL has limits. Those people were LESS FREE to be
> homosexual, or racially egalitarian.


That has nothing to do with free will. People were, and are
free to think whatever they want. Notice also in the case of
slavery how its 'legal' status changed overnight. And how
the conservatives lost, at least regarding the most overt forms
of slavery. At any rate, that means there wasn't a single
'river' 'flowing' in a single direction.



> 
> Could they still do so? Yes, at a cost. Fuck, for that matter, the
> slave could refuse to do his work and not BE a slave too. There would
> be a cost: beatings, or death. But he has the CHOICE, right? THAT is
> your free will?


So you don't know what free will means, and you are
confusing free will with political freedom. 

Indeed the slave had free will and could CHOOSE to disobey.
What he didn't have was POLITICAL FREEDOM.

If I point a gun at you and say your money or your life, you
are free to decide for yourself what you want. That's
'metaphysical' freedom or free will. You are not free in the
sense that your natural rights are not being respected and you
are not free to keep your property, I am stealing it. By the
way, I am free to become a thief or not. I can't blame someone
else if I do.



> 
> Sure, from a hard-assed use of the terminology "free will" and an
> inflexible way of looking at it, that can be claimed.

You mean, from a correct usage of the terminolgy and sticking
to logical thinking. 

> 
> But for christ's sake you KNOW WHAT I MEAN when I say the slave
> doesn't have free will. 

Well, it would be a lot clearer if you simply said that the
slave didn't have freedom. Coincidentally, "lack of freedom"
would be the definition of slavery...The point I was making is
that despite the fact that the slave was physically coerced, he
still had a will that opposed that coercion. 


> There is a COST to exercising it. It isn't
> fucking FREE.

Now you added a third layer of equivocation =)

> 
> Same for going against social conventions.
> 
> It's fucking grade school elementary.



Let's put it another way :

There are 'benefits' to being a corrupt lapdog who goes along
with whatever corrupt nonsense is currently fashionable. So? Is
that what you advocate? If that's not what you advocate, what's
the point of bringing it up? Is your point that I 'should'
'suck it up' and keep quiet, don't rock the boat, or what?



> 
> > I am not. But I can change the animal anyway. Cats don't
> > have 'leaders'. And my remark would be as relevant, or even more
> > relevant than your comments about humans being 'primates'
> 
> Domesticated cats, no. But anyone with a cat will tell you they are
> LESS SOCIAL pets than dogs.
> 

I happen to have a few cats and I wouldn't make such a  remark.
"Less social"? Less servile than domesticated dogs? Dogs vote,
cats don't? What does "social" even mean?


> That is my whole point.

...

> 
> > So you say. So what. Bottom line is, comparing humans to
> > other animals doesn't prove anything.
> 
> How very Biblical of you.

How so?


> 
> There is an idea in our culture, that it is man's right to use the
> planet, and animals any way we see fit. Because we can, basically.
> It's "might makes right." It's Yahweh's commandment to "hold dominion
> over the earth" where he set man apart from animals.
> 
> It's a primitive notion, really.

Yes, like anything coming from those retards. But I don't
subscribe to it. 

You know, I don't have to either agree with what you're saying,
or with the bible...

> 
> Are you mention humans are animals. Now, its perfectly normal in our
> science to compare lions to tigers. Or horses to zebras. We're
> 

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

2016-09-19 Thread xorcist
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 06:11:43PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> We should probably imagine 10 year time frame, not 6 weeks :)

I think more on the scale of 100 years, but yeah. 10 would be wonderful.

> But even though it's difficult, without a core of belligerently
> principled and strongly persistent fellow souls, you'll be a one man
> band, and that's no fun :/

Well, I dunno. I play a little guitar. I think it'd be a blast to be able
able to rattle off some harmonica, and thump a pair of kick drums
simultaneously.

But I get your point.

> An interim step could perhaps be "direct democracy" - some variant on
> Swiss style democracy.

Indeed. I don't often use the word "anarchist" in most discussions with
people, unless the forum is such that I have good reason to believe
they'll understand the real meaning of it.

"Direct democracy" is an OK term. Most will appreciate it. Personally, I
dislike it, because I am not that much of a fan of democracy the way most
people think of it. i.e. Everyone is entitled to vote. I don't agree.

One needs a license to drive a car. One needs a license to own a firearm.
Rightly so. Exercising those rights can have real consequences for the
public, and it seems prudent to make sure people have the information they
need to be responsible.

If voting TRULY mattered, if it was POWERFUL, you'd NEED a license for it.
I feel this is a nuance most fail to grasp.

"Anti-authoritarianism" is another OK term. Except I don't like labeling
things "anti" .. you set up defining what you're AGAINST, rather than what
you're FOR. Sets the wrong tone, in my estimation.

It is, to me, very telling that we don't even have really appropriate
terminology.. that is how deeply ingrained the authoritarian alpha/beta
thing goes. And, as Chomsky would point out, if one lacks the language for
something, it becomes very difficult to think properly about it.

An old flame of mine likes to just drop the "anarcho" and call herself a
Syndicalist. When people ask, she describes the free association of people
into syndicates. She was fond of pointing out that it sounds bad-ass to
people to "join a syndicate" .. calling up "romantic images" of joining
outlaw crime syndicates, or such.

I'm rather sure that wouldn't scale the way we want either.

In certain contexts, all of these terms can be useful and effective.. but
the lack of a single banner or anthem that most of the "fringe" can unite
under is a real problem. And it isn't JUST a matter of terminology.

The scattered, fragmented voice of the Occupy movement speaks to that
problem.

So many people know .. no.. more importantly FEEL.. deeply, truly feel
that there is something wrong with our society. They can taste the
plastic.
The problem is, none of us can really KNOW what we want in its place,
because we've never tasted anything else, except maybe in fantasy, or
dreams.. perhaps a few fleeting few moments where one manages to escape
the world, just for a moment, and catches the scent. One woman dreams of
steak.. some older gent a bit of ice cream. The young kid wants a pizza.
And we quibble over which one we should have.. and in the meantime, we're
forced to subsist on the cafeteria slop.

Its baffling to me now, but I remember being an ideologue. But for the
life of me I can't remember what the fuck I was thinking.



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

2016-09-19 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:18:03PM -0300, juan wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 02:43:08 -
> xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > >   I'm not really following. No doubt we can find more than a
> > > few instances of people acting like animals, but what of it?
> > >
> > >   It's also true that people can act in rational ways, and
> > >   that's what supposedly make them human.
> > 
> > Agreed, with the proviso that quite often people rationalize, rather
> > than act rationally. They rationalize away animal instincts.
> 
>   I don't know what you mean by 'rationalize' - Isn't that
>   psychobabble? 
> 
>   Also, there are animal behaviours that don't entail aggresion
>   towards other animals, so even "acting like an animal" isn't
>   necessarily a bad thing.
> 
>   Bottom line again, your 'realistic' view that SOME humans do
>   what they do because of their animal nature is bullshit. 

I think you missed the agreement - I'm reading you both saying almost
the same thing on this point.

Juan, I agree with your wording, but it's not what I read xorcist say.

I'm also very strongly agreeing with the principle "we should strive for
something higher than our 'base instincts'", as well as "'rationalizing'
evil behaviour as merely 'animalistic' tendency is a self fulfillment of
propagation of that which we say is evil.

xorcist said what some people do; you say they shouldn't do that, except
for those "animalistic" behaviours which are not evil (of course).

Looks to me like we're all on the same page here...


>   Right. You are generalizing and that's why your argument fails.

I am quite guilty of tearing down generalisations and missing if there
was something useful, whether in frustration or whatever.


> > about Joe six pack, basically.
> 
>   Joe six pack doesn't necessarily join the military to murder
>   brown children for fun. 

Doesn't necessarily, but often enough 'does' (effectively does). Sad but
true. What Joe six pack ought do is say "no, I conscientiously object,
and if that's what it comes to, I'll take solitary for X years, rather
than go and shoot those brown children" - there are just so many
personal stories over the web these days of ex grunts who've become
"peace activists" (perhaps to purge their conscience?) but that does
little to stop the killing machine - saying no -before- shooting folk in
other countries is what is needed to stop the killing.



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

2016-09-19 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 06:11:43PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> >> You know, the main problem with anarchism is that there are no doctors
> >> and engineers to speak of.
> 
> > Guaranteed we could find at least a handful of "doctors and lawyers",
> > who subscribe to at least some aspects of political anarchy!
> 
> Yes, of course. But a handful is not nearly enough,

We should probably imagine 10 year time frame, not 6 weeks :)

Relationships, real relationships. One person at a time. Only option.


> and I find that pragmatic professional types who aren't political
> ideologues don't want to waste time with a group composed of such
> people,

There are no rules. This also means I am not obliged to keep discordant
disagreeable folks in my house at my think tank meetings, or invite them
back.

I don't have time to be steamrolled by those who denounce literally
everything, including "use of the word 'freedom' is oppressive because
that means I'm agreeing with everything you might say in the future" (I
kid you not, some folks are -really- messed up - I can't work with
people so fragile of mind and belligerent of intention (belligerent in
that they will pick any 'hot' word and say it cannot be used, in order
to denounce or 'control' the entire group - not on my watch!)).


