Media Hoaxhunter Razimus Says He Knows Who John Titor Is

[titorite]

Ren.... how long have you been at this? Over a decade now. Their comes a time to stop playing around buddy. just saying. As for Raz.... we all know he is nothing but a blow hard ginger clinging to 15 minutes of Internet fame. An incompetent debunker that is more than willing to lie to prove his version of thought. ....

 

[Samstwitch]

Ren.... how long have you been at this? Over a decade now. Their comes a time to stop playing around buddy. just saying. As for Raz.... we all know he is nothing but a blow hard ginger clinging to 15 minutes of Internet fame. An incompetent debunker that is more than willing to lie to prove his version of thought. ....

Hey, Ren has a right to post here just like you and everybody else. Admittedly, sometimes he gets carried away, but he's been behaving.

I'm glad Ren posted this video. It's definitely something many of us are interested in, if only for the reason of disproving it. So be respectful please.

 

[Ren]

 

[Ren]

So Sam and Pam, what do you think?

 

[Samstwitch]

Thanks for posting this Ren! I'm watching it now. Will post my assessment when done.

 

[Ren]

I'll be waiting. I just sent an email to Morey asking him to tell me what he is thinking.

 

[Ren]

Ren.... how long have you been at this? Over a decade now. Their comes a time to stop playing around buddy. just saying. As for Raz.... we all know he is nothing but a blow hard ginger clinging to 15 minutes of Internet fame. An incompetent debunker that is more than willing to lie to prove his version of thought. ....

Titorite. I've been on the commercial Internet since 1992. On military only Reuters News Service since 1989. That's how long I've been doing this. I was born to do this.

 

[BlastTyrant]

I never followed the Titor theory much as i find it to be a large hoax, but i am curious as to what sam and pam have to say about the video

 

[Samstwitch]

MY ASSESSMENT

I watched the entire video with an open mind. I was expecting some big revelation. It did not arrive. Before I go into detail about my assessment, I would like to say that I am a writer. I notice word usage, linguistics, writing styles, etc., because I am a writer.

Here's my assessment.

Razimus found writings by a guy named "Morey Haber" on the Internet. Razimus says, Morey is Larry Haber's brother. (Larry Haber is the attorney for John Titor's mother, Kay.)

Razimus did a comparison study between the writings of John Titor and Morey Haber. Razimus claims the linguistics, the word phrases, word usage, etc. between John Titor and Morey Haber are the same...and in HIS OPINION, the two guys are one-in-the-same. Razimus believes Morey Haber is John Titor.

I watched the comparisons presented by Razimus. I read an article by Morey Haber. I have read all of the John Titor postings. The comparisons were totally LAME. Here are some of my reasons:

1) Morey Haber and John Titor both have an extensive use of vocabulary, but that does not mean they are the same person. In fact, the writing styles between John Titor and Morey Haber are VERY DIFFERENT. See for yourself. I posted an Article by Morey Haber at the bottom of this Comment, or view the Article by Morey Haber here: The Apple way of (in)security - Apple, security - CSO | The Resource for Data Security Executives
View writings by John Titor at: JohnTitor.com

2) Razimus, CONTINUALLY compared HIS OWN use of vocabulary to Morey Haber's and John Titor's vocabulary. This was not a good comparison. It is very obvious to me that Razimus has a very limited vocabulary compared to Morey or John (or myself).

Example: For instance, Razimus said he doesn't use the word baseline, and he doesn't know anyone who uses the word baseline. He shows where Morey and John use the word baseline.

MOREY HABER: "you must first establish a baseline"
MOREY HABER: "just coming up with a stable baseline"
JOHN TITOR: "It throws off the baseline no stress readings."

First, Morey and John use the word baseline in a different context. Morey uses the word as a noun. John uses the word as descriptive to a noun. (I think that's an Adjective, can't remember.)
Second, even though Razimus doesn't use the word baseline, many other very intelligent people in the world use the word baseline. That is why it is in the English dictionary.

