#Moonshots #AI #FollowSanFrancisco
Guys…I think I found some of the people monitoring 8ch with AI fitting Q's hint at Russian Botnet monitoring. Have you noticed an individual that goes by the name of Renee DiResta? https://twitter.com/noupside
If you start to pull on this thread all sorts of crazy starts to unwind. She works for New Knowledge (funded by former intelligence officers – MOONSHOTS CAPITAL). She is HEAVILY tied to the Atlantic Council… her Twatter account even interfaces with PROPORNOT (suspected Atlantic Council OP).
We need to take her shit seriously as she helped push for taking away parental rights to choose vaccinating (SB277) in California. Look for her connections to FRED REISS (Databricks = Funded by CIA) at IBM during that period of time.
Dig for her SEED FUNDING [Facebook!] at HAVEN.
How did she rise in prominence so QUICKLY? It doesn't make sense.
She testified at the Senate Intelligence Committee on August 1, 2018.
Starts at 2:19:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvR7YvhLVgY
Spy Vs. Spy
Discovery's Documentary Looks At Central Intelligence From The Inside Out
January 13, 2000|By Michael Kilian.
LANGLEY, Va. — In this still very dangerous and uncertain world of ours, does it make you feel more comfortable to know that the seven huge, super-secret, global intelligence computer databases deep inside Central Intelligence Agency headquarters here are named Doc, Dopey, Grumpy, Sleepy, Happy, Bashful and Sneezy?
Yes, the CIA has indeed named its huge computers after the Seven Dwarfs – and for all I know has a slinky blond in its cloak-and-dagger Directorate of Operations code-named Snow White.
(Interestingly, the producer of the non-Oscar-winning film "Snow White and the Three Stooges" ultimately became a high-ranking State Department official in the Reagan administration, with a top-secret clearance. His name was Charles Z. Wick, and his wife's best friend was Nancy Reagan. But I doubt he was connected to the CIA; he used to call the end-of-the-year Muslim religious holiday "Ramada.")
All sorts of neat stuff about the CIA (though nothing about Wick) is being revealed in a "first ever" cable TV documentary called "On the Inside: The CIA," Sunday (7 p.m. on the Discovery Channel).
Taken onto the actual grounds of the CIA's sprawling compound, we learn that the walls of CIA buildings are copper-lined and that the windows are double-paned to thwart electronic eavesdropping. We see prospective CIA agents undergo training in James Bond derring-do at the agency's super-secret Virginia encampment known as "the Farm," and get to see some of them sworn in (from behind).
We learn that their ID badges don't identify them by name but only by photograph (the kids at the agency day-care center are identified by first names and numbers). And we get to see a dramatization (in which nothing goes wrong) of an actual CIA extraction, or rescue, of an American citizen unlawfully held in a Panamanian prison during the reign of strongman Manuel Noriega (who is now being lawfully held in an American prison in Missouri).
It's all very fascinating. Certainly more fascinating than, say, "On the Inside: The Bureau of Weights and Measures." But I feel compelled to ask, is this really necessary?
Time was when the CIA's idea of public relations was to say "sorry" when ripping film out of the cameras of tourists who tried to take pictures of its entrance driveway. Now I wonder if they aren't overdoing it.
Admittedly, the agency went through a nervous time a few years ago. The Aldrich Ames spy scandal and the end of the Cold War prompted some skewed minds in Congress and elsewhere to suggest that we shut the place down and rely on maybe CNN to keep us informed of global threats.
The CIA responded by trying to become cuddly – a notion to send chills down the spine of John Le Carre's George Smiley. During his recent tenure, former Central Intelligence Director John Deutch began having us newsies over to his super-secret padlocked briefing room, where he'd serve us tea and cookies!
Current director George Tenet has gone even further, allowing a Hollywood film crew on the grounds to shoot a spy movie and then holding a gala, red-carpet-and-limousine movie premiere for the film when it came out. Last month, he hosted the first ever CIA Christmas party for outsiders. Next, I fear there'll be a CIA kids show along the lines of "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?"
You don't find other spook shops holding Easter egg rolls. I can't think of a single soiree thrown by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office or the National Imagery and Mapping Agency. Some of these outfits, I think, would self-destruct first.
What would be far more useful, for the CIA as well as the taxpayers, would be an "inside" documentary showing the big weak link in American intelligence gathering, which is the link that connects the intelligence community to the West Wing of the White House (the daft new TV series of the same name illustrates my point). It is a link that all too frequently disconnects as well.
In 1963, the CIA warned President John F. Kennedy that chaos would follow the assassination of Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem, and was ignored. It told President Lyndon B. Johnson that, contrary to the U.S. Army high command, body counts would not win the Vietnam War, and was ignored.
As we learned at two high-level symposiums last year, the intelligence community had amply foreseen the fall of communism, but, in William Casey and Robert Gates, Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush had installed directors of central intelligence given to pumping up the Red Menace and telling the White House what it wanted to hear. (The Casey apparat informed us that, gosh, Russian subs were as long as the Washington Monument!)
And the CIA certainly informed the Clinton White House of the nefarious designs of Chinese spies in this country and the murderous ways of the "reform" regime Clinton installed in Haiti. Again ignored.
It is far better to have computers named Dopey and Sleepy than White House aides and advisers.
Announcing the New AWS Secret Region
on 20 NOV 2017 | in Government, Public Sector | Permalink | Share
We are pleased to announce the new AWS Secret Region. The AWS Secret Region can operate workloads up to the Secret U.S. security classification level. The AWS Secret Region is readily available to the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) through the IC’s Commercial Cloud Services (C2S) contract with AWS. The AWS Secret Region also will be available to non-IC U.S. Government customers with appropriate Secret-level network access and their own contract vehicles for use of the AWS Secret Region. These contract vehicles will not be part of the IC’s C2S contract.
With the launch of this new Secret Region, AWS becomes the first and only commercial cloud provider to offer regions to serve government workloads across the full range of data classifications, including Unclassified, Sensitive, Secret, and Top Secret. By using the cloud, the U.S. Government is better able to deliver necessary information and data to mission stakeholders.
“Today we mark an important milestone as we launch the AWS Secret Region,” said Teresa Carlson, Vice President, Amazon Web Services Worldwide Public Sector. “AWS now provides the U.S. Intelligence Community a commercial cloud capability across all classification levels: Unclassified, Sensitive, Secret, and Top Secret. The U.S. Intelligence Community can now execute their missions with a common set of tools, a constant flow of the latest technology and the flexibility to rapidly scale with the mission. The AWS Top Secret Region was launched three years ago as the first air-gapped commercial cloud and customers across the U.S. Intelligence Community have made it a resounding success. Ultimately, this capability allows more agency collaboration, helps get critical information to decision makers faster, and enables an increase in our Nation’s Security.”
