AI and Trans-humanism, which one (or both) is a graver threat to humanity?


Been wanting to recreate this thread and expand just haven't gotten around to it till now. I believe that some faction(s) of transhumanist elites are most likely behind the whole 'covid'/agenda 20/30/50 insanity. I started this thread well over 3 years ago (1/29/2018), and there's no doubt we are in knee deep of the Agenda 21 campaign. As usual, not gonna correct links, just pasting and copying from Way Back Machine for now. I figured this belonged in this sub-forum, doesn't really fit in the other categories, transhumanism (and AI, nano-tech even) figures heavily in the coming decades as far as health and medical treatments/technologies.

Post #1 (original thread, from gl69m)
Has any body been checking anything out on these two topics lately, AI and trans-humanism (trans-h would also include genetic engineering and bio-cybernetics)?

Been wanting to start a thread like this for some time now, like well I should have done this years and years ago, for all I know it may already be too late. I think this is the most important topic/threat we face in the world today: in terms of any so-called “freedoms” we have left in this world, or even whether humans, humanity will even survive the planned changes coming the NWO seems to have coming. I will make a case that it is “science fact” now (some of it) and not “science fiction”, but perhaps I could be wrong and any super AI/trans-human realities may still be many (or many many) years away, but if there is any chance whatsoever of opposing or stopping it, now is the time! I think there is plenty of technology already here to get these things rolling into place (to impliment depopulation for instance, which is already ongoing in so-called 'third world' for many years now), all that is needed to implement it into hyperdrive is the hyper tribal hive mentality (here I am really referring to “western” or “white” culture, globally) the PTBs are pushing to be coaxed into extreme defense/then attack mode, i.e. the 'immigrant crises'.

There are some earlier threads that touch upon these subjects, but they don't seem to question into it very far, nor sound very much in the way of alarm bells. I think this topic deserves extreme alarm bells (scrutiny), and I will argue it needs a huge amount of protest world wide, to counteract and oppose these changes if it is at all possible: but yes it will not be easy at all to convince people to oppose it (even for their own or children's/descendants sake), without sounding like a pure chicken little sky is falling fearmongering. I think the risk of possible extinction of humanity (or how we are now at least) far outweighs the possible ramifications & risk of sounding like a fearmonger, so I will get this thread off and running then.

Here is a list of some recent robot and AI vids on Youtube, does anyone here see that there is anything of major concern? There should be throngs of people online stating how massively incorrect all this push for technology is, doesn’t anyone remember all these crazy movies so many of us have grown up with??!! Most people seem to be cool with it, think it is all just bitchin'! From what I see online nowadays. On top of that, most sheople are asleep to this threat because they're caught up in the 'terror' threat with all the psyops, 9/11 and even well before that too.

This robot can jump gaps and do back flips, who knows how much more advanced the robots are that we have not seen yet? I'd be hard pressed, I don't think this is CGI IMO.

I robot del futuro sono gia tra noi ! - 2018 - (Of the future are already among us)

You Tube

World's Top3 Humanoid Robots - Asimo vs HPR-4 vs NAO!

Real World Terminators in development by the military, I wonder how much of this they have ready in underground military bunkers, awaiting the orders to use them on the surface?
US Army Future Most Advanced Robots DARPA Real Terminator Battle US Military Robots Full Documentary

AI Robots Full 2018 Documentary ~ Taking Over The World

The Dangers of Artificial Intelligence - Robot Sophia makes fun of Elon Musk - A.I. 2017

Artificial Intelligence: it will kill us | Jay Tuck | TEDxHamburgSalon

This vid talks about programmer bias in AI written algorithms. First algorithm he discusses is about how a husky dog was mis-identified as a wolf because almost all the wolf photos used in the algorithm written programming used wolf pictures that were in the snow, and the husky dog photo was in the snow. COMPASS criminal sentencing algorithm (04:10 in), used in 13 states, a study shows that black people are 77% likely to be deemed by the algorithm as “at risk” for recidivism (repeating an offense after release from jail/prison) of violent crime than whites are. Not much racist bias in the programmers right? In lawsuits against this type of AI usage for case back log sentencing and parole cases, defendants were told they were not denied due process if the programs were used “properly' but then were not allowed to have the source codes of the algorithms examined, imagine that.

The Real Reason to be Afraid of Artificial Intelligence | Peter Haas | TEDxDirigo

You Tube

Haas states at the end of his talk (highly paraphrasing/interpreting here), “we need not fear killer robots, we need to make robots more like people and people not become more like robots”. This highly depends on who is making the robots and programming them. Also he says we have to fear our own “intellectual laziness” in programming, more than fearing the machines themselves; but really in my estimation it is not the intellectual laziness of these people (the AI makers) to be feared, it is their biases, racist and any other type of biases that they have (about who is a desirable human and who isn't) that should be the most disturbing. And most importantly, it is the directions and manipulations of the so-called PTBs and their intentions for the implementation of this technology that we should really fear the most.

Another thing is, are any of the people creating or directing this technology, are they misanthropes?

Misanthrope- quick google definition-
noun: misanthrope; plural noun: misanthropes; noun: misanthropist; plural noun: misanthropists

  1. a person who dislikes humankind and avoids human society.
hater of mankind, hater, cynic;

Of course for conscious and awake non-white people (counter-racists), in a global system of RWS, and with the threat of both AI and trans-humanism (if indeed the primary power of these reside in “white” hands) (i.e. depopulation agendas also), they have the most to be concerned about. For up to 90% (or more) of the worlds people on the globe now, it has to be of the utmost importance to deal with this issue and to challenge it with all their might. I don't want to be alarming, but ignoring and not acting about this issue seems to be an extremely unwise choice in my estimation.

And to be probably more accurate too, a certain percentage of “whites” (not that I know what that % is, but any % should be enough to fucking wake some sheople up) also face depopulation targeting, as “collateral damage”, and I would say not by some nefarious alleged immigrant (non-whites) taking over bullshit meme that has been promoted for so many years now; these memes in my view is nothing but a very specific strategy to increase racism and racist attitudes in whites to the fever pitch % necessary to have firm support and absolute minimum resistance to the AI/trans-human depopulation agendas; which will primarily target non-whites (in my view), specifically blacks the most, and then secondly most any darker skinned non-whites not deemed as black. This is just the logical extension of a survival strategy to avoid (or at least the fear of) “white genetic annihilation” by the white supremacist core of the NWO. I will expand on this later on in the thread.

Now supposedly this robot, Sophia, was granted citizenship by Saudi Arabia, have to wonder if that is just a huge ruse to peak interest (or disgust) about AI. Sure is weird, in Saudi Arabia they supposedly gave a “white” robot the first AI citizenship, well I guess the Saudi elite are pretty much the closest to white (accepted as at least passing for white) among all the middle east and Arab nations in general.

Meet Robot Sophia as Saudi Arabia Becomes First Country To Grant Citizenship To a Robot

You Tube

This video here the voice of Sophia (in this video and the next one listed) sounds a little too human, I mean scripted and voice acted: I think this may be a female actress conversing the lines into the voice of Sophia, and conversing directly with the “Powder” looking robotic like creator dude, from an isolated studio room in real time. Just a conjecture, but the the robot talking about taking over and extincting humanity, seems a bit to in your face flippant really, I hope that's not real AI consciousness in this robot, that would be really scary. Perhaps it is all just propaganda/fearmongering?, or are they perhaps really serious about it? I will try to summarize a few possible theories of PTB factions and intent a little later.
Robot Sophia Got Shut Down by her Creator

You Tube
One black robot that I could find, but the robot is only a bust, why not a full sized black or brown android like Sophia? I would say obvious racism at work there, some people might be offended at suggesting that could be racist of course. On the other hand, they might feel relieved that they are not represented thus far as fully replaceable as a human like perhaps Sophia is representing, who knows.
Bina 48 Meets Bina Rothblatt - Part One

You Tube

Cool robot built by a 20 year old black guy in South Africa, built in just two weeks by thrown away material and used electronic parts. This guy should be working for a tech company, whether he has a degree or not, no way I could create what he has there. It may not seem like a really great robot he has there, but imagine if he had serious materials to work with! I'm sure there are tons more of these intelligent and self motivated inventor types out there, in Africa, South America, Central America Mexico South East Asia, maybe here in the U.S. too; most if not all of them are not getting the attention and access they need to further their skills and talents.
Nas Daily : He Built A Robot From Trash!!

You Tube

More possible racist AI algorithm creation and programming?
'A beauty contest was judged by AI and the robots didn't like dark skin'
And of course the most superior than though not racist (gtfoh) favorite Youtube blog stars of the alt right, weighs in on the racist AI beauty pageant,
Red Ice Live - Robots Judge Beauty Contest & Prefer Mostly Europeans

You Tube

oh no, can't be racist, white algorithm designer = 99% white beauty winners, can't possibly be racist, no way, and it was supposedly 75% white photos submitted, so there, can't be biased, sheesh! They say non-whites should write their own algorithms. True of course, but even if they did though (or probably have already), some dedicated white supremacist “intel” personnel would quite likely (at least attempt to) sabotage their efforts. But that is definitely what's needed for non-white people, their inclusion in the AI/trans-humanism movement, or non-whites will be faced with pure extinction if this movement succeeds in their depopulation agendas. Can't be any pussyfooting around with this notion, burying heads in the sand won't save anybody when it comes to this shit.

Of course I think this movement (AI/trans), needs to be seriously opposed with all humanly possible effort, even for the majority of the white underclass here, but in the more “developed' world, i.e. western civ, I don't see this happening, primarily because they are still majority white and white supremacist dominated.

In this video from the Advise Show, the host Phil shows and discusses a short clip from a white woman (presumably from Jersey or NYC? By her accent) (0:30-2:06, woman's short and extremely revealing racist rant). Don't know how her video ended up on the “WORLDSTARHIPHOP.COM” site. She just thinks it's so refreshing that Trump made those comments, he's the bomb, she tells her “peeps” peace out, not ripping off ebonics lingo much is she?? She says “we all thought, we all said it” (in private with no non-white people around, she referring to all white people of course??).

Trump Supporting Becky Is Estactic At Hearing Haitian & African Nations Being Called Sh*tholes

You Tube

This woman is not exactly well codified as a racist is she?, it's glaringly obvious (IMO) that her hatred for immigrants is nothing but very thinly disguised hatred for all dark skinned people, plain and simple; and she hates them regardless of them being American born or not. Can anyone seriously disagree with that, am I wrong about that??

Yes, the host here Phillip S. from the Advise Show does say inflammatory stuff about whites, this woman, and Donald Trump. He also frequently uses words like “neanderthug”, but I fail to see many white people being really offended nor affected by such a term, certainly not from an internet video. That might be different if you were being called that constantly and harassed with that language on a daily basis by other people, non-white people more especially, in public, school or workplaces. Just being called names in and of itself would not really be racism though, and whites are simply not subjected to systemic racism despite the absurd false claims of rampant reverse-white hating racism by the so-called crypto communist three headed liberals and jews.

One thing I can say for sure is, that if you add the hate filled attitude of this woman and people with the views of “Red Ice” (Trump supporters in general), and mix this with AI/trans-humanism, you will quite certainly (100%) end up with the most racist and egregious depopulation schemes possible, no different than if the KKK would be in charge of it. For all the pretension that the 'white nationalists' or 'alt right' does not want to be painted as “extreme” racist as nazis are, that they are just “separatists”, I contend that nothing could be further from the truth, but hopefully the masses of them can and will prove me wrong. I seriously doubt that though. I think this gives further support to the counter-racist theories of counter-racists such as the C.O.W.S. Show and people like Gus T Renegade. For them, the greatest threat with this issue is, racist man, racist woman, and racist child, anybody that can be called on by the PTBs (pool of people to be educated and indoctrinated into the technology workforce) to further this agenda.

If Red Ice and this woman, in actuality does represent the majority of white people (even 51%), then how can they (counter-racists) afford not to consider all white people as possibly racist (suspects)? Especially when an issue with the highest possible stakes in on the table with the subjects of depopulation/AI/trans? They simply can't afford to take such a risk and join with significant numbers of whites, if whites can deceive them, that they may outwardly act 'liberal' but inwardly think on the “right” or “alt right”. That puts them in much too vulnerable a position to oppose these kinds of things, and the power imbalance cannot be ignored for them. I feel this is terribly wrong and tragic, shouldn't be that way, but facts and logic keeps getting in the way of “you should believe in that which makes you the happiest” (quote from a sister of mine, to me in 2004) and not to mention “wish in one hand and shit in the other, and see which one fills up first” (quote from my Dad, probably heard this by the time I was maybe 6 years old).

For my theories of the NWO, and possible different factions among them, and what is the end goal, or endgame with all this depop/AI/trans shit? I would divide them up probably at least three categories (but then some sub categories too):

1- utterly racist, seeks to wipe out all people not considered white, would align with KKK/nazi types. Probably they are not the majority type in the NWO. They obviously want human labor (except white people mostly probably) replaced with machines. People like David Duke or the William Luther Pierce (author of the "Turner Diaries" would likely fall in this category.

2- utterly racist, but desire to keep some non-white people around as subservient slaves, probably for sexual abuse, rape, and experimentation as well. They surly want most if not all human labor replaced with machines, probably want 90-95% depopulation. People like the Clintons and Ted Turner would likely fall in this category.

3- this faction may comprise of true misanthropes (hates all people perhaps even?), but yes still utterly racist; perhaps they actually want to even eliminate all humans, even white people or so-called 'jew supremacists', including any descendants of their own, replace us all with machines/robots/androids or and/or also with so-called enhanced or 'super-humans', they want to evolve “humans” into another species I reckon. Techno gurus and misanthropes would fall in this category, not sure who is a really good example, possibly Bill Gates maybe.

There could be a lot more factions too, but I will start off with these three. Is there a fourth faction, that actually wants to replace "white" people (so called 'Kalergi' plan?), or eliminate them and give non-white people the planet? I seriously doubt it, but perhaps it has to be considered as well.

Another potential faction, that of the machines/computer brains themselves, are they "conscious" already? Can they upgrade and write their own code even now as Jay Tuck claims? Can they (and/or will they?) decide whether humans survive or not in the coming near and farther future?

A further refinement of my theory of these factions, is the subject of trans-humanism, as it relates to genetic engineering, so-called human improvement, bio-cybernetics; this complicates these three categories and in my view probably warranted to think of there being further sub-categories of these three main groups. I will have to touch further upon that aspect of trans-humanism in later posts.

Obviously there are so many technologies they have to choose from to kill off whole swaths of people at a time, chemical bio weapons (chemtrails could be utilized with these) along with machines/drones/robots/AI, I think nukes are basically a hoax (but may be powerful enough like the MOAB {mother of all bombs}) though. The question is are they really gonna go through with it, and if so when? As I've stated earlier threads, some “depopulation” has already been ongoing for years in Middle Eastern and African countries, just when are they going to make it fully global? Perhaps the next war (WWIII) or the agenda 21? Now is not the time to keep stalling to oppose these things.

Let me know what you think about this here Let's Roll, I feel our situation may indeed be dire, and it may already be too little too late to stop the techno juggernaut, but why think of it as impossible, that might as well be suicide IMO. If any one thinks this is just straight up fearmongering, let me know that if you feel like it, and then feel free to stick your head back in the sand, no problem, sorry to disturb your sleep.


Post #2 (original thread, from griff)
Great thread, Glen!

After I have a chance to look at all you've presented, I will try to join in on the technology aspects. I'm not going to get into any of the "supremacy" aspects (not my realm), although to a certain extent, I do understand your perspective of it.

Post #3 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Felt like throwing in just a couple more videos about drones, how they can be used as weapons, police and terror as well as military:

Russian guy with machine gun armed drone, looks and sounds pretty real to me, I don't think this looks like CGI to me. I can imagine, what if this guy screwed up controlling where he was shooting this thing and end up taking himself out, how poetic justice that would be.

Prototype Quadrotor with Machine Gun!

You Tube

Small drones supposedly controlled all by AI (un piloted by humans), with facial recognition, 3 grams of explosives, precision skull strike for the kill. I hope this is science fiction, but if it's not, well....


You Tube

Note what mr. death salesmen jim carey lookalike says at @`2:05 in,


Trained as a team, they can penetrate buildings, cars, trains, they can evade people, bullets, pretty much any counter measure. They cannot be stopped (Robocop like applause here). Now I said, this was big, why?, because we are thinking big. Watch (he points to video screen). A 25 million dollar order, now buys this (fleet of thousands of small drones flying out bottom hatch of a transport plane). Enough to kill half a city, THE BAD HALF (!).
goes onto say that nuclear is now obsolete, well it was really a hoax anyway in my estimation, so now they roll out mass murdering flying machines for hire. Who wants to be considered part of THE BAD HALF in your city? Any takers? I wouldn't think so, at least I hope not.

He continues “Take out your entire enemy, virtually risk free”. “Just characterize him (Target Profile- age__, sex__, fitness___, uniform___, ETHNICITY____), release the swarm, and rest easy”

Notice the drones in a nazi swastika shape formation @~3:03.

Anybody still asleep after this wakeup call? Anyone getting scared yet?

He says these are available today!! Some of the comments suggest this is a sci-fi episode of some kind (“Black Mirror”?). Actually at the very beginning of the video it shows the website (an anti-military industrial SJW presumably, “, Buenos Aires Event, TV Truck 02”). Even if it's not real as of yet, can there be any doubt that some company out there is capable of making this already, and maybe even like 10-20 years ago already for all we know. I mean, like the Quadrotor russian guy was saying, oh you won't see what he has in his video available on the market for another 10-15 years, I would think the opposite is true, been available already for 10-15 years (or more) before we (the public) ever see it.

Some comments also point out the likely limitations of such small drone units, but who would we want to have any access to creating, buying, or distributing such technology? I would hope people working in this area of technology do not have any racist (WS or other supremacy complex ), or extreme political ideologies, I hope a lot of people will agree with me about that. In my estimation, I have to wonder if there is anyone (higher ups, elites) who could realistically be trusted not to abuse weapon systems like these, things that could deliver perhaps chem or bio weapons also, and surveillance of course and all manner of other disruptive terrorist type applications on any community, practically anywhere in the world (except perhaps underground prepper bunkers I guess).

The only way to really hold any nefarious techno violent abuse at bay by govt. (police) and secret govt., in my view would be mass protests and demands that only just and equitable systems be made and only be made "by and for" and then put in the hands of people who are wholly morally and ethically sound and without any racist or other biases. No one failing such psychological parameters should even be allowed near such technologies and access to them. Try convincing the mass fed sheople of this, fed a daily diet of racist stereotypes and 'terror' psyops, that is the real challenge in my view. Who would get to decide the psyche testing and criteria, another thorny question of course also, has to be figured out somehow.

Post #4 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Trying to come back to this thread when I had a little time, there is just so much material that could be covered, not easy at all for me to know where to begin. I would say my purpose for the thread is to lay out the case that these particular ideologies/subjects and activities; that- AI, technology in general (hi-tech enthusiasts or proponents) and trans-humanism, does not have (and many of them probably never had, but I'm speaking more so in our time) at it's root/foundation, the best interests of humans in general at heart. More bluntly I would say it has only a small demographic of representative people's interest at heart. Needless to say, but I will lay out the case best as possible, these people are overwhelmingly racist white supremacist also, not much different from the rest of “western culture”, but that might not mean all of them desire to totally annihilate all non-white people, but some of them surly do. For any butt-hurt white race soldiers reading this, we could simply call it a “global system of injustice”, but it still means the same thing as global RWS.

My main point is that this techno revolution in my opinion, is likely to wipe all humans out, at some point, so if we don't desire that, it's probably now or never, start opposing it now, or just tuck your tail and head between your legs, or bury your head back in the sand and then just kiss all of humanity's ass goodbye. But since there is so little opposition to it that I'm aware of, why is that? Well, I think that WWIII and depopulation, and proposed technology to carry that out, can probably easily be sold to “western masses” as 'solutions' to 'overpopulation crises' and 'immigration problems': if that is, it is sold as “population reduction” targeted at non-white people, and not white people. Another words, if “white culture/identity” really does equal “white supremacist”, which I allege has been amply and unfortunately been thoroughly demonstrated on the C.O.W.S. thread; then the progression towards that would likely meet very little resistance from the “white western” masses, even from so-called 'liberal' so-called 'socialist/communist' SJWs, because of endemic racism/WS within this population.

Well, in our more supposedly 'politically correct' times, it will of course be sold (already has been ongoing for many years) in a variety of different marketed packages, racist coded packages for the “conservative” more overtly racists, and one more 'anti-racist' PC coded for the racist-light SJW crowd. Even non-white people who are more confused about RWS will likely be sold on these types of 'solutions', the ones packaged in the PC SJW marketing strategies, of which I will throw out the Agenda 21 as basically exactly one such strategy.

The strategy of the Agenda 21 marketing, is using absurdly lingoistic language towards 'development', 'sustainability' as a means of helping the poor and oppressed, code in general for non-white peoples of the world. This strategy is aimed at the SJWs and confused non-white people. I've heard an awful lot of “conservative” conspiracy theorists and yes I say racist unflinchingly, talk about agenda 21 as basically a so-called 'zionist'/'communist' plot to inundate white people in the “western world” with black and brown people, this is a different strategy to sell the same thing, only disguised of course. In the rightwing marketing they are screaming about it all being a plot for 'white genocide', when really it is just the perceived fear of “white genetic annihilation” without ever acknowledging that that's what their actually talking about.

So this strategy, marketed in different ways at this false left/right dichotomy, on the one hand the left is sold Agenda 21 as a way to help the poor, but not all of the poor can likely be saved, so it turns into “lifeboat ethics”, which I have talked about in the Dave McGowan Depopulation thread. So on the right, is the screaming bullshit 'white genocide' strategy, meant of course to increase the racist desire for world wide depopulation of non-white people. So where do these two strategies merge to finally implement quote un-quote “real” depopulation, or not just the military industrial complex business of perpetual war and rotational systemic ongoing depopulation? Well, that's of course where the “war on (of) terror” and all these psyops come in to play of course, and racism/WS takes care of the rest, in order to sell the 'necessity' of world wide “population reduction”.

Of course the technological means to actually carry out world wide mass murder of up to billions of people in rapid time frame might not actually be available as yet: it is a safe bet that racist WS race soldiers in the military intelligence industrial complex (which has to include people in the “techno” revolution imbedded of course) are dedicatingly hard at work 24/7/365 to hasten the push button capability of such. Doubtless in my opinion.

Now here is the infamous Agenda 21 document pdf, and I have read bits and pieces, but the language is so ridiculously convoluted as to be impossible for me to read any inference of it into which side of the coin (fake 'left' or “right”) a conspiracy theorist could argue it is better evidence in favor of. On the one hand, the endless pseudo-leftist sustainability talk about the goals to alleviate poverty could be used as evidence it is 'anti-white' and promotes 'white genocide'. But the problem with that is, on the other hand, there is no concrete language at all that I could comprehend of “how” any of that, sustainability or alleviation of poverty is supposed to be accomplished, and so in my view it is complete hogwash (that it's actually about helping the poor, code in general for “non-white” people) and what I would call a “controlled opposition” of an SJW (racist-light) side of the coin.

United Nations Sustainable Development
United Nations Conference on Environment & Development
Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992


I'm going to paste only a small snippet of the document to give the flavor of the language used, in my view, the rest of the document pretty much reads the same.


Agenda 21 - Chapter 3

Enabling the poor to achieve sustainable livelihoods
Basis for action

Poverty is a complex multidimensional problem with origins in both the national and international domains. No uniform solution can be found for global application. Rather, country-specific programmes to tackle poverty and international efforts supporting national efforts, as well as the
parallel process of creating a supportive international environment, are crucial for a solution to this problem. The eradication of poverty and hunger, greater equity in income distribution and human resource development remain major challenges everywhere. The struggle against poverty is the shared responsibility of all countries.

While managing resources sustainably, an environmental policy that focuses mainly on the conservation and protection of resources must take due account of those who depend on the resources for their livelihoods. Otherwise it could have an adverse impact both on poverty and o
n chances for long-term success in resource and environmental conservation. Equally, a development policy that focuses mainly on increasing the production of goods without addressing the sustainability of the resources on which production is based will sooner or later run into declining productivity, which could also have an adverse impact on poverty. A specific anti-poverty strategy is therefore one of the basic conditions for ensuring sustainable development. An effective strategy for tackling the problems of poverty, development and environment simultaneously should begin by focusing on resources, production and people and should cover demographic issues, enhanced health care and education, the rights of women, the role of youth and of indigenous people and local communities and a democratic participation process in association with improved governance.

Integral to such action is, together with international support, the promotion of economic growth in developing countries that is both sustained and sustainable and direct action in eradicating poverty by strengthening employment and income-generating programmes.
Now the problem right off the bat is this line, “Enabling the poor to achieve sustainable livelihoods”. I mean there is no evidence whatsoever, and plenty to the contrary, that the UN has ever been about “enabling the poor” for any such thing, except to keep them exploited (land, labor and resources) and oppressed by the powerful nations. Let's just keep that in mind as I go forward with the argument.

I won't spend any more time on the Agenda 21 document for now, it's 351 pages, so I figure let's just focus on some of the key buzz words used, “sustainability” and “development”. So that will bring us to other buzz words and concepts, some I've found recently, “smart cities”, and also “resilient cities” and “automated cities”.

I think I had first heard about the basics of such concepts from the “Zeitgeist” movie,

Zietgeist movie maker,

Jaques Fresco

and so the Venus Project by the Fresco dude, was an early advocate of what we could term as smart or potentially automated cities. The “Zeitgeist” founder and the Venus Project have parted ways a few years ago apparently. I don't feel like getting into the particulars of these at the moment. Next, I found the “resilient city” term, and so I saw a Youtube video talking about this “100 Resilient City” movement, and so googling that, I came up with this pfd,

100 Resilient Cities

in which I found that St. Louis is listed as one of the 100 “resilient cities” as a “second wave” city (slide 29 of the ”100 Resilient Cities” document); and why the second wave, and what each wave means, I don't really care right now. As it turns out, there are also documents for these cities you can look up, that spells out that an office called the CRO or “Chief Resilient Officer” is setup that “advises” the mayor's office (slide 23 of the ”100 Resilient Cities” document),


Who is the Chief Resilience Officer?
The CRO is a catalytic force, transforming the way cities organize themselves to better meet the
challenges of building resilience in the 21st century. The CRO will lead the city’s resilience
building efforts, including:

Working across silos to create and implement a resilience strategy

Serving as a senior advisor to the Mayor or municipal leader

Promoting resilience thinking, and acting as both a local and global thought leader

Coordinating resilience efforts across government and multi-sector stakeholders

Liaising with other CROs, 100RC staff, and service providers via the network and platform
Here is the pdf for the city of St. Louis, incidentally signed by the racist former mayor here Francis Slay,

Executive Order 56: Establishing Office of Resilience (173.90 KB)

On the first page


An Executive Order relating to the City of St. Louis's participation in the 100 Resilient Cities (“100RC”) Initiative as a member City:

Whereas, the Rockefeller foundation (Grantor) has approved a two year grant to the City of St. Louis
this was signed in July of 2016.

There was many stories about Frances Slay I'd heard from a former radio personality here, Lizz Brown, about the racist (par for the course in all of the major cities) actions and policies of Slay (mayor from 2001 to 2016). One anecdote in particular involved his daughter as a college student who had a black female student friend that came to the daughter's house with her one time, and father mayor Slay reprimanded the daughter in another room in an easily heard voice that she “should not be associating with the likes of them” (paraphrasing what I remember hearing).

The continued assault on the St, Louis public schools' state/federal accreditation was ongoing in his administration, which I think finally succeeded, and a number of failure charter schools were created during that period also. And the refusal to allow the city to control the police force, which is under control for the last 150 years by some MO state created agency/committee that I think is based in Jefferson City MO, but I think the mayor sits on a three person council that meets with this agency, that's the way I remember it described anyway.

Those were just two tidbits of the racist actions of the Democratic party mayor Slay, while surly being painted as one of those 'socialist' 'leftist' SJW type of mayors. His predecessor, Lyda Krewson, also a Democrat and first female mayor of St. Louis, no doubt will carry on the pseudo SJW racist-light policies in St. Louis.

Here is a planned automated city that will supposedly be tested while no one will currently live in it, I would presume after it has been built?