MORE EXAMPLES: Below are words used by John and Morey that Razimus thinks are uncommon and indicate John and Morey are the same person:

Unix
streamlined
syntex
exponentially
periodically

I use the words exponentially, periodically, and streamlined. Does that mean I'm John Titor?!!!

3) Razimus said, both John and Morey each used in a sentence the word infrastructure with regards to computers. Razimus believes using the word infrastructure in regards to computers is uncommon and a giveaway that Morey is John Titor...BUT here's what I found on the Internet regarding the definition of the word infrastructure: "In information technology and on the Internet, infrastructure is the physical hardware used to interconnect computers and users." SOURCE: What is infrastructure? - Definition from WhatIs.com

Keep in mind that John Titor lived in the year 2036 where computers were very advanced. I'm going out on a limb here, but I'd guess that in the year 2036, with the exponential increase in technology today leading up to that point in time, the word infrastructure might be used even more often in regards to computers (as it is also used today).

Also keep in mind that Morey Haber is not only a writer, but Vice President of Business Development for eEye Digital Security (a provider of unified vulnerability and compliance management solutions based in Irvine, Calif.) so computer lingo/language is a big part of his vocabulary. Meaning, it would not be unusual for him to periodically use the word infrastructure when discussing computers.

4) Razimus noted that John Titor and Morey Haber both used the following 3-6 word phrases that are, in HIS OPINION, uncommon. I have news for Razimus...I ALSO USE THESE PHRASES!!! Does that mean I could be John Titor?!!!

has the ability (3 word match)
is based on the number of (6 word match)
in the last few months (5 word match)
As long as the (4 word match)
I do not want (4 word match)
For more information on (4 word match)
for the same reason (4 word match)
be used as a (4 word match)
do not have a (4 word match)
do not have any (4 word match)
if you want to (4 word match)
have a chance to (4 word match)
have the ability to (4 word match)
here are a few (4 word match)
I am aware of (4 word match)
I have seen a (4 word match)
I look forward to (4 word match)
I would like to (4 word match)
in the first place (4 word match)
is about the same (4 word match)
is not enough to (4 word match)
know the answer to (4 word match)
much more of a (4 word match)
I do not want (4 word match)

5) Razimus notes that John Titor and Morey Haber do not often use contractions in their writings.

Definition of contractions used in this context: a shortened form of a word or group of words, with the omitted letters often replaced in written English by an apostrophe, as don't for do not, isn't for is not, etc.

I AM GUILTY OF THIS AS WELL. Many times in my writings, I do not use contractions. Does this mean I could be John Titor???

6) Here's a direct quote from Razimus: "And now here's a six-word phrase match 'can have a drastic impact on'. I don't know anyone that uses this six-word phrase match, but both Morey Haber and John Titor do."

THAT IS RIDICULOUS. I have used that six-word phrase myself. Does this mean I could be John Titor???

7) Razimus notes a comparison where both Morey and John use a 4-word match how do you know ending with a 'Question Mark'. Razimus believes this to be unusual.

To that I say: DUH, how do you know ends with a Question Mark, because that phrase IS A QUESTION.

8) Razimus compares Morey Haber using the word "AutoCad" to John Titor using the word "CAD".

IMO, this is another STUPID comparison. Those are two different words!

9) Razimus notes two sentences where both John and Morey use the phrase ask yourself how many.

A direct quote from Razimus: "I've never used the phrase 'ask yourself how many' very often, but I have heard some people use it, and it's probably slightly older people from myself..."

Then Razimus notes the 2 places where John and Morey use the phrase.

MOREY HABER: "First, ask youself how many Windows 2000 Workstations and Servers you have deployed in your environment?"

JOHN TITOR: "Yes. You will be forced to ask yourself how many civil rights you will give up to feel safe."

