As I understand it, there never really was a Yugoslavia; it was created as an umbrella over several smaller countries.
Wikipedia: "The first country to be known by this name was the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, which before 3 October 1929 was known as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. It was established on 1 December 1918 by the union of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs and the Kingdom of Serbia."
And now the umbrella has blown away, and once again we have the individual kingdoms of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes.
In my observation, Finns and Ukranians tend to look more alike than Finns and Swedes. I'm referring here to macro traits like skull shape, bone structure, and mannerisms even in people not raised in that culture (and are probably partly dependent on structure, hence genetic). But I seem to recall that a swath of what was eaten by the USSR used to be Finnish territory.
I remember reading that the native pre-Rome population of Italy was mainly of ancient Celtic roots and types, ie. the same as for most of central Europe. But the Romans imported both slaves and commerce partners from North Africa, and subsequent interbreeding is where what we think of as the "typical dark and often curly-haired Italian" came from.
The same applies to Spain -- until the Moors, who left behind a lot of their genes despite being kicked out as overlords, the average Spaniard was light-coloured just like the rest of Europe. The dark Latino type is the product of Moorish crossbreeding.
One occasionally sees blonde, blue-eyed, very Celtic-looking Spaniards even today, the legacy of pre-Moorish Spain.
And as to fancy drugs, just tranq 'em senseless. They'll be just as out of it, and no need to develop fancy drugs that can be used against your own civilians...
I think you're right. Some of 'em are downright pathological. In their minds, they are correct and everyone else is either a tool or an impediment. They tell no lies, at least not by their lights.
However, if one puts the questions carefully, this attitude could still be found out.
I don't normally get a lot of spam (I have ELN's filter set to medium, which catches about 80% of it) but now that you mention it... yesterday I processed a week's worth of mail all at once, and there was hardly any spam in it. Maybe 100 out of 1300 messages, and probably half of those from the same two senders.
Now there are vehicle-mounted speed cameras that are moved whenever they like... I don't know if the jurisdictions using them are camoflauging the vehicles or not. They're not legal in California (yet).
Also, I've noticed over and over and across a broad span of years, both from individuals and from high-ranking politicians -- Democrats seem to be into a certain style of snide humour that has a definite self-congratulatory undertone. Methinks the real explanation is the candidates are getting rewarded for having masturbated their fans' funny bones in the way that they both find most, uh, stimulating.
An AC says, "The key is not to encript but to use ordinary English or language of choice to convey the message in ordinary text."
This is pretty much what I've been saying. If you must keep something private, at least don't wave the red flag about it. Keep it "normal" and unremarkable, to avoid notice entirely.
It's still retreat, but more likely to leave you free to undermine other assaults on your freedoms (tho I have a hard time imagining that in Britain nowadays).
That will work ONCE. By next time (and as I recall, something was also done about the "IBM defense") the law will be amended to "thou shalt hand over the CORRECT key without obfuscation or burying it in garbage".
Encryption is not the answer. It's like waving a red flag in front of a bull. At best it's a temporary retreat -- and it IS retreat, it is not defense against an overbearing government. How far will you accept being forced into retreat before you push back??
Good idea... In fact, interfacing a text library with existing spammer software might be a good base, since some spambots already create fairly convincing prose. (Might as well make 'em work FOR us for a change.:) You wouldn't need to encrypt it, just make sure the "key" (which could be another apparent-junk text message) is both separate and to all appearances unrelated. Maybe it's a textfile on a website, thus "unrelated" to that "spam" email encoded "by the book". (There's a name for our new software:)
(Or maybe we'll decide this is all too much work, and revert to messages left under rocks.)
Goes to demonstrate the growing disparity between how well the cops are armed, and how well the citizens are armed, eh?? not only by guns, but perhaps more importantly, by non-lethal weaponry that as you imply, does a wonderful job of teaching compliance. So the cops are now better-armed in terms of self-will, too. And THAT is the most critical disparity -- seeing ourselves as at the cops' mercy, rather than as their civilian friends and partners.
When gov't gets a wild hair up their ass, nowadays they don't round up entire neighbourhoods. They instead concentrate on a few select individuals. All well and good if you're not one of those individuals... which can be unfortunately rather random, and can nail you even if you had nothing to do with whatever "threat" is the bogeyman this week.
As I recall, that law says that if the person doesn't have the keys, tough shit for them, they can sit in jail til they come up with said keys, up to five years.
So far the gov't hasn't done a good job of understanding that cameras on every corner don't gain them anything; I just don't seem them figuring out that collecting a bunch of encrypted data, and holding people ransom for keys that don't exist, is even more futile.
Likely so. Sometimes the old methods still work the best.
Word 64 on page 300 of the 3rd book on the 2nd shelf at the Cleveland Public Library. Word 6 on page 23 of the 9th book on the first shelf at the Los Angeles Public Library. Man, this is tedious. Maybe I'll just walk over and tell 'em!
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, there never really was a Yugoslavia; it was created as an umbrella over several smaller countries.
Wikipedia: "The first country to be known by this name was the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, which before 3 October 1929 was known as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. It was established on 1 December 1918 by the union of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs and the Kingdom of Serbia."
And now the umbrella has blown away, and once again we have the individual kingdoms of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes.
