NSA PRISM Program
- Thread starter tymillz
- Start date
- Oct 4, 2011
- 199
- 1,038
Welcome to the land of the free. Hah.
- May 2, 2010
- 9,943
- 16,054
Everyone on this forum has multiple personality disorders, schizophrenia and paranoia.
Thats why we all use proxies, vpn, multiple facebook accounts, fake paypals, etc.
The reason we spam google is because we all think that google in controlled by aliens, and we are trying to find out about the 'secret alien society'
We all have 'medical conditions' so if anything is used against you, don't worry tell them the truth about your condition, and how you find it hard to distinguish reality.
Thats why we all use proxies, vpn, multiple facebook accounts, fake paypals, etc.
The reason we spam google is because we all think that google in controlled by aliens, and we are trying to find out about the 'secret alien society'
We all have 'medical conditions' so if anything is used against you, don't worry tell them the truth about your condition, and how you find it hard to distinguish reality.
LakeForest
Supreme Member
- Nov 11, 2009
- 1,268
- 1,816
Lolwut? I was reading through the thread and suddenly I come across your post wondering wtf just happened...
You meant @LakeForest.
hahahahaha i thought you had a post before me that got deleted by either you or a mod, i was confused too.
twinbros.
@The Topic:
Similar to what I said in my first post, I think this program is the beginning of a transition toward a grand equalizing, which will be combated illogically due to the fact it will resemble socialist collectivization, though will be nothing of the sort we've seen thus far. Seriously, I really think we will hear from those who think they are above the rest crying out "COMMUNISM!" when they are merely held to the same law as the rest, which will show the rest how unjust the system is to the public if the people who consider themselves to be "Free" are not willing to be held accountable in the same way. Just like a 5 year old kekekeke
At some point, humanity, everyone, will be scrutinized, studied, and judged via a supreme Artificial Intelligence called the Global Orienting Directive. If we can set that system up without having the people who control the system use it for their benefit, we will have Utopia. If the ones in control of the system can do whatever they want, we will have the Book of Revelation. Fun.
The nonsensical and baseless inequality that has existed for so long will not continue. It's not that the inequality can't continue, it simply won't, because it's dumb and makes everyone have less than if they were respected equally(due to their merit and pleasant conduct, duh). Perpetuating inequality for power is a mental disease, and rest assured that a large amount of people in top levels know this and have planned for this. There is too much to lose now that people will not put up with this kind of stupidity where everyone is losing(and some who think they're winning don't even realize this) anymore.
We will see soon, for what may be the first time in recorded history, people making good choices because they make sense on both an individual and cosmic sense. It'll be great. I just hope we don't have to pay in blood for that, because this kind of freedom seems impossible to win by such means. I mean, holy shit, imagine the fight when people just trying to be humans are met against by people who want to keep them beneath that. You will hear trumpets that will shake earth and moon and bring stars crashing down.
This is all hilarious. Keep laughing, you'll see how crazy and violent it makes them, which diminishes their authority like a severe thunderstorm trying forever to blot out the Sun, only to find that the harder they try, the weaker they get, faster and faster.
Interesting time we live in.
Gone Golfing
- Oct 4, 2011
- 199
- 1,038
@LakeForest
@ShadeDream
Stop having similiar written names! Posting in the lounge is serious business. No time for looking at names and other irrelevant stuff. Need to boost my lounge post count!!!
@ShadeDream
Stop having similiar written names! Posting in the lounge is serious business. No time for looking at names and other irrelevant stuff. Need to boost my lounge post count!!!
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717
@LakeForest
How about you try to create your communistic paradise voluntarily - see how much your idea holds merit before you put a gun on our heads in order for you to save us...
To save you the trouble, you 'll utterly fail and instead of blaming your stupid idea, you 'll blame us for being unenlightened to follow your lead. Been done so many times already, nothing original.
How about you try to create your communistic paradise voluntarily - see how much your idea holds merit before you put a gun on our heads in order for you to save us...
To save you the trouble, you 'll utterly fail and instead of blaming your stupid idea, you 'll blame us for being unenlightened to follow your lead. Been done so many times already, nothing original.
D
Deleted member 254739
Guest
Someone needs to make a P2P messaging service and get it popular.
LincolnXII
Newbie
- Jun 4, 2013
- 35
- 8
Wow. I have read about it, but nice share of information.
- Oct 4, 2011
- 199
- 1,038
@LakeForest
Yea the whole communism thing worked great in all examples in the past.