> which as I say, in my experience tend to be the type that
> crowd under the banner of anarchy.

Mums and dads, engineers, yes. Those without too much of a personal axe
to grind.

However, you need your core, and your core must have persistence of
conviction.

It's hard to find persistence of conviction except in those who are also
keenly aware of evils, and distinctly angry in response (oh no, not me
of course - it's everyone -else- that suffers this neurosis ;)

But even though it's difficult, without a core of belligerently
principled and strongly persistent fellow souls, you'll be a one man
band, and that's no fun :/


> > I do wish there were an easier silver bullet where I could say to you
> > "yeah, good on ya mate! go live your own life and avoid all politics
> > it's all doomed anyway, so I pat your back for giving up mate!"
> 
> Well, I will say that I've all but given up on "anarchy." Or, rather, I've
> come around, perhaps, more to Thoreau's view: we're not ready for it.

An interim step could perhaps be "direct democracy" - some variant on
Swiss style democracy.

I read this early in the year from someone's "to read" link, that direct
democracy is at least for some folk, an "aka" of anarchy.

And it sounds so much more palatable - most are neither aware nor
willing to be aware of the nuance that anarchy means something other
than chaos for example.


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

2016-09-19 Thread xorcist
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 02:43:08 -
>   Do you think that slaves wanted to be slaves? And do you think
>   that the people who enslaved them were not responsible for the
>   enslavement? THAT is free wiil at work.
>
>   "There are limits free will" is just a vague, irrelevant
>   comment.

Whatever. This is just hard-ass, inflexible thinking. The point of the
matter is that right and wrong are largely a matter of interpretation
through cultural norms.

It was socially reinforced to be racist back then. It was socially
reinforced to not be homosexual. Hence, it was MORE DIFFICULT to be
racially egalitarian, or homosexual. This, it would seem to me, shows that
FREE WILL has limits. Those people were LESS FREE to be homosexual, or
racially egalitarian.

Could they still do so? Yes, at a cost. Fuck, for that matter, the slave
could refuse to do his work and not BE a slave too. There would be a cost:
beatings, or death. But he has the CHOICE, right? THAT is your free will?

Sure, from a hard-assed use of the terminology "free will" and an
inflexible way of looking at it, that can be claimed.

But for christ's sake you KNOW WHAT I MEAN when I say the slave doesn't
have free will. There is a COST to exercising it. It isn't fucking FREE.

Same for going against social conventions.

It's fucking grade school elementary.

>   I am not. But I can change the animal anyway. Cats don't have
>   'leaders'. And my remark would be as relevant, or even more
>   relevant than your comments about humans being 'primates'

Domesticated cats, no. But anyone with a cat will tell you they are LESS
SOCIAL pets than dogs.

That is my whole point.

>   So you say. So what. Bottom line is, comparing humans to other
>   animals doesn't prove anything.

How very Biblical of you.

There is an idea in our culture, that it is man's right to use the planet,
and animals any way we see fit. Because we can, basically. It's "might
makes right." It's Yahweh's commandment to "hold dominion over the earth"
where he set man apart from animals.

It's a primitive notion, really.

Are you mention humans are animals. Now, its perfectly normal in our
science to compare lions to tigers. Or horses to zebras. We're content to
abstract from their behaviors, and find similarities and guiding
principles for the activity of different genus'.

Except when it comes to humans, and our primate relatives. It's arrogance.

>   OK. So in **authoritarian cultures**, some grown-ups pay
>   attention to 'leaders'. There are also grown-ups who believe
>   incredibly stupid and evil nonsense they call 'religion' -
>   especially rhe jew-kkkristian sort. Do you think the bible
>   comes from the DNA? But it just so happens that children don't
>   believe that shit 'naturally'. They have to be brainwashed and
>   coerced into believing it.

Lets be precise: in authoritarian cultures MOST adults will pay attention
to the leaders. The ones that don't will get a label and will suffer some
level of ostracism or social sanctions.

Does religious nonsense come from DNA? No, not as such. But considering
that EVERY human culture has developed some type of religious mythology,
I'd say that its in our bones, so to speak. It's not JUST a matter of
coercion and control, either. For example, shamanistic religions where
there is no priestly initiation, or transfer of authority, etc. Humans
seem to have a great need for myth.

But lets take it a step further. What is a "non-authoritarian" culture?
Hippies? Punks? Bohemians and beat-nicks? Sure. But even they have
leaders. They have ALPHAS that get a measure of deference and respect. The
key difference, and why we don't consider them authoritarian, is that
there is less expectation to conform and do as one is told. But, for
example, you're still going to get treated oddly by most members of these
sub-groups if your fashion sense is to wear a three-piece button up suit.

But what is important to realize is that the alpha/beta dynamic exists in
*virtually* all human social interaction. It *PLAYS* to a deep need, among
most primates, to HAVE that dynamic.

There are always anomalies. You may be one of them. I certainly am. As a
child, I was socially ostracized for being friendly and talkative with
mentally handicapped kids. They were my "lessers" and there was an
expectation that I'd treat them as such.. not to be mean to them, but to
not include them in "the circle."

I saw many kids grow up and learn those types of "lessons." The vast
majority folded to social pressure.

I never cared about it. Still don't.

But I recognize that for many people, they deeply care about what others
think of them.

>> Agreed, with the proviso that quite often people rationalize, rather
>> than act rationally. They rationalize away animal instincts.
>
>   I don't know what you mean by 'rationalize' - Isn't that
>   psychobabble?

Not at all. Let me give you an all-to-common example. 

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

2016-09-19 Thread juan
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:21:23 +1000
Zenaan Harkness  wrote:


> 
> Eben Moglen should stand in politics. Linus Torvalds should stand in
> the same party - wouldn't that be fun :)


Torvalds? Torvalds should either learn the ABC of politics or
stick to coding. And same thing for that fucking asshole
stallman.

http://torvalds-family.blogspot.com/2008/11/black-and-white.html

Has torvalds published any more thoughts on his beloved
psycho-murderer obomba? 

I think torvald's views should put to rest the idea of good
politicians (apart from dead politiians), good political
parties and similar nonsense. 



 


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

2016-09-19 Thread xorcist
> Does not matter if your seats of power are in a global hegemonic empire,
> or merely the 12 seats on your local council, or some other system where
> a "benevolent dictator is supposed to wield ulatimte authority" - by
> "being too smart to get involved in politics", as you correctly point
> out,

Yes, I agree with you that it would be better for all if a different lot
of people got involved in politics, whether at a local or global level,
etc.

The trouble is that it is difficult to convince people to act against
their own immediate interests.

For example, I happen to know an exceptionally smart woman that I think
would be great in politics. But she'd get decimated in an election because
of her lifestyle choices. She has a long-term, polygamous relationship and
open relations with other people.

There is an additional layer of complexity here: what individualist
anarchist types view as "moral", "acceptable", and "normal" is
fundamentally different than the population at large. And unfortunately,
these are the types of things that the population focuses on; largely
because they are unable to comprehend matters of the issues.

> Well, you seem to get it, why have you not created a political party
> "Anarchy FTW" or some such?

I have, actually, at different times in life. The difficulty that I've run
into is two fold.

First, there has been a difficulty in uniting left-and-right oriented
anarchists. That is "solvable" by simply focusing on one perspective and
getting a group behind that. I don't much care, personally, if we're
speaking about anarcho-capitalism, or anarcho-syndicalism, or whatever.
>From my perspective, neither have be implemented at a large scale, and
both seem to have advantages over the current failing system, so I'm happy
to give either a chance. Others are more dogmatically ideological about
it, in my experience.

But the bigger issue has been disruptive individuals. Whether they are
just hard-line ideologues, or agent provocateurs, I won't bother to
speculate. But the problem is that there is always a few individuals who
manage to dominate the conversation, and derail practical things for some
type of "purity." And to argue against them is to get labeled a sell-out,
fascist sympathizer, or other nonsense.

I was acquainted with an 'anarchist' group that ended up voting for George
Bush Jr, the second time around on the "principle" that he is the worst
choice, and that it would hasten the downfall of the State. I've been
acquainted with others that advocate not voting at all.

> How is it that, regardless of political philosophy underlying whatever
> political system currently prevails in the shared common delusion, that
> we can justify NOT being involved?

There are all manner of rational justifications for not running for
office. Not wanting your personal life torn apart, and the people close to
you harassed and hurt is damn good justification.

There are less rational reasons to not vote.. even if you pencil in "no
one" or "putin" or whatever nonsense, and take the time to encourage other
members of the electorate to think differently about their duty while on
line.

>
>> You know, the main problem with anarchism is that there are no doctors
>> and engineers to speak of.
>
> Speak for yourself.
>
>
> And I encourage you, with a warm heart, to advise yourself to caution
> yourself in the words you use, in the genericisms you proudly flaunt as
> they they're God's given truth to the current reality.

I believe if you re-read what I wrote, you'll see that I was careful to
use "to speak of" and "mostly" as needed. Perhaps I could have couched it
more.

