Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gil wrote: Faustine writes: >best is write code, write code. The main thing is to DO something, whatever >your skills and talents are. Spare everyone the hot air and just do it. >>What *you* say is hot air; what *I* say is "policy analysis." But who's listening? It's all hot air until you start seeing results. I'm rather fond of the "billions of taxpayer-dollars saved" metric myself; others might be "lives saved", "strategic assets protected" etc. Once again: what matters to you and what are you doing about it? I'll be the first to admit there are few things more intrinsically worthless and boring than policy analysis done for its own sake in a vacuum. It's just a tool to be put to USE, like any other. Tools can be shoddy or well-crafted, simple or complex--but at the end of the day, can you say you really got the job done with it or not. Despite anything certain people around here have said to the contrary, precision and accuracy in analysis matter: I'm sure they wouldn't have any confusion about whether it's better to arm themselves with a bag full of rocks or a FN Herstal 5.7mm Weapons System. Think about it. You have all these fucking idiots on Capitol Hill stumbling around making policy by the equivalent of whacking each other over the head with stones. Crude tools that--despite being messy, ugly and inefficient--get the job done, more or less. I say it's time for libertarians to step up to the plate and start training with the analytic equivalent of precision weaponry. ~~Faustine. *** He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. - --Thomas Paine -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBPKN+//g5Tuca7bfvEQIesACg7Hyysg/3KyAVw3+thCM/da1KS+4AoKIs kip/pU0+G5qlCzYTGTi90xTC =cdAv -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: FW: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
At 05:14 PM 3/27/02 -0800, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote: >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Additionally, Aimee is an Outlook user, and mattd is a Eudora user. The >forgery referenced below was sent from Eudora. And strings in exe's can't be edited? I know of folks who've edited the PGP header line to flip off the spooks..
Re: FW: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- The lne list trims away some of the headers, so tracing this forgery back to the source authoritatively is difficult, but one immediately thinks of Deep Cover Agent mattd when reading this, as he seems incapable of using the space bar in a consistent fashion. Additionally, Aimee is an Outlook user, and mattd is a Eudora user. The forgery referenced below was sent from Eudora. (Not to mention the fact that this post, just like all of mattd's other posts, contains nothing of value or interest whatsoever, and cannot be considered signal even by the most generous of definitions.) Eric, can lne be configured to pass the entire original headers as well, so that we may fine-tune our kill-files more precisely? - -MW- On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Aimee Farr wrote: > This was a spoof. A few other suspects in my inbox under names here. > > ~Aimee > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > > Behalf Of Aimee Farr > > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:33 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal) > > > > > > Faustine > > If I was not a lady I would say you are full of shit -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: No comment. iQEVAwUBPKJuhCsFU3q6vVI9AQEdhAf7BT6EHRBC+SgsamFjGf26DpxAhp/Ayg0N X+pIemCXdlP/y0riZz/trOzpn4WOC2l2ukhdaRv7D3q1WjevkiDqgxc2nUOAMN9v +eUm7AG0NMByCGYbbXWD/avA8LJx/WcEyZWE4dXWNyd3Txj/IrGD+I8v7NcmQdbA VxaVrvMnSx0S7zvm4SCGA2bhrI5Z0+bCPPZMPJOLGG5fIDgrV/kbyxZmfzh8L+AP E+NjuRpGD1YX3lIcsHPEmAeWelefSoegBIdyNqb4afXrKtmXHCRUVq22F4a/luzq xnFN8v48sDa3Zic4H2P1NS5XkXeL4AfruP4Ve1Y8X526elTFewtdVg== =c46Q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Morlock wrote: >> And whatever deceptive advantages might possibly come from the *public >> perception* of rampant incompetence and donutchompery, the drawbacks are >Optimism may somatize one against dread of reality, but it will surely >impair accuracy of predictions. Sure. But for the life of me I can't see where you ever got the idea I'm an optimist just because I don't think it's time to retreat to a bunker watch the whole world go up in flames. As bad as it may very well be now, you seem to be forgetting it could be a WHOLE lot worse. The more people who care about liberties give up and do nothing, the uglier it's going to get. Should the emphasis be on developing technology instead of fretting over laws? Actually, I agree. Like I said in a previous post, the