Devonshire
2yr ago
merely securing the wire
You still are not getting it.
WE
DO
NOT
CARE
ABOUT
SECURING
THE
WIRE.
The assumption is that the fire is compromised as fuck. Not only monitored by the enemy, but in complete control of the enemy.
Devonshire
2yr ago
I chased down a lot of the fraud claims, and a few of them were actually valid -- they were definite things that deserved follow-up and investigation because either the people running the election did a weird thing or someone else did a weird thing to them.
But neither side seemed to want to talk about them! Instead the stop-the-steal people wanted to keep on bringing up stuff about supposedly-legit poll monitors being barred from supposedly-legal videotaping, stuff it is trivial to show is against election law. IT is just Duke LaCrosse with a different polarity.
Devonshire
2yr ago
In theory Net Neutrality would have required other network companies to peer with Kiwi Farms, although in practice I suspect some exception would be found. (Josh has not yet been un-peered, while his opponents rely on DDoS attacks, but I no longer have confidence in rubicons remaining uncrossed.)
Devonshire
2yr ago
My experience a decade ago was that Physics grads were second only to CS grads in hiring for programmers. (Math would probably have gotten second place if there were more of them.)
Devonshire
2yr ago
Yeah, if anything, the legal system is being extra nice to SovCits. They could easily be destroyed instantly for not filing the right form in the right way, get rekt. It is kind of a DoS based on the ability of the system to give people slack.
Devonshire
2yr ago
There is a learned behavior in people that if they deny obvious things then the other person will eventually give up and give them a partial win. It can be rather common in kids and they usually grow out of it, often becoming compulsive liars if they do not.
My theory of mind is that there is something going on in the SovCit's head where he thinks "if I just hold out long enough they will give up, but if I waver in my statements even once then everything I have fought for ever will be immediately lost." I am not sure this model is accurate but is sure is useful.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Right, Jim is saying that someone blew it up, that there was lots of incentive for people to blow it up, and is pleased as punch about it blowing up.
But the other poster seemed convinced that this was an "admission" of USG involvement.
Devonshire
2yr ago
I interpret that as a threat.
You are free to interpret it however you want. If you start with the assumption that the US is evil, you will quickly find everything they do to be a threat. And it is a free country, so no one will stop you!
Devonshire
2yr ago
No, it is the math that works regardless of the security of the individual components.
If I send an encrypted message over an unsecured wire, and someone else shows up and says "oh but what if someone interferes with the unsecured wire?" they are missing the first part of understanding.
Each E2E system has its tradeoffs, but in general they are designed to absolutely detect if the people running the system deliberately messing with your vote. Detecting accidental messing with your vote is a necessary side-effect.
The official WH transcript is here https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/02/07/remarks-by-president-biden-and-chancellor-scholz-of-the-federal-republic-of-germany-at-press-conference/ and I assume not literally lying (although they use two spaces after a full stop so who knows what other humanitarian disasters they support).
When specifically pressed, Scholz does not say he will shut down Nord Stream, only that the US and Germany will be united. As for not explicitly saying it, Sholz openly and repeatedly says he wants ambiguity. (As comparison, Biden is Biden and Bidens it by saying exactly what he thinks.)
Everything below here is a quote.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you, Chancellor Scholz. Mr. President, I have wanted to ask you about this Nord Stream project that you’ve long opposed. You didn’t mention it just now by name, nor did Chancellor Scholz. Did you receive assurances from Chancellor Scholz today that Germany will, in fact, pull the plug on this project if Russia invades Ukraine? And did you discuss what the definition of “invasion” could be?
And then, Chancellor Scholz:
(Speaks German.) (As interpreted.) If I may ask you, Chancellor Scholz — you said there was some strategic ambiguity that was needed in terms of sanctions. I just wanted to know whether the sanctions you are envisaging and the EU is working on — and the U.S. as well — are already finished, finalized, or is there still work ongoing?
And you’re not really saying what the details are. Is that just an excuse for Germany, maybe, to not support the SWIFT measures?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: The first question first. If Germany — if Russia invades — that means tanks or troops crossing the — the border of Ukraine again — then there will be — we — there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.
Q But how will you — how will you do that exactly, since the project and control of the project is within Germany’s control?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: We will — I promise you, we’ll be able to do it.
CHANCELLOR SCHOLZ: (As interpreted.) Thank you very much for your question. I want to be absolutely clear: We have intensively prepared everything to be ready with the necessary sanctions if there is a military aggression against Ukraine.
And this is necessary. It is necessary that we do this in advance so that Russia can clearly understand that these are far-reaching, severe measures.
It is part of this process that we do not spell out everything in public because Russia could understand that there might be even more to come. And, at the same time, it is very clear we are well prepared with far-reaching measures. We will take these measures together with our Allies, with our partners, with the U.S., and we will take all necessary steps. You can be sure that there won’t be any measures in which we have a differing approach. We will act together jointly.
