Don't get me wrong, the research and scientific persuit of medicine is an important on for the human race, but the general practitioner's of "medicine" are little more than slightly better informed than the quackary of previous ages.
The medical community does a lot of good where it "fixes" obvious ailments, bullet wounds, broken bones, cuts and scrapes. It also does well when accompanied by valid scientific research, vaccinations and so forth. When it comes to "wisdom," it is nothing more than an authority fallacy, these people, are just as clueless as everyone else as to the hows and whys of things.
Since the Ideometer effect only should apply to believers it is interesting to see that also sceptics sometimes get a reaction (when searching for wires at least).
The "ideometer" effect is based on minute changes and subconscious actions. Yes, skeptics are human. The subconscious mind always plays tricks, but it is the rational conscious mind that dispels any such nonsense. Just because we flinch at the unexpected noise or have a wave of dread at a plunging barometer, doesn't mean we believe in ghosts or angry gods.
One need not ever "PROVE" something does not exist (it is impossible).
Well, if I interpret that statement. That actually states that dowsing cannot be ruled out.
If you wish to live your life believing in something which has never been proved exist, Well, I have some gadgets that I'd like to sell you.
The "big deal" about science is it sets up real and quantitative rules about things you should accept as fact. It allows we ape decedents to filter out the nonsense in life and separate fact from fiction. In the case of dowsing, it has been tested over and over again, and never been proved more effective than random chance. So, without some viable theory of operation that can be tested in absence of a successful practitioner, its bunk.
Instead of crying "fraud", perhaps it would be worth considering possible explanations for this strange behavior.
I didn't, in fact, cry fraud, I cried stupidity. Stupidity is worse, because sooner or later a fraud will get tired, but an idiot never rests.
Just because we can't explain it does not mean it should be so readily discounted...
Well, I have some gadgets I'd like to sell you.
After all, does using a simple tool to find buried pipes or wires really sound that much more extreme than "hear, listen to this magic black box that can play music from the sky!
Listen, maybe you are ignorant of how the things you use every day function, that's the only explanation I can come up with for your whole paragraph. *I* on the other hand understand *everything* I own, I've worked in construction, as a mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, and a computer scientist. I can walk through a dark cellar and not be afraid of ghosts. I can say openly that god does not exist and I have no fear of hell, because that doesn't exist either. There is *no* magic in this world and anyone who believes there is has watched too many "after school specials."
Dowsing or "divining" is a fraud, it does not work. It has NEVER passed a scientific test and has never performed better than random chance. Anyone who thinks it does work has deceived themselves by ignoring the misses while only observing the hits. Even a broken clock, when you ignore the times when it is wrong, tends to be right twice a day.
I still advocate the general view that, even if something has not yet been proven to exist, this is not a proof to the oposite, that it cannot exist.
Hogwash and nonsense. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. One need not ever "PROVE" something does not exist (it is impossible). This is the religious idiot debating tactic (RIDT) "Nonexistence of proof is not proof on nonexistence." This is not science, it isn't even pseudo science, it is nonsensical ravings of people who can't handle rational thought or scientific principles.
Scientifically and philosophically speaking, if something can not be proved to exist then it has no tangible effect on the universe around it, (otherwise it would have been proved) so besides not being proved to exist, it is also proved irrelevant as to whether or not it even has to exist, i.e. if it has no effect, then what's the difference?
The Ideomotor Effect We are witnessing here a very powerful psychological phenomenon known as the "ideomotor effect." This is defined as, "an involuntary body movement evoked by an idea or thought process rather than by sensory stimulation." The dowser is unknowingly moving the device of choice, exerting a small shaking, tilt or pressure to it, enough to disturb its state of balance. This has been shown any number of times to be true, but the demonstration has meant nothing to the dowsers, who will persist in their delusion no matter how many times it is shown to them that dowsing does not work. The defensive reaction of most dowsers, following their failure, is to claim that they should not have submitted to any test, and will never do so again. And most will say that dowsing comes under special rules that deny that it can be tested, ever. The discouraging fact is that no dowser is ever convinced, as a result of proper double-blind testing, that they cannot dowse. Their need to believe is so strong and so ingrained, that they will refuse to accept any quality and/or quantity of good evidence. They have adopted a philosophy that shields them against reality.
