You're almost like talking to that philosopher AI.
Can you give me an estimate for how long an answer takes? Is it instant? If not; is it long enough for a human to type it (most of it; some of it; crucial parts to it)?
Don't you just talk normally like the rest of the larvals, where it's not so complicated?
What for? Conformity to party line? Regurgitating the information that was suggested for them to consent to? Pretending that agreement vs disagreement (choice vs choice) represents communicating within offer/consent (balance/choice)?
I do me and those who do themselves often find balance in our interactions. Others react upon want; which is what causes the conflicts between want vs not want (reason). I react upon need; and others perceive that I don't try to impose wants on them; which in return may inspire them to also question our collective needs.
He likes to use aka in there and sometimes the (word in parentheses). What's that mean when he does that.
AKA implies "also known as" aka also perceived as; which is in opposition to comprehension (understanding), and in-between operates free will of choice; responding to perceived; while transmuting it into comprehended. Or ignorance causes the corruption of comprehension.
PAREN'THESIS, noun [Gr. to insert.] from PA'RENT, noun [Latin parens, from pario, to produce or bring forth.] + THE'SIS, noun [Latin thesis; Gr. a position, to set.] It's a bit like a follow up expression; an extra explanation tied to what came before).
I'm still struggling to shape language into a lesser corruption by stripping all the rhetorical tricks back out; while putting the natural connotations back in. Not to make language usable; but to prevent ignorance from using it as a defense tool to stay ignorant.
Pointing out the revisionism from Latin to Pig-Latin (English); the deliberate contradiction of English through legalese (using the Black's Legal Dictionary definitions to hide maritime admiralty law underneath the peasant rules of behavior); the unification of all languages towards the English slave language through the world wide web, and the underlying encoding of it through Gematria etc. should be each by itself enough to get others to question their means of communication; but alas ignorance is bliss.
On the other hand; my attempts to explain the above; is what grew my comprehension of the foundation underneath all languages aka origin of information (energy); sound (flow/form); and means of communication (resonance).
I think this guy's illuminati
Illuminated aka in process of growing comprehension by choice based adaptation to perceived inspiration. I am ONE response to ALL that is.
Not as snooty as that one guy.. hang on lemme see if I can find that..."I am a Rofschild" AMA
Know this, Illiterati, and understand its deep meaning: "FOR WANT OF KNOWLEDGE, MY PEOPLE ARE LOST"
Can you give me an estimate for how long an answer takes? Is it instant? If not; is it long enough for a human to type it (most of it; some of it; crucial parts to it)?
What for? Conformity to party line? Regurgitating the information that was suggested for them to consent to? Pretending that agreement vs disagreement (choice vs choice) represents communicating within offer/consent (balance/choice)?
I do me and those who do themselves often find balance in our interactions. Others react upon want; which is what causes the conflicts between want vs not want (reason). I react upon need; and others perceive that I don't try to impose wants on them; which in return may inspire them to also question our collective needs.
AKA implies "also known as" aka also perceived as; which is in opposition to comprehension (understanding), and in-between operates free will of choice; responding to perceived; while transmuting it into comprehended. Or ignorance causes the corruption of comprehension.
PAREN'THESIS, noun [Gr. to insert.] from PA'RENT, noun [Latin parens, from pario, to produce or bring forth.] + THE'SIS, noun [Latin thesis; Gr. a position, to set.] It's a bit like a follow up expression; an extra explanation tied to what came before).
I'm still struggling to shape language into a lesser corruption by stripping all the rhetorical tricks back out; while putting the natural connotations back in. Not to make language usable; but to prevent ignorance from using it as a defense tool to stay ignorant.
Pointing out the revisionism from Latin to Pig-Latin (English); the deliberate contradiction of English through legalese (using the Black's Legal Dictionary definitions to hide maritime admiralty law underneath the peasant rules of behavior); the unification of all languages towards the English slave language through the world wide web, and the underlying encoding of it through Gematria etc. should be each by itself enough to get others to question their means of communication; but alas ignorance is bliss.
On the other hand; my attempts to explain the above; is what grew my comprehension of the foundation underneath all languages aka origin of information (energy); sound (flow/form); and means of communication (resonance).
Illuminated aka in process of growing comprehension by choice based adaptation to perceived inspiration. I am ONE response to ALL that is.
Know this, Illiterati, and understand its deep meaning: "FOR WANT OF KNOWLEDGE, MY PEOPLE ARE LOST"