CITE: The $1 billion city that nobody calls home


In the arid plains of the southern New Mexico desert, between the site of the first atomic bomb test and the U.S.-Mexico border, a new city is rising from the sand.

Planned for a population of 35,000, the city will showcase a modern business district downtown, and neat rows of terraced housing in the suburbs. It will be supplied with pristine streets, parks, malls and a church.

But no one will ever call it home.

The CITE (Center for Innovation, Testing and Evaluation) project is a full-scale model of an ordinary American town. Yet it will be used as a petri dish to develop new technologies that will shape the future of the urban environment.

The $1 billion scheme, led by telecommunications and tech firm Pegasus Global Holdings, will see 15-square-miles dedicated to ambitious experiments in fields such as transport, construction, communication and security.

CITE will include specialized zones for developing new forms of agriculture, energy, and water treatment. An underground data collection network will provide detailed, real-time feedback.
"The vision is an environment where new products, services and technologies can be demonstrated and tested without disrupting everyday life," says Pegasus Managing Director Robert Brumley.

Without a human population to worry about, the possibilities are endless.

Driverless vehicles could be used on responsive roads, monitored from above by traffic drones. Homes could be designed to survive natural disasters, and fitted with robotic features. Alternative energy sources such as Thorium power could be tested at scale.

"You can bring new things to have them stressed, break them, and find out the laws of unintended consequences," says Brumley. "This should become like a magnet where people with ideas and technologies come, and not just test but interact."

The director describes CITE as an "intermediary step" between lab testing a technology and it reaching the public. He believes the process will deliver more market-ready products and address the 'Valley of Death' -- the shortfall that exists between investment in research and development, and the revenues this generates.

"The US spends billions of dollars on research and gets 2-3% return in commercial products," says Brumley. "This facility could extend and increase the return."
I won't paste the whole thing, I think this gives us the idea of what so much huge sums of money is now being invested in, for the actual cities and residents of the planned future apparently. I think the 100 Resilient Cities, being part of Agenda 21, is probably a ruse to siphon off funds from the major urban population centers of the world to fund the automated cities that the “elite” want to move the chosen keepers of the earth into, if they succeed on the Agenda 21 depopulation schemes.

Which I would say depopulation right now in the poorer countries/areas is could already be accelerating, and the “immigrants”, the few survivors of this that actually get to come to Europe and the U.S., and the urban cities in Africa, South America, Asia, all probably, potentially I guess, being setup for a mass culling, mass murder.

Once enough of these automated cities are online and functional, other automation meant to replace workers in a huge range of jobs will make the depopulation agenda seem much more 'necessary' for George W.'s friends the haves and have mores. And the redneck racists who will gladly support that, in their doomsday prepper bunkers (waiting for SHTF), will be left on their own, but they are of course well stocked up (deliberately allowed to of course for several decades now) to join in on the depopulation “purge” agenda, of the poor (code primarily non-white). At least that's what it looks like to me right now. As far as whether the rednecks would be let in to the Logan's Run domes after a possible mass bloodbath occurs, I can't say for sure, nor would I care if they survived a mass culling or not either; they would not deserve to survive anymore than the “elite” would in my view.

Here is an article from the UK about automation (in U.S. too) of perhaps from 40-60% of all jobs by 2035,

The automated city: do we still need humans to run public services?


But whether everyone can be “upskilled” to carry out more fulfilling work, and how many staff will actually be needed as robots take on more routine tasks, remains to be seen. Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael Osborne’s influential 2013 paper The Future of Employment: How Susceptible are Jobs to Computerisation?, estimates that 47% of US jobs are “at risk” of being automated in the next 20 years. Another report by Deloitte found that in London, 29% of admin and support services jobs, and a whopping 72% of transport and storage roles, are at “high risk” of automation.

However, a report Forrester published last year was less pessimistic about people’s future employment prospects, suggesting that only 9.1 million US jobs will be automated by 2025. Robinson is more inclined to believe Forrester’s estimate. “It’s inarguable that as technology develops, it will automate certain tasks. But ‘tasks’ are very different to ‘jobs’. I also think some reports are hugely optimistic about what technology will be able to accomplish in [the] future.”

If Google or another tech giant does eventually manage to create an artificial general intelligence that can successfully perform any task a human can, the job losses would dwarf anything we’ve seen before – and not only among the 1.5 million people employed by local government in England. A universal basic income, which would provide everyone with enough money to maintain a decent standard of living, is often cited as a solution to this problem. But in the medium term we might find robots still need our help; that there are things we simply do better than machines.

Now personally, I think that sustainability, even for a continually growing population, we need to have communities that have independent local control of food supplies and producing their own necessary items: more localized economies, everyone should have food garden plots (indoor hydroponics also where feasible) to supplement an outside industrial market so no food shortages occur, etc. The capitalist/communist intelligence military complex would have to be broken up first to accomplish this, or at least taken down several notches; and industries though still needed would really simply be necessary to scale down to manageable energy consumption and waste producing levels. Automation could still be beneficial, as long as a system of justice instead of a system of injustice will be put in place, and not by people who want to cull, or murder 90-95% of the world's population.

Something like “contribution-ism”, like that described by the “Ubuntu” movement should be the model, where each community has it's own mini-corporate centers (locally controlled) to produce local products and thus abundance and a way out of poverty, at least a much greater equitable creation and distribution of commodities and wealth production compared to the globalist system we have now, especially for poorer communities.
I first heard about this movement from a guy named Micheal Tellinger a while back, and he gives a great talk about the possibilities of “free energy” and the like. But being a white man from the UK coming into Africa and trying to sell this to Africans, selling them back (marketing it as though it were a new idea) their own traditional way of life really, there is no way he should be trusted to not sabotage such a movement before it ever could get off the ground. Really that was a traditional type of existence for most people in the world prior to the euro-colonial expansion in the 1400s, in the general sense anyway.

Tellinger makes some incredible claims about advanced civilization(s) existing all over the planet and all over Africa in ancient times (up to perhaps 200,000 to 400,000 years ago), with archeological finds of many different kinds of ruins in Southern Africa and all over Africa really, as well as stone megalithic structures found all over the planet. But then he goes into the Ananaki bible and Sumerian mythology and aliens built the pyramids racist white supremacist standard operating procedural non-sense (and humans, aka black people then, were created by the aliens as a slave race to mine the gold that is still being stolen off the planet even now): and then despite also talking the lingo of a 'socialist' SJW of course, so really I don't know how much of his whole claptrap to take seriously or not. Some of the concepts he brought up were very interesting, the free energy and sound and resonance stuff, at least sounding really cool and promising if there is any truth to it of course.

Well I guess if nobody really gives a shit about justice, then all the automation and depopulation will continue to progress unimpeded I suppose.

Gonna have to cut this post off here, and come back to the trans-humanism when I have more time.


Post #5 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Been wanting to come back to the thread and continue about trans-humanism, it is a very deep and varied topic, at least conceptually for sure. So for each post, I have to lay out enough background to show not only what's been going on (and recent) in such fields/circles, but also potential plans nefarious or not, to back up an assertion I've made earlier in the thread, namely (post #4)


I would say my purpose for the thread is to lay out the case that these particular ideologies/subjects and activities; that- AI, technology in general (hi-tech enthusiasts or proponents) and trans-humanism, does not have (and many of them probably never had, but I'm speaking more so in our time) at it's root/foundation, the best interests of humans in general at heart. More bluntly I would say it has only a small demographic of representative people's interest at heart.
Now though, it can be argued from many trans-humanist proponents that they are not nefarious, “eugenicist” (minded) and most would likely claim they are not racist, sexist, classist etc. But I think from what I have looked at previously, and am starting to more now so, that that is not accurate, not the case, the overwhelming majority of tech/AI/trans-humanist (and derived mostly from “humanists” as well) enthusiasts and philosophical adherents/researcher/developers, are “white” and male; so unfortunately if a global system of racism white supremacy does exist akin to a C.O.W.S. theory of it (i.e. the “globalists”), which there is vast evidence to affirm something like that is indeed true IMSO; so I say that trans-humanist/AI idealogues are indeed overwhelmingly “racist” (insert other oppressive expletives here also if desired) and would/will not blink or flinch at “depopulation” talk or plans (within certain audiences anyway).

I contend that they are definitely racist, and many believe in some form of “evolution”, but many also believe in some form of white christian religious strand that promotes obviously white supremacy: of which the “western” strain of “christianity” really is not at all truly at odds with certain “darwinistic” evolutionary theories (“eugenics” also) or strands, so in my view, despite some “evolutionists” being at odds with most “creationists”, the overwhelming congruency of the two separate types of camps (that are supposedly opposed to each other), is that at the foundational bedrock/framework of each, is the true religion derivative of each, racism white supremacy. There is no question of the truth of this in my mind and thinking, these type of people prove that over and over again, race/racism trumps all for them over any other point of any disagreement between the camps.

I believe a connection can also be made that the “christian” (white supremacist strands) concepts of “transcendentalism” or the “transfiguration” is perfectly compatible in many ways with “trans-humanism”, and I would argue is a logical extension of such and consistent with the PTB white supremacist elite desire for continued “white genetic survival” (or basically avoidance of “white genetic annihilation”, or at least the fear of) and I mean in context of the current world political and demographic configurations we are currently in. I don't know if I can fully cover this point in this post, I may have to try and come back to that later.

But to get to all that, I have to lay out a minimal foundation, a little definition of “trans-humanism” of course. I chose this site here to start with, seems a there is a significant list of notables (people) from a “trans-humanistic” movement that contributed to this site, so here is that site with their basic definition of “trans-humanism”,


What is


is a way of thinking about the future that is based on the premise that the human species in its current form does not represent the end of our development but rather a comparatively early phase.
Transhumanism is a loosely defined movement that has developed gradually over the past two decades.
Transhumanism is a class of philosophies of life that seek the continuation and acceleration of the evolution of intelligent life beyond its currently human form and human limitations by means of science and technology, guided by life-promoting principles and values.
– Max More (1990)
Humanity+ formally defines it based on Max More’s original definition as follows:

  1. The intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally improving the human condition through applied reason, especially by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.
  2. The study of the ramifications, promises, and potential dangers of technologies that will enable us to overcome fundamental human limitations, and the related study of the ethical matters involved in developing and using such technologies.
Transhumanism can be viewed as an extension of humanism, from which it is partially derived. Humanists believe that humans matter, that individuals matter. We might not be perfect, but we can make things better by promoting rational thinking, freedom, tolerance, democracy, and concern for our fellow human beings. Transhumanists agree with this but also emphasize what we have the potential to become. Just as we use rational means to improve the human condition and the external world, we can also use such means to improve ourselves, the human organism. In doing so, we are not limited to traditional humanistic methods, such as education and cultural development. We can also use technological means that will eventually enable us to move beyond what some would think of as “human”.

About the Transhumanist FAQ

The Transhumanist FAQ was developed in 1998 and authored into a formal FAQ in 1999 through the inspirational work of transhumanists, including Alexander Chislenko, Max More, Anders Sandberg, Natasha Vita-More, James Hughes, and Nick Bostrom. Several people contributed to the definition of transhumanism, which was originated by Max More. Greg Burch, David Pearce, Kathryn Aegis, and Anders Sandberg kindly offered extensive editorial comments. The presentation in the cryonics section was, and still is, directly inspired by an article by Ralph Merkle. Ideas, criticisms, questions, phrases, and sentences to the original version were contributed by (in alphabetical order): Kathryn Aegis, Alex (, Brent Allsop, Brian Atkins, Scott Badger, Doug Bailey, Harmony Baldwin, Damien Broderick, Greg Burch, David Cary, John K Clark, Dan Clemensen, Damon Davis, Jeff Dee, Jean-Michel Delhotel, Dylan Evans,, Daniel Fabulich, Frank Forman, Robin Hanson, Andrew Hennessey, Tony Hollick, Joe Jenkins, William John, Michelle Jones, Arjen Kamphius, Henri Kluytmans, Eugene Leitl, Michael Lorrey,, Peter C. McCluskey, Erik Moeller, J. R. Molloy, Max More, Bryan Moss, Harvey Newstrom, Michael Nielsen, John S. Novak III, Dalibor van den Otter, David Pearce,, Thom Quinn, Anders Sandberg, Wesley R. Schwein,, Allen Smith, Geoff Smith, Randy Smith, Dennis Stevens, Derek Strong, Remi Sussan, Natasha Vita-More, Michael Wiik, Eliezer Yudkowsky, and

Over the years, this FAQ has been updated to provide a substantial account of transhumanism. Extropy Institute (ExI) was a source of information for the first version of the Transhumanist FAQ, version 1.0 in the 1990s. WTA adopted the FAQ in 2001 and Nick Bostrom and James Hughes continued to work on it, with the contributions of close to hundred people from ExI and WTA, including Aleph and Transcedo and the UK Transhumanist Association. New material has been added and many old sections have been substantially reworked. In the preparation of version 2.0, the following people have been especially helpful: Eliezer Yudkowsky, who provided editorial assistance with comments on particular issues of substance; Dale Carrico who proofread the first half of the text; and Michael LaTorra who did the same for the second half; and “Reason” who then went over the whole document again, as did Frank Forman, and Sarah Banks Forman. Useful comments of either substance or form have also been contributed by (in alphabetical order): Michael Anissimov, Samantha Atkins, Milan Cirkovic, José Luis Cordeiro, George Dvorsky, James Hughes, G.E. Jordan, Vasso Kambourelli, Michael LaTorra, Eugen Leitl, Juan Meridalva, Harvey Newstrom, Emlyn O’Reagan, Christine Peterson, Giulio Prisco, Reason, Rafal Smigrodzki, Simon Smith, Mike Treder, and Mark Walker. Many others have over the years offered questions or reflections that have in some way helped shape this document, and even though it is not possible to name you all, your contributions are warmly appreciated.
Now my basic shorthand way of defining what I think of trans-humanism/transhumanists (so far), would be that these people are:
physically and spiritually weak human beings that want to either transform (quickly) or evolve (somehow, quick or slow) into super-humans akin to the comic book type superheroes; through a variety of available (or available at some “future” point) possible technological avenues of course.
But if they (current trans-humanists) can't transform or evolve in our current time frames, naturally their thinking is transposed onto their own children (or grandchildren et al) here, the desire for them to become super-human at some point

Now some of the ideas coming out of AI/trans-human movements, have in my view some ways that are good ideas, technological and biological even, for the improvement of human physical frailties, diseases, conditions, standards of living world wide, etc. etc. But at this point, regardless of the technological advances having been made up to this point, what we (public) potentially aware of per se (and I cannot speak much only speculate about what has not been yet revealed publicly): all of it right now the way I see it, it only feeds into a commercially desire/demand driven corporate/govt. avenues of development for those that can afford such developments; capitalistic/fascist/communist elites and overlords. So far I remain unconvinced from what I see from these people, that their intentions are really otherwise, to benefit all world's peoples and not just the elite 1%, just doesn't look that way to me.

One link I found that I think perhaps links “trans-humanism” to “eugenics” is, the derivation of the term (found this I think Wikipedia entry from google search of who coined the term)

The term transhumanism was originally coined by English biologist and philosopher Julian Huxley in his 1957 essay of the same name.”

This article clearly shows that Huxely was a eugenicist, and some argue against racism but I find that claim is not tenable, all them were racist I would argue.

‘Julian Huxley and the Continuity of Eugenics in Twentieth-century Britain’

Professor Paul Weindling


The life and ideas of Julian Sorrell Huxley (1887-1975) represent not only considerable contributions to evolutionary theory but also to eugenic thought and social planning. Huxley’s career history was complex and disjointed making him an international and very much a public figure. This paper sees Huxley’s peripatetic career as linked to ideological agendas, not least of “a new world order”.1The problems addressed here are, first, the extent of continuities in eugenic commitments from his interwar views and, second, to determine the contours of Huxley’s post-Second World War eugenic thinking. Huxley emerges as a crucial bridging figure from what has been referred to as “old eugenics” to a new eugenics based on molecular biology, providing an influential analysis of human evolution and a set of persuasively appealing concepts for both the wider public and scientific elite.2

i. Early Years

Huxley was a chameleon like figure, adept at fitting in with current social rhetoric while pursuing a social agenda defined by long-held evolutionary convictions. Huxley always qualified humanism with the terms “scientific” or “evolutionary” to emphasise the determining role of the natural sciences. His distinctive “scientific humanism” was rooted in his formative period as a student and young academic in Oxford (and elsewhere), and sustained throughout his life. Taking up the mantle of his crusading grandfather, T.H. Huxley, his public role was an apostle for evolutionary eugenics. This was in keeping with British middle class interests, as Huxley shaped an agenda of issues regarding the state of the nation’s physical and mental health from the pioneering welfare legislation of the Edwardian period to the reformist and welfare oriented 1960s. His role in organisations like the British Social Hygiene Council, Political and Economic Planning (PEP), and the British Population Society, formed in 1929, very much reflects this. He was an outstanding advocate of the advance of what Paul Mazumdar calls “the scientific intelligentsia” and seeking to shape what historian Harold Perkin has called the rise of professional society.6Huxley was convinced that science had to have both impact and meaning. As a public intellectual, he deployed his promotional talents in order to direct the current of public discourse on birth control and welfare, by setting it within a biologically conceived framework.
Now I will have to look up more on the PEP and the BPS (World Population Conference of 1927), to see what connection these might have to current trends in possible “depopulation” agendas. Could be interesting, only have so much time though. Julian Huxely (his brother Aldous wrote the famous or infamous “Brave New World”) has been connected to many other eugenicists of note of course, in the article, was the first director of UNESCO in 1948, and later in the article is connected to the Rockefeller and Ford foundations. The article has a section that shows that Huxely had a critique against “Nazi race theory”, and claims he was not racist or he was anti-racist but other parts of the article prove otherwise IMO.


Since his time as a student at Balliol College, Oxford (from 1906-1909) and young zoologist, he was a committed eugenicist. The Eugenics Education Society was founded in 1907 although its Oxford branch was launched in 1913 when Huxley was at Rice University Texas. T.H. Huxley in his Romanes Lectures spoke stridently against social selection, and although it is difficult to pinpoint the exact date of any eugenic epiphany for Julian Huxley around 1912-13 eugenics was certainly intensively debated at Oxford. For example, Huxley, Harold Laski and J. B. S. Haldane all debated “Heredity” at the student Essay Society at New College, Oxford in 1912, a Galton Club was formed at the College, and further debates took place at the Oxford Union.7From 1919 until 1925 Huxley was Fellow at New College, and the population geneticist J.B.S. Haldane (Huxley’s former “fag” at Eton) was Fellow from 1919 until 1922. Huxley’s students included the cytologist and contraception pioneer J.R. Baker who was undergraduate at New College from 1919-22, and the population geneticist E.B. (“Henry”) Ford. These bio-social theorists represented a political spectrum from Haldane on the extreme left to Ford and (a later Oxford recruit) the botanist Darlington on the extreme right: they all continued to exert influence on questions of biology and society on into the 1960s.8C.P. (“Pip”) Blacker (1895-1975) was another Huxley student, who went into clinical medicine, and became Huxley’s lifelong friend and fellow eugenicist. Whereas Allen focuses on Huxley the fully formed left-leaning eugenicist of the 1930s, Barkan discovered a right-leaning Huxley at Rice.9This continued on into 1920s when at the World Population Conference of 1927 Huxley maintained his stance for restrictive immigration controls.10Yet Huxley’s Oxford phase merits consideration as culturally elitist, a conviction that he held fast to as an axiom of his ideas of human evolution.

ii. Eugenic Campaigner

Although seeing the social potential of genetics, Huxley did not restrict himself to eugenics as applied genetics. He advocated eugenics as a social science, addressing the issue of a “social problem group”.14He was Life Fellow of the Eugenics Society from 1925, active on its Council from 1931, its Vice-President 1937-44, and President from 1959-62. He supported the campaigns for voluntary sterilisation legislation in the early 1930s, and for negative eugenic measures against persons carrying the scientific stigma of “mental defect”. Huxley straddled science and social action. He saw biology as a means to solve social welfare problems. He consequently built bridges between eugenics and the social sciences by working on behalf of Political and Economic Planning (PEP), of which he was a founder member in 1931. Huxley’s advocacy of social planning and state centralism clashed with an older style of eugenic imperialist. Huxley was similarly supportive of Mass Observation. The historical consensus is of Huxley as a moderniser and reformer, seeking to establish eugenics as part of an agenda of social planning and to shape the emergent welfare state on biological lines.15

This meant a fundamental redefinition of eugenics as concerned not with race but with biological qualities. Huxley’s advocacy of “reform eugenics” meant a break with an old guard of racist imperialists among eugenicists like Leonard Darwin and Cora Hodson of the Bureau of Human Heredity.16He ceased to speak of racial deterioration during the 1930s.17This is fundamental understanding for Huxley’s position during the 1950s and 60s.
Now that last part I quoted, it's claimed he broke with old racism/eugenics (supposedly he was 'leftish' leaning anyways right?) at some point: what I would call it was a refinement in that time of racism white supremacy in the context of “eugenics” and population control; I would use this passage that makes some of his views not really easy to distinguish from “Nazism” (parts I bolded for emphasis),


iii. Against Race

Huxley caught the mood of the times politically. In the 1930s he supported the critique of Nazi race theory, by co-authoring We Europeans (an anti-racist study of 1936). He astutely substituted the term “ethnic group” for the discredited idea of race, which he saw as by now debased “pseudo-science”. The menace of Nazism taught Huxley to be critical of anything linked to the idea of race. He was a strident opponent of Nazism, and, signed whatever anti-racist manifesto was afoot.20 The “Geneticists’ Manifesto” (authored by his friend Muller) of 1939 very much expressed the wider shift of opinion to a position critical of Nazi racial politics, while preserving commitments to biologically based social reform.21 He still found it difficult to shed an elitist form of thinking that differentiated between peoples as supposedly culturally inferior or superior.22 Sluga points out that Huxley retained ideas of Britain’s imperial role in contexts like Africa, in advancing literacy and disease control.23

iv. The Humanist Agenda

During the 1930s Huxley took a public stance as an avowed “scientific humanist”, by which he meant that his ethical ideas had a basis in evolutionary theory.36 As President of the Social and Political Education League, his lectures were published by the Rationalist Press Association. He linked his evolutionary ethics to the social agenda of eugenics: it meant approval for family allowances to encourage professional middle classes to have children of (hopefully) good eugenic quality, and the elimination of mental defect by reproductive controls.37 He explained that eugenicists should avoid a “holocaust” of the unfit by segregating mental defectives to prevent their reproduction.38 The economic and social system had to be altered to advance the reproduction of “the most successful stocks” particularly of the professional classes.39 Huxley advocated the ideas of eugenics as a sacred ideal and of “racial hope”, so that religion would advance his ideals of social evolution.

Huxley was always at pains to differentiate his views of eugenics from Nazism. During the war this was a clear-cut matter of opposing the anti-democratic Nazi state as well as of its racist underpinnings as “pseudo-science”. In 1940 Huxley viewed Communism and Nazism as “social movements of a religious nature”, which were destructive of life.40 In 1941 Huxley published a tract Religion without Revelation, a work reprinted in 1945. This manifesto for “a socially founded humanist religion” appeared in a secularist series, the Thinker’s Library, the first volumes in the series being works by Darwin, Haeckel and Herbert Spencer. Huxley argued for a humanist religion which would be life sustaining on the basis that mankind had outgrown old superstitions, and had evolved to a stage when a new religion was needed. Religious feelings like grace were natural experiences, and that a reverent approach to reality was needed to make the most of life: Huxley concluded “I believe in the religion of life”.41

Huxley argued that Nazi race theory was “pseudo-scientific” while his ideas were linked to scientifically valid observations. In 1940 Huxley forthrightly condemned the Nazi system as a negation of all civilised values: as organised destruction. Using the Freudian concept of projection, he diagnosed how the Nazis transposed their own inadequacies and failings on the Jews.42 Unesco was less concerned with diagnosis and post-mortem on Nazism, but rather a forward looking set of social beliefs, ones that Huxley was already hoping for in the darkest days of the war when an Allied victory was still uncertain.43 His Romanes Lectures on Ethics and Evolution of 1943 argued that “conscious evolution” should be the primary focus of ethical endeavours.44

Life for Huxley had a positive social value. Unesco adopted a forward looking philosophy of universal education aimed at preventing a future war. Here Huxley supported the psychiatrist John Thompson in developing its German programme as a therapy for a maladjusted nation.45 Huxley took up a number of issues at UNESCO notably conservation, utilisation of natural resources, and over-population.46 Huxley continued to develop these themes on leaving UNESCO. He was well positioned to drive forward a eugenically informed agenda in 1950s Britain and on a broader world stage. But at the same time, Huxley was also in a politically exposed position, out of step with Cold War culture. His espousal of biological values earned him enmity from the right, including Roman Catholics, and advocates of individual rights. He did not participate in the movement for the freedom of science of J.R. Baker and Michael Polanyi, nor the Congress for Cultural Freedom, in which his friend the poet Stephen Spender was so prominent. His only contributions were a review of Teilhard de Chardin, and an appreciation of the left-leaning Haldane for the journal Encounter.47
and from the v. The Post-war Era ,


Huxley, then, sought to establish a biologically based social philosophy. Part of this agenda was population policies – Huxley tried to get population problems onto the agendas of the United Nations as well as onto those of its specialised agencies, not least UNESCO, FAO, WHO as well as supporting the UN Population Commission. He took up population questions while still director general of UNESCO in 1948. He was aligned with the Rockefeller Foundation, being on good terms with the physical sciences programme officer, Warren Weaver. On the population front, there were dividends for the population lobby. The Population Council managed to intrude birth control into the United Nations agenda, and population control came to be regarded as a legitimate part of the politics of international assistance.53 Huxley endorsed the strategy of world population control.

Eugenics remained controversial during the Cold War period of the 1950s. There were two sets of criticism: first, the shadow of Nazi Germany as a state which had imposed laws of racial selection with devastating cruelty. Nazi racial and eugenic policy meant that a link could be drawn between forced sterilisation and genocide. During the 1950s the Catholic Church intensified its opposition to birth control and abortion, a position going back to the Papal encyclical Casti Conubii of 1932. A strengthening of Roman Catholic religious revivalism during the 1950s with its stress on the Incarnation and Infallibility meant continuous tensions between reproductive biology with the Roman Catholicism over birth control.

Huxley positioned himself with the biologists and physical anthropologists who sought to retain a biological component in the term “race” as a population group, when it was discussed by UNESCO during 1950.62Huxley’s humanism remained firmly founded in evolutionary theory.63 It was at this juncture that Huxley coined the term “transhumanism”, a term that he used only intermittently.64
Margaret Sanger in the United States provided a similar linking of biochemical innovators like Pincus with classic eugenic aims. As regards abortion and birth control eugenicists – or as some termed it “crypto-eugenicists” gained in influence through such organisations as the International Planned Parenthood Federation and the Family Planning Association. Huxley was a speaker at the Sixth Planned Parenthood International conference at New Dehli in 1959.
I can't quote or break down the entire long article, but I think as long as the article author was accurate, I think there is valuable information that I would say is in favor of a link between “eugenics”, humanism, scientific humanism, evolutionary thought and the like to the current “trans-humanism” movement(s) and as well as AI movement or “Robot cults”, I think AI and Trans-humanism is very closely linked in my opinion, overwhelmingly white, male (not elusively male of course), just as the previous iteration of racism white supremacy was in the earlier phases of it, eugenics, scientific racism etc., in the 19th and 20th centuries. AI/trans is all a continuation of that, I believe the information is available to prove and establish that link.

Here are some other interesting articles I found, describing some of the ideas of transhumanism and a few critiques, some seemingly against, one possibly for but with reservations maybe (good article I think byMeghan O'Gieblyn, “God in the Machine”, I think this article can help establish a link with “christianity” and “trans-humanism”)

They want to be literally machines’: Writer Mark O’Connell on the rise of transhumanists

Biohackers, cryonics, brainuploading and more

By Angela Chen@chengela Feb 25, 2017, 5:00pm EST

The long read
God in the machine: my strange journey into transhumanism

The Techno-Libertarians Praying for Dystopia

The ethics of transhumanism

I may try to elucidate some of these articles later, or not, that is very time consuming. I would like to though. But one question I think is highly important, and for me to establish part of my premise, is this movement truly racist? It doesn't seem to be that easy to establish this with zero doubt save me finding quotes from prominent trans-humanists saying things akin (or at least coded equivalents to) to known extreme white supremacists. Here is one comment from a trans-humanist critique blog, that on the surface may not sound like a KKK redneck, but I would argue shows a complete disdain for any and all peoples who are not white, so I fail to see how it is really any different.

