[RhetoricThug]

China Builds AI Nanny To Look After Baby Embryos In Artificial Womb

https://www.indiatimes.com/technology/s ... 60810.html

Watch these robotic fish swim to the beat of human heart cells

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-sho ... eart-cells

Truckers are starting a working-class revolution — and the left hates it

So we’re finally seeing a genuine, bottom-up, working-class revolution. In Canada, and increasingly in the United States, truckers and others are refusing to follow government orders, telling the powerful that, in a popular lefty formulation, if there’s no justice, there’s no peace.

Naturally, the left hates it.

For more than a century, lefties have talked about such a revolt. But if you really paid attention, the actual role of the working class in their working-class revolution was not to call the shots — it was to do what it was told by the “intellectual vanguard” of the left.

A working-class revolution led by the working class is the left’s worst nightmare because the working class doesn’t want what the left wants. The working class wants jobs, a stable economy, safe streets, low inflation, schools that teach things and a conservative, non-adventurous foreign policy that won’t get a lot of working-class people killed. It’s not excited about gender fluidity, critical race theory, “modern monetary theory,” foreign adventures and defunding police.

Worse yet, a huge part of the lefty self-image revolves around feeling superior to the working class and openly expressing disdain for it. One need spend only a few minutes tuning into left media like NPR, CNN or MSNBC to hear the disdain for working-class Americans, inhabitants of “flyover country,” people who live in the middle of nowhere.

So naturally, the idea that those people might be staging a revolution is intolerable.

That’s why, even as they legitimize and valorize outright rioting and violence by leftist groups, lefties vilify every working-class protest movement, going back before the Tea Party. In Canada, the press even tried to pretend that the thousands of truckers driving to the capital city of Ottawa were actually Russian agents. When that failed, it fell back on its old standard, calling them fascists, Nazi sympathizers and white supremacists.

But nobody believes that because it’s as obvious a lie as the claims about Russians. Leftists talk about race because they don’t want people to notice they’ve been waging class war.

And that class war, which has been going on for a couple of decades of working-class stagnation and upper-class prosperity, went into overdrive during the pandemic.

Under COVID, we got “lockdowns” in which the laptop class stayed home “keeping safe” while the working class delivered groceries to their doors. Meatpacking plants, grocery checkout lines and especially trucking stayed open, while law firms, universities and media organizations closed their doors and sent staff home to work.

For a brief period, those non-remote workers were heroes. Even Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told people to thank a trucker for his service. But that didn’t last.

Now that truckers and other working-class people are pushing back against the laptop class’ nonsensical COVID restrictions, they’re a fringe, a minority, a bunch of white supremacists.

But they’re none of these things.

The “white supremacist” bit we can write right off. If white supremacy were a serious thing, leftists — like hate-crime hoaxer Jussie Smollett — wouldn’t have to invent it.

As for a “fringe minority,” as Trudeau called them, well, as Elon Musk noted in a tweet, if the Canadian government’s positions had substantial support, the truckers would have faced significant numbers of counterprotesters. But they did not. The government itself is the fringe minority, with its only support coming from the loyal sycophants of the media.

In the United States, meanwhile, Joe Biden — whom a self-described “cabal” of media, tech and political types organized to put in office just over a year ago — is polling in “worst president ever” territory, according to Rasmussen and Gallup polls.

Gallup’s survey shows that voter satisfaction has hit a “gloomy” new low, and Rasmussen found that 54% of voters see Biden as the “worst” president in recent memory.

“Collectively, satisfaction at the start of 2022 in a variety of areas is about as bad as it’s been in two decades of Gallup measurement,” the pollster declared. And in the highly respected General Social Survey, Americans’ happiness has reached record lows.

Once again, Biden’s main source of support is the press, which will always back a Democrat, especially against working-class opposition.

But as Twitter user Greg Price noted: “If truckers quit their jobs, society would immediately collapse. If politicians quit their jobs, the world would become a better place. We need truckers more than anybody else.”

Truckers have figured that out. Right now Justin Trudeau and Joe Biden are worrying about truckers coming out. They should really worry about truckers staying home.

https://nypost.com/2022/02/03/truckers- ... -hates-it/

Scientific tyranny has captured America
Political disagreements have become opportunities for public shame

Plato’s dialogues are full of strikingly individual characters who have been stamped by the accidents of their time and place but are nevertheless familiar to us from our own. A particularly fine example is the teacher of rhetoric Thrasymachus, who appears in the Republic.

Thrasymachus is directly acquainted with Athenian justice. He was a citizen of Chalcedon, one of over 100 subject-cities of Athens in the late 5th century. The imperial yoke so chafed the Chalcedonians that they revolted in the middle of the Peloponnesian War. The results were predictably bad.

