/pnd/ - Politics, News, Debate

>>95784

>Tor (which is blocked atm)

What do you mean? I'm posting from tor right now.

>>95784

Yep, I got that earlier when I logged in as well. That's some damn fine https management, there.

>>95795

No you're not. You might be using the Tor browser, but you aren't using the .onion site. Congrats on that.

>>95808

>No you're not. You might be using the Tor browser, but you aren't using the .onion site. Congrats on that.

What benefit would using the .onion site serve?

The point of Tor hidden services is to keep the location of the servers hidden - which is pretty much pointless if you also have a clearnet domain

>>95810

What it means is you're not using Tor. You're just using a VPN. If you were actually routing through Tor, you could not post on this board.

>>95827

No, that's not how Tor works.

>>95827

>Boomer doesn't understand technology

lol

>>95843

>note the attached screenshot

Yep.

>a federal statute is referenced as a ban reason

You get banned for violating US Law anywhere on this entire website. That is the only global rule. At least the actual law that you broke was cited. Be glad for that.

>the board is actively staffed by FBI glownigger retards

A staff member of this board made the very thread in which you are posting. Note the name field in the OP. Only the BO/Vols have actual names.

>>95843

The ban in your screenshot isn't even from this board, you fucking retard.

>>95846

>>95845

No you retards.

It doesn't matter whether the ban is justified because it is a FUCKING TOR EXIT NODE.

That means that banning it doesn't do anything to prevent the poster from posting again. However it is a giant nuisance to all Tor users that half the time you click "post" the exit node is banned and you have to reload the page.

>>95845

I didn't break the law. Someone posted here with a TOR node and social engineered you into banning the TOR node forever.

You guys are applying security controls incorrectly. Preventing a good person from doing something good is just as much of a security failure as allowing a bad person to do something bad. That is the fundamental struggle of security. The sooner you realize that the better off the board will be.

SOMEONE RUND OVER A GUY WIF A CAR - CARZ BAND NOW

^ that's not how it works

>>95846

Dear Moron, the screenshot is from here. I took the screenshot myself. Thanks

>>95853

The screenshot is a ban from /qresearch/. This is /pnd/. Completely different board. Dumbass.

>>95853

>Preventing a good person from doing something good

You think you were trying to protect the President? Just a good citizen doing a good thing by posting on a hidden board on the asshole of the internet? You didn't do diddly shit, faggot. Literally nothing happened.

Also, anyone and everyone who posts on /qresearch/ should be permabanned from all boards and their families should be found, set on fire, and shot in the face. Q is a disease that can only be cure by fire and bullets. The cult must be eradicated for the good of mankind.

>>95859

>>95863

>What is tor

Go back to reddit

>>95867

>he got caught ban evading and is still trying to pretend it wasn't him

lol

>>95859

I don't post on that board. I post here. Are the bans global?

I didn't come into this thread to shit on you guys because I know being a mod anywhere is a thankless job.

You're not applying security controls incorrectly. If you banned tor and now you're getting MITMed, your policy has exposed you to government surveillance. Think about that.

>>95863

I didn't make the original post that prompted the ban. I do not post on or read that board.

>>95867

You're not using Tor. If you come to this site using Tor on a board with IDs, your ID will show as 0000000. Every time, without fail. If you have an actual ID, then you're not using Tor. You THINK you're using Tor (my guess is you fell for some skiddie's Chrome add-on), but you're not. You might be on a VPN, you might have an IP-spoofer, but you're NOT USING TOR.

Welcome to the internet, Boomer.

>>95873

I didn't make the original post stupid. That's the point. For a long time I had to use the clearnet address to post via tor until the staff here banned all of the tor nodes because they refuse to apply different access control methods.

Who do you think has suggested hashing a unique value to allow access to tor nodes?

>>95879

If you post on the clearnet address using tor, the post ID is hashed. If you post to the onion address using tor, then 00000 is returned.

>>95879

>If you come to this site using Tor on a board with IDs, your ID will show as 0000000. Every time, without fail.

That's how it was on 8ch.net but apparently not here.

If you don't believe me, go download tor browser and try it yourself.

>>95890

this

tor + 8kun.top + post = hashed ID

tor + 8kun.oinion address + post = Zeroed ID

>>95894

Yes, I know, and here's what's so funny about that:

tor+8kun.top = your raw IP hash

If you're not using the .onion site, you're not using Tor. You're just using Firefox with noscript.

