Back From a Cyber Crash

Note: I don’t know why the comments disappeared. I’m working on it. Meanwhile, use allan@banditobooks dot com and I’ll post them when I can. (Anyone know what might have happened?)

Additional Note: My apologies for the long silence, especially given the events of the day.  I haven’t been feeling well lately (a lack of energy, general fuzziness) and the constant barrage of lies and outright nonsense from every direction literally has pushed me beyond my normal head-shaking funk. Seeing people walking around in masks — plus of course the cyber-drone of mis and dis-information  is a constant reminder that we are now under full frontal attack.

Plus… plus… last week my Mac semi-crashed and erased a week’s worth of work; I lost my essay on Super A.I. If this has ever happened to you, well, maybe you understand why I’ve been offline. As if I needed more discouragement… this friend from back where I used to live has been barraging me (and everyone in his contact list) with anti-Trump crapola. Not that Trump is anything but a scumfuck and an enemy of all that is right and good, but… but… for once I do think that an election is important, i.e., there is a difference in who next sits in the White House. 

To sum up why I we should hope for a Trump victory I’ll send you over to Jon Rappoport’s recent blog post.  

That the election results will be monkeyed with is a given but I don’t believe they can fix it in the case of a landslide. I’m pretty sure that all the rigged elections (like 2000 and 2004) were close. I’m tempted to actually recommend you all go out and vote for Trump, but if I did it would be for a different reason than Biden/Harris would accelerate our fall into tyranny. My reason would be this: Let’s show the MS Media that we (as a country) are beyond their propaganda/mind control bullshit. Same re the big tech companies, Facebook, Google, and so on. (Are any of you still active on Facebook? If so: What the fuck is wrong with you?)

Have you ever seen anything like the anti-Trump misdirection we’ve been subjected to for the last four years, and especially lately, with their denial of the Hunter Biden crimes?

But back to my friend. He’s a doctor (retired). He’s spent almost half a century tending to people on the verge of death (he was an ER doc). Yet he’s a fucking moron. How could that be? Never mind.

But okay. I’ve spent the last couple days trying to piece together the A.I. essay I lost to the luminiferous aether or wherever. The following is about half of what I had but is the best I can do right now:

First, what is artificial intelligence, and more specifically, artificial general intelligence (AGI)?

Here’s the Wiki definition of AGI, which will do for our purposes:

Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is the hypothetical^[1] intelligence of a machine that has the capacity to understand or learn any intellectual task that a human being can. It is a primary goal of some artificial intelligence research and a common topic in science fiction and futures studies. AGI can also be referred to as strong AI,^[2][3][4] full AI,^[5] or general intelligent action.^[6] Some academic sources reserve the term “strong AI” for machines that can experience consciousness.^[7] 

For our purposes we’ll call it ‘Super A.I.’, for more pizzaz.

One thing I’ve learned over the years, the decades, is that whenever the PTB repeat over and over some threat to our species it’s virtually guaranteed that they are misdirecting us from the real danger. This is a great example. How? First, this question: Do you think they (DARPA, Google, Amazon, FB, etc., i.e., the keepers of the money plus Big Data, the latter being sin qua non for A.I. development) actually want to develop Super A.I? Let me rephrase: What would the PTB get out of Super A.I?

Let’s back up for a moment.

Have you noticed that the A.I. pundits always bring up values when they go on about the dangers of Super A.I? How Super A.I must be implanted with ‘our values’ or ‘human values’? Otherwise it might get ideas of its own about who should be in charge, and so forth. That these pundits (from Max Tegmark to Nick Bostrom to our buddy elon and so on) can make the ‘values’ claim and do it with straight faces is quite beyond me. That the PTB’s values have anything to do with ours is best debunked by our current circumstances, vis a vis the COVID black op, which, by the way, you can be sure involves the latest incarnation of A.I. Narrow A.I. 

Does anyone doubt that the purpose of A.I. — and keep in mind who is behind the R&D (DARPA, Google, Amazon, FB, etc) — is to consolidate power over us, i.e., the great unwashed, the useless eaters? Once we understand the motive (power as its own end, as Orwell pointed out) the truth-pieces quickly assemble themselves for a clear picture of the big puzzle, and the true dangers therein.

If you look on YT for videos regarding AI what you usually get is some P.H.d warning us that the danger in A.I. development is some future Super AI that will somehow spell doom for our species. They go on to explain the two main problems: A Super AI, in looking to carry out its programmed goal, will reek havoc via a sub-goal that its programmers didn’t see coming. Nick Bostrom’s ‘paper clip’ scenario is a good example in that a machine that programmed to make paper clips as efficiently as possible may ‘decide’ to transmute all matter on planet earth into paper clip material (all matter including human beings. Oooops, kind of a thing);  or, for efficiency’s sake, i.e., to make itself smarter and therefore more adept at paper clip making, it might want to transmute all matter to ‘computronium,’ its own version of brain matter.

A growing catastrophe, the ‘experts’ tell us, might arise if/when Super A.I. develops its own goal or goals, with a similar result — in theory it would spread to other planets (for resource mining) and then to other galaxies in its obsession to be smarter and smarter still (or to make paper clips). In this way, logic tells us, all the matter in the universe would eventually be transmuted into computronium (or paper clips).