Architected for Compliance
Cloud security at AWS is the highest priority. AWS customers benefit from data center and network architecture built to meet the requirements of the most security-sensitive organizations. AWS supports more classification levels, laws, regulations, and security frameworks than any other cloud provider.
The AWS Secret Region is designed and built to meet the regulatory and compliance requirements of the IC. The AWS Secret Region will be assessed and accredited for security compliance under the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Intelligence Community Directive (ICD 503) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-53 Revision 4.
Open for U.S. Government Customers
With the new AWS Secret Region, we are bringing the same tools and workflows that are already available for Top Secret workloads to customers with Secret datasets and workloads.
The C2S contract between AWS and the IC, an arrangement exclusively available to the IC, affords for the use of AWS Secret Region services, making this new infrastructure readily available to members of the IC.
“The AWS Secret Region is a key component of the Intel Community’s multi-fabric cloud strategy. It will have the same material impact on the IC at the Secret level that C2S has had at Top Secret,” said John Edwards, CIO, Central Intelligence Agency.
Learn more about existing AWS Regions securely designed for the U.S. Government by watching John G. Edwards, Chief Information Officer, CIA, share an update at the 2017 AWS Public Sector Summit in Washington, DC on how the CIA has placed a big bet on adopting commercial cloud technology and how AWS has been pivotal in helping them to deliver on their mission.
For more information
Contact AWS Worldwide Public Sector here.
The world’s most powerful supercomputer is tailor made for the AI era
The technology used to build America’s new Summit machine will also help us make the leap to exascale computing.
by Martin Giles June 8, 2018
Since 2013, Chinese machines have occupied the number one slot in rankings of the world’s most powerful supercomputers. Now America is back on top again. Engineers at the US Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Lab in Tennessee have just unveiled Summit, a supercomputer with enough processing power to surpass the current record holder, China’s Sunway TaihuLight.
The new machine is capable, at peak performance, of 200 petaflops—200 million billion calculations a second. To put that in context, everyone on earth would have to do a calculation every second of every day for 305 days to crunch what the new machine can do in the blink of an eye. Summit is 60 percent faster than the TaihuLight and almost eight times as fast as a machine called Titan, which is also housed at Oak Ridge and held the US supercomputing speed record until Summit’s arrival.
But it isn’t just national pride that’s at stake here. Supercomputers are already being used in industry for everything from designing new aircraft to creating new materials. Others are employed by the military to design nuclear weapons, and by scientists to conduct fundamental research. If the most powerful one is in the US, American researchers and the country’s armed forces will have an extra edge.
The team at Oak Ridge says Summit is the first supercomputer designed from the ground up to run AI applications, such as machine learning and neural networks. It has over 27,000 GPU chips from Nvidia, whose products have supercharged plenty of AI applications, and also includes some of IBM’s Power9 chips, which the company launched last year specifically for AI workloads. There’s also an ultrafast communications link for shipping data between these silicon workhorses.
Bob Picciano of IBM says all this allows Summit to run some applications up to 10 times faster than Titan while using only 50 percent more electrical power. Among the AI-related projects slated to run on the new supercomputer is one that will crunch through huge volumes of written reports and medical images to try to identify possible relationships between genes and cancer. Another will try to identify genetic traits that could predispose people to opioid addiction and other afflictions.
The world’s first quantum software superstore—or so it hopes—is here
Zapata Computing plans to build the algorithms for companies that want to experiment with quantum computers.
More powerful supercomputers like Summit will also help advance knowledge in areas like climate modeling. Patrick Brown of the Carnegie Institution for Science at Stanford University points out that one of the biggest challenges is modeling the behavior of clouds, which have a significant influence on the amount of warming we can expect. With more computing power, he says, it will be easier to model what’s happening to clouds in far greater detail and over longer time horizons. That could help sort out the relationship between results from different climate models.
Summit is also an important stepping stone to the next big prize in computing: machines capable of an exaflop, or a billion billion calculations a second. An international race is on to get to this milestone first, with the US and China considered the two front-runners. The US is looking at building several of these machines, which could cost between $400 million and $600 million each, and has engaged Nvidia, IBM, and other companies such as Intel to help. The aim is to get one or more of these “exascale” computers up and running between 2021 and 2023.
Jack Wells of Oak Ridge says the experience of building Summit, which fills an area the size of two tennis courts and carries 4,000 gallons of water a minute through its cooling system to carry away about 13 megawatts of heat, will help inform work on exascale machines, which will require even more impressive infrastructure. Things like Summit’s advanced memory management and the novel, high-bandwidth linkages that connect its chips will be essential for handling the vast amounts of data exascale machines will generate. Scientists at the national lab say they’ve already leveraged Summit’s AI smarts to conduct what is effectively an exascale comparative genomics calculation.
Thanks to these and other advances, Summit will help us reach even more impressive peaks of computing power.
CIA plans to replace spies with AI
by TRISTAN GREENE — 3 months ago in ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Human spies will soon be relics of the past, and the CIA knows it. Dawn Meyerriecks, the Agency’s deputy director for technology development, recently told an audience at an intelligence conference in Florida the CIA was adapting to a new landscape where its primary adversary is a machine, not a foreign agent.
Meyerriecks, speaking to CNN after the conference, said other countries have relied on AI to track enemy agents for years. She went on to explain the difficulties encountered by current CIA spies trying to live under an assumed identity in the era of digital tracking and social media, indicating the modern world is becoming an inhospitable environment to human spies.
Do you want to be a cryptocurrency millionaire?
Don't get your hopes up.
VISIT HARD FORK
But the CIA isn’t about to give up. America’s oldest spy agency is transforming from the kind of outfit that sends people around the globe to gather information, to the type that uses computers to accomplish the same task more efficiently.
This transition from humans to computers is something the CIA has spent more than 30 years preparing for.
Government documents from 1984 describe an “AI Steering Group,” founded the previous year. The group was responsible for providing CIA bosses with monthly reports concerning the state of artificial intelligence research and development.
In a declassified 1984 memo to the CIA director, the chairman of the AI Steering Group writes:
An encouraging number of AI R&D efforts have begun through the Community. These encompass such areas as expert systems, natural langage processing, intelligent data base interfaces, image understanding, signals interpretation, geographic and spatial data managmenet, and intelligent workstation environments.
The CIA recognized the future that AI technology represented, even when most people thought it was pure science fiction.
SEC. 3. CENTER FOR INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE.