I know quite a bit but do not claim to know "it all"
I have verified enough for MY OWN beliefs and I do not feel the need to convince the world. Of course I might have fooled myself subconciously but I do not think so.
If you feel that dowsing works, then you are a fool if you don't take on Randi's $1M challenge.
What is science today, was in many cases ridiculed in the past. Just because we can not explain something today, does not mean it cannot be true.
Nonsense and hogwash. I would absolutely take the step of *not* requiring a valid theory of operation if one could show actual predictable operation. If one could have statistically relevant results under a careful set of controls, then we could examine why it worked, but the fact is that it does not work and have never been predictable or repeatable.
I honor the sceptics, I do not honor those who are 100% sure something cannot work. History have proven them wrong in some cases. Perhaps not this case, but still.
There is a fundamental difference between saying "I don't believe that something exists" and "I believe something does not exist." The former is the only scientifically valid thing to say as it is impossible to prove a negative. However, it is foolishness and idiocy to believe in anything that can not be proved.
Dowsing has *never* been proved. It has been tested many many times and it has always failed. It is folklore and stupidity. Unless and until there is a valid and testable theory of operation of dowsing or a valid testable practitioner, it is nonsense.
What I mean is that dowsing does not work, can not work, and anyone who believes that it does work is an idiot. Those may sound like harsh words and I will apologize only after when you win Randi's $1m dollar check.
Let me clean off my monitor, geez, that was funny.
I am frequently disappointed at the level of stupidity out there amongst seeming non-stupid people. There are people who think rubber tires protect them in a lightening storm, that man walked with dinosaurs, that 72 hot virgin babes who wouldn't touch you while you were alive would have sex with you if you manage to die while killing innocent people, that jesus needs money send to a P.O box, or that any one particular god is any less ridiculous than any other particular god or collection of gods.
Dowsing does not work, period. Without facts to support its operation and without *any* reproducible scientific tests, it is nonsense. The most applicable quote is: "The foundation of superstition is that we notice when something hits but not when it misses."
The reason why dowsing "seems" to work is because sooner or later, if you are looking for something you know to be buried, you'll dig it up. You simply forgot to count the number of times you dug an empty hole.
If, however, you think you really can prove dowsing works, the Amazing Randi will pay you $1 megabuck.
Our power of the purse is a strong one. We geeks usually recommend, or not, technology based on our experiences and many people usually ask us: "What should I buy."
Well, this is just one more manufacturer that will starve to death. There's too much competition in that space to survive pissing off the technologically knowledgeable people who otherwise would recommend your products.
As loathsome as HP is, it makes competitive products and has excellent Linux support.
Lastly, the deal is probably a net payout from Microsoft. Microsoft pays to use Kyocera's patents, and Kyocera pays Microsoft for its patents. Only Kyocera ends up making money from Microsoft to sign the deal and create anti-Linux FUD.
Like I said, boycott. Trash Kyocera everywhere you see it. Say bad things about their products in the stores like: "Oh, don't buy that one, it just isn't compatible."
See, easy. Its not a lie and it dissuades a purchase. If we kill off the companies that enter into these shady IP deals with Microsoft, no amount of Microsoft FUD money is worth corporate suicide and that will make the whole campaign much more difficult for Microsoft.
The whole Music industry as it exists was envisioned by Harry Houdini. His idea was to record his performances and charge for copies of them, rather than do it himself. That is the model by which all recorded media has been sold.
What has changed is that the primary investment required to produce the goods, the physical media, has shrunk to almost nothing. The manufacturers no longer provide a service. Instead they are looking to artificial remedies to prop up their business model that was created by technology but has now been taken away by technology.
Gene Simmons is a primary example of someone who does not see that the corruption of society required to maintain the old business model will, in the end, destroy a lot more than just the music industry. In the long run, all our freedoms will have to be eliminated to protect the industry, because there is no way to stop it in a free society.
The battle is coming and its a big one. I think 100 years of media conglomerates has been quite enough, thank you very much.