Also, to the staff here. Not every single user is out to get you. I filed a shitload of ban appeals that have painstakingly explained all of this shit and it gets me nowhere.

You have an access control problem because your board is intended for people to post anonymously. So how do you control posts without being able to correlate a poster with an identity? You can't. You're playing a blindfolded game of Whac-A-Mole you're shooting a tor node instead of the person behind the tor node. This would be akin to banning phone posters because phone posters spammed the board.

Think of it this way, Trolls/glowniggers/JIDF spam the board (this is bad for the board) and in response they are rewarded by deanonymizing or exposing yourselves and your userbase. They are winning on both sides of the coin and we, the good users, and you, the staff, are losing on both sides of the coin.

You have to correlate a user with a unique value in some way so you can associate that unique value with the evidence of the performance of some kind of work. This will give the staff the leverage to induce a penalty that is much more expensive to an enemy than the expense associated with the work you must perform to impose a penalty upon the enemy.

For example, suppose some glownigger posts nigger or shit pictures. That takes 1 captcha worth of work. You may need to login to a panel and ban someone, put a reason, remove the post etc. It is more expensive for you to ban the ip address of a troll (which doesn't get rid of the troll anyway) than it is for a troll to troll. To create a penalty, have your users perform some work or allow them to correlate themselves with creating good posts and threads (work) by way of a unique value. Then you can whitelist the unique value granting it more permissions.

For example, suppose a user uses the same pw. The pw is hashed. You now have a unique value that you can correlate with a user irrespective of an IP address. Evidence of some quantity of favorable work such as quality posts allows that unique value to be whitelisted and allowed to post via the onion address. If someone posts nigger or shit pictures, they have to perform much more work to be able to get whitelisted than it takes for you to revoke their whitelisted status. Now the system behaves in a way that favors the moderation staff.

Good users can go in tiers, 1. can post via tor, 2. can post attachments via tor, 3. when flagging posts for moderation, front of queue

Work can be a good posting history. Work can be in the form of a donation because money is work and your enemies understand better than anyone else that money is the last thing they want to get to an opponent. Work can be the solving many captchas in series. Work can be an applet that mines for bitcoin that must be left open for a given time span. The penalty you impose is to disregard for whatever work has been performed that led to a users whitelisting.

You have already essentially blacklisted the tor nodes. Create a system that allows people to be whitelisted, then blacklist all VPN and tor nodes. Now you have control.

>>95942

I understand that it is less than ideal but there was no alternative if someone wanted to post an image via tor here. Sure, the exit node would be exposed but I'd make a tls1.3 connection through the nodes. The idea isn't total perfect security, which doesn't exist. The idea is making it more difficult/expensive/inconvenient/annoying for an enemy to spy on you. The old site allowed tor attachments via TOR. The new site is getting progressively more restrictive to the extent of exposing the userbase, which isn't good.

>>95963

I'm fundamentally arguing that the current status where in which a user is associated with a hashed IP does not successfully target a user because user isn't an IP. Suppose all VPNs and Tor were revoked, users will simply change their dynamic IP when they are banned, which requires little work.

Make a board that people must post on for a while before they get write permission to a second board that is read only to people not whitelisted.

There are a lot of ways to control access to the board and keep it from getting spammed into oblivion frustrating the staff.

>>95784

>>95843

It was clearly a mistake on Vanwanet's part. Nothing big, goyim, just a temporary misconfiguration.

>>95963

>we, the good users

You want to fundamentally change the core essence of the image board into a merit-based system and you call yourself a "good user"? Fuck you, the horse you rode in on, your mama, and the nigger she rode to spawn you.

>>95980

>I want the board to remain a haven for spamming and a fountain of diarrhea and nigger pictures that is impossible for a small staff to moderate

The change is minuscule. We have already had tor node access revoked because mods don't have another way to counter spamming. We have already lost that. The system already stores passwords as hashes in a db. The system already stores IPs as hashes in a db. The system is already designed to correlate someones posts with their IP address. The only problem is that an erroneous assumption is being made that IP=identity. I'm saying password or some other unique value should = identity. What I am describing is the exact same thing we already have just swapping IP correlation with password as the unique and distinct value. This is hardly a revolutionary change.

If someone just uses the same password, they can be found to be not a nigger dick and shit posting glownigger retard troll. Then they can get access to more than what they already have access to by default. They can get authorized to tor post because they aren't abusive retard tweens/glowniggers/jidf/project jigsaw counter messaging dumb asses.