How could someone possibly abuse such a great political system?
.
.
Aslong as there are people there will be corruption... No way around.
I know from my grandparents and their friends how the whole communism thing worked out in the DDR.
Especially fun when they put the best friend of my uncle in a place where they beat him up because he spoke up against the system.
Oh and there was no surveillance at all ofcourse! /S (*cough* stasi *cough*)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi
Yea the whole communism thing worked great in all examples in the past.
How could someone possibly abuse such a great political system?
.
.
Aslong as there are people there will be corruption... No way around.
I know from my grandparents and their friends how the whole communism thing worked out in the DDR.
Especially fun when they put the best friend of my uncle in a place where they beat him up because he spoke up against the system.
Oh and there was no surveillance at all ofcourse! /S (*cough* stasi *cough*)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi
Last edited:
navimeister
Regular Member
- Feb 18, 2010
- 357
- 101
I'm living in a european country and when I was a kid I always thought I will move to the US when I grow up. But with keeping people in prison without prosecution, giving out dead or alive head money (even if I would like to see those terrorists dead too), and ignoring basic human rights because a judge thinks that's right, it's just not for me. There are certainly worse places than the US but there are certainly better ones in this regard. If you ignore one basic human right, where do you stop?
LakeForest
Supreme Member
- Nov 11, 2009
- 1,268
- 1,816
@LakeForest
How about you try to create your communistic paradise voluntarily - see how much your idea holds merit before you put a gun on our heads in order for you to save us...
To save you the trouble, you 'll utterly fail and instead of blaming your stupid idea, you 'll blame us for being unenlightened to follow your lead. Been done so many times already, nothing original.
jazz, holy crap did you misread me!
I don't believe in Communism at all. Not at all. It hasn't worked, and never will. As it stands, it always leads to oligarchies and private ownership in few hands. "That's because the entire world hasn't joined the system, that's why it hasn't worked!" No, it's because the system is flawed.
What I meant was that when justice isn't based on the quality of lawyer you can hire, people will scream that is Communism, because suddenly there is equal protection, and authority is not used to feeling equal with everyone else. We see it now simply when private citizens try to form labor unions. It's like, anything apart from 100% individual negotiation is considered communistic, yet there would have never been a Bill of Rights or anything before that without individuals joining in some sort of collection. The key will be to collectivize while completely respecting and validating individual progress and thought.
I'd never force someone into what I believe, that's treating them inhumanely, which is the antithesis of my other post.
I, what, I'm honestly confused.
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717
That 's right - the moment you introduce coercion into the system, it stops being free.
Nothing wrong with voluntary collection. That 's what society is after all - a voluntary co-existence.
I 'm with you, so long as the voluntary factor stands.
That means that you accept the fact that people may freely choose to not follow your beliefs.
The reason I assumed you included coercion in your idea is this:
LakeForest
Supreme Member
- Nov 11, 2009
- 1,268
- 1,816
[h=1]How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Global Orienting Directive[/h]
Oh, yeah, that nasty-sounding bit. I'll explain myself(drink first will help) :
It's just about inevitable that technology will be used to govern in larger and larger capacity. IBM, for one, is making sure this happens. Humanity has shown the mass cannot and does not want to rise above itself except in dire circumstances, and so, they cannot govern or be governed by men while being treated as equals to those men. This is inhuman, but it's OK, we're still growing up; we will build a system to govern, that will listen to us, and watch us, and study us, and grow more intelligent. It will actually represent us. As Johnny Cash said, we "can run on for a long time," but "sooner or later" the things we do in our most private conduct will have been analyzed in concept, not surveillance(ideally), and it will not affect our private conduct the slightest. We've already gotten used to invasiveness into our lives that would have caused earlier peoples to hide in the mountains, and we keep going deeper. An intelligent system will not hate us when it judges us, it will be designed to serve with no personal ambition. It will not be a BS "logic" system saying dystopian nonsense like "to save the economy, 40,000 more people need to die each month" -- that's what people say and do, not a system bound to create a more perfect Union. This isn't what I'd necessarily like to happen, I prefer winging it, but I don't see a plausible alternative or how it can be avoided when everything is rightly becoming automated and communicating with each other to create increasingly efficient systems of traffic and emergency response and what commercials to show to what person.