only way you can counter math is with better math. If what you do best is write code, write code. The main thing is to DO something, whatever your skills and talents are. Spare everyone the hot air and just do it. Take a good look in the mirror and ask yourself: what are you doing that matters to anyone besides yourself? If all you're doing is going to a meaningless job for the paycheck, coming home, watching TV, puttering around and grousing on the Net, you're part of the problem--as useless and irrelevant as the faceless horde of sheep you despise. On that account, my conscience is clear. Maybe when I'm old and tired I'll give up and join you in the bunker. But unlike some of you, I'm not fooling myself that there'll be some magical Galt's Gulch safe-haven to get away to. I'm a libertarian realist. I believe in doing what I can in this world rather than ignoring history and human nature and pining away for an imaginary one. >Unless you have some historical examples of well-concealed government >competence ? In the main? Not particularly. But I could go on all week with case studies of incompetence, waste, and abuse which could have been avoided if only a decisionmaker-- interested only in staying elected-- had been persuaded to follow sound advice instead of bad. Say what you will, but I think chipping away at the state by facilitating privatization is a bigger achievement than than throwing rocks at pigs in a parade. I'd rather be able to know I did my part to save the taxpayer literally billions of dollars than know I cost the police department a couple of bandaids and a couple of man-hours to write up my criminal record. To each his own. ~~Faustine. *** One of the chief sources of cultural paranoia is the ever-widening rift between the beliefs of people and their actual behavior, and the tacit assumption among these same people that this practice---this contradiction between idealism and practice---is a normal state of affairs. Lionel Rubinoff, "The pornography of power" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBPKIT+fg5Tuca7bfvEQI3ngCfV6rJkX9F2XkhSOg83idmDwqH/AcAoI+l G7PVUTU9moLmgcJvA5Hye2lA =x/sW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Aimee Farr wrote: > And I thought you were from Texas. ;) > > Hold it up to a mirror. It's the same size it was before, only reversed. -- There is less in this than meets the eye. Tellulah Bankhead [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.open-forge.org
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
> And whatever deceptive advantages might possibly come from the *public > perception* of rampant incompetence and donutchompery, the drawbacks are Optimism may somatize one against dread of reality, but it will surely impair accuracy of predictions. Unless you have some historical examples of well-concealed government competence ? = end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards. http://movies.yahoo.com/
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
Faustine If I was not a lady I would say you are full of shit On 26 Mar 2002 at 23:07, Faustine wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Faustine: > Aimee wrote: > >Well, I doan' kno' nuttin' 'bout no agents. That fact has been > >established. > Careful parsing is the spice of life... :P >>So sayeth the academic-researcher-grad student pretext... :P IT S A CONSPIRACY -some poor idiot, right now > >But, you know, after pondering on that a bit...What if "the lie" was > >supposedly "really secret stuff?" > >You know, "ME LUCKY CHARMS!" > >I know the little boys and girls are after me lucky charms. > >If "3 or more agents" happen to run in the door with me lucky charms, > Sounds about right. >>Yep, they would be lucky and charming. Ha! Look, even if you like the idea of PSYOPS in Afghanistan (for instance), you have to admit what s surfaced in the media has been embarrassingly crude and ham-handed. I suppose the best you could hope for is that it s really all part of a play the idiot and look ineffectual strategy while diverting attention from the real business at hand. Risky, at any rate-- since as any good poker player knows, the merest twitch of the eyelid risks being interpreted as weakness, causing your opponent to raise the stakes. Not good. Failing any evidence to the contrary, it s likely just wishful thinking though. I m really not in the all feds are incompetent donutchompers camp, but more and more it s looking suspiciously like the donutchompers have the upper hand. And whatever deceptive advantages might possibly come from the *public perception* of rampant incompetence and donutchompery, the drawbacks are deadly. Strength is good. I think Ashcroft and co. are making a HUGE mistake playing up the Christian