IMO, this is another stupid comparison. Many intelligent people use the term ask yourself how many. It is not that uncommon.

10) Razimus compares John and Morey using two DIFFERENT variations of the word observe. Here are the two PHRASES that Razimus sites as being the same...even though they are NOT the same words.

MOREY HABER: "set of observations"
JOHN TITOR: "set of observables"

IMO, another STUPID comparison.

11) At the end of the Video, Razimus says (as if these 4-word phrases are something important to compare):

DIRECT QUOTE FROM RAZIMUS: "I will end with the following quotes."

"I do not want to draw additional attention to myself." - John Titor

"I do not want to be hidden from the Internet." - Morey Haber

"I do not want???"

IMO, another VERY STUPID comparison.

MY CONCLUSIONS: I would like to point out, again, that I use many of the same phrases, words, and non-contractions that John Titor and Morey Haber use, however, I AM NOT JOHN TITOR! IMO, neither is Morey Haber, LOL. Morey Haber and John Titor are NOT the same person.

P.S. Excuse me for using the word "STUPID", but if the shoe fits...

Last, but not least, here is an Article written by Morey Haber for you to compare his style of writing with John Titor's. IMO, they are totally different.

The Apple way of (in)security
Morey Haber — 15 April, 2010

When will Apple become a juicy target for hackers and cyber-crooks? Industry experts have predicted that as Apple's market share grows, so will the malware targeting its platforms.

To date, this has yet to happen, but why?

Is the Mac really that much more secure than the PC in terms of design or policy? Or is Apple's market share still below some sort of malware tipping point? After all, the PC has a much larger market share and is the platform of choice for most businesses. Thus, it's a far more enticing target for hackers. Right?

Not necessarily. There are two key markets where Apple is a leader: MP3 players and smart phones. iPods rule the music world, and even as they've become internet-capable, hackers have ignored them. Contrast that to USB storage, printers and other peripherals that have posed serious security problems. (Pentagon Slammed by Cyber Attack | Defense Tech)

The same is true of the iPhone. Granted, the iPhone isn't the smart-phone leader in terms of market share (that would be BlackBerry in the U.S. and Symbian worldwide) (Smartphone Sales Up 24 Percent, iPhone's Share Nearly Doubled Last Year (Gartner) | TechCrunch), but it's surely number one in terms of prestige.

Yet, the attacks are few and far between.

This doesn't mean Apple platforms don't have vulnerabilities. They do. Plenty of them. The March software update of the Leopard and Snow Leopard operating systems corrected a record-setting 92 vulnerabilities, a third of which were critical. Apple's software has just as many flaws as everyone else's.

Control Mitigates Risk

What's different about Apple's software is that it is very tightly controlled.

The Apple way of security is this: control the hardware, tightly control your own software, control where users get third-party software, control what type of software can be installed and then control what that software can do after installation. As a result, you have controlled malware.

You may have a load of vulnerabilities, but this process makes it difficult for hackers to exploit them.

Despite industry and investor pressures, Apple has never decoupled its software from its hardware. In fact, when Mac clone companies have emerged, Apple has gone on the offensive with lawsuits and PR attacks. (Federal Judge Rules Against Scrappy Mac Clone Manufacturer Psystar – Consumerist)

With tight hardware control, Apple doesn't need to worry about a slew of hardware vulnerabilities, such as faulty drivers or communication ports accidentally left open by default.

Next, Apple strictly polices the software that runs on its devices. If you want your software on the iPhone, there's one way to do it: get pre-approved applications through the App Store.

You cannot add an app that does something malicious or questionable, such as piggybacking spyware, unless Apple approved the app in the first place. If you're embedding adware or spyware, good luck on getting approval.

If the approved app has some flaw that wasn't uncovered in the approval process, Apple's larger process will still mitigate the risk. Approved apps must be self contained, meaning that attacks that rely on function, file or buffer overflows can't be executed. Apple has thus eliminated an entire class of attack.