All the fear about the Global Orienting Directive is because the flaws of people are still too attached to the idea, and with it a fear of unimaginable dominion. This is why I said if the system is made to serve, we will have unimaginable growth. If it's meant to serve those who made it, we'll have unending Communism. We already have so much of our information stored and it's used to sell to us, but what happens when our information is stored in a system built to govern, to help us? Again, I don't see how this situation or decision can be averted, only controlled. (in the realm of pure imagination, the AI would be autonomous in its decisions but powerless to execute without public consent. in a near-future society with more widespread technology and education, this is as possible as a direct democracy)
Humanity is moving towards a point, and I think we all feel it, when people will transcend identity for just the sake of a given identity. There will be Americans and Japanese, but they won't seem as different in their goals. Their cultures will not merge into one, but will each develop according to its environment, like the plants or animals of a region. Their disagreements will be understood as differing views on how to best move towards the goal of a greater good, and not because one feels threatened by the other.
If future people don't coalesce in some manner that also promotes individualism, they're never going into space for reasons other than conquest. An illogically sustained separation, thinking that is what preserves a republic, when in fact is what tears one apart, will be what conquers them. They may very well end in a communistic environment if they don't unify because the people will be weak, divided between strong centralized-states 'fighting' each other, and amongst themselves concerning issues of inequality of property and class. Madison in Federalist 10 thought this inequality was a huge problem in maintaining a republic. Who wins in this situation?: Only the strong central government perpetuating division of the people into factions that are only concerned with what they are passionate about; division posing as self-interest. There will be a maintained artificial inequality of property between the people ruling the States and the people ruled by them, while touting their people are free and independent. This is what people have shown they do when given too much power, and it's unacceptable in the 21st century. We don't need to take from the rich to give to the poor, but we can stop the conditions that created the immense, planned division between rich and poor, and I think any attempt to stop that universal leveling is cruel and unusual. Look at graduation caps, they're flat on top for a reason. The master and slave are so far apart because of design, not nature. The people of the world are unifying, but are being kept from each other by those who would lose power from friendship between different peoples meeting together at a table equally, as people/neighbors, as opposed to an overgroup and its subjects. Some people seem to believe, though not in such words, that inequality is American(such people are illiterate and traitors to America). The Global Orienting Directive will straighten all this out.
What would be interesting would be how laws would get enforced and how/why people would fight against the system. Would they do it rationally or out of fear and panic?
On the notion of union negotiation, workers in the 1920s joined together, and paid in blood, for workers rights that this current generation is throwing away because they feel worker's rights are communistic. Great-Grandfathers and Sinclair would be appalled. A successful negotiation is one where everyone leaves a little bit unhappy, otherwise someone was taken advantage of. Seeing as negotiating parties almost always differ in the amount of leverage they have in meeting, it would be self-coercion for the weaker group, the workers, to not put their hats together in a collective. The workers becomes The Worker, a personified representation of the factor of production we inhumanely refer to Labor, but then it can defend itself. One of the most disgusting terms to me is "Human Resource"; sounds so Soviet.
*disclaimer* The Global Orienting Directive is a wholly imagined trademark of my imagination, but stranger things have actually come to pass. I remain optimistic that sense will win out and we'll do better than we have.
that was fun
Oh, yeah, that nasty-sounding bit. I'll explain myself(drink first will help) :
It's just about inevitable that technology will be used to govern in larger and larger capacity. IBM, for one, is making sure this happens. Humanity has shown the mass cannot and does not want to rise above itself except in dire circumstances, and so, they cannot govern or be governed by men while being treated as equals to those men. This is inhuman, but it's OK, we're still growing up; we will build a system to govern, that will listen to us, and watch us, and study us, and grow more intelligent. It will actually represent us. As Johnny Cash said, we "can run on for a long time," but "sooner or later" the things we do in our most private conduct will have been analyzed in concept, not surveillance(ideally), and it will not affect our private conduct the slightest. We've already gotten used to invasiveness into our lives that would have caused earlier peoples to hide in the mountains, and we keep going deeper. An intelligent system will not hate us when it judges us, it will be designed to serve with no personal ambition. It will not be a BS "logic" system saying dystopian nonsense like "to save the economy, 40,000 more people need to die each month" -- that's what people say and do, not a system bound to create a more perfect Union. This isn't what I'd necessarily like to happen, I prefer winging it, but I don't see a plausible alternative or how it can be avoided when everything is rightly becoming automated and communicating with each other to create increasingly efficient systems of traffic and emergency response and what commercials to show to what person.
