Encryption

[crayon]

I asked the board to do this very thing on MY encrypted transmission a couple of years ago. I gave them the recorded message, the algo and the key and it still has NOT been cracked.

When I first started reading this thread I thought of your challenge bro!



If ppl would just search ....

 

[rescue161]

When I first started reading this thread I thought of your challenge bro!



If ppl would just search ....

I know. This topic always seems to come up and it always ends the same...lol

I sure wish those "super computers" would tell me what my message said... Oh wait, I've changed my key since then. Oh well, at least that message is outdated and useless to me now.

 

[N_Jay]

I was talking about technology.

I know, but in general the belief that the government has technology well advanced from what is available or at least known to commercial and university research is false.

...How do you know? ever heard of the DST? https://www.cia.gov/offices-of-cia/science-technology/index.html

Yes, of course, but again, they are not that secret, just focus on specific problems.

Read a little on quantum computing and you will see we need some significant breakthroughs to get even a rudimentary computer working. To think that one agency has cracked all those issues while all the others working on it have not cracked any is a foolish position to take.

EDIT:
Notice how many non-TLA labs are working on the problem, and have been for over 30 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing

Also interesting;
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/sep08/6794

"Kitaev is optimistic for the future of quantum computing but thinks it's still too early to predict which of the many approaches will ultimately lead to a working device. “I think there are many unresolved problems with quantum computing,” says Kitaev. “But hopefully some of them will work.” "

He is OPTIMISTIC it will work IN THE FUTURE!

 

[immelmen]

I know, but in general the belief that the government has technology well advanced from what is available or at least known to commercial and university research is false......

....they are not that secret, just focus on specific problems.

Really? Like I said, how do you know?



The DST's existence and function an organization, as well as the DI or DO, is not secret at all(hence the website). But unless you can at least describe the wall tile design in the john at NHB, its a safe bet you also have no idea of what lye behind their doors. It should make sense that they want it that way. With no inference of any specific capabilities or technology, rather in the most general terms; How much easier it must make the job when the world underestimates...under-imagines ones capabilities.

 

[RiceCake]

You guys need to stop over complicating a relatively simple concept while you ignore everything posted around you to continue this pointless effort of ego self-masturbation...

Encryption cracking projects that offer rewards better than "just hearing what is in the sample", like actual money, still take years even on shorter encryption keys or simpler methods.

Anyone who posts some stupid long-winded explanation after this will have ignored what I said, and completely proven my point.

 

[N_Jay]

Really? Like I said, how do you know?

1) Common Sense
2) Working with the Feds
3) Common Sense
4) Having worked in a university research lab
5) Common Sense
6) Having worked in industry tracking evolving technologies
7) Common Sense

Did I mention that it would be a real leap of faith and breach of common sense to think that somehow the Feds have solved all of the multiple problems with bringing a technology to fruition far enough ahead of the many commercial and university research programs studying the same issues with many more people all around the world, when the sum total of those labs has yet to solve even the minimum set of issues required.

The DST's existence and function an organization, as well as the DI or DO, is not secret at all(hence the website). But unless you can at least describe the wall tile design in the john at NHB, its a safe bet you also have no idea of what lye behind their doors.

I will tell you with certainty that I have little idea what is behind the walls, but I will tell you with even greater certainty that with little study you can know what is NOT behind the walls.

They don't have cold fusion, they don't have a universal code-beaker, and they DON'T have a working practical quantum computer. (Nor the remains of a crashed extra-terrestrial UFO)

 

[immelmen]

1) Common Sense
2) Working with the Feds
3) Common Sense
4) Having worked in a university research lab
5) Common Sense
6) Having worked in industry tracking evolving technologies
7) Common Sense

.....riiiiiiight, like I said, how do you know? :roll:

I don't see having been "read in" to any SCI or SAP compartments in your list so there could be mermaids, unicorns and a time machine in the vault and...you...will...never...know. Google "James Jesus Angelton" and read why.

 

[N_Jay]

.....riiiiiiight, like I said, how do you know? :roll:

I don't see having been "read in" in your list so there could be mermaids, unicorns and a time machine in the vault and...you...will...never...know. Google "James Jesus Angelton" and read why.

I guess you lost track as soon as the lines exceeded seven words.

Did I mention that it would be a real leap of faith and breach of common sense to think that somehow the Feds have solved all of the multiple problems with bringing a technology to fruition far enough ahead of the many commercial and university research programs studying the same issues with many more people all around the world, when the sum total of those labs has yet to solve even the minimum set of issues required.

Maybe you like making such leaps of faith, but I have NEVER seen any evidence to justify it.

Yes, as you imply, "Anything is possible", but people who rely on that type of thinking in lieu of objective reasoning are very weak minded.:roll::roll:

 

[eorange]

Yes, as you imply, "Anything is possible", but people who rely on that type of thinking in lieu of objective reasoning are very weak minded.:roll::roll:

Rewind a few centuries: N_Jay would be the guy discrediting heliocentrism, using the "common sense" at the time, in favor of geocentrism!

 

[N_Jay]

Rewind a few centuries: N_Jay would be the guy discrediting heliocentrism, using the "common sense" at the time, in favor of geocentrism!

A said "using common sense", not "falling for common beliefs".

It is immelmen who is falling for the common belief that the Government has great and wonderful technologies well advanced beyond the best commercial and university research facilities.

My common sense is a little different from that.

 

[scannerfreak]

I know. This topic always seems to come up and it always ends the same...lol

Yep and that time is now. We are going in circles again..Closed..