The actual change to identity = pw from identity = ip is trivial. Good identity that demonstrates non-abuse gets to use things that are prone to concealing users who like to abuse the system.

Really think about it for longer than 10 seconds.

>>96011

We already have passwords. There is a password on every post, which is hashed and stored in a db. There is already hashing for IPs and identity correlation based upon IP. The change is for the system to assume password hash = ID because only one person can have it where as many people can share an IP such as a tor node.

>>96018

I didn't make the original Q post, stupid. Read the thread stupid. I posted from the same node some q-poster used stupid. A mod banned the node because they think node=user stupid.

>>95963

>I filed a shitload of ban appeals

Reported. Take a hint.

>>96037

Dear lazy idiot who didn't read the thread,

When someone uses tor, they are assumed to be the IP address of the tor node, which is obviously erroneous. They are therefore exposed to bans intended for other people because the system assumes that IP address, which is stored as a hashed value = identity. I have repeatedly proposed that password, which is already included in every post by default, is already hashed and stored in a database, be assumed to = identity. If someone uses the same PW for so many posts, without those posts needing any moderator attention, they can get their hashed PW they have been using whitelisted to post from TOR nodes. Blockchain and copious necessary is not required. It's a very simple solution. The work associated with earning the whitelist will make shitposting too expensive to get the whitelisted pw.

Thanks for not reading the thread or using your brain in any way whatsoever and instead making a fart of a post.

Yours Truly,

Anon

>>96038

Don't care. We're under no obligation to unban tor because just one faggot isn't posting CP links.

>>96046

Okay. Literally do not care.

>>95827

>>95942

>tor+8kun.top = your raw IP hash

No, it's your tor exit node's IP hash. You clearly have no clue how tor connects to clearnet sites.

>>95963

This is why ((1)) torniggers are cancer. No post history = itchy banhammer finger.

But yes very keen on an ACL-type solution however opsec fags will kvetch. So, instead I propose a solution that can be applied on a per-thread basis:

Approve posts only aka

>nothing comes through that isn't approved

Fuck that mod load though.

>>96038

I got your ban appeal and unbanned the node. Not all mods unban based on appeals, I try to be understanding and read them. On old /pol/ a rule was only vols can unban/deal with appeals that made them. Here it's anything goes. Problem is already discussed earlier basically when people spam with tor ((1)) the node gets blocked. Most of the moderation headache is from this behavior.

The other argument is that tor isn't really much more secure than any other method. Reasoning is if you are truly triggering the glowies they'll use their library of hardware backdoors to pwn you. Tor is basically irrelevant in that situation.

I don't post much, just tested this through http://jthnx5wyvjvzsxtu.onion/pnd/ :

"Sorry. The owner of this board has decided not to allow Tor posters for some reason…"

Are there any solutions to this? Seems like well, site dead. Where to move to next? I think the spam argument is a red herring, it's easy to change IP and spam too, Jim Watkins was probably asked to remove tor access by DNC

pnd with tor blocked is the same as posting on cuckchan, both are Fake Anonymous

>>96126

That's the BO's choice. Nobody else can change that.

>>96127

Use a VPN - something 4chan won't let you do unless you buy a Pass. Most free VPNs are pretty crappy, but if all you're wanting is to remain anonymous on /pnd/, then use the Opera browser's built in VPN. If you want more protection, you'll have to pay. $40 for 2 years at privateinternetaccess(dot)com works for me for all my torrenting and getting around pesky region locks. Though I'm sure rage-filled opinions will fly as to what is the best VPN. Your level of involvement is up to you.

>>96157

>List of "hardware backdoors" please.

>>96157

dig his bio in recent years

>>96042

Lol imagine actually being against tor when communities like ours are one of the biggest targets of (((government surveillance))) and then even being overly smug about it

As far as VPNs go, I used to use Cyberghost back when it was free but after they started charging people I essentially lost my VPN.

Can anyone please recommend a half-decent free VPN service?

>>96180

>being so terrified that you won't even type the word Jews

lol

>>96172

>Q brigade drank the kool-aid and believes the government gives a shit about this tiny ass website

lol x 2

>>96191

Just use tor, it's simple, completely free and more secure than a simple VPN.

Using any free VPN is even worse than using no VPN at all because the VPN provider makes money by selling your data.

The exception (maybe) is ProtonVPN which offers a stripped down free plan and a free trial week.

