The folks at Telecomix Crypto Munitions Bureau have put up a list of
IP addresses of worldwide governments and agencies, so that you can
block them through your firewall. If you’re running a server or a
domain, you can also modify the .htaccess file to ban these IPs from
accessing your site. You can also force anyone from the above listed IP
addresses, when attempting to connect to your site, to view a static
image instead. I would recommend something which clearly states why they
are not allowed access, for example:
[]
Details on how to do this modification, and nearly every other
conceivable modification of the .htaccess file, can be found here.
[]I’m very proud (and very late, due to security issues) to
announce that the first issue of Graceless has been released. We are
an international collective producing a printed and online journal of
the radical gothic. Printed copies are available here, or if you
know me IRL you can just ask me for a copy on the cheap. Or, as cheap as
it gets, you can download the online version here. Also, I will be
tabling copies at the 2011 San Francisco Anarchist Bookfair.
“Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient
evidence for a conviction, and, having separated the prisoners, visit
each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies for the
prosecution against the other (defects) and the other remains silent
(cooperates), the defector goes free and the silent accomplice
receives the full 10-year sentence. If both remain silent, both
prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge.
If each betrays the other, each receives a four-year sentence. Each
prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one
is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the
end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act?”
Obviously, the rational choice is not to snitch, and cross your fingers
that your accomplice does the same, right? Well, rationally thinking, wrong.
If each suspect only cares about minimizing their own jail time, then
the prisoner’s dilemma forms a non-zero-sum game. (A zero-sum game is
one in which the total benefits and total losses of all players equal
zero, for instance, if Asimov, Bradbury, and Clarke dumpster a block of
tofu and Bradbury takes a larger piece, the others get less, but the
total benefits and losses is zero. A non-zero-sum game is one in which
the aggregate total gains and losses is not zero, meaning that everyone
will either collectively benefit or collectively suffer together.) In
game theory, the sole concern of each player is maximizing their own
payoff (less jail time), with no concern for the other player’s payoff.
The curious Nash equilibrium (i.e. rationalized solution) for this game
is a Pareto-suboptimal solution, that is, rational choice dictates both
players to play defect, even though each player’s individual reward
would be greater if they both played cooperatively.
[]
As can be seen, each player faces the same choice: 1) 6 months/10 years,
or (2) no time/4 years. Clearly, the second choice is better. Which is
to say that snitching is better. Which doesn’t exactly correspond to
actual human behaviour: snitching is the unfortunate exception, not the
rule. It just doesn’t sit right at all, mathematically, statistically,
rationally, logically, or otherwise. But then, this is where things get superrational.
Douglas Hofstadter, in Metamagical Themas, proposes that the
conception of rationality that leads “rational” players to defect is
faulty. Instead, Hofstadter posits an alternative rational behaviour,
which he terms “superrational”. Superrational thinking logically leads
to cooperation as follows:
Superrational strategy is identical for both players, since both
players are no longer playing for purely their own benefit, but for
the benefit of minimizing jail time overall.
Therefore, since both players will do exactly the same thing, the
result lies on the diagonal of the payoff matrix. (Either both will
defect or both will cooperate.)
To minimize jail time from solutions on the diagonal, both players cooperate.
Superrational players behave in the following manner:
In my continuing research on fascism within the occult, I have come
across a very well-written treatise advocating such views. The Order of
Nine Angles’ Book of Wyrd, a zine-sized manuscript outlining rituals,
runes, eugenics, and aeonics, with literary expositions on Nietzsche’s
Anti-Christ and the Old Norse Poetic Edda, outlines the philosophy
and methods of what transhumanists sometimes term provolution: the
intentional, or pro-active, application of evolution upon a species.
“Man need not be a passive spectator or a victim of the ‘gods’ or ‘fate’
but by understanding the laws of nature and the cosmos can, through his
Will, be an active agent in the evolutionary process.”^1^ states the
seventh point in their “Articles of Faith”. Within their doctrine of
cosmology, the universe is cyclic – a continual oscillation between
creative and destructive principles yields dialectical historical
stages, the study of which is called aeonics. In this process of
renewal, Nietzsche’s Übermensch is seen as a spiritually individualistic
(i.e. satanic), space-faring transhuman, the next stage in the evolution
of humankind.[]
In the Book of Wyrd, aeonics and its implications for future human
cultural and biological manifestations are explained by a continuation
of the ideas proposed by German historian and philosopher Oswald
Spengler in The Decline of the West: “…while Spengler predicts the
close of Western Civilization, [Stephen] Brown considers an option which
goes beyond it. Spengler describes Western Civilization as ‘Faustian’.
Its symbol is limitless space. This is reflected in its exploration and
colonization, art, architecture (e.g. the Gothic spire), and a form of
science that seeks to unveil the secrets of nature. Its reach is
infinite. ‘Faustian’ is the ‘race soul’ of the West that makes it
unique. As we’ve seen, while Spengler points to the conclusion of
Western Civilization like others before it, Brown suggests what might
come after it if the opportunities are seized by those few who have a
sense of destiny. And what is this possible destiny? The logical outcome
of the Faustian will: Space Colonization. […]Brown also points out the
potential this would have for cultural variation (and by implication
biological evolution). It would see the creation of a myriad of new,
self-contained cultural laboratories throughout space, and the expansion
of man’s destiny to infinity. Should we grasp the opportunities to build
upon the ruins of the post-Western world, the destiny of mankind will be
to play amongst the stars.” ^2^
The point to which I find this text and its doctrine interesting is its
similar relation to tenets of various individualist anarchisms. These
latter strive to emphasize the hegemony of the individual’s Will over
the presiding external forces of collective groups, society, traditions,
and ideological systems. Individualist anarchism commonly rejects
romantic notions of revolution, which would require social organization
to produce alternative systems, instead it often favors more
evolutionary methods of social experimentation and education. Thus,
fascism and anarchism can be seen to differ only in their means of
producing a new society, not in that …