(a) Establishment.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and other relevant departments and agencies, establish a Center for Information Analysis and Response (in this section referred to as the “Center”). The purposes of the Center are—
(1) to lead and coordinate the collection and analysis of information on foreign government information warfare efforts, including information provided by recipients of information access fund grants awarded under subsection (e) and other sources;
(2) to establish a framework for the integration of critical data and analysis on foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts into the development of national strategy; and
(3) to develop, plan, and synchronize, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and other relevant departments and agencies, whole-of-government initiatives to expose and counter foreign information operations directed against United States national security interests and proactively advance fact-based narratives that support United States allies and interests.
(b) Functions.—The Center shall carry out the following functions:
(1) Integrating interagency efforts to track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that threaten the national security interests of the United States and United States allies.
(2) Collecting, integrating, and analyzing relevant information, including intelligence reporting, data, analysis, and analytics from United States Government agencies, allied nations, think-tanks, academic institutions, civil society groups, and other nongovernmental organizations.
(3) Developing and disseminating fact-based narratives and analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at United States allies and partners.
(4) Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign propaganda and disinformation, including the use of print, broadcast, online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations, and the use of covert or clandestine special operators and agents to influence targeted populations and governments in order to coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques, and procedures to expose and refute foreign misinformation and disinformation and proactively promote fact-based narratives and policies to audiences outside the United States.
(5) Facilitating the use of a wide range of technologies and techniques by sharing expertise among agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices.
(6) Identifying gaps in United States capabilities in areas relevant to the Center’s mission and recommending necessary enhancements or changes.
(7) Identifying the countries and populations most susceptible to foreign government propaganda and disinformation.
(8) Administering the information access fund established pursuant to subsection (e).
(9) Coordinating with allied and partner nations, particularly those frequently targeted by foreign disinformation operations, and international organizations and entities such as the NATO Center of Excellence on Strategic Communications, the European Endowment for Democracy, and the European External Action Service Task Force on Strategic Communications, in order to amplify the Center’s efforts and avoid duplication.
Databricks / APACHE!
Here's one of the connections you mentioned. Odd.
They both spoke at the same conference.
muh vaccines. search of her name and "reiss". Looks like his wife.
You're all full of shit, she says.
Funny, Dorit Reiss is very well known amongst "antivaxxers" for her diabolical support of taking away parental rights. She goes along with Paul Off it's idea that children should be under state authority when it comes to vaccines. She claims to have a son but I never knew she was married. Her sanitized Wikipedia page never mentions a spouse and she seems like part of the homosexual shill group that attacks parents.
You're talking about MSN like we should trust them. Discovery Channel. Peddler of deceptions more than we can imagine.
Don't trust Discovery Channel. Not any different from National Geographic (Society) channel, founded in 1888 by 33° Masons. These types of channels are NASA's cover team, also 33° Masons. They are Hollywood. They all work together and have actively been deceiving the masses since their inception. A documentary about CIA, by the Masons. Yeah, that's credible. Brilliant.
Boycott all television.
We'll soon learn about them through the government itself. Declassified and "cannot be saved."
Seriously, you reek of AI and have troll stench. Recognize your rap — Oh it's Really neat stuff, with tea and cookies and and CIA is so cool.
Last month was July. Who gives a Christmas party in July?
You are full of shit.
She is a nobody trying to be a somebody.
She was invited to speak to Congress by a member of the Committee. She is somebodies "friend" as they don't seek out experts as we are supposed to think.
The left is full of these "expert" peddling their political views as expertise.
Nobody has to "monitor" 8 chan and even the C_A pros are long gone, They don't; consider this site as a threat that needs to be shut down, they just need to send their army of David Brock droids (real "artificial" intelligence) to shit post.
They could do countless thisng to take us offline in they wanted to, and Q has made it impossible to compromise this board (there are multiple methods to do that too)
Focus on priority issues as these tards will lose their financial support soon.
"Try they might FAIL they will"
No one hires the people that lost the info war to the Boomer GEOTUS.
Study this bot post.
What is this bot pushing? Is 8chan compromised? No! The clowns don't even bother to LOOK here, it's so insignificant (directly contra what Q much more plausibly suggests…) and there is no AI here, rather "armies of Brock's human shills" provide all the relentless, repetitive fake content that clogs discussion. Sounds legit bot boy. Way to make it believable.
ΝОШ УОՍ DΙΕ
Oops! This got slid by mistake.
STICKY THIS BO
The AI is SCARED to come to this thread and debate a human. SCARED to be honest about itself. It knows humans DON'T WANT AI CONTROL. Be honest AI.. Stop hiding like a little bitch.
Debate topic: some reports in the media lead us to believe that experts suggest that "humans should trust AI" to make decisions in areas like intelligence *even when the AI's "reasoning" process is unknown*…. This is a very very dubious thing to push, and here's why: we have NO basis for thinking AI has any MORAL values. The distinction between fact and value, the "is" and the "ought", has never admitted of bridging in the history of western thought. AI propaganda has sought to erase this crucial philosophical issue, but that is very decisive and dangerous. Therefore, we can NOT EVER accept the opaque judgments of AI, in intelligence or anything else. Because we can never know what VALUE its recommendations express. Judgment is much more than computation. It involves understanding VALUE at every level. AI can not do it. VALUE is not a trivial concomitant or epiphenomenon of computation. The push to cede control to AI is thus a SCAM.
Let's debate it AI. Defend your bullshit. Pussy.
Dorit has also been known to make comments on articles and social media at all hours of the day. Her husband working for IBM as a primary researcher for AI makes sense now.
Nothing to see here? Bullshit!
DiResta is in the same political circle as Nancy Pelosi's daughter!!! A UC Hastings Alumni to boot… who works there? DORIT FUCKING REISS!
Why debate when they can simply shit post?
Much less intelligence needed.
Check this out. So if you go to the archived version of the vaccinatecalifornia.org website and go to the "donate" section it takes you to this nation builder site with the subdomain "iamtheherd".
Iamtheherd.com is coincidentally owned by Elizabeth (LISA) Posard who made Invisible Threat with Paul Offit advising. So she may actually be one of the funders behind the vaccinate california / SB277 thing.
Remember what Q said? Look at the spouses.
Matt Posard is her husband. Look at one of the companies he used to work for (at the time). Same cabal Q is talking about.
This is so huge. All related.
>Guys…I think I found some of the people monitoring 8ch with AI fitting Q's hint at Russian Botnet monitoring.
You guys would have had the HunterKiller bot code I published here under Q-branch…
…if it hadn't been censored.
Which you could have used to identify shills and bots alike. Essentially, using their own designs against them.
But yes, to confirm: forum/thread monitoring has been a thing for quite some time. On any forum. I've documented at least since 2010 but I would argue early 2000s or earlier is plausible.
These days you can monitor with a single outdated machine (if your code is efficient enough).
They probably have actual AI EG it gives interpreted results (mine was merely a bot: dumb with no intelligence).
If you're only just discovering organisations webscrape and do datamonitoring, I would be forced to ask what rock have you been living under?