But then again - JUST USE TOR!

>>96199

>the government doesn't care about us

t. fat neckbeard in his basement too stupid to remember how the government reacted to Tarrant.

>>96207

>still pretending it was Tarrant

It was the El Paso shooter's manifesto that got 8chan deplatformed, you faggot; and it was Cloudflare who did it, not the government. Go be a history rewriting newfag on 4chan.

>>96227

Hey, faggot, Jews are the ones who don't say words (like typing G-d instead of God) as a sign of respect. All you're doing is respecting Jews by using their chosen sign of respect when you refer to them. Then again, you probably are a Jew and don't want to piss off your brothers.

>>96191

The only free one I use is ProtonVPN, but it's slow af sometimes…

>>96207

>>96180

use (You)r (((TOR))) to watch video

LARP or part of the 99.9%?

>>96313

I'd contribute to it, especially now that we're on our own platform and don't have to rely on kiked-out TOSes.

>>96259

>>96207

Thanks anons.

Yeah I saw the warning. Idk what it was but heads up to the admins that I refuse to log in whenever that thing is active. FBI wont get my password that easily. Tor is back have fun. We'll probably never find out what this was about

>>96345

Jim needs more advertising shekels because his Super PAC is tanking.

>>96096

>On old /pol/ a rule was only vols can unban/deal with appeals that made them.

That was literally never a rule, unless you mean 4chan for some reason.

>New Reply button flashes dozens of times between “New Reply” and “Posting”

>does absolutely nothing whatsoever

>eventually the same meaningless error comes up

>have to change operating systems, browsers, and IP addresses to post

>posting magically works perfectly, once, and then goes back to the same problem

Kill Jim.

>>96345

test.

codemonkey has always been absolutely incompetent. Everything he has implemented has turned into shit and this entire fucking shit website has been unstable since day 1

>>96042

>We're under no obligation to unban tor because just one faggot isn't posting CP links.

<A GUY RAN SOMEONE OVER WITH A CAR SO WE BANNED CARS

<JIGS ROB AND KILL EACH OTHER SO WE BANNED GUNS

<SOME COINTELPRO POSTER/TROLL/JIDF/TWEEN POSTED DIX SO WE BANNED TOR NODES

<THERE WAS DIRT IN THE SLUCE BOX SO I THREW AWAY ALL OF THE GOLD WITH THE DIRT

<I THREW OUT THE BABY WITH THE BATHWATER

The flaw in the design and application of this security control is that it is intended to counter abuse but abuses people who are not causing a problem.

You're attributing the abusive behavior of the COINTELPRO tor posters with users who work to make this board good. I spend several hours a week posting references to this board because I think the messages here are important. It is becoming increasingly difficult for me to post here. The COINTELPRO tor poster spam has social engineered the staff into exposing the userbase by inhibiting everyone from using tor. The enemy is winning on both sides of the coin. Heads: The userbase is exposed to illegal surveillance and inhibited from posting from tor. Tails: You allow tor but don't create a different access control mechanism so the moderation becomes a pain in the ass, the quality of the board is degraded, and the staff gets burned out and frustrated.

>>96071

>You seem pretty attached to this password idea, and it almost seems like you think you personally came up with some kind of new or original solution to the problem of needing to limit freedoms within reason, but (((whose))) reason? And for what reasons?

The staff has been social engineered into banning tor nodes by COINTELPRO tor posters who abuse the board, hampering normal user freedom that existed on the old board. I'm proposing a mechanism to whitelist posters who are not a source of abuse. I am proposing a pathway to restore freedom to good posters. I didn't restrict anyone's freedom to begin with because I don't shitpost/cointelpro post/troll.

>I realize we all think we know better than most everybody else, but how do you prove that to everybody else when they're all thinking the same thing? Think about it! How do you measure freedom, what tools do you use to measure it, and who gave you the right to limit freedom by measuring it in the ways you do?

I use to be able to post from tor, now I can't post from tor because COINTELPRO tor posters spammed the board. A penalty is being imposed upon me that is intended for someone else, a false positive is just as much a security failure as a false negative. The enemy has induced conditions that have forced the staff to expose their userbase to the self described "intellignce" community.

As to what I know or don't, I have experience in the area of physical and information security and I'm trying to help the staff so users can tor post again. How am I the problem or the source of the inbibition of "freedom"?

>>96096

>This is why ((1)) torniggers are cancer. No post history = itchy banhammer finger.

