pjrv : Messages : 2396-2438 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2396?)

 23:56:17

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2396
 	From: "Tunde" 
Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 2:18 pm
Subject: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	psitrooper24

  	  	

This paragrapgh in Prus post caught my attention
again in my search for more answers ...

"What if a session can be many things at once, depending on how you
look at the data, who's doing the tasking, what their intention is
and whether the session enters a communications channel like a fax
machine, or a website or a copier. A channel wherein the session can
be captured and married with other sessions too numerous to count so
something other than the intended purpose emerges?"

How or what is the best way forward in protecting
ones RV data from being "captured" or hijacked electronically?

Peace,
Tunde

Reply | Forward
	
#2397
 	From: "pjgaenir" 
Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 2:56 pm
Subject: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	pjgaenir

  	  	

> "Tunde" wrote:
> How or what is the best way forward in protecting
> ones RV data from being "captured" or hijacked electronically?

Hmmmn. Is "don't send it electronically" too obvious?

There is pgp for email, and there are secure gateways for the web.
However, a really good surveillance should be able to get through
that (or, just get it, and send it to someone who'd return it
unencrypted).  Remember that unless we are talking about the boring
suits in fbi or something, many groups have technologies somewhat
more advanced than street offers.  There is FedX, but of course all
official paper channels are easily interfered with by officials.

The biggest danger in electronic communications isn't hacking; it is
(1) potential technologies most swear don't exist, like the ability
to read and selectively add/delete w/a targeted hard drive from a
good distance away outside; and (2) the physical intrusion of those
interested in the materials and persons (and often, resulting taps on
physical equipment).

Most persons and groups under heavy surveillance have someone in
their building, or next door/above etc. that is part of the
surveillance team.  It seldom happens any group that generates
sufficient interest to be heavily monitored does not have someone(s)
physically near them as part of that.

***

Unless I felt my life was threatened, I wouldn't worry about it.
Maybe all my email is read; maybe my sessions are retasked; so what?
If I couldn't change it, I'd rather just not worry about it.  My RV
is for me.  If it is serving my purposes, I'm good with that. RV is a
part of my life.  I can't imagine even considering not doing it for
any reason besides not having time.

I am not going to live my life hunched down in the great fear that
somewhere, somewhen, someone else might be invading my privacy.  I
hope nobody else does either.  Geez, it's just so dark and
dysfunctional sounding.

Until I have it proven to me otherwise, I believe very stoutly that
the *viewer's intent* -- the *shaman's or magickians will* -- is the
primary determiner of whether, and to what degree, anything in an
individual's life can be messed with by another.

PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2400
 	From: Rocheleh 
Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 2:02 pm
Subject: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	rochelehhakt...

  	  	

Tunde wrote:

> How or what is the best way forward in protecting
> ones RV data from being "captured" or hijacked electronically?

I can only comment on the electronic part offhand, I haven't really
thought the rest over. I just read 3 days' mail and saw what happened.

I'd recommend using public key cryptography. Last time I checked, there
were multiple pieces of software with user-friendly interfaces, for
multiple platforms. Open-source, too. GnuPG, OpenPGP, PGPi... use a
4096-bit key pair, change it whenever you feel like and you'll be as
safe as it gets, technologically speaking. Of course, one can still rent
the apartment next door and pick up on the EM your computer emits. ;)
Technologically, this is possible. But I'd say if you use the proper
encryption, you're safe. You could also use cypherpunk remailers for
transmitting anonymous e-mail. As far as I know, there is a Windows
frontend for using those, it's called Quicksilver or something like
that. I haven't really used it - though I do use a variant of PGP, and
an encrypted filesystem of sorts on my notebook, in case it's lost or
stolen. Heck, I wouldn't want a street mugger reading my RV sessions, LOL!

Other related things:
more and more e-mail providers support SSL. There's even SSL-IRC for the
encryption junkies out there :), and a friend of mine uses something
similar for AIM, so that must be possible too.

Yes, and have a friend set up a Linux/etc firewall box. It never hurts
to have one, and a 486 is sufficient for that purpose if it's properly
configured.

Rachel

Reply | Forward
	
#2436
 	From: Timelord2029...
Date: Fri Mar 7, 2003 11:37 am
Subject: Re:Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	psitrooper24

  	  	

> rocheleh...s.com writes:
> I'd recommend using public key cryptography.