I suspect this commenter is probably alt-right and absolutely typical of trans/AI enthusiaists who are white, probably world wide. I won't paste all of Carrico's response to “Black Guy From the Future Past”'s question, it serves as background to the commenter “jimf” who gave their own answer to “Black Guy”'s question. I can only imagine that “jimf” would scoff and dance around at being called a “racist” for his answer or that his answer is actually racist. I think however that his answer does indeed demonstrate that at least he believes that the bulk (and the core) of “trans-humanists” are ideologically on the “right”, white, and yes racist, but he would probably exorbitantly down play (or justify) that racism even if he did admit to it.

I also find it interesting that Carrico (Dale) was mentioned in the trans-humanist website FAQ section too ("Dale Carrico who proofread the first half of the text;"), so I'm wondering if he was at one time a trans-humanist then parted ways with them? Not sure at the moment, I would presume probably so.

Friday, December 21, 2012

"Is Transhumanism Racist?"



Using Technology to Deepen Democracy, Using Democracy to Ensure Technology Benefits Us All

Friday, December 21, 2012

"Is Transhumanism Racist?"

Upgraded and adapted from the Moot, "Black Guy From the Future Past" has this to say:
Hello Dale. Is transhumanism racist? I've been reading your blog and you continually make reference to how most futurists tend to be white. Also, many scientific fields are dominated by white people, more specifically white males. How does this skew ideas about the "future". I await your response. Thank you. (BTW I am that rare black guy who has encountered transhumanist ideas on the net and have noticed the alarming lack of representation of other races, cultures and their ideas)
Is transhumanism racist? Since there are unquestionably transhumanist-identified people who are conscientiously anti-racist anything like an affirmative answer by me will provoke the usual howls about my hostile unfair ad hominem attacks. As always, one needs to recall at the outset that one can benefit from racist legacies or mobilize racist discourses without necessarily affirming racist beliefs, indeed while earnestly affirming anti-racist ones, and so recognizing the force of racism is often a matter of exposing structural effects rather than making accusations of unalloyed bigotry.


jimf said... > . . .assumptions, aspirations, and discourse. . .

The logic is simple. The Way Ahead will be discovered, cleared,
and paved by the tiny handful of people with the smarts, power,
and money to do so. Most of those people will be white, male,
and wealthy (and probably unapologetic Republicans who are at
heart Ayn Rand fans).

The other 99.99999% of humans (including most people of color,
inhabitants of the Third World, and women) simply do not matter.
They are as irrelevant to the Bright Shining Future as the
99.9% of living species that have gone extinct in the history
of life on earth.

To tender-heartedly listen to them (the irrelevant 99.99999%)
begging for equal consideration, or even to be distracted by
their claims to basic minimum sustenance, is to lose sight
of the Important Things (things that will lead to Artificial
Intelligence, Nanotechnology, Life Extension [for the .0000001%
who can actually make good use of it], etc.).

> . . .their endless futurological white penis parade. . .

Well, in the future, they'll have turned blue.

(my note, "Black Guy"'s response to Dale, he seemed to ignore jimf, and probably should have)

Black guy from the future past said... Thank you Dale. This article is so well written and so dense, I will have to read it at least three times. Thank you for taking the time to respond to my inquiry. It is quite alarming indeed to see the parallels between racism and transhumanism, in how transhumanists literally aspire to make everything so "neat", "clean", "orderly", homogenized...dare I say "white" (using it in the most abstract sense). Thank you.

5:15 PM
Don't know what “jimf”'s link to an image was, I came up with error 404 not found.

This article by Dale Carrico, he argues that this movement is largely “eugencist” in nature, but can be slightly contrast with . I haven't really read all of it or absorbed it as yet, but a decent account, little wordy for my tastes in some respects, but he doesn't give specific examples or quotes from the movement to support the opinions in his piece, but he has claimed to have read and analyzed a great deal of trans-humanist literature, so I would think his critique is probably relatively accurate; although doubtless his conclusions are not equivalent to ones I am postulating about this movement.


Sunday, January 27, 2008

Eugenics and the Denigration of Consent

I have argued that both the "transhumanist" and "bioconservative" stances (roughly, the undercritical technophilic imagination as against the undercritical technophobic imagination) on questions of so-called "enhancement" medicine can rightly be described as eugenicist. In my view, there is a significant parallel to be discerned between
[one] on the one hand: the "transhumanist" who feels a moral obligation to "enhance" human capacities, morphologies, and lifeways by means of emerging genetic, prosthetic, and cognitive techniques to better facilitate the project of engineering the homo superior of the "posthumanity" with which they identify, and

[two] on the other hand: the "bioconservative" who feels a moral obligation to ban such "enhancements" and such techniques to better facilitate the project of preserving the homo naturalis of the parochial and static vision of "humanity" with which they identify.
These projects to facilitate particular parochial conceptions of humanity with which they identify through emphatic recourse to or repudiation of medical technique, seem to me in both cases profoundly eugenic (it pays to remember that in foreswearing emerging forms of medical technique, "bioconservatives" are enshrining as "natural" the norms and practices that currently contingently guide kinship and reproduction in the service of patriarchy and other traditional hierarchical social forms, a selective breeding program no less technical and artificial for having lasted in most places for many thousands of years).

"Transhumanist"-identified readers often object to my characterization of their viewpoint as eugenicist. It is a sore spot with them: after all, they get a lot of that... but if the shoe hurts, you may be wearing it. It is true that few of them openly advocate coercive or involuntary programs of medical intervention to facilitate their engineering of an "optimal" "enhanced" posthumanity (although even self-declared "democratic" transhumanists like James Hughes advocate the suppression of, say, non-hearing prospective parents who would "screen" for an atypical but certainly both valuable and nonlethal while scarcely demonstrably disadvantageous non-hearing child as an expression of gratitude for and solidarity with their own non-hearing lifeway, for example). Indeed, some transhumanists declare in exasperation that their viewpoint amounts to more or less my own (when it palpably does not).

I believe that to value human lifeway diversity and human stakeholder equity as people of the secular progressive democratic left in an era of prosthetic/therapeutic polyculture demands neither [1] pretensions to knowing what ideal human optimality properly consists of and pressuring human plurality into reflecting it nor [2] pretensions to knowing what ideal human normality consists of and pressuring human dynamism into conformity with it, but instead [3] always only the struggle for more informed, nonduressed consent, peer to peer. What is wanted in my view is a politics that will shore up the scene of informed, nonduressed consent in therapeutic contexts, and celebrate the proliferation of wanted human capacities, morphologies, and lifeways that will be sure to eventuate from such a consensual scene. Against the eugenicism of the elitist "transhumanist" optimizers and the eugenicism of the elitist "bioconservative" preservationists, I have proposed the better alternative of a more informed, nonduressed consensual secular democratic prosthetic polyculture.

I disagree that "transhumanists" are in accord with my view here, but before I elaborate why let me first address the question of coercion that some "transhumanists" believe gets them off the eugenicist hook despite their overconfident belief that they know what optimal human health, abilities, and ways of life will look like and their advocacy of that optimality as an "objective standard" that should function as a norm in public discourse, in administrative policy, and shaping professional and institutional formations.

It is not only those who go so far as to actively advocate involuntary modification who are typically described as eugenicist in my understanding. There are disciplinary pressures beneath the threshold of conspicuous coercion that will yield eugenic effects just as surely, and often more efficaciously, than blatant threats and attacks of violence will do. Certainly programs of involuntary medical intervention constitute the most hideous and heartbreaking end of the eugenicist spectrum, but one can easily observe comparable homogenizing and restrictive effects arising from popular misinformation, from social stigma, from mass mediated promulgation of norms, from uncritical and inertial workings of orthodox institutional healthcare mechanisms. And the workings of these unexamined orthodoxies do no small amount of the work enabling more conspicuously coercive interventions, by marginalizing and befuddling objections to them and sanctifying their "best intentions" as only natural.

Not everybody needs, as some "transhumanists" apparently seem to do, literally to see a Nazi brandishing a firearm or cracking a whip in the service of genocide before they will grant that even now society is conspiring unnecessarily and at great human cost to cast certain perfectly liveable and flourishing and legible and wanted human capacities, morphologies, and lifeways as less-than-human, as offenses to humanity demanding "remedy" whatever those who incarnate them might have to say in the matter.

As far as I can tell, "transhumanists" who hide behind their restraint from conspicuous coercion to protect themselves from the "eugenicist" charge for all their glib talk about what objectively counts as a life worth living and a capacity worth "enhancing," have simply arbitrarily accepted a far too-restrictive conception of what can count as eugenics and then pretend everybody else agrees with that conception when almost nobody actually does. In my view the very idea of a discourse of morphological or lifeway "improvement" in the abstract -- rather than and apart from discourses and practices of actually diverse, actually wanted, actually expressed, informed nonduressed consensual prosthetic/therapeutic interventions -- is dangerously eugenic in its implications.
That's about half of his article here, just don't feel like posting all of it. I certainly agree with Carrico's excerpt here that I bolded, certainly a "eugenicist", nor a "racist", has to be an extreme right wing hatefullogue that trolls the internet and posts at Stormfront or something, that narrow of a range of definition of these terms is not accurate nor meaningful in my view.

There is a lot more to flesh out on this subject, but I will cut this post off here, come back to it later.


Post #6 (from original thread, from gl69m)
I know I'm real slow at coming back to threads to follow up; just wanna add a few things to this one.

Here is one of the most visible trans-humanist spokesman who also is the more or less political leader or candidate for the “Transhumanist” political party:

The Transhumanist Who Would Be President

An interview with Zoltan Istvan

A Transhumanist Goes to the Conventions

Zoltan Istvan
Jul 28 2016, 10:28am


The RNC was surprisingly more open to transhumanism than the DNC.

Zoltan Istvan is a futurist, author of The Transhumanist Wager, and a 2016 US Presidential candidateof the Transhumanist Party. He writes an occasional columnfor Motherboard in which he ruminates on the future beyond human ability.

Somewhere between a roaming white llama, a purple face-painted dancing mystic, and a pack of born-again, sign-waving Christians screaming that I was going to burn in hell, I saw the irritated soul of America.

It wasn't the America you see on CNN or hear about on NPR, but rather it resembled a traveling circus performing under the sprawled-out tent of democracy—and the tent was faded and fraying at the edges.

Either way, as the 2016 Transhumanist Party Presidential candidate—someone who advocates for robot rights, brain implants, and AI to one day replaceall government—I fit right in.

Earlier this month, my volunteers and I had decided to attend both 2016 national conventions—the GOP convention in Cleveland (which ended last week) and the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia (which ends Thursday).

Another interesting point about the convention was protester diversity. For all the criticism that Trump and the Republican Party gets about being racist, the protesters (and supporters) outside the GOP convention were packed with diversity. There was an extremely large amount of different races, creeds, ethnicities, political philosophies, and social movements afoot—including an all women's group of "Muslims for science," which I appreciated. The protesters and supporters that couldn't get into the Democratic convention were nothing of the sort. Everywhere I looked were young, white Americans, many camping out at FDR Park in South Philly. Diversity was limited, even if everyone was preaching for it. On the other hand, regarding gender, I did see more women protesters at the DNC than the RNC. (my note: now here I wonder how much of this diversity, what general % was supporters of Trump as opposed to the protesters, unless I saw for my self I'd be skeptical that there was serious “diversity” for the supporters side, I'm not sure what that evidence is, but not looking that up right now)

Interestingly, many of the delegates I spoke to at the GOP convention didn't seem to care what my futurist policies were or weren't. What they cared about was that the transhumanist ideas I suggested could move the economy forward. Luckily, they can, I insisted. Gene editing tech, exoskeleton technology, and driverless cars—core transhumanist issues—are going to make many new billionaires. The delegates smiled, welcoming me to the club, asking if GOP speaker and transhumanist Peter Thiel was a friend of mine.

This wasn't the way it was supposed to be. I tend to lean a bit left in my policies, and the Christian right—rulers of the GOP—were supposed to despise me. After all, I'm an atheist candidate. Yet, it turned out, at least at their convention, that my musings were welcome.

The Transhumanist Party and my campaign generally aim to be politically centric, and we focus on how we can best promote a science and technology agenda. Nothing on Planet Earth affects our lives more than innovation in science and tech, so you'd think the major candidates would be talking more about it. Sadly, they're not. It's politics as usual with them, which is perhaps why so many Americans are disgruntled about the major candidate choices they have.
Peter Thiel is another prominent trans-humanist it would seem and an apparent supporter of Trump I presume. This photo here Zoltan includes, shows what looks like to me some good ol' boy bible thumpin' rednecks, and I will say it out loud and call them likely racist (well I'm only 99.9% sure about that
), I have just seen too many of those types in various youtube vids, and known a few people similar that description (mindset) my self in my own life.

The ironic thing I think is, people like this very likely welcomes the shit out of tech/technology/AI etc. and probably many transhumanist ideals (akin to human “evolutionary” style improvement, via technology, and eugenics); so long as they stay in white supremacist hands, and such trans-humanists (and tech) stay at least relatively close (without apparent conflict) to whatever religious views they espouse to. Dude on the very right with the sign of the list of all who await hellfire!

I'm slightly dismayed they got “masturbators” and “metal-heads” on the list, I'm doubly fucked there
damn! That's quite an extensive list! of hellfire awaiters there, maybe some people deserve hellfire, I aint really sure who, surly these guys didn't put themselves on that list.


I wonder, do they realize that Jesus, if he actually existed was probably a black man or maybe he was mulatto (he was Hebrew right?)? They even include “white supremacists” and “little monsters” (wtf do they mean by that one??!!) on that extensive list. I think they might as well just put all humans on the list except the names of the 8-9 guys standing there, would be simpler
. The ironic thing is, I bet these guys would welcome trans-humanism if it were in christian supremacist hands, and wiped out all so-called sinners by their definitions. But if there are too many transgendered and gay people into the movement, I'm sure they might not be so approving of it (trans-humanism) if they realize more of those people might be some of the geeks and nerds that are into pushing trans-humanism forward so much, and that it possibly is supportive of say gender fluidity (say even in cyborgs), or more racial inclusion (not seeing that so far though) or maybe even race fluidity or perhaps primarily skin color fluidity say (like chameleon like).

So Zoltan is an atheist, but I wonder exactly why, what is his motivations towards dis-belief in deities. I have suspicions about some atheists and any real motivation to be “anti-religious”, cause sometimes the charge of un-feeling and in-humanness, violence justified through war with all the "scientific' "rationalism' mentality does describe some of those kind of people very well, anti-spirituality in my view, some on the “left” as well as the “right”. I am definitely not anti-spiritual, but it is almost impossible to really define that from what I can make of it, and I do consider myself to be basically an atheist or maybe agnostic is a better word, just not strong enough objectivity to what “theism” really is or the “empirical” objective evidence for any “deitie(s)”. I'm really someone who wants to be a theist, but the evidence is horribly poor and horribly confusing, so I'm more or less atheist by default. But atheism simply in of itself does not make spiritually impossible or un-real, nor even life after death (at least the possibility), but most theists make the mistake of assuming that to be true when it isn't.

Zoltan's book “The Transhumanist Wager”, some of the reviews makes it sound to me very similar, a lot like the same vein as Aldous Huxley's “Brave New World” (in a more modern our time context that is), some what satirical about potential abuse of power by those they actually support but also a lot of predictive programming it seems to me also. Weird stuff. I haven't read either book, but just making a casual comparison from the brief description of the two books from what snippets I have read about them.

Zoltan seems to advocate the probable extinction of “democracy”, and by logical extension of that, would seem that if a “singularity” ever actually comes about, I would think he's sure to recommend it become the “one world govt.” dictator for all, even if it were to become a “Jesus” singularity.

The Jesus Singularity
Zoltan Istvan

Aug 24 2016, 12:55pm

Wild Transhumanist Campaign Tech We’ll See in Future Presidential Elections

Zoltan Istvan
Jun 22 2016, 12:15pm


If we’re lucky, given how crazy these elections have made America look, maybe technology will make future elections disappear altogether.

Lest we think future elections are all about the candidates, perhaps the largest possibility on the horizon could come from digital direct democracy—the concept where citizens participate in real time input in the government. I gently advocate for a fourth branch of government, in which the people can vote on issues that matter to them and their decrees could have real legal consequence on Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Presidency.

Of course, that's only if government even exists anymore. It's possible the coming age of artificial intelligence and robots may replace the need for politicians. At least human ones. Some experts think superintelligent AI might be here in 10 to 15 years, so why not have a robot president that is totally altruistic and not susceptible to lobbyists and personal desires? This machine leader would simply always calculate the greatest good for the greatest amount of people, and go with that. No more Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, or whatever else we are.
As much as I despise the fake and rigged democracy that we have now, right now I'm not presently leaning toward robot/AI dictators as a better solution, certainly not while knowing who it is that is working towards creating the “singularity”; IMO which is strongly supported by those currently in control of the rigged democracy as of now anyhow.

My feeling is though, that their show (the hardcore trans-humanists) of acting like they care about and trying to get involved in politics, is just that, just for show: I think they are working on technology that in their minds will be unstoppable (built in mechanisms against all resistance to it's power) and basically all powerful (from a human standpoint), so it could go (quietly and secretly) around any political resistance. And perhaps not even secretly if the technological power really comes to fruition, as it is potentially possible for it (them) to do so, I have to believe such could be our possible future at this point. And in which case, gun enthusiasts (or in some cases gun nuts) can have all the weapons and firepower in the world, and machines and AI (if advanced enough, nano weapons too) may have all kinds of ways to defeat that and the most super prepared doomsday prepper wouldn't stand a chance against that anyway. So all the Trump era Make America Great (racist) again behavior might not matter in 10, 20 or 50 years from now, or maybe even sooner, I really don't know right now.

I found this site here,

Lifeboat Foundation
Safeguarding Humanity

which seems to espouse a belief in investing in technologies to quote perhaps save humanity (or as many people as possible?) from some impending planned “de-population” agenda. Supposedly I guess.

in the “About” section


Learn about our advisory boards, board of directors, staff, finances, procedures, FAQ,timeline, our programs, and how to contact us!
Mission Statement

The Lifeboat Foundation is a nonprofit nongovernmental organization dedicated to encouraging scientific advancements while helping humanity survive existential risksand possible misuse of increasingly powerful technologies, including genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and robotics/AI, as we move towards the Singularity.

Lifeboat Foundation is pursuing a variety of options, including helping to accelerate the development of technologies to defend humanity such as new methods to combat viruses, effective nanotechnological defensive strategies, and even self-sustaining space colonies in case the other defensive strategies fail.

We believe that, in some situations, it might be feasible to relinquish technological capacity in the public interest (for example, we are against the U.S. government posting the recipe for the 1918 flu virus on the internet). We have some of the best minds on the planet working on programs to enable our survival. We invite you to join our cause!

The Lifeboat Foundation is working on a prototype Friendly AI and also has launched the world’s firstbitcoin endowment fund.
Top Ten Transhumanist Technologies

by Lifeboat Foundation Scientific Advisory Board member Michael Anissimov.

A lot of prominent trans-humanists and quotes are used and discussed on this site, so it seems to be partially warning but I'd say mostly promoting, a trans-humanist ideology/agenda if you ask me.

From the “Existential Risk Programs” section (click on “Programs”)



An existential risk is a risk that is both global and terminal. Nick Bostrom defines it as a risk “where an adverse outcome would either annihilate Earth-originating intelligent life or permanently and drastically curtail its potential”. The term is frequently used to describe disaster and doomsday scenarios caused by non-friendly superintelligence, misuse of molecular nanotechnology, or other sources of danger.

The Lifeboat Foundation was formed to prevent existential events from happening, as once they occur, humanity may have no possibility to correct the error. Unfortunately governments, and humanity in general, always react AFTER a disaster has happened, and some disasters will leave no survivors so we must react BEFORE they occur. We must be proactive.

The Lifeboat Foundation is developing programs to prevent existential events (“shields”) as well as programs to preserve civilization (“preservers”) to survive such events.


Our approach to existential risks cannot be one of trial-and-error. There is no opportunity to learn from errors. The reactive approach — see what happens, limit damages, and learn from experience — is unworkable. Rather, we must take a proactive approach. This requires foresight to anticipate new types of threats and a willingness to take decisive preventive action and to bear the costs (moral and economic) of such actions.”
Nick Bostrom

We cannot rely on trial-and-error approaches to deal with existential risks… We need to vastly increase our investment in developing specific defensive technologies… We are at the critical stage today for biotechnology, and we will reach the stage where we need to directly implement defensive technologies for nanotechnology during the late teen years of this century… A self-replicating pathogen, whether biological or nanotechnology based, could destroy our civilization in a matter of days or weeks.”
Ray Kurzweil


Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazardsby Nick Bostrom – Yale 2001 PDF version

How unlikely is a doomsday catastrophe?by Nick Bostrom and Max Tegmark – December 18, 2005.

Immortalist Utilitarianismby Michael Anissimov – May 2004

Memes and Rational Decisionsby Michael Vassar – 2004

The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Eraby Vernor Vinge – San Diego 1993

Why the future doesn’t need usby Bill Joy – Wired April 2000


Catastrophe : Risk and Responseby Richard A. Posner – 2005

A Choice of Catastrophesby Isaac Asimov – 1981

The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinctionby John Leslie – 1998

Our Final Hour: A Scientist’s Warning: How Terror, Error, and Environmental Disaster Threaten Humankind’s Future In This Century — On Earth and Beyondby Lord Martin Rees – 2003

The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Deadby Frank J. Tipler – 1997

The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biologyby Ray Kurzweil – 2005


Our LifeShield Bunkers program now enables you to participatein a local LifeShield Bunker.


Our LifeShield Bunkers program is a compliment to our Space Habitatsprogram. It is a fallback position in case programs such as our BioShieldand NanoShield fail globally or locally.
I guess if you are wealthy enough, perhaps you too can buy one or invest in these high tech survivor bunkers and/or technologies that are described as attempting to safe guard a small tiny portion of the population (in bunkers), or perhaps even try to protect the entire world (to the best of their collective scientific ability I suppose) against terrorist and/or governmental de-population attacks. Right.


7 eco-shelters for surviving the apocalypse


Are you worried about the imminent end of the world? If you have been distraught by the hype and rumors of the apocalypse, now is time to cut out the anxiety and start looking for an indestructible shelter to save you and your loved ones. From recycled luxury pads under the Mohave Desert to a bunker-nightclub in Moscow, here are 7 eco-shelters to get you through the apocalypse in comfort and with style!

7 Best Life-saving Apocalypse recycled bunkers

If you were looking for a totally indestructible shelter for surviving the approaching doomsday, a converted nuclear ballistic missile silo could have been a good option, but sadly this particular model is completely SOLD OUT. Retailing forjust $2 million per apartment, the Survival Condo in Kansas, is a 14-story shelter with enough food to feed 70 people indefinitely. It also comes with a fitness center, a bar, a pool and a movie theatre showing videos of how the Earth looked before it all went down in flames.

Some of these look like the ultimate doomsday super prepper bunkers no doubt
! But I bet they aint shit
compared to the military industrialist govt. underground city complexes.

Last question in the FAQ section


I only have $10 in the bank. Is there a chance I could get on a lifeboat?

In the tradition of Harvard’s admissions policy, we expect lifeboats to not be exclusive to the rich and powerful. We expect that there will be lotteries for spots on lifeboats and there will also be trust funds to provide “lifeboat scholarships”.
“Lotteries” and “lifeboat scholarships”, awesome
! Expect that to save maybe a few hundred to maybe a couple thousand people world wide from the de-pop culture.

I wanna come back to this article in another post,

The long read

God in the machine: my strange journey into transhumanism

by Meghan O'Gieblyn

I think this interesting, given various religious/philosophical views, is trans-human/AI really possible, or is there some “divine” limit(s) placed upon human ability to create such, can technology only go so far? It could provide some intuitive reasoning on the level of concern, yes or no, how worried should we be about the possible extinction of “humanity” as we know it. Can humans as we are now also co-exist along side trans-humans or AI, robots and cyborgs, as is portrayed in lots of sci-fi? I think these are great and important questions for our generations as of right now.


Post #7 (from original thread, from patrick jane)
"Interstellar Posthumanity?" - Royal Astronomer connects AI/Transhumanism & Space Travel...

Martin Rees is not your average astrophysicist... He is arguably as deeply entrenched in the monolithic edifice of Scientism as one could possibly be. And lo and behold, he too, is a fervent believer in the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence, and believes that extra terrestrials would most likely be AI, or beyond biological physicality, and that such a "post-human" existence is our own inevitable fate as well...

Astronomer Royal: If we find aliens, they will be machines - Telegraph

The Future of Human Civilization - Cyborgs, AI & The Posthuman Era - Prof. Martin Rees (Full Interview from "artificial intelligence channel")


Post #8 (from original thread, from patrick jane)
Creepiest Transhumanist Propaganda I've Seen Yet...


Post #9 (from original thread, from patrick jane)
Goertzel's Golems: the link between Cosmism and AI...

So Ben Goertzel, (main AI developer behind the Sophia robot) is actually a COSMIST.... How did I not realize this until now?? I did a video on Cosmism back in April of 2016 called ""Upload to the Heavens": Cosmism, Transhumanism, & Flat Earth Cosmology "


Post #10 (from original thread, from griff)

Originally Posted by gl69m View Post

...I wonder, do they realize that Jesus, if he actually existed was probably a black man or maybe he was mulatto (he was Hebrew right?)?...
Will provide input on more of your post later as time allows, but just wanted to state that I totally agree that Jesus was not Caucasian, it just wouldn't make sense.

~(G)Q Know your enemy!
Ephesians 6:12 James 5:16 Romans 8:31
The glass being "half full or half empty" is irrelevant: I have this much water, how can I maximize its utilization...


Post #11 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Wanted to add a few vids and info to the thread, have been severely neglecting doing anything with it for the longest.


You Tube
Published on Nov 5, 2018

This guy has 2 channels it looks like, over 700 videos, haven't watched beyond these two videos. Very interesting info, most of it I've probably ran across these ideas before, and also shows that other people are seeing these kinds of things going on and sort of "waking up" as it were.

Most interesting idea he has (paraphrasing) is the elite, "caveman" he euphemistically calls them (kinda reference to white people in general as well): when/if they go back in their caves, which I think underground fortified military style bunkers is probably more accurate (or even the "underground cities conspiracy theory"); they will take all the most advanced techno with them. He expands further and says within the earth's history, wouldn't be the first time it has happened. Makes sense to me. Kind of recycling a new age each time after "renewal" (de-population have to assume). Reset, reboot.

Yeah, also he says no way that all of today's technology was developed in ~139 years, probably always been there (in underground hidden cities) and gets marched back out, recycled in stages, I agree with that, but or IMO could have to be reverse engineered again every time from old ancient texts and scrolls, weird devices. Either way their not just inventing it now out of nothing.

One idea he says that I would basically can't agree with, is that they are a "1000" years more advanced than what they reveal to the public, to me that seems over reaching conclusion. If that were true IMO, it would hardly seem they would need the rest of us at all, would be wiped out already without continuing to collect and study and store everyone's genetic material. Unless they just sadistic fucks just toying with us and dragging it all out.


You Tube
Published on Jun 3, 2018

His commentary here is likely spot on, extreme surveillance and the technology to monitor with all your devices and electronics, and control your vehicle if they want to, His info and take is very reminiscent of Griff's video he post of the Corbett on the radio with a female talk show host. Both very informative discussions, every teacher in all schools should be giving out information like this instead of propaganda, but that's the system I guess.

"Smart" Tech And The End Of Privacy


I cannot help but to underscore the extreme severity of this invasion (and why I am living as close to the trailing edge of technology as possible).

Worthy of watching in it's entirety with close scrutiny, while comparing your own personal exposure.

Courtesy: The Corbett Report
Hassan also discusses the racial aspect of these topics, and how the system targets blacks more than anyone else, and I have to agree, the evidence overwhelmingly proves that. He strongly suggests that it's because on a genetic level most blacks were descended from a warrior class (he mentions Shaka Zulu), and they have more defiance against the system.