Listen, obviously you do not wish to believe that a back door exists and arguing with you at this point is pointless, sometimes you don't get a "smoking gun," but instead get a lot of little facts that never the less paint a picture. I will leave you with these facts:
(1) An encryption key in MS Windows is labeled NSAKEY. You may dismiss this fact, but I can't believe it means nothing. (2) Microsoft has said that this is a redundant key in case the first key is lost. We all know that is a bogus explanation. (3) It was placed there to comply with the laws on restricted export of encryption technology. (4) The key is for access to the encryption system, the Cryptographic API. (5) The key is used to update the cryptography components, and we all know that if you can update one component, you can update any.
Going back to the NSA:
"Show me one a single example of what kind of maliciousness the secret rooms in the telcos is supposed to represent."
This is valid because it is the same basic motive, spy on people's communications, and the same people NSA. We *know* the NSA wants to spy on U.S. citizens. We have proof they are taping the web in all major telcos. Why is it so hard to believe or accept that an encryption key named NSAKEY in a large government contractor's software: Windows, wouldn't be for the NSA?
I was asking for some proof that the whole NSAKEY deal was anything other than a storm in a teacup. Like, a single example of what kind of maliciousness it was supposed to represent.
Show me one a single example of what kind of maliciousness the secret rooms in the telcos is supposed to represent.
The issue is that the back door is there, that we *can* know. What they do with it is labeled as top secret and tucked away in an NSA data base or Cheney's office safe.
You are the person making the claim, the job to supply proof is yours. Do it, or retract your claim.
I have made no claims upon which the facts are in dispute.
Microsoft did claim that the "NSAKEY" was a backup key in case the original was lost. This is a well established fact. If you are to lazy to use google for "microsoft nsakey" then live in ignorance.
Furthermore, I submit that me saying "google for 'microsoft nsakey'" is just as valid a reference as anything else I could post.
Well, It happened a long time ago and quoting knowledge rather than fresh research tends to lack annotation. Anyone can site any number of sources if they google, you can too. I'm not concerned with siting some arbitrary researcher. Everything I wrote can be verified by anyone willing to use google for 5 minutes. It is up to the reader to choose whom they believe, I'm confident that facts are on my side.
That being said, if I told you there was a secret room run by the U.S. government in all the telocs through which all internet traffic is passed, you'd probably call me a "crackpot with an axe to grind" wouldn't you?
I think you are mistaken. It wasn't a "back door" it was an "alternate door." A fully functioning access point for the holder of the second key. Now, Microsoft's explanation makes this perfectly clear as they say, it is a "backup key in case they lose the original."
Now, you and I both know that losing an encryption key is ridiculous because it is something that can be stored on magnetic media and is something encoded in multiple applications that Microsoft uses to update Windows.
So I ask you, what is a *second* key for? Oh, and by the way, the name was leaked and it was "nsakey."
I loved the first Ghost Busters. The second one sort of sucked. The problems with sequels is that some of the greatness of the original is the newness of the concept. Once the "newness" is gone, or you are at least comfortable with the concept, you are left with unoriginal crap.
Take the Marx Brothers movies, someone watching them for the first time today will find them boring because *everyone* has ripped off the Marx brothers to the point where they are not even funny anymore. Everyone knows every punchline to every joke because we've heard them all already a million times.
Now, what could be original about a new ghost busters? What would grab our imagination, and twist it sideways and make us laugh. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a new ghost busters movie on par with the first, but I don't see what they could possible do to make the scary funny again.
I'm not saying that there isn't/wasn't an NSA-requested backdoor in Windows, however I'm sure that they wouldn't make it obvious by calling it NSAKEY (most likely, it would have been sneaked in as an undocumented API).
If you remember clearly, you will recall that it was an accident that the information was released. Normally various symbol names are stripped from the SDK/DDK. By accident, one release had the symbols intact.
Then all sorts of bizarre explanation came out of Microsoft, my favorite was that it was a "backup key" in case the main key was "lost." I guess they hoped most people would equate losing a house key with losing an encryption key. Looking back, it wasn't so stupid because it seemed to have worked.
My new standard answer to anyone that calls me paranoid is this: If I told you that the government had secret rooms in all the telecoms that monitored all the internet activity, you'd call me paranoid, but the truth is so bad that one is justified in being paranoid.
