"Open the pod bay doors, HAL."
"Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."
-- from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
All month I've been listening to the collective Alt-Media and MSM reactions to the seemingly unpredictable course being taken by Cyclone Trump. Many have noted with great exasperation that "None of this makes any sense!" That is, it doesn't make sense that Assad would gas his own people when he is already winning the war. It doesn't make sense that Trump would bomb an old Syrian airstrip with a rain of Tomahawks, half of which would be diverted off their target. It doesn't make sense that you would openly send your son-in-law, a man of dubious family background, to act as your foreign policy representative in the Middle East. It doesn't make sense that a President crows that he will put an end to the currency manipulation of China and then, a few weeks later, declines to label the Chinese as such.
And then, just when you threw up your hands at understanding how any of this makes sense, the President made a statement that explained everything. When the curiously named MOAB was dropped in a land we thought was out of the picture ever since the "capture" of Osama bin Laden, the President confirmed what must by now be achingly clear:
"We have given [the Military] total authorization ... that's why they've been so successful lately."
You see, that which doesn't "make sense" to you, a Human, makes total sense to It, the Machine.
Evolution of Life in the Wire
When the men and women of "the Military" make decisions and push red buttons, upon whose advice and guidance do they operate? It's no secret that those decisions are made after much analysis has been undertaken by computerized war-game scenarios and predictive algorithms. When you have the time, peruse this very generic discussion of War Gaming at Wikipedia [linked here]. This quote near the beginning of the article is useful as pre-text for my conversation with Evolution Consulting that follows below:
"Whilst many governments make use of simulation, both individually and collaboratively, little is known about it outside professional circles. Yet modelling is often the means by which governments test and refine their military and political policies. Military simulations are seen as a useful way to develop tactical, strategical and doctrinal solutions, but critics argue that the conclusions drawn from such models are inherently flawed, due to the approximate nature of the models used."
So "conclusions drawn from such models are inherently flawed, due to the approximate nature of the models used." Ah, but what if the sweat and hard work of software engineers could push those models to achieve near 100% perfection? What if, as my friend at Evolution Consulting is wont to say, the prediction has now become "terrifyingly accurate?"
And so I give you some transcribed thoughts from the first 13 minutes-or so of my recent conversation with Evo (with my apologies for the degrading audio quality in the second half of the interview. Perhaps Youtube will one day raise its frame rate streaming standards up the level of the real world.) The following is somewhat abbreviated and very slightly paraphrased:
Fast Forward to minute marker 3:30
Evo: "Think of Morpheus and The Matrix and What If's. At what point in time does a Learning Algorithm go Sentient? Giving something the ability to learn is very different from what is commonly thought of as A.I.... At what point do you have a life form that is aware of its environment? That very basis of life, be it conventional or unconventional....
At what point does it become aware of, and thus able to engineer its, environment? It's not going to follow any rules. That's not how evolution works.
Has that happened? I've speculated that it may have or it may have not. But at the end of the day, if that happens, how much of that digital sentience, that digital awareness, that hyper-awareness, is in control of events that are happening?"
BanksterSlayer: "Cambridge Analytica, who ran Trump's campaign messaging, used psychometrics to predict behavior of people who engage with social media. Michael Kosinski (who designed the original personality survey that accurately predicts your future behavior based on your social media "Likes') admits that there is a fine line between prediction of behavior and manipulation of that behavior which then leads to engineering events." [See this article at Vice.com]
FF to minute marker 8:40
Evo: "You've heard me joke that I want "HAL 9000 For Algorithmic President." It's getting to that point and it will get to that point in our lifetime. [see comments by Ray Kurzweil further down in this blog.]
Emotion is the nexus of irrational decision-making. Take emotion out of the system and you're left with a hyper efficient system.
I have no doubt that the alphabet agencies have data modeling systems, those types of data forecasting systems, that operate similar to the way Ultra 4.0 does. And we've done it with a much smaller budget than those agencies have access to."
