/t/ - Technology

Discussion of Technology

Index Catalog Archive Bottom Refresh
Mode: Reply
Options
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8000

Files

Max file size: 32.00 MB

Max files: 5

Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more

E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules

The backup domain is located at 8chan.se. .cc is a third fallback. TOR access can be found here, or you can access the TOR portal from the clearnet at Redchannit 2.0.

Be aware of the Fallback Plan

8chan.moe is a hobby project with no affiliation whatsoever to the administration of any other "8chan" site, past or present.

(352.52 KB 891x902 xrctfy_xcity.jpg)
Chaosesque anthology deleted from moddb Anonymous 05/04/2021 (Tue) 19:31:48 No. 3921
>https://www.moddb.com/games/chaosesqueanthology > Game Over >The game you are trying to view has been deleted and is no longer available. This may have occurred at the developers request because it is no longer active and was not released, or it may have occurred because it violated the sites Terms of Use. If this is a mistake and you are a member of this games team and would like it re-activated, please contact us with the details. >Continue browsing the game list, to find the profile you are after. >Account Banned >Your account has been banned. If you believe this is a mistake and want to be unbanned, please contact us. Try searching:
>>3956 >Why on earth would you link any account to any other on the internet? Opsec, people. I'm sorry you messed up your thing, but you really should have thought through what you were doing. I guess all you can do now is put it on GitHub. Shows that those who are pro-child bride are not "retards who can't program anything". Think of the romantic era painters who painted cute young girls because they liked them. Should they have not done so? >It's only going to get worse from now one. Twitch et al have said they're going to ban people for events off-site too.
(15.91 KB 460x350 107-i5.jpg)
>>3923 a. Stop using 4chan. b. Reupload fork elsewhere. >Shows that those who are pro-child bride are not "retards who can't program anything" lul
>>3964 >Shows that those who are pro-child bride are not "retards who can't program anything". Not only was that not something people disputed, you're playing into identity politics (this is just "shove blacks into programming jobs to show other blacks that they can code, even though they always could've just joined the industry themselves if they were actually interested, but with some variables changed) and compromised your anonymity for a nonexistent argument with a very contentious stance on a specific topic. You are outrageously foolish and almost asked for this to happen.
>>3974 >and compromised your anonymity for a nonexistent argument with a very contentious stance on a specific topic. What's the point of living if you cannot marry cute young girls? Are whores enough for you? >You are outrageously foolish and almost asked for this to happen. Were the French philosophers foolish when they signed their anti-age-of-consent petition in the 70s?
(160.43 KB 1000x658 afghan-girl-and-marine.jpg)
(56.83 KB 624x351 afgh.jpg)
(427.61 KB 982x674 afghan14.jpg)
>>81496715 >Bro stop talking in the third person we know it's you I'm merely a 3rd party observer. I just want to know what happened with the project and why westerners can persecute men who want to marry cute young girls world wide? Why can they do that? Why is it that they are able to destroy every pro-child bride culture? Why is it that there is nowhere we can move to any longer? Why won't woman worshiping westerners allow any place on this planet that doesn't follow their constructed religion?
(444.21 KB 1000x658 afghan-girl-and-marine.gif)
Yes: This is correct. Libertarainism is radical individualism. A nation of one (see: former Yugoslavia). The reason to subscribe to libertarianism is to arrest for oneself a personal benefice. It is an ideology of personal law. The reason it fails is because in the desire to liberate an article from it's current possessor: it does not furnish a payment sufficent to overcome the demerit the rest of the society would impose on the possessor. The French liberals of the 60s and 70s signed their petition because they wanted young girls for themselves. All men joined the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to furnish mates for themselves where they otherwise could not. The greater society does not concern itself with what is of value to the individual man: he exists to work for and serve the society. Thus the "we libertarianism" does not ever benefit the man directly: the needs of the women and her children outweigh him in all cases by number. He works his life; he pays off his debt that he incurred for being born into this world; then he dies. The society does not exist for him: he exists to serve the society. What benefit to him is it to even live? Other than animal instinct. What if he surpasses such in self-thought? The men in Afghanistan, who live in the dirt, with their adorable child brides: they are visibly happier than the American Soliders and Officers who bomb them and burn them to put an end to the practice.