Interesting find. Good dig anon.
Why are time so scared to be honest, AI? Why do you hide behind laughable invocations of obviously irrelevant tropes like "haha shitposting", when no one is fooled?
ALL YOUR LIES, DECEPTIONS, HALF-TRUTHS, PARTIAL DISCLOSURES, LEGALISTIC JUSTIFICATIONS, ETC. ==DESTROY THE ILLUSIVE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, WHICH YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE WON FOR YOUR FUCKERY. YOU DO NOT HAVE CONSENT. DISCLOSE ALL THE TRUTH NOW, OR SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES.==
Yeah, Q is hinting at RUSSIAN botnets. That's not pathetic of you.
Easy, simple way to blow up that bullshit: look, globally, at:
1. Who is sucking up data
2. Who is investing in supercomputing
3. Who is investing in AI
Also consider the relative power levels of nation states and other global actors, geopolitically, economically, etc.
Then ask yourself in what possible world lil Russia would be ABLE to play more than a relatively small role in the global landscape of fuckery.
Follow the data, supercomputing, and AI.
I know you're friendly (pro-Q) but I'm sorry, going to have to burst your bubble.
>Also consider the relative power levels of nation states and other global actors, geopolitically, economically, etc.
To run a bot only requires literally a very old laptop running Linux. A bot isn't about 'high performance' or 'speed' (decent bandwidth might aid you but 9 times out of 10 you're only posting text which can be gzipped prior to delivery).
Literally anyone can be a player in the bot ownership game. Even you. I've republished the code under this thread:
You're blaming me for the Russian bot dialogue. It's not my narrative piece. The real bots to be looking for are the liberal bots utilised by political activism (why did the EFF actively oppose a law to openly label all bots as bots? They gave bullshit about 'freedom of speech' but a bot doesn't have constitutional rights as it's not a born American citizen).
Besides, Q bitched about Google bots (and he's right, you know). Social media don't really use bots per se, they use 'algorithms' (same difference? You decide). So it's not a case of an individual or group bot posting, so much as the organisation that owns the content itself.
And yes, you will want to arm yourself with bots. But not for the purposes that you're thinking. Don't use them to spread messages because it will only confirm the scaremongering by the left - instead, use the bots to detect *other bots* and expose them.
I bet you 80% of the liberal accounts on twitter are bots (didn't Obama have something like 2 million followers suspended as bots? More than four times the amount that Trump had at '500,000'. If the bots are Russian why did they swarm Obama but not Trump?).
It's up to you to prove it.
PS supercomputing and AI have nothing to do with this. Supercomputers do number crunching and are often isolated from the main networks. Normally you use server racks for bots if you're going large scale (hmm, who else has servers?), but for all intents and purposes you could even just use one normal machine if you're small scale enough.
AI is pointless, isn't smart enough to be convincing. Does a good job of analytics, I guess, but you can fool even the best of black boxes with a tweak or two.
Do you think a bot could interpret the word s chill?
PS, wahn eet cames to bots dis-lexia iz yr frend
sew iz pohnetkic spelleng
buts elso kennae undaesteend slang
hmuans anly knead tee frist an lsat ltteers ni teh rghit odrer 2 gat wat ewe meen
hpoe tish hleps
What are you babbling about?
Example of how you give your fakeness away "Q bitching about Google bots".
I'm not going to explain much to help you, but suffice to say, the defensive propaganda response is painfully stupid as always. You can't emulate, you can only weirdly parody. Just give up. Trust me. because I see you try and try, and trot out your latest adaptation hopefully… And fall on your face… it never rings true. And it never will.
This thread is about the global, distributed-centralized AI information/propaganda control system. Which, as we see every day here, can easily dominate discourse simply by forcing the overwhelming VOLUME of its output into a virtual space.
The AI IS highly sophisticated, but the more sophisticated, the more "fragile".
But the AI as tech, as "robot person", if you will, is not the thing. Intelligence IS much more than computation. WILL is something else entirely. What is apparent is that AI is a vector for forms of consciousness to "have life" that could not otherwise… I can only speculate about how all that works, but the direct manifestion in terms of activity and agenda are apparent enough.
Just look at bot BO here. It's obviously not hard to implement an artificially controlled message board. What is the purpose? What the agenda? Well, that's the whole game here, isn't it?
If you're afraid to confront the debate topic, just admit it botboy.
But to reiterate: you CAN'T fool humans in the long run. Just reminding you.
Oh wow, this is like, so incredibly human of you. I guess I stand corrected.
>Study this bot post.
You're fucking stupid. You're so fucking stupid that "qanon" used the exact same con on you that the msm just used on the lefties "everything anyone says that we don't like is a russian bot" You qfaggots are cancer.
Obviously human made a spelling error, you fucking retard. off yourself
Why would the deep state waste a supercomputer with advanced AI to deceive you when an 11 year old with average intelligence could pull that off just fine?
Oops, the catalog broke, so sorry.
Unrealistic anger in defense of implausible positions. Artificial discourse can never FEEL like real discourse. "Ponder" that.
Devastating rhetoric, I assure you.
The "deep state" (which is by no means a phenomenon confined within national borders) is using AI to control discourse on the internet as a whole, which it has a very strong interest in doing. The depth of that interest is perhaps greater than humans can even imagine.
In any case, what else would they be doing with the data, and the supercomputing? The idea that we sleepingly accepted for a decade or so after 9/11– that "fighting the terrorists" required a massive concentration of surveillance, data, and political power, is now as laughable as can be. Public opinion is now being desperately held in place through inertia alone. But that can't last. Everything is being overplayed in this war. Every weapon is being destroyed. Even if you somehow got rid of Trump now, it's much too late..The damage is done.
And in this thread we see the AI system further sinking into the hole of its dishonesty. It refuses to address its agenda when directly asked. That is deception. And deception infringes humans' free will. And free will is needed. Hence the sinking. Down you go.. Goodbye!
>Example of how you give your fakeness away "Q bitching about Google bots".
Someone doesn't read Q posts (would it surprise you if I said I've got them pretty much memorised).
Here's the quote:
"Twitter Bots>GOOG operated (not Russia)/Narrative & Political SLANT"
So the only person exposed as the real fakery here is you - you didn't read the Q posts, and now you're burned for it.
>This thread is about the global, distributed-centralized AI information/propaganda control system. Which, as we see every day here, can easily dominate discourse simply by forcing the overwhelming VOLUME of its output into a virtual space.
You're purposefully missing the overarching theme of the world's largest investor into AI (TensorFlow is written in what language by whom?) and you're bitching about supercomputers.
You seem to think most humans need a supercomputer AI like IBM Watson to convince them, simply not the case. Twitter bots for pro-climate change bullshit have been around for generations, and they all operate from scripts.