> Guaranteed we could find at least a handful of "doctors and lawyers",
> who subscribe to at least some aspects of political anarchy!

Yes, of course. But a handful is not nearly enough, and I find that
pragmatic professional types who aren't political ideologues don't want to
waste time with a group composed of such people, which as I say, in my
experience tend to be the type that crowd under the banner of anarchy.


>
> I do wish there were an easier silver bullet where I could say to you
> "yeah, good on ya mate! go live your own life and avoid all politics
> it's all doomed anyway, so I pat your back for giving up mate!"

Well, I will say that I've all but given up on "anarchy." Or, rather, I've
come around, perhaps, more to Thoreau's view: we're not ready for it.

Today, I tend to put more focus on practical things, and rather avoid the
ideology. What can be done to keep the internet as free as possible? What
can be done to combat state surveillance? What can be done to see firearms
rights preserved as best as possible? If I have to deal with National
party folks, or Liberal party, or Greens, or whoever, thats fine.

> ... generally, learn to be a great human, a fantastic team player, a
> subtle and ego free behind the scenes influencer (if possible, I know
> from extended personal experience that ego is a shit of a thing to try

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

2016-09-18 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 01:04:28AM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:20:15PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:22:44 -
> >>
> > We can hope for the occasional 'benevolent' dictator. They might be
> > rare, but they occasionally get into a seat of power.
> 
> For sure. I'd be an avowed monarchist if I could have even a 25% chance 
> that the king would be a Marcus Aurelius.
> 
> I don't think that such men are rare, in fact. I think they are smart
> enough to avoid politics. Politics attracts the worst of the lot.

This is a fundamental problem. You, me, others, we need to promote those
within our circles whom we consider to have a moral foundation for their
choices and actions in life, to try to take and hold seats of power.

Does not matter if your seats of power are in a global hegemonic empire,
or merely the 12 seats on your local council, or some other system where
a "benevolent dictator is supposed to wield ulatimte authority" - by
"being too smart to get involved in politics", as you correctly point
out,

the DEFAULT POSITION is that the worst of our lot TAKE THE SEATS of
power!

They are not challenged by those with good foundations!


No matter your system, we have a duty to one another to hold each other
to a higher standard, and to be involved in politics and the wielding of
power that any gathering of humans implies, political or otherwise,
since it's ALL politics.


> > I remain marginally hopeful you will never be proven wrong on "that
> > which exists, exists."
> >
> > But hey, I'd love to proven wrong on that too :)
> 
> Lol. Yeah, I don't think I'll get proven wrong on the existence part
> necessarily. But maybe someone will come up with a clever way to culture
> jam and get a whole bunch of quality people into the fold questioning the
> need for centralized institutions of power.

Well, you seem to get it, why have you not created a political party
"Anarchy FTW" or some such?

It might sound funny, but how can this not be anything but a personal
duty of you, I, and any with wholesome intention?


How is it that, regardless of political philosophy underlying whatever
political system currently prevails in the shared common delusion, that
we can justify NOT being involved?


> You know, the main problem with anarchism is that there are no doctors
> and engineers to speak of.

Speak for yourself.


And I encourage you, with a warm heart, to advise yourself to caution
yourself in the words you use, in the genericisms you proudly flaunt as
they they're God's given truth to the current reality.


Guaranteed we could find at least a handful of "doctors and lawyers",
who subscribe to at least some aspects of political anarchy!


Fatalism is not becoming of the intellect - that's a descent into blind
and bloody fanaticism.


> Its mostly political ideologues, and
> change-the-world hippies and freaks.

MAY BE mostly. Certainly not all.

I'm pretty sure most "mainstream" folks are aware that we need to start
doing something different to get a different global outcome :)


The conspiracy theorists have proven on many counts to be conspiracy
factists :) :)


Turns out, some of them "freaks" were actually more rational and more
observant than the religiously blind "majority".


This is a good sign.


> A few ivory tower professors.

And lawyers.


Eben Moglen should stand in politics. Linus Torvalds should stand in the
same party - wouldn't that be fun :)

Yes yes, of course throw RMS into the mix - I've tried communicating
with him about all this, but he's a bit stubborn in wanting the platform
and the solutions to be laid out for him, perhaps not as aware of the
influence he could personally wield were he to join or start a political
party.

We need to gently, with kindness and patience (LOTS of patience with the
narrow but humanely belligerent such as RMS), steer the ivory towered
intellectuals into the firm and unrelenting direction of participation
in politics. WHATEVER system prevails at $this point in time!


There is no other way that I can conceive of, to get an overall better
future.


I do wish there were an easier silver bullet where I could say to you
"yeah, good on ya mate! go live your own life and avoid all politics
it's all doomed anyway, so I pat your back for giving up mate!"


Hmm?


> Great people, in my experience, but you don't get solid respectable,
> work-a-day "professional" types that way, and they are the key.. the
> backbone, to any real social movement.

That's just patience, persistence, working first and foremost on purging
$my own demons, working on recognizing fellow $justice seekers, weeding
out their bullshit, owning $my bullshit when others call me on it ...

... generally, learn to be a great human, a fantastic team player, a
subtle and ego free behind the scenes influencer (if possible, I know
from extended personal experience that ego is a shit of a thing to try
to purge).


Be the one who can in 6 

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

2016-09-18 Thread juan
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 01:51:48 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 21:20:15 -
> > xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> > I think, though I'm not completely sure, that there was a
> > rather widespread opposition to the clipper chip, including
> > opposition among more 'respectable' members of the
> > establishment. The same members of the establishment that
> > today fully backdoor their own chips, like intel and amd.
> 
> Not that I recall. Outside of computer and crypto-nerd rings, few had
> even heard about it. This was the '90s. Ma and Pa weren't on the
> internet yet. No one really knew what the fuck the internet was.


I didn't mean joe six pack, sorry. I meant opposition inside
'the industry'

At any rate, even if intel and co. didn't oppose the clipper
chip  at that time, at least they hadn't put their own version
in their processors. Now they have. 



> 
> There was very little coverage in the media. I don't recall many
> senators opposing it. But nonetheless, you can throw PGP in there too.
> 
> If the state had its way, there would still be a crypto export ban,
> and you've have mandatory key escrow.


Key escrow like you have now in apple, amd, intel etc systyems?




> 
> 
> > Yes, bitcoin is interesting, but if so called regulators
> > wanted to damage it, they could do so in a few days.
> 
> That's hardly the point. The question wasn't what technical/code type
> things are invulnerable to the state. The question was, what sort of
> crypto/techie stuff has encroached on traditional state power, or
> limited its reach.


I'm not sure when it was stipulated that was The Question, but
it's kinda obvious that a system that can be destroyed in a few
days hasn't limited state power to any meaningful degree.



> 
> I'd also offer that in Real Soon Now, you'll see small towns adopt
> crowdfunding in lieu of taxation. That will spread, and probably quite
> quickly.

lol...


> 
> The point is, there are all sorts of things that are eroding state
> power, or have the ability to do so, right now.

I don't see the state power being eroded, at all. As to things
having the 'ability' to do so, of course. Since the danw of
history.
 


> 
> > That's pretty much a tautology. But reality includes
> > people, who are supposed to be moral agents and can choose to
> > behave in different ways.
> 
> Well, now we get into the whole free will thing. 


You started the topic =)


> Sure. We have free
> will, or at least if we don't, I'm apparently not free to believe
> otherwise. But there are limits to it.

True. My point however was that stating "this is reality"
doesn't say much.


> 
> The social milieu is much like a river. You can swim in it, and to a
> degree you can control your direction, but you will always be moving
> with the current. If you're an extraordinary swimmer, maybe you can
> make progress against the current. These are the  inspirational social reformers here>.
> 
> A white male living in 1740 quite literally was not AS FREE as you or
> I in terms of his beliefs about race, slavery, God, and so on. Social
> pressure.


Not sure what you mean. 


> 
> Could he CHOOSE to marry a freed black woman? Yeah. In theory, but you
> have to accept he'd be an incredible anomaly.
> 
> Now, not so much.

So?


> 
> 
> >
> >> And reality IS that every social animal has a pecking order.. an
> >> alpha/beta dynamic. Humans are not exempt from this, and it
> >> manifests for us, in various forms, and governments and our
> >> institutions are among them. It's why the most driven, "alpha"
> >> sociopaths rise to power, and the whiny betas piss and moan about
> >> it, and don't.
> >
> >
> > So you think there are no honest people - people who seem
> > honest are actually cowards?
> 
> No, I'm not sure where you're getting that from with that. My point
> here is simply that there are underlying dynamics that we usually
> explain away, but which we don't actually understand. So, in the
> above, I'm trying to suggest that your average person NEEDS authority
> to bow to. They really do need it. Without it, they are like a dog
> that loses the leader of its pack. 


I don't know, I mean, I see stray dogs all the time. They don't
belong to any pack. And then there are dogs that have 'owners'.
Those don't belong to packs either...they belong to their
masters...



> It is a frightening situation, and
> fills them with anxiety. The primary characteristic of a leader, in
> humans, is when the shit is hitting the fan and most people are
> unsure of what to do, and pissing themselves.. the leader says, I
> KNOW WHAT TO DO. He's quick. He's certain. He's "strong." That is
> comforting to people. Hence, Trump, by the way.