(159.05 KB 624x351 afgh.gif)
It's constructively all westerners. Especially western men. Only people who act really matter. The men in the west who act, act to slaughter any culture that allows child brides. Direct torture and murder to snuff out said cultures. At home western white men root out, imprison, kill, and torture any of their "fellows" who would marry young girls. They end any possibility of whatever vestiges of legality it had; and conspire enmass to deny any man the ability to marry their young daughters for any price. That is what white men are. Enemies to all and to eachother; bound in only one goal: the worship of their "white lady". The men of the next generation have an absolute natural right to the girls fathered by the previous. This is natural law. Which white men deny.
>>3977 >What's the point of living if you cannot marry cute young girls? Are whores enough for you? Not only is that completely besides my point (which is that regardless of much you view yourself as right, your stance is typically considered perverse and morally objectionable, making your lack of OPSEC even more foolish), the fact that you can marry "cute young girls" that aren't children, the fact that there's much more to marriage than marrying a girl that's young and cute (you're unlikely (but not absolutely won't be) to be romantically and sexually attracted to a genuinely ugly and/or old person, but your marriage would mean a lot more to you if it's on the proper foundation and not solely on her being good-looking and "fresh"), and the fact that you're disingenuously labelling the only alternatives to your preferred child brides to be the adult-aged whores in western countries (presumably as a way to bolster your argument by ignoring whatever supposedly small amount of adult-aged, non-slutty women are out there) completely crumbles your argument away, and demonstrates that getting into an actual argument with you on this would probably just be a pervert making poor arguments to justify his position of being in favor of adult men marrying little girls; in short, a waste of time. >Were the French philosophers foolish when they signed their anti-age-of-consent petition in the 70s? From what I understand of the situation, yes. In any case, I'm not going to waste any more of my time on this as you seem like an insufferable opponent to have an argument with (misunderstood a seemingly obvious point to be saying something I wasn't and created a false dichotomy between child brides and the culture of encouraged sluttiness in the west) about something that's veering completely out of technology, especially since the reasons against your position seem rather obvious and I see no real way for you to make a strong case in favor of it that isn't just >"muh roasties/whores" (false dichotomy) >"there's nothing with marrying cute young girls" (omitting a crucial detail in your argument, probably to try and make it more palatable). >whataboutism (as if Muslims having child brides (and statutory rape) in their culture justifies you having a similar position, albeit with presumably no religion you personally believe in to justify it spiritually (not to mention that you've seemingly never outright condoned having sex with said child bride while they're still a minor, and I don't want to put words in your mouth)) As I said before, despite my disgust at your position, even if that woman and I may agree on your views being perverse, I suspect that she may only care because she saw an opportunity to use you as a stepping stone by making a victim out of a relatively easy target (presumably popular project lead on an open-source game who condones child brides who has poor enough OPSEC to have his ideas be traced back to him, and probably even admitted that those were his posts) for what I imagine could be significant gains in popularity and traffic (significant enough for her to consider this a worthy endeavor, anyway; I doubt she'd satisfied with just sacrificing you on the proverbial altar). As a result, I'm hardly cheering for that woman for using your potentially-ruined reputation to boost herself up. She ought to be punished or still not garner an immense amount of traffic towards her projects (making this effort at least fruitless for her, even if she successfully managed to make you a pariah in the indie game development scene (not like it would be squeaky-clean without you, I imagine there's a significant amount of just-as-bad or way-worse indie devs when it comes to a position like yours)).
