Re: The Simplest Overview of Recent Crypto System Claims.

On Jan 27, 7:19 pm, "Joseph Ashwood" <ashw...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

The reason he says these things is because he refuses to understand any
reality that doesn't match with his delusions. The wikipedia description
doesn't work for him because it says he's wrong. This is the same problem he
has with [fill-in different name] description, it says he's wrong.
                    Joe

Wikipedia only parrots the writers of the articles and lots of those
can contain wrongs of various magnitudes of implication.

I am reading and thinking about what both sides of the argument above
say. I cannot complain when attempted rational honesty is at work and
even as errors to be captured are the sport of all. Better discussion
is when mutually recognized terms are used; this is not Scientology.
Rational definitions are not just what you what them to be by changing
classical definitions to represent ideas poles apart, or at least
tilted askew from some sort of prior consensus. Putting a truly new
thought into words, failing to no only say but understanding what
someone else hears them to mean breaking the topics into tractable
fragments so that you can not only see the trees as real but
ultimately the forest as a whole.

What I would like to see would be a scaled down example from quiver to
heart along the idea of Ritter's Toy Ciphers. This is not to say that
his legacy was to make toys but to model things down to a level where
the innards were easily understood and then scale those models up with
understanding. Details are important but a box of parts does not
magically become anything but a box of parts that might even fit
together some or many ways.

Explain the systems as a child might need it done. Keep at the magic
of well chosen words and find even new ways and examples in the spirit
of what you are already doing. And this goes for all with their own
pet prejudices who want to politic reality because they are also
standing too much on the feet of others, usw.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Michael Clark, would you like to make a retraction?
    ... even occurred to you that this was inconsistent with reality as we ... You really have no understanding of evolutionary biology at all. ... treeless habitat competing with sabertoothed lion, outrunningand hyena ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Reality can be known?
    ... understanding is limited there is agreement with my statement in that, ... Below are two opinions you expressed about reality being known or not ... we cannot conceive of the reality of God. ... while it is through true science ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Science and God
    ... understanding is accepting that reality cannot be understood? ... look at it seems to bring understanding to a grinding halt. ... similar distinction in his work on consciousness. ... The quale is usually defined as the subjective ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)
  • Fucking dont accord a lord!
    ... In the ramifications of party doctrine she had not the faintest ... reality, and to use Newspeak words, she became bored and confused and said ... appearance of orthodoxy while having no grasp whatever of what orthodoxy ... successfully on people incapable of understanding it. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Are you ruling, I mean, carrying at times horrible wifes?
    ... reality, and to use Newspeak words, she became bored and confused and said ... appearance of orthodoxy while having no grasp whatever of what orthodoxy ... successfully on people incapable of understanding it. ... became aware that someone larger than himself was walking just behind him. ...
    (sci.polymers)
Quantcast