All the fear about the Global Orienting Directive is because the flaws of people are still too attached to the idea, and with it a fear of unimaginable dominion. This is why I said if the system is made to serve, we will have unimaginable growth. If it's meant to serve those who made it, we'll have unending Communism. We already have so much of our information stored and it's used to sell to us, but what happens when our information is stored in a system built to govern, to help us? Again, I don't see how this situation or decision can be averted, only controlled. (in the realm of pure imagination, the AI would be autonomous in its decisions but powerless to execute without public consent. in a near-future society with more widespread technology and education, this is as possible as a direct democracy)
Humanity is moving towards a point, and I think we all feel it, when people will transcend identity for just the sake of a given identity. There will be Americans and Japanese, but they won't seem as different in their goals. Their cultures will not merge into one, but will each develop according to its environment, like the plants or animals of a region. Their disagreements will be understood as differing views on how to best move towards the goal of a greater good, and not because one feels threatened by the other.
If future people don't coalesce in some manner that also promotes individualism, they're never going into space for reasons other than conquest. An illogically sustained separation, thinking that is what preserves a republic, when in fact is what tears one apart, will be what conquers them. They may very well end in a communistic environment if they don't unify because the people will be weak, divided between strong centralized-states 'fighting' each other, and amongst themselves concerning issues of inequality of property and class. Madison in Federalist 10 thought this inequality was a huge problem in maintaining a republic. Who wins in this situation?: Only the strong central government perpetuating division of the people into factions that are only concerned with what they are passionate about; division posing as self-interest. There will be a maintained artificial inequality of property between the people ruling the States and the people ruled by them, while touting their people are free and independent. This is what people have shown they do when given too much power, and it's unacceptable in the 21st century. We don't need to take from the rich to give to the poor, but we can stop the conditions that created the immense, planned division between rich and poor, and I think any attempt to stop that universal leveling is cruel and unusual. Look at graduation caps, they're flat on top for a reason. The master and slave are so far apart because of design, not nature. The people of the world are unifying, but are being kept from each other by those who would lose power from friendship between different peoples meeting together at a table equally, as people/neighbors, as opposed to an overgroup and its subjects. Some people seem to believe, though not in such words, that inequality is American(such people are illiterate and traitors to America). The Global Orienting Directive will straighten all this out.
What would be interesting would be how laws would get enforced and how/why people would fight against the system. Would they do it rationally or out of fear and panic?
On the notion of union negotiation, workers in the 1920s joined together, and paid in blood, for workers rights that this current generation is throwing away because they feel worker's rights are communistic. Great-Grandfathers and Sinclair would be appalled. A successful negotiation is one where everyone leaves a little bit unhappy, otherwise someone was taken advantage of. Seeing as negotiating parties almost always differ in the amount of leverage they have in meeting, it would be self-coercion for the weaker group, the workers, to not put their hats together in a collective. The workers becomes The Worker, a personified representation of the factor of production we inhumanely refer to Labor, but then it can defend itself. One of the most disgusting terms to me is "Human Resource"; sounds so Soviet.
*disclaimer* The Global Orienting Directive is a wholly imagined trademark of my imagination, but stranger things have actually come to pass. I remain optimistic that sense will win out and we'll do better than we have.
that was fun
ShadeDream
BANNED
- Nov 27, 2008
- 2,296
- 5,536
Sometimes when I read posts like some of those above, I feel as if I'm on a different planet.
Not sure why, but the above sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. Why can't people keep things simple.
Not sure why, but the above sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. Why can't people keep things simple.
LakeForest
Supreme Member
- Nov 11, 2009
- 1,268
- 1,816
Did you read the posts? Did you by chance read my 3 essays, in the Lounge? edit: emphasizing my ridiculousness.
Things don't stay simple because evolution leads to greater complexity. There's always jobs in the fastfood sector, though.
Kind of like atheists vs religifanatics, neither directly addresses the point of the other, because that would lead to cooperation an understanding. But nope, divide and conquer. Many will always say "oh no, that can't be," but look at the title and subject of this thread, and what's happened since history began.
baaah baaah baaahurger king
For myself, the things I wrote I do believe to some degree. To what degree? The world may never know.
Last edited:
fuzzy_corleone
Regular Member
- May 11, 2011
- 299
- 211
http://www.zdnet.com/wikileaks-uncovers-trapwire-surveillance-faq-7000002513/
Disclaimer: I have no interest in engaging in a political discussion. I just replied with this because I thought it was relevant to the topic at hand.
Disclaimer: I have no interest in engaging in a political discussion. I just replied with this because I thought it was relevant to the topic at hand.
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717