TOR was initially funded,developed and unleashed on the world by DARPA; just sayin

I appreciate the info here. Though there are plausibly both valid and invalid uses of TOR. Or rather, there may be differences such that it would still be ideologically sound to use TOR for some things oneself, while decrying its use by others, where the purposes, details of use and/or outcomes were different, or even potentially different.

AaronNGray's avataraaronngray

The initial funding, development, and implementation for the TOR project was provide by United States Naval Research Laboratory and DARPA. So you can blame them for letting the dark web out onto the internet with all the clandestine behaviour that that resulted in.

It has taken the CIA and FBI years to get to the point where they can detect traffic and end points; and they were complaining, along with the governments of this world about the use of TOR and the little known I2P.

View original post

Radish

Once upon a time there was a lovely little radish named Emily. Emily was the radish-child of a number of attempts at naming a child which had not previously turned out as Emily. In the process of naming the child Emily many cogs and levers were employed, to make sure the child turned out just right. One would think that the father of the child was most important in the eventual outcome but much of the genetic information is changeable and even were it not, so on and so forth. Is this, perhaps, the expression of an attempt at immortality. Probably not. One is either immortal or one is not.

Rather, the exchange of information through bodily fluids is exacted by a sort of smooth, rhythmic up and down motion where the naked penis is in contact with the naked, soft wetness of another human and a wet fluid is ejected from the internals of the penis-having participant. As you may have guessed, it is necessary that there is a sharing of internal selves for both parts of the process.  So we have information exchanges. There is a line of positive and negative that flows through the universe and all this up and down movement, though fun in its own right, is aimed at altering these patterns to positive. We have a constant counting upwards that occasionally deals in negative numbers by accident.

So then, this is why we are often attracted by fragility. Even without the act of procreation the pursuit of positive emotion has its allure, and the more negative the more alteration potential. So what has this got to do with the radish named Emily? Hold a radish in your arms. Cradle the radish. Tell me what you feel. The flush red of its radish cheeks. The little radish-specific ‘cheep cheep’ sounds it makes. You have before you a radish that you yourself created — but why? Because on some level you knew that the act of creation would create whole fields full of radish related joy. Surely there will be other radishes, but this is your radish. Now eat the radish. The radish is part of you. You are both beautiful.

ARPANET and the unintentional playground

AaronNGray's avataraaronngray

ARPANET or the Internet as we now know it was release prematurely onto an unsuspecting world by the American Department of Defence (DoD), it is not fit for purpose. It was designed to be robust but fails miserably under certain conditions when attacked. Basically the routing protocols that make sure all your packets of data are directed and arrive in the right place and are reassembled by the IP (Internet Protocol) layer is open to fakery by flooding your local network with false packets, which can take over your communications by utilizing a number of techniques.

This attack can be done by a botnet which is a number of computers usually the same subnet provided by you ISP (Internet Service Provider). Windows computers are renowned for being open to being misused for attacking other computers without the users knowledge. Remember the Microsoft advert with a castle and guard dogs around a girl sitting…

View original post 900 more words

Foxes

lightdipintheroad's avatarlightdipintheroad

We should be kinder to foxes.

I’m making an unfair assumption here.  For all I know you’re unfailingly lovely to foxes.  Maybe you feed them and stroke them and call them Reynard (give yourself a gold star if you get the reference), and go about your merry way with a skulk of loyal vulpini guarding your every move, keeping you from harm with their cunning trickster ways.

Fuck that last bit.  Who am I to assume all foxes are cunning tricksters?  I mean I know most stereotypes have a little basis in fact, but they’re mainly lazy assumptions to make us feel better about being cruel to those Others, no?  Hardly seems fair, what with Them having thoughts and feelings and mums and dads etc.

Yes, sometimes foxes misbehave.  They knock over our bins to get at the food we don’t want, dig out our chickens, spoiling our attempts at…

View original post 492 more words