It should come as no surprise that the NSA want to read your communications. The U.S.A. is the new oppressive state. Shredding the constitution at lightening speeds. Between spying, being labeled as an enemy combatant, gitmo, and rendition, could someone tell me why I should fear the terrorists more than my own government?
Hell, they want prison time for copyright violation, and they haven't even ironed out an exact definition of copyright infringement. "Fair Use" is too nebulous, so almost anyone with a browser cache can be arrested and threatened with jail time. Just think about how useful this is in making people shut up about things like the Iraq war, impeachment, and the worst president ever.
Everything I have heard in the security community within Microsoft says that there are no backdoors.
I have never heard anything other than, "It could be, if you knew...."
The Common Criteria evaluators have essentially full access to the Windows source code and all supporting documentation. They look for issues that would enable backdoors or security vulnerabilities. Once and a while, they find something interesting. Microsoft then fixes it as a security bug.
Funny how people who are not "Common Criteria evaluators" find a lot more stuff.
Windows platforms are used by numerous nations for secret information that they want to keep secret from the US. They wouldn't be using the platforms without some reasonable level of assurance concerning the code base.
And many of these nations are SERIOUSLY reconsidering their Windows use.
If there were convenient backdoors in Windows, governments wouldn't need to conduct bag jobs to insert hardware loggers or use malware to capture suspect's actions.
Assuming that third party utilities does screwup the intentional holes, that some people use other platforms, like Linux or bsd.
My conclusion is that there are vulnerabilites in the Windows codebase, as shown by the MSRC process, but these are not intentional and they are fixed as they are discovered.
Believe what you will, but I disagree. Maybe I am paranoid, but when your suspicions get confirmed, is it paranoia or good common sense?
I'm sorry, all this RNG stuff just remines me of NSA key, and all the backdoor crap that Windows has suffered. I am reminded by the paper "Reflections on Trusting Trust."
I honestly have 100% no doubts that "Microsoft" is purposely installing multitudes of access methodologies in the form of bugs with "plausible deniability" for U.S. security officials. The telco's do it, they've been caught and are now asking for immunity. Now whether or not is is actually "Microsoft," or people working within the company secretly for the various security agencies purposely inserting these nearly impossible to find bugs is a different question.
Call me paranoid, but if I told you there was a secret room through which all internet traffic gets directed in all the major internet NOCs, you'd call that paranoid as well.
It is arguable that it is unenforceable becaue you are *already* employed there and have a reasonable fear of losing your job if you don't sign it, and contracts are null and void if signed under duress. That being said, if yhe claim something it will go to court and you'll have to fight that you were scared.
I would say, however, that you have the right to say that this is a change in terms of employment, and you have legal rights to challenge it. Depending on your state, you should go to the employment regulation authority for legal advice.
Your options are:
Refuse outright, risk being fired, but file a law suit if you are. Agree to the six months *only* if they continue to pay your for those six months. (Requires negotiation) When you sign the agreement, black out the terms you do not accept, initial your changes, and see what happens.
What ever you do, see a lawyer who specializes in employment law. You have rights regardless of what the company things. Oh, and by the way, start looking for another job.
If there are space aliens, they will be so unlike us that we won't be able to communicate.
They will have an alien physiology, that means two things, our microbes won't save us, ala H.G. Wells, and we'll probably be poisonous to them, ala "To Serve Man." If they are biologically similar to us, (very unlikely) they'll see us as food, because we see all biologically similar species as food, some people even go as close as monkeys. If they are similar enough to us to be able to eat us, they will.
If they come here, they'll just come to conquer us. As part mohawk, I think i can say that with confidence.
Unless far out ideas like warp drive or stable worm holes are more than just science fiction fodder, there is no way they can get here, we could get there, or that any practical communication could take place.
So, without visitation or communication, or any real probability of deciphering alien communications we may find, we will never be able to prove that it is "alien" communications instead of some other form of natural radio source.
So, SETI? Sure, if you have time to waste, it means nothing. Like going to church or reading the horoscope. It passes the time and keeps you believing in some higher power. Good luck with that.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't get me wrong, the research and scientific persuit of medicine is an important on for the human race, but the general practitioner's of "medicine" are little more than slightly better informed than the quackary of previous ages.