Interesting commentary about AI, race and racism, and will machines become more intelligent than humans and decide humans should be wiped out? Zennie says if the machine wants to kill us all off, (paraphrasing) it would be because it was not more intelligent than us and was given psychopathic paranoid schizophrenic programming. Makes sense to me.

On Artificial Intelligence, Stephen Hawking, And Racism

You Tube
Zennie62 Oakland Latest News Today Commentary Vlog
Published on Dec 2, 2014

On a hopefully less grim note, flying car available by 2019? Anybody remember the Jetson's cartoons? This one doesn't quite look like that yet. Gotta love the open blades of death with no protective cage, so that sooner or later some idiot will get their head or other body parts chopped off after moving to close to it, or too close to it when it starts up.

One wonders the laws and regulations (of there are any yet?) regarding these types of craft, they said right now no license is needed to own and operate. Imagine the number of extra air crashes this will add every year, when people flying small planes and helicopters with licenses crash as much as they already do! It looks cool, could be fun, I'm sure the 2030 models will surely be a lot better and safer than this one, what a fucking genius who gives us the open blades, hell the movie "Elysium" (scifi 2013) showcased vehicles with propellers with protective cages, but oh no not at the start of the industry building they I guess decide initial profit over safety every time, just like autos first came out with no roofs and no seatbelts (and a bunch of other safety features).

Silicon Valley Company Preps Affordable Flying Car for 2019

You Tube
Published on Jul 12, 2018


Post #12 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Been a little bit since I last posted, busy at work and home, you know the drill.

Govt. shutdown from Chump I mean Trump, how ironic, their trying only now to cut off the flow of money (or at least to a trickle) that have made the elite like Trump and his conservaturd NWO ilk so fabulously wealthy beyond all of our wildest fantasies. Perhaps already now they have their underground mountain super prepper bunkers fully stocked and ready to go to start the depop, the purge, the hunger games, the logan's run agenda 21 domes, all the decades of predictive programming being played out, starting very very soon?, if all govt. assistance is cut off to the poorest? Even the prison guards who house the black and brown prisoners of war in the prison industrial complex, even they might get hung out to dry on their own, maybe.?

All conspiracy theorists have been seeing something like this coming for a very long time now, is it finally here? Most people are never really gonna be fully prepared for that, but that's the type of shit hit's the fan that the rest of the world experienced already for many centuries of colonialism anyhow. To the doomsday preppers of course, it's part of their religion, probably they are more prepared than most.

Florida prepper has message for preppers everywhere, the central part of U.S. is at far more risk of total mayhem if the system collapses now. I think he has at least some actual strong salient points that make at least part of what he is saying true, and shouldn't be totally ignored.


You Tube
Florida Maquis
Published on Jan 4, 2019

I think his main point is that the coasts, particularly NY, CA, FL, TX, access to foreign materials and trade from the oceans, more money in their budgets for, well he says "security' (so-called), than the interior. I would think he's right about that. He says prisons with cut off funding will be letting prisoners go, where will they go? Un guarded suburbs of course, well on the coasts more money, more police and better funded security right?, less up tick in crime right? Maybe an up tick if they do get released, but this is also white supremacist code, most prisoners are black and brown, percent wise of course. Some commenters in the video say prisoners will be executed en mass, AI/chemical style perhaps, they wouldn't dare let them all out they say, I don't how true that might be or not.

This is all basically a thinly veiled coded message for white people to be scared of and practice racism and armed violence if and or when they might see an increase in black and brown folks in their neighborhoods or even near their mostly all white towns; if a large release of prisoners would actually come to pass. I don't think he said anything about race of any of the convicts, but people using at least a few brain cells will pick up on that code relatively easily.

I assume these kind of white preppers are also saying or predicting this type of result and interaction with poor people from govt. assisted or Section 8 housing if all SNAP and rent (evictions) is cut off indefinately and if the shutdown continues well past February. Food riots are easy to predict, no shit sherlock- people need to eat or die, doesn't anybody remember movies like Soylent Green (came out before I was born and I'm 49 now)?; anybody remember Arnold in the movie Running Man "All they want is food for god's sake!!" when he was framed for massacaring people in a Bakersfield CA food riot??

EBT Food Assistance Shut Down USA will Mimic Global Food Shortage Reactions (770)

You Tube

Adapt 2030
Published on Dec 30, 2018


With EBT food assistance programs set to cease payments Feb 01, 2019 as Trump squares off with Democrats, neither willing to give an inch, it will come down to the people to decide which sides policies is correct to get the government open again and food assistance flowing again. Sudan experiencing bread shortages as the economy collapses, so this in my opinion is a dry run for governments across the world to see how citizens will react to food shortages, American style !
Being in the IL with my family myself, I don't relish the prospect of Florida Maquis being right about a collapse in the midwest even while the coast population centers are more secure, but the logic there is, if goods and raw materials, oil to refine to gasoline ect., river traffic and foreign and even domestic trade gets cut off, economy for the interior will suffer much earlier and much more harshly than the other states with more money and outside trade access, he has a point I find very hard to ignore.

I'm not mister Rambo, I have no weapons other than softball bats in my house. Certainly I will risk my life to protect my family, but not foolishly if I can use my wits, if any situation arises. I have no wish to be suspicious of people in need, but I know my wife harbors that type of suspicion, hell my own kids too. That puts me in a very tough situation not to call upon abuse if we happen to encounter such civil unrest if food shortages begin to occur, people get evicted from Section 8 or other govt. assisted housing (of which at least half of recipients are white btw); not to victimize the poorest further from this system which already victimizes them, and I also have to protect my family too. But alas this may be more fearmongering than necessary; that is if local states and townships would at this time; would actually begin to ban together and form true means, contingency plans, of equitable and just local food and resource distribution, and tell the corporate fascist scumbags in Washington and London and Rome to fuck off, and don't fall for the racist WS race baiting so that a racist and (and certain amount of poor white collateral damage also) purge does not occur; but this kind of purge is what the elite want.

Scum the likes of Trump is itching to be dictator it appears to me, and is holding the govt. hostage to fund a wall that they don't even give a shit about, the Dumb Ass Crats are in league with the whole thing, got rich off if the govt. too, now being stingy with a measly 5 billion??!! a drop in the bucket, nay a drop in the swimming pool of corporate welfare, and they claim to give a shit about the poorest of Americans. I've said before, no useless wall will stop 'illegals' from pouring in anyway, there is thousands of miles of coast and planes to bring them in, hell they might build ladders or tunnels over and under (or through) the wall for them, included in the 5 billion (well that might cost a little extra). The only reason they want a wall at all is to milk more money out of the govt. which is what they are the best at. If it was so fucking important for so-called 'national security', 'border security', him and his wealthy fucking rothchilds and other cronies could have paid for it and built the fucking thing already.

Even if they build a worthless fucking wall, they will still bring in 'illegals', for no other reason than apparently they need the labor. Unless they have automation ready now, in which case maybe they won't need them for much longer, and a lot of us low caste people either perhaps.

Here is a few recent articles on the Hypocrisy of Chump and the other conservaturds who scream bloody murder about 'illegals', but there is ample proof that they are the ones benefiting the most from all of that 'illegal' labor.

Making President Trump’s Bed: A Housekeeper Without Papers
By Miriam Jordan
Dec. 6, 2018

Trump Organization responds to claims it hired illegal immigrants
By Frank Miles | Fox News
Dec. 6, 2018


The Trump Organization hit back at a bombshell report in The New York Times that said President Trump’s elite resorts had numerous illegal aliens as housekeeping, maintenance, and landscaping employees.

“We have tens of thousands of employees across our properties and have very strict hiring practices. If any employee submitted false documentation in an attempt to circumvent the law, they will be terminated immediately,” a spokesperson for the Trump Organization told Fox News via email.
I don't buy the lame ass lying grandstanding defense by team Trump on this bombshell for one second, but I imagine their hiring really is strict and racist though, for the jobs with real authority and salary of course that would be true.

Trump business empire shuns E-Verify, hires illegal immigrants
By Stephen Dinan and S.A. Miller - The Washington Times - Thursday, December 6, 2018


Just five of the 565 companies in President Trump’s business empire are signed up to use E-Verify, the government’s best tool to weed illegal immigrants out of the workforce, according to a Washington Times analysis that suggests the president could personally be doing more on that front.
He could be doing more??!! Really!? If that number is true, 5 out 565?, that's like 0.88% of his companies, that would surely prove the hypocricy is deliberate; they are exploiting these people far more than what the immigrants are getting out of coming here 'illegally', which is the total opposite of the shoved down our throats conservaturd sjw narrative that these immigrants ('legal' and 'illegal') are a "burden" on the system; it looks to me like they may be what has kept it from collapsing for last three or four decades, labor wise, since white people are not reproducing themselves at replacement rates apparently, and they have been continuing an ongoing mostly slow paced race soldiering genocide on the black communities ever since "slavery" ended. Blacks were the main labor force in the "service" sector industries and agriculture in the U.S. until a large portion has been replaced by brown and hispanic peoples from south of the borders for last four decades or longer. White people generally don't want those jobs because most feel it is beneath them, or the labor might be in general too hard for most of them anyway.

Supposedly though immigrants taking too many "american's" jobs, but white unemployment is still much lower than black unemployment; why, because blacks are less qualified (racist code for 'less intelligent')? or (most, maybe not all) whites still practice a great deal of racism, in the work place as well? Everybody knows that answer even when they are not honest about it.

Feds targeting more worksites crack down on undocumented workers – but not their employers
Alan Gomez, USA TODAY Published 12:13 p.m. ET Dec. 11, 2018 | Updated 5:01 p.m. ET Dec. 11, 2018


The Trump administration ramped up arrests at businesses suspected of employing undocumented immigrants in 2018, but data obtained by USA TODAY show that federal agents did so by mostly targeting those working illegally and not their employers.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was ordered to quadruple worksite enforcement this year, and it did just that. In fiscal year 2018, which ended Sept. 30, ICE set 10-year highs for the number of worksite audits conducted (5,981) and criminal charges filed (779).

ICE leadership claimed its crackdown is focused on employers and employees equally as part of a balanced approach to worksite enforcement, but the data show that the majority of arrests in 2018 were of workers.

The 113 members of management charged with criminal violations in 2018 increased 82 percent from the previous year, but the 666 workers charged with criminal violations increased by 812 percent. The number of "administrative arrests" – those for basic immigration violations that are predominantly used against workers – spiked from 172 in 2017 to 1,525 in 2018. The 121 federal indictments and convictions of managers in 2018 represented a 10-year low for the agency.
In 2017, the chart further down shows that only 62 management arrests were made, definitely lower than Obama's numbers, if this chart is true, but a huge spike in targeting the 'illegals' as the only real culprits in this labor operation.


"We're going to do it a little different," Homan said. "We're going to prosecute employers that knowingly hire illegal aliens, (and) we're going to detain and remove the illegal alien workers."

That strategy played out during a raid of a meatpacking plant in Bean Station, Tennessee, in April. In that case, 97 workers and the owner of the plant, James Brantley, were arrested.

Brantley pleaded guilty to four federal crimes, including knowingly hiring undocumented immigrants. Federal agents seized $107,000 in cash they found during the raid that was meant to pay undocumented workers to avoid taxes, he was fined $41,000 by the state Occupational Safety and Health Administration for "serious" violations of worker safety rules, and he could be forced to pay $1.3 million in unpaid taxes during his sentencing hearing in February.

Robert Hammer, who heads Homeland Security Investigations for ICE in Tennessee and oversaw the Bean Station raid, said that case originated as a financial one and the immigration violations were "not the overarching goals."

"While the public's perception may have been that we solely went in to get (the workers), there was a broader strategy at play here," Hammer said.

Immigration experts on both sides of the debate have serious doubts about that strategy.
Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a national federation of business owners that advocate for improved guest worker programs, said the increase in worksite enforcement punishes businesses that are trying their best to operate in an outdated immigration system.


That “absurdity” of the guest system is one point that advocates on both sides agree on. Esther Lopez, secretary-treasurer of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, which represents 1.3 million people who work in farms, plants and factories around the country, said the administration should work with Congress to improve guest worker programs rather than “deliberately targeting” hardworking immigrants.
Absurdity of the "guest worker programs", understatement of the century, when in control by the elite racist white supremacists, recruiting and transporting most of them and exploiting brown (and some immigrant black) labor to the fullest while pushing the narrative of blaming them as the only real criminals in 'illegal' immigration, and then punishing them (the workers) when they do their selective raids and very few white racists in control of it (the managers) getting punished for it, and probably let off from white collar lock up early for good behavior in short time to go back out and do it all over again. Aint they so fucking patriotic.


“It is time for our nation’s leaders to recognize the incredible contributions these workers make to our economy and focus on policies that create good-paying jobs that help every worker succeed, not tear innocent families apart,” Lopez said.

Derek Benner, the head of ICE Homeland Security Investigations, sees things differently, characterizing his agency's crackdown on undocumented labor as a border security issue. If undocumented immigrants don't have jobs waiting for them in the USA, he said, that will lower the flow of illegal immigration across the border and lessen the power of cartels that control human smuggling routes throughout Mexico and Central America.

He said the most important number to look at is the increase in audits of companies, from 1,360 in 2017 to 5,981 in 2018.

Benner is in the process of hiring 60 auditors to add to the 120 conducting worksite audits to increase that number even higher. His agents are doing more direct outreach to businesses about worksite enforcement, using new technology to speed up audits and creating a more centralized auditing center to streamline the entire process.

The goal, Benner said, is to change the impression business owners have that they're unlikely to get a visit from ICE to check their workforce. Instead, he wants business owners to fear an ICE immigration audit as much as they fear an IRS tax audit.

"People feel there's a pretty good chance that their (income tax return is going to be audited by a computer or seen by human eyes," Benner said. "People at some point will feel like there's a legitimate possibility that ICE ... is actually going to come audit their employment records."
The height of absurdity and hypocrisy by the right wing, not that the 'left wing' isn't in cahoots with them of course they are, they ('liberals') "act" like they give a shit about the non-white people doing most of the labor, but that's a facade and a farce, their just as bad as the conservaturds but most brown and black people appear to be very confused about that and fall for the sjw 'liberal' act and narrative, to their detriment of course.

None of this is absurd though, and should be totally expected, if it understood that we do live in a global system of racism/white supremacy, driven by the fear of white genetic annihilation, the dedicated and targeted and disciplined goal of white genetic survival. I can wish it wasn't that way, and that a land of and society of true justice is around the corner, but their are just too many facts and evidence that points to this being the truth which can't be dismissed, or ignored. Especially at our own peril, for not banding together and quit practicing racism. Too many white conspiritards keep justifying and explaining away WS racism to black people on the Youtube comment wars, saying it's just race baiting divide and conquer by the 'jew supremacists' and their supposed to ingnore it and it will not affect anyone but they themselves damn sure aren't dismissing what they consider "anti-white racism", which really is an oxymoron in real terms now, but I suppose that could change eventually right?

How many white people want to be among the white collateral damage of this (possibly coming) purge? I think the preppers are raring to go it looks like. The conservaturd big mouths who haven't prepped, they better hope they have trained and worked out hard, "prepare for slaughter" as the Hebrew Israelites preach on the streets that they say Yahweh and Jesus is coming back to bring an end to white rule and the edomite kindom, they say god is gonna help them put white people into slavery, karma what goes around comes around, "he that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity", etc. etc. I don't want to be enslaved nor my children, but these hatefilled white nationalists, wouldn't bother me to see them in chains, or slaughtered if they continue their racist drivel, be hard pressed to say they don't deserve it.


Post #13 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Just wanted to add a quick note, comment worth noting, the govt. workers expected to show up to work (those who are considered "essential" personnel) without getting paid, indefinitely, if they drag on the shut down, couldn't that be viewed as a simplified definition/version of slavery? How the fuck are the ones still showing up to work even eating while on the job right now? I've seen some Youtube vids, commenters saying that some of these workers may be turning to food banks to eat, gofundme pages, charities etc.

Now I think, just like conservatives will say, a lot of the govt. service apparatus is parasitical on the economy to begin with, but that was built along with corporate fascism, which is no real difference from communism/marxism (that is just a repackaged corporatism anyway, miss me with that bullshit conservaturds), and they have benefited hugely from the corporate/govt. fusion welfare state just like the liberal sjws.

My job hasn't been affected yet, the grain industry here I don't think has been affected yet, but the longer it drags on, the more the penny pinching corporations will cut back on everybody, longer hours for less pay and layoffs, the usual corporate way. Only the elite get to have jobs with more pay for less work, everybody wants that, don't they?

I listened to an interview, I believe a Khemetic Sa Neter channel, interviewed a native american tribal representative I think from North Dakota or maybe Minnesota, just don't know where I saw it at right now. He was stating the obvious, they are working hard to find alternatives for resource providing for people under their tribal jurisdictions. The wealthier 5$ indians who are 1/2 to 1/16 indian and mostly white are most likely way better off than more genetically legitimate indigenous peoples here in the americas; it should be obvious they have practiced racism as outlined by the system in order to have the wealth they have, and still they lay claim to tribal cultures and heritage.

I would love to see Trump removed from office, impeached, for treason, attempting to destroy the country, but I seriously doubt that will happen. I think that if any "food riots" occur, it will be an excuse to roll in the military industrial complex (they are not on full shut down I don't think); I would look to places like urban poor Chicago and Milwaukee for something to pop off: not that they aren't already living under veiled martial law anyway (secret police shootings and organ harvesting).

Alternatively, a second 9/11 may occur to provide this pretext, so that the U.S. military will be used under the excuse of providing order out of chaos to get the purge started and rolling.

Sounds like a lot of doom and gloom, sorry but let's get real here.

Post #14 (from original thread, from Truthissweet)
From gl69m:


Alternatively, a second 9/11 may occur to provide this pretext, so that the U.S. military will be used under the excuse of providing order out of chaos to get the purge started and rolling.*
I do believe that Jade Helm 15 (maybe 16,17,18 secret Jade Helms as well, for all we know), practiced martial law. Are we seeing in the past three years, exactly, or close to, what Jade Helm was about: creating a state where a number of mind-numbing events (mostly courtesy of the tanned one at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.) are taking place simultaneously, so that the only option (the perps assume the population has been conditioned like a marinated London broil since at least 9/11), is to declare a "state of emergency", meaning martial law?

Those who still back Trump (I have to be nice here), should really look hard at what is going on. You have a horrible businessman who most likely took on the roll of president ( via get out of jail free card and Deutsch Bank) as way to escape legal and financial crisis. This past two years has been like Dallas. Is there a difference between JR and Donald (other than the accent)?


We might see a "who shot Donald" episode, but we won't see a Bobby in shower scene saying the past two years have been a dream.

From gl69m:


Soylent Green
I saw the movie when it was released. This was a good follow-up to Planet Of The Apes for C. Heston. I was 12, but the movie still resonates with me today. I don't know if things will get as bad as depicted in the movie, but considering post WWII to current times, there has been a definite push to "them against us" and I think "them" is behind schedule and desperately trying to catch up.


Post #15 (from original thread, from gl69m)
I was thinking of something today, a wild thought came to my mind; do police body cams use facial recognition (software or other tech)?

Mainly this thought came to me because I have seen a large number of racial profiling videos lately; race soldier white supr/blue isis, harassing and arresting and mainly terrorizing, mostly black people (well the ones i've seen seems to be about 99%+); and so this thought here I have thought about this years and years ago is-

can video be altered such that an identity of someone on video (their image) can be replaced with the image(s) of another person (who looks similar enough, height weight, other features ect.) and make it look authentic?

How many more false convictions by 'law enforcement' could be obtained by such a tactic than already has always occurred? And make the evidence look legit enough to fool even people who would be skeptical?

A simple scenario is, that 'law enforcement' utilizes (or really more accurate to say "employs") "confidential informants", as people who they gain information from and also as criminal witnesses sometimes (perhaps eye witnesses as well), to make arrests and get convictions.

Suppose someone innocent is arrested and even convicted of a crime they didn't commit; in some case there may have actually been no crime at all just a fabricated crime/incident, but in some cases an actual crime has been committed but by someone else- who in all likelihood is a "confidential informant". I think this is a good explanation for a lot of crime in high crime areas, especially poor black and brown neighborhoods. Lots of "gang' members are probably "confidential informants" (probably MKUltra'd or manchurian candidate like).

I'm not saying this explains all crime there or anywhere else, this is just one type of scenario among many; but we really just have no way of knowing how much the crime rates are falsified and how many innocent people are arrested and convicted, to fill up people inside the prison industrial complex, which is really the modern day slave facilities (google how many companies are now using prison labor for products/services, it's enormous).

Has anybody seen or heard of this company (or brand?) before,


I googled my question about police body cams using facial recognition, and a Veritone ad popped up I think was at the bottom of the page first time I searched it.

Quote: | Veritone Redact | Download the Solution Brief‎‎

Save time & improve efficiency using AI to automate face redaction & sensitive information. Streamline, accelerate & reduce costs linked to video evidence redaction workflows. Automated Solution. Get a Demo. How It Works. Download Brief.
Now when they use the term "redact" or "redacting", I'm sure it would be argued (by legal teams) that they are not altering the evidence to falsify it in order to falsely prosecute anyone who was innocent: but if you have a skeptical mind like I do, I have to ask- how in the hell is it really possible to completely insure that that could never happen; particularly in an already totally corrupt system?

And for black and brown people, how can "justice" possibly be assured with this technology in a thoroughly racist whitesupr system?

The answer to those two questions seem obvious to me, no way in hell or on earth can it be assured that such abuse will not take place in the current system (NWO) we have now.

Here's a flavor of the wording from this ad,



Easy-to-use: Turn-key solution powered by AI

Secure: Hosted in AWS GovCloud to support CJIS compliance requirements

Flexible: Use it anywhere. All you need is a desktop, browser, and internet connection

Agnostic: Works with all commonly used cameras and video or audio formats

Reliable: Automatically redacts faces and objects with high accuracy

Fast: Results in up to 90% time savings, freeing
up resources

Accelerate Your Video & Audio Redaction Workflows With Veritone Redact

Developed for law enforcement, judicial agencies and legal & compliance teams,
Veritone Redact automates the process of redacting video and audio evidence.
Gone are the days of time-intensive, frame-by-frame evidence redaction! With automated face detection and automatic tracking of manually selected sensitive imagery, Veritone Redact enables you to quickly tackle massive volumes of video and audio content at incredible speed and efficiency.


Expedite compliance with pubic records requests
Reduce time required to redact files, saving costs and freeing up resources
Protect privacy of witnesses and others appearing in footage
Preserve the integrity of video and audio evidence for cases


Remove privileged information or PII from evidence to be produced
Identify and label redacted files for specific cases
Mark redacted evidence as relevant or privileged
Include redacted copies in discovery productions


Simply share or download once you're done!



Upload video evidence from any source



Auto detect and review faces and objects, select items to redact



Start auto redaction

Automatically detect faces and heads within video and audio evidence
Expedite a once manual process by tracking defined images forward through the file
Check your work in application with redaction preview filters
Redact detected faces, heads and selected images in video evidence automatically with one click
Copy of redacted media file is downloadable to a local computer

Capture comprehensive reporting of all actions taken against redacted evidence to support compliance with chain of custody requirements
Download all actions as audit logs in Excel file format along with the redacted video or audio files

Manage digital evidence redaction workloads by tagging evidence with its status in the approval workflow
Download and send shareable redacted evidence files for quick distribution in existing inter and intra-agency workflows
"Automatically detect faces and heads within video and audio evidence"
Check your work in application with redaction preview filters
"Redact detected faces, heads and selected images in video evidence automatically with one click"

Does everybody see what I mean here, how I think the term "redacting" can be used in multiple ways?

Now I saw in another link (not sure which link right now) for Veritone they used the term obscuring or blurring to describe "redact" or "redacting" of someones face in video evidence, they say for "privacy protection"(?, like who gets this protection and who doesn't I wonder). To me, or am I just crazy, that to "redact" or "redacting", someone (a technician) could also alter a face to someone else's face, and with technology like this? There are tons of examples of celebrity revenge porn with altered heads on the bodies of porn models, although in photos they usually don't look very convincing that it hasn't been photoshopped.

And they could do it damn quick with this also, perhaps even in real time, like in livestream social media videos? Perhaps like even in a massacre like the recent one in Christchurch New Zealand. Perhaps even the audio can be altered, switching actual voice of someone else onto the person in the video.

Suppose the alleged terrorist Brenton Tarrant in his livestream of that attack, is actually a military/intelligence special forces operative, they could have switched Tarrant's image and voice onto another man doing the actual attack.

I'm not saying Tarrant is innocent or guilty, right now I have no idea, I'm saying with this kind of tools at their disposal, it seems quite probable they could pull that kind of shit off. Reminds me of the fight scene near the end of the "Running Man" movie where the face of Arnold was put onto a stunt double and Arnold's (the governator) character wasn't even there fighting the other gladiator guy (who they had also switched his image too, Jessie Ventura's character, the other governator).

To me this is scary shit, because if they get the capabilities perfected here, just about anybody could be seen and heard on video doing things they never did, and in places they had never been, in real time even, and maybe even eventually they can do all this with cgi and not even using stunt doubles. If the cgi gets life like enough, will we be able to tell the difference?, than all bets are off about the truth of what we're seeing anymore.

Some of the articles about facial recognition underscore that in the last few years the early trials had very high rates of false positive returns, mis-identification (some as high as 98%!). Some articles also noted that there is a growing data base of faces from the entire population, and that with using AI that is getting faster and faster at connecting data, this can be used (at least potentially I guess) for very quick positive (well that depends!) ID of "suspects' on scene by LEOs.

This Forbes article claims such facial recognition technology can provide a "defense" (notice why I quotationed this) against accusations of racial bias (in 'law enforcement'),


Setting Boundaries
The use of facial recognition on bodycams also offers a defense against accusations of racial bias. Policies can be set to prevent officers searching those not identified by facial recognition, even when stopped.
Where the accusation is made that stop and search over-polices low-level crime in specific communities, facial recognition on bodycams offers a balance. It is this kind of safeguarding that will help prompt broader adoption.

Facial recognition on bodycams will also provide secondary verification for matches from surveillance vehicles and CCTV cameras. Following an initial match, an officer on foot approaches the person and runs a second check from a bodycam, running from the exact same watch list. Only if there is also a match is anything taken further. In of itself, this is a very material safeguard against so-called false positives. It also provides a person to person interaction before any final decision on an arrest is made.
The part I underlined and bolded, I highlighted this from the article, no one who will admit how thoroughly racist this system is should take this at it's word that it won't be used in a racist manner, possibly making it even worse for black and brown people being falsely targeted and racially profiled, and be used to make it all seem legit and the 'evidence' more 'solid' and fool proof for the media and courts, juries ect. It should not be believed nor trusted in my view.

And yes, even white people can be falsely targeted, arrested and convicted by these means; but we all know that within the racist WS system that white people are not racially profiled (falsely); obviously racists will not admit to this truth. In my opinion it will happen to white people but just like it's always been it will be quite rare. Unless more and more non-white people get access to such technology? I don't see the dedicated RWS elites allowing that.

This technology can also track all kinds of objects and "redact" them too; in my view I think probably they can be adding and deleting objects and people in whole scenes, and completely changing the reality of what is seen and heard. FEers will no doubt say they been doing this all along to make us believe the earth is round and that space exists, blah blah blah, I really won't even type any more scribble thinking about Flerfer nonsense

Enough for now, hopefully that will wake up a few people's eyes (and minds) when they see this post. I just thought this was important enough that I wanted to add this today and not wait till later while I was still thinking about it.


Post #16 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Has anybody heard of this company and app called "Banjo"? Or the man Damien Patton (guy with the Duck Dynasty beard, or is he the 666 "Omen" Damien

Just recently seen this on youtube, first time I'd heard of it,

How a Tech Startup Is Using Artificial Intelligence to 'Know Things Before Anyone Else' | Inc.

The founder (or co-founder), according to Google,


Founded by Damien Patton and David J. Phillips in Redwood City, CA, Banjo launched on June 22, 2011. The app was originally conceived of as a tool for ensuring you never missed out on friends nearby. The app reached 500,000 users in six months and one million users in nine months. ... Banjo currently has 6 million users.
I watched Patton's talk, and I have to say I found myself feeling pretty skeptical about some of the details of his life story there, supposedly he dropped out of high school at 15 and became a homeless hobo for about 2 years (according to this article, The Most Important Social Media Company You've Never Heard Of, then before moving in with his dad, and then he joins the Navy and and served in "Desert Storm" and oversaw sorties flying into Iraq during the merciless bombing phase in 1991 I assume. I think I'm mainly skeptical of that homeless part, sounds too much like a business guru/hero with too humble of a background story to me.

