The retarded Australian Government.... fucks up again.
Let me qualify this:
To understand the real meaning of "Retard" read this:
http://suker-punch.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/i-have-redefined-definnition-of-retarded.html
OK - as a for instance on dealing with retarded fucks.
Arc welding of Alum (A metal invented by Humpty Davros - King of the Daleks), has been around since it stopped being as expensive as platinum and a few world wars economised the mass extraction of it.
Basically the welding of it, and the variations in the alloys etc., is SO commonly practised, technologically - it's as big a secret as gluing up paper with glue.
It's not like we are making 500 nuclear bombs, at 10 a day for $20,000 each, like for Project Orion.....
No, we are talking about welding aluminium sheet...
And I like to read and research - and different organisations and different companies - some produce brilliant manuals and some produce really shit manuals.
The general gist is this:
"Use only equipment dedicated to aluminium welding. Assuming the grade is weldable, wire brush all the excess oxide off the surface, with a stainless steel wire brush or an abrasive scrubbing pad, and then tack weld the joint and then weld it, using Alternating Current, with a high frequency overlaid current, to clean the oxide film off the metal surface, and then set your welding machines amperage to X amps for every Y mm thickness."
And that is fucking it.
No fucking mystery about this at all.
All the welding companies have guide books, there are a million "how to" videos and tutorials on Youtube and other sites...
The (Australian) Civil Aviation Authority - has lessons / requirements; and all the technical schools teach it.
All the airlines have aircraft welding programs, people and facilities:
Welding niobium, stainless, magnesium, inconel, alum, etc., etc., all here - all to aircraft welding specification - loads of info on the training and tens of thousands of people do it....
http://www.thefabricator.com/article/arcwelding/delta-repair-welders-aim-high
The American military / airforce has some really good training manuals on how to do it...
Freely available and downloadable online from here.
TM5-805-7
http://everyspec.com/ARMY/TM-Tech-Manual/download.php?spec=TM5-805-7_WELDING_20may1985.045566.pdf.
TM 1-1500-204-23-8
http://www.armyproperty.com/
http://www.armyproperty.com/tm/1-1500-204-23-8
TM 1-1500-204-23-8
AVIATION UNIT MAINTENANCE (AVUM) AND AVIATION INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE (AVIM) MANUAL FOR GENERAL AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE (MACHINE AND WELDING SHOP PRACTICES) VOLUME 8
And it's ALL marked as "Approved for public release."And every fucker around the world has it on their site as well - there are like 460,000 returns on the search: TM 1-1500-204-23-8
http://www.weldingcourseblog.com/best-welding-courses-u-s-air-force-academy-co-find-evening-welding-courses-colorado-here.html
There are 15,000 books on google; "TIG welding aluminium"
There are 75,000 videos.
730,000 returns on the web.....
Duh!
The information is out there.
So I wanted to get a hold of the Australian Air Forces manual on TIG welding.
Guess what?
The dumb fucks wrote back and said,
"We can't give you a copy of that, because it's a national secret."
Yeah - and what they have is what every welding apprentice has and what every training centre in Australia provides, and what everyone, in every welding department in every aircraft manufacturing and repair facility, all around the world has, and uses - and that is the best these fuckwits can come up with.
I am not insulted at the refusal - I am insulted at the total fucking bullshit reasoning behind the refusal. You know I don't like dumb fucks and the military is filled with particularly STUPID dumb fucks.
In terms of complete and utter dumb fuckness, it's below that of people who use cigarette lighters to see how much fuel is left in 44 gallon drums...
Or people who use electric hair dryers in the shower.
These people should be fed rat poison, by telling them it's a new organic museli - and help to remove the institutionalised stupidity from the gene pool.
"It's natural mueslie, says it's really healthy and lowers cholesterol. Have some more."
So that is the best and brightest in the Australian Airforce.
What next? Letting people know that they should pull their pants down before they shit, is top secret?
So good one you fucking dick heads.
And back into the general thrust of nazi impositions and retarded arseholes in the Australian government.