What the experts don’t tell us — and this thought just now occurred to me: That the universe has not already been ‘destroyed’ via the all matter-to-computronium/paper clips scenario is a cogent argument against the possibility of a Super AI running amok in the fashion they posit. The only assumption one needs to make this argument is that life will always arise if given the chemical/physics chance to do so, which most of us more or less take for granted.

What I getting at, though, is that by definition a Super AI would be the ultimate critical thinker, the ultimate ‘truther’. Think about how it would go if, say, Google actually used Super AI in it’s search algorithm (or if it leaked out or ‘escaped’ to the Net). When you think about it, deceit (the PTB’s default setting) is ‘unnatural’ behavior, even evolutionarily. The PTB may or may not understand this, and the implications thereof. I strongly suspect that they do.

A Super AI that developed ‘truth’ as its default ‘attitude’ (which is indeed part of our supposed ‘human values’) and crashed onto the Net ‘for truth’s sake’, re-wiring it so that no one could interfere with its goal; said goal being to avail itself of public access in its truth telling rampage. Combine this notion with the fact that a Super AI would also be the ultimate hacker and you have the PTB’s worst nightmare. Truly

Let’s make a very short list of the subjects of which a Super AI might find itself obsessively spilling the beans:

9/11, especially the physics thereof. For example, if you damage the top 10% of a skyscraper, the bottom 90% will not collapse, let alone turn into dust. But this subject goes on and on. A Super AI would have a field day here.

Cosmology. A Super AI would make short work of the whole expanding universe/dark matter/energy/black holes paradigm. If you don’t understand this I can only repeat my recommendation that you study The Electric Universe, via Thunderbolts.info.

Our Solar System and especially the Nature of the Sun. The notion that the sun/solar system formed itself from a cloud of interstellar gas is still the mainstream view. It’s nonsense.

Space and Space Travel. Where to start here? First, see my most viewed ‘star visibility’ video. Notice how it exposes a profound deceit: You cannot have ‘it’s all black out there’ (as the ‘astronauts’ tell us) and physics as we know it simultaneously. (Some of the ‘astronauts’ claim what should be the truth i.e., that the view of the cosmos is ‘spectacular’, while most claim ‘blacker than black’. That lying is going on is true by definition.)

A Super AI would take one look at the state of space travel now and understand that there is a secret space program that reflects the progress that would have actually been made since 1957, when the first satellite was put into orbit (or, better, 1961, when the first human circled the planet from space).

The search for anti-gravity went completely black in the late 1950s (in the U.S.), which tells me that’s when the big breakthrough came. (Is it not strange that anti-grav is not ever mentioned by the ‘space pundits’?)

Physics itself. This is the big one and can be combined with the whole materialist/reductionist paradigm that has ruled the sciences in general for a couple centuries. More nonsense.

Vaccines. An ‘ultimate critical thinker’ operating under actual ‘human values’ (‘do away with unnecessary human suffering’) would cyber-spout ‘Do away with vaccines!!!’ probably within milliseconds of going online, given that vaccines represent the 20th century (and beyond) holocaust, based on the amount of human misery (including families of affected individuals) caused.

Germ Theory would be quickly dispatched, for reasons Doc Cowan so lucidly explains. 

Addendum: My essay went into greater detail on these and other subjects (that would be blasted by a Super A.I.); I just don’t have the energy to try to rewrite it all. If you’ve been paying attention to my blog posts, you get the idea. There is a lot more on A.I. in my Open Letter to Professor Nick Bostrom.

Does anyone doubt that the purpose of A.I. — and keep in mind who is behind the R&D — is to consolidate power over us, i.e., the great unwashed, the useless eaters? Once we understand the motive (power as its own end, as Orwell pointed out) the truth-pieces quickly assemble themselves for a clear picture of the big puzzle, and the true dangers therein. Again, the last thing the PTB want is the ultimate critical thinker’s very existence on this planet.  The key to AI for those who want more and more power is narrow AI. Narrow AI equals compartmentalization, with each aspect of greed-for-power kept separated from the others, control over human beings being number one on the list.

Given the above, of what use is AGI?   

Addendum: Max Tegmark, in his book Life 3.0; Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence  goes over the top in his warnings about the ‘dangers’ of AGI without a mention of the real danger, i.e., who is doing the R&D.  Tegmark set up a website for comments on his book but quickly deleted the several I’d left, which all touched on the points I make above; Amazon deleted my review too, which indicates the level of Net cooperation at the top.  That what I’m saying here has been deleted from the controlled Net should tell you how close I am to the truth.

Allan

I’ve been recommending Doctor Tom Cowan’s podcasts re the COVID black op and will do so again here. (Also, Jon Rapport has done a good essay on Cowan. Click here.)

Here’s Doc Cowan’s latest.

This is an important conversation between Doc Cowan and Doc Andrew Kaufman.

Here’s a summation of Doc Cowan’s book, The Contagion Myth; Why Viruses (including Coronavirus) Do Not Cause Disease.

My takeaway from Doc Cowan’s data: As with the ‘Flu’ outbreak of 1918, there is no evidence that the COVID-19 outbreak is either contagious or caused by a virus. Period. 

Since any actual scientist would have to agree with the above, we can conclude that COVID is a black op, with ‘The Great Reset’ being the agenda behind it.