Comments on: ¡Atención!", "1234567890"

¡Atención!", "1234567890"

rongorongo — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:31:28 -0800

Find a short wave radio and before long you should be able to tune into The Lincolnshire Poacher - the station plays an introduction comprising part of the eponymous folk tune followed by a robotic female voice reading strings of numbers: listen! So called Numbers Stations have been a mysterious constant of short wave radio for several decades. The Conet Project [previously 1, 2, 3] has made a collection of the recordings available allowing you to listen to "Ready! Ready! 15728", "The Buzzer" (especially mysterious), "Gong Station Chimes", "Magnetic Fields" and many others....

Nobody will admit to owning or running these stations - but, since the 70s, a small community of followers has been gathering information on them in sites like Spynumbers, in books like Simon Mason's "Secret Signals" and as samples that have made their way into tracks like "Gyroscope" from the Boards of Canada. NPR recorded the spooky "Shortwave Numbers Mystery" and The Washington Post profiled Londoner Akin Fernandez who was behind the Conet CDs. The most credible theory is that the stations are for the benefit of spies (for MI6 in the case of the Lincolnshire Poacher) and that they are broadcasting messages for use with one time pads. In the UK, by the way, you are breaking the law by listening to these transmissions - and, as a spokesperson from the British ministry of defence said (quoted by Wired), "These [numbers stations] are what you suppose they are - people shouldn't be mystified by them. They're not, shall we say, for public consumption." That's OK then. Message ends.

By: kalessin

kalessin — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:41:24 -0800

Brilliant and batshitinsane.

By: Mid

Mid — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:42:35 -0800

One of my favs: the Yosemite Sam station [.wav]. That's some sort of data burst just before the Sam part.

By: thandal

thandal — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:42:49 -0800

Don't forget the woodpecker

By: Artw

Artw — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:44:31 -0800

Great post.

By: Slack-a-gogo

Slack-a-gogo — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:48:30 -0800

Numbers stations are my ghost stories. Between that slightly eerie shortwave radio fidelity, the hypnotic tones of the announcers, and their mysterious origins they freak me out, yet I keep going back to the Conet Project discs and the many audio snippets and links found here Simon Mason's site. The hair is standing up on the back of my neck just thinking about it. I was hooked on numbers station back when I first read about them in one of William Poundstone's Big Secrets book, even though it took another decade before I actually heard one.

By: dirtdirt

dirtdirt — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:48:37 -0800

I have a bunch of those conet recordings on my iPod, and it's just so peculiar to have them pop up in shuffle. I love these things, they are so spooky and weird and COOL. they make me want to get a short wave radio.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:50:18 -0800

The Conet Project has spent a fair amount of time in the flapjax home CD player over the years. It's a classic, for sure!

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:51:39 -0800

Presumably there are "numbers sites" out on the Internet somewhere. Or torrents with innocent (relatively) names but odd data contents.

By: Slack-a-gogo

Slack-a-gogo — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:59:29 -0800

dirtdirt : I have a bunch of those conet recordings on my iPod, and it's just so peculiar to have them pop up in shuffle. I did the same thing, and occasionally it can disorienting if you're not paying attention. dirtdirt : they make me want to get a short wave radio I got a cheap cheap shortwave radio and spent weeks trying to tune these in and, even with the aid of an online broadcast guide and somebody in my area in IM directing to me one I should be able to hear - I couldn't get any. So my advice would be to get a good shortwave. I've been trying to convince Mrs Slack that we need a shortwave radio more than we need a new washing machine, but she's not going along.

By: ardgedee

ardgedee — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:03:40 -0800

> I first read about them in one of William Poundstone's Big Secrets books So did I, when I borrowed a friend's copy. Years later, I got a copy of my own, a cheap British reprint, and was disappointed to find it missing the chapter on the numbers stations. This makes for an implicit admission on the part of the British government, and therefore even creepier.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:06:35 -0800

The cracking challenges sound fun, but I'm surely vastly underequipped (in terms of radio hardware, mathematical know-how and time) to consider a real attempt.