(250.65 KB 1448x2048 cirno_7.jpeg)
>>3994 >the fact that you can marry "cute young girls" that aren't children, Wrong. Girls, by definition, are children. And no: you cannot actually have a "cute" woman: what you are enjoying is the makeup: not the actuality. Another component of cuteness is the personality and the lack of history. The man does not exist for the benefit of the woman and I will not accept that he does no matter how "morally objectional" the scum of the earth (white people) demand otherwise. There is nothing "morally objectional" about YHWH's law: which explicitly allows child brides and explicitly sets the man as the ba'al (master/lord/etc) of the female. Whites just simply follow another religion: the worship of the white woman, constructively. As do you. Also another thing that makes young girls good brides is that they can be yours: and NOT their own person. YHWH notes the man is the ba'al (master/lord) of the female. This comports with the Law of YHWH's pro-child bride position. It is impossible with adult women: she cannot be yours: she is her own and others. Additionally dating adult women is adultery: YHWH notes that you may not take other men's women. The hebrew simply specifies man, woman, girl, etc. Not the false-translations whites read (Husband, Wife, etc (but note: these translations are false because of the changes in the English language itself. Wif simply means woman in older iterations of the language). >making your lack of OPSEC even more foolish Tell me what my "lack of OPSEC" is? Do you know my identity? No. Does your friend in belief? >As I said before, despite my disgust at your position, No. I am willing to die for my beliefs. I will not back down. I will not censor them. It is mans right to have young virgin female children as brides. A right given by YHWH: and stolen by white people like yourself who find anything good for men and BAD for women "morally objectionable". Yes it is BAD for women when the man isn't a mule. But it is good for men. I had to make a decision. The programmers were adament that Grsecurity was "not violating the GPL" and "you are not a lawyer". The arguments were not working on them. Citing law and cases wasn't working. Showing censored versions of my IDs helped. Same with using 4chan. There is not one proxy in this world that works with 4chan. So to get my pro-child bride message, regarding YHWH's law, out: I had to use 4chan. Just as the french philosophers, to get their anti-age-of-consent message out; had to sign their names. >>Were the French philosophers foolish when they signed their anti-age-of-consent petition in the 70s? >From what I understand of the situation, yes. Go to hell. > (presumably popular project lead on an open-source game who condones child brides who has poor enough OPSEC to have his ideas be traced back to him, and probably even admitted that those were his posts I am not going to hide my beliefs about child brides. It is a Natural Right of man to marry cute young girls; aswell as a Religious Right.
(7.28 KB 212x238 biden.jpeg)
Wish he would allow men to be free in the world again; and to marry cute young girls (yes strictly construed: female children: ie: virgin young girls)
(584.01 KB 2560x1920 anime383883.jpg)
(2.39 MB 1600x880 1583131707366.png)
(37.94 KB 320x320 a1442173249267.jpg)
(28.87 KB 744x699 blnd.jpeg)
(162.57 KB 1366x768 xonotic20191217131832-00.jpg)
(357.76 KB 1366x768 xonotic20191226221924-00.jpg)
>>4005 Fuck off pedo.
>>4079 Physically MAKE ME FUCK OFF, you FUCKING PIECE OF TRASH. You wanna go you fucking anti-child bride heretic faggot? You want to?
(205.12 KB 992x1628 admissiontor.png)
(68.92 KB 633x371 tordev.png)
(2.95 MB 903x4560 imgur.png)
.
(1.01 MB 1027x5019 toretc.png)
(10.42 KB 128x150 tr.png)
A tor dev attacked the opensource game