...trump is a 'leader'? More than half the electorate hates him

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

2016-09-18 Thread xorcist
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 21:20:15 -
> xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>   I think, though I'm not completely sure, that there was a
>   rather widespread opposition to the clipper chip, including
>   opposition among more 'respectable' members of the
>   establishment. The same members of the establishment that today
>   fully backdoor their own chips, like intel and amd.

Not that I recall. Outside of computer and crypto-nerd rings, few had even
heard about it. This was the '90s. Ma and Pa weren't on the internet yet.
No one really knew what the fuck the internet was.

There was very little coverage in the media. I don't recall many senators
opposing it. But nonetheless, you can throw PGP in there too.

If the state had its way, there would still be a crypto export ban, and
you've have mandatory key escrow.


>   Yes, bitcoin is interesting, but if so called regulators
>   wanted to damage it, they could do so in a few days.

That's hardly the point. The question wasn't what technical/code type
things are invulnerable to the state. The question was, what sort of
crypto/techie stuff has encroached on traditional state power, or limited
its reach.

I'd also offer that in Real Soon Now, you'll see small towns adopt
crowdfunding in lieu of taxation. That will spread, and probably quite
quickly.

The point is, there are all sorts of things that are eroding state power,
or have the ability to do so, right now.

>   That's pretty much a tautology. But reality includes people, who
>   are supposed to be moral agents and can choose to behave in
>   different ways.

Well, now we get into the whole free will thing. Sure. We have free will,
or at least if we don't, I'm apparently not free to believe otherwise. But
there are limits to it.

The social milieu is much like a river. You can swim in it, and to a
degree you can control your direction, but you will always be moving with
the current. If you're an extraordinary swimmer, maybe you can make
progress against the current. These are the .

A white male living in 1740 quite literally was not AS FREE as you or I in
terms of his beliefs about race, slavery, God, and so on. Social pressure.

Could he CHOOSE to marry a freed black woman? Yeah. In theory, but you
have to accept he'd be an incredible anomaly.

Now, not so much.


>
>> And reality IS that every social animal has a pecking order.. an
>> alpha/beta dynamic. Humans are not exempt from this, and it manifests
>> for us, in various forms, and governments and our institutions are
>> among them. It's why the most driven, "alpha" sociopaths rise to
>> power, and the whiny betas piss and moan about it, and don't.
>
>
>   So you think there are no honest people - people who seem
>   honest are actually cowards?

No, I'm not sure where you're getting that from with that. My point here
is simply that there are underlying dynamics that we usually explain away,
but which we don't actually understand. So, in the above, I'm trying to
suggest that your average person NEEDS authority to bow to. They really do
need it. Without it, they are like a dog that loses the leader of its
pack. It is a frightening situation, and fills them with anxiety. The
primary characteristic of a leader, in humans, is when the shit is hitting
the fan and most people are unsure of what to do, and pissing themselves..
the leader says, I KNOW WHAT TO DO. He's quick. He's certain. He's
"strong." That is comforting to people. Hence, Trump, by the way.

But for another example, take war. Chimpanzees go to war. There are times
when their population will fragment, and two camps will emerge. Males will
engage in late-night raiding parties, surprise attacks, killing other
males and male children, kidnapping females, and stealing food.

That is not appreciably different to how human war was fought for hundreds
of thousands of years. Recently, we don't kidnap females, and we don't
steal food. We're interested in other resources.

Now, are these similarities between social mammalian alpha/beta dynamics
to human dynamics coincidence? Is it coincidence that our closest cousins,
chimps, engage in organized violence similar to us? Or are there real
animal dynamics at work? Herd dynamics.

I personally don't think so.

And my point in all this is to show that, its not a problem with
institutions, religions, politics, "the elite" or any of that stuff. All
of those things are SYMPTOMS of the real problem.

The real problem, being, we act like what we are: primates.

>
>   I'd point out that yes, the current system is a horrid mess,
>   but if we assume it's the result of real, unchangeable 'human
>   nature' that 'just exists', then any action is pointless,
>   unless we want to join 'their' side of the game.

No, not at all. Evolve, and encourage others to do so as well. Look,
gravity exists. A downward pull to the earth exists. It's unchangeable.
Period. But it can be USED, and overcome. That takes 

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

2016-09-18 Thread Mirimir
On 09/18/2016 10:22 AM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>> Fwiw, for those who aren't aware... The point of trolls like this one,
>> 'xorcist', and cyberpiggie et all is to stalk individuals posts on lists
>> with garbage so people start to think, whenever the one being targeted
>> posts, "Oh fuck that means I'm gonna see all that shit from x...@xxx.xxx
>> again and wish the targeted person would stop posting and just lurk.
>>
>> Stupid... Simple... Social engineering.
>>
>> Rr
>>
> 
> 
> How fucking stupid. If that was my goal, I wouldn't have taken the mail
> off-list to avoid shit ON-LIST. If that was my goal, I wouldn't have
> specifically tried to NOT influence the list. You're so paranoid its
> laughable. You're not that important, mate.
> 
> But, if your goal was to paint me in this way, you'd have done well to not
> post my off-list mail to the list. Not that it really matters, its obvious
> that people buy into your bullshit.

Posting private messages is very bad form, without explicit permission.

Just sayin'.

> And no.. my goal isn't to stalk you. I'm just tired of seeing shit which
> isn't the slightest bit relevant to crypto, or even resistance to the
> state, on this list.

Ditto.

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

Ditto.

> Now its just wankers speculating, and regurgitating links from open news
> sources.. and you act like you're leaking privileged information.
> 
> lulz

Ditto.

So hey, xorcist, welcome :)



Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-18 Thread Razer


On 09/18/2016 04:30 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 08:10:18AM -0700, Razer wrote:
>> On 09/17/2016 10:36 PM, grarpamp wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Zenaan Harkness  wrote:
 usual activities of society, and not have to produce "papers please"
>>>
>>> s/produce/obtain/
>>>
>>> If one has no obligation to obtain, one cannot produce.
>>> Most law forces one to obtain (permission) under threat of
>>> paper duress, to partake in various civilities and liberties.
>>> That's fucked.
>>
>> The law of the land is you have to identify yourself.
> 
> Our Crimes Act says verbally stating name and address is adequate.
> 
> 
>> You don't have to produce papers unless you're operating a vehicle.
>> Even then you don't have to produce, but you'll get a fixit ticket for
>> not having it with you.
> 
> Failure to produce papers/ cards etc which prove identity, is grounds
> enough to be "temporarily detained" whilst your corpus (body) is hauled
> off to their police station in the back of their police vehicle, so they
> can "endeavour to establish your identity".
> 
> Many cases, including my own, they don't drive you back to your vehicle.



HAHAHAH! Drive you BACK? No? Really? ROTF! No one, except perhaps a
dignitary ''erroneously inhibited from proceeding'' gets 'a ride back'.
Get picked up on a warrant, for even a misdemeanor, if the charging
state wants to prosecute, or just wants to make a month of your life
miserable, and you COULD find yourself at the other end of the country
without 'a ride back' (sometimes after the charges are summarily dropped
... after a two week hold-and-cros-country-transit)

> 
> 
>> OTOH, things can be 'different you're POC, homeless or poor... For
>> instance a homeless friend of mine was given a camping ticket last
>> winter. In the process the officer asked for his ID.
>>
>> He informed the cop it was buried away for the night but he knew his
>> *Identification Number*. The cop told him that wasn't good enough, to
>> give him his *social security number*. My friend explained that was a
>> violation of US federal law... The number is SPECIFICALLY forbidden from
>> being used as general identification and it said so right on the card
>> ... and the cop wouldn't want him to commit a federal crime, now would he?
>>
>> The cop then said something truly chilling that went something like this:
>>
>>> "Well if you don't I guess I'll just have to take you in for a
>>> 'book-and-release. That means you won't see your sleeping bag and
>>> other property for a few days."
> 
> That's what we get for allowing unaccountable, unfettered, and for most
> of us, unstoppable power in the hands of a small percentage of the
> population, in a sanctioned and badged group of employees of a
> corporation (at least here in Aus the Police became a corporation some
> years back), which due to the aforementioned, naturally attracts those
> with small dick syndrome (or small ovary syndrome), aka bullies.
> 
> 
>> This is the middle of the winter in a town where it can go to freezing
>> in the early morning.
>>
>> My friend complied, under duress, and he wrote that on the ticket too. A
>> ticket that never got filed.
>>
>> Postlogue: I did a check for my friend and found that if you don't have
>> identification information for a non-jailable offense (ie. infractions
>> in California) the solution is simple. A thumb-print on the ticket to
>> simply prove you were there. Every cop has a print kit in their car.
> 
> I'd only say "a solution" rather than "the solution".


Anything but a 'final solution'... See the last part of this enquote below

> 
> And "the solution" that we -should- have, is that verbally stating name
> and address -ought- be enough, if you've damaged no property nor human
> (and yourself doesn't count).

