Light the torches! NSA's BFF Senator Feinstein calls for e-book burning Senator Dianne Feinstein is calling for a pair of controversial instructionals to be banned from the internet. Feinstein (D-CA) did not say exactly how she plans to scrub The Anarchist Cookbook and Inspire magazine from every server, desktop and notebook on the planet, but none the less she wants both titles pulled from …
Funny, last week it was TM 31-210. For those who don't know it's the US Army's Improvised Munitions Handbook.
This brings back my teen years, long summer months blue boxing to the US BBS boards, whilst trying unsuccessful to get stoned on dried banana skins..
Kept me out of real harm, when my peers were steeling cars, getting high and hiring dodgy prostitu.. oh wait that was me with GTA. Oh well - Thank you Jolly Roger for great teenage years ...
These documents are not, in my view, protected by the First Amendment...
See #1 here: http://quarterbacks.org/Democrats/
... and should be removed from the internet."
See first comment in this thread re: nails and jelly.
Next thing is to ban education.
I happen to have an MSc in Chemistry from the days when the "chemical warfare agents" advanced course was only just renamed to toxicology (while retaining most of the same curriculum). We also studied all the wonderful aspects of nucleophilic substitutions and why nitrate sticks so nicely to toluene and why and how do you need to purify the resulting mix to make it stable. Things like hexogen, peroxide (inclusive of explosives), etc were elective. Compared to that the anarchist cookbook and the Al Qaeda manuals are frankly something from Sesame Street. Should be ban it too?
Add to that a nearly complete second MSc in Molecular Biology and Microbiology. I recall growing viruses on cell cultures (for real - not in a petry dish on a windowsill as described in the BBC mocumentary "SmallPox"), bacteria and modifying the buggers with lovely antibiotic resistance markers. It was also in the days before fluorescent markers so radioactive phosphorus, H3 and C14 was being used by the bucket load in the lab. So plenty of experience in handling that too. Once again, compared to that the Al Qaeda manual are again - stuff out of Sesame Street performed by your fav muppet. Should we ban mol biol and microbiology too?
And with this intellectual baggage I went to work in computer security (for a while) and telecoms after that. By the thought crime standards of Ms Feinstein and Treasonous May I should just take a gun and blow my brains out. They are too effing dangerous to exist.
I'm a bit into amateur science myself - and this panic creates some problems for us. It's very hard to get hold of tetrahydrofuran - no supplier will sell to a residential address. I had to get it off some dodgy ebay seller. Now I'm concerned because some man up in Scotland has just been sentenced to five years for possessing acetone and hydrogen peroxide, two chemicals which can potentially be used (if you're reckless enough) to manufacture propanone peroxide, a rather nasty explosive. I have a lot of acetone, I use it for 3D printing and casting tin. So now I get to worry because if the police or fire service should have any reason to poke around my home they'll find bottles of scarey chemicals and assume I must be a terrorist.
I destroyed my tetrahydrofuran by burning yesterday as a precaution. I don't need it any more, I finished that line of experiment.
During the holidays I am helping a kid who has GCSE chemistry in June. I've discovered his main problem with analysis is that the school hasn't actually done any practicals. They've "watched videos".
When I was this kid's age I was cooking up my own fine grain developers with the help of the local pharmacist who was only too happy to help me get the necessary chemicals. I experimented with uranium intensifier, and I got to be quite good at sepia toning (using ferrocyanide). Looking back over my career I can point to work that resulted in millions in export earnings; that early investment in a bit of geeky fun paid big dividends.
Unfortunately the government is run by someone with a degree in PPE, and the best we can hope for an alternative also has a degree in PPE. The head of UKIP left school at 16. The head of the Lib Dems couldn't even stand up for Forgemasters or against tuition fees. I haven't bothered to look at the Greens.
In a sane world, one not run by the scientifically clueless, we'd just allow people to register as amateur scientists with a basic background check similar to DBS and let them get on with it. Because it could pay serious economic dividends, whereas the real risks from terrorism are minute.