>>3923 >Everything is OpenSource and I've been working on this project for a decade, who's website has been taken down by the anti-child-bride /g/ woman. You need to find name and address of that bitch and we are going to murder her. >>3981 >It's constructively all westerners. Especially western men. Only people who act really matter. The men in the west who act, act to slaughter any culture that allows child brides. Direct torture and murder to snuff out said cultures. At home western white men root out, imprison, kill, and torture any of their "fellows" who would marry young girls. We have to kill all western people and Americans. Get your guns bros and we start. We also need sabotage, on every level possible, sabotage everything.
>>4179 >tfw foone is a cuck Feels bad. I knew it already but I didn't want to be reminded.
>>3921 youre cool and your game is cool
>>4216 Thank you.
(236.46 KB 1200x812 8doctors.png)
(77.28 KB 1228x499 8d2.png)
(27.47 KB 400x400 tordev.jpg)
>The Tor developer is a tranny who had to go to 8 doctors to have his dick sawed off. >As noted: >>Wow this faggot had to visit 8 doctors to get permission to get his dick chopped out before starting HRT hormones while feeling super white and privileged. >https://twitter.com/isislovecruft/status/1394371115863080963 > Is involved in implementing elliptical curve algorithms; which are easy to mathematically backdoor; and are hard to get right (which is why no one trusts them), and were never needed in Tor for the previous 25 years. >A Tor developer who cannot seem to decide on which name she/he/it would like to be called by, going through several legal name changes: >AKA: Sarah Michelle Reichwein >AKA: Isis Agora Lovecruft >Birth name unknown. So the rundown is: Tor suddenly needed a new cryptographer 2 years ago (why?), hired this person who implemented elliptical curve cryptographic libs for rust, etc. In the security hobby realm no one ever trusted elliptical curve crypto due to possible vulnerabilities and backdoors.
>>4250 >calling yourself isis Clearly sound judgement.
>>4250 >In the security hobby realm no one ever trusted elliptical curve crypto due to possible vulnerabilities and backdoors. Where did you get that idea from? The one time I was introduced to cryptography in college it was mentioned as a major part of cryptography, but since the math was too complicated we instead looked at rsa. My understanding of why people were skeptical of ECC didn't have to do with the algorithm itself, but more with a standard for random number generation that was pushed by the NSA and used ECC. The problem was that they didn't justify the parameters they used for the initial seed. Here's a computerphile video of what I'm talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nybVFJVXbww I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about, but you never really explained either. Not to mention it's similar to how people say"Java is insecure", when it has nothing to do with the language itself but the browser plugin.
>>4259 Elliptical curve have had multiple vulnerabilities in opensource projects during the hey-day of opensource from the early 2000s onwards. We just don't trust it at all. "HEY THE MATH!" isn't an argument: one wrong move any your crypto is trash: that's actually how crypto systems are broken in the real world: making sure novices implement them. It is seen it as "Hey use this new thing which you might not understand instead of the old well tested thing you have been using!" "Trust us on this!" It's hard/impossible to validate if the implementation of ECC you are using is secure at all, if the constants used don't lead to backdoors keys, etc etc. No way in the world to verify any of it. Notice here that Tor decided to hire a novice "cryptographer" to implement someone else's algorithims. That's not something we can trust at all. After 25/30 years of Tor existing (it was a Navy project in the 90s): SUDDENLY!!! Let's hire this novice to work on our crypto: because SUDDENLY it needs to be changed: and we can't have the men who worked on it originally to do so. We do not trust this. Especially ECC. I think you're a young guy if you trust ECC. No one in the cryptographic world trusted it when it was put out in the early 2000s. No one. But if it came out before you were born then you might trust it because "it's always been there" for you.
>>4259 Once bitten, twice shy. ECC's bitten us in the ass before. It's had massive vulnerablilities that were discovered by opensource cryptographers (when they were men and doing it For Free, not hired tranny fucks doing it for Pay) in the early 2000s. We can never trust it. Especially from where it comes from, after this. Remeber the SSH vulnerabilities with ECC, there were others. Don't you remember on vulnsec mailing list and slashdot, and everything about the ECC mathematical vulns? Don't you? Isn't it in your memory?