By: Malor

Malor — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:10:22 -0800

Great post. If they are using one-time pads, then it wouldn't matter how long you listened to the numbers. You'd never be able to make sense of it. OTPs are only breakable if someone screws up and uses some of the numbers twice, and only for the section of the OTP that was repeated. With the advent of easily-writable DVD storage, getting tons of random data in the hands of agents is dead simple. (But, of course, you have the operational problem of making damn sure that the OTPs don't fall into enemy hands.) Without the pad, the data stream is entirely eavesdrop-proof. So, listen, don't listen, whatever. Doesn't matter. There's no point in a law against it. :) I don't have the book handy to check, but I'm pretty sure Cryptonomicon talked about how some messages from some OTPs were broken. Whatever agency this was hired a nice little old lady to spin a tumbler of ping pong balls with numbers on them, pick balls out at random, and write the numbers down. But, bless her heart, she sometimes didn't think the numbers looked 'random enough', and changed what she drew. This narrowed the problem space enough that the enemy was able to partially intercept some messages. Don't know if this is true or not, but it's a great story -- the little old lady leaking state secrets because she just wanted to, you know, help. :) Presumably there are "numbers sites" out on the Internet somewhere. Or torrents with innocent (relatively) names but odd data contents. It'd likely be fairly trivial to bury messages in, say, comment fields for video formats, or in revision histories for Word documents. There are tools to detect steganographic data, but there's so much data that it'd be extremely difficult to catch the leaves out of the electronic storm. The detection tools we know about are oriented around finding data from known packages; it seems to me that a clever antagonist would likely write custom software. I suspect a few 'random' bits per picture in, say, EBay auctions, would be remarkably hard to detect. You can say an awful lot with a tiny amount of actual bandwidth... consider that fleets used to be run with cloth flags on masts, and just how much got done with the telegraph.

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:11:51 -0800

Double.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:17:10 -0800

Whatever agency this was hired a nice little old lady to spin a tumbler of ping pong balls with numbers on them, pick balls out at random, and write the numbers down. Even during WWII, there were surely more efficient ways of generating random numbers. I suspect a few 'random' bits per picture in, say, EBay auctions, would be remarkably hard to detect. In fact, I seem to remember a guy who searched ebay images for steganographic data.

By: rongorongo

rongorongo — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:21:17 -0800

Presumably there are "numbers sites" out on the Internet somewhere. Or torrents with innocent (relatively) names but odd data contents. I am sure there must be. However the beauty of radio-based numbers stations is that they give no clue to their audience. A radio is a pretty innocuous device if you are found out so the only vulnerable element is the one time pad itself - (which, in the Russian version at least, was made to have edible sheets). If a technically competent enemy bugs or captures your computer, on the other hand, then I suspect you will have to have been pretty diligent to effectively hide your trail.

By: tellurian

tellurian — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:29:14 -0800

So my advice would be to get a good shortwave. After my post I was pretty enthused and after some heavy hinting, ended up with a short wave for my birthday. I spent several weeks in the backyard trying to rig up a decent antenna (figuring that was what was needed) to howls of derision and 'nerd' from family members (they just don't understand) and the sucker never worked properly (cue more howls of derision and 'nerd'). As rschram said in that thread "In my experience, those cheap radios work only in remote areas." I haven't had the opportunity to try that out yet... but one day.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:31:43 -0800

Lots of talk about OTPs, but it should be easy to tell if these are OTP messages: The data will be random. Given that, I just took the first two rows of this message and subjected it to a randomness test. (I excluded the obvious error-detecting duplication of every number.) Result: "Moderate evidence against randomness" So it may not be OTPs after all. Given my experience with Security Departments, they like to see lots of machinery and care little or nothing about actual security. They would love a huge long algorithm with lots of complicated software and would not much like "we give them a disc of random numbers" however much better it would really be.

By: crapmatic

crapmatic — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:43:48 -0800

That gong station would make a great opener to Josie.

By: crapmatic

crapmatic — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:47:29 -0800

Is Magnetic Fields a veiled reference to Jean Michel Jarre, or is it his music?