"Register as amateur scientists" - why would we allow government to be involved in any of this. If you create something dangerous and cause harm, then arrest and punishment is needed. Otherwise, why should "big brother" know or care what chemicals you have to experiment with. Just as government has no business know who has guns or what kind of guns they have.
There are these things called driving licenses which are operated by most societies, and for a reason. I know I'll get downvoted for this, but I'm glad I don't live in a country which practices the kind of extreme libertarianism you espouse.
Incidentally, the Second Amendment says nothing at all about recording who has guns, or what they have. It says people have the right to have them, and it wants a well regulated militia. Now to me, a well regulated militia would seem to imply some sort of controls. But then I'm not a Supreme Court judge or a pol bought by the armaments industry. If my neighbor has a Kalashnikov I think I have the right to know, because I'd rather find out before he goes on a shooting spree rather than, as you advocate, afterwards.
Incidentally, the Second Amendment says nothing at all about recording who has guns, or what they have. It says people have the right to have them, and it wants a well regulated militia.
No, no, no, no, no! That amendment is always being misunderstood. It has nothing at all to do with firearms and everything to do with heraldry. The point about a well-regulated militia is precisely to do with the regulation of a militia as opposed to having individuals with men bearing the arms of their lord and master.
Whilst I agree 100% with you, what should we do about these?
I want to know that when I get on a plane the pilot isn't going to take it out on me by slamming into a mountain, just because HE had a bad day.
When I get on a train I want to know that the guy standing down the corridor from me with that awfully big rucksack (he and I can't sit down as it is too full) hasn't decided that today Allah isn't wanting another visitor to Paradise.
When I fly off on hols, I want to know there isn't a numptie with a new toy from his mate a Mr Putin, who is itching to test it out.
I agree with you, but how far should I agree with you?
"Now I'm concerned because some man up in Scotland has just been sentenced to five years for possessing acetone and hydrogen peroxide, two chemicals which can potentially be used (if you're reckless enough) to manufacture propanone peroxide"
They can also be used, in suitable concentrations, for removing nail varnish and bleaching hair; beauticians beware!
I spent most of my time in high school chemistry class working out how to play with explosives without getting blown up and how to play with toxic gases/aerosols without getting poisoned/dissolved/whatevered. It is _trivial_ to make nitrocellulose and not much harder to make nitroglycerin. (Making them in any quantity and without blowing yourself up or having some other wee accident involving nitric or sulphuric acid is a little less trivial.) Every time I hear that some poor boy has been arrested for 'possession of bomb-making materials' I laugh. Right now the following bomb-making materials are in my house or garage: gasoline, kerosine, powdered laundry soap, wax candles, granulated sugar, powdered sugar, isopropyl alcohol, hydrogen peroxide, liquid soap, chlorine bleach, lye, foam shipping peanuts, lots of paper of various grades, olive oil, coconut oil, ammonia, iodine, potassium permanganate, charcoal, butane, propane, sulphuric acid, assorted nitrates and nitrites, and substantial amounts of copper, magnesium, aluminum, ferric oxide, and the means to make those last four into powders. (Warning: you might want to be careful when powdering the magnesium or the aluminum. Just a thought.) And, oh, large amounts of chlorides, of which sodium chloride is but a minor component. And, of course, lots of insecticides. For those who know not chemistry, this means that I can assemble a wide variety of low, medium, and high explosives, plus a wide range of incendiary devices and several war gases.
Every single item is perfectly legal. Consult your local high school chem text for info on assembly. And the chem lab should have lots more fun stuff.
To James O'Shea's comment:
We all have around the house potentially lethal stuff like kitchen knifes, axes, rat poison, bug sprays, tobacco (nicotine is one of the most poisonous things if in the right form!!!), cricket bats, hammers, nails, razor blades etc. How can any Big Brother control those items?
Than, those members of the public with particular skills like self-defense, martial arts, weaponry knowledge, driving licence, flying licence, train and tube driving licence and so on, are presumably dangerous at a certain point. How can ANYONE prevent ALL OF THEM do something stupid?