Even the browser, a juicy attack target, is closed off in Apple's world. Many plug-ins never get approved, even when they have broad acceptance. Case in point: Apple still doesn't allow Adobe Flash because of its security risks. The Flash player has direct access to the underlying operating system and file system. In Apple's world, that's risky behavior, and they refuse to allow it.

Control the device, control the operating system, control third-party software and add-ons, and again, you've essentially controlled malware.

If Apple's Way Is So Secure, Why Isn't Everyone Doing It?

Other vendors aren't following Apple's lead for some very compelling reasons. The first is price. By decoupling the operating system from hardware, competing hardware vendors drive down the price of the device.

This happened with PCs, as we all know, and it's happening again with smart-phones. Android had been on the market less than a year when the price point for many of its phones fell below $100 (factoring in carrier subsidies). Then, for the 2009 holiday season, carriers offered two-for-one deals, dropping the price below $50.

Apple never wins on price and never intends to. While this is all well and good when there is tangible product differentiation, as with the Mac, it's a more risky approach in the mobile market where hardware and operating systems are becoming less and less important, while immediate access to a wide array of apps is more so. Apple seems to recognize this--or is bowing to pressure from AT&T--since outdated iPhone models have been priced more and more competitively in the last few months.

The second disadvantage of Apple's way of security is flexibility. Do you need a custom application for your business? Then you'd better go with something other than Apple or brace yourself for a long, arduous approval process. Developing and running a custom app that doesn't have Apple's seal of approval violates the Apple EULA. It's easy to see why the PC is the platform of choice for most business sectors.

Third, there is the speed issue. The app market is changing so fast these days that a closed app store could soon be a competitive disadvantage. Consumers, especially younger ones, expect their phones to keep up with the latest fads. A closed market that forces a lengthy approval process on developers will always lag behind an open market.

Finally, all of these problems combine to create the problem of market share. Closed systems are good from a security and maybe even an aesthetic standpoint, but they rarely capture the market share of open platforms.

That doesn't mean Apple's choice isn't a good one. It works for them, but, unfortunately, this model doesn't translate well from this high-end niche to the broader market.

Is There a Middle Way?

Even though security and openness seem to be mutually exclusive, Google may have already stumbled upon a happy medium.

Android phones come locked down out of the box. The Android Market contains only approved apps, and the default mode is to only allow downloads from the Android Market.

Also see Android Security Chief: Phone Attacks Coming

Of course, it only takes a couple taps to open up your phone to outside apps, but at the very least, setting the device up this way protects a whole class of users from themselves. The naïve user who opens every spam and thinks CD-Rom trays are cup holders won't click out of default mode. Of course, they won't be early adopters of smart-phones, but we'll conveniently ignore that for the moment.

Granted, a simple default protection does nothing to address hardware flaws, OS exploits, flawed plug-ins, etc., but it may not have to. The heart of Google's strategy is to move everything off of the client and into the cloud.

Throw cloud computing into the mix and the Apple way may translate after all. If the time comes when pretty much anything of value resides in the cloud and not on the device, then hackers will shift their attention away from devices.

The risks won't disappear, but the burden is on cloud providers to handle these risks, not end users. And any time you take security decisions away from end users, you've improved security.

Morey Haber is Vice President of Business Development for eEye Digital Security, a provider of unified vulnerability and compliance management solutions based in Irvine, Calif. For information visit
Vulnerability Management - Assessment - Endpoint Protection - IT Security Software | eEye Digital Security
.

PARANORMALIS MEMBERS: PLEASE DO NOT REPOST THIS COMMENT IN IT'S ENTIRETY! It is too long to repost. If you want to make references, use EXCERPTS. Thanks.

 

[Samstwitch]

I just sent an email to Morey asking him to tell me what he is thinking.

You should send Morey a link to this thread and invite him to Paranormalis for a discussion on the matter. I would love to hear from him..........!