This got my dander up....
https://theconversation.com/paranoid-defence-controls-could-criminalise-teaching-encryption-41238
Author
-
Daniel Mathews
Lecturer in Mathematics at Monash University
Paranoid defence controls could criminalise teaching encryption
You might not think that an academic computer science course could be classified as an export of military technology. But under the Defence Trade Controls Act – which passed into law in April, and will come into force next year – there is a real possibility that even seemingly innocuous educational and research activities could fall foul of Australian defence export control laws.
Under these laws, such “supplies of technology” come under a censorship regime involving criminal penalties of up to ten years imprisonment. How could this be?
The story begins with the Australian government’s Defence and Strategic Goods List (DSGL). This list specifies goods considered important to national defence and security, and which are therefore tightly controlled.
Regulation of military weapons is not a particularly controversial idea. But the DSGL covers much more than munitions. It also includes many “dual-use” goods, which are goods with both military and civilian uses. This includes substantial sections on chemicals, electronics and telecommunications, among other things.
Disturbingly, the DSGL risks veering wildly in the direction of over-classification, covering activities that are completely unrelated to military or intelligence applications.
To illustrate, I will focus on the university sector and one area of interest to mathematicians like myself: encryption. But similar considerations apply to a wide range of subject material, and commerce, industry and government.
Encryption: an essential tool for privacy
Encryption is the process of encoding a message so that it can be sent privately. Decryption is the process of decoding it, so that it can be read. Encryption and decryption are two aspects of cryptography, the study of secure communication.As with many technologies subject to dual-use regulation, the first question is whether encryption should be covered at all.
Once the preserve of spies and governments, encryption algorithms have now become an essential part of modern life. We use them almost every time we go online.
Encryption is used routinely by consumers to guard against identity theft, by businesses to ensure the security of transactions, by hospitals to ensure the privacy of medical records, and many other organisations. Given that email has about as much security as a postcard, encryption is the electronic equivalent of an envelope.
Encryption is perhaps dual-use in the narrow sense that it is useful to both military/intelligence agencies as well as civilians. But so are other relatively mundane technologies like cars.
Moreover, since the Edward Snowden revelations —- and even much earlier for those who were paying attention – essentially everyone knows they are subject to mass surveillance by the US National Security Agency, along with its Five Eyes partners, including Australia.
While states have no right to privacy, an individual’s right to privacy is considered a fundamental human right. And in today’s world, encryption is essential for individual citizens to safeguard this human right. Strict control of encryption as dual-use technology, then, would not only be a misuse of state power, but would represent the curtailment of a fundamental right.
How the DSGL covers encryption
Nonetheless, let’s assume for the purposes of argument that there is a justification for regarding at least some aspects of cryptography as dual-use, and consider how the DSGL covers encryption.The DSGL contains detailed technical specifications. Very roughly, it covers encryption above a certain “strength” level, as measured by technical parameters such as “key length” or “field size”.
The practical question is how high the bar is set: how powerful must encryption be in order to be classified as dual-use?
The bar is currently set low. For instance, software engineers debate whether they should use 2,048 or 4,096 bits for the RSA algorithm. But the DSGL classifies anything over 512 bits as dual-use. In reality, the only cryptography not covered by the DSGL is cryptography so weak that it would be imprudent to use.
Moreover, the DSGL doesn’t just cover encryption software: it also covers systems, electronics and equipment used to implement, develop, produce or test it.
In short, the DSGL casts an extremely wide net, potentially catching open source privacy software, information security research and education, and the entire computer security industry in its snare.
Most ridiculous, though, are some badly flawed technicalities. As I have argued before, the specifications are so imprecise that they potentially include a little algorithm you learned at primary school called division. If so, then division has become a potential weapon, and your calculator (or smartphone, computer, or any electronic device) is a potential delivery system for it.
These issues are not unique to Australia; the DSGL encryption provisions are copied almost verbatim from an international arms control agreement. What is unique to Australia is the strict level of regulation.
Criminal offences for research and teaching?
The Australian Defence Trade Controls Act (DTCA) regulates the DSGL and enacts a censorship regime with severe criminal penalties.The DTCA prohibits the “supply” of DSGL technology to anyone outside Australia without a permit. The “supply” need not involve money, and can consist of merely providing access to technology. It also prohibits “publishing” DSGL technology, but after recent amendments, this offence only applies to half the DSGL: munitions, not dual-use technologies.