By: mephron

mephron — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:01:57 -0800

Double. posted by grouse at 7:11 AM on June 30 [+] [!] Eponysterical, indeed.

By: casconed

casconed — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:32:03 -0800

This teeters on being eponysterical.

By: casconed

casconed — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:33:00 -0800

+grumble grumble+ tabs.

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:33:53 -0800

Double.

By: regicide is good for you

regicide is good for you — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:34:57 -0800

Great post about a compellingly creepy subject. I'd never known about this stuff. Thank you. Ghost stories, indeed.

By: christopherious

christopherious — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:08:46 -0800

Another "previously" (sorry if I overlooked it above).

By: owtytrof

owtytrof — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:13:01 -0800

I introduced some friends to these around 2am on a Saturday night a few weeks back. Dimly lit house, two of us with a slight beer buzz, the other two sober. I kept playing mp3 samples until I was told "Seriously, you're scaring me. Stop!" When listening to these, or sometimes just thinking of them, my eyes mysteriously start watering.

By: RufusW

RufusW — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:29:45 -0800

Agreed, very spooky. Can't an MI5 or CIA agent just connect to a friendly satellite?

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:37:11 -0800

The analog deliciousness of numbers stations is incredibly addicting. It's right up there with driving late at night and trying to tune-in the distant stations-between-stations on AM. It has this certain human scale that immediately connects on a deep level. Discovering mysteries.

By: inthe80s

inthe80s — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:38:50 -0800

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:53:09 -0800

Agreed, very spooky. Can't an MI5 or CIA agent just connect to a friendly satellite? Sure, but that would require launching one or more satellites, developing receivers, establishing a secure one-way communication system that isn't vulnerable to eavesdropping, and making sure no part of the technology falls into enemy hands. Number stations require setting up one or two shortwave stations, which can be anywhere with reliable power and equipping your agents with one-time pad info (up for debate, obviously). Agents require pen and paper and a radio.

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:54:08 -0800

Can't an MI5 or CIA agent just connect to a friendly satellite? Remember, the people these broadcasts are meant for are, presumably, undercover. Putting up the sort of assembly necessary to connect to a CIA satellite would most likely draw unwanted attention. Think about the typical US neighborhood...anything on the roof of a house beyond a DirecTV dish or a TV antenna is going to be noticed.

By: gangster_computer_god

gangster_computer_god — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:54:44 -0800

I too bought a SW receiver after hearing the Conet Project, but seemingly unlike the rest of the mefi nerds i actually managed to find quite a few numbers stations, although it took a 15 metre antenna and an antenna tuner to get decent reception. The Lincolnshire Poacher is the easiest to find, always starts on the hour and plays for 45 minutes - i seem to recall it plays every day except Sunday - hey, even spooks get a day off. Awesome to put it on when guests came round. Wait until it's 5 minutes to the hour and let em sit there listening to static for a while and then freak out when the music starts.

By: medeine

medeine — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:01:06 -0800

I too have a few of these Conet tracks on my ipod, and they bring back fond/creepy memories. I first read about these numbers stations when I was 10 or so, in a book called Big Secrets. Which led me to messing around with my dad's world band radio in the basement, late at night, in often-successful attempts to locate these stations. Which led to some serious hair-standing-up-on-the-back-of-my-neck moments.

By: Malor

Malor — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:05:34 -0800

Whatever agency this was hired a nice little old lady to spin a tumbler of ping pong balls with numbers on them, pick balls out at random, and write the numbers down. Actually, even NOW this is a hard problem. Electronic generation of true random numbers is extremely difficult. Anything that uses an algorithm to generate random numbers isn't actually random, and most computers don't have a high-quality internal source of entropy to use. So, mostly they use algorithms that get reseeded periodically from sources that are believed to have good entropy. This is much weaker than a true RNG. From what little I know on the subject, I gather that attacking random number generators is an area of research. It's a soft spot in most modern cryptography... the fact that our random numbers aren't really random. Aunt Mildred in the basement with the ping-pong balls is low-tech and slow, but she'd be an extremely high-quality source of entropy, as long she didn't change any of the numbers. If lives were on the line, I think I'd rather have her generating my code sheets than a computer, even in 2008. The depth of paranoia you need in that field is just astonishing. Cryptographers are terrifyingly intelligent. If you're interested in this stuff, Cryptonomicon is a great read. The story's kind of so-so, but the underlying history in the book is fascinating.

