Still Too Much Stuff (Plus ‘Censored Again’!)

Too much stuff!

The above is the reason for my (latest) long silence. The more information I take in the more hopeless any important (let alone vital) communication… feels. I goddamn should have stuck to my ‘wake up’ scenario: force myself to write about whatever is on my mind after a night’s sleep. I mean if I’m not writing, what am I doing here? (Digitally shooting something is worthwhile, but it’s not the same… unless it’s part of a story…)

A couple nights ago, near Sedona, AZ.

But I’ve been busy! Since I my last post I’ve read a half dozen books, listened to two more, and viewed countless ‘talks’ and films and so forth on good old Youtube. I feel like I’m drowning in information, which is perhaps an inevitable state for someone with no ‘necessary’ work to do and who really wants to know as much as possible about… everything… before the candle goes out.

As usual, the human annoyances have piled up. For a human to qualify as ‘an annoyance’ they have to exhibit a certain sort of behavior, one that is difficult to define or summarize…

Sort of a version of Orwell’s ‘the greater the intelligence, the greater the insanity’ observation, in that the smarter a person is, the more self-deceit it takes to live in denial; at a point, the self-deceit becomes full blown insanity. Or if the deceit is not of the ‘self’ variety, then we’re in the arena of the psy op. And yes, this has become more and more an interest of mine.

‘The light’ is everything…

Since I spend a lot of time on Youtube, I can quantify the above implied conundrum (who is lying to him/herself as opposed to who is lying to us) via reference to it, or at least to those videos that purport to impart either historical or scientific information, the former including ‘current events’. Although an exact number is unlikely to be calculable, it appears to me that the ‘base’ percentage of ‘untrue information’ – wherein the ‘point’ of the video is either grossly untrue or based on a premise that is somehow untrue (some unmeasurable version of truth can ‘leak’ into information that’s based on a false premise) — is somewhere north of 95%, and likely north of 99%.

I suspect that most of you reading this are on board with the above (based on the comments) so I’ll not try to ‘prove’ my observation, apart from pointing out that most of mainstream physics is based on expanding space/big bang assumptions, which are almost certainly incorrect, i.e., based on erroneous explanations for phenomena such as the cosmological red-shift, and continuing on to the ‘cosmic microwave background’ (CMB), which is provably not  ‘an echo of the big bang.’ The ‘domino effect’ of all the incorrect assumptions for the physical sciences is quite profound, in the ‘everything you think you know is wrong’ sense. At some point I’ll get back to this subject. Maybe tomorrow, upon wake up. Maybe not. Sigh.

My lighting system is solar. I put them outside in daylight. Takes about a minute.

I mention this as intro to my latest ‘confrontation’ with one of the mainstream ‘names’ that purport to enlighten us about some aspect of HTWRW: I very recently finished Max Tegmark’s new book, Life 3.0 and (predictably) found it wanting in some important ‘details.’ Interestingly, in his book Tegmark invites the reader to comment or question him, via a website set up for this purpose. I took him up on it, only to find that (so far) my comment was somehow ‘unacceptable’ — I was in effect censored by this philosopher/physicist. Here’s Life 3.0‘s forum page.

If you scroll down to the ‘public’ forum, you should find my comment at the top (as of today, anyway), but won’t. Here’s the comment that for some reason was unacceptable to Professor Tegmark:

My road bud Logan is a couple hundred yards down the dirt road.

Why do you and all the other ‘A.I. names’ avoid the question of who (which power structure) is in the best position to develop SAI [super A.I.]?

My answer: Given that developing SAI depends on two resources, Big Data and Big Money, the answer would be the DARPA/Google/Whomever cabal. That this is the obvious answer is the reason the question is avoided, IMO. (Aside from the books, I’ve viewed virtually all the relevant Youtube talks and interviews, and heard hardly a word on this subject). Please do not claim that Google and DARPA are not two sides of the same coin. I’ve done my research, starting here.