Hi Rachel,

This was what i wanted to confirm Thanks alot.
I was just wondering if there were any other
options available. Thanks for taking the time to reply
(and thanks to pj:)Got a few PEM advices as well
and a little insight as to why not many people talk
on lists too openly or ever post their sessions if they can help it.I might try
and collate all the

Just to clarify as well i will still be viewing/sharing stuff online and i
encourage others to do the same in their development & exploration of RV.

Just be wary and trust your instincts which iam
sure you all do anyway.
Have a nice weekend

peace,
Tunde

------------------------------
Moderator's note: If I made a dime for every time somebody was sure that their
personal conversation is SO IMPORTANT to the world that legions of people are
lurking just to capture it, I could retire.  I assume you know that the best way
to destroy any remotely organized, powerful group, is to make everybody paranoid
about each other, and splinter things into 1001 warring factions. PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2438
 	From: "stanley01420" 
Date: Fri Mar 7, 2003 2:59 pm
Subject: Re:Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	stanley01420

  	  	

> Moderator's note:   I assume you know that the best way to
>destroy any remotely organized, powerful group, is to make
>everybody paranoid about each other, and splinter things into
>1001 warring factions. PJ

I'll bet there are some out there who might even pay a million
bucks to do that.  Well, we must be onto something then.

trypper

pjrv : Messages : 2416-2545 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2416?)

 00:02:55

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2416
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	greenmn900...

  	  	

PJ,
You wrote:
"Until I have it proven to me otherwise, I believe very stoutly that
the *viewer's intent* -- the *shaman's or magickians will* -- is the
primary determiner of whether, and to what degree, anything in an
individual's life can be messed with by another."

That pretty much says it all.  Non-locally, we are *very* powerful and very
self-contained.  That's why those who are more psi-aware than the average
person are much less vulnerable to these issues than the average person.
Warm Regards,
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2453
 	From: "Eva" 
Date: Fri Mar 7, 2003 8:29 pm
Subject: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	k9caninek9

  	  	

PJ,

> You wrote:
> "Until I have it proven to me otherwise, I believe very stoutly
that
> the *viewer's intent* -- the *shaman's or magickians will* -- is
the
> primary determiner of whether, and to what degree, anything in an
> individual's life can be messed with by another."

Just out of curiosity, I see you have that opinion.  Did you require
that to be proven to you as well?  Or maybe it just seems to hold
true from what you have seen?  If something else seems to hold true,
will that count as proof too or will you require extra proof?  Don't
get me wrong, I tend to agree for the most part, but I think it is
wise to realize why one chooses to believe what one chooses to
believe.  People tend to find what they look for.  Maybe they find it
because it's true or maybe they find it because they didn't pay much
attention to stuff that didn't support what they already thought.
-E

--------------------------
Moderator's note: Hi E., well those are good points.  However, I believe it
'stoutly' (what a wonderfully british word, isn't it?) because at several points
in my life when I've been involved with groups related to psi (indirectly) and
had various experiences and effects, I have seen the whole group respond and
interact on this level, and I have deliberately worked to free myself from both
the drama queen effect of the group and the interference of whatever effects I
didn't choose to have.

Now, whether the black triangle guy is something I can block out -- other than
becoming nearly psychically inert so off the radar -- I don't know.  Perhaps
not.  I never tried back then. But at least for what I considered to be
'people', self-determination certainly held the key.  This may be because "every
individual is sovereign" as I sometimes say, and intent is what matters most; or
it may be that Seth is right and there are infinite probabilities, and I've
merely chosen to move my attention to the one where things do not affect me. 
(That is one argument against PK you know. That it may not be that one 'changed'
anything as that one merely moved to the probability(s) where that thing was
changing/already-different.)

I can't really argue any detail about the psychic interrelation of people
because I don't think anybody, and certainly not me, is any kind of expert on
that -- answers would help us properly define the very nature of reality and
existence.  I will not disagree with much of anything that relates to the
possibility of psychic interaction.

I only choose to believe -- based on my granted limited, and granted assumption
of human, previous experiences, that I have a lot of control over my reality
experience if I choose to pay attention.  That's not a blanket statement but I
made it sound like one, I see now.  Right now that's my opinion.  If the guy in
'the mirror' comes back repeatedly and I am trying to block him and it doesn't
work, I will certainly revise my opinions. :-)

PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2468
 	From: "Eva" 
Date: Sat Mar 8, 2003 1:24 am
Subject: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	k9caninek9

  	  	