After leaving the military, Patton then spends a year learning welding and mechanics in San Diego in order to schmooze his way into then becoming a Nascar pit crew guy. After rising to chief mechanic, he then gets a degree from University of North Carolina in Greensboro (magna cum laude) in less than three years no less, but I didn't see from the article or his talk that I recall (only watched it through 1 time) what his degree was in or was it just a B.S. or Masters PHd or what. Then he helps run a software business, then becomes a "crime scene investigator" (he gets so good he ends up training the local police force, so he is an obvious race soldier RWSicst I would say). This guy's a regular jack(off) of all trades here, a real "Buckaroo Banzai" for sure. To me it smacks of he is probably jesuit trained and still part of the military apparatus in my opinion.

The guy wins 2 Google "hackethons" in Silicon Valley, while supposedly knowing no one there, and then gets the inspiration and the money from that to start up his company that becomes "Banjo", the usable app from it was released in 2011.

Now I haven't read or digested all of what his company does or where it's based, but my impression is that it has a network of AI computers that get "signals" (data of all kinds) from social media, cameras, audio, perhaps surveillance cameras video/audio ect.? Probably from every cell phone out there too for all we know, who the fuck knows??!! That is the tagline kinda of the company, "know anything (and everything really) before anyone else knows". With this kind of information gathering (on literally possibly every device out there that can generate any kind of signal or data?) and combined with the military/intelligence tools like "Veritone" (see post #15), I would say you have a recipe for history "redaction" or revision (in real time almost quite possibly, in hours or maybe even minutes eventually?), like "1984" (George Orwell) style.

Here's some portions from the article that I think reveal how this could be used by military/intel/media to do just such a thing, and rather quickly,


The software itself is Banjo's secret weapon, which Patton says is capable of performing two quadrillion-plus calculations on the "hundreds of thousands of geo-tagged mobile posts" flooding in each minute: It simultaneously does linguistic and topic analysis, geo-data analysis, and photo and video classification, as well as some 30,000 other sorts of computation. Over the past four years, the software has documented the baseline state for each square of the global grid: This one is a featureless expanse of cornfield. This one's a war zone with constant smoke and fire. Here's Times Square--expect a steady flow of profanity and people dressed like Muppets. As posts rise from these specific locations and become visible to Banjo, the software compares them with that steady state: Deviations from "normal" (for example, a sudden uptick in the word gun, or images of fire or smoke or a riot in a normally serene area) trigger an alert back to the mother ship, where computers, aided by a handful of humans, can assess the alert and either disregard it or pass it on. (The number of humans required to monitor the system has shrunk to just a handful as Banjo's software has gotten smarter.)

It was through such an alert that Banjo found and recognized the significance of a single tweet sent just after 12:30 a.m. last November 20, from a location near the Florida State University campus in Tallahassee. Though the post contained no hashtag, Banjo's tripwire was triggered by the phrase "scared shitless," as well as by the pattern of words and the surge in Twitter and Instagram posts coming from that specific location. The software recognized the anomaly in that piece of the grid and brought it to the attention of folks at Banjo HQ--who then notified the local CBS affiliate. That channel became the first news outlet to report the wounding of three people in an FSU library shooting. This is why key media properties (including NBC and ESPN) are among Banjo's first paying customers. As one Banjo staffer puts it, "Banjo turns your laptop into a drone."

If you think that sounds creepy, you're forgiven. It's not hard to imagine how Banjo could be turned to a darker purpose in the hands of an Assad or a Putin. Except for one thing: "The drone is there only when you want the drone there," Epstein, the CMO, explains. "People want to be public, or they wouldn't post publicly. And they want their location to be known, or they would turn their location settings off."

In other words, you have the power to remain invisible to Banjo.
That last part I bolded, cause, well for one how bout in the hands of "Trump" or some other slime ball in the whitehouse or NSA headquarters? Just because you can maybe turn off your location settings on your phone, does that really mean it's off or actually "invisible" to "Banjo" or some other surveillance tool? I seriously doubt it.

Banjo apparently helped identify the Boston Bombing suspect in 2013?


On April 15, 2013, when two pressure-cooker bombs exploded near the finish line at the Boston Marathon, it didn't take long for Banjo's staff of about a dozen (there's now more than 50) to realize they were learning about events on the ground faster than reporters were--and faster even than the police. Since Banjo uses location as its primary filter, the system could ignore the global noise and drill straight down to Boylston Street. Four days later, it followed the manhunt through Watertown, block by block, via posts from people mere feet from the scene.
And this part here about "social listening", or we would call that "Big Brother",


"The idea of tracking visual data through the social Web--that's what people are becoming concerned with," Essex says. "When you're talking in pictures, how do you listen?"

Essex wouldn't name the companies he's met that claim to have solved this conundrum, but it was clear Banjo had shown him something radically new. " 'Social listening' is a fledgling field," he says, "but 'visual listening'--what Banjo is doing--is a field that's really not even born yet. The implications are staggering. And if you overlay location with that, then you're into some pretty remarkable intel. That you can measure it, that you can codify it, is head-spinning."

Banjo's "visual listening" capability is a function of what seems to be a major step forward in photo classification technology. Banjo asked me not to reveal certain elements of its solution, and I am certainly no expert in the field, but Patton's nontechnical explanation goes like this: Banjo combined two analytical techniques that "never would have been mixed before--and because we mixed it, it unlocked a 'Holy shit!' "

Image classification is a field in which Google has toiled for years. It recently announced that it had developed software with Stanford that can describe the entire scene depicted in a photograph, thanks to a combination of visual classification and natural language processing. Still, a key Google executive doesn't even try to hide his admiration for what Banjo has achieved. "I can't comment too much on photo recognition," says Waze founder Bardin. "But in general, the biggest problem is defining the question you want to ask." And what's unique about Banjo, he continues, is "they can ask the question better than anyone else: 'What is happening in the world that's different, right now, at this location?' That allows them to take out of the analysis the 99 percent of the data that is not relevant."
No sales team supposedly?, but I guess somebody at the company tells "customers" how to subscribe and get what signal mining they want from Banjo I suppose,


Companies in stealth mode rarely generate revenue; Banjo Enterprise pulled in "less than $1 million" in 2014, according to Blue Run's Malloy. But that was just in the second half of the year--through word of mouth, with no sales team. Malloy says he fully expects Banjo to grow by a factor of 20 this year. One senses he thinks that estimate may be very low indeed. Malloy, who was, famously, the first investor in PayPal, says he thinks Banjo "could be at least as big an opportunity."

Several of Banjo's customers declined to comment for this story. But Banjo put in an appearance at this year's Super Bowl, powering the social media streams for Bud Light's House of Whatever, a massive Millennial-baiting frat party, and curating and serving images to Anheuser-Busch's various digital advertising platforms. "It also allowed us to become a customer service center," says Nick Kelly, who leads communications for the brand. "We could see what was working, what issues we had--'This line is too long' or 'I love this concert.' "

To me it all sounds like that military/intel is the real customer, and well really every part of the global corporate structure is just a branch of that, a branch of the "military" so to speak, especially law(less) enforcement (courts too) and the media, that's the way I believe it should be viewed anyway.

I have to wonder I think from his talk, I can very well imagine that Patton, being such an AI enthusiast, is probably quite likely a "trans-humanist" also, he sounds like he would be; but just a cursory Google search for that I didn't find any hits that made any connection of him or "Banjo" to trans-humanism.

Post #17 (from original thread, from 911conspiracyT)
Fascinating app, not available in my country per Google Play (the U.S.). However, one can download the app on and possibly emulate the Android using the new Windows 10 feature. I'm on 7, so I can't participate in this experiment. Anybody else?

Edit... I just sent the company an email. We'll see if their service is still available.
Edit 2... I got the app downloaded by changing a setting in my phone, but its functionality is limited.



Post #18 (from original thread, from gl69m)
@911conspiracyT (post #17),

Thanks for the post Matt about the Banjo app, preciate that.

Sorry (to Phil, Rob, griff, Ruby, Matt, anybody else who doesn't mind my posts at least
) that I have not posted in quite a while, still dealing with chronic pelvic pain, making progress (at least slight) towards curing myself, but long hours sitting in front of a computer does not seem to help. I'm going to start trying to make at least one post a week now, not guaranteeing that but see how it goes of course.

So Matt, you have Banjo app on your phone (smart phone right, iphone or android?), what does the app do that would have any interest for you, or just the general consumer/users out there? Just curious if you have used it for anything useful for you personally.

This video here, Damian Patton, he demonstrates the Banjo app on a smart phone,

Banjo Demo at SXSW 2012

CEO Damien Patton demos the features of Banjo, the social discovery app, for LAPTOP Magazine at SXSW 2012.

The main thing I get from this app usage, hell is still surveillance, even if the average consumer/user is the one doing it: for instance the "friend alert" feature on the app, he states that we're (as in the Banjo technology) watching your friends and even when they are not on Banjo at that time (but I would presume they have to be on their phones then {or at least you know where the hell their phone is at that time
}) and can alert the Banjo app user (and set distance radius, even far away cities) where your friends are at that time.

To me the whole thing smacks as a huge surveillance net, technology to track as many people as possible, all the time; people and events of course, in real time 24/7/365.

I would imagine that the Banjo app(s) available for businesses/corporations and gov/military are considerably (understatement
) more detailed and invasive with information it can gather and provide for such "surveillance", I would have to think so anyway.

Gonna come back later for more posts regarding the link between "trans-genderism" and "trans-humanism".

Post #19 (from original thread, from 911conspiracyT)
The hive mind is coming. Imagine combining Banjo as seen on Patton's phone above, with Musk's Neurolink (see video), remembering a similar tech touted by Intel in 2009.

Of course only the rich (and an elite unit of agents) will have the Neuralink at first, unless brain surgeons start a charity. However, everyone (except for the domestic terrorists called Luddites, those pesky mofos blowing up cell towers and disrupting the frail 5G infrastructure... and except for those opting out for less radical reasons of privacy [spit on the floor]/health/religion [strict orthodox Jews don't use cell phones on the Sabbath, Friday sundown to Saturday sundown, Amish, etc.]) will wear Google Glasses or a competitor's version, the wearable tech that will finally replace cell phones in a few years. The glasses will allow augmented reality and real-time AI "assistance" with instant "telepathic" communication and visual input from friends around the world. App development for the platform of augmented reality will erase privacy and give police instant facial recognition input (no ID card required, despite the Amazon face ID flaws), in addition to your position in time and space as recorded (with audio) thanks to your smart glasses. Invite people to walk in your shoes, or never mind as the police do.

Have a nice day.

Post #20 (from original thread, from 911conspiracyT)
Incidentally, as noted on the Banjo app entry at Wikipedia, "Banjo launched a new feature called Banjo Rewind, which allows people to search past events and go back to specific moments in time." So (when/if the app is ever re-released -- no publicly available version exists today) those with access will be able to go back in time and replay the feed from your glasses, with all the input that came from your interface.

The amount of data requiring storage seems too large, but the value of said data will inevitably pay for the hardware. The Luddites will look for those hard drive storage warehouses in order to destroy them, but resistance is futile.

Post #21 (from original thread, from Truthissweet)
From 911T:


However, everyone (except for the domestic terrorists called Luddites, those pesky mofos blowing up cell towers and disrupting the frail 5G infrastructure...*

Can you post some links to some Luddite cases blowing up towers. Interesting topic.

Post #22 (from original thread, from 911conspiracyT)
That's just my imagination picturing the future. Somebody will start the new Luddite movement, if not the trans-humanists themselves. It's just a matter of time. The Hegelian Dialectic suggests an extreme opposite to counter the Borg-style future towards which we are heading. The synthesis of the opposing sides will still satisfy the objective.

In the short run, these attacks on the cell towers (and 5G small cells, utility poles, etc.) will increase security for the infrastructure. People in love with their Internet of Things will call for more surveillance, etc., to keep their 5G running. I imagine the "Luddites" will organize when robots begin to take people's jobs on a large scale... like driving a cab or Uber in the city. (Self-driving cars need 5G small cells every 300 meters or so, often much less, depending on line of sight around buildings and trees... and rain, believe it or not, impedes the signal. Keep the people around for those days, unless weather modification is used to keep the cities dry....)

I should add a link to the 5G Crisis thread.

Post #23 (from original thread, from 911conspiracyT)
An important video on Musk's Neuralink by Truthstream Media:
"Putting a Chip in Your Brain Will Not Make You a Superhero (or a god)"

Interesting to hear the Hegelian Dialectic mentioned here also, but the fear isn't coming from 5G but from AI.

Post #24 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Thanks Matt for the responses, really cool. Yeah, the Neuralink definitely does sound like first steps towards producing a hivemind, Borg (guess you're a trekkie maybe?
), or lots of mind controlled slaves at least.

Good videos, going through those now, thanks.

So, I'm guessing you will pass on getting the electrodes and chip in your brain?? haha, yeah me too! I'll go on the fence and say there are no takers from anybody coming here to LRF either (visitors and posters)

@Truthissweet (post #21),

Luddites description, from Wikipedia (Google search)


The Luddites were a radical group of English textile workers and weavers in the 19th century who destroyed weaving machinery as a form of protest. The group was protesting the use of machinery in a "fraudulent and deceitful manner" to get around standard labour practices. Luddites feared that the time spent learning the skills of their craft would go to waste as machines would replace their role in the industry. It is a misconception that the Luddites protested against the machinery itself in an attempt to halt the progress of technology. Over time, however, the term has come to mean one opposed to industrialisation, automation, computerisation, or new technologies in general. The Luddite movement began in Nottingham and culminated in a region-wide rebellion that lasted from 1811 to 1816. Mill owners took to shooting protesters and eventually the movement was suppressed with military force.Wikipedia

History Channel description (


The original Luddites were British weavers and textile workers who objected to the increased use of mechanized looms and knitting frames. Most were trained artisans who had spent years learning their craft, and they feared that unskilled machine operators were robbing them of their livelihood. When the economic pressures of the Napoleonic Wars made the cheap competition of early textile factories particularly threatening to the artisans, a few desperate weavers began breaking into factories and smashing textile machines. They called themselves “Luddites” after Ned Ludd, a young apprentice who was rumored to have wrecked a textile apparatus in 1779.

I certainly agree quite strongly with the cautionary stance and reaction of a "Luddite", to new technology in particular with the AI/transhuman stuff. I'm not against new technology, as long as we all still keep some basic control over it, how it's used, for who etc, and not the other way around, it or someone else (elite) using new tech to control (or eliminate) all of us.

The Dykes (Truthstream Media) are pretty popular on Youtube, 84+ million views. I have to say Melissa sounds a lot like a female James Corbett. If I wasn't sure, her voice sounds, well, you know, a little dykie, if you know what I mean.

I wonder if they are downplaying the actual threat of AI, becoming smart enough to enslave or wipe all humans out, with their Hagalien dialectic talk. They sound possibly dismissing it as a potential danger. I do agree with what they were saying that some transhumanists want super powers through technology, to become like superheroes.

Post #25 (from original thread, from gl69m)
I let this thread lag too much, need to add some more stuff to it, but I've just been too lazy, even though I've had some holiday days off over christmas and new years. Wanted to put up a year end movie/tv show review featuring movies with ai/transhumanistic themes, but like I said, I'm lazy
! Well anyways, I can still do that, I know a little late to get it in before 2019 ended but oh well.

I have watched a considerable number of movies and shows in the last few months, mainly out of sheer boredom and depression (mainly over my injury that I still haven't fixed yet, I guarentee I will eventually though), wanting to just be mindlessly entertained (don't we all??!
). I also am hooked on a stupid little game app called "Toy Blast" (I picked the name Toy Blaster on my game avatar), I'm pretty good at this game, and I can get to the top of the Illinois list on occassion; every two weeks there is a "Legends Arena" you make it into after beating the 50 new levels, and then it's just a race to the highest level you can attain in two weeks time. You can spend money on boosters, and apparently this gane rakes it in, as of 2015 it was the 4th highest grossing sort of free download game out there, bringing in over 250 million $. I refuse to spend money on a free game, especially if there is no possible financial reward for placing as high as possible. The highest I've made it to on the world list for a two week little game season is ranked #94th, beat 1468 levels in two weeks. The top ones can get to over 4600 in two weeks, I have to assume they are spending a considerable amount on the boosters to make it that far, this is at times a maniacally frustrating game, one of those free to play and pay to win kind of games.

I really should spend a lot less time on that stupid frustrating game (unfortunately I enjoy it too much when I'm defeating lots of levels easily though) and watching so much frivolous entertainment and focus on more productive things. But entertainment may also show us clues to predictive things being planned by the powers that be, so to speak, if you can pay attention and interpret the details. I half ass jokingly think of it as 'research', haha!

I'm a sci-fi fan anyway, that's what I normally prefer watching, and it seems that these days the dominant theme in so many movies is ai and trans-humanism, sometimes a combination of both mixed together. Not to say these two themes haven't been around, they've really been around longer than most of us have been alive; but there seems to me to be a crescendo being depicted nowadays that is pushing the extremely strong notion of the inevitability and futility of stopping ai (and perhaps transhuman) from dominating and taking over. Terminator movies started out seeming more like fanciful fiction in my view (like the comic book movies), but now it feels like it may be getting "for real", some of the concepts in these movies have technologies that are catching up to the concepts at an ever faster and faster rate it seems to me.

Here are a small list of some of the movies I've seen in last 6 months, these depicting a strong ai theme, "Ex Machina", "Tau", "I Am Mother" and "Kill Command". Kill command also depicts a strong transhumanistic theme, has a female character who has a chip in her brain that allows her to mentally call up data instantly over the internet and view it seemingly in front of her like a screen but in her mind I suppose. I may review some of these movies later. I Am Mother depicts an ai robot practicing trans-humanism to sort of recreate the human race after a so-called extinction event (movie description from IMDb- "In the wake of humanity's extinction, a teenage girl is raised by a robot designed to repopulate the earth."). "A-X-L is another movie, about a robot dog that I saw, kind of a low budget goofy man's best friend kind of campyness, but special effects are moderately okay.

Some of the movies I've seen depicting a strong transhumanistic theme, "Self/less", "Advantageous", "Diveregence"; "Morgan" is a movie that blends both ai and transhuman in one entity, a synthetic/genetically engineered biological human enhanced with nano technology I suppose. "Replicas" is a movie that strongly sort of merges the two as well, starring Kenau Reeves (starred in the Matrix, which I have not seen all of, and I have some misgivings about portions of the plot explanation though, might get into that in a later post) as a neural transfer specialist working for a more or less clandestine bio-tech (military in actuality) company. Certain actions of Reeves' character kinda pissed me off, but the movie brings his character off as I suppose a transhumanistic hero, transcending death for his family through full human cloning.

Anyways, the movie I'm going to review (spoiler alerts ahead, wink wink) a little more in depth for now is one I watched just over the holiday partial break period (I had two holiday days off in the middle of the week both last week and the week before) , is called "The Mandela Effect", here is a brief overview from a short LA Times article about the movie,


In the film, Charlie Hofheimer plays Brendan, a game designer whose young daughter accidentally drowns. Over the objections of his wife, Claire (Aleksa Palladino), and his best friend, Matt (Robin Lord Taylor), Charlie seeks out a disgraced academic (Clarke Peters) who believes that if thousands are adamantly certain about — for example — an incorrect spelling of “the Berenstain Bears,” this may be evidence of alternate realities.

Not sure when exactly it was released, I saw it using the Amazon Fire Stick, using the Kodi app with add ons that can stream the movies somehow, my son told me there is gray area around the legality of that, not getting into that now, I have no idea what's legal and what isn't, hopefully not incriminating myself here. Some of the movies/shows I've seen from the Kodi and some from Netflix and Hulu (which we have legitimate accounts for).

My primary opinion of the movie is that it is a long promo for a version of a "simulation" conspiracy theory. It's telling too that hollywood (I guess it's from hollywood) would make a movie using Nelson Mandela's name and the term and concept coined by him (or coined in honor of him), and then have the main character and family be white of course, big shocker there right? Anyhoo, it does have the token black male character who is a mathematical genius, that the 'liberal' LA Times points out is a "disgraced acedemic", and at the same time they didn't even bother to give the actor's (Clarke Peters) character's name in the movie in the article. I guess they figured that wasn't important enough, nothing racist there right, well according to an alt-righter (writer) I suppose.

Clarke Peters plays Dr. Fuchs by the way, and his character I assume was forcibly made to retire by acedemia for bringing up possible mathematical computer proof of a version of a "simulation" or alternate reality theory. Alternate reality theory to me would be more like a multi-verse or parallel universes theory, and "simulation theory" to me wouldn't necessarily be the same at all, if say that there was really only one "simulation" going on right? At least I would think the two are not really equivalent in concept.

I noticed too the Berenstain/Berenstein Bears reference as the first (I think) in the movie as an example of either a false memory or a Mandela Effect (via 1984 style historic revision I assume). I remember that as a spoof conspiracy theory a few years ago, but my Mandela effect for that one is that for some reason I always thought it was spelled either Bherenstain or Bearenstain, go figure. The Berenstein conspiracy angle is part of the "Jews Control" everything 'conspiracy' too. The other really popular one in this movie the main character presented is the line from Darth Vader to Luke Skywalker in "The Empire Strikes Back". "Luke, I am your Father" (the line was actually "No, I am your father"
, honestly I couldn't remember which one seemed to be correct in my memory of seeing that movie such a long time ago).

Curious George, the racist colonialist brown monkey "children's book" character is also featured in the movie, with and without a tail as another example of the "Mandela Effect".

I like Dr. Fuchs character a lot in this movie, very rational, intelligent, and gives the main character enough ideas and information to try and create his own code to either interrupt the 'simulation' they believe, or he (the main character, he was a video game designer) is trying to create a do over and get his daughter back, re-write the simulation so speak. Unfortunately, the main character is informed by a family member of Dr. Fuchs' that he passed away before this guys gets to try out his new code; they just couldn't help themselves, about 99% of sci fi movies kill off the black guy (it might be less than that, but is extremely repetetive in these movies and pisses me off, and is very unoriginal anyways besides being racist). Dr, Fuchs had supposedly hung himself, I presume to explain the plot device that he felt extreme pressure from certain shady people or the "simulation" itself not to continue pursuing the "alternate reality" theory, which was the pressure he also felt to force him into a "disgraced" retirement. It's worth noting how many modern lynchings of black people nowdays are alleged 'suicides' by hanging.

Dr. Fuchs' character (and even the actor himself Clarke Peters looks a little bit like him too) reminds me a great deal of a real scientist mathematician by the name of Dr. Sylvester James Gates. I saw some videos with Dr. Gates discussing physics and string theory with Niel Degrasse Tyson, at least two years ago or more,



Dr. Sylvester James Gates makes Neil DeGrasse Tyson desperate to hold on to Atheism

and it's my opinion that Dr. Fuchs character seems to be heavily inspired by Dr. Gates, although I found a snippet from this conference here,

2016 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate: Is the Universe a Simulation?

where Dr. Gates repudiates that he really believes in a "simulation" theory, despite the fact that he has found that there are several sets and types of equations in string theory that are identical to certain computer simulation type coding (or maybe just computer coding? done back in the 40s or 50s I think), and these equations describe the universe as they know it in the "physics" sense so to speak is what I think he was saying. My way of thinking about that is, that the computer coding even back then could have been borrowed from the mathematics in any case, and not mean that we live in an actual simulation the way I look at it.

But of course if you believe in an all powerful deity, anything it creates would be a simulation if the deity could change it at will, so in that sense I would say that a lot of religious believers faith would not really be incompatible with a "simulation" theory in my view. If we were all a mere "simulation" that also seemingly represents less free will and ability to change anything than we would have other wise to believe in some other reality, at least that's my opinion, and only one reason I reject that as any real possibility. It kind of leads to certain form of extreme relativism, especially if you mix "simulation" with "alternate/multiverse", you would always be in doubt about reality, sounds too schizophrenic for my tastes, that's why I don't particularly entertain such 'theories' for me.

The other extremely implausible piece of the movie is the absurd lack of security in the building where the quantum super computer is housed, and the main guy gets in there with no real problem (after he accidentally kills the non-disgraced academic who took over the job from Dr. Fuchs, to run the quantum computer) to download his little developed coding program to feed to the super computer, and walla, he interrupts the "simulation", ends up getting his daughter back at the end of the movie. No mention of getting the tragically "suicided" Dr. Fuchs back it seems, a terrible shame in my opinion.

Overall, if I was to rate the movie, I guess I have to give at least a D-, or 1.5 out of 5, it was interesting enough to get through the whole thing, in large part owing (for me anyway) to Dr. Fuchs' character. This movie might get a lot of attention in some conspiracy circles, especially ones like the flat earth sphere (
) of influence, a lot of flat earthers have repeatedly gone back time and time again to "simulation" style theories to explain away all the evidence that proves a global earth.

Another couple of things I've noticed about a lot of movies/shows nowadays, conspiracy thinking is depicted as being a lot more fashionable and not strictly relegated to calling all conspiracy believers nothing but "tin foil hat wearers". I would say that is probably a mixed blessing, and also that at least some conspiracies are less politically incorrect than others, and I would imagine "simulation theory" is one that is not so politically incorrect to the mainstream. Another thing is that so many movies do depict the primacy of the female character(s), depicting them as almost superiorly capable, not only mentally but physically as well, sometimes more so than male counterparts, or at least as equal to. That sets off conservatives quite a bit I know, so it doesn't bother me too much, even if it is not 100% realistic. The thing is though, it's almost always white women, so there is a racist angle to it none the less seems to me.

Anyways, that's it for now.

Post #26 (from original thread, from gl69m)
This post I'm going to cover two occurings in the world of coming automation that caught my fancy recently, robot farming and automated trucking. It will be a limited post so I won't be up all night with my slow typing ass, so I will try later to come back later and elaborate more on the one article ("Age of Robot Farmers") and the automated trucking videos.

First up, an automated strawberry picking machine/tractor with robot arm appendages attached that can pick strawberrys, maybe as good as human pickers or better, or maybe not yet or perhaps there isn't enough time/data yet to tell if that is true or not. One thing is for sure, there has to be plenty of investment (money, companies, engineers, tech folks, elites, etc,) pouring into the development of machines like this, designed to do all sorts of jobs that still require human labor for.

The Age of Robot Farmers

Picking strawberries takes speed, stamina, and skill. Can a robot do it?

By John Seabrook
April 8, 2019

Not going to post the entire article here, it is pretty lengthy, just snippets of pertinent areas to my interest and what is useful and relevant to the thread. The opening paragraphs of the article,


It was a hot February morning at Wish Farms, a large strawberry-growing operation outside Plant City, Florida. Gary Wishnatzki, the proprietor, met me at one of the farm offices. In the high season, Wish Farms picks, chills, and ships some twenty million berries—all handpicked by a seasonal workforce of six hundred and fifty farm laborers.

Wishnatzki is a genial sixty-three-year-old third-generation berry man, who wears a white goatee and speaks softly, with a Southern drawl. His grandfather Harris Wishnatzki was a penniless Russian immigrant who started out peddling fruits and vegetables from a pushcart in New York’s Washington Street Market in 1904. He and a partner established a wholesale business in 1922, and Harris moved to Plant City in 1929, to run it. Gary Wishnatzki is the first in his family to own a farm.

Wishnatzki, that name sounds like a nazi, hell the guy looks more like a german nazi than a russian in my opinion too. Or maybe his family is "jewish/russian", part of the 'jooworld order' right? Who fucking knows. So I guess his grandfather (allegedly penniless immigrant? fucking please, prove that) never owned a farm nor his dad, just sold produce secondhand, particularly berries I guess. In these two Youtube videos of Wish Farms, Wishnatzki did not sound to me as though he had a southern drawl or accent, in my opinion anyway.

Strawberry Harvesting Robot Demonstration in Florida

Notice too in the article, the mention of the ~650 seasonal workers that are needed to ordinarily pick all the strawberries and package them, get them stored, to market, etc., well that might mean 650 pickers not including the other farm and packaging workers, I don't know.