By: Malor

Malor — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:06:32 -0800

Darn it, I picked out the wrong reply-to quote there. The italics above should be: Even during WWII, there were surely more efficient ways of generating random numbers.

By: christopherious

christopherious — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:18:48 -0800

Apparently radio isn't the only place to creep oneself out.

"'Wake up out there!' Then more numbers. (Keel's informants recall the statement as "Wake up down there!" Since I never achieved a clear-as-a-bell connection, I suppose either reading is possible.) More rarely, I heard gibberish sessions--the odd, sped-up instructions in a strangely familiar foreign language. Imagine Alvin the Chipmunk on amphetamines delivering a lecture in Spanish . . ." -Martin Cannon, "The Numbers Game," The Anomalist 1, Summer 1994, p. 40). (Note: Current externally-hosted PDF link seems broken to me, so here's a Wayback alternative just in case).

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:18:51 -0800

Electronic generation of true random numbers is extremely difficult. Anything that uses an algorithm to generate random numbers isn't actually random, and most computers don't have a high-quality internal source of entropy to use. Oh, I know. I'm just thinking....static? I seem to remember a project that was using lava lamps. For that matter, use an AuntMildredBot that does the same thing with the ping pong balls, but automatically and at high speed. You could put an RFID chip or similar in each one. In 1942 I don't know what you'd use, but if I had a budget and a need for more than a few bits per hour, I'm sure I'd sure find something. A coin-flipping robot would probably be doable. Use two different metals for the opposite sides (but be sure the weights are the same) and measure the conductivity of the face down side? No wait, even better: Make a grid on the floor such that a dropped coin of diameter D has exactly a 50% chance of connecting two terminals. Then keep flipping and checking. If you're interested in this stuff, Cryptonomicon is a great read. Applied Cryptography is even better.

By: christopherious

christopherious — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:22:09 -0800

Forgot to mention that Cannon was, in the above-linked article, relating some of his telephone looping experiments.

By: KirkJobSluder

KirkJobSluder — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:27:13 -0800

Applied Cryptography is even better. The Codebreakers is even better, and is probably the source for much of the Cryptonomicon.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:30:21 -0800

The Codebreakers is even better I stood in the library a few months ago, fondling that book. I really want to read it but I also really don't want to get side-tracked off the projects I'm already working on. What I want is to have already read it.

By: PHINC

PHINC — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:40:41 -0800

I used a numbers station track to make this short film.

By: greenie2600

greenie2600 — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:12:00 -0800

I love this shit. I have the Conet Project CDs, and they're just...wow. There's something unearthly about these stations. I guess the mystery of their origins, and the absence of any explanation for them, makes it seem like they have no origin or explanation—like they're emanating spontaneously from the ether, or through a fissure to some parallel reality. The message is distilled until all that's left is inexplicability. After all, that's the intent—to keep the contents and the origin of the transmission unknown. And then there's the way shortwave transmission affects the audio signal (heterodyning, general degradation), the foreignness of the languages, the weird archaism of the technology...it all adds up to a supremely surreal listening experience.

By: jtron

jtron — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:08:19 -0800

Much like PHINC, I used the number stations for soundtrack purposes.

By: blastrid

blastrid — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:16:59 -0800

I've been fascinated with this ever since I bought Geogaddi the day it came out and listened to it in my bedroom with headphones on at 2am. Because I don't have a SW Radio, on late-night drives I often tune to static on AM just because it's beautiful. There are online receivers that you can remotely tune; the biggest I've found being DX Tuners. I refuse to get RealPlayer to listen to that NPR piece, so I found this alternative here. Just scroll down to the December 10 show. I'm listening now, so I don't know yet the value of the accompanying pieces about North Korean transmission decoding and pirate radio.