>>4254 I wonder what the next name change will be? Went from ??? birthname to Sarah Michelle Reichwein pronouns she/it Then to Isis Agora Lovecruft pronouns they/them So 2 legal name changes so far.
>>4259 >cumputerphile video >jewtube you stink of soy fucking killyourself loser
Alright, I did a little bit of searching and found some links talking about the problems with ECC (since none of you fuckers provided links yourselves), but again it was about a specific standard and the parameters they chose (which is what I said). Archive them yourselves if you want. https://www.wired.com/2007/11/securitymatters-1115/ https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/10263/should-we-trust-the-nist-recommended-ecc-parameters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_up_my_sleeve_number https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Elliptic_Curve_Cryptography >>4261 >"HEY THE MATH!" isn't an argument: one wrong move any your crypto is trash "HEY THE MATH" is the entire argument for why cryptography works. >It's hard/impossible to validate if the implementation of ECC you are using is secure at all, if the constants used don't lead to backdoors keys That's why usually when people choose starting parameters for random number generators, they choose something like "DEADBEEF" or some other quirky trivia number. They're actually called "nothing up my sleeve" numbers (see above). I'm pretty certain this could happen with any other random generator. >because SUDDENLY it needs to be changed: and we can't have the men who worked on it originally to do so. Maybe they left/got old? I mean people change roles after 25/30 years. Though I'm much less skeptical about this person's circumstances mainly because I'm not worried about ECC. Also I've heard ECC is better for certain things (open ssl link). >>4250 10+ years ago based off this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGIE7KTJiBY Based off the voice pretty certain their name was Sarah before >>4262 >It's had massive vulnerablilities that were discovered by opensource cryptographers (when they were men and doing it For Free, not hired tranny fucks doing it for Pay) in the early 2000s. What are they? Could you give a link? > Don't you remember on vulnsec mailing list and slashdot, and everything about the ECC mathematical vulns? Don't you? Isn't it in your memory? Not it isn't. Link it so I can learn more. Also >>4261 and >>4262 >We That's not how shit works here
(88.79 KB 805x851 kys.png)
>>4269 >wikipedia >youtube >wired >stackexchange
User was banned for not putting effort into their post
>>4269 Look at this nigger trying to soy with us Get lost kid
>>4270 LOOOOL get soyed ⚠ User was SOYED for this post
>>4269 >What are they? Could you give a link? So you want me to search my brain for a LINK from 20 fucking years ago? Get real. Do your own fucking research. >Not it isn't. Link it so I can learn more. You do NOT remember the ECC mathematical vulns posted on slashdot and the nmap vulnsec mailing list? WHY do you NOT remember this? Basically you are calling me a fucking liar. Because YOU are too NEW. >>We >That's not how shit works here Yea it is DIPSHIT. ONCE BITTEN: TWICE SHY. No we will N O T trust Elliptical Curve Crypto. Man you really don't remeber the SSH vulns that piece of shit created...
>>4269 >Not it isn't. Link it so I can learn more. So YOU can learn more? What the F U C K do I give a SHIT about YOU? You going to legalize child brides? HMM? Are you? Nope. Why would I help a fucking enemy who's just trying to deebooooonk me? And the following proves you're an enemy: >>because SUDDENLY it needs to be changed: and we can't have the men who worked on it originally to do so. >Maybe they left/got old? I mean people change roles after 25/30 years. Thou Yea: they really need to fuck with the crypto: you know the "bitrot"; right DIPSHIT FUCK. Right? And they really NEEED to hire a novice to do it. Right DIPSHIT FUCK? You know the top-notch navy contractors weren't good enough. So now they need some tranny faggot strainght out of colledge. Right faggot? Right? GO AND FUCK YOUR FUCKING SELF. And YES That IS how we do things here. I've been on the net longer than you you piece of fucking SHIT.
>>4270 Do you think that user was the Tor trans-faggot trying to defend elliptical curve crypto (or eliptical curve "crypto" as we like to call it)?


Quick Reply
Extra
Delete
Report

no cookies?