What you said about detaining if you don't produce papers above. That
CAN happen. But, at least locally, and in my hitchhiking experience
around the US and Canada a few decades ago it just hasn't happens to me
or really? Anyone I know.

Now kid with the cop and tell them your name is Jimi Hendrix or George
Metesky-Abbie Hoffman or Rosanne Barr or Colin Kaeopernick, and yeah.
You're gonna get faceplanted and they'll hold you in some stinkhole jail
cell until the fingerprints come back via the turnip train.

Actually... You MIGHT get away with George Metesky. Try it. Let me know
how it works out...

> 
>> My friend said he was going to sue for privacy violation but never did.
>> It ain't easy being broke and houseless and trying to file a state level
>> civil rights suit on your own.
> 
> True.
> 
> 

>> I suspect they wanted his social security
>> number for a database of local homeless.


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

2016-09-18 Thread xorcist
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:20:15PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:22:44 -
>>
>> "I tried being an anarchist but there are too many rules."
>
> Gold.
>
> :)

Hah. Glad you got a kick out of it. That one got me laid once, in fact.


>
> We can hope for the occasional 'benevolent' dictator. They might be
> rare, but they occasionally get into a seat of power.

For sure. I'd be an avowed monarchist if I could have even a 25% chance 
that the king would be a Marcus Aurelius.

I don't think that such men are rare, in fact. I think they are smart
enough to avoid politics. Politics attracts the worst of the lot.

>
> I remain marginally hopeful you will never be proven wrong on "that
> which exists, exists."
>
> But hey, I'd love to proven wrong on that too :)

Lol. Yeah, I don't think I'll get proven wrong on the existence part
necessarily. But maybe someone will come up with a clever way to culture
jam and get a whole bunch of quality people into the fold questioning the
need for centralized institutions of power.

You know, the main problem with anarchism is that there are no doctors and
engineers to speak of. Its mostly political ideologues, and
change-the-world hippies and freaks. A few ivory tower professors. Great
people, in my experience, but you don't get solid respectable, work-a-day
"professional" types that way, and they are the key.. the backbone, to any
real social movement.

That's why the hippies failed in the '60s. They couldn't get enough
middle-class normies to smoke grass and fuck freely. It was too scary for
them.

In Zen monasteries, the roshi, the master, is treated like "one of the
guys." You can make jokes, and poke fun at each other. That sort of thing.
There is no grand show of deference inside the monastery. That is for the
outside world. The roshi will wear fancy robes, and everyone will bow and
all this.

Because the knew that if you lived without authoritarianism, and showed it
to the general public (especially a rigid society like Japan), it would be
dangerous. But, you make a big show of bowing to some guy, and people
think "oh ok.. they must be OK, they have structure like everyone else."

But the monks know its all nonsense.. its just for show. It's an act, a
play they perform.

I've often thought that a successful anarchist movement would need to
incorporate something like that.. as social camouflage.




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

2016-09-18 Thread juan
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 21:20:15 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:22:44 -
> > So, how effective have your crypto techniques and tools been
> > against the state?
> 
> Depends on what your metric is, I suppose. But, I'd argue that absent
> Matt Blaze's Clipper chip hack, your land line phones would have been
> entirely tapped well before 9/11. Sure, it didn't matter longer term
> because cell phones became the defacto standard. It remains to be
> seen whether Silent Circle will have an impact.

I think, though I'm not completely sure, that there was a
rather widespread opposition to the clipper chip, including
opposition among more 'respectable' members of the
establishment. The same members of the establishment that today
fully backdoor their own chips, like intel and amd. 



> 
> Bitcoin is causing a stir, and providing the budding opportunity for
> an economy absent a state.

Yes, bitcoin is interesting, but if so called regulators
wanted to damage it, they could do so in a few days. 


> 
> These two examples, to my way of thinking, have had a more tangible
> outcome than observation, and discussion.. and perhaps, even more than
> outright protest. Because I don't see Wall St. responding to
> protests.. but they ARE responding to Bitcoin, and implementing their
> own block-chain mechanisms.

I'm sure wall street would respond to real attacks against
them. Whatever protests were done, I don't think they were
serious. Real riotting and beating up bank owners doesn't seem
like an irrelevant 'tool'.

And yes, there seems to be a sizable amout of blockchain hype
in the financial mafia, but I'm not sure what it means. It
seems to mostly be...meaningless hype.  Those people don't need
any new crypto techniques - they have the ultimate technical
device, the printing press, now gone digital. That and the
state's guns.



> 
> 
> > And what is stoping you from discussing crypto? Rhetorical
> > question of course. The answer is, you and others can
> > discuss whatever you want and ignore whatever posters you want to
> > ignore. It's not like the list has a 100kb quota per day
> > that's all being used up by 'off topic' posts.
> 
> Yeah, sure. I can ignore the pissing and moaning about the media, and
> the state. And likewise you can ignore my pissing and moaning about
> this list.

=)
 
> 
> Or, I can engage - as you can. It seems we're both favoring the later.
> 
> > Is that supposed to mean : only 'abuses' of power are a
> > problem, not power per se?
> 
> "I tried being an anarchist but there are too many rules."
> 

Haha! That's a good one =)


> It's not supposed to mean anything other than what I said. People that
> make it to cypherpunks are already quite likely informed. I don't see
> the need in pointing out the obvious.

Seems to me that at least a few posters don't really get the
full picture, but OK.


> 
> But, to answer your inquiry about power directly, I'll bite. Do I
> think there are "legitimate" forms of power? Depends on what you mean
> by legitimate. Do I like it? No. But I accept reality. I wish that
> reality was different. It would be nice if power structures were
> different, and while I'm at it, I think I'd like to add more purples,
> and some green to the daily sunset. But that is all nonsense. Reality
> just IS.

That's pretty much a tautology. But reality includes people, who
are supposed to be moral agents and can choose to behave in
different ways. 


 
> And reality IS that every social animal has a pecking order.. an
> alpha/beta dynamic. Humans are not exempt from this, and it manifests
> for us, in various forms, and governments and our institutions are
> among them. It's why the most driven, "alpha" sociopaths rise to
> power, and the whiny betas piss and moan about it, and don't.


So you think there are no honest people - people who seem
honest are actually cowards? 


> 
> Changing that game is about a lot more than changing any individual
> institution. It is about more than changing ALL the institutions.
> 
> Crypto won't help there, except as a tool to avoid state oppression.
> Activism and protests won't help, except as a means to draw attention
> to minor issues. Even if you manage to effect full-on insurrection,
> and get rid of alpha-male school bully #1, unless you change the very
> dynamic of behavior, some other douche will just take his place.


Yes true. On the other it seems reasonable to expect that if
running a government gets you killed, wannabe rulers will think
twice about it. 


 
> And that, in a nutshell, is why I don't favor even bothering with
> most of this stuff. The depths of "the problem" go deep enough that
> all it does is to become its own form of 

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

2016-09-18 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:20:15PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:22:44 -
> 
> > Is that supposed to mean : only 'abuses' of power are a
> > problem, not power per se?
> 
> "I tried being an anarchist but there are too many rules."

Gold.

:)


> Crypto won't help there, except as a tool to avoid state oppression.
> Activism and protests won't help, except as a means to draw attention to
> minor issues. Even if you manage to effect full-on insurrection, and get
> rid of alpha-male school bully #1, unless you change the very dynamic of
> behavior, some other douche will just take his place.

We can hope for the occasional 'benevolent' dictator. They might be
rare, but they occasionally get into a seat of power.


Linus Torvalds demonstrates that a bit of assinine dictatoriness, when
mixed with a dose of willingness to hear others say your an ass and
demur to their authority when they're right, can work.

RMS might be arse up on "democratic" government, but his dictatory
immovability for free libre software was and remains a decent stand for
something better in the world.


I heard a conspiracy once that Hitler tried to take back the money
power, just like JFK a bit later, and got convinced by insiders in his
circle to attack Russia in the winter when he should have consolidated.


> And that, in a nutshell, is why I don't favor even bothering with most of
> this stuff. The depths of "the problem" go deep enough that all it does is
> to become its own form of distraction. Rather, I prefer to proceed this
> way:
> 
> Find a small, soluble problem that fills a need. Propose a solution. 
> Implement it. Repeat.
> 
> If everyone does a little, a lot will get done.

+1

Excellent foundations. I used to suggest that to people who were new to
the Internet re wikipedia - make it a bucket list to start or improve at
least one article every few years.

I'm sure a few of us around here have done so...


> Or, you deal with it, and shovel shit working for "the Man."

Sure. Just be careful you don't "sell your soul" in the process.

> It's just the nature of things.
> 
> I'd love to be proven wrong, however.

I remain marginally hopeful you will never be proven wrong on "that
which exists, exists."

But hey, I'd love to proven wrong on that too :)


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-18 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 08:10:18AM -0700, Razer wrote:
> On 09/17/2016 10:36 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Zenaan Harkness  wrote:
> >> usual activities of society, and not have to produce "papers please"
> > 
> > s/produce/obtain/
> > 
> > If one has no obligation to obtain, one cannot produce.
> > Most law forces one to obtain (permission) under threat of
> > paper duress, to partake in various civilities and liberties.
> > That's fucked.
> 
> The law of the land is you have to identify yourself.

