full-disclosure - Fwd: fuck symantec & boycott bugtraq

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1042309380.13748.39.camel@FatBoy>
From: ken_i_m at elegantinnovations.net (Ken Dyke)
Subject: Fwd: fuck symantec & boycott bugtraq

On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 10:37, Ka wrote:
> > Without a multi-point view of history the decision of what to do "NOW"
> > will, to a very high order, be wrong.
> 
> And with a multi-point view of history this is not
> different. Just the opposite, because the illusion
> to have a multi-point view (about the present and not 
> about the past) will create the false assumption
> "to be in the know". Consequently erroneous assumptions
> and conclusions will be overlooked, more probably.

The object of acquiring an understanding of history is to raise one's
decisions above "merely random".  Additionally, "history" is much
broader than the cultural-indoctrination crap they teach in school
(especially US schools but applies to all church or state sponsored
schools).

> > I think, therefore, ken_i_m
> 
> Nope. Therefore you think that you are the thinker 
> (or Ken or whatever).

"I think, therefore, I am."  -- Rene Descartes
Sam, Sam I am." -- Dr. Seuss

My sig is a pun, which I thought rather obvious.  It has been getting
laughs for over six years now.

Descartes was wrong about duality.  But he was right about one thing. 
You have to start somewhere.  He started with, "I think, therefore I
am."  Which is not a bad place to start as long as you are aware of the
constraints this starting place puts on any conclusions based on it.

> If you love to be pedantic in your thinking, go the whole
> way. Otherwise the points where you stop to be pedantic
> are an indication of your unchallenged illusions, of your
> unverified copies from historic scriptures.
> 
> You certainly wouldn't execute a script on your workstation
> without having analyzed it first. With your brain you seem
> to be less aware. Why else would you copy and reproduce 
> variants of old, written bullshit (aah, say: historic scripts)
> like "I think, therefore I am" ?

Your psychoanalysis is based on insufficient data.

-- 
I think, therefore, ken_i_m
Chief Gadgeteer,
Elegant Innovations
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030111/7c084310/attachment.bin