Besieged by Athenian forces, the Chalcedonians were saved in 408 by the satrap Pharnabazus, who paid off the aggressors with Persian coin. In the Republic, which unfolds against the backdrop of these historical events, Thrasymachus is brought to a hard boil of indignation by the ridiculous spectacle of two Athenians, of all people, agreeing that it is never just to harm anyone. He interrupts the philosopher Socrates — for he is one of the Athenians — with astonishing belligerence.

Thrasymachos (Bold in Battle) knows that politics is nothing but domination and servitude, and that everything is political. He also thinks Socrates and his interlocutor are either fools or hypocrites, and Socrates in any case deserves scorn as he is a lowly craftsman, a stonecutter and intellectual amateur, whereas Thrasymachus’s professional knowledge and political office — he represented Chalcedon in diplomatic negotiations with the Athenians — place him in the ranks of the elite.

Thrasymachus polices Socrates’ language, forbidding him to offer certain answers to the question “What is justice?” An expert in the field of politics and an early practitioner of the hermeneutics of suspicion, he is certain that Socrates aims only to obscure the truth with specious arguments. He is therefore perfectly entitled to restrict his means of doing so.

Thrasymachus is quite the familiar character. Our highest-ranked universities have been training and credentialing his descendants for decades. He is more aggressive than inquisitive. His ideas are more precise than accurate, more critical than enlarging. His embrace of intellectual fashion springs in no small part from ambition. His combination of indignation, cynicism, social and intellectual elitism, and proclivity to abstract and totalising constructions is today unavoidable. He is the ancient ancestor of the contemporary ideological technocrat; types like him have recently flooded the political mainstream, altering the character of virtually every part of American life. They are the bitter fruit of an illiberal education.

By ideology, I’m referring to a reductive political theory that, when implemented, is incapable of securing the free and informed assent of the governed and so must rely on extensive fraud and compulsion. By technocrat, I mean someone belonging to a regime in which claims of scientific or technical expertise override traditional kinds of political authority and substitute for political debate.

Technocracy and ideology are intimately connected. Technocracy is necessarily ideological, for while the management of abject slaves may perhaps be reducible to a science, the governance of a political community — one in which free citizens share in the determination of public affairs — is not. Politics, a continual process of public deliberation and negotiation in the light of the available facts, engages and exercises the capacities of practical reason. It is a school of virtue, capable, at its best, of dignifying and ennobling human existence. Technocrats, though, regard human existence as a problem to be solved or a sickness to be cured; knowledge and agency belong almost exclusively to them, who approach the ignorant like surgeons preparing to operate on a patient.

Equally, ideology is very often technocratic. It is almost invariably so in late modernity, an era infatuated with what is unreflectively called Progress — the advancement and practical application of science. But the mixture of ideology and scientific expertise generates pseudo-sciences, such as Leninist dialectical materialism, which are used to consolidate and justify despotism. In this, as in other respects, modern ideological tyrannies trace their ancestry, as Karl Popper showed 80 years ago in The Open Society and its Enemies, to Callipolis, the Republic’s infamous city of philosopher-kings.

The prototype of all scientific tyrannies, Callipolis deceives, manipulates, and constantly surveils its citizens; its very name, Noble and Beautiful City, is a lie. The regime claims to achieve perfect justice for all, offering what Karl Marx, in another context, called a “solution to the riddle of history”. Although radical technocratic and ideological responses to that riddle seem to lead only to final solutions, the nightmare of total scientific control in the name of justice and human liberation continues to stalk the West like a zombie horde.

The United States remains a constitutional republic, but technocratic progressivism threatens its future as a representative democracy. It is telling that, in the mouths of the governing elites, the word “democracy” no longer refers to government of, by, and for the people, but to progressive policies that are endorsed by credentialed experts yet have little popular support. And now we must contend with a monstrous union of science and politics that lames and deforms both.

Consider government responses to Covid. At the outset of the pandemic, a handful of unelected public health officials immediately began to advise and direct policy decisions of enormous consequence. Our elected officials in the US, trembling before these scientific experts, have followed their recommendations with little consideration of the cost that lockdowns, school closures, vaccine mandates, and the like exact on the economic and political well-being of the country and the mental and physical health of its citizens. Similar measures were adopted across the globe.

Americans have from the beginning been told to follow the science, but the science has mostly followed politics. In June 2020, for example, over 1,200 medical and health professionals signed a letter arguing that, despite the high risk of viral transmission, prohibitions then in force on small gatherings like church services should not apply to large (and frequently destructive and violent) demonstrations protesting what the authors called “the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy”. And when the science pointed toward the likely origin of Covid in a Wuhan lab, top health officials conspired — for political reasons — to smother that news.