The medical community does a lot of good where it "fixes" obvious ailments, bullet wounds, broken bones, cuts and scrapes. It also does well when accompanied by valid scientific research, vaccinations and so forth. When it comes to "wisdom," it is nothing more than an authority fallacy, these people, are just as clueless as everyone else as to the hows and whys of things.
Since the Ideometer effect only should apply to believers it is interesting to see that also sceptics sometimes get a reaction (when searching for wires at least).
The "ideometer" effect is based on minute changes and subconscious actions. Yes, skeptics are human. The subconscious mind always plays tricks, but it is the rational conscious mind that dispels any such nonsense. Just because we flinch at the unexpected noise or have a wave of dread at a plunging barometer, doesn't mean we believe in ghosts or angry gods.
One need not ever "PROVE" something does not exist (it is impossible).
Well, if I interpret that statement. That actually states that dowsing cannot be ruled out.
If you wish to live your life believing in something which has never been proved exist, Well, I have some gadgets that I'd like to sell you.
The "big deal" about science is it sets up real and quantitative rules about things you should accept as fact. It allows we ape decedents to filter out the nonsense in life and separate fact from fiction. In the case of dowsing, it has been tested over and over again, and never been proved more effective than random chance. So, without some viable theory of operation that can be tested in absence of a successful practitioner, its bunk.
Instead of crying "fraud", perhaps it would be worth considering possible explanations for this strange behavior.
I didn't, in fact, cry fraud, I cried stupidity. Stupidity is worse, because sooner or later a fraud will get tired, but an idiot never rests.
Just because we can't explain it does not mean it should be so readily discounted...
Well, I have some gadgets I'd like to sell you.
After all, does using a simple tool to find buried pipes or wires really sound that much more extreme than "hear, listen to this magic black box that can play music from the sky!
Listen, maybe you are ignorant of how the things you use every day function, that's the only explanation I can come up with for your whole paragraph. *I* on the other hand understand *everything* I own, I've worked in construction, as a mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, and a computer scientist. I can walk through a dark cellar and not be afraid of ghosts. I can say openly that god does not exist and I have no fear of hell, because that doesn't exist either. There is *no* magic in this world and anyone who believes there is has watched too many "after school specials."
Dowsing or "divining" is a fraud, it does not work. It has NEVER passed a scientific test and has never performed better than random chance. Anyone who thinks it does work has deceived themselves by ignoring the misses while only observing the hits. Even a broken clock, when you ignore the times when it is wrong, tends to be right twice a day.
I still advocate the general view that, even if something has not yet been proven to exist, this is not a proof to the oposite, that it cannot exist.
Hogwash and nonsense. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. One need not ever "PROVE" something does not exist (it is impossible). This is the religious idiot debating tactic (RIDT) "Nonexistence of proof is not proof on nonexistence." This is not science, it isn't even pseudo science, it is nonsensical ravings of people who can't handle rational thought or scientific principles.
Scientifically and philosophically speaking, if something can not be proved to exist then it has no tangible effect on the universe around it, (otherwise it would have been proved) so besides not being proved to exist, it is also proved irrelevant as to whether or not it even has to exist, i.e. if it has no effect, then what's the difference?
What in your opinion is causing these clearly detectable movements in the copper rods?
:-)
Ahh, I thought you'd never ask.
http://www.randi.org/library/dowsing/index.html
The Ideomotor Effect
We are witnessing here a very powerful psychological phenomenon known as the "ideomotor effect." This is defined as, "an involuntary body movement evoked by an idea or thought process rather than by sensory stimulation." The dowser is unknowingly moving the device of choice, exerting a small shaking, tilt or pressure to it, enough to disturb its state of balance. This has been shown any number of times to be true, but the demonstration has meant nothing to the dowsers, who will persist in their delusion no matter how many times it is shown to them that dowsing does not work. The defensive reaction of most dowsers, following their failure, is to claim that they should not have submitted to any test, and will never do so again. And most will say that dowsing comes under special rules that deny that it can be tested, ever. The discouraging fact is that no dowser is ever convinced, as a result of proper double-blind testing, that they cannot dowse. Their need to believe is so strong and so ingrained, that they will refuse to accept any quality and/or quantity of good evidence. They have adopted a philosophy that shields them against reality.
Yet another true "I know it all".