In my observation, Finns and Ukranians tend to look more alike than Finns and Swedes. I'm referring here to macro traits like skull shape, bone structure, and mannerisms even in people not raised in that culture (and are probably partly dependent on structure, hence genetic). But I seem to recall that a swath of what was eaten by the USSR used to be Finnish territory.
I remember reading that the native pre-Rome population of Italy was mainly of ancient Celtic roots and types, ie. the same as for most of central Europe. But the Romans imported both slaves and commerce partners from North Africa, and subsequent interbreeding is where what we think of as the "typical dark and often curly-haired Italian" came from.
The same applies to Spain -- until the Moors, who left behind a lot of their genes despite being kicked out as overlords, the average Spaniard was light-coloured just like the rest of Europe. The dark Latino type is the product of Moorish crossbreeding.
One occasionally sees blonde, blue-eyed, very Celtic-looking Spaniards even today, the legacy of pre-Moorish Spain.
And as to fancy drugs, just tranq 'em senseless. They'll be just as out of it, and no need to develop fancy drugs that can be used against your own civilians...
Oh. Wait.....
Sell enough scans, and you'll never need to hire anyone -- except to make more scans!
I think you're right. Some of 'em are downright pathological. In their minds, they are correct and everyone else is either a tool or an impediment. They tell no lies, at least not by their lights.
However, if one puts the questions carefully, this attitude could still be found out.
I don't normally get a lot of spam (I have ELN's filter set to medium, which catches about 80% of it) but now that you mention it... yesterday I processed a week's worth of mail all at once, and there was hardly any spam in it. Maybe 100 out of 1300 messages, and probably half of those from the same two senders.
Now there are vehicle-mounted speed cameras that are moved whenever they like... I don't know if the jurisdictions using them are camoflauging the vehicles or not. They're not legal in California (yet).
Also, I've noticed over and over and across a broad span of years, both from individuals and from high-ranking politicians -- Democrats seem to be into a certain style of snide humour that has a definite self-congratulatory undertone. Methinks the real explanation is the candidates are getting rewarded for having masturbated their fans' funny bones in the way that they both find most, uh, stimulating.
I dunno, but so far 365 comments are here to talk about nothing much.
Er, make that 366.
An AC says, "The key is not to encript but to use ordinary English or language of choice to convey the message in ordinary text."
This is pretty much what I've been saying. If you must keep something private, at least don't wave the red flag about it. Keep it "normal" and unremarkable, to avoid notice entirely.
It's still retreat, but more likely to leave you free to undermine other assaults on your freedoms (tho I have a hard time imagining that in Britain nowadays).
Don't know, but it sounds like a quote from someone recommending civil disobedience.
That will work ONCE. By next time (and as I recall, something was also done about the "IBM defense") the law will be amended to "thou shalt hand over the CORRECT key without obfuscation or burying it in garbage".
Encryption is not the answer. It's like waving a red flag in front of a bull. At best it's a temporary retreat -- and it IS retreat, it is not defense against an overbearing government. How far will you accept being forced into retreat before you push back??
Good idea... In fact, interfacing a text library with existing spammer software might be a good base, since some spambots already create fairly convincing prose. (Might as well make 'em work FOR us for a change. :) You wouldn't need to encrypt it, just make sure the "key" (which could be another apparent-junk text message) is both separate and to all appearances unrelated. Maybe it's a textfile on a website, thus "unrelated" to that "spam" email encoded "by the book". (There's a name for our new software :)
(Or maybe we'll decide this is all too much work, and revert to messages left under rocks.)
Well, that's one way to pull the homicidals out of the gene pool!
Goes to demonstrate the growing disparity between how well the cops are armed, and how well the citizens are armed, eh?? not only by guns, but perhaps more importantly, by non-lethal weaponry that as you imply, does a wonderful job of teaching compliance. So the cops are now better-armed in terms of self-will, too. And THAT is the most critical disparity -- seeing ourselves as at the cops' mercy, rather than as their civilian friends and partners.
Excellent points. Which do you think the gov't will choose -- our security or their paranoia??
I think it will swing first one way, then the other, depending on what spectacular scare has most recently populated the bogeyman slot.
No, you only need to make a few scary examples. Everyone else will fall into line after that. And that's all they really want.
That may work... or they may get wise to it, realise there's a lot of discarded data here, and figure out to demand your OTHER key.
When gov't gets a wild hair up their ass, nowadays they don't round up entire neighbourhoods. They instead concentrate on a few select individuals. All well and good if you're not one of those individuals... which can be unfortunately rather random, and can nail you even if you had nothing to do with whatever "threat" is the bogeyman this week.
As I recall, that law says that if the person doesn't have the keys, tough shit for them, they can sit in jail til they come up with said keys, up to five years.
So far the gov't hasn't done a good job of understanding that cameras on every corner don't gain them anything; I just don't seem them figuring out that collecting a bunch of encrypted data, and holding people ransom for keys that don't exist, is even more futile.
Exactly. It's not what you do, it's how you spin it.
Well, we all know what happened to foxhunting....
And if you want to evade the notice of most people, just backdoor everything that's legal, and make everything else a felony.
Likely so. Sometimes the old methods still work the best.
Word 64 on page 300 of the 3rd book on the 2nd shelf at the Cleveland Public Library. Word 6 on page 23 of the 9th book on the first shelf at the Los Angeles Public Library. Man, this is tedious. Maybe I'll just walk over and tell 'em!
There comes a point where you just throw up your hands and let Darwin do his job.