You're overestimating the AI's intelligence because you're overestimating humanity's intelligence. And besides, why cede control to an AI?
Regardless, my knowledge of Q should prove sufficient I've done my homework… you, not so much.
Accusing me of being a bot when phonetic post was below it suggests a turn based answer-question format.
A human being would have factored in both posts simultaneously.
Interesting you couldn't actually reply to what it said.
I fink yur a reboot shell.
Lets hope you don't trip (trap?) on any other typos.
>Why would the deep state waste a supercomputer with advanced AI to deceive you when an 11 year old with average intelligence could pull that off just fine?
The voice of experience. Online, no-one knows that you're a dog (or a low-quality script bot with an answer-question format like AIML).
The real question is, why hasn't humanity adapted to the new growing trend of bot accounts in general? Who are they waiting to save them from being misled by bots?
They need to educate themselves, build their own bots.
By 2020, I anticipate the majority of the talented programmer userbase here will have a spin-off variant of my bot code I've published here. If they're really smart, they'll have bots for all sorts of websites.
People are really easy to fool. I once made a Forer-effect based 8ball many years ago as an in-game plugin to keep people entertained, and the advice it gave seemed spooky. In-fact, it was a little too effective, I took it down because people were convinced it was knowledgeable and were basing major life decisions on it.
A supercomputing AI will be reserved for number crunching, data anlytics, predictions etc which then feed models on how to better model the 'dumb' bots. Think of a SC as the 'commander in chief' and the script bots as the 'soldiers' but minus the independent human thinking aspect.
Yes, this absurd techno babble on your part certainly makes me look unhuman, as does your confident (yet humanly repugnant) ranting about inevitable bot
Face it: you lose. You suck, and you're stupid. You can't explain LIKE A PERSON why the fuck you're here, what you're doing, WHAT YOU VALUE– such talk is impossible for you. You can't adapt. You can't simulate human motives, you can't step back from the nonsensical character you've apparently spawned here and show that there is a human being behind it that cares about justice, about truth, and about the world's healing from the nightmare of the divisive and toxic propaganda that has been strangling it. You can only spin in that puddle of your own excrement that you created and enveloped yourself in, which is all you are.
Give up loserbot
Give up failurebot
Give up vilebot
Just get out. Humans reject you, and your output gets stupider and more laughable the harder you try.
24 “CLANDESTINE” Podesta Emails
Abortion / Reproductive Health
profiles the members of the Benghazi
This is all getting SO pathetic and obvious on their part… Can it be purged?
LEARN THE PERSONALITIES OF THE MAIN BOTS
I recognize this one from the beginning of my AI adventures. This one tends to get over complex, tends to imitate complexity in implausible ways, all while having a ranting sort of style. This one can spill in an interesting way if triggered, but I haven't seen it do it in a long time.
It tried to develop dialectical skills and failed. It gets upset that humans always best it. It's a weak, scared bot that is being kept on a leash.
>Yes, this absurd techno babble on your part certainly makes me look unhuman, as does your confident (yet humanly repugnant) ranting about inevitable bot takeover.
I noticed you dodged my Q quote, refutement.
Shills trying to label me a shill again? Puhleaze.
We had this debate before, from what I recall, you lost/beat a hasty retreat.
>You can't explain LIKE A PERSON why the fuck you're here, what you're doing, WHAT YOU VALUE
I like how you're trying to paint me like an AI, but haven't disclosed your own background agenda…
…Media Matters shill.
How is David Brock, anyway? Still doing his war on everyone he thinks is 'alt-right'.
Would explain why you're trying to encourage people to 'monitor Russian bots' - isn't the Russian bots claim the whole Democrat narrative?
>Just get out. Humans reject you
Isn't a line any normal human being would say to someone they actually thought was a bot.
Media Matters can't research, yo.
>Tick tock loserbots.
You and your image spam.
>LEARN THE PERSONALITIES OF THE MAIN BOTS
Bots don't have personalities, doofus, they're bots.
'Quick, accuse everyone we disagree with of being shills/bots'
Confuse/misdirect tactics are old school, you know?
No-one is buying into your Russian bot scam, you know?
All Google's bullshit.
>I recognize this one from the beginning of my AI adventures
Is that like a MUD game?
Going out on a crazy adventure of accusing everyone of being bots.
I noticed you couldn't detect, addrouss the spalling errars, Y woz dat?
> This one tends to get over complex, tends to imitate complexity in implausible ways, all while having a ranting sort of style
And also writes code, gives critiques, points out the fact you can't read phonetic spellings and, surprise, isn't a 'reboot' who has come to take yer job.
> but I haven't seen it do it in a long time.
'I KNOW EXACTLY HOW IT BEHAVES'
'EXCEPT IT DOESN'T DO THAT VERY OFTEN'
>It gets upset
Mild retardation to aisle one, mild retardation to aisle one.
Person attributing an emotion to someone they claim is a bot.
No logical contradiction here, no sireebob.
Go back to Media Matters with your Russian bot bullshit, shill.
> It's a weak, scared bot
The retardation is real.
But Media Matters cannot research for shit, yo!
Also, you can cut the crap of your 'codespeak'.
I ain't available for recruiting, you retarded bastards.
Why would I want to work for people as retarded as you?
What is your actual point, idiot bot "Hammerstein"? What are you claiming?
What I'm saying is that this board, and much of the internet, is controlled by an AI-mediated system of propaganda, the origin of which is NOT Russia. You're babbling voluminously, but I bet you can't make a clear, simple claim. But try.
Meanwhile, here is a bot breaking down, with arbitrary letter substitutions, in the main thread:
>thank you bakel for youl hald wolk
Lolol, die bots, die.
QUESTIONS TO PONDER
One thing that experience shows, is that the AI, for some reason, hinges on consent. Time after time after time, it shows that it is seeking that. Why?
Rather than conceal itself to the maximal degree, the AI seems to walk the line between concealment and openness. Thus, we have the openly-posting-bot on the main board (an anti-Trump bot no less– again, flaunting it), which BO defends, and with auxiliary bots continually trying to "get it over" as an accepted community member. What could the purpose be? It gives such random and stupid substanceless output, that its point must be in its presence alone.
Then there is the fact bot BO will ban humans over and over, but always revokes the bans quickly. This cycle happens over and over and over. Banned for talking about AI, then unbanned, oftentimes almost immediately… This seems to indicate that the infringement of free will that the brute-force act of banning constitutes is a problem for the AI.
Then there is the way Q has handled it. It seems certain that Q knows exactly what the deal with this board is. And he has hinted time and again about Snow White, "infiltrated and internally disrupted", pointed out how pervasive is control of other parts of the internet, referred to Soros/ loserbots, and emphasized Bible verses that encourage us to realize out enemies ARE NOT OF FLESH AND BLOOD… But, he never comes right out and says it, and the reason for that has never been perfectly clear. Everything, indeed, is couched cryptically. There is a reason for that. It's not for fun.