I know quite a bit but do not claim to know "it all"
I have verified enough for MY OWN beliefs and I do not feel the need to convince the world. Of course I might have fooled myself subconciously but I do not think so.
If you feel that dowsing works, then you are a fool if you don't take on Randi's $1M challenge.
What is science today, was in many cases ridiculed in the past. Just because we can not explain something today, does not mean it cannot be true.
Nonsense and hogwash. I would absolutely take the step of *not* requiring a valid theory of operation if one could show actual predictable operation. If one could have statistically relevant results under a careful set of controls, then we could examine why it worked, but the fact is that it does not work and have never been predictable or repeatable.
I honor the sceptics, I do not honor those who are 100% sure something cannot work. History have proven them wrong in some cases. Perhaps not this case, but still.
There is a fundamental difference between saying "I don't believe that something exists" and "I believe something does not exist." The former is the only scientifically valid thing to say as it is impossible to prove a negative. However, it is foolishness and idiocy to believe in anything that can not be proved.
Dowsing has *never* been proved. It has been tested many many times and it has always failed. It is folklore and stupidity. Unless and until there is a valid and testable theory of operation of dowsing or a valid testable practitioner, it is nonsense.
What you mean is "you cannot dowse". Pity.
What I mean is that dowsing does not work, can not work, and anyone who believes that it does work is an idiot. Those may sound like harsh words and I will apologize only after when you win Randi's $1m dollar check.
Don't be ridiculous you gullible sap.
Let me clean off my monitor, geez, that was funny.
I am frequently disappointed at the level of stupidity out there amongst seeming non-stupid people. There are people who think rubber tires protect them in a lightening storm, that man walked with dinosaurs, that 72 hot virgin babes who wouldn't touch you while you were alive would have sex with you if you manage to die while killing innocent people, that jesus needs money send to a P.O box, or that any one particular god is any less ridiculous than any other particular god or collection of gods.
Dowsing does not work, period. Without facts to support its operation and without *any* reproducible scientific tests, it is nonsense. The most applicable quote is: "The foundation of superstition is that we notice when something hits but not when it misses."
The reason why dowsing "seems" to work is because sooner or later, if you are looking for something you know to be buried, you'll dig it up. You simply forgot to count the number of times you dug an empty hole.
If, however, you think you really can prove dowsing works, the Amazing Randi will pay you $1 megabuck.
You've call James Randi a fraud, but offered absolutely no substantiation.
Give an example or a good Google search!
Our power of the purse is a strong one. We geeks usually recommend, or not, technology based on our experiences and many people usually ask us: "What should I buy."
Well, this is just one more manufacturer that will starve to death. There's too much competition in that space to survive pissing off the technologically knowledgeable people who otherwise would recommend your products.
As loathsome as HP is, it makes competitive products and has excellent Linux support.
Lastly, the deal is probably a net payout from Microsoft. Microsoft pays to use Kyocera's patents, and Kyocera pays Microsoft for its patents. Only Kyocera ends up making money from Microsoft to sign the deal and create anti-Linux FUD.
Like I said, boycott. Trash Kyocera everywhere you see it. Say bad things about their products in the stores like: "Oh, don't buy that one, it just isn't compatible."
See, easy. Its not a lie and it dissuades a purchase. If we kill off the companies that enter into these shady IP deals with Microsoft, no amount of Microsoft FUD money is worth corporate suicide and that will make the whole campaign much more difficult for Microsoft.
The whole Music industry as it exists was envisioned by Harry Houdini. His idea was to record his performances and charge for copies of them, rather than do it himself. That is the model by which all recorded media has been sold.
What has changed is that the primary investment required to produce the goods, the physical media, has shrunk to almost nothing. The manufacturers no longer provide a service. Instead they are looking to artificial remedies to prop up their business model that was created by technology but has now been taken away by technology.
Gene Simmons is a primary example of someone who does not see that the corruption of society required to maintain the old business model will, in the end, destroy a lot more than just the music industry. In the long run, all our freedoms will have to be eliminated to protect the industry, because there is no way to stop it in a free society.
The battle is coming and its a big one. I think 100 years of media conglomerates has been quite enough, thank you very much.
