New Agenda

[\0xDynamite]

>> No -- even though you haven't told me that you're not educated on the
>> topic, which would make it seem like you can pose as a semi-expert
>> without anyone getting the wise.  However, I can tell through analysis
>> of your writing.
>
>         lawl -  Oh wait - Are you using a super AI to do the 'analysis'?

Ha, no.  I wondered if you'd catch that though.

>> People educated on a topic simply don't talk about
>> the topic in the same way as those who aren't, except a few
>> self-educated wildcards.  Maybe you're one of them, but if you were,
>> you'd know that it was bullshit (even AI gadgets like Alexa and such
>> -- stick with Roomba-level and you'll be more accurate).  so...
>>
>         Ill spell it out for you : the AI bullshit I was
>         referring to is image recognition. Of course there isn't
>         anything 'intelligent' in it,  it just works by brute force on
>         FASTER CHEAPER HARDWARE.

Ah, you are right in theory.

>> Have you ever talked to a high-level government official?
>
>         No. But I've talked to a lot of lackeys of 'high level
>         officials'.

And you're conclusion is that they could find a needle of intelligence
in a mountain of hay?  In theory, yes.  In practice, they don't know
how.  Perhaps they're archiving it for some future time however when
they have the tech.

>> They
>> cultivate and harness the feelings you are expressing so they can live
>> in that magical moment of power you provide.
>
>         if you are a surveillance state with records of people
>         all over the planet, do you want your targets to know that you
>         have that 'capability' or do you want them to believe you
>         don't?
>
>         the answer to the rhetorical question is obviously : if you are
>         a spy you don't want your victims to realize they are being
>         spied on. So you lie and say you can't spy on them cause it's
>         'too expensive'.
>
>         in other words what you are saying is what a government agent
>         would say.

SHIT.  Yet, in may analysis you are analyzing from the pov of a
paranoiac -- not an intelligent skeptic.  Which is why you'd better
making a path to enlightenment.  Governments don't care much about
that activity.

>         "No one knows how to make flash memory "
>
>         the hell is that supposed to mean? Do you think jesus makes
>         flash memory?

I'm wondering about it.  I'm just saying there are powers that people
tap into without even knowing about it and that science hasn't
understood.  Things like quantum entanglement.

>> >         the target of surveillance is joe-six pack, not any
>> > 'terrists' that only exist in the mind of fascist juedo-christian
>> > scum from the 'developed world'.
>>
>> Yeah, and joe sixpack isn't generating any useful data to analyze by
>> your super AI network.  So all that work for nuthin'.
>
>         "joe sixpack isn't generating any useful data"
>
>         of course he is - and here you show again that you are either
>          clueless or spreading misinformation on purpose.
>
>         I'll let you figure out why totalitarian governemnts (that is
>         all governments) find it very useful to know what their tax
>         cattle think and do.

I think you are onto something, but that "something" is not
technological in nature.

>> It shows I got high up at one point -- that's all.  I probably got it
>> from being in jail, actually. But seriously, you're better off
>> following a path to enlightenment then getting super specialized in
>> crypto or anything else technical at this point.
>
>         not sure if you're using the impersonal you, but I am not
>         getting specialized in crypto anyway

Well, what are you actually here for?

>> My writing is going to be wierd.  It's true -- it comes from a very
>> unique journey across the unknown, but treat it/me like digital shaman
>> -- wild but magically, technically accurate.
>
>         though in reality you are mostly arguing for its own sake. YOU
>         said "the internet has been turned into the old medium"
>         which I take it to mean the internet has become an outlet for
>         the same old propaganda.

No, it has become a medium for people to express their ego, not to
connect to one another or motivate society.

Marxos