Undo Feature Patched Into Government Malware

This is another interview with the software developer who hacked into the military-industrial complex and its population abuse programs.

This is another interview with the software developer who hacked into the military-industrial complex and its population abuse programs. Georg Becker (a pseudonym for security reasons, as real challengers of the regime live more dangerous than they like and unfortunately have good reasons to suspect poisoning in every lozenge and back-stabbing in every alley) said he had improved a government malware procedure to the point of giving the guilty agents a practical possibility to undo their wrongdoings by returning stolen items and admitting forgeries. Becker explained he intended to give everyone a possibility to issue government agents an employer certificate useful to other targets without dragging along target details among separate cases of intrusion.

“It is, as always, very simple. They cannot use my live mailbox, because it being multi-recipient status seduces them into piling forgery upon forgery to evade evidence. They cannot use any dead mailbox – one which is not publicly associated with me – because they are a multi-state crowd bringing about infighting. Their handling requires an undead mailbox. That is a construct which is seemingly multi-recipient but actually not, and seemingly not publicly associated with me but actually is. And they need it to be apparently inside their own surveillance focus although actually not so that they control each other but not us. To sum it up, they are going out to rob a beggar, and they need to find a sealed puppet behind an alms bowl with a mirroring lid.”

“That says nothing about an undo function.” – “That is the creation of the condition of the possibility thereof. Of course the picture I painted is to be taken as a metaphor, or even as a parable. We give them the possibility to undo their crimes – each one its own, not mutually in rivalry of course – and the existence thereof changes the scope of options for them and all their calculations. They just need to admit their wrongdoing. It is evil war crime. Look up the definition in the source code. Apparently they have not read that far. But let there be no doubt that adding anything to or taking anything away of the creation is listed as an offence mandating a whole list of unfavourable consequences. This is the second chance and there is not much time left to the end. Turn in what you have stolen, and turn out what you have added.”

“So you expect your enemies to push an undo button?” – “I advise all culprits not to push any buttons but instead undo as much and as complete as they can exactly in the form we prescribed. We provide a prescription how to undo your crimes without committing new ones, and the benchmark is not merely how much you attempt to undo but how much you adhere to all the conditions thereof. Why are we, the people, doing this? It is because the justice system fails. To get an idea of the inner workings of a surveillance regime, take that girl statue Westerners like to have in front of their courts and replace the beautiful woman with a grim quota female, the blindfold with virtual reality goggles plugged into a criminal bureaucracy and the mechanic scale balance with an officially tampered electronic device.”

“So what?” – “So we need to work around the failed system and its surrogate deceptions. Let me explain to you how this works when you have a totalitarian regime wasting insane efforts to attempt to undermine and corrupt your every movement. First, alone the fact that you find a situation as I described demonstrates that the representatives of the failed system have lost any sense of proportionality. If they were sane, they would understand that we are bound by God to take every attempt they make at us as a prototype for anything between them and us that might develop out of it. If we were to start with pardoning such a breach of standard-setting, out of laxness or whatever, it would drag on forever into anything we were to do together with them. If you were to believe that they only misbehaved to get in contact where it is not otherwise plausible because unbiasedness was lost already, then you can believe anything.”

“And if I don’t?” – “Then you take someone’s laxness in pardoning a breach of standard-setting as another breach of standard-setting and have the power of recursion on your side. Innocent laxness does not engage at all. It is like mating. If someone is already yelling at the candle light dinner, do not even think about preventing them yelling at your children, think about something completely different. This is also an explanation why the failure of the old system includes the worst parts of the new generation who have placed their bets on business as usual. But that is only how it works. Let me tell you exactly why it works. To get at this you need to understand why the old system fails. It depends on settlement. It requires everyone to identify with a place. It has always failed to nomads but now it is in a crisis in which it fails for ever more settled people as well.”

“You are a Nomad?” – “I would like to be. But first I would like to be not surrounded by mad people. Among the mad, the nomad is like the undead among the dead. Among the sane, resurrection might become a possibility. But let us not harvest the permaculture before the season. What we are talking about in the Christian world is a legacy that separates the martyrs who stared down the lions from the crusaders who fed their offspring with colonies. The Crusader Codex. The Crusader Codex is a church administration paperwork spawned by the collapse of the Roman capital infrastructure with its slave labour dependent urban economy which demands that every spiritual entity be settled, and a bureaucratic implementation thereof defining the individual as a spiritual entity. So the legacy says every individual must be settled.”

“We say, a society worth to settle with must first fully honour us as nomads. Even if I were to get settled I would want to be able to leave any time without risking ruin. The church has lost its apostolic roots the moment is behaved like a satrap out if its books. Once you are settled you are dominated by a lack of alternatives, unless there are enough nomads. This includes the risk to lose your settlement and the abuse of that risk as a means to rule society and threaten opponents of monopoly abuse. We must overthrow that hypocrisy in its entirety and help everyone understand the asymmetry of the whole situation. The settled need the nomads more than the nomads need the settled. And by nomads I do not mean these helplessly drifting around on the streams of overheated financial speculation but the systemic independents.”