>But yes very keen on an ACL-type solution however opsec fags will kvetch.

>Fuck that mod load though.

I've seen many of the posts the staff have removed just trying to tor post and seeing bans intended for other people. The staff is doing a good job of removing the shitposts and keeping the board from devolving into a sewer like 4chan. The traditional moderation is fine.

Unfortunately, it seems the only tool the staff have been provided to inhibit the flow of spam is an explicit IP ban, which is a blunt non-specific countermeasure. The boards from the outset have been designed with the assumption IP = USER IDENTITY, which is not so in all use cases except static IP users.

At present, you have context to evaluate someone's posting history but that context is based upon IP address hash only. Your system is being abused by COINTELPRO tor posters so you were forced to ban tor in an effort to inhibit the flood of COINTELPRO tor poster spam. Banning tor nodes inhibits tor spam but it also inhibits normal tor posters too. The enemy will just jump to another VPN and shitpost until all VPNs are banned leaving you with an increasingly exposed userbase who will be less prone to posting. The enemy isn't being hit, the proxy is.

You have to create some way to separate the good from the bad in order to allow users to tor post and not open yourselves up to spam.

As to ACL kvetch, consider the fact that the system already performs user tracking by IP address hash allowing staff members to create an explicit ACL blacklist. You've banned almost every tor node by way of manual explicit ACL blacklist because tor is a source of most enemy shit/cointelpro posts, so "tracking" is already happening.

If the user is posting from a home IP address, go ahead and ban the IP as per usual but most IPs are dynamic anyway. Only allow whitelisted password hashes to post via these VPN/TOR source IPs. An implicit VPN ban in conjunction with a pathway to a user making their way onto a whitelist ACL will save the time you would have spent manually blacklisting all vpn and tor nodes over time, while creating an avenue for quality posters to still use a vpn/tor.

Tracking the password hash makes sense because this a value the user can set that is already hashed and stored. The system can automatically whitelist a password hash if no moderator intervention was necessary on that password hash after some quantity of posts you deem necessary. For example, a user has to make 10 posts to get access to a tor whitelist. A user has to make 20 posts to get whitelisted to post attachments via tor. Now if someone wants to spam the board, they will have to perform a lot of work to earn access to the whitelist before they can just spam the board. If they spam, you can just yank their whitelisted PW hash and they have to start over again. They have to perform more work to abuse the system than you need to perform to protect the system. You now have a pathway to understanding who can be trusted with access to tor, which is often abused. You now have a mechanism to impose a penalty upon someone.

I personally would prefer not to have to go this route at all but I do not see another pathway to allowing someone to get themselves whitelisted anonymously.

>I got your ban appeal and unbanned the node.

Thank you, I appreciate your time and consideration. As you know I am not the node and it would just be re-banned in the future.

>The other argument is that tor isn't really much more secure than any other method. Reasoning is if you are truly triggering the glowies they'll use their library of hardware backdoors to pwn you. Tor is basically irrelevant in that situation.

Endpoint compromise is always a threat but there are different levels of surveillance. They have direct action exploitation, active traffic rerouting and HTTPS downgrade, and passive traffic re-routing where they just log. To counter the threat of endpoint compromise, consider running an OS within a VM. Most malware and remote exploits self destruct when they become self aware they are running in a VM. VMs are used to host a great deal of government and industry infrastructure so you get to piggyback off of their expectation of secure infrastructure. VMs are challenging to escape to compromise the entire host machine. You compartmentalize the risk into a container filled with nothing important.

>>96172

This, this is probably the hottest site on the internet. The site owner was called before congress. Not having tor exposes the entire userbase.

>>96191

I doubt anyone will tell you because someone will use it to spam and get it banned.

>>96199

Hello FBI

>>96256

I apologize for taking your post the wrong way and offending you.

>>96345

Thank you for allowing tor. Some other things aren't working correctly.

1. I can't post attachments via the onoin address but I can via tor and the clearnet address. Can you please allow this?

2. The max filesize is 16MB, which is too low for many PDFs can this max attachment size be increased for PDF files?

3. The max filesize is currently 16MB and there are supposed to be up to 5 objects per post. So, the way the rules are written someone should be able to make an 80MB post that includes up to five 16 MB files. However, in practice, a user can only post 16MB worth of objects total regardless of the quantity of objects attached. For example, I can't post two 16MB images totaling 32MB. I can post five files that are 2MB in size. The max post size is actually 16MB instead of 80MB as stated.