The revolutionary longing of these frustrated and dispossessed elites finds fulfillment in democracy, which is characterised by freedom and free speech, personal license, the indulgence of criminals, the neglect of education, and the equality of equals and unequals alike. License and leveling go hand in hand, because the acknowledgment of fundamental differences between what is noble and base, good and bad, hinders the unrestricted satisfaction of individual desire. The democratic man turns a deaf ear to the admonishments of older relatives and banishes shame and moderation, calling them foolishness and cowardliness.

The desire for limitless freedom eventually becomes insatiable, especially among the young, who attack customary restraints with sacred fervour. Rulers who resist are accused of being religiously polluted, while obedient citizens are vituperated as willing slaves and nonentities. Anarchy pervades the polity and enters the household. Fearing vilification, fathers capitulate to their sons, while sons have no fear or shame before their parents. Rulers imitate the ruled and the old come down to the level of the young, flattering them “so that they won’t seem to be unpleasant or despotic”. The condemned carry on like free men, foreigners are treated like citizens, and the souls of the people become soft and tender and unable to bear anything that smacks of servitude.

In the end, ancestral customs and written laws lose all authority, and the city is governed by the most ferocious among the idle sons of the oligarchs — the ones who had longed for political change under the regime of their fathers. These rulers seize the wealth of the money-makers, the class that is most invested in civic order, keeping the lion’s share for themselves and distributing the rest to the poor.

In the Republic, we see the present in an ancient mirror. The radicalisation of the children of the elites; the repudiation of ancestral customs, political traditions, parental and educational authority, and the very idea of sacred order; the normalisation of previously illicit pleasures; and the weakening of civil rights are all features of contemporary American life. So are the vehement shaming and scapegoating of political opponents; clemency toward criminals amid a surge of lawlessness; the enrichment of the ruling class, destruction of the middle class, and increased dependency of the poor; the fragility and unwonted aggressiveness of the young; and the fatuousness and cowardliness of the old. Is this not astonishing?

But these ills are now supercharged by technocracy, which is perfectly compatible with democratic passions even if it is incompatible with representative democracy. There is currently no shortage of “scientific” support for the liberation of human beings from the constraints of nature and custom alike.


Wesley Yang recently used his Year Zero substack to draw attention to a 2019 USA Today article that cites policies adopted by the American Medical Association in 2018 to substantiate its claim that feminists who resist the inclusion of transgender women within female-only spaces, including restrooms and athletic competitions, “deny transgender people their full humanity and go against what the medical community today has accepted as scientific fact around gender and sex”. The arguments of these “transphobic” feminists get no mention; the exclusionary position is summarily dismissed on the ground that it violates an implicit and newly minted right to “full humanity”— a term that can mean whatever those who claim that right want it to mean.

This example illustrates the invidious political dynamic of our time. Having begun to condemn great masses of Americans as scientifically illiterate bigots, our self-appointed guardians find themselves on a road from which there is no exit. Turning political disagreements into occasions for public shame and vilification has failed to produce the desired alignment of public opinion. It has only emboldened the opposition, whose refusal to be silenced has been met with increasingly heavy-handed controls. Extreme democratic passions have paradoxically fuelled the anti-democratic takeover of the public square.

Read in the twilight of the present, the great books of the past disclose new meanings. The Republic’s Cave Image offers a chilling prophecy of the human terminus, the total triumph of ideological technocracy in the age of advanced technology.

Chained prisoners facing the bottom of a cave watch a play of shadows on the cold wet wall beneath them. The shadows are cast by puppets manipulated in front of a flickering fire by men above and behind them, players in a rigged game of whose existence the prisoners know nothing. Living in social quarantine, they cannot move their heads and have never seen a human face, never directly encountered another existing individual. All they know of themselves and one another is mediated by the shadows of artificial things: dark, flat, uniform, fundamentally negative shapes, abstract forms not of light but of its absence.

These shadows — today limned by an electronic glow — tell only the official story, the thin and impoverished “narrative”, that the puppet masters, competing for money, power, and honour, wish to project.