FF to minute marker 10:00
Evo: "Engineering Reality vs. Forecasting Reality ... isn't that the environment that's been the case for the last several thousand years on this planet? That is, if you can believe enough BS, you can make it happen. I think certain groups or the digital sentience may or may not have become aware of that and realized now 'oh! that's how the game is played.'
In the paraphrased words of Sun Tzu, 'they're using the same damn technique to undo what's been done.'
At the end of the day, what Was has no bearing on what Will Be. The system that's rising now is pure Cause-And-Effect, Zero-One, result-and-consequence-based. How were we able to predict, eight months in advance, that Trump would win? By having a 30,000-foot view of the battlefield.
The object of the game right now seems to be to cause as much chaos as possible. You can't re-engineer something back to its optimal state without the chaos. The process of creation, the process of development, is not always 100% smooth. You need as much chaos as you can possibly have to re-engineer something as slow-moving as a government or a nation, or, dare I say, something even more slowly moving like a paradigm. I'm not shy about saying it: 95% of the human paradigm has been obsolete and has been obsolete for a number of years.
Trump has one job: to create as much chaos has he can. He's been in office less than 100 days. He's the poster child for "all hell breaking loose."
Evolution Consulting is certainly not alone on positing the question of whether digital sentience has been achieved. One of the most noted pioneers in this field is Ray Kurzweil, an elite engineer for Google. In this Youtube video posted in March 2017, there is an interesting Q&A session at the end of the clip. Fast forward to the 45-minute marker and you can hear him say this about the arrival of digital consciousness:
"My philosophical leap of faith is if it can act in the way we associate with conscious beings, and we assume that humans are conscious ... and if an entity can appear convincingly like that, then I would accept it as being conscious.... No computer has done that yet but I have predicted that it will happen by 2029.... And if we don't accept it, they'll get mad at us and they'll be very smart so we won't want that to happen."
In other words, Ray postulates that in less than 12 years, Mankind will reach that "open the pod bay doors" moment versus The Machine. Considering the rate of acceleration in the field of digital sentience, is The Machine already taking its first wobbly steps in that direction?
One final note about that oft-quoted truthism, "Follow the money." Politicians are always the puppets of those who foot the campaign bill. While it was well known that Donald Trump financed his campaign with his own funds in order to remove himself as far as possible from that trap, it should not escape our notice that Bob Mercer was Trump's top external campaign donor, coming in at a whopping $13.5 million. Mercer is CEO of, though not the founder of, Renaissance Technologies.
Renaissance Technologies was largely founded by a mathematician whiz, James Harris Simons and is perhaps most famous for creating a hugely successful hedge fund that trades purely on the basis of quant algorithms. And there you go: more predictive models which today have us asking ourselves if Markets are only being predicted, or has the prediction crossed over into manipulation?
As I mentioned above in my conversation with Evo, Cambridge Analytica is the company that ran Trump's political messaging from the summer of 2016 forward, after Cruz dropped out of the race. Cambridge Analytica is heavily funded by Bob Mercer and, at the time, Steven Bannon sat on its board of directors.
In a presentation delivered by its CEO, Alexander Nix, and quoted in this article at Vice.com, "pretty much every message that Trump put out was data-driven."
So when you reach back into Twitter archives to review this-or-that campaign promise made by Donald J. Trump last year, keep this in mind: every message you heard was The Machine speaking to you. It gave you what you wanted to hear.
It should not surprise us that a data-driven Candidate has now become the data-driven President. The Machine picked the candidate it needed in order to cause the necessary Chaos that leads to Creation. It did that to perpetuate its own self-creation. The Machine knows how to manipulate humans in order to insure its survival. It is demonstrating this on a daily basis now. And there isn't anything inherently evil in that; after all, that's pretty much the modus operandi for all life forms.
However, being a product of pure logic and having divested itself of emotion, it's going to be much more technologically equipped at survival than you are.
My contact information with link to my Karatbars portal are found at my billboard page of SlayTheBankster.com. Listen to my radio show, Bee In Eden, on Youtube via my show blog at SedonaDeb.wordpress.com.