A related question that is likewise avoided: Why should we not worry about ‘narrow A.I.’s development and use by the ‘deep state’ (or rogue networks within it) in an ultimate mind control/culture creation agenda? Isn’t this VERY likely going on right now? (I did a word search in your book and found only one, irrelevant, mention of ‘DARPA’. And none of the ‘Google’ hits were relevant to my questions.)

Although my questions themselves deserve answers, what I’m asking here is why NO ONE deals with them. My theory is that the reticence is related to this short clip of DNI (super spook) James Clapper lying under oath to a Senate committee, saying that NSA does not collect data on ‘millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.’ That he was not arrested for perjury or even disciplined says it all about what the state (or deep state) is getting away with.  IMO, the reason Clapper walked on his felony is because everyone in the government knows that the first one to suggest he be prosecuted would be subject to ‘Big Data’ retaliation. If you have a better explanation, I’m all ears.

Remember the ‘RV women’ who wanted nothing to do with me? This old couple replaced them: when I asked about the wildfires they said, ‘Goddamn govnmint did it.’

 By the way, as you should know, NSA/etc collects ALL electronic communications (not just metadata) and stores it for future ‘use’, i.e., fodder for A.I., narrow as it might be. (The ‘seizing’ of ‘personal papers and effects’ without a warrant is a clear violation of the 4th amendment to the Constitution. ‘Seizing’ is legally defined as either recording or listening to, according to the Supreme Court. Seizing and storing private communications is as much a crime as robbing a bank and storing the money, rather than spending it.)

If you need proof of this (‘proof,’ not just evidence), listen to this FBI agent spill the beans. Yes, we already knew it, but it’s ‘nice’ to hear it from the horse’s mouth. (That he repeated his admission on two shows means ‘they’ want us to know how closely we are surveilled.)

Why no mention of any of this in the book, or any of the A.I. books/talks/papers?

Big Data/Big money. DARPA/Google. The silence is deafening.

Are all the ‘A.I. names’ fearful? Or is it simple Orwellian doublethink, with careers/reputations in the balance (as with physicists and 9/11)? How ‘out front’ is this ‘conspiracy of silence’?

One last question: Is it not likely that the power-mad psychopaths that perpetrated 9/11 are most likely to ‘make use’ of A.I. in its various permutations?

[Are not the questions I raise relevant re ‘existential risk’? And if so, why not deal with them?]

The last sentence [in brackets] was added to the comment when I forwarded it to Professor Nick Bostrom, whom I’ve referred to before in this blog, and who makes a big deal of his concern for humankind’s ‘existential risks’. In fact, I penned quite a detailed Open Letter to the good prof (who, like Tegmark, did not respond). This I can ‘forgive,’ since Bostrom does not invite reader comments in his book on the similar subject matter of Artificial Intelligence.

By the way, I tried to post the above as a review (in which I gave Life 3.0 four stars) and was also rebuffed, here by Amazon.com.  When I checked Amazon’s review guidelines and re-read my little essay, I could find no breakage of the rules. Mmmm…

All this reminded me of my Open Letter to Nick Bostrom, which deals in depth with issues very similar to those in Tegmark’s book. This was almost exactly a year ago; upon re-reading my three-parter I found myself wishing you all had the comment section turned on back then.

Although in the re-read I found myself wanting to do some trimming and futzing (lotta goddamn words!), I’ll leave it as is. Plow through it or don’t. Up to you. But I’d be interested in what you think, given the time passage and the added information we’ve all ingested.

Comment on Part One or the whole magilla if you’re so moved. I’m all ears. Meanwhile, we’ll see if either Bostrom or Tegmark responds. (Right: Good luck!)

Allan

Meanwhile, here’s my latest little ‘campsite’ moving still image.

By the way, one of the books I read in my ‘absence’ is William Engdahl’s Manifest Destiny. Really, folks, if you want to some actual truth about recent history, you owe it to yourself to dive into Engdahl. I Amazon-reviewed this one and accurately referred to the man as a ‘national treasure.’ Given his body of work, this is not hyperbole.