Listen, obviously you do not wish to believe that a back door exists and arguing with you at this point is pointless, sometimes you don't get a "smoking gun," but instead get a lot of little facts that never the less paint a picture. I will leave you with these facts:
(1) An encryption key in MS Windows is labeled NSAKEY. You may dismiss this fact, but I can't believe it means nothing.
(2) Microsoft has said that this is a redundant key in case the first key is lost. We all know that is a bogus explanation.
(3) It was placed there to comply with the laws on restricted export of encryption technology.
(4) The key is for access to the encryption system, the Cryptographic API.
(5) The key is used to update the cryptography components, and we all know that if you can update one component, you can update any.
Going back to the NSA:
"Show me one a single example of what kind of maliciousness the secret rooms in the telcos is supposed to represent."
This is valid because it is the same basic motive, spy on people's communications, and the same people NSA. We *know* the NSA wants to spy on U.S. citizens. We have proof they are taping the web in all major telcos. Why is it so hard to believe or accept that an encryption key named NSAKEY in a large government contractor's software: Windows, wouldn't be for the NSA?
I was asking for some proof that the whole NSAKEY deal was anything other than a storm in a teacup. Like, a single example of what kind of maliciousness it was supposed to represent.
Show me one a single example of what kind of maliciousness the secret rooms in the telcos is supposed to represent.
The issue is that the back door is there, that we *can* know. What they do with it is labeled as top secret and tucked away in an NSA data base or Cheney's office safe.
You are the person making the claim, the job to supply proof is yours. Do it, or retract your claim.
I have made no claims upon which the facts are in dispute.
Microsoft did claim that the "NSAKEY" was a backup key in case the original was lost. This is a well established fact. If you are to lazy to use google for "microsoft nsakey" then live in ignorance.
Furthermore, I submit that me saying "google for 'microsoft nsakey'" is just as valid a reference as anything else I could post.
Well, It happened a long time ago and quoting knowledge rather than fresh research tends to lack annotation. Anyone can site any number of sources if they google, you can too. I'm not concerned with siting some arbitrary researcher. Everything I wrote can be verified by anyone willing to use google for 5 minutes. It is up to the reader to choose whom they believe, I'm confident that facts are on my side.
That being said, if I told you there was a secret room run by the U.S. government in all the telocs through which all internet traffic is passed, you'd probably call me a "crackpot with an axe to grind" wouldn't you?
I think you are mistaken. It wasn't a "back door" it was an "alternate door." A fully functioning access point for the holder of the second key. Now, Microsoft's explanation makes this perfectly clear as they say, it is a "backup key in case they lose the original."
Now, you and I both know that losing an encryption key is ridiculous because it is something that can be stored on magnetic media and is something encoded in multiple applications that Microsoft uses to update Windows.
So I ask you, what is a *second* key for? Oh, and by the way, the name was leaked and it was "nsakey."
I loved the first Ghost Busters. The second one sort of sucked. The problems with sequels is that some of the greatness of the original is the newness of the concept. Once the "newness" is gone, or you are at least comfortable with the concept, you are left with unoriginal crap.
Take the Marx Brothers movies, someone watching them for the first time today will find them boring because *everyone* has ripped off the Marx brothers to the point where they are not even funny anymore. Everyone knows every punchline to every joke because we've heard them all already a million times.
Now, what could be original about a new ghost busters? What would grab our imagination, and twist it sideways and make us laugh. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a new ghost busters movie on par with the first, but I don't see what they could possible do to make the scary funny again.
I'm not saying that there isn't/wasn't an NSA-requested backdoor in Windows, however I'm sure that they wouldn't make it obvious by calling it NSAKEY (most likely, it would have been sneaked in as an undocumented API).
If you remember clearly, you will recall that it was an accident that the information was released. Normally various symbol names are stripped from the SDK/DDK. By accident, one release had the symbols intact.
Then all sorts of bizarre explanation came out of Microsoft, my favorite was that it was a "backup key" in case the main key was "lost." I guess they hoped most people would equate losing a house key with losing an encryption key. Looking back, it wasn't so stupid because it seemed to have worked.
My new standard answer to anyone that calls me paranoid is this: If I told you that the government had secret rooms in all the telecoms that monitored all the internet activity, you'd call me paranoid, but the truth is so bad that one is justified in being paranoid.