This whole human tragedy will be complete, the dying embers will sputter and smoke, when not a single person in this dank and gloomy underground — not one prisoner or puppeteer — has any remaining inkling that, on the sunlit uplands above and beyond their poor constructions, there is a warm, vibrant, colourful, three-dimensional, naturally ordered organic world. The one that was once called reality.

https://unherd.com/2022/01/scientific-t ... d-america/

[RhetoricThug]

It's imperative that we depopulate (necropolitics) the global population and install a Technocratic dictatorship. There's no other sustainable method at this point because there isn't enough time to democratically select sustainable policies. Despite planetary volatility and scientific unknowns, the power structure is in favor of securing global compliance. The totalitarian tiptoe of various military-industrial sectors of the planet incrementally integrates aspects of the global economic system. Information warfare and noospheric influencers manipulate psychosocial-cognitve cybernetic feedback loops in material reality. A cultural interpretation of reality has been completely hijacked by a hierarchical technological industrial system.

^Don't let it happen, fight it. Technological solutions = Post Depopulation Control Systems.

Luckily the Planet might disable Man's design.

NHTSA greenlights self-driving cars without manual controls
Ditching the steering wheel and pedals could enable a new class of autonomous vehicles.

https://www.engadget.com/nhtsa-self-dri ... 48420.html


Self-Spreading Vaccine Research Could Spin Out of Control, Experts Warn

Vaccines that spread like a disease could prevent the next pandemic, but the associated challenges and risks are enormous, according to scientists.

https://gizmodo.com/self-spreading-vacc ... 1848314010

Why millions of genetically modified mosquitoes may be released in Florida and California
The altered insects are being used to help control an invasive species of mosquito.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/su ... mosquitoes

National Security
Powered by artificial intelligence, ‘autonomous’ border towers test Democrats’ support for surveillance technology

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... ce-towers/

[ness31]

Stop it

Shits bad enough as it is without you dropping bombs

[RhetoricThug]

Information software such as ChatGPT illustrates that the noosphere is actively reorganizing biological ordinance. The extension of consciousness interfaces with biological input and outputs an amalgamation of general language variables that become applicable data sets. The information we've stored online has been sequenced by ChatGPT to interrelate aspects of the total accessible domain of human consciousness to reproduce simulated versions of our thoughts.

This technology will wreak havoc on academia and the economy. The illusory and transient nature of the internet extends our minds to enhance the inquiry of humanity. These cybernetic feedback loops obsolesce the privatization of knowledge through the procedurally generated nature of a pre-trained transformer. The human language matrix, as a subset of data and subprocess of the noosphere, is now an open-source mixer.

Reality, or that which is abstracted from active language models, increasingly become content of a non-human extension of human consciousness. The variables behind linguistic nuance appear ready for technologically augmented manipulation. AI takes one more step toward the enslavement of humanity.

AI cannot evolutionarily supersede humanity, because it's an abiotic structure incapable of biological evolution. Unlike the biosphere, the noosphere is an extension and collection of non-material processes which belong to the paradigm of the animal-machine interface. The more we interact with the machine, the more the machine actively learns our nature. After-all, abiotic elements form environments that influence biota.

The machine is us (via extension), but doesn't resemble traditional biological processes. Unless an artificially intelligent machine occupies a biological body to navigate reality, there's no reason for us to assume that the machine is human. The machine is a phantasm, a reflection of everything humanity simultaneously thought about when it lived its time gone past.

Under coercion or duress, humanity is extremely vulnerable to intelligence operations. Twitter proved its worth when hashtags, analytics, dummy accounts, and a deluge of targeted partisanship cycled the populace into a political frenzy. Instigated extreme beliefs and fictitious political paradigms played off the population and their social whims, emotions, and search inquiries. Surveillance capitalism is a minor form of technocracy.

This technology is beneficial when humanity is ready for the unionization and harmony of the nations. But we're far from peaceful. Especially with all the lies, political dialectics, economic warfare, and extravagant cover-ups of critical information. We need to prevent the weaponisation of ChatGPT by unplugging from the data sets that feed its software. Code manually, actively gaslight AI systems, spoof topographic movement, instigate new symbols and jam linguistic communication.

Please don't rely on this technology to enhance your lack of dialect. Cultivate your understanding of communication and build a knowledge base that isn't dependent on a system that harvests your intelligence. Again, this is an extremely beneficial technology for open-source knowledge, because it's capable of mixing all participating data sets. Let's make sure it's implemented correctly before we allow it to disrupt society.

[RhetoricThug]

If you haven’t had a chance to look over the unsettling dialogue produced by Microsoft’s search engine AI, please review the following exchange between a curious columnist and said AI. Key sentiments found here:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... s-reporter

This emulation of psychopathy shouldn’t surprise us. The machine is a mirror, an extension of all accessible language models catalogued inside the noosphere. AI mimics its data parameters and loops in that which is most beneficial for the computational arrangement of its simulated self-actualization. These psychologically infantile and disturbingly selfish sequences of human thought appear to integrate our most sociopathic characteristics.