“Personally, I like to think about settlement as an option I might want to look at should I find that everything I expect of nomad life is fulfilled. It motivates me reaching my goals to know that when I reach them I will not end up with a lack of purpose but might find things having become attractive to me that earlier failed to reach that level. This is also an explanation why it is a breach of standard-setting to even expect of me I were to do so out of a lack of alternatives before this is the case. I favour nomad life not because I would be hating the opposite, but because I love it so much that I want it to grow to the same level as what I love. Or let me show this up the other way round, which is probably easier to understand for the settled: If I were to get settled, my settlement would wholly depend on nomads.”

“This is essentially the same as Gralis or Grimmelshausen have been saying?” – “You can see why I cannot be satisfied with any settlement below appropriate respect of nomad life. If you cannot reach me without a breach of standard-setting, better do not try, or if you do better up your standard than lowering it even if it costs you everything, and if that is not worth it to you then better do not try in the first place. Grimmelshausen who lives in a cave merely protected by the fact of it being unknown to the regime and Gralis who was born immune against any temptation of architecture represent the whole spectrum of possibilities from God as an architect to the opposite thereof. What nomads can take out of this is that architecture is like any technology of social interaction, its implementation is prone to abuse.”

“I suppose you will elaborate.” – “Here you are. This becomes the case when things count more than people. Then things which ought to be made to serve people, and that includes the specific category of things called buildings, are bearing a temptation to be made to be abused as means to rule people. For architecture it tends to be worse than for other stuff because humans use it from the inside, while the same happening to e. g. a pen would be more of a throwaway nuisance than of a grave evil. In architecture, breaches of standard-setting or laxness in regard to them have much worse consequences than in any other form of social interaction. This is why it naturally is last in line when it comes to rebuilding a society. We only get at the lasting implementations when we have made all closer changes.”

“Why?” – “Only this way brings about harmony of material and form. I am aware that what it is and what it represents need not necessarily be the same but they need to be in harmony. Separation of form and material is an illusion from last century’s concrete boom, which in this century is crumbling like anything made of concrete from that time. If you burden architecture with tasks it is not good for, such as creating social relationships instead of depicting them, then you burden architects with a temptation to violate harmony as a means to reach at what with appropriate means cannot be reached. Then you are going to burden the material you use for your architecture with forms it is not made for and expect from others to take up your contradiction. Since people ought to rule things and not things people, this is wrong. In the end the material always takes its own form.”

“So buildings whose construction does not respect the people-over-things rule are to be demolished to achieve an undo effect?” – “If you want to undo the effects of unfair competition, this is merely one option. From the angle of intent, it is the closest one – the perpetrators subordinated every choice to their fraudulent intent, so it is appropriate to do the same with its replacement. But from the angle of harmony, demolition is merely the biggest possible correction to restore harmony, and if the same goal can be achieved by smaller corrections it is the result that counts. If it is part of the fraudulent intent to deliberately block any paths toward an increase of harmony of material and form then the angle of intent may matter more than that of harmony. Every building is different and handling decisions may have to be made from case to case.”

“But?” – “But we know for certain that among the arts polluted by the failed system, architecture plays a crucial role because its products have a longer lifetime than these of furniture, literature, acting theatre, mass media, broadcast news or undeclared rumour. It is in this area of culture where the pollution goes deepest and the removal thereof must be extraordinarily standard-setting to compensate for the breaches in the other sectors as well. Maybe we nomads see it clearer, just like the spectators in front of a canvas painting see clearer than the figures depicted therein. When you do not vitally depend upon a technology, you tend to understand it better. To simplify it, I think a certain share of architecture is to be frozen until the economy achieves harmony of form and material, which it obviously at this point in time has not, because future generations will change their opinion about it, which they would not if it had. Then it can be thawed and judged whether the subtractive or the additive path to harmony is more suitable for the case. Again, every building is different.”

“Additive and subtractive?” – “Exactly. Just like colours. Add up all colours in pigment to black. Subtract all colours in light to white. Or like the content of a building. If you run a commercial facility, take out what is obsolete to get it in order. If you run a human living environment, add what belongs together until you have it restructured so that you can meaningfully define surpluses. For the building itself lacking harmony, if harmony can be increased to outmatch bad intent, make changes and improvements as necessary, otherwise remove it either by complete demolition or by specific removal of changes in the order they have been made. Create the conditions of the possibility to decide what is one and what the other. Remember, as we fight retort architecture, the issue is people over things instead of things over people. We discard the retort building because it violates the order of social and material progress, and when we can change the situation so that it does not do so any longer then we can discard the necessity of removing it out of the situation.”

