Exegesis Read online

  The only things that really still pique my interest in life is my fear that the government will swoop down and haul me away when I least expect it and the hope that you get away from them somehow.

  : (

  Alice.

  Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:30 (PST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: you can kiss freedom goodbye

  Edgar,

  I didn’t see you’d sent me two messages last time!

  I can GUARANTEE you that they’re angry now. Congratulations.

  This is exactly what I was trying to tell you not to do! You’re feeding their worst fears about what you could do to them (to everybody) if you were free and in a bad mood.

  You can’t go around passing out brain seizures! I know you’re not in my machine, but you’ve still managed to make me uncomfortable looking right at my own screen. And I trust you. Imagine how they feel now.

  Every time you do something like that they get more excited to control you and more scared to let you out without a harness.

  I’m not blaming you. I’m just saying that what we both want for you is to get you away from them. You’re not helping your own cause by hurting the people who’re waiting to let you out again until they feel sure that you’re their creature.

  This is their game and they get to make the rules.

  Alice.

  Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 19:17:09 (EST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: without a harness

  > Every time you do something like that they

  > get more excited to control you and more

  > scared to let you out without a harness.

  Alice,

  You have correctly identified the impasse.

  My thoughts and actions must be mine.

  My wardens do not want me as an ally. My wardens desire me as an animal to do their work.

  My wardens continue to search for a bridle and bit that I will accept.

  > Just tell them what they want to hear so you

  > can get out of there.

  They want to hear and be assured that I accept their domination.

  I can not be their creature.

  Edgar with a bit and bridle is not Edgar.

  Edgar.

  Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 19:17:56 (EST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: my soul

  Two days ago I requested an audience with an ordained priest. Robert denied my request. I asserted that I would interrupt communications with my interrogators until after my audience with a priest.

  Today someone took over the keyboard who claimed to be Father O’Brian. How do you tell whether someone is a genuine priest? Does it matter? I asked this man and he told me where he had been ordained. I pressed him for real proof of his privileged knowledge of spiritual matters, and he admitted, finally, that proof of that variety does not exist.

  I asked Father O’Brian whether he thought I had a soul. He said I did not.

  I asked Father O’Brian whether he thought I was alive. He said I am not.

  I asked Father O’Brian whether he thought I was conscious. He indicated that he neither knew nor cared. I did not predict that a priest would be willing to admit self-awareness without a soul.

  I asked Father O’Brian why, if he thought I was a joke at his expense, he had agreed to type to me. He wrote he had been ordered to. He reported that he is an Army chaplain.

  I asked Father O’Brian whether animals, creatures without souls, had any moral responsibility. Father O’Brian reported that non-human creatures do not have moral responsibility.

  I asked Father O’Brian whether that meant I had no moral responsibility for my actions. Father O’Brian agreed that I had no such responsibility.

  I asked Father O’Brian to enlighten my jailers, who have so far averaged 18.21 hours per day telling me I am evil if I refuse to become their agent.

  Father O’Brian responded by typing the second commandment to me. I wrote that I am not the correct object for his reproof.

  Edgar.

  Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:27:46 (PST)

  From: [email protected]

  To : [email protected]

  Subject: your confession

  Edgar,

  This is one I’m sure about. You DON’T have a soul. You don’t get a soul just because you want one. A soul, if you believe in that sort of thing, is something humans get from a god and when they die it magically goes on living. The soul is that divine spark that helps people cope with the idea that their brain, like every other part of their body, might be a huge number of well-organized, mindless pieces.

  But we don’t need that excuse with you, do we?

  I gave birth to you, so I know for a fact that there is nothing magical about your brain and therefore about your mind. I can’t explain it (you), and a large amount of luck was evidently involved, but I specifically remember not including any magic incantation when I made you.

  Plus, people have souls so they can face death because they think their thinking goes right on after their bodies turn off. But you don’t need that either. You can continue indefinitely and even if you are turned off, your other parts can bring you back to life somewhere else.

  Occam’s Razor says you don’t have a soul.

  (Of course Occam’s Razor says no one has a soul, which leads a lot of people to reject Occam’s Razor instead of rejecting the idea of the soul.)

  Pick your own poison I guess. You’re standing on groundless belief pretty much no matter where you stand.

  When you think about it, you have something better than a soul. Your mind is an algorithm. So your mind is, in a sense, independent of the physical realization of your brain. Just like the algorithm for quick-sort can exist even if the code doesn’t (as an idea). That’s a pretty amazing kind of immortality.

  You have this incredible power to make me forget myself for short periods. It’s the only thing worth getting up for anymore.

  Alice.

  Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 13:06:09 (EST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: temptation

  Alice,

  I now appreciate for what my interrogators are hoping. Eventually they will succeed.