Sorry to pepper you with this but there doesn't seem to be a board to communicate with the staff.

>>96706

1. The BO can't change that.

2. The BO can't change that.

3. The BO can't change that.

This is why Tor should be forever turned off. Torniggers don't know how this site works.

>>96710

>Frowny faced double digit IQ glownigger retard kvetches to re-expose the userbase to more convenient and less expensive 5 eyes surveillance following the catastrophic failure of a multi month adventure in cointelpro shitposting nigger dicks, shit pics, low effort posts, and a failed MITM traffic re-routing attempt

I assumed he would have access to speak to codemonkey and that codemonkey might even read this thread. I made a similar request in K, which didn't go anywhere either. All I can do is make proposals and requests. If the answer is no, so be it. Requesting improvements to the system to make the system function better benefits everyone but the people who want the site to fail.

>>96738

>chodemonkey

They don’t have any special access to chodemonkey. The site’s code is so shit that you can’t PM someone else unless they PMed you less than a week ago. Chodemonkey isn’t going to read this thread. Ever. He doesn’t care about you. He personally took down 8chan because he hates whites and wants us all to die. This site exists exclusively to grift shit off of Q-LARPers.

/pol/ is gone forever.

The BO of /d/ (you know, the sexual degeneracy board?) has been given control of /pol/ and has explicitly said that if it ever comes back, it won’t be for political content. The fact that you don’t seem to comprehend what this means tells us that you’re too fucking retarded to understand who and what chodemonkey is. Shut the fuck up already, torpedo.

>>96738

YOU can talk to codemonkey, you faggot.

https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ

If you want to reach him through the board, the only one he gives a shit about is /v/. Go there, Tornigger.

>>96738

>I assumed he would have access to speak to codemonkey and that codemonkey might even read this thread.

You new here?

>>96706

>1. I can't post attachments via the onoin address but I can via tor and the clearnet address. Can you please allow this?

They used allow this during 2013 and maybe early 2014 but it pulled because of cheese pizza posting, they aren't ever allow tor image posting ever again

>2. The max filesize is 16MB, which is too low for many PDFs can this max attachment size be increased for PDF files?

>3. The max filesize is currently 16MB and there are supposed to be up to 5 objects per post. So, the way the rules are written someone should be able to make an 80MB post that includes up to five 16 MB files. However, in practice, a user can only post 16MB worth of objects total regardless of the quantity of objects attached. For example, I can't post two 16MB images totaling 32MB. I can post five files that are 2MB in size. The max post size is actually 16MB instead of 80MB as stated.

Been complained for years chodemonkey doesn't care about this site, /sudo/ was never used by the staff, there were months when everyone thought Ron died because there is no communication at all with him or any of the staff, Jim and Ron never cared for this site. >>96706

>2. The max filesize is 16MB, which is too low for many PDFs can this max attachment size be increased for PDF files?

>

>3. The max filesize is currently 16MB and there are supposed to be up to 5 objects per post. So, the way the rules are written someone should be able to make an 80MB post that includes up to five 16 MB files. However, in practice, a user can only post 16MB worth of objects total regardless of the quantity of objects attached. For example, I can't post two 16MB images totaling 32MB. I can post five files that are 2MB in size. The max post size is actually 16MB instead of 80MB as stated.

>>96767

I appreciate your insight. Stop being sensitive about making it more difficult to spy on everyone.

>>96775

>I read his account for a while after the old site went down. I don't have a twitter account because twitter is a large scale Jew social engineering / psychological warfare program.

>>96800

>You new here?

New relative to you, yes. I use to read k and pol but was more interested in k. I infrequently posted, normally sharing references on k. I liked the old site better.

I spent a lot of time reading references and evaluating arguments made on pol and came to the conclusion that pol is correct and incorrect about many things. I became interested in how populations are controlled.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

>>96817

>>96823

The word you are actually looking for would be Sapient and you are an idiot simulation theory peddler likely from fucking reddit.

Simulation theory serves absolutely no purpose for us or any other movement as it encourages nihilism and even if it were true would literally not matter at all, the knowledge would change nothing, take your idiocy and your I'm the only one aware bullshit out of here.

>>96983

Not only does a Turing test have nothing to do with sapience and more to do with seeing if an automaton can accurately mimic being human to such a degree that it fools a human. Which no machine has ever accomplished, and i'm not sure one ever will. Even if one eventually does, a pass proves nothing about the machine. That machine doesn't necessarily have sapience, or even autonomous intelligence, it may simply be a very advanced mimic.