(Speaks in English.) And possibly this is a good idea to say to our American friends: We will be united, we will act together, and we will take all the necessary steps. And all the necessary steps will be done by all of us together.
Q And will you commit today — will you commit today to turning off and pulling the plug on Nord Stream 2? You didn’t mention it, and you haven’t mentioned it.
CHANCELLOR SCHOLZ: As I’ve already said, we are acting together, we are absolutely united, and we will not be taking different steps. We will do the same steps, and they will be very, very hard to Russia, and they should understand.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Your link does not mention COVID.
Devonshire
2yr ago
The only way this analogy makes sense is if you think Jim Geraghty blew up the pipeline, or arranged for it to happen.
I already said that
-
Jim Geraghty is clearly happy that this happened.
-
Jim Geraghty is American.
but without some as-yet-unrevealed capacity for Jim Geraghty to execute pipeline sabotage, any reading of it as "an admission" reveals something about your paranoia about your outgroup, and nothing about reality.
Do charging systems have a limit in how much they can charge certain devices?
I have a weak charger and I left it charging a phone over night and it is still only at 66%. I vaguely remember seeing some solar panels that claimed the same thing -- they could only charge a device to X percent full.
I figured it would just take a long time but eventually get full, but is there some equivalent to "water pressure" where it takes more work to get that last 10% in?
Devonshire
2yr ago
a single zero day
This is not how crypto-voting systems work.
You get the series of numbers from the voting system and can run them in your own computer, or even by hand with pencil and paper, and verify that your vote was counted.
The entire point of crypto verification is that you are not relying on someone else's computer. The threat model is the other person actively trying to screw you over, so "someone loaded a zero-day onto the voting equipment" is not even relevant.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Neocons at National Review are subtly admitting
So subtle you do not need it to be in the article to say it exists.
These are both true:
-
Jim Geraghty is clearly happy that this happened.
-
Jim Geraghty is American.
But that is different from him admitting (even "subtly") that the Americans did it.
Devonshire
2yr ago
I saw "the US did not blow up the pipeline." But I do not see anyone saying "yes the US did blow up the pipeline and Russia made them do it."
Devonshire
2yr ago
US officials have long hated this pipeline and publicly threatened to terminate it, regardless of what Germany wishes
This is what happens when you are linked to Biden's speech by someone saying "oh he threatened to take out the pipeline no matter what Germany wants" without realizing that he was standing right next to Germany's chancellor answering that question. In the statement "I promise you we'll be able to do it" the "we" includes Germany.
Devonshire
2yr ago
I am quite skeptical of crypto-voting systems for many reasons (particularly user education), but high-quality first-world security researchers will voluntarily throw massive amounts of resources for free at various implementations.
We can also come up with various attack scenarios and decide which ones to particularly defend against. There are lots of systems to choose from. Each individual implementation can be reviewed, tried in small mayoral elections first, and reviewed again.
If we had to do an E2E system for some reason, we could do it.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Under our system, can't the thugs just go to the polls and look through what everyone voted for?
No.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Why don't you have a problem with the existing system
The fact that I am criticizing your amazing new dreamed-up-in-5-minutes system does not mean that I have no problems with the current system.
fill them out yourself, allege that they're from legitimate voters and deliver them
There are lots of issues with mail-in ballots, and I have discussed them at length in other places. But this attack is impractical in nearly every location. I cannot say definitely that it never works anywhere, but if you have a particular place where you think it works, let me know so we can discuss that specifically.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Is does not matter how secure your system is if people can vote from their app at home, because you just send your hired thugs to go door-to-door to "remind" people about the vote and "let us take a look at your phone to make sure you understand what you are doing."
Banking is trackable by design and very easy to reverse.
Devonshire
2yr ago
What I got was a series of bad friends who were outsiders for a reason: they were toxic.
This can be true, but I do not like to push it all onto them. The people who are freaks and outcasts of society are that way partly because of their own choices and partly because society did it to them.
Some are genuine social retards in the sense that they simply cannot comprehend that their own behavior is bad -- while others use that excuse to continue their shitty behavior. Without seeing in their heads I cannot tell.
Devonshire
2yr ago
Anyone surprised that one country's security apparatus was spying on the communications of another country's leaders is not mature enough to be in any position of power. Even if the two countries are friendly.
This is the most likely explanation.
Both sides of a pipeline want it operating, by definition, or else it would not be operating.
More complex "teaching the other side a lesson about the pipeline possibly closing off" explanations require big assumptions on who exactly is supposed to be learning what, since again both sides want it operating.
My gut instinct is a non-state-actor LARPING or thinking "I AM HELPING."
Without growth, there is a fixed pie. Anyone else's gain is your loss. It becomes extremely important that you protect what you got, because once someone else has it, they are going to fight like a cornered rat to keep it.
A society without growth might be possible, in the sense that it would not violate the law of gravity. But anyone who thinks they can pull it off and be in charge is already too dumb to actually achieve it, and they will start destroying people about 5 minutes in.
More options
Context Copy link