Zero Knowledge
Patron⌗
SIGNAL⌗
The Valkyrie says, “There are no secret messages in this video… However, there will be, if you look for them.” - @4:06
ANALYSIS⌗
My problem exactly. It is exceedingly difficult to know if the “messages” I’m seeing truly exist, or if I’m “reaching” for meaning that isn’t there.
SIGNAL⌗
The Valkyrie says, “Some of my trigger words and props come from the birds. They give the best ideas. Can you tell me if they’re giving any good ideas now? …sometimes, from bird to bird, it goes through different translations… I wonder how much gets lost in translation? What if I’m doing their ideas wrong?” - @8:13
ANALYSIS⌗
All of the collaborators at pen.university have been given bird-related code names. While I would agree that “birds” have given the most and the best of my ideas, they’ve been quiet as of late. I find ASMR to be so incredibly repetitive and boring; it’s been a long time since I’ve seen anything that truly impressed me. I have been so uninspired by ASMR in recent months.
If “lost in translation” refers to the way that secret messages are being delivered (i.e. in plain sight), then there are almost certainly details being lost. Without proper verification, one can never be certain that a message was sent or received accurately.
SIGNAL⌗
The Valkyrie says, “Did you remember the thing you were supposed to remember? This is not a test… I’m sending it to you now… Let me know when it gets to you… If you can figure it out, you’re going to figure it out without getting the answer from someone else.” - @13:00
ANALYSIS⌗
I remember my activation word (if that’s actually what it is.)
You people never tell me anything. You never confirm anything. You never just give me the damn answers.
SIGNAL⌗
The Valkyrie says, “I want you to send me a gift. This gift will be a new color. One that I haven’t seen… I’m talking about one that I haven’t even imagined.” - @22:01
ANALYSIS⌗
It’s funny you should mention this. My activation word is a new color.
It also relates to something I’ve talked a lot about, zero-knowledge proofs:
Imagine your friend is red-green colour-blind (while you are not) and you have two balls: one red and one green, but otherwise identical. To your friend they seem completely identical and he is skeptical that they are actually distinguishable. You want to prove to him they are in fact differently-coloured, but nothing else; in particular, you do not want to reveal which one is the red and which is the green ball.
Here is the proof system. You give the two balls to your friend and he puts them behind his back. Next, he takes one of the balls and brings it out from behind his back and displays it. He then places it behind his back again and then chooses to reveal just one of the two balls, picking one of the two at random with equal probability. He will ask you, “Did I switch the ball?” This whole procedure is then repeated as often as necessary.
By looking at their colours, you can, of course, say with certainty whether or not he switched them. On the other hand, if they were the same colour and hence indistinguishable, there is no way you could guess correctly with probability higher than 50%.
Since the probability that you would have randomly succeeded at identifying each switch/non-switch is 50%, the probability of having randomly succeeded at all switch/non-switches approaches zero (“soundness”). If you and your friend repeat this “proof” multiple times (e.g. 100 times), your friend should become convinced (“completeness”) that the balls are indeed differently coloured.
The above proof is zero-knowledge because your friend never learns which ball is green and which is red; indeed, he gains no knowledge about how to distinguish the balls.
I now know what I must do.
I must prove to the world that I can see colors they cannot.