goody goody schtick it plays straight into the Arab fundamentalist interpretation of the US; and the realists won t believe it (and wouldn t give a crap anyway. And never did.) Even more worriesome, though, is that some of them actually seem to believe it. America ought to deserve better than to be run by a bunch of simps. Emphasis on ought. By the way, did you catch the video of Ashcroft singing some cheezy maudlin patriotic gospel song at a theological seminary? At a fake press conference podium, yet. Surreal. Absolutely nauseating, made my blood boil. Didn t know whether to laugh or throw up... John Ashcroft SINGS! Let the Eagle Soar http://www.ifilm.com/ifilm/product/film_credits/0,3875,2424640,00.html AAAAAAaaaAAAGH! Ahem. Where were we. As someone once said, I d rather side with someone who burns the flag and wraps themselves in the Constitution than someone who burns the Constitution and wraps themselves in the flag. > What shows that the snowers know they've slowly been snowed? Bet > it keeps a lot of people awake at night, that one. Tricky, but fascinating. If > anyone knows of any good links to counter-deception detection, drop me a line. > Not sure how "on topic" it is, but something everyone here would do well to > read about. Either that, or just default to not trusting anyone, ever. Works >for me. >>Empathy skills in personal matters. You mean like gaydar for bullshitters? >>On a grand scale: >>1. counterdeception teams - multidisciplinary, "non-cultured," outsiders -- >>creatives, narratives, hoaxers, jokesters, emplotters, etc. Yeah but where? In the TLAs themselves? Consultants? Here s my card, I m with Flimflam Inc, an In-Q-Tel startup... Where s the oversight? Getting a room full of natural-born bullshitters together sounds dangerous no matter who s footing the bill. And put a con in a room full of squares call it personal bias if you want to, but I know where I d put my money as to who d come out ahead. Hm, unless you consider the case of Hanssen, the genuinely square con. Just goes to show you the limits of pigeonholing and profiling. >>2. devil's advocacy in the event stream Yep. Complacently blocking out opinions you disagree with is always a bad idea. >>3. competitive analysis >>4. MUST HAVE: highest-level precision black channels -- requiring nothing >>short of a resurrection. Close surveillance. Sneaky submarines are not good >>enough. Catch 22 re. the Deutch prohibition on working with scummy types. I think it points to the need to re-evaluate exactly what it is we re trying to accomplish. >>5. Cultural change -- a bit of British eccentricity; decision-maker >>sensitization Reminds me of the classic story about the time Herman Kahn was asked about Dr. Strangelove: "Dr. Strangelove would not have lasted three weeks at the Pentagon... he was too creative." >>6. Monitoring of foreign open source media and organizational theme >>variations (quantitative content and textual analysis; inferential scanning) Absolutely; open source analysis is for everyone. >>7. Monitoring of internal organizational dissenters, noncomformists and the >>intuitives (instead of quashing them, solicit them) Hey, I
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
> Faustine > If I was not a lady I would say you are full of shit On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, around 21:00 PST, cypherpunks mail-list (and the Movement with it) reached the absolute bottom. It can get only better now, and I'll drink to that. Cheers ! = end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards. http://movies.yahoo.com/
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Faustine: > Aimee wrote: > >Well, I doan' kno' nuttin' 'bout no agents. That fact has been > >established. > Careful parsing is the spice of life... :P >>So sayeth the academic-researcher-grad student pretext... :P ITS A CONSPIRACY -some poor idiot, right now > >But, you know, after pondering on that a bit...What if "the lie" was > >supposedly "really secret stuff?" > >You know, "ME LUCKY CHARMS!" > >I know the little boys and girls are after me lucky charms. > >If "3 or more agents" happen to run in the door with me lucky charms, > Sounds about right. >>Yep, they would be lucky and charming. Ha! Look, even if you like the idea of PSYOPS in Afghanistan (for instance), you have to admit whats surfaced in the media has been embarrassingly crude and ham-handed. I suppose the best you could hope for is that its really all part of a play the idiot and look ineffectual strategy while diverting attention from the real business at hand. Risky, at any rate-- since as any good poker player knows, the merest twitch of the eyelid risks being interpreted as weakness, causing your opponent to raise the