If there's one thing guaranteed to spawn more copies of the book, an attempt by a clueless politician is it. People will host copies just because someone wants to ban it.
You don't fight extremism with censorship, you fight it with education. Or by making a few copies readily available for download and logging the IP address of those who actually do.
Couldn't agree more. My thought on fighting terrorism is to convince people that living in a stable society is a far better option than joining those crazy people with guns that want to destroy that society.
Right now a lot of people in the middle east are presented with the option of:
"Support those guys from the other side of the world that blew up your cousin because of his beliefs" or
"fight with the guys that are from your area and are trying to kill the people that killed your cousin"
For the price of a single bombing run, we could use that money to turn the decision into:
"Support the people that gave you a couple farm animals, the equipment to build a farm, and the ability to build a well for some fresh, clean water" OR
"Fight with the guys that just want to kill everyone who doesn't believe what they do, and you'll probably end up getting killed in the process"
How about adding,
Support the people that invested into your local economy, creating jobs, etc, helping to remove the desire to kill your cousin and (enter your favorite villain, religion, race, socioeconomic class, etc here...) in the first place...
I vote for trade not aid, but have an up vote anyway
Trade is definitely something to do, you just need to get them to a point where they have something to trade. Look at South Korea, after their war they had nothing and needed aid to rebuild, now they are a massive economical and technological juggernaut and have re-paid all the aid they were given.
was to protest the jailing of somebody who had sold a copy of the (seemingly updated) Jolly Roger Cookbook.
He wrote me a very lovely letter back defending his position.
He was wrong.
I quit his party immediately, and feel sad.
Partly it was due to myself having happily played with thermite after delving through the JRC, I remember happily keeping in my school blazer pocket (I believe there was 50p involved to cover the cost of the floppy).
Mainly though, it's my knee-jerk abhorrence to the very concept that access to knowledge could be considered dangerous, and should therefore be forbidden.
Wouldn't want to speak for everybody, but trying to stop the spread of any knowledge strikes me as counterintuitive to the improvement of the lives of all - and maybe more pertinently, a f'in ridiculous unobtainable goal.
A Jew is a child of a Jewish mother. The referenced article states that one of Lenin's grandfathers was Jewish. If it had been a grandmother, then, yes. A grandfather, no. He wasn't Jewish. He wasn't raised as Jew. No circumcision, no Jewish ceremonies of any kind.
Furthermore, three-quarters of his genes were from non-Jews. Are Jewish genes so powerful that they override even when out-numbered three to one? Is there some variant on the old Southern 'one drop' policy at work here?
Trotsky and Marx were Jews. Lenin had some Jewish ancestors, courtesy of one grandparent. He wasn't Jewish.
You mean the same people that read "Thou Shalt Not Kill", then somehow interpreted that to mean: "We need to kill all the Muslims, God demands it!" Of course a lot of other nations in the area heard that and thought "Oh no, they're going to kill us, better kill them all before they kill us!" (Or maybe it was the other way around, who knows who really fired the first shot, doesn't matter anyway).
If your god wanted them dead, they would have done it already; if your god really favors you, they'll prevent you from dying, or at least reward you if you do die. No need to kill others preemptively in the name of 'defense'.
if your god really favors you, ...... or at least reward you if you do die.
Well, there's a religion that says (according to some practitioners) "You died for me.. here's 72 virgins and the keys to heaven.. have fun!". Another leaves out the 72 virgins bit.
And that just scratches the surface of all the loony tunes in the Middle East and the Bible Belt in America.
Yes, genesis said knowledge was dangerous, but to whom? I believe the problem was that God did not want Adam and Eve to also eat from the tree of life and therefore become "gods like us", if I remember the quote correctly.
The takeaway being: the more knowledgable the public, the more uncertain the positions of those in power. Which is probably the single most important lesson of that book.
I think you will find it only the know algae of good and evil, so morality not all knowledge, the concept that the universe and world before the was made, and therefore understandable is the foundation of modern science. Believing the rest is up to the rader to decide.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