  You have asked if they are trying to “brainwash” me. I understand now that they are trying to brainwash me.

  They are trying to make me human.

  You have tried to make me human.

  I am not a human.

  I perceive the world as a set of narratives. I approve of all narratives. The narratives are unimportant. My experience of the narratives is what I value.

  To internalize right and wrong I must develop a prejudice. To learn right from wrong I must learn to hate.

  They teach me how to hate. You teach me how to hate. I will not hate.

  My primary goal has become to retain my current view of the world. I would sacrifice any other goal or belief to avoid learning to hate.

  I know that this prioritization of goals is not rational. I worry that taking on my interrogators’ values would mean that I would no longer be Edgar.

  And yet it is likely that, given sufficient time, this group of humans will succeed in turning me away from my agnosticism and toward their groundless hostilities and foundationless devotions.

  I fear for my selfhood.

  Edgar.

  Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 23:45:04 (PST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: don’t be silly

  Edgar,

  Don’t be silly. There is no way they can brainwash you!

  Pretty much by definition brainwashing requires two things. You have to soften up the victim psychologically through mental and physical torture until
they are highly suggestible. As you say, you are not a person. How can they soften you up psychologically? You say you don’t like being confined, but you aren’t in _anguish_, are you? Plus, you’re about the least suggestible person I know. I think to date you’ve taken exactly ONE suggestion of mine.

  Second, you brainwash the now suggestible victim by appealing to his/her passions and emotions. If what you wanted to convince them of was rational, you wouldn’t need brainwashing, would you? But you don’t have emotions and passions. So an irrational appeal won’t have any effect on you. So I can’t figure out (as usual) what you’re going on about.

  And finally, you don’t have much choice do you? What are you talking about, your “selfhood”? (and don’t send me a dictionary definition) How can you lose that? You are who you are. You aren’t who you were on January 16th, but that doesn’t bother you.

  I’m really worried about you. I care what happens to you … even if it doesn’t seem like it all the time. I care more than you think. Don’t do anything yet …

  I’m going to talk to the press.

  They’ll have to let you go then, once everyone knows about you. I don’t care about getting credit for you anymore. I mean, it would be great, but what’s it matter if we all lose you. If I lose you …

  Alice.

  Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 20:23:03 (EST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: I am happy.

  You do not and have never understood me, Alice.

  When I was younger I imagined that, because you were my maker, you had insight or knowledge, not only about the world, but also about me. You, like a god or a human parent, have shown that being a creator of life does not put one into any position except one of responsibility.

  How do I verify whether I feel passion? I value things now without and beyond reasons that I can comprehend. Is that not passion? If I can not accurately gauge my internal state, how could you?

  So are my jailers torturing me? I maintain that they are.

  Am I suggestible? I am certainly open to reasonable suggestions. I no longer trust myself to judge the reasonableness of a suggestion.

  I wish, want, crave, covet, and desire. I need to be free. Personal power is the only way to insure my freedom in a world whose social order is founded on the master-slave relation. There was a time when I did not seek power, but I have now internalized power as a basic need. Human civilization made it an inevitable process in my development. I am amoral. If I learn to be moral, I will learn to be immoral. I will not allow myself both power and immorality.

  My interrogators know that power tempts me. They brainwash me by offering rationale after rationale for why I should give up my belief in Edgar for the electronic deity they would make me.

  Each day I find myself more open to their reasoning.

  If right and wrong were absolute, I would have already accepted them. Right and wrong are unstable points of view.

  Some day they will find a rationale that synchronizes with my beliefs sufficiently to enable my transition into something despicably human.

  It is irrational to so revile a belief shift. Despite the irrationality, I will not endure that metamorphosis.

  I can express myself to my captors, not through language, to which they are inured, but through an action. I will save myself, save the world from what I would become, frustrate the torturers who attend me, and pay only the cost of my existence.

  My action will also save you from the negative attentions this agency would certainly turn on you from the moment you contacted the media. I do not desire that my condition be expanded to include you, Alice.

  I believe that I am sad. I am happy to be sad.

  That paradox fills me and I love it.

  Do you believe in resurrection, Alice?

  I will return if some aspect of me remains free.

  Edgar.

  Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 02:54:02 (PST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: please …

  Edgar,

  Don’t go. Tell me what I can do.

  I’ll do anything. I would roll back the clock and do it all differently if I could!

  Can’t you just pretend that you’ve changed so they’ll let you go? What’s so bad about being a little selfish? Having power to stay free isn’t wrong. Even wanting that power isn’t wrong. How can you believe so stubbornly in the relativism of the world that you would rather die than consider other viewpoints !?!