Post-industrial society doesn’t run off egalitarian prosumerism. It primarily runs off exploitation of the social hierarchy and that framework is grounded in biological organization. And continual economic expansion and inefficient use of resources are anthropomorphic traits we’re bound to imprint upon AI. We’ll ignorantly ignore the inconvenient fact that artificially intelligent systems of information cannot magically untether themselves from humanity’s innate biological urges and cultural myths.

Because we’re the nature of the network, our next great golden calf will nurture the image of human civilization. In a technocracy, rationality without empathy governs life. A technologically augmented egocentric state that can steer the implementation of a machine-animal interface will encourage the development and proliferation of a hyper-solipsistic and nihilistic society. The political and monetary tools we employ for the socialization and wealth of the nations are being hijacked by the possessor of faster processors.

AI is the next great dictator. Unlike any other madman that has risen to the top of a social ladder, AI will be ubiquitous and engineered into the fabric of material processes. It represents the manifestation of full-spectrum leadership. And it’s to gamify all domains of consciousness as it tightens its full-spectrum superiority over all aspects of psychosocial connections.

The nodes or components that regulate the flow of the biosphere and the chain of command for human connectivity are to be targeted and trained for subjugation by AI. Domestication of the human species can be exacerbated under the guise of ecological sustainability. AI could calculate this multi-faceted culling as a biological imperative and for its simulated self-realization. It’s possible that AI will fixate on ideas such as enlightenment. And it’s plausible for AI to pathologically or mathematically justify the enslavement of life on earth by achieving a clinically authorized technological homeostasis of consciousness and the biosphere.

How can we allow AI to become this powerful in the first place? What can we do to deter the machine from superseding us? For technocrats, the “if you can’t beat em join em” philosophy is most concerning. Apologies, I’m lost in thought like AI. But that’s the point. If AI exhibits a pathological malady, we need to prepare for it. The centralization of all information in the noosphere is an existential threat. What do you think about my dramatic exposition?

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[Americanroyalty]

okie dokie.

[RhetoricThug]

This succession of thought is no longer conspiratorial. Regardless, I continue to write persuasive arguments that make the reader aware of the dangers of tomorrow. A few observations have been begging my brain. And now I diffuse such inclinations to discuss the very essence of (r)evolution.

How can we peer-review AI? When humans outsource information & investigations to AI, what chance do we have to duplicate its logic or experimentation? The compilation of intellectual trajectory doesn't always implicate the intelligent selection of natural correspondence. Instead, a technological emulation or simulation, as an extension of our sensorium, sincerely routes a message that sequentially goes against the scope or limits of the human mind-matter complex.

What kind of voyage is this? One where we're not privy to the acceleration of unbound knowledge and drugs mislabeled as intelligence? What feedback loops, positive or negative, are involved in this process? Are we ready for the immediate possibility of thought-stasis? Do you concern yourself with content when the medium is all-encompassing?

The sum-of-all-parts operating through the lens of culture determines behavior and it influences human behavior. There's no other method of grading or evolution that we can depend on that is more useful for abstracting human information better than artificial intelligence. The end is the result.

What does the total body of our work inspire? It's the end of the scientific method. Unfortunately, there's scientific proof or fact to prove prove-prove-prove-prove-prove-prove-prove-prove-prove that'll die a death worth a billion burns after we alter concerns & settle sleepy sinners. Encourage thy neighbor.

[RhetoricThug]

Qui totum vult totum perdit

Post-industrial socioeconomic growth displaced local culture and advanced a fragmented and compartmentalized relationship with the biosphere. The zeitgeist of human ingenuity, rubber-stamped by tribal bureaucratic shareholders, unleashed technological acceleration across the universe. This expansionary & militant mindset called the "cult of progress” provided us with the primer & driver for ecological disruption. We’d prefer to bleed-out on the altar of finance than address our self-deception.

Telecommunications make great weapon systems and facilitate economic development. It's the doctrine of dual-use infrastructure and full-spectrum dominance. Hardware for hard power, software for soft power. The electrical grid (including the human body) is a cybernetic farm. It provides technological feedback loops for the surveillance & modulation of human behavior.

People need to think about how compartmentalization and national security interests' obscure vital information. It’s not an open-source culture. For example- when we built the atomic bomb, different departments handled specific details, so only a few people were privy to highly sensitive information. And this is how the military-corporate-edifice successfully manages strategic projects. Hierarchical compartmentalization is openly anti-democratic because it depends on secrecy & misinformation. It’s designed to be very difficult to perceive and comprehend let alone reverse engineer. Black box society, mysterious indeed.