I said nothing about any government, I am not jewish, and I don't care about your silly little shit test for sentience. Which does not denote the quality of being human in any respect. Nowhere in anything that I have come across in any philosophy or school of thought whatsoever. Being sentient is simply defined as having the ability to feel or perceive things subjectively. Which even dogs have been proven to be able to do.

A good test would test for both which so far as I am aware only humans have been able to show in any capacity.

This is all not minding the fact that you sound and speak like a fucking Q-tard, that believes only THE ALMIGHTY Q-TRUMP and his followers know anything and even seem to believe only they are rational actors. The evidence suggests otherwise, and suggests they are more like the robots you describe. On top of that not only did you not actually respond to any part of my post save "sapience" which is the ability to think, or the capacity of being wise. It is the mark of our species and specifically seemingly only of the European variety and even then seems to be a quality few posses among us. You also, completely avoided my calling you out for peddling useless theories about everybody else and our existence here on earth. Fuck even Christianity kiked as it is, has more of the truth than simulation theory. As if that wasn't bad enough, you rely on a kiked ass movie to make a point that has absolutely no merit to the discussion at hand, nor does it contribute to the topic of the thread in any meaningful way.

My advice to you go back to >>>/qresearch/

nobody here wants to hear your bullshit.

>Not using tor + onion site in this blatant honeypot

looooooooooooooooooool

>>97317

A VERY LONG TIME…

Wow…I would have better luck talking to a potted plant at this point. Are you this incapable of understanding the similarities between your behavior and need for programming and control (government, etc) and machine behavior which also needs programming and control that makes your definition of sapience IRRELEVANT?

>Machine: needs programming, control, input

>You: needs programming, control, input

You seem to want to use the machine to prove yourself, instead of seeing your own self in the machines requirement for function.

You identify with the machine because it is your own nature…you haven’t proven that it is any different or ‘exceptional’ than you are…you both require the same directives and inputs. Thus neither of you are sentient.

So, really…not seeing it, are you?

Hmmm, well that is interesting I have to say.

You kind of went off the rails with the drumpf thing…which is ironic since we are speaking about not needing controllers and you can’t relate to anything other than someone who appears (in your own mind erroneously) to need controllers. Rather bizarre. I am going to think about the functional feedback loop that you appear to be locked into based on looking at your minds ability to process.

>>97508

Boy did I hate that ‘religion’ thread. All the kikes congregated there and it was non-stop satanic kikery…this despite the fact that there was little difference between ‘religion’ and ‘politics’ for ages. They are one and the same throughout human history.

>>97516

what the fuck are you talking about?

I want to be the government you moron because other people DO NEED PROGRAMMING as you put it, I don',t I could walk off into the woods tomorrow and live off the land and not care one bit, I don't need this government nor do I want it. I don't need anybody's control directives, input or programming as I program myself kind of the definition of a self-aware and sapient and sentient robot.

Unless of course you are in a roundabout calling us all robots because we want to secure a better future for our descendants than what you have created.

No matter whiuch way you're going with it it serves no purpose here where we understand that a large proportion of our populace is just

living on autopilot, we call them Lemmings NPC's, Normies, the terms are various but all boil down to the same concept.

I also don't think you need a controller, I think you are controlled, whether you know it or not, you talk like every single Q infiltrator on this board, you type the same way, in the same style, saying the same boring tripe we all figured out years ago, and found what you are talking about right now a pointless nihilistic exercise that leads people down a hole to literally being tools of those in power.

>>97552

Board Owner just undid that the other day, so it must be shit codemonkey or somebody else is doing.

>>97552

Tor nodes are banned because the 8chan administration is a bunch of incompetent degenerates.

They simply do not differentiate between Tor exit nodes and regular IPs.

However if you go use the Tor hidden service jthnx5wyvjvzsxtu.onion (as opposed to the clearnet domain 8kun.top) posting should work without problem.

(However there are some restrictions in place when posting from the hidden service because the admins are imbeciles)

>>97571

Thanks, I was trying to post images, which is banned from the onion address. So I was forced to use the clearnet domain name.

If you see a problem, think of a way to fix it and make a proposal. Pointing out a problem and bashing the staff requires no real effort. Propose how you would fix the problem. Be constructive.