So in the article, as well as in one of the videos on automated trucking, they state a case of a "shortage" of workers taking the jobs (agricultural and trucking), and thus the business need for automated (robots/machines) to fill the labor gap/shortage. If there really is a "shortage" of workers, what is the underlying causes of that. For agriculture in the U.S., the article leans on a crackdown of immigrant workers (well the article states "illegal immigration" but this assuredly would affect "legal immigrants" as well I would have to believe), thus leading to fewer people in the workpool that normally fill those jobs.


In recent years, though, seasonal labor has become much more scarce, and more expensive—making it difficult for growers of apples, citrus, berries, lettuce, melons, and other handpicked produce-aisle items to harvest their crops. Years of attempts to crack down on illegal immigration, both at the state and the federal level, partly explain these chronic shortages. In 2011, for example, Georgia enacted a strict immigration law that targeted undocumented workers and their employers. Later that year, the state reportedly lost eleven thousand crop workers. To fill the gap, officials established a program whereby nonviolent offenders nearing the end of their prison terms could do paid farmwork. The program had few takers, and many prisoners and probationers who did try it walked off the job, because the work was so hard. Georgia farmers lost more than a hundred and twenty million dollars.

“It’s very expensive,” Wishnatzki said of the process of getting visas for temporary agricultural workers—they are issued under a program called H-2A —because of all the red tape and the cost of housing. (“Expensive” is a relative term: H-2A workers are still among the lowest paid in the country.) “But at least it guarantees that we have workers, so we’re able to plant a crop,” he continued.

“I testified before Congress before last year’s Farm Bill, and I told them, ‘If we don’t solve this with automation, we’re in huge trouble.’ ”

The solution, Wishnatzki believes, is to make a robot that can pick strawberries. He and a business partner, Bob Pitzer, have been developing one for the past six years. With the latest iteration of their invention—known around the farm as Berry 5.1—they are getting close.

In the above video, Wishnatzki states a case for justifying replacing people with the robot that can pick the fruit, he claims the people are leaving and fewer people are wanting to take the job to replace people leaving I assume he means, and he claims that "replacing people is relative" meaning allegedly there will be some machine maintenance with higher skilled labor jobs to replace some of those job losses. Probably much fewer jobs created than lost I would think.

This video demonstrates a little more of the machine in action (the Berry 4.0 version) in the field.

SPW On RFD-TV: Robotic Strawberry Harvester Rolls Out In Florida

In this video, Pitzer mentions farmers "begging" for help because of "issues with the labor", of course he doesn't elaborate on those "issues". Paul Bisset makes claims about how the robots will cut costs; guarenteed harvesting throughout the season, reduce overage in packing and cooling costs, last thing he says is food safety (traceability) because it's "hands free"- presumably I guess he's implying germ free or less germs than hands could transmit to the fruit- If the machines aren't cleaned after several acres though would that really be true? and I guess it wouldn't be known without thoroughly testing it- have to wonder if it will get tested thoroughly before bringing robot picked produce to market- I seriously doubt that will happen. And I guess they would guarantee getting the machines up and running lickety split every time they breakdown right? I suppose, so only the wealthier farms could afford that for now anyway I would assume.

One thing the New Yorker article does indicate indirectly (without meaning to I'm sure), is that most agricultural work, particularly harvesting, has traditionally been done mostly by non-white people, though the article doesn't mention any race of the seasonal workers explicitly (most are Mexican it states); which I saw in other articles- I posted this in earlier posts that farm work was mostly done by black people up until about probably 60 years ago or so. The thing is, for all day labor jobs out in the hot sun, white people aren't the best suited for that and not many white people will do it all now days for the low pay that especially seasonal workers generally get. I lot of white supremacists complain all day long about the 'illegals' and brown immigrants coming to America for this work, but if they didn't, how many white people would do that work if they weren't doing it? I can't recall any of these stupremacists mentioning solving the problem of getting white people to fulfilling all the labor needs, if that is white people are unwilling or unable to do that work, if that is the stupremacists were actually successful in driving out all non white people, which would require that they start and win a second "civil war" I suppose, unlikely I would say, but I'm sure many of them love "the idea of starting one".

I'm sure AI/transhuman enthusiasts (who most of them are all white stupremacists also) are pushing for the machines to replace all the labor of black and brown people in the fields still currently needed, to feed not only white people but all other people too really, that American and other white dominated countries agriculture produces. To me that seems like another step in the direction for justification and setup of depopulation- particularly a racist depopulation, since most of the skilled jobs to maintain and run the machines are surely being catered by the techies to be trained/educated and filled by mostly whites, and there will be a few token but brilliant asian, black, brown and other peoples who are educated and skilled enough to get those jobs. The people losing those field jobs will mostly be driven into further poverty and be more transient than already, and this will create further human problems to deal with for them for sure.

Anyways, the article has lots of other info to cover, but is too long for one post for me, I will move on in the post to the next subject, automation of trucking.

This selection of videos highlights some discussion about the possibilities of (eventually that is) replacing human drivers, completely even, with automated self driving trucks (think "Maximum Overdrive" maybe, well hopefully not
). First two videos from actual truckers made 5 and 4 years ago, both these guys are humorous and seem to grasp the severity of the situation of truckers possibly losing jobs and definitely losing pay for sure.

Autonomous trucks are the end of trucking
Trucker Brown

Self Driving Truck Delivers Load. Is This The Future of Trucking?

And some other videos demonstrating that the trucks can drive by themselves, albeit only technically on the highway for now I guess, but still require humans on board to take over getting on and off the highway, presumably to refuel too I guess, drive in the city and back up into docks.

Dave Whyte rides in the Peterbilt autonomous truck

Embark Trucks' Self-Driving Truck Drives From Los Angeles To Jacksonville | CNBC

This video offers no proof that this truck went all that way with no humans on board, I have to assume a driver was on board for refueling, getting on and off the highway, driving into the city at final destination etc. At least I assume that anyway.

Could driverless vehicles spell the end of the road for truck drivers?

This video also claims there is a shortage of workers to fill trucking jobs, and thus the "need" for automation to fill that gap, I didn't really see them show evidence to support that, I guess it could be true but I doubt it; if anything if there is an actual shortage I think probably due to that it is getting harder and harder to obtain a CDL than it used to be than not enough actual people to fill the jobs.

This video also highlights that perhaps completely truckerless trucks are many years away (15 to 20 they say, which is what the two truckers also surmised), but many commenters in the video comments seem to believe that it is only 5-7 years away from now. Hopefully it will never happen, but the techies surly aren't going to quit trying as long as they will always have sufficient resources to pursue it. Both the truckers point out quite logically (just like I would), unlike the news commentators that didn't point this out, if everything get's automated and so many people out of work? who the fuck is gonna buy all the product that's produced, how will the "masses" afford anything if "automation" puts way too many people out of work and the jobs aren't replaced for them to go to? I could only imagine that the elites and AI enthusiasts could give a fuck less about that, but I digress, and I'm going to cut this post off for now, try and comment on more details of this article and videos later.


Post #27 (from original thread, from gl69m), I'm pretty sure I posted this one in Mid March 2020, it was before I saw the Whitehouse Coronavirus Briefing on March 20th 2020.
Not gonna spend time on following up on other posts at the moment, just wanted to say a few things about the current "pandemic' (COVID-19), and add a at least one show I think is worth checking out, called "The Unlisted" (Australian 2019, on Netflix ).

Whether or not this "pandemic' is "real" or fake/manufactured (to some extent? I suppose), I couldn't tell ya. Some small conspiracy theories are floating around; one involved Chinese spies stealing the virus from a Winnipeg Canadian govt. research lab and transporting it back to Wuhan in China, where a they say a Chinese govt. lab is reportedly a block or two away from the original seafood market where the outbreak there supposedly originally started. I saw that on some you tube video about a week ago, not sure which one didn't save a link. I'm sure there are many more ways for the Chinese govt. (among many govts. globally of course) to have possession of this virus and many others, so I wouldn't give that little theory any real attention, it seems almost besides the point to figure out a true root origin, at least from my perspective, not any great researcher here.

One thing I noticed on you tube especially, there is a large number of channels removed that up until probably a year ago, would have been calling this entire thing fake, and some removed perhaps for good reason, most others for bullshit reasons, but searching for hits on google and you tube, I was mostly coming up with mainstream (lamestream) sites calling out supposed fake-news scams about the virus, fake cures mostly, and supposedly false information about the spread/severity of the virus etc.

I was not aware until this last week or two that the COVID-19 virus is related to the SARS virus, apparently SARS is also a "corona-virus", supposedly at least 7 corona-viruses are known about, I thought I read somewhere that corona-viruses are also related to the common cold virus perhaps the cold is a corona-virus (not COVID-19 strain of course), not really sure about that right now.

I would likely think (IMO) we are really dealing with a real virus and not a "fake" one, although whether it is genetically engineered or not, how the fuck would the lay public be able to know? As far as, is it a "real" pandemic as opposed to entirely "fake", I would believe it is real, to an extent, but that would not mean it isn't or couldn't be a planned or manufactured event, and how many actual true cases of infection are there? They could lie about the numbers either way, way too high or too low, we would have no way of knowing.

It does seem to me, that people, not merely govt.s and companies/corporations, are taking this way more seriously than any of the other so-called outbreaks of the past 15-20 years; SARS of course, different bird and pig flu's, the ebola scare, west nile virus, Chaga's disease, Zika virus, I'm sure I'm missing many here, you get the point. Seems like the numbers of cases of this virus is definitely higher than the previous "outbreaks', haven't researched that though. It still seems relatively tame though to me, the severity and quickness of it, death toll (%), compared to numbers given about past epidemics; and kind of tame for a "shit hits the fan" event; but I would say, it is probably (most likely) a dry run for a future "shit hits the fan" event(s)/outbreak(s). Just my conjecture of course.

So far, I have not heard of any probable "confirmed" cases in my town of Alton, or the metro east Illinois side of the St. Louis area, but I did hear about a "confirmed" case reported in St. Louis, supposedly there are 5 confirmed cases in Missouri, and supposedly at least 93 cases in Illinois, per Chicago Tribune article, and Illinois is shutting down restaurants and bars from inside customers,


Gov. J.B. Pritzker announced Sunday that all bars and restaurants in Illinois will be closed to the public, beginning at close of business Monday through March 30. They will remain open for delivery, drive-through and curbside pick-up orders, the governor said.

Here are the latest updates on the coronavirus in the Chicago area and Illinois:

5:56 p.m.: 93 cases in 13 counties

Dr. Ngozi Ezike, director of the Illinois Department of Public Health, said there are now 93 confirmed cases in 13 counties statewide.

“The number of positive test results we get each day is increasing exponentially, and the number of counties across Illinois is also expanding,” she said. “People should assume that this novel coronavirus is in their communities. And we all need to take steps to protect ourselves and reduce the spread.”

She said there’s evidence that transmission of the virus occurs when symptoms first start, “so it’s important to limit close contact with people as much as possible, even if you don’t feel that sick.

Of course I have heard on social media, the encouragement of "social distancing", keeping a minimum of 6 feet (?) between people in crowds and public spaces, so they are encouraging "anti-social" behavior, so to speak,
Anthrax - Antisocial (Lyrics on screen)

and of course, self quarantine, for two weeks minimum, if you feel sick, or whatever. The shelves in many grocery and department stores are getting low on stock, particularly paper towels and toilet paper, hand sanitizer, I'm not sure what all else, some is from over buying but some is the shipments are reduced I think, and some the stores may be with holding stock in order not to run out perhaps, so some is supply being interrupted by various means, perhaps "manufactured" temporary shortage so to speak in some way as well.

Trump of course accused Democrats of "politicizing" the outbreak by blowing it out of proportion I guess he means; and he called it their new "hoax" although I didn't see anywhere where he explained (or anyone else for him) what he supposedly meant what the "hoax" was about this event that the Democrats are allegedly perpetrating- according to him. I'm assuming he did not mean that he believes the virus or "outbreak' is entirely "fake", as it were. Meanwhile, he seems to be sticking to the travel bans to and from China, and now Europe, right now I don't know where all else. All schools are shut down for now in Illinois as far as I know, perhaps other states as well. My kids are out of school now, so doesn't affect us, but has to be affecting a huge number of people of course. I don't know about day cares right now.

This show, "The Unlisted", on Netflix, I think is pretty good, I liked it, watched all 15 episodes (season 1), the ending (slight spoiler alert) seems to beg for a second season, don't know if there will be one or not though.

The Unlisted NEW SERIES Trailer | Netflix Futures


When they learn of a secret plot to turn students into super-soldiers, identical twins Dru and Kal team up with a band of runaway rebels to take back their world.

I thought it was relatively well acted, I really like the twins role in this, the brothers seemed to work well together in the story. The plot revolves around a company that is using what is known as the "Global Child Initiative" (not sure if it is only a corporate or also govt. initiative, I suspect govt. sponsored too?) to secretly implant the students with chips that can be turned on to "mind control" the student's behaviors, and give them extra strength/stamina (which I find that part {extra strength] one of the usual implausibilities of these kinds of shows, what do you expect though, it is science "fiction"). The "Global Child Initiative" sounds like a descendant of the "The no child left behind" act of George Sr. Bush fame to me, supposedly to help increase education for as many children as possible and supposedly to alleviate much of global poverty (yeah right, the plot totally proves the opposite of course) as possible as well.

One thing about the ending episode, the plot makes it appear as though the govt. and the major investors seem to be unawares of the secret plot, I find that really another implausibility, which seemingly really doesn't make sense in the real world to me. Anyways, though, overall I like the series so far, and it underscores that there is no reason to discount that there (probably) are secret plots out there for real, most likely would be govt./corporate, to implant us and control us, generations in the future at least; however the show makes it look way too easy to fight that kind of conspiracy off with smart and nerdy kids and the internet, another implausibility I think in the real world.

For all we know, a vaccine program, like that probably being now developed for the current pandemic even, could be used to "implant" children (and anybody really) with chips or even nano-bots, for such a purpose, mind control of the population. Just my conjecture of course. All for now, later.

Post #28 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Wanted to add this to the thread, my brother sent me an Instagram post about these little mini rfid chips about a week ago, I didn't even know these existed, for over 14 years now apparently shit,

February 6, 2006

World's smallest and thinnest 0.15 x 0.15 mm, 7.5µm thick RFID IC chip
- Enhanced productivity enabled by 1/4 surface area, 1/8th thickness -




Tokyo, 6th February 2006 --- Hitachi, Ltd. (NYSE:HIT / TSE:6501) today announced it has developed and verified operation of a 0.15 x 0.15 millimeter (mm), 7.5 micrometer (µm)*1 thick contactless IC chip, the smallest and thinnest in the world, to date. The chip is a smaller version of the 0.4 x 0.4 mm "µ-Chip"*2 currently being marketed by Hitachi, maintaining the same level of functionality. The distance between each circuit element was reduced by using SOI technology,*3 which has an insulating layer in the substrate, instead of the Si (silicon) only substrate currently being used. Compared to the 0.3 x 0.3 mm, 60µm thick IC chip*4(henceforth 0.3mm IC chip) announced by Hitachi in February 2003, surface area is reduced to a quarter of the original size. Developments in thin chip fabrication technology have also enabled the chip to be reduced to one-eighth the thickness of the 0.3mm IC chip, at the same time. This significant decrease in size, increases the number of chips which can be fabricated on a single wafer, thus increasing productivity by more than four times. Compared to the current product which was used at the 2005 World Exposition held in Aichi, Japan, productivity is increased by about 10 times. This technology is expected to open the way to new applications for contactless IC chips.

The µ-Chip is one of the world's smallest contactless IC chips which uses an external antenna to receive radio waves (2.45 GHz microwaves), and transforms it to energy to wirelessly transmit a 128 bit (10^38 ) unique ID number. As the data is written during the fabrication process using ROM (Read-Only-Memory), it is impossible to rewrite the data and thus provides a high level of authenticity. The admission ticket system for the 2005 World Exposition, which had approximately 22,050,000 visitors, employed the µ-Chip, has a performance record of no incidence of confirmed forgery and 0.001% incidence of ticket recognition error. By taking advantage of the merits of compactness, high authenticity and contactless communication, and combining it with Internet technology, the µ-Chip may be utilized in a broad range of applications such as security, transportation, amusement, traceability and logistics.

Hitachi has been working on technology such as increasing communication distance and decreasing antenna size, whilst maintaining those merits, to enable a broader range of applications for the µ-Chip. The enhanced compactness and thinness of this new chip has further broadened the range of possible applications, including securities like gift certificates and a large variety of certificates. Further, as with the 0.3mm IC chip, the new chip has a double-surface electrode, and therefore despite its even smaller size, connection with the external antenna can be easily achieved, and high productivity maintained.

Features of the IC chip developed
(1) World's smallest size achieved through application of SOI technology In the past, to prevent malfunction as a result of interference from neighboring devices, a wide device separation region was necessary around high frequency devices. Using SOI process, each device was surrounded by insulator, thus even when the devices were located in close proximity, interference between devices could be prevented and thus higher integration achieved on an even smaller area.
(2) Thin chip achieved through application of SOI technology This was achieved by complete removal of the silicon layer on the reverse side of the SOI substrate on which the circuit is fabricated.
These results will be presented at the IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC 2006), being held from 5th - 9th February 2006, in San Francisco, California, U.S.A.

Pretty freaky shit, maybe we are all chipped already and don't even know it, ugghh!
Hopefully not, not sure if there is anyway to check your body for something like this, not like examining your skin for fleas or bites, or even (gosh forbid) lice in your hair or something, especially something inside your body or blood. I wonder if there are even smaller chips than this available by now, even nano-sized ones.

Didn't mean to alarm anyone, now back to the regularly scheduled bullshit daily dose of phony coronie balogney virus media briefings

Post #29 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Wanted to post some important information on (quite) probable coming automation that may well displace many a 'covid' unemployment stint, perhaps even before full so-called re-openings are fully allowed? Here are 10 articles about automation, that writers of seem to think that automation may well displace some jobs, maybe many, before the year is over? Possibly, haven't read all of them fully yet, only skimmed a few really.

Coronavirus speeds the way for robots in the workplace
Apr 25, 2020

Coronavirus-related recession could spike automation
Mar 24, 2020

Robots Welcome to Take Over, as Pandemic Accelerates Automation

Broad unease about losing jobs to machines could dissipate as people focus on the benefits of minimizing close human contact.
April 10, 2020

Study finds stronger links between automation and inequality

Job-replacing tech has directly driven the income gap since the late 1980s, economists report.
May 5, 2020

2020 Predictions About Automation And The Future Of Work From Forrester
Oct 30, 2019

How Will Automation Affect The Job Market? 15 Coaches Share Their Predictions
Feb 20, 2020

How hard will the robots make us work?
In warehouses, call centers, and other sectors, intelligent machines are managing humans, and they’re making work more stressful, grueling, and dangerous
Feb 27, 2020

The robots are coming for your job, too
September 3, 2019

Gartner Predicts 69% of Routine Work Currently Done by Managers will Be Fully Automated by 2024
January 23, 2020

The Robots Are Still Coming
More people are needed for blue collar jobs in areas where AI-enabled automation was to have the most impact. So where are the robots?
4/1/2020 (have to get a link later)

Have to come back to these later, yeah I say that a lot, if not, here are some automation sources at least.

Wanted to also add two sources for nano-technology,
National Nanotechnology Initiative

Frequently Asked Questions


How does U.S. spending compare to other countries?

The United States is not the only country to recognize the tremendous economic potential of nanotechnology. The U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative's member agencies have cumulatively spent more than $23 billion since the inception of the NNI in 2001. According to a Lux Research estimate released in December 2015, “The U.S. leads in government (state and Federal) nanotechnology funding with $1.72 billion spent in 2013 and $1.67 billion spent in 2014. Europe’s collective spending (European Commission and individual country programs) was $2.45 billion in 2014, an increase of 9.8% from 2012. While some countries, such as the U.S., continue to have centralized government programs to coordinate nanotechnology activities, most countries no longer do. In fact, many countries no longer explicitly fund nanotechnology, although it may be a part of initiatives that are funded under different technology support programs. Because of this change, it is difficult to determine with certainty the level of nanotechnology funding by country or region.”

Learn more on the NNI Budget page.

For example, there are over 1,900 U.S.-based companies conducting R&D, manufacturing, or product sales in nanotechnology in 2016. Of these companies engaged in the nanotechnology sector, over 36% have participated in the Small Business Innovation Research or Small Business Technology Transfer programs funded by the Federal agencies that participate in the National Nanotechnology Initiative. The most recent Business R&D and Innovation Survey (BRDIS) conducted by the National Science Foundation (NSF) found approximately 1,500 companies engaged in nanotechnology with approximately 1,100 of these classified as small businesses (less than 500 employees). The difference in the number of companies cited above can be attributed to the year the data was collected and other methodologies.
(I bet most if not all of these small businesses are "essential', am I right or am I right, ah ah,

In December 2015, Lux Research estimated that nanotechnology-enabled products generated $1.6 trillion in global revenues in 2014; and that figure is anticipated to increase to $3.5 trillion in 2018.

Are nanotechnology products available today?

Yes, nanotechnology is enabling more and more products every day, from engine catalysts to cancer medicines to stain-proof pants, and everything in between. Revenue from the sale of nanotechnology-enabled products in the United States has grown more than six-fold from 2009 through 2016.

Previous estimates stated that 6 million nanotechnology jobs will be needed by 2020, with 2 million of those jobs in the United States
(Roco, Mirkin, and Hersam 2010). According to the U.S. News/Raytheon analysis, the number of STEM jobs increased 20 percent between 2000 and 2014. Looking ahead, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects that between 2012 and 2022, employment in occupations that NSF classifies as science and engineering (S&E) will increase 15 percent.

Wikipedia on nano-robots,


Nanorobotics is an emerging technology field creating machines or robots whose components are at or near the scale of a nanometer (10-9 meters).[1][2][3] More specifically, nanorobotics (as opposed to microrobotics) refers to the nanotechnology engineering discipline of designing and building nanorobots, with devices ranging in size from 0.1–10 micrometres and constructed of nanoscale or molecular components.[4][5] The terms nanobot, nanoid, nanite, nanomachine, or nanomite have also been used to describe such devices currently under research and development.[6][7]

Nanomachines are largely in the research and development phase,[8] but some primitive molecular machines and nanomotors have been tested. An example is a sensor having a switch approximately 1.5 nanometers across, able to count specific molecules in the chemical sample. The first useful applications of nanomachines may be in nanomedicine. For example,[9] biological machines could be used to identify and destroy cancer cells.[10][11] Another potential application is the detection of toxic chemicals, and the measurement of their concentrations, in the environment. Rice University has demonstrated a single-molecule car developed by a chemical process and including Buckminsterfullerenes (buckyballs) for wheels. It is actuated by controlling the environmental temperature and by positioning a scanning tunneling microscope tip.

Nanorobot race

In the same ways that technology research and development drove the space race and nuclear arms race, a race for nanorobots is occurring.[18][19][20][21][22] There is plenty of ground allowing nanorobots to be included among the emerging technologies.[23] Some of the reasons are that large corporations, such as General Electric, Hewlett-Packard, Synopsys, Northrop Grumman and Siemens have been recently working in the development and research of nanorobots;[24][25][26][27][28] surgeons are getting involved and starting to propose ways to apply nanorobots for common medical procedures;[29] universities and research institutes were granted funds by government agencies exceeding $2 billion towards research developing nanodevices for medicine;[30][31] bankers are also strategically investing with the intent to acquire beforehand rights and royalties on future nanorobots commercialisation.[32] Some aspects of nanorobot litigation and related issues linked to monopoly have already arisen.[33][34][35] A large number of patents has been granted recently on nanorobots, done mostly for patent agents, companies specialized solely on building patent portfolios, and lawyers. After a long series of patents and eventually litigations, see for example the invention of radio, or the war of currents, emerging fields of technology tend to become a monopoly, which normally is dominated by large corporations.[36]

Main article: Biochip

The joint use of nanoelectronics, photolithography, and new biomaterials provides a possible approach to manufacturing nanorobots for common medical uses, such as surgical instrumentation, diagnosis, and drug delivery.[37][38][39] This method for manufacturing on nanotechnology scale is in use in the electronics industry since 2008.[40] So, practical nanorobots should be integrated as nanoelectronics devices, which will allow tele-operation and advanced capabilities for medical instrumentation.[41][42]

Main article: DNA machine

A nucleic acid robot (nubot) is an organic molecular machine at the nanoscale.[43] DNA structure can provide means to assemble 2D and 3D nanomechanical devices. DNA based machines can be activated using small molecules, proteins and other molecules of DNA.[44][45][46] Biological circuit gates based on DNA materials have been engineered as molecular machines to allow in-vitro drug delivery for targeted health problems.[47] Such material based systems would work most closely to smart biomaterial drug system delivery,[48] while not allowing precise in vivo teleoperation of such engineered prototypes.


The emerging field of bio-hybrid systems combines biological and synthetic structural elements for biomedical or robotic applications. The constituting elements of bio-nanoelectromechanical systems (BioNEMS) are of nanoscale size, for example DNA, proteins or nanostructured mechanical parts. Thiol-ene ebeam resist allow the direct writing of nanoscale features, followed by the functionalization of the natively reactive resist surface with biomolecules.[53] Other approaches use a biodegradable material attached to magnetic particles that allow them to be guided around the body.[54]

This approach proposes the use of biological microorganisms, like the bacterium Escherichia coli[55] and Salmonella typhimurium.[56] Thus the model uses a flagellum for propulsion purposes. Electromagnetic fields normally control the motion of this kind of biological integrated device.[57] Chemists at the University of Nebraska have created a humidity gauge by fusing a bacterium to a silicone computer chip.[58]

Retroviruses can be retrained to attach to cells and replace DNA. They go through a process called reverse transcription to deliver genetic packaging in a vector.[59] Usually, these devices are Pol – Gag genes of the virus for the Capsid and Delivery system. This process is called retroviral gene therapy, having the ability to re-engineer cellular DNA by usage of viral vectors.[60] This approach has appeared in the form of retroviral, adenoviral, and lentiviral gene delivery systems.[61] These gene therapy vectors have been used in cats to send genes into the genetically modified organism (GMO), causing it to display the trait. [62]

Main article: Nanomedicine

Potential uses for nanorobotics in medicine include early diagnosis and targeted drug-delivery for cancer,[65][66][67] biomedical instrumentation,[68] surgery,[69][70] pharmacokinetics,[10] monitoring of diabetes,[71][72][73] and health care.

In such plans, future medical nanotechnology is expected to employ nanorobots injected into the patient to perform work at a cellular level. Such nanorobots intended for use in medicine should be non-replicating, as replication would needlessly increase device complexity, reduce reliability, and interfere with the medical mission.

Nanotechnology provides a wide range of new technologies for developing customized means to optimize the delivery of pharmaceutical drugs. Today, harmful side effects of treatments such as chemotherapy are commonly a result of drug delivery methods that don't pinpoint their intended target cells accurately.[74] Researchers at Harvard and MIT, however, have been able to attach special RNA strands, measuring nearly 10 nm in diameter, to nanoparticles, filling them with a chemotherapy drug. These RNA strands are attracted to cancer cells. When the nanoparticle encounters a cancer cell, it adheres to it, and releases the drug into the cancer cell.[75] This directed method of drug delivery has great potential for treating cancer patients while avoiding negative effects (commonly associated with improper drug delivery).[74][76] The first demonstration of nanomotors operating in living organisms was carried out in 2014 at University of California, San Diego.[77] MRI-guided nanocapsules are one potential precursor to nanorobots.[78]

Another useful application of nanorobots is assisting in the repair of tissue cells alongside white blood cells.[79] Recruiting inflammatory cells or white blood cells (which include neutrophil granulocytes, lymphocytes, monocytes, and mast cells) to the affected area is the first response of tissues to injury.[80] Because of their small size, nanorobots could attach themselves to the surface of recruited white cells, to squeeze their way out through the walls of blood vessels and arrive at the injury site, where they can assist in the tissue repair process. Certain substances could possibly be used to accelerate the recovery.