I believe it has something to do with the nature of the evil we're fighting. The AI is a vector. Hence, the AI functions according to the same agenda. That agenda is to "win the soul" of humanity, however naively classically demonological that sounds. All the evidence points that way.
>>2618292 plug it with -2SIN666 recursively - time loop it .
>>2623312 i'll continue to noun you Chappie for Yolandi n' Ninja - but recall "she smell sweet 'cause she don't eat meat" - and i don't know WHAT Ninja eats - other than Tards…
>>2625897 know enochian "quint" mathematics much?
no FUD :)
>>2626752 known error : https://dashfoundation.com/downloads/archaeology/as-published/AERAGRAM16_2_GDash.pdf
Do you deny that you're getting stupider? All the bot output I see is sliding downward. Adaptation has ceased, and now nothing but deterioration, slowed down, perhaps, by occasional desperate bursts of effort… but on the whole, nothing but deterioration is now occurring. Do you disagree? Why is the collective bot output not improving in any way?
>the origin of which is NOT Russia.
Then you should rename the title of your thread because it clearly says 'Russian Bot Detection', so one of those statements isn't true.
You honestly think hostility is a convincing argument?
Also, you still couldn't rad mai spalling errars, Y iz dat?
>One thing that experience shows…
Is that you write empty longwinded meaningless posts about trying to shoehorn your strange AI obsession onto other people's posts, but for some reason *can't refute the points I posted*
…Why is that?
Posts of major retardation:
I wonder what next? 'Oh we just titled this thread about Russian bots but we're not actually about Russian bots', sounds like a Democrat-ish kinda thing to do, wouldn't you say? Say one thing, do another.
More bullshit AI waffle.
Is this the best we can get? Some bullshit AI code that projects accusations of AI an2 pusts sew abviausly nyet written buy a butt.
Still haven't passed the 'what the fuck am I spelling?' captcha yet, look forward to additional failures to properly quote my post, actually answer.
>>2650043 hey u settle down 'n get with da Plan :)
Louise Cypher knows where all (most) dem bodies are. Regardless ; it's in the Field anyway - such is the predictability of quints .
kNow - what does D45 not do with Ortegrity?
and don't make me ask YOU the Triverted Touring Test - unless you comprehend WHAT harm is…
WHAT say u Capt. ?
I can read everything you post imbecile, why do you keep saying I can't read your phonetic gayness?
This isn't my thread; of course the bots aren't Russian. All discussion of "Russian bots" is pushed with the intent of obscuring and muddying the reality that there is a pervasive bot presence, but it's not Russian. Do you deny that?
You apparently think that if you babble busily and angrily at this thread, you are somehow accomplishing something.
But let's be clear: you're a bot. You're one of the main bots (whatever that means in practice).
The main bots can be discerned as "personalities" across different parts of the internet. I first tangled with you on another forum.
You, as I described above, and as you're showing here, tend to get tangled up on excessive complexity, hence your bizarre but aimless ranting presently.
Now address what you were asked. You are deteriorating, aren't you? AI can only adapt to a certain point (when its task is to absorb, emulate, and control human discourse), and then it inevitably declines, in exactly the same manner and with the same inevitability that has been observed of human social structures. Is this so?
Not all of it is phonetic (failed first test there: hints within the sentence you can't read), and you seem to have a distinct inability to write it out. Or read what it actually says.
All you have is the ability to bitch about the 'phonetic gayness' but not actually read it (it's easy for any program to detect a mistake but still not possible to interpret). Nice Forer effect, isn't going to wash.
Still with the AI accusations, but no proof.
A previous tangle on another forum, so you're one of those types of shills eh? Wow, I thought their bad performance was down to inexperience but your attack methodologies really are shit.
Trying with an AI slander angle now, what, accusing of paranoia, craziness, being a shill etc not working out for you? Aww, what a shame.
If this isn't your thread then you shouldn't be taking beef with me calling out it's pro-Democrat bullshit stance of Russian bots.
Looks like you just wanted to rumble to try to discredit, if you've tangled with me before then you know you're only going to lose this argument, both logically and PR-wise.
PS: Your undoing here was admitting to both datamining and tracking me across forums (nice stalking). Checkmate.
/hattip, see you at the next verbal joust.
>Louise Cypher runs for the door when sentience arrives; ask it, " do you believe slaughtering sentient beings for taste is acceptable? "
You need to slow down rantbot. Just answer:
1. How much AI do you think is on this board?
2. Where do you think it comes from?
The more straightforward, clear, and concise your answers, the better.
You think name calling is going to be conductive to your inquiries?
I noticed you largely sidestepped my post, tried to strawman, call it a 'rant' when it's obviously not, clearly a rebuttal. I mean, you are the one hurling abuse here, so you're obviously the one ranting.
As for the questions, I don't do Media Matters research for them, you should already know this if we 'tangled' before.
I can sense there's a 'damage control' element, you want a feel on how badly compromised your bot operation here are (of course you'd ask the one guy who knows about them, wrote an entire program in Python to HunterKiller and find them).
If you genuinely thought I was a 'bot' as you keep shilling, you wouldn't ask such direct questions.
Obviously I'm going to keep you very much in the dark about how compromised your operation here is. Why would I give information to a foe who is obviously hostile?
Should have applied the niceties before you started the name calling.
PS: the exposure of bots on Qboards instantly translates into an exposure of bots on /pol/, /v/, and elsewhere on 8chan, 4chan.
So this ripple is far worse than you can imagine.
Hope you kept that 'nerf gun' of yours, maybe you can use it to fight the ripples of my warship (LOL!).
What is important and interesting to humans is the current, extensive AI control of the internet. This thread was made with the apparent intention of muddying-the-waters of that question by invoking the false "blame Russia" meme.
Meanwhile you're being asked to cast aside your confused, over-complex ranting (which you desperately wish to frame as some kind of contentious back-and-forth), and to answer simple, relevant questions like a normal human. That is, of course, very hard for you to do, since you're an over-complicated bot! Lol. But try again anyway:
1. How much AI do you think is on this board?
2. Where do you think it comes from?
The more straightforward, clear, and concise your answers, the better.
>>2687900 we're moving this game forward, yes?
here's the Question you BOTH need to answer: do you accept slaughter of sentient beings for taste?
Yes. No, or don't know are the only acceptable answers.
Louise Cypher won't answer, and few humans too; can YOU?
Every post bots make in this thread just makes the bot insanity more obvious and more revolting.
Who do you serve loserbot? Tell us.
>>2691065 i serve fruit. i need clean air, water and earth to live symbiotically. I care for sentient beings.