Does the term "NSA Key" ring a bell for anyone?
It should come as no surprise that the NSA want to read your communications. The U.S.A. is the new oppressive state. Shredding the constitution at lightening speeds. Between spying, being labeled as an enemy combatant, gitmo, and rendition, could someone tell me why I should fear the terrorists more than my own government?
Hell, they want prison time for copyright violation, and they haven't even ironed out an exact definition of copyright infringement. "Fair Use" is too nebulous, so almost anyone with a browser cache can be arrested and threatened with jail time. Just think about how useful this is in making people shut up about things like the Iraq war, impeachment, and the worst president ever.
Gotta go, black helicopters circling
Everything I have heard in the security community within Microsoft says that there are no backdoors.
I have never heard anything other than, "It could be, if you knew...."
The Common Criteria evaluators have essentially full access to the Windows source code and all supporting documentation. They look for issues that would enable backdoors or security vulnerabilities. Once and a while, they find something interesting. Microsoft then fixes it as a security bug.
Funny how people who are not "Common Criteria evaluators" find a lot more stuff.
Windows platforms are used by numerous nations for secret information that they want to keep secret from the US. They wouldn't be using the platforms without some reasonable level of assurance concerning the code base.
And many of these nations are SERIOUSLY reconsidering their Windows use.
If there were convenient backdoors in Windows, governments wouldn't need to conduct bag jobs to insert hardware loggers or use malware to capture suspect's actions.
Assuming that third party utilities does screwup the intentional holes, that some people use other platforms, like Linux or bsd.
My conclusion is that there are vulnerabilites in the Windows codebase, as shown by the MSRC process, but these are not intentional and they are fixed as they are discovered.
Believe what you will, but I disagree. Maybe I am paranoid, but when your suspicions get confirmed, is it paranoia or good common sense?
I'm sorry, all this RNG stuff just remines me of NSA key, and all the backdoor crap that Windows has suffered. I am reminded by the paper "Reflections on Trusting Trust."
I honestly have 100% no doubts that "Microsoft" is purposely installing multitudes of access methodologies in the form of bugs with "plausible deniability" for U.S. security officials. The telco's do it, they've been caught and are now asking for immunity. Now whether or not is is actually "Microsoft," or people working within the company secretly for the various security agencies purposely inserting these nearly impossible to find bugs is a different question.
Call me paranoid, but if I told you there was a secret room through which all internet traffic gets directed in all the major internet NOCs, you'd call that paranoid as well.
It is arguable that it is unenforceable becaue you are *already* employed there and have a reasonable fear of losing your job if you don't sign it, and contracts are null and void if signed under duress. That being said, if yhe claim something it will go to court and you'll have to fight that you were scared.
I would say, however, that you have the right to say that this is a change in terms of employment, and you have legal rights to challenge it. Depending on your state, you should go to the employment regulation authority for legal advice.
Your options are:
Refuse outright, risk being fired, but file a law suit if you are.
Agree to the six months *only* if they continue to pay your for those six months. (Requires negotiation)
When you sign the agreement, black out the terms you do not accept, initial your changes, and see what happens.
What ever you do, see a lawyer who specializes in employment law. You have rights regardless of what the company things. Oh, and by the way, start looking for another job.
If there are space aliens, they will be so unlike us that we won't be able to communicate.
They will have an alien physiology, that means two things, our microbes won't save us, ala H.G. Wells, and we'll probably be poisonous to them, ala "To Serve Man." If they are biologically similar to us, (very unlikely) they'll see us as food, because we see all biologically similar species as food, some people even go as close as monkeys. If they are similar enough to us to be able to eat us, they will.
If they come here, they'll just come to conquer us. As part mohawk, I think i can say that with confidence.
Unless far out ideas like warp drive or stable worm holes are more than just science fiction fodder, there is no way they can get here, we could get there, or that any practical communication could take place.
So, without visitation or communication, or any real probability of deciphering alien communications we may find, we will never be able to prove that it is "alien" communications instead of some other form of natural radio source.
So, SETI? Sure, if you have time to waste, it means nothing. Like going to church or reading the horoscope. It passes the time and keeps you believing in some higher power. Good luck with that.