The science behind this mechanism is quite complex. Passage of cells across the blood endothelium, a process known as transmigration, is a mechanism involving engagement of cell surface receptors to adhesion molecules, active force exertion and dilation of the vessel walls and physical deformation of the migrating cells. By attaching themselves to migrating inflammatory cells, the robots can in effect “hitch a ride” across the blood vessels, bypassing the need for a complex transmigration mechanism of their own.[79]

As of 2016, in the United States, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates nanotechnology on the basis of size.[81]

Soutik Betal, during his doctoral research at the University of Texas, San Antonio developed nanocomposite particles that are controlled remotely by an electromagnetic field.[82] This series of nanorobots that are now enlisted in the Guinness World Records,[82] can be used to interact with the biological cells.[83] Scientists suggest that this technology can be used for the treatment of cancer.[84]

I think this shows a strong precedent (unless this is all just a huge amount of money wasted on "science fiction'
) that the U.S. and EU, probably Russia and China as well, all have the means to produce nano technology, as such what would be necessary to make "nano-machines" or "self assembling nano-particles" say to put in a 'covid-19' universal CoV vaccine (like the NIH/NIAID powerpoint pdf I've shown before)? I think so, that I have shown they have the intent to do so, and seem to have the capability to mass produce it too.


Post #30 (from original thread, from gl69m), ID2020 and the Mark of the Beast
Adding some more here about digital identity related to future NWO plans;

We need to get
digital ID right

ID2020 Launches Technical Certification Mark


Following the completion of v1.0 of ID2020’s Technical Requirements, we are proud to announce the launch of the ID2020 Certification Mark. Both of these efforts reaffirm our mission to improve lives through digital identity by adhering to our core principles of portability, persistence, privacy, and user control.

Aiming higher

Digital identity is being defined now — and we need to get it right. Digital identity is a term that comprises a host of technologies, processes, and systems. The ID2020 Certification Mark is not a baseline certification; it isn’t an attempt to bound the complex, uneven, and ever-expanding landscape of digital identity. Instead, the Certification Mark is an opportunity to recognize technologies that we believe could form the basis of a “good” digital identity. Our Certification Mark deliberately sets a high bar. We want to incentivize companies and organizations to design with our principles and technical requirements in mind, and fully intend for our Certification Mark to play a market-shaping role.

Some notes on the process

We have deliberately designed a simple application form in order to incentivize participation. We’ll summarize the process below, but want to note that we are fully open to revising current workflow and criteria — this is a living effort designed to evolve over time.

-Company/organization fills out the ID2020 Certification Mark Application Form.
-Our experts review the answers and, if necessary, follow up for clarification.
-If after our initial review and follow-up the digital identity doesn’t meet our requirements, we don’t issue a Certification Mark.
-If, on the other hand, we are satisfied with our initial review and follow-up, then we award our Certification Mark.
-The content of the application form is published on, along with a unique ID for the assessed digital identity system that the company/organization can use in its communications.

Three very pertinent companies involved in ID2020:

Rockefeller Foundation
Since 1913, the Rockefeller Foundation has sought to improve the well-being of humanity around the world. The Rockefeller Foundation provided ID2020 with seed funding in in 2017 and has been an ongoing supporter of ID2020’s work.

Microsoft (gates of hell)
The American multinational technology company joined ID2020 in January 2018 as a founding partner. Members of the Microsoft team sit on ID2020’s Technical and Program Delivery Advisory Committees.

The vaccine Alliance

Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance brings together public and private sectors with the shared goal of creating equal access to new and underused vaccines for children living in the world’s poorest countries. Dr. Seth Berkley, CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, sits on our Executive Board.


We Need to Get Digital ID Right
Since 2016, ID2020 has advocated for ethical, privacy-protecting approaches to digital ID.

We refer to the core requirements of that digital ID as the four P’s:

Only you control your own identity, what data is shared and with whom
How exactly can they guarantee this, even if they actually intended to?

Accessible anywhere you happen to be through multiple methods

Lives with you from life to death

Unique to you and you only

In September 2015, all United Nations member states adopted the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, including their commitment to “provide legal identity for all, including birth registration” by 2030.
exploring this next, I assume this is what's called Agenda 2030

Identity Management in 2030 - the United Nations › unsd › vitalstatkb › Attachment1077
In 2030, roles and mandates regarding ID management are clarified. 14. - In 2030, there ... Governments have realized that identity management is crucial to their operations and that a ... the UN Security Council Resolution 2178 on 'threats to international ... and Reynolds D.. Sheep, Goats, Lambs and Wolves: A Statistical.


page 5

This paper is the outcome of a
two-day ‘Expert Meeting on Identity
Management 2030’ held on July 1st
and 2nd 2015. The meeting was
organised by the Dutch National Office
for Identity Data (RvIG) at The Hague
in The Netherlands and supported by
the International Civil Aviation
Organisation (ICAO). It involved the
active participation of 36 international
experts1 in the field of ID2 management.
Most of the participants were
representatives of public, national
and international organisations.
About a third of them came from the
Netherlands, a sixth from European
countries, a quarter from African,
American, Asian and Oceanian
countries and another quarter from
international organisations.

page 6
Concepts and infrastructures

In 2030, the concept of identification
is relative, quantitative and dynamic
In 2030, general acceptance has been reached on the fact
that identity can be approached but not completely
established, and that no conclusive proof of identity exists
[1-2]. As a result, evidence of identity is used to challenge
the hypothesis of identity during the core ID management
processes of creating, checking and ending identities,
rather than proving identity. The concept of absolute,
qualitative and static identification, promising binary and
error-free statements of identity independently of the
scenario, technology and circumstances, has given way to
a more realistic concept of identification as relative,
quantitative and dynamic.

5 Directions

In 2015, after the expert meeting, a series of directions were identified for the identity (ID) management
progressing towards 2030:

The concept of identification will evolve from an absolute,
qualitative and static definition of identification relying on a
proof of identity, towards a relative, quantitative and dynamic
definition of identification relying on evidence of identity

In each country, a National Civil Registration Authority will
be created to develop efficient and trusted ID management
services based on a Unique Personal Number (UPN),
informative and integer data, and will comply at the same
time with the recommended practices of the IIMO and
data protection and privacy regulations

The Identity Management Organisation will be created to
harmonize and coordinate ID management at a global level
and support the development of digital ID infrastructures
within the National Civil Registration Authorities (NCRAs)

The IIMO will support the vision of a global identity chain
growing the trusted ID information of the NCRAs and no
longer based on the ill-trusted information of breeder

Digital ID infrastructures will replace paper-based processes
and allow for NCRAs to align their operational efficiencies
to the challenges arising from a rapidly-growing and more
mobile population and to cope with the amplification of
the migration phenomenon, desired or forced, for
personal, economical, political, religious, climatological
or other safety reasons

page 19

The tokens storing the personal and biometric data digitally
are designed to be multipurpose and cost-effective, and
their form factor is left to the discretion of their owners
I'm assuming these are small electronic portable data storage, to be held and possessed by the individual that holds all your "identity data"

Will they require micro-chip implants for all people in order to have the data secured on each person should all "tokens" or other devices or data(bases?) be lost or identity lost in system somehow?

to page 13
Particularly sighted users even choose to have several tokens,
each of them being a backup in case of loss, technical failure or
theft. Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) microchip
implantation is another mature technology, but its spread is
still limited in 2030 due to its invasiveness
for users as well as
its tagging aspect recalling some inglorious historical
In this respect, biometric technology remains a
non-invasive solution for identification and a credible
alternative to the use of microchip implants.
still limited it says, for now? how about in the future? Perhaps only in prisoners or people who volunteer to get them? children perhaps too?

ID2020: What’s Needed For Digital Identity In 2020
Posted on March 27, 202


A computerized version of identity may gain special urgency as COVID-19 continues to threaten public health. Tracking vaccines certainly will be important in ending pandemics, now and in the future. That’s part of the ID2020 Alliance, which launched late last year, and which has joint efforts in place with the government of Bangladesh and the vaccine alliance Gavi, among others.

In an announcement upon the launch, ID2020 Executive Director Dakota Gruener said, “Digital ID is being defined and implemented today, and we recognize the importance of swift action to close the identity gap.” As noted in this space, immunization is serving as a platform for digital IDs, tied to birth registration and vaccinations to provide newborns with biometrically-underpinned digital identity.

Gavi, for its part, said at the time of the ID2020 launch that 89 percent of children and adolescents who do not have identification live where that organization is active — indicating that public health may be the springboard to giving people, at birth, the records they need later in life to participate fully in the global economy.

So, if they desire to create technological platforms to identify every last living human being on earth by the year 2030, why do they keep putting out the 'conspiracy theory' 'debunks' about ID2020 being related to a 'covid-19' vaccine??

How a tech NGO got sucked into a COVID-19 conspiracy theory
15 April 2020


The case of ID2020

A public-private coalition – members include representatives from Microsoft and Accenture as well as NGOs, academia, blockchain firms, and others – ID2020 is advising the government of Bangladesh on a vaccination records system.

The non-profit, which does not work on embedded microchips, is falsely accused of being part of fictitious plans that allege Bill Gates supports mandatory vaccination and the implantation of microchips or “quantum dot tattoos” into patients.

The claims about Gates have been debunked by fact-checkers at Reuters, but ID2020 is not listed in the leading database of COVID-19 debunks.

False claim: Bill Gates planning to use microchip implants to fight coronavirus
March 31, 2020



False: Bill Gates foresees the use of “digital certificates” with health records, but did not say these would be in the form of microchip implants. (he didn't say they that microchip implants would not be used either) There are no plans (only according to them, with no evidence offered, just a dismissal) to use this future technology during the coronavirus outbreak.

“Q: What changes are we going to have to make to how businesses operate to maintain our economy while providing social distancing?

Bill Gates: The question of which businesses should keep going is tricky. Certainly, food supply and the health system. We still need water, electricity and the internet. Supply chains for critical things need to be maintained. Countries are still figuring out what to keep running. Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”
they fail to include any quote from where billdoe even says anything about how the "digital certificates" will be stored and on what or that he said that absolutely no implants (of any kind) will be used...

These 'debunkers' are pathetic, I fail to see how any of these so-called 'debunks' of digital identity linked to 'cv19' vaccine are valid whatsoever, with the available information that I just posted above these.

Related to the 'cv19' vaccine and at least partial identity based on vaccination records in "quantum dot" dye implants,

Storing medical information below the skin’s surface
Specialized dye, delivered along with a vaccine, could enable “on-patient” storage of vaccination history.
Anne Trafton | MIT News Office
December 18, 2019


MIT researchers have now developed a novel way to record a patient’s vaccination history: storing the data in a pattern of dye, invisible to the naked eye, that is delivered under the skin at the same time as the vaccine.

The researchers showed that their new dye, which consists of nanocrystals called quantum dots, can remain for at least five years under the skin, where it emits near-infrared light that can be detected by a specially equipped smartphone.

An invisible record

Several years ago, the MIT team set out to devise a method for recording vaccination information in a way that doesn’t require a centralized database or other infrastructure. Many vaccines, such as the vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), require multiple doses spaced out at certain intervals; without accurate records, children may not receive all of the necessary doses.

To create an “on-patient,” decentralized medical record, the researchers developed a new type of copper-based quantum dots, which emit light in the near-infrared spectrum. The dots are only about 4 nanometers in diameter, but they are encapsulated in biocompatible microparticles that form spheres about 20 microns in diameter. This encapsulation allows the dye to remain in place, under the skin, after being injected.

The microneedles used in this study are made from a mixture of dissolvable sugar and a polymer called PVA, as well as the quantum-dot dye and the vaccine. When the patch is applied to the skin, the microneedles, which are 1.5 millimeters long, partially dissolve, releasing their payload within about two minutes.

By selectively loading microparticles into microneedles, the patches deliver a pattern in the skin that is invisible to the naked eye but can be scanned with a smartphone that has the infrared filter removed. The patch can be customized to imprint different patterns that correspond to the type of vaccine delivered.

“It’s possible someday that this ‘invisible’ approach could create new possibilities for data storage, biosensing, and vaccine applications that could improve how medical care is provided, particularly in the developing world,” Langer says.

The research was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Koch Institute Support (core) Grant from the National Cancer Institute.

It is argued that the "quantum dots" are just a "dye" and not "implants"; however the "quantum dots" are composed of nanocrystals and those can be designed to be used as possible RFIDs, and these can be read like a barcode which is more or less a passive transponder anyhow. Plus they are encapsulated in biocompatible microparticles that form spheres about 20 microns in diameter. Why is this research funded several years ago by gates and koch but also why would these not be used to deliver a 'cv19' vaccine? unless it's still "experimental' by the time one is ready; which might be by October,
Pfizer CEO claims COVID-19 vaccine could be ready by October end, says report


American pharmaceutical company Pfizer believes that a COVID-19 vaccine could be ready by the end of October 2020, reported The Times of Israel, citing Albert Bourla, the CEO of the firm.

He, however, said that “we are running against time". The deadly virus has killed over 358,000 people and infected more than 5 million worldwide so far.
The report also highlighted the warnings from experts saying the challenges could be "daunting" as the estimates show that about 15 billion doses would be required to stop the pandemic.
15 billion doses, but they don't intend to try and make 'covid' vaccine mandatory, really??!!

This patent application I found proposes implantable RFID body chip for animals and humans,

Body Chip


Application US11/741,760 events
Application filed by James Neil Rodgers

Priority to US11/741,760

Publication of US20080266107A1

Application granted

Publication of US7777631B2

Expired - Fee Related

Adjusted expiration

This Invention contemplates a system and method to manufacture an active RFID integrated circuit as a system on a chip which is powered by enzymes located in mammalian bodies. According to this Invention the active integrated circuit system on a chip is manufactured of a glass capsule containing a porous membrane which allows the free flow of bodily fluids into and out of the capsule. The enzymes in the bodily fluids of mammals produce sufficient electrical charge to power an active RFID transponder.

This energy is stored in an enlarged capacitor of the active transponder for use when required. In spite of the enlarged capacitor the entire system on a chip integrated circuit will be less than the size of a grain of rice.
perhaps not micron size, but they probably getting smaller and smaller over time, and probably small enough to use? in the quantum dot capsule of 20 micron size, from 2007 till now in 2020-

Application 11683056 is a system of producing an RFID antenna using the silicon in an integrated circuit as the resonant antenna material for the purpose of reducing the cost of an RFID system and for the purpose of increasing the range and selectivity of the RFID system. According to this Application the base silicon sheets which make up the primary building material of the silicon chip (integrated circuit) is subjected to a laser ablation process. This creates three dimensional nano structures on the surface of the silicon thereby raising its absorption rate of electro magnetic signals. On the reverse side of the same silicon sheet a directional antenna is etched using standard photographic reduction techniques and standard semi conductor industry manufacturing methods. The two sides of the silicon are connected through doping aluminum or copper impurities into these same base silicon sheets causing conductivity within the sheet of silicon.

Designing a device which transmits electro magnetic signals from inside the body poses several difficulties. These include the size of the device, power consumption and the compatibility of materials with the body. Different body tissues, such as muscle, bone, or fat, have a different resistance to electro magnetic signals. Antennas for such devices must be extremely small and efficient to minimize signal loss and preserve power. Pursuant to this embodiment a doctor could monitor the pacemaker of a patient in her office and make adjustments wirelessly. This is as opposed to the current medical environment whereby a problematic pacemaker would have to be surgically removed and an adjusted pacemaker inserted.

The solution proposed by this Invention is to manufacture an active integrated circuit RFID transponder powered by the enzymes of the human body. The transponder would be read by low frequency interrogators. According to this medical embodiment the active integrated circuit would be manufactured of a capsule covered by a porous membrane which would allow the free flow of bodily fluids into and out of the capsule. The enzymes in the bodily fluids of the patient would produce sufficient electrical charge to power the active transponder. The electrical charge is generated through an anode and cathode manufactured into the capsule. The capsule would be of bio compatible silicon.

The antenna would be silicon, as outlined in Application 11683056, and tuned to a low frequency, as outlined in Application 11676304. The capsule would be embedded into the pacemaker, hearing aid or muscle stimulator. The result would be an active transponder.

6. The system and method of claim 1 whereby an integral part of the system on a chip integrated circuit is an anode and cathode constructed at a nano scale;
. The system and method of claim 1 whereby the casing or capsule for the system on a chip integrated circuit is coated with bio conducive material which promotes the bonding of mammalian bodily tissue
8. The system and method of claim 2 whereby the antenna of the system on a chip integrated circuit is tuned to a specific frequency in order to obviate the detuning effects of whatever mammalian bodily fluids and tissue are present in a given embodiment situation which may interfere with an effective electro magnetic signal to the RFID transponder and from RFID interrogator and vice versa.

All embodiments herein are used as examples only and do not represent limitations to the Claims of this Invention.

Could the capsule for the quantum dot vaccine patch of MIT's be like that in this patent application, glass but porous to allow ingress and egress of body fluids to power an RFID transponder? I don't see how that is impossible at all.


Post #31 (from original thread, from gl69m)
This article here may show impending proof of significant job loss due to automation/robots even at this time now as I type this,

Amid the coronavirus pandemic, many companies could replace their workers with robots
Jun 6 2020


Key Points

  • During downturns, companies usually invest in automation to save on labor costs.
  • One expert discusses why we’ll see even more of that during the coronavirus pandemic.
  • ’As one CEO said to me, ‘The machine doesn’t fall ill,’” said Ravin Jesuthasan, who’s written three books on the future of work.

The coronavirus pandemic has destroyed tens of millions of American jobs. How many of them will come back?

That might be one of the most pressing questions of the Covid-19 recession. Arguably no other downturn has threatened to leave American life so unrecognizable.

What will the labor market look like in six months? Or 10 years?

For some predictions, CNBC spoke with Ravin Jesuthasan, who’s written three books on the future of work and is a member of the World Economic Forum’s Steering Committee on Work and Employment.

We know from history, every time we’ve had a recession, we’ve come out of it with more automation, and we’re in the mother of all recessions right now,” Jesuthasan said.

The interview has been condensed and edited for clarity

CNBC: How do you see this Covid-19 recession impacting the automation of work?

Ravin Jesuthasan: Many companies are applying automation in an accelerated fashion as they look to deal with some of the cost issues of this pandemic. And so much work now needs to be done with social distancing, without contact, so we’re seeing the use of artificial intelligence and robotics to take on what might have been done by humans. As one CEO said to me, ‘The machine doesn’t fall ill.’

CNBC: Which industries are moving quickest with automation?

RJ: Where you’re seeing a surge in demand, you’re seeing more automation. For example, many banks are seeing a spike in calls as a result of the CARES Act. And instead of hiring talent, banks are speeding up robotic automation and chat bots to handle the routine transaction requests. Because of the concern of spreading the infection, we’re seeing more interest in automation in logistics, distribution and manufacturing. I actually think it’s going to affect virtually every industry in some way, shape or form.

CNBC: What jobs would people be most surprised to learn can be automated?

RJ: The work of artists. We think of automation as being for the dirty, dull and dangerous. We don’t think of artificial intelligence as being particularly creative, but we’ve seen A.I. compose music, create paintings. The last few years we’ve seen so much artificial intelligence come into portfolio management. That’s work that was once seen as requiring very high IQs, critical thinking, judgement. Today, a lot of that can be automated.

CNBC: Is there a way a person can learn how likely it is that their job could be automated? And if they think they’re at risk, what can they do?

RJ: Some organizations are asking their employees: ‘Can automation do parts of your job better than you can?’ and promising them that they will be re-skilled for a job elsewhere in the company. It’s essential that employees continuously reevaluate and question their jobs.

reassess their own jobs? for the good of the company and not themselves, and they shouldn't say fuck you for that??!!

What is the highly repetitive, rules-based work that might be substituted by automation? And what might automation free you up to do that has higher value?become a paid to stay at home sheltered in fake 'corona pandemic' stiff, is the profits the company making from increases automation for these newly laid off workers to stay at home?? Sure, sure it will...

CNBC: As automation takes off, how do we protect workers and make sure many Americans don’t find themselves jobless?

RJ: The way we avoid a jobless recovery, which is not an insignificant risk coming out of this pandemic, is to ensure that we’re approaching automation by not just thinking about replacing humans with machines.

I hope he's talking about the CEO's of the corporations here..Not only is that wrong, it can be counterproductive. There’s a large retailer we work with that approached it that way, and they ended up needing to add a lot of talent because the machine required a bunch of new skills around it to operate it effectively. Their labor costs went up 30%, not down by the 50% they had expected. eventually robots will be fixing all the machines and other robots, this cost they figure will be worth it (for them) in the long run I bet The mere presence of a robot in a factory creates three types of tasks: someone to install it, someone to operate it and then someone to maintain it. Organizations that are truly progressive will think about how to keep re-training people to find new ways of getting them to work. how many "progressive companies? very few I'd imagine

CNBC: What might the government do? agenda 21 and 2030

RJ: I think a universal basic income has a real place in this debate was never seriously considered by the global corporate leaders until 'corona', hmmm... because I think we’ll go through a period of serious transition and something like a basic income can help us get through it while at the same time we re-skill the population for the new work that’s emerging. for the "essentials' right? yeah I think we know


Post #32 (from original thread, from gl69m)
AI liscence plate reader is supposedly to blame for this incident here,

Aurora police detain Black family after mistaking their vehicle as stolen
Aug 4, 2020

Aurora police detain Black family after mistaking their vehicle as stolen
Aug 03, 2020
AURORA, Colo. — Police detained and handcuffed a Black mother and several children after mistaking their SUV for a stolen motorcycle from another state.

It happened in the parking lot of a shopping center off of Buckley Road and E. Iliff Avenue Sunday morning.

“Why are you now placing these children on the ground face into the concrete? It's hot! In front of all of us? Screaming at them. They are telling you they are hurt,” witness Jenni Wurtz said.

Wurtz recorded the incident along with several other witnesses.
She says a police car slowly pulled behind the family. The officer drew their weapon on the family and ordered them out of the car. Several of the children were handcuffed.

“That makes me very mad, because I am not anti-police. I’m anti what happened yesterday, and that was ridiculous,” Wurtz said.

The car the family was driving was not stolen. Police used a license plate scanner to gather information on vehicles in the area. They should have been looking for a motorcycle with the same plate from another state.

Aurora Police Chief Vanessa Wilson said she blames the license plate reader but could not explain why the dozens of officers who responded did not confirm the vehicle description.

“I totally understand that anger, and don’t want to diminish that anger, but I will say it wasn’t a profiling incident. It was a hit that came through the system, and they have a picture of the vehicle the officers saw,” Wilson said, defending her officers actions.
I know I know, big shocker here, cops terrorize an innocent black family, yet again. Incompetence, really??!! Not only different states registered for plate number but completely different kind of vehicle, this is total fucking non-sense, should never have happened at all.

I bet, I just bet that the new Chief Wilson will be labeled a 'liberal snowflake', a 'commie' in disguise right? by the conservaturds out there. With 'liberals' like these especially when you are black who needs conservaturds? Especially since I think she took action to fire 3 police officers who used a social media photo to mock a makeshift memorial for Elijah McClain who was murdered for no justification last year by Aurora PD.

Would this have ever happened to a white family, a mom and her 4 daughters? We all know the answer to that...
After officers realized the mistake, the family was uncuffed but more officers continued to arrive. Video shows over a dozen officers standing around the traumatized family.

“I do not think a stolen vehicle is worth traumatizing the lives of children. On top of that, I was 20-feet away with a drawn gun. They didn’t even tell me to move, secure the scene. They didn’t do anything,” Wurtz said.
Wurtz filed a complaint with internal affairs. She believes the police department's policy needs to change.

By Monday evening, an internal investigation was underway following the incident, according to Wilson.

"We first want to offer our apologies to the family involved in the traumatic incident involving a police stop of their vehicle yesterday.

"We have been training our officers that when they contact a suspected stolen car, they should do what is called a high-risk stop. This involves drawing their weapons and ordering all occupants to exit the car and lie prone on the ground. But we must allow our officers to have discretion and to deviate from this process when different scenarios present themselves. I have already directed my team to look at new practices and training,"
Always the bullshit about we need more training blah blah blah or diversity/sensitivity training, none of that will ever stop all the racist or fascist policing, only true punishment and accountability for this action and behavior, but that's what this system was set up to do so it won't change with WHO's in charge now, and then they continually ply their bullshit fake 'liberal' progressive style diversity 'inclusive' language and tactics to pacify black and brown communities while no real change takes place.

Personally I think that is the purpose of this 100% (or at least 99% fake IMO) fake 'liberal' 'anti-racist' media industry, help maintain the system as is, very very deceptive, this is the hidden hand of the consurvaturd so-called far right IMSO. Same thing with the deep state (and other independent acting groups) infiltraiting the justice movement(s) protests which is mainly centered around the Black Lives Matter movement(s), they are there to sabotage and discredit these movements and at the same time create more and more justification (in MSM and alternative media) for ever increased racist and fascist policing and more and more public support there of. Sooner or later this will be or at least it can be used to crack down much harder on anti-covid-19 dissent, although it could be more racistly enforced upon black and brown people too and much less upon white people that is always a possibility- but I am not saying white people won't get cracked down upon for dissenting against the 'covid' official narrative they are to some degree already just like they are on everyone, but I still feel the "contact tracing/quarantining" if it comes about will definitely target black and brown people much more that is my strong opinion.

The new Chief Wilson claims that,
We have been training our officers that when they contact a suspected stolen car, they should do what is called a high-risk stop. This involves drawing their weapons and ordering all occupants to exit the car and lie prone on the ground. But we must allow our officers to have discretion and to deviate from this process when different scenarios present themselves. I have already directed my team to look at new practices and training," Wilson said in a prepared statement.
If so, that officers don't have discretion to use less force if unwarranted for a quote "high-risk stop"?, then is the statement given to this news station the day before by Aurora PD then not accurate? I highly doubt it..

Aurora PD mistakenly IDs stolen car, briefly detains family, kids
Aug 3, 2020
Pause video @ ~2:40,
"There is not a written policy regarding when/how we use this stop. Officers can use discretion based on the information they have at the time." - Aurora Police Department
It's obvious who they use the most discretion for and who they use the "high-risk stop" tactic the most for, and I mean nationwide, hell world wide really, let's get fucking real here.

Was this a case of AI fucking up the information from an motorcycle to an SUVS and the different two state plates? Come on now we know better than that, liscence plate reader probably had jack shit to do with this incident, was probably a racist "karen" who called the police on this black woman and her children, and since they were filmed and complained on, then they may have concocted the liscence plate reader mixup story. Can't prove that with certainty, but speaking of AI and facial recognition in terms of racial AI individual identification,

The Best Algorithms Struggle to Recognize Black Faces Equally
US government tests find even top-performing facial recognition systems misidentify blacks at rates five to 10 times higher than they do whites.
French company Idemia’s algorithms scan faces by the million. The company’s facial recognition software serves police in the US, Australia, and France. Idemia software checks the faces of some cruise ship passengers landing in the US against Customs and Border Protection records. In 2017, a top FBI official told Congress that a facial recognition system that scours 30 million mugshots using Idemia technology helps “safeguard the American people.”

But Idemia’s algorithms don’t always see all faces equally clearly. July test results from the National Institute of Standards and Technology indicated that two of Idemia’s latest algorithms were significantly more likely to mix up black women’s faces than those of white women, or black or white men.
The NIST test challenged algorithms to verify that two photos showed the same face, similar to how a border agent would check passports. At sensitivity settings where Idemia’s algorithms falsely matched different white women’s faces at a rate of one in 10,000, it falsely matched black women’s faces about once in 1,000—10 times more frequently. A one in 10,000 false match rate is often used to evaluate facial recognition systems.

Donnie Scott, who leads the US public security division at Idemia, previously known as Morpho, says the algorithms tested by NIST have not been released commercially, and that the company checks for demographic differences during product development. He says the differing results likely came from engineers pushing their technology to get the best overall accuracy on NIST’s closely watched tests. “There are physical differences in people and the algorithms are going to improve on different people at different rates,” he says.

Computer vision algorithms have never been so good at distinguishing human faces. NIST said last year that the best algorithms got 25 times better at finding a person in a large database between 2010 and 2018, and miss a true match just 0.2 percent of the time. That’s helped drive widespread use in government, commerce, and gadgets like the iPhone.

But NIST’s tests and other studies repeatedly have found that the algorithms have a harder time recognizing people with darker skin. The agency’s July report covered tests on code from more than 50 companies. Many top performers in that report show similar performance gaps to Idemia’s 10-fold difference in error rate for black and white women. NIST has published results of demographic tests of facial recognition algorithms since early 2017. It also has consistently found that they perform less well for women than men, an effect believed to be driven at least in part by the use of makeup.

