Wednesday, 9 December 2015

Random funny stuff

Funny, eh? :P

Support me on Patreon!

I've managed to get myself onto Patreon.
Now you can start supporting my work so I can have the drive to producing more.

Remember, all the contents will still be free even without your support, but it would be great to have some support from you guys.

A fraction of your financial support will go to local charity and the rest goes to funding for the things I need for my content (eg. electric bills to run that fat oscilloscope) :D.

Let me hear your support today. For more information, visit https://www.patreon.com/suttiwit

To see what kind of content you will be supporting, visit: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiIIajsrIfH-cljZZFa7pDA

Sunday, 29 November 2015

Explaination of mysterious x86says blog and how to publish predictions of the future

Many of you may have seen my new blog -- x86says.blogspot.com; and see a vague title and some gibberish code for each post.

I owe you an explanation of this blog and why it comes about.

First, the etymology of the name: x86says. x86 is from: x86_64 -- my alias on the Internet. says is just to express that something will be said here.

Now comes the explanation:
x86says contains my predictions and views of the future that I can determine as of living today and looking into the past; like those written by great philosophers. My predictions may be correct or they may be wrong.

One can say my predictions are like those of philosophers; but unlike those of philosophers, my predictions are not written in plain English.

Why?
The problem is when a predictor predicts the future and gives it to the public at the period of time when the things predicted have not happened yet; the predictor runs the risks of the following things:
  1. They may be called insane and loose their reputation.
  2. They may actually change the course of the future to be as they have said.
  3. They may actually change the course of the future to be as they have not said.
First risk goes this way:
Assuming the predictor predicts something that of: "In 2050, the only safe source of clean water is toilet water."; The mass public may insult, bully and hurt their feelings and cause them to loose their reputation. Where in fact, this may be true in the future.

Second risk goes this way:
Assuming the predictor predicts that there would be a character in a Disney cartoon named: "Johanna". In the future, some people working at Disney may see this message and use it as an "inspiration" for the character in their work. And thus, changing the future because of the prediction-text itself; without their consent and not going by the purpose of predicting this in the first place.

Third risk goes this way:
Assuming the predictor predicts that there would be a character in a Disney cartoon named: "Johanna". In the future, some people working at Disney may see this message and may want to attack the predictor by deciding to officially not use this character at all. And thus, changing the future because of the prediction-text itself; without their consent and not going by the purpose of predicting this in the first place.

These are the problems of publishing predictions in a classical manner.

The solution
The solution is simple. Although I thought of this myself independently; I may not be the first to have thought of this.

This solution relies on the mathematically proven security of cryptographic hash functions such as SHA-512. The keys are:
  1. They are one-way functions and is therefore not feasible to trace back to a specific plain text.
  2. They give an output that is unique to the plain text that was fed into the function.
  3. Their output is deterministic; it is always a unique code that stays the same as long as this algorithm is computed correctly.
The first key solves all three problems described earlier; with this solution applied:
  • The mass public will not bother to trace back to a specific plain text.
  • Disney does not know their future cartoon character until they actually attempt to create it or otherwise. Therefore, it does not change the future.
The second and third key answers the question as to how the mass public can trust the predictor that the prediction which is given after the future happening is actually not a made up text after the future happening and it is in fact stored in the past long ago as a specific text in English and therefore successfully predicted since such times.

The third key also gives the predictor credential by allowing the mass public with a correct and standard implementation of the hashing algorithm to compute the predictor's plain text's (given after the future happening) hash output and compare it to the hash which was given in the past long ago.
Should they match, the future was indeed predicted in the past.

Even though the mathematics and the theory backs everything up; the hash needs to be published onto a secure platform where:
  • the hash can be publicly seen.
  • there is an accurate timestamp of the time the hash was published which the mass public can trust.

Method
The basic method of publishing the prediction:
  1. The predictor predicts the future.
  2. The predictor writes their predictions in English.
  3. The predictor hashes their written words using an algorithm they trust.
  4. The predictor publishes their hash algorithm's output to a secure platform with the criteria stated earlier and allows the mass public to see.
  5. The predictor stores their written words in a safe, secure and secret place and keep the written words a secret.
One can see that the predictor now has their written words of prediction in two asymmetrical parts much like public keys in cryptography: The public part (the hash), the private part (the written words).
The predictor may also choose to apply stenographic or/and cryptographic methods to their written words.

The predictor may also choose to write a vague topic just enough to give the mass public a clue about what the prediction is about (such as: Food, Technology, Medicine).

The predictor should also plan of what shall happen to their written words once the predictor is deceased.

The basic method of proving the prediction after the future happening:
  1. The predictor releases the relevant written words of prediction to the public.
  2. The predictor claims that the released written words is the input that resulted in a hash which was published in the past.
  3. The predictor encourages the mass public to hash the released written words with the hash algorithm used in the past and compare the output at present to the hash output in the past.
If the hash output in the present is a match to the hash output in the past then the mathematics prove that the future happening was indeed predicted in the past.

The predictor can use the timestamp provided by the secure platform the hash output was published on to prove their claim in step 2.

This method provides security for the predictor: They need not publish their written words until the predicted future happening occurs.

Compared to the classical method that introduces the three problems mentioned earlier:
  1. The predictor predicts the future.
  2. The predictor writes their predictions in English.
  3. The predictor publishes their written words to a secure platform with the criteria stated earlier and allows the mass public to see.
Example using the classical method that introduces the three problems mentioned earlier
We will be using three characters in this story: Alice, Bob and Eve.