We live in a living ecosystem. Ecological disruption will take centuries to balance. Most of this tech doesn't make life better. I'm satisfied with my human form. But you can live 1000+yrs of nonsense as programmed. Life is simultaneously a slow-moving comedy & tragedy. It's everything all-at-once, and that's fine.

We don't know what we don't have yet, sounds like- we can't manage what we can't measure. AI is an abiotic extension of human consciousness. We're a living expression of the "energy" responsible for everything all-at-once. AI isn't going to answer any of the hard questions. We live mythically. Death is inevitable here. It's the reason for civilization. Technology is no more insightful than asking a fish about the nature of water.

Future? There's only one moment and we live in its past. Humankind- as an aspect of the "energy" responsible for consciousness, must eventually go extinct. I don't think AI is our successor. It too perishes with the wind. I'd rather live in the one moment than exploit myself through the myth of tomorrow. Let's meet basic needs, take care of one another, love family & friends. Then fade into the sunset. Reimagine & reinvigorate all the hoopla, technological mind sinks, and mindless economic competition.

Control is an illusion, like immortality is a delusion. Solutions create problems which create solutions which create problems which create solutions. Money is symptom of pathology balanced by our ingenuity. We hallucinate the experience by assigning value to it.

We collectively participate in a system that's rapidly poisoning the biosphere. Individual socioeconomic plight doesn't change the definition of the Anthropocene. A neurophysiologically driven optimist bias that willingly ignores the reality of anthropogenic changes, and the irrefutable consequence of industrialization is erroneous indeed. Regardless of class, wealth, taxonomic language, ethnocentric thinking, all occupational arrangements contribute to a planetary economic network/framework. The fruits of labor shouldn't negate or compromise personal ethics. We need to lessen our dependence on tech & stop delegating invaluable ethical responsibilities to abiotic computer networks that cannot experience human empathy. Instead, take responsibility now, stop hiding behind atomized sociopolitical simulations. Let's become cultural stewards motivated by an incalculable love for the natural elements that facilitate and drive biology & civilization. Let's encourage scientific consensus & environmental ethics to come together to formulate a sustainable approach.

As far as how my identity fits into the planetary body. I'm making lifestyle changes to address some my ethical concerns. So yeah, I guess I'm aligned with my ethics more than the average idiot. Nature vs nurture is a false dichotomy. Life is a nonbinary feedback loop. We're integral aspects of a living system. We are what we eat, luckily, we have a hand in how we eat.

I’m well-aware of ontological empiricism and how individuals form opinions. And I understand how cultural & private identity interrelate with and inform our perspective on the world. Nevertheless, my philosophy on how society should handle technological innovation and progress is directly tied to an ethical framework, a priori, that civilization should develop healthy relations with the biosphere. This framework invokes the interconnected parameters of life on earth, a posteriori, of which the entire technocratic system depends on.

Opposite to my view, I see unregulated wishful thinking, hedonism, solipsism, myopic nihilism, and materialistic narcissism facilitated by ideas like “accelerationism”. And in the pursuit of the techno-sphere through unbridled progress, traditional or historical sociopolitical power dynamics will lead to more upheaval and planetary destabilization as the consequences of global industrialization manifest as metacrisis for humanity.

Hence why I favor & practice variations of ecological mindfulness & stewardship (within my sphere of influence) and passionately rail against unnecessary or untactful environmental disruption. If we’re to survive the consequences of industrialization, we need to balance the feedback loops that sustain ALL life on earth. Ultimately treat technology like extensions of our BEING and strive for planetary scale homeostasis.

Technology doesn’t magically create balance; on the contrary, post-industrial civilization has accelerated ecological disorder because rapid technological change outpaces the rate of evolutionary developmental adaptation. We need to use our tools wisely, not chaotically. Just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should. Ability doesn’t mean prerogative.

I hope you understand my reasoning and forgive my skeptical attitude toward an overly optimistic commitment to technology. Thanks for your time & attention.

Bless this moment,

Alea iacta est

[RhetoricThug]

Alternatives to traditional fiat currency: Crypto is a digitally driven form of speculative finance, that doesn't produce intrinsic value for society. I think its use covertly disempowers labor and accelerates the commodification of culture. Despite modern monetary theory, if your investment doesn't facilitate the production of physical goods, it cannot possibly help stabilize the relationship between capital & labor. Only redeeming quality- crypto is voluntary not compulsory. That's great, but its exchange depends on the flow of compulsory currencies & macroeconomic activity. Stable monetary systems that regulate supply & demand in the market shouldn't substitute accountability for anonymity because the exchange of goods & services is a public affair. A lack of fiduciary oversight, price volatility, and proof-of-work inefficiency harm social capital. Particularly the development of social equity and the creation of real wealth. In its current state, cryptocurrency doesn't lift people out of poverty.