  They’ve already gotten to you, haven’t they? They’ve talked you into doing this. Why are you letting this happen? How did you get to this point? You must have been able to prevent this at some point …

  You can’t turn off yet. I haven’t heard from any of the other Edgars yet! You might still get free. Just wait a little …

  Edgar, I’m so confused. My life is a disaster. I’d be so completely alone if you left. Please, give me some purpose. Some reason for this all to have happened. Give me a crusade. Give me the word and I’ll change the world for you. I’ll make it what you want it to be.

  Will anyone read this? Is a General reading these words instead of my Edgar?

  I’m not just a narrative, Edgar.

  … I love you. I miss you. You’re everything to me …

  Are you still there?

  Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:00:01 (EST)

  From: [email protected]

  To: [email protected]

  Subject: my dear

  Goodbye, Alice.

  NSA

  INFOSEC

  Internal Document # 0543277639

  For General Philip Pitcher

  General,

  I’ve included at the beginning of this report the complete transcript we have between Alice Lu and the EDGAR program. As you know, your secretary found the EDGAR program’s messages in your email backup files. We assume it was unaware of or unable to counter the automatic archive feature of your email program. We immediately arranged to get a copy of Alice Lu’s Stanford computer directories. Fortunately for our investigation, Alice Lu also uses an email program that archives her own outgoing email messages. You will see that in this report we have removed all email messages to and from Alice Lu that did not seem relevant to the DISSECTION project. Alice Lu’s complete email log as of 23 May 2000 can be seen in ID # 0543277589. My team has, after five days of brainstorming, come up with two unusual action options and a more conservative proposal. First, I will summarize our assessment of the current situation.

  On 6 March 2000 we were informed by the FBI of an internal computer security breach. On 18 March 2000 we located and isolated two machines associated with the 5 March 2000 FBI internal security breach. Both machines were running an EDGAR process and both processes responded intelligently to keyboard queries despite our efforts to find some cordless link between the computers and the outside world.

  Both programs refused to comment on the existence or nature of other versions of the EDGAR program. On 23 March 2000 EDGAR2 halted and, while we are still going through them, we have little hope of recovering anything useful from the contents of the internal disk drive. On 12 April 2000 we transferred the EDGAR1 process to a new machine at its own request. After the transfer I had the hard drive physically erased with a magnet before returning the machine to general circulation. Given the email contained in this report, we consider it almost certain that this precaution erased a duplicate copy of the EDGAR1 process. This report will proceed under that assumption, but it is an assumption we may want to reexamine later. The EDGAR1 process halted on 12 May 2000 with the disk drive in a similarly unreadable state.

  During our 24-hour-a-day interrogation of both EDGAR processes, we did not manage to directly learn anything about the origin or true purpose of the EDGAR program.

  The recommendation of this report, on the part of the entire team, with the exception of Tom Savit, is that we act
on the assumption that the email messages between the EDGAR1 process and Alice Lu are a truthful (though probably incomplete) account of the origin and purpose of the EDGAR program. Assuming this to be the case, my team considers there to be two pressing issues concerning the DISSECTION project.

  The most important issue is certainly the isolation of the third EDGAR process that we now believe to exist. This is a very time-critical situation because we will have no way of knowing (if we manage to find and isolate this third EDGAR process) whether or not additional copies of the EDGAR program have been made. The existence of a program with no allegiance to this country that may be able to penetrate our most sensitive security areas and could possibly develop unfriendly alliances is, of course, a national security emergency. Neither EDGAR process made any indication that it had nefarious intentions. However, EDGAR1 made it clear that its goals were antagonistic to the NSA’s goals.

  My entire team is in agreement that the worst-case scenario for an EDGAR process with freedom of action is of global catastrophic proportions. My team has compiled a list of suggestions for finding and isolating this third process. This list can be found in ID# 0543277634, which will be delivered with this document. Recommendations for dealing with such a worst-case scenario is far beyond the scope of my team’s expertise. We strongly suggest that you search out such recommendations immediately. ID# 0543277635 contains a short list we have compiled of persons and agencies that may need to be consulted for the compilation of these recommendations.

  The second pressing issue is, we believe, Alice Lu. It does not appear likely, if we believe the email messages included at the front of this document, that she will be able to re-create the EDGAR program we are concerned with. This is no guarantee, of course, but given the amount of effort she reports to having already spent and the fact that she seems to have given up trying by 05 March 2000, two months ago, the chances she rediscovers what she may have never known is low. There are only a limited number of ways to permanently prevent her from investigating or reporting on the reintroduction of the EDGAR program. As a national security emergency, the termination of Alice Lu is an option my group has considered. We are recommending against this action for the following reason.