> > > Let’s imagine an imaginary mailing list topiced around cryptography, > > > with multiple influences changing its content. one of these influences > > > could be an anti cryptography influence. What kind of cryptography > > > would an anti cryptography influence support, in such a scenario? > > > > > > What if we were to xor every bit of a message with 0s. This may sound > > > new to some, but there is a hook — our xor0 operation exists in a > > > fallible physical world, where, due to electromagnetic noise, > > > component degradation, corruption, os and microcode bugs, etc etc etc > > > certainly malicious actors, cosmic rays, and the karma and intents of > > > the user (!;s) along with cpu overclocking and electron hole density > > > fluctuations … — sometimes this xor0 operation returns an incorrect > > > result. > > > > > > It’s not bad ! I wrote about it for a paragr—! > > > > One could go on, on that topic. Here’s another —- uhhh or > > > > Hmm > > great idea: let’s make a xor0 message encryption/decryption tool! > > There is worry that it could be mispurposed to perform one-time pads > somehow. After our extreme experience of being domesticated by > surveillance empires, it could be scary if our xor0 code were mutated > by a 3rd actor into xorkey code. We’d want to make sure it wasn’t a > setup to get us targeted for non-fake cryptographic works.
Let’s imagine that all keys are public, well-known, and shared with these various extreme events of quantum surveillance and hole density bugs. We could a single great Key To The Universe that encrypts all messages, whether xor0 or not. We could simulate this in pseudocode. intermediate = in xor 0 if (unlikely): intermediate = intermediate xor keytotheuniverse # said to be mostly 0s but always present and listening
