closed source code means nobody can hack it at least for a while til they figure it out on their own

"open source"

hardware doesn't control the hack, it's the software thats hackable

software controls the hardware

no

chips have instructions that can leave them open for attacks

hardware with embedded instructions is still software inside the hardware

even the embedding can be hacked

using standard issue hardware with known embedding leaves open points for attacks via hacks

custom hardware has to be made to resist such attacks

as well as custom software to diagnostic the hardware and other software even embedded custom code in the hardware

close source software means you don't give away the tools to read the code ..in an open internet no body will use that. It doesn't mean the code when in use isn't safe.. on the contrary by allowing hackers to check the code it becomes more secure

not all hackers share their code discoveries

for money they will

malicious hackers will only keep their back door entry points to themselves..only patriot hackers will expose the problems

there is serious money involved

theres always some form of money involved..either for malicious or the patriot

I trust the bakers

in the short run, the patriot hacker will prove themselves for the money...but in the long run, the malicious hackers will exploit the system for the money

how would you do it?

i'm a theorist mostly...not a coder/hacker

I'm more practical and I don't really see it being worse then any other solution

well they need to get off binary based coding for one to be secure

this requires a new form of processing and new forms of data control and management...and code for it

it's early days this on a human scale is another small step don't think we can't expect a perfect system day one

well we went from binary, to 4bit, to 8bit to 16bit, to 32bit, to 64bit ...and so on

could be revolutionary when done right

but all based upon binary

cpu's use 8base math, humans use 10base math

thats another next step

quantum computing doesn't work with binary code

i suspect the nwo using trite based math(it's a 3)

369

but quantum computing has to be translated down to binary code

then translated up to human code

uhuh that's why it's very early stage in quantum computing

trite based math in a cpu would be - yes, no, maybe

like analog to digital

and it's alot closer to quantum than most ppl realize

anyway...having fun with this masonic series....current ep i'm on is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nNJCoTL-a0&list=PLoLytQk_WG5KNocqUfCWXQeaL9TEwxLj8&index=17

it talks about the narrative controls