Our Crimes Act says verbally stating name and address is adequate.


> You don't have to produce papers unless you're operating a vehicle.
> Even then you don't have to produce, but you'll get a fixit ticket for
> not having it with you.

Failure to produce papers/ cards etc which prove identity, is grounds
enough to be "temporarily detained" whilst your corpus (body) is hauled
off to their police station in the back of their police vehicle, so they
can "endeavour to establish your identity".

Many cases, including my own, they don't drive you back to your vehicle.


> OTOH, things can be 'different you're POC, homeless or poor... For
> instance a homeless friend of mine was given a camping ticket last
> winter. In the process the officer asked for his ID.
> 
> He informed the cop it was buried away for the night but he knew his
> *Identification Number*. The cop told him that wasn't good enough, to
> give him his *social security number*. My friend explained that was a
> violation of US federal law... The number is SPECIFICALLY forbidden from
> being used as general identification and it said so right on the card
> ... and the cop wouldn't want him to commit a federal crime, now would he?
> 
> The cop then said something truly chilling that went something like this:
> 
> > "Well if you don't I guess I'll just have to take you in for a
> > 'book-and-release. That means you won't see your sleeping bag and
> > other property for a few days."

That's what we get for allowing unaccountable, unfettered, and for most
of us, unstoppable power in the hands of a small percentage of the
population, in a sanctioned and badged group of employees of a
corporation (at least here in Aus the Police became a corporation some
years back), which due to the aforementioned, naturally attracts those
with small dick syndrome (or small ovary syndrome), aka bullies.


> This is the middle of the winter in a town where it can go to freezing
> in the early morning.
> 
> My friend complied, under duress, and he wrote that on the ticket too. A
> ticket that never got filed.
> 
> Postlogue: I did a check for my friend and found that if you don't have
> identification information for a non-jailable offense (ie. infractions
> in California) the solution is simple. A thumb-print on the ticket to
> simply prove you were there. Every cop has a print kit in their car.

I'd only say "a solution" rather than "the solution".

And "the solution" that we -should- have, is that verbally stating name
and address -ought- be enough, if you've damaged no property nor human
(and yourself doesn't count).

> My friend said he was going to sue for privacy violation but never did.
> It ain't easy being broke and houseless and trying to file a state level
> civil rights suit on your own.

True.


> I suspect they wanted his social security
> number for a database of local homeless.


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

2016-09-18 Thread juan
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:22:44 -
xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:


> I remember when this list had posts from Assange and others on actual
> cryptographic techniques and tools,


So, how effective have your crypto techniques and tools been
against the state? 

And what is stoping you from discussing crypto? Rhetorical
question of course. The answer is, you and others can discuss
whatever you want and ignore whatever posters you want to
ignore. It's not like the list has a 100kb quota per day that's
all being used up by 'off topic' posts. 


> does ANYONE on cypherpunks need to be convinced of the abuses of
> power?

Is that supposed to mean : only 'abuses' of power are a
problem, not power per se? I've seen a fair amount of
people in this list trying to 'argue' that government is
great as long as 'we the right people' are in power. In turn I
could ask, how can ANYONE on cypherpunks pretend that ANY 
government can be a legitimate institution.



> where real information was
> shared. New information and ideas.

"Don't get me wrong", I would love to have secure computing and
telecom platforms, but it's painfully obvious that in the last
20 years we've moved in the exact opposite direction. Now the
hardware comes compromised. "out of the box". And that's not
because of off-topic posts to the cpunks mailing list. 


> 
> Now its just wankers speculating, and regurgitating links from open
> news sources.. and you act like you're leaking privileged information.
> 
> lulz
> 



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

2016-09-18 Thread xorcist
> Fwiw, for those who aren't aware... The point of trolls like this one,
> 'xorcist', and cyberpiggie et all is to stalk individuals posts on lists
> with garbage so people start to think, whenever the one being targeted
> posts, "Oh fuck that means I'm gonna see all that shit from x...@xxx.xxx
> again and wish the targeted person would stop posting and just lurk.
>
> Stupid... Simple... Social engineering.
>
> Rr
>


How fucking stupid. If that was my goal, I wouldn't have taken the mail
off-list to avoid shit ON-LIST. If that was my goal, I wouldn't have
specifically tried to NOT influence the list. You're so paranoid its
laughable. You're not that important, mate.

But, if your goal was to paint me in this way, you'd have done well to not
post my off-list mail to the list. Not that it really matters, its obvious
that people buy into your bullshit.

And no.. my goal isn't to stalk you. I'm just tired of seeing shit which
isn't the slightest bit relevant to crypto, or even resistance to the
state, on this list.

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

Now its just wankers speculating, and regurgitating links from open news
sources.. and you act like you're leaking privileged information.

lulz



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

2016-09-18 Thread Александр
2016-09-18 18:31 GMT+03:00 Razer :

> for those who aren't aware... The point of trolls like this one,
> 'xorcist', and cyberpiggie et all is to stalk individuals posts on lists
> with garbage so people start to think, whenever the one being targeted
> posts, "Oh fuck that means I'm gonna see all that shit from x...@xxx.xxx
> again and wish the targeted person would stop posting and just lurk.


*+1*
!


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

2016-09-18 Thread Razer
Replying through list b/c I don't want this scumbucket disruptor having
a mail header from direct email to 'sigAint'.




No 'pissing contest' necessary.
Your email's blocked at the server buhbye troll.


On 09/17/2016 09:32 PM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> Taking this off-list, because it doesn't need to be on list. If you want
> to smear other's mailboxes with it in a pissing contest, go right ahead. I
> don't feel the need.
> 
>> I'm NOT a kid
> 
> So you say. No real way for me to know that though, is there?
> 
>> I've been a victim of US intel agency stalking, slander, and disruption
>> operations. When it was still done with phone, and file cabinet, and
>> punch cards (if computer methods were used at all)
> 
> If this is true, its supposed to impress me? Welcome to the club. You have
> any idea how many people have been similarly stalked? Fucken millions.
> Doesn't make you special, or mean you're a wrench in their gears. Cuz if
> millions of wrenches were in the gears, they wouldn't be spinning.
> 
> Punch cards, huh? They were phased out in the 60s. So that'd make you, at
> the youngest, around a 20-something in 1965 or so. Call it 20 in '65. So
> you're 71. On cypherpunks. With a handle like "Razer."
> 
> And getting your panties in a bunch about age?
> 
> I call bullshit.
> 
> Take it from me. I'm no where near 71. But I am old enough that if someone
> called me "kid" I wouldn't get all offended and try to "prove my age" like
> some fucking 4 year old talking about how they are 4 and a half.
> 
> I'd say "Fuck man.. I wish. Those were good days."
> 
> But whatever. Your age is actually irrelevant to me.. I meant "kid" more
> as "get with it, son." Age, proper has nothing really to do with it. But
> thanks for the line of bullshit about punch cards to prove it.
> 
> lulz.
> 
>>
>> Blah
>>
> 
> Right. So another internet warrior who preaches to the converted (does
> ANYONE on cypherpunks need to be convinced of the abuses of power?)
> thinking their life is a great wrench in the gears of power.
> 
>> Blah blah My life IS a monkey wrench in their gearworks. In real life,
>> in real time.
> 
> Prove it. Because shit-talking on the net does fuck-all. Point me to one
> widely-read article where you exposed previously unknown secrets, or even
> linked together some public facts to give a new view of a situation. Show
> me original research. Show me a piece of code you wrote that in any way
> would piss off a fed.
> 
> Show me one single, tangible thing, that you've done to help other people
> resist state power.
> 
> Because if you think running 'whois' and speculating about a two-bit law
> office on a dis-frequented, unknown mailing list, is being a "wrench in
> the gearworks" you're fucking deluding yourself.
> 
> I'll grant you've probably inspired some people you know personally, and
> thats admirable.. truly.. and its needed; but unless it has the
> possibility of catching fire on the net and crossing borders, its no
> wrench in the gears, mate.
> 
> At best its some dust adding to the friction, but its no wrench.
> 
>>
>> You say. Your older or passed relatives have number tattoos on their
>> bodies? Some of mine did. They weren't 'watching the moves'.
> 
> I dunno. Some of my older relatives have ink, and lived outside the law.. 
> maybe one of them got a prison ID number put on at some point. I wouldn't
> know for sure. Never asked them to strip down, and I know well enough not
> to ask about things they don't offer to talk about.
> 
> But having hard-ass relatives in biker gangs isn't enough to vet me.
> 
> And having relatives that got caught up in the political machines means
> fuck-all for you, too.
> 
> I'd expect a 71 year old long time activist to understand these things.
> 
>> Been waiting a long time. Like waiting for the stars to align. My life
>> is a monkeywrench. Waiting is bullshit.
> 
> Who the fuck is talking about waiting? Figure it out. Work on the problem.
> Figure out a way to culture jam, even if on a small scale..
> 
> Dig up information on that law firm, if it really interests you. Put
> together that original research. Schmooze them, maybe get a free meal out
> of it, and get pics of the people behind the scenes. Dox the fuck out of
> the whole op if you want.
> 
> I really don't want to denigrate YOU, or discourage you -- but the point
> I'm trying to make is that cypherpunks isn't the place for this thing,
> man. We get it. Anyone that makes it to this list gets it, in some way or
> another.
> 
> Reposting articles and chit-chatting about how so-and-so could likely be
> in bed with DHS means shit. Get the proof.
> 
> 
>>
>> You assume I'm emotionally involved?
>>
>> ROTF ROTF ROTF!
>>
>> You're fishing.
> 
> 
> No. It's obvious that you're got all offended at my original post because
> I didn't fall in with what you wanted. I didn't respond with "hot damn
> these elite fucks piss me off, I'm with you man.. lets piss and moan about
> it on cypherpunks"
> 
> And don't 

Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-18 Thread Razer


On 09/17/2016 10:36 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Zenaan Harkness  wrote:
>> usual activities of society, and not have to produce "papers please"
> 
> s/produce/obtain/
> 
> If one has no obligation to obtain, one cannot produce.
> Most law forces one to obtain (permission) under threat of
> paper duress, to partake in various civilities and liberties.
> That's fucked.
> 


The law of the land is you have to identify yourself. You don't have to
produce papers unless you're operating a vehicle. Even then you don't
have to produce, but you'll get a fixit ticket for not having it with you.

OTOH, things can be 'different you're POC, homeless or poor... For
instance a homeless friend of mine was given a camping ticket last
winter. In the process the officer asked for his ID.

He informed the cop it was buried away for the night but he knew his
*Identification Number*. The cop told him that wasn't good enough, to
give him his *social security number*. My friend explained that was a
violation of US federal law... The number is SPECIFICALLY forbidden from
being used as general identification and it said so right on the card
... and the cop wouldn't want him to commit a federal crime, now would he?

The cop then said something truly chilling that went something like this:

> "Well if you don't I guess I'll just have to take you in for a 
> 'book-and-release. That means you won't see your sleeping bag and other 
> property for a few days."


This is the middle of the winter in a town where it can go to freezing
in the early morning.

My friend complied, under duress, and he wrote that on the ticket too. A
ticket that never got filed.

Postlogue: I did a check for my friend and found that if you don't have
identification information for a non-jailable offense (ie. infractions
in California) the solution is simple. A thumb-print on the ticket to
simply prove you were there. Every cop has a print kit in their car.

My friend said he was going to sue for privacy violation but never did.
It ain't easy being broke and houseless and trying to file a state level
civil rights suit on your own. I suspect they wanted his social security
number for a database of local homeless.

Rr


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread grarpamp
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Zenaan Harkness  wrote:
> usual activities of society, and not have to produce "papers please"

s/produce/obtain/

If one has no obligation to obtain, one cannot produce.
Most law forces one to obtain (permission) under threat of
paper duress, to partake in various civilities and liberties.
That's fucked.


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 08:54:09PM -0700, Razer wrote:
> On 09/17/2016 08:46 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Razer  wrote:
> >> Your older or passed relatives have number tattoos on their
> >> bodies? Some of mine did.
> > 
> > Some of mine didn't, for those of you too young to have elders
> > that weren't tracked for life and to have heard them say it.
> > And none are born with them. That freedom is worth fighting for.
> > 
> 
> Amen.

++

"Papers please!"

The driver license in Australia was updated just in the last few years,
to have ones date of birth, on the back, enlarged to take up half the
printing area on the rear of the card.

We Aussies kicked back against the "Australia Card" a decade or two ago,
and now they want to use the "state issued driver license" as a back
door to the national identity card.

This is not good.

We ought have the right to go about our business, participating in the
usual activities of society, and not have to produce "papers please"
unless there is some genuine cause.

Exercise of our rights, in relative safety and competence, ought never
be preconditioned on random production of "papers please" under
sufference of arrest, jail and or criminal or civil charges for merely
failing to produce "papers please".


And yes, this is just one particular fight, challenge, confront etc
(pick your favourite term, by all means).


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread Steve Kinney
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/17/2016 11:22 PM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>> Myself, I'm MUCH happier with the way "the news" is today (with 
>> competition by the Internet, etc) than 20 years ago. Â I remember
>> well how "the news media" misled the public with the Randy Weaver
>> case, Waco, etc. Â "The news media" wouldn't touch discussions
>> about complaints by various women about Bill Clinton, UNTIL one
>> of them filed a lawsuit in about 1996. Â The next day, as if on
>> cue, suddenly all the media began to talk about that case, as if
>> they had suddenly become aware of what was going on...when
>> everyone knew that they must have been already quite aware.Sure, 
>> some of today's 'information' is 'the chaff', rather than 'the
>> wheat', but I'd rather have the opportunity to sift through ALL
>> of the news, rather than let the MSM (mainstream media) Â decide
>> what little to show to us.
> 
> True. Good point.
> 
> You're right that competition from the internet has caused the news
> to tighten up some, in that certain things can't be ignored. But it
> also seems to me that the spin and misdirection that they use is
> also ramping up to bigger-than-ever levels. I guess the two
> probably go hand-in-hand.

Good catch, 2x.

Anything called "activism" intersects with broadcast media (one to
many) and network media (many to many) in the information warfare
battle space of Political Warfare.  Any actor one has not personally
vetted should be presumed hostile, at best easily manipulated; those
one does trust for real reasons will make mistakes.  Opposition
propaganda, astroturf, deception operations, elicitation, smear jobs,
joe jobs, etc. ad Illuminatus Trilogy run rampant.  Anyone who aspires
to schange the world, without controlling access to multi-billion
dollar assets, needs to fight and win the Internet.  There are no
instant easy answers; just learning to ask the right questions is a
major undertaking.

Razer has a very solid background on WTF the people whose boots are on
the real, physical ground are up against.  When radicals fail to
integrate physical and network comms strategies successfully, radicals
fail is all.  The opposition is in the same position.  As Bugs Bunny
would say, "This calls for strategy."  An occasional reminder that we
are not /just/ playing games with computers and shit is well in order.

:o)





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

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX3h9EAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqVBcH/3loG5dsu6Jv6ANJic+Gr2yU
TBhPo9aGtVUQRb1TgbrzEJ8kxE+V3qeOgLG0ZuaLICLOmVQg4wJeVWf6a3v6mgTv
NsfntHgMPMN95+SR2E4kxcPYnOLVf11wOR44ldI1cZ0HhS3R5za4QWr8mSBFf6dF
hOt0du1BwUK1ZsYg0l3DSPt1aHHoeWh6EX0pNPPoCXsmBbdMi++y+MJGCwu6m8ST
JZ136Ohvx+FHh0xakjfy47b2vNrnIzuNzHsDdqJS2NupSd3TTAlDsqtckaPzcAfw
wBDx/ePRuTiB/qNwWO6z+0DZXHbnG6vx3zOc5Pi5K21jnpjL9BnuaSpUh3ELZ/o=
=9dP6
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 02:58:24AM +, jim bell wrote:
> opportunity to sift through ALL of the news, rather than let the MSM
> (mainstream media)  decide what little to show to us.

That would be Main Stream Misinformers.


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread grarpamp
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Razer  wrote:
> Been waiting a long time. Like waiting for the stars to align. My life
> is a monkeywrench. Waiting is bullshit.

Be the wrenches, bros. Even if your life is hard or shortened
due to it, it's still what you believe. Tis no better star to shine.


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread xorcist
Well, lets look at both questions here:

First, the Cloudflare part is simple: they offer more than DDOS protection.
They can seemingly keep your site visible even if your site itself is
down, they offer analytics, and so on. And lets not forget that they
probably have some savvy salesmen that can convince some lawyers to pay up
and use the service.

As for why a lawyer's office would run a site like that. DHS connection is
certainly a possibility that I wouldn't dismiss.

Another possibility is simply personal interest, or the pet project of a
wife, daughter, or friend of the attorney's.

Or it could be professional. Sure, they may mainly focus on personal
injury law, but maybe they are on good terms with a client that came to
them about helping with the website hosting stuff where they can trust
some measure of attorney-client privilege if someone comes around asking
about the site and so on.

Instead of speculating, why not write them a letter and ask? Google up a
few other similar aggregators, and name drop them. Write to someone
mentioned on the site, explain that you're writing an article about up and
coming political-oriented news sources, and would like to include them.

Fucking social engineer some info, and cross-check it against facts you
already know.

> But the burning question is why would an apparently legitimate (Search
> news for "Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty & Proctor"),
> personal injury law firm be operating a site that consolidates
> hot-button current activist issues in the first place, and WHY does it
> feel the need to protect itself at all with Cloudflare or any dDos
> circumvention tools? If you're regurgitating other people's news no
> one's going to be interested in wasting their time, fr any length of
> time, dDosing you.
>
> Could it be one of the DHS's lesser-known corporate cyber-cop partners?
>
> That's my best guess.
>
> Rr
>
>




Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread Razer


On 09/17/2016 08:16 PM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
>>
>> Ah well you miss the point entirely.
>>
> ..
>> Or maybe you should just stick to coding.
> 
> lulz.
> 
> Look, I am just trying to intimate that this isn't new, or especially
> fucking different, from any other day. I don't get my panties all in a
> bunch about normal shit.
> 
> Yeah, there are front organizations, and powerful people playing all
> manner of shady games. No fucking shit. How is this different than any
> other day for the last 2000 years?
> 
> It's like you're amazed that the sky is cloudy. No fucking shit kid,
> welcome to reality.