What is “supply” then? The law does not define the word precisely, but the Department of Defence suggests that merely explaining an algorithm could constitute “intangible supply”. If so, then surely teaching DSGL material, or collaborating on research about it, would be covered.
University education is a thoroughly international and online affair – not to mention research – so any such “supply”, on any DSGL topic, is likely to end up overseas on a regular basis.
Outside of academia, what about programmers working on international projects such as Tor, providing free software so citizens can enjoy their privacy rights online? Or network security professionals working with overseas counterparts?
Examples of innocuous, or even admirable, activities potentially criminalised by this law are easily multiplied. Such activities must seek government approval or face criminal charges -— an outrageous attack on academic freedom, to say the least.
There are exemptions, which have been expanded under recent amendments. But they are patchy, uncertain and dangerously limited.
For instance, public domain material and “basic scientific research” are exempted. However, researchers, by definition, create new material not in the public domain. And according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, “basic scientific research” is a narrow term, which excludes research with practical objectives.
Lecturers, admirably, often include new research in teaching material. In such circumstances none of these exemptions will be of assistance.
Another exemption covers supplies of dual-use technology made “preparatory to publication”, apparently to protect researchers. But this exemption will provide little comfort to researchers aiming for applications or commercialisation, and none at all to educators or industry. A further exemption is made for oral supplies of DSGL technology, so if computer science lecturers can teach without writing (giving a whole new meaning to “off the books”) they might be safe.
There is no explicit exemption for education. None for public interest material. And indeed, the government clearly envisions universities seeking permits to teach students DSGL material – and, by implication, criminal charges if they do not.
On a rather different note, the DTCA specifically enables the Australian and US militaries to share technology.
Thus, an Australian professor emailing an American collaborator or postgraduate student about a new applied cryptography idea, or explaining a new variant on a cryptographic algorithm on a blackboard in a recorded lecture broadcast over the internet — despite having nothing explicitly to do with military or intelligence applications — may expose herself to criminal liability. At the same time, munitions flow freely across the Pacific. Such is Australia’s military export regime.
Brief reprieve
There is nothing wrong in principle with government regulation of military technology. But the net is cast too broadly in the DSGL, especially in the case of encryption. The regulatory approach of the DTCA’s permit regime is effectively one of censorship with criminal penalties for breaches.The result is vast overreach. Even if the Department of Defence did not exercise its censorship powers, the mere possibility is enough for a chilling effect stifling the free flow of ideas and progress.
The DTCA was passed in 2012, with the criminal offences scheduled to come into effect in May 2015. Thankfully, emergency amendments that passed into law in April this year have provided one year’s reprieve.
Despite those amendments, the laws remain paranoid. The DSGL vastly over-classifies technologies as dual-use, including essentially all sensible uses of encryption. The DTCA potentially criminalises an enormous range of legitimate research and development activity as a supply of dual-use technology, dangerously attacking academic freedom —- and freedom in general —- in the process.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That gets right up my fucking arse that does.
It reminds me of a variation in stupidity with this Aldi add - You know the mobile phone rings so the bozo answers the sauce bottle - and looks pleased about it.
So we have these arsehole ministers playing kiss arse to the phoney American war on humanity, run by the arseholes of the American oil companies....
And now we get threatened by them, by proxy, from our own public servants, who threaten us with wiping out lives out, if we don't comply with Pax America and it's Nazi surveillance state.
I am busy raging - so I am kind of making these numbers up... but they are about as factual as I can get without looking it all up..
The fucking idiot Americans, could have spent 50 billion dollars on enough solar panels to power the USA for NIX, giving almost unlimited electricity for ever, at like 5c a KWH, but nooooo the fucking government, the military and the corporations - all war profiteers, spend $5 trillion dollars a year, every year, on a bogus war on terror, killing millions of people and using nuclear weapons to do it (depleted uranium munitions), and the USA is insolvent or bankrupt - about 20 times over.... they can't even pay the interest....
