From: Yash (yashk2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Jan 07 2002 - 00:51:46 MST
No, you're wrong again: you assume the author consciously coded the entire
text.
This is not the case usually, as one of the most efficient steganographic
coding is what is known as the Null coding, whereby the part that is coded
is the smallest possible part of the text (more fluff to people not aware of
a hidden message).
Then again, what do you know about what goes on in a masonic lodge? Their
knowledge, even if written in plain text (although they do have encryption
devices too) would still not be open to interpretation to the uninitiated.
I'll say it again - what the Rabbis, Brahmins, Masons, etc... do is an act
of faith, it is unnecessary to discuss whether they are right or wrong.
The Rabbis sits down with the ancient Hebrew scripture, performs some
mathematical operation on them (like Temurah, Notariqon, etc...) and then
considers the result. The result may or may not be that what he expects, but
is a starting point for more meditation and contemplation, and possibly
interpretation, through his own upbringing as a religious scholar - it could
be partly intuitive, partly rational thought.
e.g. if a Rabbi 'decodes' the name of a person, who, in scripture is a
benevolent character, but finds the numerical code to be the equivalent of
the code for 'Evil', then he doens't get worked up about 'Oh no, this
person's nature is rather Evil, not good as revealed by the code'. Instead,
he probably will reflect on how 'even the best may have some evil within'.
This is along the same line as masons who contemplate the pavement which is
made up of black and white squares, symbolising, among other things, the
existence of good and evil, intertwined in the development of the universe.
This is a very simplistic example but I hope it does convey how things go.
What good is it trying to rationalise something like this when you don't do
it yourself? It is the same attitude as religious extremists who want to
force their beliefs into other people's throats.
Best way to go about it is to check it out. And see if the tools described
really do make you see a world in a grain of sand and somehow makes you
expand your consciousness.
Yash.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
Of Steele, Kirk A
Has anyone besides L'erm and myself made a REAL study of steganographic
methods? Merm, a book does not a valid theory make!
Reproducability and a systematic model does.
This is a familiar thread among those who seek to validate belief with
pseudo-formal methods. A lot of lip service is given to the INTENT of
formality. But when peer reviewed for adherence to formal structure, this
type of argument fails miserably. The progenitor of the mormons tried it,
the Hesitics (sic) have tried it, countless fundementalists have tried it,
the Masonic Lodge quit trying it.
1) Take the ENTIRE UNTRANSLATED body of text that is CONTIGUOUS from ONE
AUTHOR.
2) Apply the steganographic key to the ENTIRE portion of STEP 1.
3) Read the 'plain text'
If there is intelligence to be decoded, it will be apparant as an entire
gramatical construct, not a fragment here, a misspleled word there; ONE
COMPLETE SENTACE WILL JUMP OUT AT YOU!
THIS HAS NEVER (repeat) NEVER BEEN DONE!
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:38 MDT