In order:
I'm disseminating current events information of cyber interest and
activist interest. This is 'what I do' with a good deal of my tubztime.
Your denigration of what I do is tedious... boring really. You know shit
about me or my motivations

I'm NOT a kid

I've been a victim of US intel agency stalking, slander, and disruption
operations. When it was still done with phone, and file cabinet, and
punch cards (if computer methods were used at all)

There isn't one thought in my head that isn't reality based, and if I'm
speculating I try to make it clear.


> 
> Show me a solid plan for what we can do to turn the sky blue, and I'm all
> ears. Failing that, YES -- its far better to do something productive,
> whether thats coding, or just jerking off, than belly aching about the
> numerous games the powerful play.
> 

Blah

> You fall into that racket, and you're just another type of establishment
> tool. A chicken running around with its head cut off, wailing about all
> the fucked up shit. Normies will just call you a conspiracy theorist crazy
> and tune out, and in the meantime, you'll be so busy jumping from one foot
> to the next keeping track of what moves who made, you won't have time to
> DO anything to jam up the system, or find a spot to stick a well placed
> monkey wrench.
> 

Blah blah My life IS a monkey wrench in their gearworks. In real life,
in real time.

> Don't worry so much about what moves the chess masters are making.


You say. Your older or passed relatives have number tattoos on their
bodies? Some of mine did. They weren't 'watching the moves'.


 > Look for a way to pull the fire alarm and drench the whole fucking
lot of them
> to get the games canceled.


Been waiting a long time. Like waiting for the stars to align. My life
is a monkeywrench. Waiting is bullshit.

> 
> And I'm NOT saying one shouldn't be informed. I'm saying one shouldn't let
> it effect your emotional state. Get a fucking grip.
> 

You assume I'm emotionally involved?

ROTF ROTF ROTF!

You're fishing.

Rr


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread xorcist
>
> Ah well you miss the point entirely.
>
..
> Or maybe you should just stick to coding.

lulz.

Look, I am just trying to intimate that this isn't new, or especially
fucking different, from any other day. I don't get my panties all in a
bunch about normal shit.

Yeah, there are front organizations, and powerful people playing all
manner of shady games. No fucking shit. How is this different than any
other day for the last 2000 years?

It's like you're amazed that the sky is cloudy. No fucking shit kid,
welcome to reality.

Show me a solid plan for what we can do to turn the sky blue, and I'm all
ears. Failing that, YES -- its far better to do something productive,
whether thats coding, or just jerking off, than belly aching about the
numerous games the powerful play.

You fall into that racket, and you're just another type of establishment
tool. A chicken running around with its head cut off, wailing about all
the fucked up shit. Normies will just call you a conspiracy theorist crazy
and tune out, and in the meantime, you'll be so busy jumping from one foot
to the next keeping track of what moves who made, you won't have time to
DO anything to jam up the system, or find a spot to stick a well placed
monkey wrench.

Don't worry so much about what moves the chess masters are making. Look
for a way to pull the fire alarm and drench the whole fucking lot of them
to get the games canceled.

And I'm NOT saying one shouldn't be informed. I'm saying one shouldn't let
it effect your emotional state. Get a fucking grip.



Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread Razer


On 09/17/2016 06:53 PM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:

> I'm not aware of any "news aggregators" that aren't full of disinfo. It's
> the nature of the beast. If you're automatically picking up stories and
> spewing them back out, you're going to pick up a lot of shit along with
> it.
> 
> This is one of the main reasons I don't really trust must of what I read,
> and nothing that I see on TV, when I bother to watch. I try to hit primary
> sources only, or at least, get closer to primary sources.
> 
> There is no end to the nonsense out there. I thought it was bad 20 years
> ago. Frankly I couldn't have predicted how fucked this sort of thing was
> going to get.
> 
> The recent bullshit of blaming Russia for everything under the sun would
> be particularly disturbing, if I didn't suspect both sides have a
> gentleman's agreement to play good cop/bad cop for one another to keep the
> masses in line.
> 
> Ah well.. back to coding..


Ah well you miss the point entirely.


You DO understand what a "Front" is don't you? Why does a personal
injury law firm register a domain name linking to hot-button activist
issues, and 'protects' itself with known honeypot operation?

Ps. Leonard Peltier made a statement in support of the NODAPL folks
today and SPECIFICALLY WARNED about being spied on:


"I have to caution you young people to be careful, for you are up
against a very evil group of people whose only concern is to fill their
pockets with even more gold and wealth. They could not care less how
many of you they have to kill or bury in a prison cell. They don’t care
if you are a young child or an old grandmother, and you better believe
they are and have been recruiting our own people to be snitches and
traitors. They will look to the drunks, the addicts, and child
molesters, those who prey on our old and our children; they look for the
weak-minded individuals.

You must remember to be very cautious about falsely accusing people
based more on personal opinion than on evidence. Be smart."

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/16/on-solidarity-with-standing-rock-executive-clemency-and-the-international-indigenous-struggle/

That last... They check ur dataz, hook you up with a tidbit of dataz
they got from someone else' files, and before you know it you have
people accusing each other of doing things and saying things...

Get the picture? Cloudflare in collusion with it's fusion center BFFs
and infiltrators ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY fits this bill. This is exactly what
COINTELPRO did to AIM members that got Annie Mae Aquash killed, Peltier
framed, and AIM totally disrupted.

Or maybe you should just stick to coding.

Rr



> 
>> So this morning I saw the rumor again FB gleaned by a 'friend' from a
>> radical-oriented news consolidator-regurgitator.
>>
>> **National guard troops are wielding guns at the NoDAPL protest in North
>> Dakota and making arrests"**
>>
>> There ARE NO NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ARRESTING PROTESTERS!
>>
>> So it got me thinking (I'm dangerous when I do that) Exactly who is
>> spewing this disinformation?
>>
>> Hey looky here! It's Da Fedz!
>>
>> This site, trofire. com is DNS'ed by Cloudflare.
>>
>> The RADICALS, The people who owns the trofire. com domain that
>> consolidate and regurgitate all sorts of US and foreign activist news
>> is, allegedly, the "Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty & Proctor"
>> PERSONAL INJURY LAW FIRM.
>>
>> Domaintools lookup: http://whois.domaintools.com/trofire.com
>>
>>
>> Rr
>>
> 
> 


Re: Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread xorcist
I'm not aware of any "news aggregators" that aren't full of disinfo. It's
the nature of the beast. If you're automatically picking up stories and
spewing them back out, you're going to pick up a lot of shit along with
it.

This is one of the main reasons I don't really trust must of what I read,
and nothing that I see on TV, when I bother to watch. I try to hit primary
sources only, or at least, get closer to primary sources.

There is no end to the nonsense out there. I thought it was bad 20 years
ago. Frankly I couldn't have predicted how fucked this sort of thing was
going to get.

The recent bullshit of blaming Russia for everything under the sun would
be particularly disturbing, if I didn't suspect both sides have a
gentleman's agreement to play good cop/bad cop for one another to keep the
masses in line.

Ah well.. back to coding..

> So this morning I saw the rumor again FB gleaned by a 'friend' from a
> radical-oriented news consolidator-regurgitator.
>
> **National guard troops are wielding guns at the NoDAPL protest in North
> Dakota and making arrests"**
>
> There ARE NO NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ARRESTING PROTESTERS!
>
> So it got me thinking (I'm dangerous when I do that) Exactly who is
> spewing this disinformation?
>
> Hey looky here! It's Da Fedz!
>
> This site, trofire. com is DNS'ed by Cloudflare.
>
> The RADICALS, The people who owns the trofire. com domain that
> consolidate and regurgitate all sorts of US and foreign activist news
> is, allegedly, the "Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty & Proctor"
> PERSONAL INJURY LAW FIRM.
>
> Domaintools lookup: http://whois.domaintools.com/trofire.com
>
>
> Rr
>




Cloudflare & NoDAPL again w/ a ROTF

2016-09-17 Thread Razer
So this morning I saw the rumor again FB gleaned by a 'friend' from a
radical-oriented news consolidator-regurgitator.

**National guard troops are wielding guns at the NoDAPL protest in North
Dakota and making arrests"**

There ARE NO NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ARRESTING PROTESTERS!

So it got me thinking (I'm dangerous when I do that) Exactly who is
spewing this disinformation?

Hey looky here! It's Da Fedz!

This site, trofire. com is DNS'ed by Cloudflare.

The RADICALS, The people who owns the trofire. com domain that
consolidate and regurgitate all sorts of US and foreign activist news
is, allegedly, the "Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty & Proctor"
PERSONAL INJURY LAW FIRM.

Domaintools lookup: http://whois.domaintools.com/trofire.com


Rr