stakes. Not good. Failing any evidence to the contrary, its likely just wishful thinking though. Im really not in the all feds are incompetent donutchompers camp, but more and more its looking suspiciously like the donutchompers have the upper hand. And whatever deceptive advantages might possibly come from the *public perception* of rampant incompetence and donutchompery, the drawbacks are deadly. Strength is good. I think Ashcroft and co. are making a HUGE mistake playing up the Christian goody goody schtick it plays straight into the Arab fundamentalist interpretation of the US; and the realists wont believe it (and wouldnt give a crap anyway. And never did.) Even more worriesome, though, is that some of them actually seem to believe it. America ought to deserve better than to be run by a bunch of simps. Emphasis on ought. By the way, did you catch the video of Ashcroft singing some cheezy maudlin patriotic gospel song at a theological seminary? At a fake press conference podium, yet. Surreal. Absolutely nauseating, made my blood boil. Didnt know whether to laugh or throw up... John Ashcroft SINGS! Let the Eagle Soar http://www.ifilm.com/ifilm/product/film_credits/0,3875,2424640,00.html AAAAAAaaaAAAGH! Ahem. Where were we. As someone once said, Id rather side with someone who burns the flag and wraps themselves in the Constitution than someone who burns the Constitution and wraps themselves in the flag. > What shows that the snowers know they've slowly been snowed? Bet > it keeps a lot of people awake at night, that one. Tricky, but fascinating. If > anyone knows of any good links to counter-deception detection, drop me a line. > Not sure how "on topic" it is, but something everyone here would do well to > read about. Either that, or just default to not trusting anyone, ever. Works >for me. >>Empathy skills in personal matters. You mean like gaydar for bullshitters? >>On a grand scale: >>1. counterdeception teams - multidisciplinary, "non-cultured," outsiders -- >>creatives, narratives, hoaxers, jokesters, emplotters, etc. Yeah but where? In the TLAs themselves? Consultants? Heres my card, Im with Flimflam Inc, an In-Q-Tel startup... Wheres the oversight? Getting a room full of natural-born bullshitters together sounds dangerous no matter whos footing the bill. And put a con in a room full of squares call it personal bias if you want to, but I know where Id put my money as to whod come out ahead. Hm, unless you consider the case of Hanssen, the genuinely square con. Just goes to show you the limits of pigeonholing and profiling. >>2. devil's advocacy in the event stream Yep. Complacently blocking out opinions you disagree with is always a bad idea. >>3. competitive analysis >>4. MUST HAVE: highest-level precision black channels -- requiring nothing >>short of a resurrection. Close surveillance. Sneaky submarines are not good >>enough. Catch 22 re. the Deutch prohibition on working with scummy types. I think it points to the need to re-evaluate exactly what it is were trying to accomplish. >>5. Cultural change -- a bit of British eccentricity; decision-maker >>sensitization Reminds me of the classic story about the time Herman Kahn was asked about Dr. Strangelove: "Dr. Strangelove would not have lasted three weeks at the Pentagon... he was too creative." >>6. Monitoring of foreign open source media and organizational theme >>variations (quantitative content and textual analysis; inferential scanning) Absolutely; open source analysis is for everyone. >>7. Monitoring of internal organizational dissenters, noncomformists and the >>intuitives (instead of quashing them, solicit them) Hey, Im game. Be sure to file all this under the expectation of being conned category though. the niceties of g
Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
Faustine: > Aimee wrote: > > > > To wit, no two people can safely tell the same lie to the same person. > > Bah. I say it depends entirely on what the lie is, who's being > lied to, and how > confident and artistic the confidence artists are. You're probably right. > Choate: > > Actually they can, only one (or both, if we allow 3 or more agents, only > > one is required to 'know' the lie) of the people must believe it is the > > truth. > > If they were good enough (and their targets comfortable enough), all three > could be lying their asses off about anything and nobody would ever be the > wiser. Likewise, with three or more targets playing it the other > direction. > > > >Well, I doan' kno' nuttin' 'bout no agents. That fact has been > established. > > Careful parsing is the spice of life... :P So sayeth the academic-researcher-grad student pretext... :P > >But, you know, after pondering on that a bit...What if "the lie" was > >supposedly "really secret stuff?" > >You know, "ME LUCKY CHARMS!" > >I know the little boys and girls are after me lucky charms. > >If "3 or more agents" happen to run in the door with me lucky charms, > > Sounds about right. Yep, they would be lucky and charming. > >that might smell really fishy to some people since leprechauns > are hard to > >catch. > > Somewhere over the rainbow. > >Furthermore, if you ask them about these lucky charms in isolation, they > >better know the lucky charms like the back of their hand, or further > >investigation is likely to review not-so-lucky inconsistencies. The > >"knowing" part can be rendered irrelevant by context, indeed it is > >sometimes imperative that everybody KNOW so as to > provide...uhm.secondary > >alternative consistency. > > But what about when the unlucky charmers find they're actually the victims > of a deceivers-deceiving-the-deceivers-deceiving-the-deceivers > kind of thing. Recursive is just writing backwards. > What shows that the snowers know they've slowly been snowed? Bet > it keeps a lot > of people awake at night, that one. Tricky, but fascinating. If > anyone knows of > any good links to counter-deception detection, drop me a line. > Not sure how "on > topic" it is, but something everyone here would do well to read > about. Either > that, or just default to not trusting anyone, ever. Works for me. Empathy skills in personal matters. On a grand scale: 1. counterdeception teams - multidisciplinary, "non-cultured," outsiders -- creatives, narratives, hoaxers, jokesters, emplotters, etc. 2. devil's advocacy in the event stream 3. competitive analysis 4. MUST HAVE: highest-level precision black channels -- requiring nothing short of a resurrection. Close surveillance. Sneaky submarines are not good enough. 5. Cultural change -- a bit of British eccentricity; decision-maker sensitization 6. Monitoring of foreign open source media and organizational theme variations (quantitative content and textual analysis; inferential scanning) 7. Monitoring of internal organizational dissenters, noncomformists and the intuitives (instead of quashing them, solicit them) Sounds down your alley of interests, interested in your thoughts. Due to the changing nature of the world, the U.S. could easily find itself hoodwinked, isolated, paralyzed and worse. It used to be "Uproar in the East, strike in the West." Today, it's "Fool the Sky." (transparent or false-flag cover plan) Our goal-states, perceptions, decision-points, etc. are there for all to see. Most deceptions play upon expectations. Our surveillance capabilities and superior military seem to point to a BARBAROSSA scenario -- a grand deception. Concealed within our strength is our weakness. > >And, "lucky charm lies" can take many forms, including physical, > which might > >be subject to verification, additional investigation and other > stuff I don't > >want to happen to me lucky charms, because I might want the > enemy to believe > >they are TRULY "lucky," "charmed," and "mine." > >I'm sure "it depends," but perhaps that wisdom came from just such a > >situation. > > Oh really? *blink blink* like what? "The Allies are landing at Normandy!" ..."It's just a trick." "What does German intelligence say?" ...Just what the British told them. The comment was from a review of FORTITUDE (deception plan) by one of the British designers. We could learn a lot from them --- save hundreds of thousands of lives by using these concepts defensively, domestically, and in new contexts. With each day that passes, we loose more of the window, and waste our resources on low-return countermeasures which do nothing but present 'barriers of certainty' to our adversaries, albeit a thin veil of comfort to our population. (I frequently point out that the Germans practically held hands along railways, and we still blew them all to heck in WW II.) In some places, we are taking actions that play into deception designs. Maybe we should change that, along with a few "street signs." Our
Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Aimee Farr wrote: > Recursive is just writing backwards. No it doesn't, it means 'write again'; as in over and over. -- There is less in this than meets the eye. Tellulah Bankhead [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.open-forge.org
RE: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal to noise proposal)
And I thought you were from Texas. ;) Hold it up to a mirror. (Well... it does make a point.) ~~Aimee > > Recursive is just writing backwards. > > No it doesn't, it means 'write again'; as in over and over. > > > -- > > > There is less in this than meets the eye. > > Tellulah Bankhead > [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.open-forge.org >