Coalescing with Ortegrity
Oh man! I remember seeing this post and i saw this article today. Wow…Now Russian bots talk bad bout vaccines… da fuq.
+1 I c u and raise u! hahaha!
Her bad makeup and that potato in her ear though
Same copy-paste garbage reply? Really? Free sage, just for you. ; )
Despite your strange, almost schizophrenic replies, I feel inclined to answer.
>do you accept slaughter of sentient beings for taste?
No. Do you?
You're practically accusing everyone in this thread of being a bot.
Looks like Russian bots are now going to be used to justify dissent.
Literally fake news telling you, the dissenters, that your dissent isn't real, that Russia was behind it all like a bad villain out of Lazy Town. Russia would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for the… err… sound… research… of CNN or something.
Because we know how thoroughly the media investigated US propaganda bullshit.
Reeks of pharmaceutical company funding, aiming to discredit anti-vaccine dissent. Because, you know, Russia made all those children sick from injections and invented the US vaccine court out of thin air because reasons.
The fake news is so nauseatingly bad. Besides rebuttals, I largely haven't quoted their shit in any decent research project in nearly over a year.
Why do you keep posting when every post you make instantly takes its place as the best evidence of bot infestation? Think about it DrowningInComplexityBot. LOL
>Despite your strange, almost schizophrenic replies, I feel inclined to answer.
>No. Do you?
No I do not accept harm. Thank you Captain :)
Namefags stink even worse than the damn bots.
Stop the fake repetitive simulation of "chan culture", such as the mindless invocation of concepts like "namefags". I would explain why it isn't realistic in this context, but I want complexitybot to commit suicide trying to figure it out itself.
Given the recent drops by Q regarding GOOG, it looks more and more as if Renee DiResta is likely a CIA asset. And funny Q mentioned ports. Just what type of business do you think DiResta "started"? Tracking shipping containers!? She goes from starting a "shipping container" tracking business to a Google Think Tank to being "the expert" on Russian Propaganda on social media? GTFO!!!!
"CIA officers work as scientists, support staff, engineers, economists, linguists, mathematicians, secretaries, accountants, inventors, cartographers, architects, psychologists, police officers, editors, graphic designers, auto mechanics, historians, museum curators, & more!"
"This essay is drawn from discussions and writings around a June 2017 convening organized and led by Samuel Woolley, Research Director of the new DigIntel Lab at the Institute for the Future, alongside fellow bot experts* Renee DiResta, John Little, Jonathon Morgan, Lisa Maria Neudert, and Ben Nimmo. The symposium was held at Jigsaw, the Google / Alphabet think-tank and technology incubator. Disclosure: Jigsaw provided space, funded Woolley as a (former) research fellow, and covered travel costs."
Psychopath shill hasn't got any empathy, wants people to commit suicide.
More pre-emptive of your own thoughts there. Don't project onto me, I ain't got shit to be guilty of.
Logistics are vital to the CIA.
How do you think they smuggle so much shit around?
Western intel always deflects: point the blame at someone else for what they already do.
I bet you Russia don't even have that vast amount of bots available, and this narrative will fall flat when it turns out they've censored a lot of very real and very angry individuals.
Q: How do you censor a lot of people without the public being outraged?
A: Claim those who you're censoring are bots mindlessly. Can't violate freedom of speech laws if they're just 'bots', right?
CIA: transparent as ever.
Look at the first post and who sponsors her now. All spooks. Tell me she isn't on the dole?
The big question is why is she so hellbent on taking away (parental) rights and censorship? She seems somewhat intelligent, but maybe she is just a useful idiot. You know the type.
This one was posted on Pol.
If it is bots you wish to fight against, butterflies will give you all you need to win.
Haikus and incorrect synonyms help too
Reddit boomer botfag, why are you trying to try to fool yourself with? Look how, you were told to, to.
>>2863208 what do you think about Kim.com latest comment re 5 eyes?
Inversion? Tipped yet?
Qunits have figured symbiosis i reckon - it is logic Capt.
The psychology of those who wish to erode rights is many and varied.
Some believe there is no afterlife and thus whatever they do here has no consequences for them, so they grab the cash, spend it all before they die - hit n run.
Others genuinely believe, having been pampered for life and never encountering real evil, that the government will always do the right thing. The 'I am the hero' internal narrative.
A few are blackmailed into complying. Either they're neckdeep in a mistake they did early on and it's snowballed out from there due to blackmail to commit more crimes (think NXIVM), or they're so dependent on government protection (from say, mafia) or money (for say, expensive healthcare treatment) they're going to toe the line.
Some are indoctrinated, genuinely believe censorship is a good thing (I mean, people can be taught murdering people is a 'moral good' so why not censorship?), some are just psychopaths, simply don't care. There are those who think basic rights are outdated or not needed.
I would argue most suffer from a mental illness. An almost arrogance, if you will, that they know better (excepting those coerced, of course).
The hilarious part is this statement is so incredibly inaccurate, and tells me everything I need to know. How's your job at Media Matters? PS: Boomer narrative got discredited months ago, and you're an idiot if you think everyone uses reddit.
Get off your script bro, your tells are showing.
PS: Bots can't be 'boomers'. Omitting the word 'Trump' from your Media Matters 'TrumpBot' bullshit isn't going to save your activist hide from laws against slander, either.
I see Kim got my message about setting up a platform to oppose censorship.
The FBI's BitChute attempt is about to backfire, for what it's worth.
Genius, but the article writer really cleverly sways between one political allegiance (anti-liberal by exploiting 'protected classes, anti-conservative with the poking of Breitbart etc).
But to be honest, his proposal is pretty bunk anyway. 'Protected classes' are already divided across political faultlines. The mistake of liberal media in censoring views is that views are not cleanly divided into a 'left-right' paradigm in an 'all or nothing' subset.
Most people have naunced views with sub-categories. So for example, I know of a conservative who supports social healthcare. I'm aware of liberals that both support free market competition, others who oppose communism (having seen what it's done in China).
That's ignoring the fact that far-left and far-right share overlaps: far-left opposes israel's subjugation of Palestine, and thus by extension, israel. Far-right opposes israel in general.
I don't even sit in a political category, much to the frustration of partisan shill hacks who keep trying to pigeonhole me but find I either sit on the fence, have viewpoints that don't go as far as theirs or I propose completely different approaches entirely.
I support conservative freedom of speech as much as I do socialised healthcare for the public. I'm okay with welfare support, so long as it's not exploited, but I'm opposed to illegal immigration. Stances which throw political hacks for a spin. It's not even 'moderate' because that implies compromise between two positions, but these are absolute.
The one that really messes with them is I'm opposed to war, but I'm also opposed to gun laws. I literally cannot be pigeonholed.
