Skip to main content

Posts

THE RISE OF FASCIST SOCIAL MEDIA

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines fascism as: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control .  The phrase "dictatorial control" is important for the case that I am going to make about fascism in social media. The word "dictatorial" means "of or relating to a dictator," and a dictator is "one ruling in an absolute and often oppressive way." In 2020, social media has seen a rise in the number of autocratic events of censorship. The two social media outlets that I am going to focus on are Facebook and Twitter.  Background Facebook is a semi-private curated blogging platform where you, the user, share information at your leisure. The public part of Facebook is in Facebook Groups. With a group, outside people who are not privy to your "Facebook Wall" will join your group and establish a communal discourse. This can be private, by invitation only, or public. The Facebook is auth-walled so that you must
Recent posts

A Self Defeating Race False Narrative

2020 is the year of the pandemic. The SARS-Cov-2 (Covid19) virus has rampaged across the planet infecting 4,893,136 [1] people by May 20, 2020. At this time, of those 4.8M people, 323,256 people have perished from complications that arise from the infection. Arising out of this pandemic has been a narrative about non-white ethnic groups being disproportionately affected by the infection [6,7,8]. A narrative that conditions people to believe that they are perpetually victims only creates a "collective victimhood" [4,5] in that group. This "collective victimhood" costs its members millions in unrealized potential, sends them cowering from social interactions that would otherwise benefit them, and ultimately creates an environment that perpetuates itself. Let's try to dispel that false narrative and deal just with data. I pulled my data from the CDC [9] looking at mortality only. The mortality data from CDC contains per-state mortality rates on a per-infectio

Number of Primes

Anderson's Theorem (a) The number of primes in [1,n] is no more than 2+floor(n/2). The probability of n being prime when n is not prime is 1/2 - see Dasgupta,Papadimitriou,Vazirani "Algorithms" page 26. Therefore, the E(pi(n)) is n/2. (b) There does not exist another set of adjacent primes other than {1,2,3} 5: 2 + floor(5/2) = 2 + 2 = 4:=> {1,2,3,5} : 4 <= 4 26: 2 + floor(26/2) = 15 => {1,2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23} : 10 <= 15 Langrage's Theorem is Wrong Langrange's theorem about primes states that pi(x) is the number of primes <= x. The pi(x) is approximately x/ln(x). He postulated that the lim of pi(x)/(x/lnx) as x-> infinity was 1. This is incorrect. if the number of primes is bounded by n/2 then refactoring and reducing Lagrange's Theorem results in the lim of ln(x) as x approaches infinity. This is always infinity. Lagrange's theorem on some tests: 5: 5 / ln(5) = 3.1, incorrect 26: 7.9, incorrect

Atoms in The Universe

Computer scientists like to talk about the number of atoms in the universe when talking about computational complexity. If you have 10**100 nodes to evaluate, and there are only 10**86 atoms in the universe, then there is no way to compute your node tree. 10**86 atoms? Where does that number come from? Who made this up. In [1] the claim is that there are 10**86 hydrogen atoms out there. That seems like alot, right? Remember Avogadro? He came up with a number too [2]. His number is 6.022 x 10**23 atoms per mole. That's alot of atoms too, right? Hmm. If you had one cubic mole of something, how many atoms are in there? Well, that's (10**23)**3, or about 10**69. That's not 10**86, but it's close. How many cubic moles are 10**86 atoms then? Well, about 86/69, or about 1.25 cubic moles. So the total sum of all atoms in the universe is just 1.25 cubic moles? Or rather, let's topsy turvy this. There are more atoms in 1.3 cubic moles of water than the universe. Ah

HTML Core Obfuscator

It's time for HTML of the future to give us the ability to obfuscate data in-memory. If password fields were stored as obfuscated values, then there would be a very low chance of a password recovery by any person or any exemplary skill. Plus, we wouldn't have to rely upon client-side JS to do hash obfuscation. I suggest a simple extension to the input form element: [ input type='password' obfuscator='sha512;salt=FooFooFoo' ] We would define our own salt, or no salt, to keep the hash consistent (homomorphic) across creation and challenge. This can be done with JS but it doesn't prevent malicious adware JS from exploring the DOM and getting the "value()" property of an input element that is named "password". Pretty please?

Not So Safe Safelinks

Today I got a phishing email for my gatech account. It was nothing special and easy to identify as phishing. So why blog about it? Because today I decided to test out safelinks. Why not, right? It's Microsoft, and they make a habit of telling me that I should use Edge because it is safer than Chrome and Firefox. I clicked on the safelink that was hosted on eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com and it opened in Edge. Wait, why did I have to hit a European safelink server Microsoft, if I am in the USA? I don't remember authorizing you to do that, but then again, who cares about us in the US. The safelink redirected successfully to logins.gatech.com which is a shameless phishing site. It pulls resources from gatech.edu but has a self hosted JS file that has the same URL path as the one in the buzzport login page. It's a clever phish and it would likely defeat most users. So that made me mad. I put on my Cyber cape and started to dig. The IP is hosted on AWS: Name:   

HP Web Site Failure

The HP site for buying stuff on their Labor Day Sale is broken. I tried it on other computers and each had the same result. Not sure if HP was able to sell anything on their big sale weekend, but I couldn't buy anything. Funny part was the feedback widget that didn't work. Not only could I not buy anything from HP but I couldn't report the problem I was having. Maybe someone at HP could run this through QA again.