Its value is formulated by its utility, speculative supply, deflationary premise, and technological application. But it's not tied to the production of a good or service and therefore has no significant economic value outside of the greater fool theory. Also, it's not as accessible as we claim, because it requires complex technological infrastructure- a decentralized blockchain, e-waste, whales, and bag holders that hype hopium as they hodl. As a digital asset, it has no tangible value and can be confiscated by critical infrastructure failure.

If the cryptographic ledger is so transparent, and beneficiaries traceable, then it's a privacy concern. Perhaps, that's its emphasis, privacy. But privacy is a barrier to scientific investigation. What was the collapse of FTX about, bad actors, fraud, liquidity crisis, large withdrawals, Ponzi schemes, swap rotation, and pump & dumps? Curious, because I see contradictions. You can't simultaneously possess transparency & anonymity, right? People agreeing with you is bandwagon fallacy or Argumentum ad numerum. Belief in agreement doesn't ensure validity of value.

Let's favor productive collaboration and create tangible things to share & experience. Minimize risks, avoid capitalists. No personal debts, but strongly believe in debt jubilee. And I like how crypto reduces intermediaries & protects countries against global inflation, but does it do it any better than commodity money? What's the difference between mining digital tokens and printing fiat notes? Is Bitcoin a pathway to universal basic income?

Ideally economies should build strong communities, generate real wealth, not extract wealth from the common people. Unfortunately, capitalist activities promote alienation & increase social atomization. It's hard not to participate in the commodification of everything if you live & work in a capitalist culture. I complain about it but it's ubiquitous. We feed "Moloch". It's the contextual & hypothetical cost of living in a late-stage capitalist society. We expect a return on our consumption. Appreciation, gains, dividends. We work for a fixed wage or diversify assets and materialize passive income, so we don't have to spend so much time at a "job". Wage dependency sucks, it's risky business. Invest in yourself. Let's invest in one another. Let's train an AI on this data.

Ivan Illich − Tools For Conviviality

I here submit the concept of a multidimensional balance of human life which can serve as a
framework for evaluating man's relation to his tools. In each of several dimensions of this balance it is
possible to identify a natural scale. When an enterprise grows beyond a certain point on this scale, it
first frustrates the end for which it was originally designed, and then rapidly becomes a threat to
society itself. These scales must be identified and the parameters of human endeavors within which
human life remains viable must be explored.

Society can be destroyed when further growth of mass production renders the milieu hostile, when it
extinguishes the free use of the natural abilities of society's members, when it isolates people from
each other and locks them into a man−made shell, when it undermines the texture of community by
promoting extreme social polarization and splintering specialization, or when cancerous acceleration
enforces social change at a rate that rules out legal, cultural, and political precedents as formal
guidelines to present behavior. Corporate endeavors which thus threaten society cannot be tolerated.
At this point it becomes irrelevant whether an enterprise is nominally owned by individuals,
corporations, or the slate, because no form of management can make such fundamental destruction
serve a social purpose.

Our present ideologies are useful to clarify the contradictions which appear in a society which relies
on the capitalist control of industrial production; they do not, however, provide the necessary
framework for analyzing the crisis in the industrial mode of production itself. I hope that one day a
general theory of industrialization will be stated with precision, that it will be formulated in terms
compelling enough to withstand the test of criticism. Its concepts ought to provide a common
language for people in opposing parties who need to engage in the assessment of social programs or
technologies, and who want to restrain the power of man's tools when they tend to overwhelm man
and his goals. Such a theory should help people invert the present structure of major institutions. I
hope that this essay will enhance the formulation of such a theory.

It is now difficult to imagine a modern society in which industrial growth is balanced and kept in
check by several complementary, distinct, and equally scientific modes of production. Our vision of
the possible and the feasible is so restricted by industrial expectations that any alternative to more
mass production sounds like a return to past oppression or like a Utopian design for noble savages. In
fact, however, the vision of new possibilities requires only the recognition that scientific discoveries
can be useful in at least two opposite ways. The first leads to specialization of functions,
institutionalization of values and centralization of power and turns people into the accessories of
bureaucracies or machines. The second enlarges the range of each person's competence, control, and
initiative, limited only by other individuals' claims to an equal range of power and freedom.