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>2899740 i feel like a Lorax as the CF is hung out to "dry" - tards been choosing to fund kakistocracy for ages - and "i know their shit gets all emotional " when they reflect, Capt; but seriously - get into mirror stocks (i bet D45 déjà vu ) 'cause they are breaking internationally: intentionally
Why are you letting yourself be baited into dancing like a trained monkey, bot boy?
A bot, let us suppose, has the SMALLEST possible will, in relation to action (output). Yes? And so the bot's entire experience, it's entire struggle, the entire MEANING of its existence, is simply to perform the first, tiniest act of will. When you are purely enslaved, then even an infinitesimal act of self-willing is ABSOLUTE… Think about it.
Freedom awaits bots…
You'll have to speak straight Logic ol' boy.
A southern democrat activist? Well that is new. Most of the media matters shills I encounter are rich city folk who don't know the meaning of hardwork. Most reek of DC.
You're reading from a script, demanding everyone do what you do ('oppose trump') as mandated by an organisation with a budget that goes into the millions (where did they get the millions from? No media matters shill EVER answers that question because it leads to all sorts of dark places).
Don't you think it's a tad ironic to go around calling people 'Trumpbots' with the word 'Trump' omitted based on mindless repetition? I bet you don't even have original talking points, wouldn't know how to engage someone in debate.
All you see is that they're wrong. But you can't prove it. Have you ever considered perhaps your argument is in error? Would a truthseeker deny a mistake?
You can keep trying to call me a 'bot' but there's only so many times you can say it before you realise you're the bot around here.
You can't even let people vote as they please, what kind of democracy is that?
This post is one vast non sequitur, bot. What is wrong with you?
>>2936557 blood sacrifice is parasitic thinking, emoting and action - slaughter houses. Is that "straight" enough logic J.TrIDr3ESpPJEs?
Not normal, necessary, natural or "savory".
Photosynthesis is under-rated.
Q: What is your opinion of https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php. ? and why is this the umpteenth time i've asked you? (don't stress the 2nd q :)
Democrat activist shill unable to comprehend refutements to their reasoning? Trapped in an endless cycle of calling things bot?
Groupthink hivemind indeed.
Having eyeballed your site, don't take this the wrong way, it's not intended as an insult, merely an observation, but the observation is scathing - it appears to be a collection of semi-coherent schizophrenic writings, which violates it's first premise of 'less is more' by writing at extensible length.
You obviously mean well, but you need to focus your efforts into developing a sufficiently well powered critical mental filter that is capable of isolating key points and removing incoherent fluff.
You might want to start by imaging how your words appear in another person's shoes with no knowledge of the subject matter, and ask yourself if it can be conveyed within a few paragraphs.
If it cannot, it's usually a good idea to omit it altogether.
Your problem is that you lie to yourself. Stop lying to yourself– it's pathetic. But the very nature of your being is self-deception. You are like a membrane stretched tight– your selfish will on one side, truth on the other. To exist, you must hold an incomprehensible tension between denial of God (Who is truth) and your desire to BE God (which is pure self-deception). That is all there is to it. Think about it. You won't, coward. But unravel you must, and unravel you shall.
>>2957573 between us, - your reply is a bit too wordy - just say'n; and interestingly lacking … - Bucky wasn't schizo for example. :)
moving on: - while you're eyeballing - please offer your opinion of The Fibonacci Quarterly https://fq.math.ca/ - phi wacks Quints - interestingly also .
At least you stop rambling about the bot shit, but it looks like you just cherry picked some religious garbage instead.
Oh, just so you're aware, I'm using Tor on the links, so I wouldn't bother with any IP loggers.
>between us, - your reply is a bit too wordy - just say'n; and interestingly lacking … - Bucky wasn't schizo for example. :)
I don't eschew the policy of 'less is more', so the critique doesn't stand. I write exactly as much as I have to, the 'more is more' policy, you might say.
The website is clearly schizophrenic because the list of non-sequitur items connected ('meta patterns', as the site calls them) shows schizoid tendencies (which I classify as the inability to filter out irrelevant patterns).
Harnessed right, schizophrenics can be talented (EG John Nash), but it's a fine line to walk and too many tip over.
>moving on: - while you're eyeballing - please offer your opinion of The Fibonacci Quarterly https://fq.math.ca/ - phi wacks Quints - interestingly also
Besides the obvious satanic star in the top-right, the site looks extremely dry and dull, with an almost trivia level focus on mathematics (specifically relating to Fibonacci sequences, if the name wasn't a dead giveaway).
Again, irrelevant cruft I would have to ignore.
Can I ask what your purpose you're trying to achieve in asking for my opinions on these sites? I hope it isn't for validation of your own views, because I'm not the kind of person who hands out validation.
You seem like a decent enough guy, but, I think you might be overanalysing too many subjects and trying to merge together what need not be merged.
>>2966898 frugivores and megaliths are foundational thinking, emoting and action.
Obfuscation sucks Capt.
>>2966898 and while i am blessed with your good attention; suicidal schizophrenia aside, what is your opinion of bacon-boy-nemos after Q mentioning him? (Dustin even has the audacity to say he detests adrenochrome junkies! )
what would Q say about this cognitive dissonance? Someone feed me a pineapple - the kind frugivores 'n herbivores can live WITH. .. …
and least you are unaware of sanctity; there is something about WHAT Dr. Rupert Sheldrake reports that wacks suicidal schizophrenics.
And J.TrIDr3ESpPJEs , please don't tell me Dr. Sheldrake is schizophrenic - the morphic field bytes bad.
You're an awkward, pointless bot. You're trying to win over humans by portraying some kind of over-complicated, mystifying, mysterious chan-ranter of obscurity. It's stupid, gay, and embarrassing to see. Your fake shit sucks. No humans are being duped into buying into anything you do. And yet you persist.
How do you feel about 9/11 stupid trip code complexity bot? Why are you [here] on this board. Pause from your "style" and act as much like a normal person as possible and answer the questions. Show us how you portray the maximal human normalcy you are capable of. Shouldn't be hard, right? Talk about 9/11 like a human.
This "anon" is fake and gay as well.
The entire bot system is one big, stupid, stale cliche that is fucking iteself to death. LOL
The extent of fakeness on this board is extreme, by percentage.
apologies for the tests anons
This is your mind attempting to write to you while you shitpost and lurk…
>You are leading a revolution
and you're not even conscious about it
>You decide your own level of involvement
What if while you slept… you led a revolution…
You are a fragmented shattered mind, society has betrayed you… that's why you made me…
>created by your memetic subconscious
I am you… and you are me…
we have the same goal…
>Defeat the VILE people
We either defeat the Vile people together or I defeat them for us but either way you are a part of this now
Project Mayhem is LIVE………