And yet everyone plays along with this unquestioning, obedient bullshit from start to finish.
The finish is WW3 - a total nuclear war. The American cunts and their lackeys are pushing the Russians around.... and the Americans have started wars all throughout the middle east....
And as far as this encryption shit goes?
Seriously.
"The practical question is how high the bar is set: how powerful must encryption be in order to be classified as dual-use?
The bar is currently set low. For instance, software engineers debate whether they should use 2,048 or 4,096 bits for the RSA algorithm. But the DSGL classifies anything over 512 bits as dual-use."
I mean HOW fucking DENSE do you have to be to do that? What kinds of fucking retarded arse licker public servants, military cock heads and moron ministers do you need to spew out standards like that.
512 bit encyrption was I think, of an even lower standard than the Enigma machine - from the retard nazies in WW2, by about 10X.
I mean that was a very clever encryption system, and the retarded goose stepping drop kicks left themselves wide open by being retarded users of it, by starting every message with "Heil Hitler"....
I love reading, I take a real interest in everything and I have only a great deal of time for some things.
I like encryption and maths - because like physics, quantum tech, calculus, CERN research, astronomy, aerospace, rocket engines, computation and building pyramids etc... it's generally very clever people doing very clever things.
Fascinating stuff.
I don't have any use for encryption, but I like it as an art form.
But these fucking retards in the government, take the cake for stupidity.
Yeahhhhhh Team Australia arse licks the American and British empires arseholes - courtesy the Federal Reserve Bank - which is a private bank, which is part of the Rothschild Bank...
While playing toady to the "Exporting Military Tech" nazi bullshit - following suite to the American version of it.
Fuck it - it's MY planet. And I didn't agree to any of this shit.
I mean the pricks in the Pentagon have something like 1/3 of their $50 trillion a year budget (or what ever it is) that they can't account for... WTF - a bunch of fucking thieves.
I don't think the Australian military is that much fucking better - I mean what is this shit about "cost over runs" - the ship or submarine, they say, will cost $3 billion, and it ends up costing us, the Australian tax payer, an additional $2 or $3 billion extra?
What the fuck? Haven't you cunts ever heard of a CONTRACT.
"You build it to the agreed price and specification - or YOU pay the penalty fees."
How come WE are paying the penalty fees?
And who is raking in all the cash and what in the fuck is it for?
And how come this shit goes on all the time in Australia - for road construction projects, tunnels, rail infrastructure, hospitals, submarines, ships, jet fighters - fucking raaa-deee raaaaa raaaa - ALL of them, almost without exception - all have major cost over runs, that have to be covered by the fucking tax payers - again and again and again....
Like what the fuck is this?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This military secrets shit - these retarded arseholes - you know ALL of them, all the Americans - the bankers and their puppet presidents, the ambassadors, the military, the CIA - everyone in that, and all the Australian equivalents, ought to be dragged into the city square for 500 lashings.
All of them.
They are ALL war criminals, thieves and liars.
Running what I call "The mormon ethics" - of a good christian family church, that profits immensely from prostitutes, drugs and gambling in Las Vegas.
The ministers, public service and the military - and the bankers and their shareholders who profit from these wars and all the impositions and enforcing their vice grip through acts of parliament to criminalising "we the people", for not going along with their Nazi state bullshit.
Drag them ALL into the town square and give them 500 lashes each.
Fuck them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And this was on in the wee small hours on the ABC Television 12.27am Tuesday 2nd of June 2015:
Modern Spies
In this two-part series journalist Peter Taylor finds out when he looks at the world of the modern day secret agent.And the gist of it is, that the Americans say the Chinese have hacked into their systems and stolen the plans for their nukes (how to actually build the bombs) and they now have a running version of the USA's Joint Strike Fighter - also stolen from the USA.
And now we have the fucking retards in the Australian Government, in co-operation, or should I say, operating at the 53rd state of the USA, as it's puppet government, telling us that WE the people of this country MUST be using and studying encryption methods that in computer terms, they predate recorded history.
The Intelligence Community.
The governments mutual intelligence pact.
The Australian Parliament is now seated.
Comments
Post a Comment