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:45:26 -0800

I responsible for the Magnetic Fields one. I did it cause, hey, it seemed like the thing to do at the time.

By: cropshy

cropshy — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:56:46 -0800

I first heard numbers stations back in the early 80's when I was getting heavily into shortwave. It's rare these days that I listen to shortwave, but I'm always a little surprised when the subject of numbers stations comes up because part of me has a hard time believing that such quaint things still exist.

By: msalt

msalt — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:29:01 -0800

It would be cool to hear a DJ (RJ?) who mixed different radio signals, mixing maybe actual danceable music with some shortwave oddities such as numbers stations and radio clocks like WWV. Anybody doing that?

By: The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew

The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:36:57 -0800

Sometimes I play the Conet Project CD's really loud in my room (because I love them). It freaked my roommates out pretty hard the first time I did it.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:45:40 -0800

It freaked my roommates out pretty hard the first time I did it. posted by The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew Well, your roommate has always seemed a little high-strung to me.

By: greenie2600

greenie2600 — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:12:17 -0800

msalt, have you heard of Scanner? Not exactly what you're talking about, perhaps, but his music is based around live cell phone and police-band transmissions, mixed with other electronic sound. Interesting stuff.

By: jason's_planet

jason's_planet — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:18:54 -0800

odinsdream said: Number stations require setting up one or two shortwave stations, which can be anywhere with reliable power and equipping your agents with one-time pad info (up for debate, obviously). One theory I've heard is that some agencies don't use pads, that the numbers refer to specific words in, say, a dictionary, a holy book, or something else that doesn't shout "foreign infiltrator."

By: thewalledcity

thewalledcity — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:27:50 -0800

For those who are looking for the Conet Project recordings, they are available on archive.org

By: Oyéah

Oyéah — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:40:22 -0800

Well downloading this stuff, and watching it on Windows Media Player, makes it even stranger. I have to think that there is plenty to know in all those squiggles, especially the ones that look like that Julia construct, if that is what it is called. It is delightfully creepy, and listening, is somewhat like being programmed from space, oooooeeeeeooooo. Ack Mak! Where is the Slim Whitman music?

By: Durn Bronzefist

Durn Bronzefist — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 01:21:07 -0800

Maybe there was more of this activity in the late 80s and early 90s, but I never had a hard time finding these stations when I was growing up and playing around with shortwave with a cheap radio. Still love hearing them from time to time even though I no longer own a radio. Same here. My family has always had shortwave radios around, and it was something I made sure I had when I moved out on my own (chiefly so I could listen to the BBC). Loads of morse out there, and occasional numbers stations, though it's been awhile since I listened, so I wonder if you're right and they're just not so common nowadays.

By: rongorongo

rongorongo — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 03:56:08 -0800

One theory I've heard is that some agencies don't use pads, that the numbers refer to specific words in, say, a dictionary, a holy book, or something else that doesn't shout "foreign infiltrator." I believe this is called a Book Cipher or Running Key Cipher. The second wikipedia link explains why this technique can be insecure due to combined low entropy of characters in the plain text and the cipher text. The KGB apparently told agents to use a book with characters which were as random looking as possible. The NPR radio program linked above has a section about a Chinese numbers station where a very up-beat woman says something like "Hi guys - a good morning to you all and get your numbers here!". They then raise the possibility that some stations might actually be broadcasting nothing meaningful at all. For the meagre cost of running an SW transmitter the Chinese could tie up a team of Taiwanese intelligence experts and also give the impression that their country might be swarming with happy enemy agents.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 04:20:58 -0800

Remember that Lennon tape-collage piece from the White Album? It had that voice intoning "number nine... number nine... number nine..." Hmm...