In 2015, Alice predicts that in 2020, people will have to live on drinking toilet water as it is the only safest source of clean water on earth.
Alice publishes her predictions of the future in 2015:
  1. Alice writes her predictions in English. Like so:
    "In 2020, people will have to live on drinking toilet water as it is the only safest source of clean water on earth."
  2. Alice publishes her written words to a secure platform with the criteria stated earlier and allows the mass public to see.
Later on after the predictions were published; Bob and Eve sees this.
The following things that the first problem states can happen:
  • Bob, being Alice's friend does not go about and provoke her. But may just warn her of what's to come.
  • Bob may personally feel Alice is going insane and this destroys their friendship.
  • Eve, being Alice's fiend does go about and provoke her. Calling her insane as her predictions seemed insane enough.
  • Eve may go about destroying Alice's reputation; talking about Alice's insanity publicly. Alice may loose her job, friends and family as a consequence.
  • Bob may have a connection with Eve such that Eve can tell Bob about Alice's insanity and Bob would believe Eve's words and agree with them.
All in all, this destroys Alice's reputation.

The following things that the second and third problem states can happen:
  • Eve (and perhaps Bob) tries to do something (e.g. poison drinking water supplies) such that regular drinking water is no longer safe to consume as a result of the prediction.
  • Eve (and perhaps Bob) tries to do something (e.g. putting bacteriophages and purifying agents into drinking water supplies) such that regular drinking water is always safe to consume as a result of the prediction.
All in all, Eve and friends can use the prediction to change the future which may or may not be what is predicted to come and thus does not go by the purpose of the prediction in the first place.

What happens in 2020 may become uncertain, but the consequences after Alice publishes such predictions is quite certain to happen.

Example using the new method
We will be using three characters in this story: Alice, Bob and Eve.

In 2015, Alice predicts that in 2020, people will have to live on drinking toilet water as it is the only safest source of clean water on earth.
Alice publishes her predictions of the future in 2015:
  1. Alice decides on a hash algorithm to employ -- SHA-512.
  2. Alice writes down her predictions in English. Like so:
    "In 2020, people will have to live on drinking toilet water as it is the only safest source of clean water on earth."
  3. Alice encodes her written words into UTF-8 bytes and computes the SHA-512 hash output. As so:
    "616a090b39397492e2a2e582f1da5ca2e432bf61ab1f2aebf73c86e45991ac5bb41993764067f48c447584adc561cd8b3eda817f5b365eae72edd9b6b4cb3203"
  4. Alice publishes her hash output onto a secure platform with the criteria stated earlier and allows the mass public to see.
  5. Alice writes down the hash output alongside her written words.
  6. Alice stores her written words in a safe, secure and secret place and keeps the written words a secret.
After the publication; Bob and Eve sees this.
Since all Eve and Bob see is the hash output, the only things that may happen are:
  • Eve may only think that Alice is talking in code and it is not logical to provoke her on this.
  • Eve is unable to feasibly crack the code Alice uses even when Eve knows that it is a SHA-512 digest; and therefore:
    • Cannot change the course of the future by knowing the written words.
    • Cannot call Alice insane because Eve does not have any evidence to prove this.
If in 2020, Alice's predictions were incorrect and her predicted events did not happen at that time or anytime soon after. She need not publish her written words.
But if in 2020, her predictions were correct and her predicted events did happen at that time or anytime soon after. She can do this:
  1. Alice publishes her written words publicly.
  2. Alice claims that her published written words is the input of the hash algorithm she employed that resulted in the hash output published in 2015.
    She claims that:
    "In 2020, people will have to live on drinking toilet water as it is the only safest source of clean water on earth."
    ="616a090b39397492e2a2e582f1da5ca2e432bf61ab1f2aebf73c86e45991ac5bb41993764067f48c447584adc561cd8b3eda817f5b365eae72edd9b6b4cb3203"
  3. Alice encourages the mass public to correctly compute the hash output of the hash algorithm she employed, using her encoded published written words as input and compare the hash output obtained today with the one calculated in 2015.
If someone from the mass public performs step 3 and gets a hash output that matches the one calculated and published in 2015; the mathematics prove the Alice indeed predicted the events since 2015.

Alice can use the timestamp provided by the secure platform the hash output was published on to prove her claim in step 2.

Eve and Bob can only accept that Alice did predict something in the future and that her predictions were true. It is not logical for Eve to provoke Alice.


Further problems
But, there are a few extra keys that this entire solution relies on to work securely that may present a few problems:
  1. The hash algorithm used today must exist and be consistent as the same hash algorithm during the predicted time of happening.
  2. The hash algorithm used today must be secure today and must not be any more vulnerable during the predicted time of happening.
The first problem is unlikely to happen as we humans keep tracks of our algorithms well. It is very unlikely that SHA-512 will disappear in 2100; although it may happen.

The second problem is quite likely to happen as computers get more sophisticated. Hash algorithms proven secure today may become vulnerable in the future. It can be difficult to predict the future of the hash algorithm used.

This list of problems did not take into account that humans can be the weakest thing in any security infrastructure:


The Voynich manuscript?
Yes, the Voynich manuscript. I have heard that people think the manuscript talks about the future.

If that is the case; I do personally believe that a technique similar to the solution mentioned earlier was used.

And if it uses a similar, if not the same technique and people from all over cannot crack it then the hash algorithm used in the past does not exist today (Solution's Problem #1).

The author of the manuscript may have also deceased before he could sort out what to do with his written words.

The rIsE IRC Network

Hura!!! After a huge amount of effort and time spent on tinkering around InspIRCd, Anope and Linode and with the help of many nice folks around the Internet especially Tools.
I have created my first IRC Network named rIsE on rise.cspr.link port 6667 (SSL +6697)

It took a lot of work so I hope you enjoy it.
It is a very new network so many things are still under construction but it is usable.

I also use my own money to pay for the cost of the servers as this is what I love doing; and since I live in a developing country, my earnings are not so much; so please do support me on this. Thanks! :)

x86_64