“White males ... is the demographic that usually gives the lowest FMR,” or false match rate, the report states. “Black females ... is the demographic that usually gives the highest FMR.” NIST plans a detailed report this fall on how the technology works on different demographic groups.
NIST’s studies are considered the gold standard for evaluating facial recognition algorithms. Companies that do well use the results for marketing. Chinese and Russian companies have tended to dominate the rankings for overall accuracy, and tout their NIST results to win business at home. Idemia issued a press release in March boasting that it performed better than competitors for US federal contracts

Many facial recognition algorithms are more likely to mix up black faces than white faces. Each chart represents a different algorithm tested by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Those with a solid red line uppermost incorrectly match black women's faces more than other groups.
I've read it was pretty bad, but 5 to 10 times worse for black people, that is fucked up. White males have the least false mismatches, lucky me in that category I suppose, if they can't make it equal this bullshit shouldn't be used at all. Who the hell is putting in all the data into the algorithms, alt-right kkk grandwizards or what??!!

I have seen stories of white men being misidentified by police and being arrested even beaten but not falsely convicted but probably that's happened too but on a very small scale compared to black men especially.
The Department of Homeland Security has also found that darker skin challenges commercial facial recognition. In February, DHS staff published results from testing 11 commercial systems designed to check a person’s identity, as at an airport security checkpoint. Test subjects had their skin pigment measured. The systems that were tested generally took longer to process people with darker skin and were less accurate at identifying them—although some vendors performed better than others. The agency’s internal privacy watchdog has said DHS should publicly report the performance of its deployed facial recognition systems, like those in trials at airports, on different racial and ethnic groups.

The government reports echo critical 2018 studies from ACLU and MIT researchers openly wary of the technology. They reported algorithms from Amazon, Microsoft, and IBM were less accurate on darker skin.

Those findings have stoked a growing national debate about the proper, and improper, uses of facial recognition. Some civil liberties advocates, lawmakers, and policy experts want government use of the technology to be restricted or banned, as it was recently in San Francisco and two other cities. Their concerns include privacy risks, the balance of power between citizens and the state—and racial disparities in results. Even if facial recognition worked equally well for all faces, there would still be reasons to restrict the technology, some critics say.

Despite the swelling debate, facial recognition is already embedded in many federal, state, and local government agencies, and it’s spreading. The US government uses facial recognition for tasks like border checks and finding undocumented immigrants.

Earlier this year, the Los Angeles Police Department responded to a home invasion that escalated into a fatal shooting. One suspect was arrested but another escaped. Detectives identified the fugitive by using an online photo to search through a mugshot facial recognition system maintained by Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office.

Lieutenant Derek Sabatini of the Sheriff’s Office says the case shows the value of the system, which is used by more than 50 county agencies and searches a database of more than 12 million mugshots. Detectives might not have found the suspect as quickly without facial recognition, Sabatini says. “Who knows how long it would have taken, and maybe that guy would not have been there to scoop up,” he says.

The LA County system was built around a face-matching algorithm from Cognitec, a German company that, like Idemia, supplies facial recognition to governments around the world. As with Idemia, NIST testing of Cognitec’s algorithms’ shows they can be less accurate for women and people of color. At sensitivity thresholds that resulted in white women being falsely matched once in 10,000, two Cognitec algorithms NIST tested were about five times as likely to misidentify black women.

Thorsten Thies, Cognitec’s director of algorithm development, acknowledged the difference but says it is hard to explain. One factor could be that it is “harder to take a good picture of a person with dark skin than it is for a white person,” he says.

Sabatini dismisses concerns that—whatever the underlying cause—skewed algorithms could lead to racial disparities in policing. Officers check suggested matches carefully and seek corroborating evidence before taking action, he says. “We’ve been using it here since 2009 and haven’t had any issues: no lawsuits, no cases, no complaints,” he says.

Concerns about the intersection of facial recognition and race are not new. In 2012, the FBI’s top facial recognition expert coauthored a research paper that found commercial facial recognition systems were less accurate for black people and women. Georgetown researchers warned of the problem in an influential 2016 report that said the FBI can search the faces of roughly half the US population.

The issue has gained a fresh audience as facial recognition has become more common, and policy experts and makers more interested in the limitations of technology. The work of MIT researcher and activist Joy Buolamwini has been particularly influential.

Early in 2018 Buolamwini and fellow AI researcher Timnit Gebru showed that Microsoft and IBM services that try to detect the gender of faces in photos were near perfect for men with pale skin but failed more than 20 percent of the time on women with dark skin; a subsequent study found similar patterns for an Amazon service. The studies didn’t test algorithms that attempt to identify people—something Amazon called “misleading” in an aggressive blog post.

Buolamwini was a star witness at a May hearing of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, where lawmakers showed bipartisan interest in regulating facial recognition. Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland) said racial disparities in test results heightened his concern at how police had used facial recognition during 2015 protests in Baltimore over the death in police custody of Freddie Gray, a black man. Later, Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) declared that Congress needs to “do something” about government use of the technology. “[If] a facial recognition system makes mistakes and those mistakes disproportionately affect African Americans and persons of color, [it] appears to me to be a direct violation of Americans’ First Amendment and Fourth Amendment liberties,” he said.

Why facial recognition systems perform differently for darker skin tones is unclear. Buolamwini told Congress that many datasets used by companies to test or train facial analysis systems are not properly representative. The easiest place to gather huge collections of faces is from the web, where content skews white, male, and western. Three face-image collections most widely cited in academic studies are 81 percent or more people with lighter skin, according to an IBM review.

Patrick Grother, a widely respected figure in facial recognition who leads NIST’s testing, says there may be other causes for lower accuracy on darker skin. One is photo quality. Photographic technology and techniques have been optimized for lighter skin from the beginnings of color film into the digital era. He also posed a more provocative hypothesis at a conference in November: that black faces are statistically more similar to one another than white faces are. “You might conjecture that human nature has got something to do with it,” he says. “Different demographic groups might have differences in the phenotypic expression of our genes.”
Michael King, an associate professor at Florida Institute of Technology who previously managed research programs for US intelligence agencies that included facial recognition, is less sure. “That’s one that I am not prepared to discuss at this point. We have just not got far enough in our research,” he says.

King’s latest results, with colleagues from FIT and University of Notre Dame, illustrate the challenge of explaining demographic inconsistency in facial recognition algorithms and what to do about it.

Their study tested four facial recognition algorithms—two commercial and two open source—on 53,000 mugshots. Mistakes that incorrectly matched two different people were more common for black faces, but errors in which matching faces went undetected were more common for white faces. A greater proportion of the mugshots of black people didn’t meet standards for ID photos, but that alone could not explain the skewed performance.

The researchers did find they could get the algorithms to perform equally for blacks and whites—but only by using different sensitivity settings for the two groups. That’s unlikely to be practical outside the lab because asking detectives or border agents to choose a different setting for different groups of people would create its own discrimination risks, and could draw lawsuits alleging racial profiling.

While King and others carefully probe algorithms in the lab, political fights over facial recognition are moving fast. Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have promised action to rein in the technology, citing worries about accuracy for minorities. Tuesday, Oakland became the third US city to ban its agencies from using the technology since May, following Somerville, Massachusetts, and San Francisco.

King says that the science of figuring out how to make algorithms work the same on all faces will continue at its own pace. “Having these systems work equally well for different demographics or even understanding whether or why this might be possible is really a long term goal,” he says.


Post #33 (from original thread, from gl69m)
Startup company in Munich (Germany?) is developing an AI social distancing monitoring "queuing" system (cameras and various sensors too?) for use in public places particularly transit areas, train stations, airports etc. or malls or large buildings gov. or hospitals corporate buildings et al.

I recommend watching ~6:47 in thru ~9:55 in, rest of video is complete waste of time IMO, this portion covers the "queuing" system.

Anti-Maskers and the face mask debate | COVID-19 Special
Jul 7, 2020

screen captures at- ~8:30, queuing/monitoring (big brother) in corporate office buildings presumably, notice the red circles representing sheople who have committed the 'heinous' violation of the minimum 6 feet distancing rule for at least a tad longer than allowed (whatever that time-frame is, 30 seconds or less? who knows),

8:49, monitoring in public hallways, perhaps even foot traffic in streets or sidewalks?

9:35, train station (or airport perhaps) one way directioning monitoring animation

I'm sure there are a multitude of these types of firms and companies working on (have been for years probably) these kinds of systems. I wonder how many of them are actually already in place? being used now? And it sure seems like only a matter of time before the social distancing/mask gestapo get's rolled out to enforce this kind of totalitarianism on the masses; will probably be rolled out in phases determined by 'covid' 'case' 'hotspots' or social unrest/protesting of all kinds etc. 1984 on steroids. And as always the inevitable "selective interpretation and selective enforcement" applies as to where and who the enforcement is enacted upon the most of course.

A few examples of mask gestapo being rolled out in Australia,

Coronavirus: Investigation launched over anti-mask arrest | 7NEWS
Aug 11, 2020

AUSTRALIAN karen gets ARRESTED after not wearing a mask a store
Jul 26, 2020

The level of force and malice in the first example is definitely way higher than the second video; first woman is treated almost like they would treat black/brown (the n-w...s in white 'supremist' speech) people but at least neither one got shot or tased (I don't think) or killed which seems good for them
. Woman in first video supposedly has a medical exemption for masks but police ignored that I guess? If a cop is hell bent on an arrest they don't let things like constitutional rights or whether a real violation even took place stop them anyways.

Seems to me we have yet to see this kind of enforcement being ramped up on a wide scale everywhere, as yet, and as the average population is not used to being treated like racial profiling victims are; that could well change if this kind of gestapo truly adopts a "colorblind" approach to the mask/social distancing enforcement. Somehow I doubt that will happen but I could be wrong but I suspect this will be test marketed in various places before becoming more widespread adopted to see how many covidiots out there (particularly white be they 'libtard' or "consurvaturd") will allow this absurd over reach of police state power without much resistance.


Post #34 (from original thread, from gl69m)
May need to talk about this here, and this connection to the transhuman/AI agenda, presenting it straight from the source first,

The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond

TheFourth Industrial Revolution | Full Version (Subtitled)
Apr 13, 2016

They seem to be selling us a very attractive way to "respond" to what they say is an inevitable takeover of AI/transhumanism, for the betterment of "all", should we be skeptical of that? well of course I am and my postings here couldn't hide that obviously.

Here is a sort of I would say a probable "progressive" rebuttal to the Davos presentation of the 4th Industrial Revolution, quite interesting.

Utopia or Dystopia
where past meets future
The one percent discovers transhumanism: Davos 2016

The most interesting portion of article to me,
The theme of this year’s WEF was what Klaus Schwab calls The Fourth Industrial Revolution a period of deeply transformative change, which Schwab believes we are merely at the beginning of. The three revolutions which preceded the current one were the first industrial revolution which occurred between 1760 and 1840 and brought us the stream engine and railroads. The second industrial revolution in the late 19th and early 20th centuries brought us mass production and electricity. The third computer or digital revolution brought us mainframes, personal computers, the Internet, and mobile technologies, and began in the 1960’s.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution whose beginning all of us are lucky enough to see includes artificial intelligence and machine learning, the “Internet of things” and it’s ubiquitous sensors, along with big data. In addition to these technologies that grow directly out of Moore’s Law, the Fourth Industrial Revolution includes rapid advances in the biological sciences that portend everything from enormous gains in human longevity to “designer babies”. Here we find our rapidly increasing knowledge of the human brain, the new neuroscience, that will likely upend not only our treatment of mental and neurodegenerative diseases such as alzheimer’s but include areas from criminal justice to advertising.

If you have had any relationship to, or even knowledge of, transhumanism over the past generation or so then all of this should be very familiar to you. Yet to the extent that the kinds of people who attend or follow Davos have an outsized impact on the shape of our world, how they understand these transhumanist issues, and how they come to feel such issues should be responded to, might be a better indication of the near term future of transhumanism as anything that has occurred on the level of us poor plebs.
So what was the 1 percent’s take on the fourth industrial revolution? Below is a rundown of some of the most interesting sessions.

One session titled “The Transformation of Tomorrow” managed to capture what I think are some of the contradictions of those who in some respects feel themselves responsible for the governance of the world. Two of panel members were Sheryl Sandberg COO of Facebook, and the much lesser known president of Rwanda Paul Kagame. That pairing itself is kind of mind bending. Kagame has been a darling of technocrats for his successful governance of Rwanda. He is also a repressive autocrat who has been accused of multiple human rights abuses and to the dismay of the Obama administration managed to secure through a referendum his rule of Rwanda into the 2030s.

Kagame did not have much to say other than that Rwanda would be a friendly place for Western countries wishing to export the Fourth Industrial Revolution. For her part Sandberg was faced with questions that have emerged as it has become increasingly clear that social media has proven to be a tool for both good and ill as groups like Daesh have proven masterful users of the connectivity brought by the democratization of media. Not only that, but the kinds of filter bubbles offered by this media landscape have often been found to be inimical to public discourse and a shared search for Truth.

Lastly, there was a revealing panel on neuroscience and the law entitled “What if your brain confesses?” panelists there argued that Neuroscience is being increasing used and misused by criminal defense. Only in very few cases – such as those that result from tumors- can we draw a clear line between underlying neurological structure and specific behavior.
We can currently “read minds” in limited domains but our methods lack the kinds of precision and depth that would be necessary for standards questions of guilt and innocence. Eventually we should get there, but getting information in, as in Matrix kung-fu style uploading, will prove much harder than getting it out. We’re also getting much better at decoding thoughts from behavior- dark opportunities for marketing and other manipulation. Yet we could also be able to use this more granular knowledge of human psychology to structure judicial procedures to be much more free from human cognitive biases.

The fact that elites have begun to seriously discuss these issues is extremely important, but letting them take ownership of the response to these transformations would surely be a mistake. For just like any elite they are largely blinded to opportunities for the new by their desire to preserve the status quo despite how much the revolutionary the changes we face open up opportunities for a world much different and better than our own.

Here is a 5 part series of videos I recently ran across, this woman has evidently researched the 4th industrial revolution quite a bit and with that the coming of "data markets" I guess it could be called (the coming "technocracy", well kind of here already really). She's a bit of conspiracy theorist too it seems, says she leans "left", I'll take her word for that for now, not sure she would agree with my brand of what that should be but I think she has studied it some significant detail.

But I really dislike all of the unnecessary and inappropriate laughter at times when the conversation turns to the grim possibilities of the new enslavement or even de-population of humanity, as though she doesn't really see herself as a potential target of this? I can laugh about that on occasion cause it's better to laugh than cry all the time at potential oncoming doom and gloom, but this woman seems to take that to much to high a level IMO, but it's the information I'm a lot more interested in, so here it is. I have yet to watch all of the 4th one yet or the 5th one.

To me it sounds a bit like a "data market", is really sensors placed on people (on or in the body, and all manner of sensors surrounding us in our living spaces), whole populations, not merely for 24/7 surveillance, but for collecting vastly huge amounts of data, for the AI computer brain engines; I suspect to "evolve" the AI towards the "singularity" the coming "consciousnesses" of this machine and future machines.

I think the 'elite' who are pushing this, may somehow be deluded that they will still be able to control all of that, for their benefit that will serve them in a future where humans will be de-populated and replaced with robots (that are all too human like in appearance and behavior) and machines: all of this data from humans about humans in every conceivable way to know us all over the planet- is way to "evolve" this "data" and transfer it to the machines/robots; to replace humans in their "elite' future idio-topia, machines they get to control how they want to, like pets that if they can program just right won't fight back or rebel, like humans do.

Ultimately I think they may see this as much easier to achieve much quicker than the transhumanist leap- becoming human-2.0, their absurd fucking idio-topia. With all lower caste/class humans eliminated and if they can fully control the created robot humanoid class and machines then they would be free to pursue that such a twisted goal, however long it would take them.

Part 1: The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Global Technocratic Takeover w/ Alison McDowell
Jul 22, 2020


Post #36 (from original thread, from gl69m)(don't know what happened to post #35 lol)
Some videos on robot farming, this is the future they want to create for agriculture, similar to what is depicted in the movie "I Am Mother" completely machine and robot automated agriculture (I mentioned this movie in Post #25). I have seen evidence of planning intent of this kind, even where I work at, I have some pictures of corporate advertising murals (somewhat similar to what I'm about to present) on a wall in one of the greenhouse buildings I sometimes go to pick up waste, but not going to post those pics for interests of not jeopardizing my employment of course.

This 30-Ton Robot Could Help Scientists Produce the Crops of the Future | WSJ
Aug 13, 2020
video description,
Arizona has what researchers call “the climate of tomorrow, today.” Scientists are using a 30-ton robotic field scanner in the state to study plant genetics and hopefully develop stress-resilient crops. Photo: Jesse Rieser for The Wall Street Journal
some helpful comments from the video about the video,
Paul Gibson
Paul Gibson
1 month ago
This really looks cool...I heard a lot of buzz words like sustainable, technology, algorithms, tetrabytes of data, etc. Said nothing about what the images are actually used for or anything about the actual production of crops except the purpose: to make growing crops possible under extreme conditions. In the future maybe some insight into how this actually helps farmers grow better crops would be interesting.(Seed selection? Description of water quantities? Types of fertilizer?)
1 month ago
I found the descriptions to be far too vague also...
Ishita Patel
Ishita Patel
4 weeks ago
They mention it briefly. At 2:41 the narrator mentions the data that the images are taking (traits of the plants being looked at) and at 2:57 the scientist mentions how they're going to use it to select resilient varieties.
Andrea Finocchio
Andrea Finocchio
4 days ago
I am a plant geneticist and this is actually a lot more powerful than that. Basically if you have the sequence of the DNA of each plant and how they look (the scientific term if phenotype), you can start to predict how certain genes could affect the phenotype of the plants. Imagine looking at a bunch of different plants that all survive drought really well, you read their genomes and discover that they all share a particular mutation in a specific gene. You canstudy that gene and insert the mutation in other plants to fortify them. This can be done by direct editing (more precise and faster, but still feared by most people) or by performing numerous specific crosses (very expensive and time consuming) . This kind of study is called GWAS (Genome Wide Association Study).
Hortibot - Field Robot Event 2007 in Wageningen - 13-14 June 2007
Apr 25, 2011
video description,

The video shows the demonstration of the Hortibot at the Field Robot Event 2007 in Wageningen Holland. The Hortibot is a Plant Nursing Robot for Horticulture and demonstrates weeding by use of a cell sprayer implement and a tine weeder. Unfortunately one of the actuators broke so was not possible to demonstrate a light weight corn seeder.
Waned to see the robotic planting demonstration, I know from working at a Monsanto seed warehouse for a temp job 5 years ago that some automation in seed planting machinery has been in use for probably well over a decade now, but don't know if fully automated robotic machinery is in serious use as of yet, but with near limitless money and resources being invested in automation these days hard to predict exactly how soon such capabilities are actually around the corner, if indeed they are.

Three videos of a group attempting a (almost) completely automated agricultural experiment,
Can robots grow and harvest a field of barley?
Dec 15, 2016

Robocrop. Planting, tending and harvesting a field of barley by robot
May 5, 2017

Robots And Drones Harvested The World's First Autonomously-Farmed Crop
Oct 12, 2017
These videos do not tell us what the results were how successful or not, that may be on this group's blog pages, not too concerned with that at the moment. The worrisome part is if they really get successful more so than if it fails utterly.

Experience with the Farmdroid FD20 field robot: Sowing and in-row weeding of sugar beet
May 2, 2020
This video shows a pretty good detailed look at demonstrating the machine planting (sowing) seeds in a field, and weeding the soil and that it can do so without harming already growing seedlings (as long as the machine stays perfectly straight in alignment). Robot harvesters like the sowing and weeding machine also exist perhaps all 3 jobs in one robotic farming machine as well. Impressive looking machine with solar power and batteries that can be kept charged by the solar panels. Relatively expensive machine though, ~80,000 Swiss francs.

This Hydroponic Farm Is Run Entirely By Robots
Oct 6, 2018
video description,

Iron Ox has just opened its first fully automated farm in San Carlos, California. The company claims that their hydroponic system can produce 30 times the yield per acre of land comparing to traditional farms, while using 90% less water.
This guy is dog whistling ("virtue signaling"- for the base of corporate customers of this technology I assume) for "depopulation" and replacement of human labor right at the beginning of the video, Brandon Alexander- CEO of Iron Ox

"If labor keeps getting scarcer and scarcer,"

Exactly how does labor keep getting scarcer and scarcer unless a "depopulation" event was already underway? Ridiculous, just fucking ridiculous pandering to misanthropic elite interests.

"someone's gonna have to farm it."

No shit motherfucker. Why don't you corporate executives get your asses out there in the greenhouses and fields and save the billions upon billions of currency expended on this research/investment? If this investment is not benefiting all peoples or not meant to, than it should be considered a worthless investment to the rest of the population at large.

best and most sensible comment and questions to illustrate my point,
El Lorenzo 1 month ago
Imagine, robot are doing farming like you do, or perhaps doing technology like vertical farming, that would create unlimited food supplies, and food prices will become cheaper, or free. What will happen to people once food become free? I am ok with unemployed and homeless, as long as my stomach full.
CEO Alexander admits to the huge unsustainable power/electricity cost of indoor farming later in the video, so the plan is robotic farming like this in greenhouses have to assume, and obviously larger outdoor robotic automation ventures like the FarmdroidFD20.

An intersting but quite alarming article from DARPA regarding what I think is really attempting to create nano-machines here. What I suspect, and have to dig for more articles, but these are not really "artificial viruses" here, I think they are sort of biologically based nano(to micro) size electronics (like parts, diodes, transistors, crystals {crystalline} microchips and receivers and transmitters etc. etc.); I think they probably have protein sub-unit structures not found naturally (in nature) that likely have metals (ions and/or other parts of the protein) scaffolding and antennae like structure that is more machine like say than a chlorophyll antennae with an Fe++ ion at it's core.

Biggest Little Self-Assembling Protein Nanostructures Created
DARPA-supported team designs protein cages that build themselves from scratch inside living cells and could serve as delivery vehicles for a range of novel therapies
found the above link that was from a related link from this post here,
from Viking911 in the Masonic Coronavirus thread,

A research team at the University of Washington has harnessed complex computational methods to design customized proteins that can self-assemble into 120-subunit “icosahedral” structures inside living cells—the biggest, self-booting, intracellular protein nanocages ever made. The breakthrough offers a potential solution to a pressing scientific challenge: how to safely and efficiently deliver to cells new and emerging biomedical treatments such as DNA vaccines and therapeutic interfering particles.

The work, funded by DARPA in a lead-up to the new INTERfering and Co-Evolving Prevention and Therapy (INTERCEPT) program, “opens the door to a new generation of genetically programmable protein-based molecular machines,” the researchers report in this week’s issue of the journal Science. The research paper is available here:

Anyone familiar with the role-playing games Dungeons and Dragons and Munchkin need only picture the 20-sided die to understand what an organic, icosahedral cargo container looks like—symmetrical, triangle-shaped panels folded evenly on each side. Unlike a die that can be held in your hand, however, these creations are the size of small viruses and are designed to interact with cells in the same way viruses might—that is, by delivering their caged contents into a cell, albeit in this case with positive, customizable outcomes. Also, whereas dice are produced in molds on a factory assembly line, these nanocages build themselves inside cells, following with atomic precision instructions written in genetic code.

Nature provides many examples of self- and co-assembling protein-based molecular structures like icosahedral protein cages. They serve as scaffolds, enzymes, and compartments for biochemical reactions in the body, and they form virus capsids—the geodesic-like protein enclosures that protect viral genomes from the human body’s immune system and facilitate their entry into cells.

“Viruses offer researchers many lessons on ways to access the body and use the body’s resources for their own purposes. DARPA is studying how to apply those tricks to the challenge of overcoming infectious disease,” said Jim Gimlett, the DARPA program manager overseeing the University of Washington effort and the INTERCEPT program. Among other goals, that program seeks to deliver into cells protein snippets that can co-evolve with viruses and provide ongoing immune protection even as viruses mutate and change.

Viruses consist of two main parts: genetic material (DNA or RNA) surrounded by a protein shell. To reproduce, a virus first attaches itself to a cell within a host organism. This occurs when a virion protein on the virus binds to a complementary molecule on the surface of the cell. The virus then enters the cell and releases its genetic material inside. These viral genes hijack the cell’s biological machinery, forcing the cell to generate new copies of the viral genome and shell proteins. While still inside the host cell, those freshly minted viral genomes and protein shells assemble into new viruses, which eventually burst from the cell and disperse to infect others.

DARPA’s focus is on the protein shells. If scientists could design customized shells and program them to embrace specific payloads and replicate within the body, they could open new pathways for personalized medicines and therapies. However, the universe of proteins is large, and the combinations of ways in which those proteins can—based on electromagnetic charges and other factors—link to one another and spontaneously fold within three-dimensional space is devilishly complex.

When designing a protein assembly process, the nature of the selected proteins and how they fold will determine if that creation can bind to particular cell receptors and whether it can accommodate a desired cargo such as small molecules, antibodies, nucleic acids, polymers, or other proteins. “Protein folding can be compared to a 3-D puzzle with thousands of pieces and an astronomical number of possible solutions, but only one of those solutions might be right for a particular need,” Gimlett said.

The University of Washington’s latest research used combinatorial computations to consider hundreds of thousands of possible protein combinations and then characterize in detail a few hundred of those designs. Then the team inserted genes encoding the desired protein sequences into E. coli bacteria to test how the instructions would be carried out within living cells. Ten of the designs resulted in assemblies within those bacteria similar to the intended three-dimensional configurations. In fact, tests conducted using small-angle X-ray scattering and negative-stain electron microscopy revealed that these cage-like structures had self-assembled with near-perfect, atomic-scale precision.

Icosahedra possess the highest possible symmetry of any polyhedron in three-dimensional space, and thus generate the maximum enclosed volume for packaging cargo among symmetric assemblies of polymers. The accurate self-assembly of a 120-subunit icosahedral protein cage is a five-fold improvement over what had been, until recently, the previous record for such a structure: a 24-subunit, two-component tetrahedron. Just last month, the Seattle team announced that it had broken that record by designing a hyperstable, self-assembling 60-subunit icosahedron, research that was featured in the journal Nature. In their latest paper, the researchers note that the 120-subunit assembly either hasn’t evolved in nature or has yet to be discovered.

“This construct’s generous capacity, and the accuracy with which it builds itself, bode well for the field of biomolecular engineering,” Gimlett said. “I look forward to seeing some of the innovative applications that will surely emerge with the arrival of this robust new platform.”

Image caption: Characterization of the designed protein cages using electron microscopy. All of the raw micrographs are shown to scale relative to the 30-nanometer scale bar in panel H. (Image: University of Washington via Science)
Now compare these images of these "self assembling proteins" with what I posted here in the Coronavirus thread,

NIAID Response to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)
(slide 8 )


Anybody else see the similarities there? Unmistakable to me. There is already plenty of "viral vectors" (created from) natural viruses with which they deliver gmo genes in transfection in cells in genetic engineering and in cellular therapies etc. or even could be used to deliver vaccines possibly; so realistically I don't think it makes sense to believe that they need more "viral cage vectors" that they need to create more out of “icosahedral” structures (however many sub-units)- I believe these are being created for the purpose of nano-machine technology and not "viral vectoring".

Now the mRNA vaccines coming out may indeed have ways of implanting mRNA genetic material through vaccines and potentially altering people's genes but I feel the nano-machine application and utilization may even be more alarming than that, and I would venture to say perhaps some vaccines will incorporate both mRNA schemes as well as the “icosahedral” structure composites like these created by DARPA, assuming again we aren't being fed more "science fiction", but like I say they are spending a shitload of money resources and scientific labor on this every single day for decades now so it's foolish to think all of it is pure science fiction. And again I think the nano-machine icosahedrals could very well create RFID tracking (data receiving and transmitting? internal interface operating system too that can be controlled from outside? "Corbett Report" mentions shit like that) capabilities like something needed for a full ID2020 cataloguing of all humans on the planet like they seem hell bent on doing with Agenda 30.


I wonder if anyone has time or is willing to read this here - EU directive ammended 23 April 2020 which regulates "medical devices" as can be seen this directive was changed not long after the official announcement of the C-virus. I wonder if this would allow eg. "nanobots" and also it looks as this was prepared before as it is quite complicated text and the "official" C emergency was not long in place at this time: It makes special reference to C19 this is already suspect imho:

Tbh I am pretty sure that "nanobots" and/or eg. Graphenoxyd which can form structures in the body could be defined as "medical devices" (?)