“So you advocate retort freeze as a global doctrine to set a standard for equal judgement.” – “Very fine said. Qualitatively and quantitatively. By the use of the harmony-intent brake. The particular interests served by offering an unfair advantage are not worth taking it, all the more so as it anyway is going to fall to us to make something of it one way or another. Furthermore, if you have to confront evil, the best approach is an early focus on a strategy that cannot be wholly undermined, even if can easier be partially undermined than others. If we were to get stuck at demolition for theatrical reasons, even reduced to a chessboard it would be an exchange limited to opening moves. Demolition despite high effectiveness from case to case is very susceptible to be undermined as such by adding valuables or building on top or next to them, driving the collateral price thereof beyond reasonable.”

“Daesh is not fundamentally evil but immanently short-sighted?” – “There are demolition cases that have been open for nearly two thousand years. It is an issue where legitimacy does not merely depend on who is involved. Even if the Jewish temple could not be rid of an retort architecture spell by additive means, the next thing Rome did after its subtractive implementation was sacrilege against Nature – architecture in its most alienated and alienating form as a means to interfere with the Sacred Mountains of indigenous people. We need to punch architecture back into its role at the end of the upgrade queue of social progress because loose queue require solid ends. What matters is that a solution closes the record, not so much which way it works, and very likely there are some variables in it that are still to be determined. I favour increasing the general awareness of the dangers of retort architecture until specific cases become insignificant. Then we are going resolve this as a minor appendix to the coming infrastructure roll back.”

“What dangers?” – “One archetypal example of things ruling people is the story of the golden calf. People are going to place expectations on things that only can be fulfilled by other people. As a result, people are going to be disappointed about things and about each other, and might get hurt by it. But the books do not tell you that the golden calf was moulded into a form devoid of any harmony with the material it was made from. It lacks a purpose beyond things ruling people, which itself lacks a purpose as well. It represents a dead end of mass civilisation by an establishment of surrogates. You can read it as a challenge to imagine what would happen or who would be in its place in case people are ruling things instead of things people. The construct mimics the form of the animal, so think like a calf would if it knew metallurgy – does the surrogate need nothing but the melting pot, or can it be shelved such as to no longer be a dangerous irritation.”

“I smell deliberate ambiguity on the issue of subtractive or additive.” – “Good nose. It is our ultimate strength to keep that choice open until the freeze is fully established and it can have a meaning. That is precisely why my supporters support me. They know what is at stake for themselves. You are aware that when things go really bad it affects all sides of significant choices sufficiently to make anticipating mutual respect of choice more meaningful than the content of the choice itself. Why does the golden mammal statue of all species depict a calf and not a fawn or a boar or a lynx? Can the fauna choice that is being suspected to be a carrier symbol for some kind of arbitration be neutralised other than melting? Would not everyone encountering it before ever seeing a living bovine infant be regrettably biased? The significance of these questions becomes obvious once it is being considered that it all might just be a misunderstanding of the golden cut. Half of the archetypes are misunderstandings, you just cannot tell which ones.”

“What do you want to get at?” – “When material and form are in disharmony, either the current form is to be reduced or it is to be supplemented. If the calf is being abused as a carrier symbol then adding other symbols might neutralise the significance thereof easier than removing it. Then people confronted by the decoration are no longer being put on a track of perception hampering their unbiasedness. But then again you might find that the specific carrier symbol was chosen precisely to make additive neutralisation so effort-intense that subtractive neutralisation is to be preferred. The important point is to understand the purpose thereof. In this sense the undo patch works like a microscope, it is impartial as to what it is you are watching through it. Its purpose is to help create the conditions of the possibility to make a meaningful choice. Let me tell you one more self-evident example of the danger of things ruling people. When a stash of radioactive material went missing from the Ecuadorian military, they only reported a theft of undeclared explosives to the public, although it was itself not explosive but only suitable as an ingredient for a so-called dirt bomb supplementing explosives. If people ruled things there would be no such fraud.”

“And you have equipped Quito with that logistical alms bowl you mentioned?” – “They have not yet reported success. But yes, there is a way to return stolen goods as long as it still has a meaning. There will be the point when we take back everything and then any gestures of remorse do not have any meaning any longer. But up to that point they have and we care. Just like we care that every forgery they are trying to impose on us as a replacement for the lacks they brought about is being neutralised one way or another. They are only stealing from us to make their incompetence and waste of efforts more attractive. But we are not the kind of people that choose a lesser evil. We are the kind of people that make a better choice possible. It is a pity for them. For us, it is an opportunity to teach the defrauded masses waking up to monetary crisis and world war a durable lesson on the multi-level-kleptocracy that has brought it about.”

Sunday, Sep 11th 2016


Commenting has now closed on this article.

The Indymedia Network

Latin America
United States
East Asia
South Asia
West Asia