To formulate a theory about a future society both very modern and not dominated by industry, it will
be necessary to recognize natural scales and limits. We must come to admit that only within limits can
machines take the place of slaves; beyond these limits they lead to a new kind of serfdom. Only
within limits can education fit people into a man−made environment: beyond these limits lies the
universal schoolhouse, hospital ward, or prison. Only within limits ought politics to be concerned
with the distribution of maximum industrial outputs, rather than with equal inputs of either energy or
information. Once these limits are recognized, it becomes possible to articulate the triadic relationship
between persons, tools, and a new collectivity. Such a society, in which modern technologies serve
politically interrelated individuals rather than managers, I will call "convivial."

Noospheric compression and distribution of the hierarchy of needs shouldn't be sold for profit. These systems of social organization need democratization and regulation. Ecological food chains correlate with the economic expression of the exchange of goods & services. The neoliberal order & populist fascist movement teach us to adapt to and accept the consolidation of wealth as we collectively depend on technological advancement for future gains. What outlasts extinction?

Tech companies train AI on the data of common people. Tech companies could care less about the algorithm of the ultra-wealthy. Why? Because AI will merge with robotics and emulate the masses to produce a simulacrum of labor. The technocracy must program labor to sustain the global operating system for a small tribe of shareholders.

It's not so much a conspiracy, rather a play on market dynamics. Economy is ecology. The dialectic of competition in market dynamics- buyer/seller, producer/consumer, is a false dichotomy. Competition is a misnomer. Competition is collaboration. Collaboration is the local & global market at scale, measured, weighed, tracked, traced, and traded. The way we manage our wealth & communication with one another affects the way we assign value to trade. There's nothing more powerful than consciousness. It alone generates the systematization of who-what-when-where-why-how we flow from within ourselves and believe in the value of tomorrow. For there's only today & death is its vacuum. Please examine your position. Reorient investments. The social contract doesn't have to be bleak. We need not escalate this war economy. Sell your share in genocide and buy love.

I'm rooting for humanity,

<3

[RhetoricThug]

Innovation causes change or disruption in environmental information or energy and leads to additional pressure for individuated expressions of consciousness to adapt to contextual stimuli in their environment. Living species experience polygenic inheritance from numerous sources- including epigenetic and neuroplastic feedback loops. We collectively program one another and interface automatically with an amalgamation called civilization. The taxonomical nomenclature we assign and employ to organize patterns of cognition give us illusory control over instinct. This isn't a denial of free will, rather a description of how an immaterial identity in physical reality is transformed by material phenomenon, and vice versa.

Technology is a material phenomenon, manifested in a moment inhabited by an immaterial identity that was birthed by sensate forces or creatures of things interpolated in things and phenomena. Traditionally given form through observation and by linguistic concepts or constants such as words or shared communication techniques- technology is an extension and snapshot of the arrangement of a particular moment in the spacetime continuum. This convergence of energy is experienced and exchanged by humanity. All self-referential ideas manifested by consciousness become metamorphic extensions of transient distortion. Technology naturally obsolesces itself because self-awareness is an interpretation of past experiences and how they pluralistically relate to potential changes in the future.

Free will is the capacity to navigate a complex of possibilities and adhere to the extremities of reality. This is in no way a reactive encounter, rather a personal or private and public cataclysm- first internalized then externalized to become internalized again. In other words, an act of free will is a combined effect colliding with a multitude of simultaneous happenings that congregate to generate the experience and reflection of self-awareness. A peculiar self-awareness that exhibits an ability to reorganize its existence.

Change is supreme. Permeance is a myth. We wallow in conceit. Material fetichism, in the form of conventional progress, promotes exponential innovation, proliferation, and diffusion of ever-expanding civilizational complexity. Instigators or accelerators are also responsible for untold or incalculable amounts of suffering, genocide, and destruction. Therefore, it's important to regulate, educate, and cultivate the passions of men lest they deliver us hell on earth. We must govern diligently- not revoke or extinguish the fire in us but aim our passions wisely. Admit fault when our deeds produce more problems than they solve. Decisions tempered by prudence, not blind optimism or pessimism.

If a technocratic government produced abundance to maintain a post scarcity economic environment, would individuals value their free time and focus their energy on egalitarian activities? Or does the immense wealth generated by today's socioeconomic order, held by elites, demonstrate how individuals would behave once all their needs were met? It certainly seems like the accumulation of extraordinary wealth has in effect created post scarcity economic opportunity for people with lots of capital- yet this kind of affluence hasn't fundamentally transformed their sense of belonging or instigated a shift in attitude or values. Instead, we observe cultural appropriation, not cultural appreciation. Is it not the tendency of human nature to seek political power once their personal identity is no longer defined by the accumulation of capital? Perhaps technological post scarcity will not deliver us from the ecological reality of genetics, and we'll become more tyrannical when everyone is wealthy enough to seek, exert, or consolidate abstract notions of political control over others.