By: fearfulsymmetry

fearfulsymmetry — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 04:46:46 -0800

This stuff's great... I've been fascinated by it ever since Mark Thomas did a section on it in his show. (And probably not unrelated to the fact that I'm from Lincolnshire)

By: fearfulsymmetry

fearfulsymmetry — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 04:54:21 -0800

NumberStationsUK Tracking the Lincolnshire Poacher

By: duncan42

duncan42 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 06:12:26 -0800

For some reason, my family had a shortwave receiver built into our 'music center' in the 70s (was this unusual?). Therefore, I stumbled upon all of this number oddness, while searching for stations to improve my schoolboy French. It disturbed me then, but it was one of many disturbing things in those cold war days. Now reading that my worst suspicions of that time are confirmed, that this apparently government sponsored psychotic stuff lingers and persists even thrives, I am once again ... somewhat freaked out.

By: dirtdirt

dirtdirt — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:25:56 -0800

One theory I've heard is that some agencies don't use pads, that the numbers refer to specific words in, say, a dictionary, a holy book, or something else that doesn't shout "foreign infiltrator." This might do in a pinch, but it relies on the secrecy of the "dictionary", and security through obscurity is basically no security at all. Once the other spooks get ahold of your dictionary, all your messages (even the ones you've already sent and received) are readable, and you are up a creek. Worse still, there is no way to KNOW that your dictionary is secure, so you think you are operating in secrecy, but the bad (or good!) guys actually know your every move? Fuck that. More likely, I think, would be a combination of a pad, numbers station, and dictionary. The pad for cryptographic reliabilty, the numbers station for up-to-date messaging, and the dictionary allows for higher bandwidth messaging (numbers to words is more efficient than numbers to letters).

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:28:15 -0800

For some reason, my family had a shortwave receiver built into our 'music center' in the 70s (was this unusual?). Yes. Your father was a spy.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:29:28 -0800

Actually, even NOW this is a hard problem. Electronic generation of true random numbers is extremely difficult. That's what HotBits is for! This would be easy enough to set up independently, given the appropriate materials.

By: msalt

msalt — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:12:46 -0800

That's what HotBits is for! (Electronic generation of true random numbers ) Unless of course some government agency provides Hotbits and tracks it.

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:43:03 -0800

I swear by gum the Chinese one is the woman who sold "numbers" on the corner by my house in Beijing. She had this loudspeaker/handset that let her record a message and then play it back, all day, at ear splitting volume and completely garbled distortion. I always assumed that she was reading off the winning numbers for the day, who knew she was an international spy?

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:46:57 -0800

msalt, which is why if you were serious enough about your random number generator to use a radioactive source, you'd use one of your own design, not that one. It's the principle that's important - that randomness is all around us, and you don't need a special algorithm to take advantage of it.

By: Durn Bronzefist

Durn Bronzefist — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:08:13 -0800

It's too late to track the Poacher over short wave. They've changed their M.O. (their M.O.O.?)

By: msalt

msalt — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:16:50 -0800

f you were serious enough about your random number generator to use a radioactive source, you'd use one of your own design, not that one. Makes sense. Though if you're trying to be discreet, wouldn't obtaining decaying radioactive isotopes be kinda rowdy?

By: DU

DU — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:35:23 -0800

..wouldn't obtaining decaying radioactive isotopes be kinda rowdy? WalMart sells them...inside of smoke detectors.

By: Artw

Artw — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:40:06 -0800

No using them to make cat-gassing boxes.

By: greenie2600

greenie2600 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:27:05 -0800

Artw, that's exactly what my mother always used to say. Spoilsports, the both of you.

By: not_on_display

not_on_display — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:21:00 -0800

Just minutes ago, I stumbled into that irdial.hyperreal.org page, while looking for audio files from the Conet Project, for a special project a friend and I are working on. My jaw dropped when the page loaded. The next thought I had was: OMG must get this on MeFi!! And that's how I found this post. Yeah, it's a pretty awesome site, huh! I had a shortwave radio on my boom box when I was a kid, and kept myself up late many a night, slooooowly turning the knob. I'd run into these stations a lot and it'd give me little chills, hearing numbers recited in foreign tongues or in English, wondering, from where? why? what's that weird music? Thanks for posting this stuff!