Well I do definitely agree that we can and often do have a lot of
control when we are paying attention.  Although, a lot of times we
aren't paying attention or maybe don't know what would be the most
useful to pay attention to.  Knowledge is power.  But I have always
been a very big advocate of not giving up your own personal power to
some else.  Do not think like a victim and you are a lot less likely
to end up as one.  It may not be fullproof though!  ;-)
-E

> PJ wrote:
> I only choose to believe -- based on my granted limited, and
> granted assumption of human, previous experiences, that I have a lot
> of control over my reality experience if I choose to pay attention.
> That's not a blanket statement but I made it sound like one, I see
> now.  Right now that's my opinion.  If the guy in 'the mirror' comes
> back repeatedly and I am trying to block him and it doesn't work, I
> will certainly revise my opinions. :-)

Reply | Forward
	
#2486
 	From: "Viv" 
Date: Sat Mar 8, 2003 1:03 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	eclecticviv

  	  	

> PJ wrote:
> If the guy in 'the mirror' comes back repeatedly and I am
> trying to block him and it doesn't work, I will certainly
> revise my opinions. :-)

Viv adds a note:

My personal experience has found, telling the guy in, "the
mirror", to go "jack himself", works well, most of the
time, too.  

Viv*

Reply | Forward
	
#2517
 	From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" 
Date: Sat Mar 8, 2003 7:32 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	ozblueriver

  	  	

> PJ wrote:
   > If the guy in 'the mirror' comes back repeatedly and I am
   > trying to block him and it doesn't work, I will certainly
   > revise my opinions. :-)

   I have only ever encountered a 'dark' force once. A really scarey beastie kept
popping up while I was in altered states. I coped by just coming out of the
meditation until I eventually got tired of that and decided to face whatever the
beastie was.
   I demended to know what it was and why it was plaguing my meditations and got
told, "This beast represents your power. You need to understand that you fear
your own power."
   I was shocked at the answer as you can imagine, but nowdays I confront
anything seemingly negative and work through it until I get the truth behind
what's happening.

   I doubt that there is anything brought into our lives that is not put there
for our good. Sometimes we are just limited by our view of what is really going
on.

   Cheers Liz

-------------------------
Moderator's note: Could be.  I dunno about 'good'; perhaps reality reflects our
core constructs just as they are, as feedback on learning to create, without
regard to whether they are good or not; good might be an arbitrary thing -- 'all
experience is equal' in some philosophies.

When I talk about reality creation, I'm not ignoring that consciously we are
very often innocent, and that's important.  And it's a lot easier to use that
philosophy on metaphysics than physical life, yet if it holds true for one, it
likely does for the other.

It is very easy to say for example that if personX was 'attacked by a negative
entity' that this might be their belief systems or whatever. On some level
that's likely true, but on another level, it's invalidating if I act like that
somehow means "it's all their fault".  If one's neighbor flips out, comes over
and beats the crud out of them, technically by the same philosophy one created
that too -- but that doesn't mean we wouldn't expect the police to consider the
neighbor guilty, not us. ;-)

Realistically, as one of my ex-fiance's used to say, "Experiences that are good
for you are rarely pleasant."  It is sometimes easier to merge or deal with
metaphysical challenges than one's parents, neighbors, children, etc.  --  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2529
 	From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" 
Date: Sun Mar 9, 2003 2:11 am
Subject: Re: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	ozblueriver

  	  	

PJ was saying:

>>>>It is very easy to say for example that if personX was 'attacked by a
> negative entity' that this might be their belief systems or whatever. On
> some level that's likely true, but on another level, it's invalidating if
> I act like that somehow means "it's all their fault".  If one's neighbor
> flips out, comes over and beats the crud out of them, technically by the
> same philosophy one created that too -- but that doesn't mean we wouldn't
> expect the police to consider the neighbor guilty, not us!>>>>>>>>

PJ, this is one of my biggest dilammas in life. I always seem to have to operate
from one of two differing perspectives. It's like having one foot in one world
and the other in a totally different world yet they are the same world. I have
no idea how to reconsile the two levels without doing the splits. LOL

cheers Liz

Reply | Forward
	
#2545
 	From: "Eva" 
Date: Sun Mar 9, 2003 1:52 pm
Subject: Re: Protecting /Securing Your RV Data 	k9caninek9

  	  	

Maybe our concept of 'fault' is an idea of our own creation that has
little or no bearing of how the greater universe works.
-E

> PJ was saying:
> on another level, it's invalidating if
> > I act like that somehow means "it's all their fault".

------------------------
Moderator's note: I agree with that. I don't think fault, or "good vs. bad" or
anything else is applicable to more than our interpretation. -- PJ