Do Elected Officials Even Exist? Who's actually running the government?
(www.frontpagemag.com)
Comments (10)
sorted by:
Deep state bureaucrats. Saved you a click.
I recently attended a school board meeting and learned that the elected officials actually have no control over what flags the schools fly, it's all decided by staff (read: unelected bureaucrats).
So when you see those Pride flags in you kids kindergarden classroom, know that it was ordered by someone paid by you.
didn't read, but by my observation, these are what is running the US government in no particular order:
Large corporations that can afford lobbyists
The unelected UN
foreign nations that have compromised our political class such as Israel and China
sheer fucking stupidity and elitism born of multi-generational politicians who take their position for granted.
rogue 3-letter agencies that are literally above the law
deeply entrenched tribalism born of a mass media that doesn't care about the truth.
It finally crystallized for me just this morning that the purpose of this entire recent "AI" phenomenon is solely to convince everyone that "artificial intelligence" exists. Inherent in that is the sense that AI is or can be made to be superior to human intelligence.
You see, after that it's a direct move to "let the machines run everything". The idea sells itself. Jillions of people, both normies and the "awake", will go right along with it, having never developed enough human intellect to see through it for themselves.
Of course, after that, whatever catastrophes result can be explained quite simply: "Can you imagine how bad it would have been if the machines had not been in charge? Those who criticize SkyNet endanger us all!"
For anyone that cares to weigh in with some reply which is an elaboration along the lines of, "No, you're all wrong, AI does exist, and it is superior," then I welcome it as a perfect illustration of my point.
"They" have been planning this for quite some time, really since the dawn of modern "thinking machines". Here's something from half a century ago:
I like to think
(it has to be!)
of a cybernetic ecology
where we are free of our labors
and joined back to nature,
returned to our mammal
brothers and sisters,
and all watched over
by machines of loving grace.
"All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace" by Richard Brautigan (1967)
AI is real in the same sense as robotics is real, and will have roughly the same magnitude of impact in the knowledge work fields as robotics has in manufacturing.
Self-driving cars, sure. 80% of what doctors, lawyers and accountants do, sure. Maybe 50-70% of what software devs currently do, sure. Writing ("journalism", movies, songs, other content creation etc.) will heavily utilize it also, but it will just accelerate the homogenization and degradation in quality that has already been happening.
AI cannot do anything that humans can't, given enough time. It can only do specific tasks faster and more efficiently. That is all it will ever be able to do.
Can you assemble and integrate various special purpose AIs and call that AGI? If you want to, sure. That doesn't make it meaningful or anything other than incremental improvement over what we had before. It still cannot do anything that humans cannot, given enough time.
They like to throw out the claim that it can already write better than the majority of humans, but what they don't do is acknowledge that 80% of humans are mostly mindless drones that aren't actually capable of logic, reason, or anything exceptional.
All that matters is can it do better than the best humans in a given domain, and that answer will always be no.
Yes, as stated, it can do specific things faster, but it cannot surpass the intellectual ceiling of humanity.
That said, yes, SkyNet is possible because humans can program it, train it, guide it, direct it. It doesn't need to have superior intellect, it just has to convince the masses that it does.
Anyways, long way of saying that I have come to a similar conclusion over the last year. This is all an operation to convince people of its superiority so they will agree to submit to its authority, not realizing it is all controlled by those already at the top and is just a means of maintaining their power (along with the rest of the control grid: digital ID, CBDC, vaccine passports, 15-minute cities, disintegration of property rights, green energy/carbon economy, hate speech laws, anti-gun laws).
You may want to look into the history of what were termed (<- past tense because no one talks about them any more) "expert systems":
Here we are three-quarters of a century later. I sure didn't get a discount from my lawyer because he was using an expert system plugged into the wall doing the work for him.
I recall a professor talking a little about the development of these systems. Specifically, they would ask experts about their thought process and then replicate that in the machine One of the phenomena they uncovered was that the more proficient an expert was, the less able they were to articulate it. That suggests that, in principle, machines would never be able to do what people did. Time has borne that out.
They avoid writing it up in an explicit way, but expert systems were the fallback after the complete failure to develop artificial general intelligence. They spin the long history of failure as "AI winter", blaming it all on "lack of enthusiasm". It's pathetic.
Just like the Big Lie technique, these grifts are always more audacious than anyone suspects, and that's a big part of why they get away with them.
I'm just waiting for the day BidenBot 3000 whips out what appears to be a Magic 8 Ball, turns it over, and says America has to bomb Iran. Then everyone turns to each other and says, "What, are we not supposed to do what Artificial Intelligence tells us?"
When I was in college in the late 90s (computer science), it was generally accepted that AI Winter was due to the previous AI paths hitting a brick wall and there were no other viable paths (so, of course, there was no interest).
That round of AI hype died down in the 70s, and at the time it mainly consisted of various Prolog systems and AST manipulation in lisp. Once they reached the limits of their capabilities the hype could no longer continue.
Every hype cycle is like that, including this most recent hype cycle with AI (outside of the fact that they are using it to essentially permanently enslave humanity under technocracy).
Same with virtual reality. Remember the hype in the 90s? Then that hit its limit and died for 20 years until Oculus, Vive, Magic Leap, etc. The latest iteration is light years ahead of the 90s tech, but still also not going to meet the hype.
AI hype started back up in the mid 2000s when big data became a thing, and then machine learning naturally followed on when all of that data was now available. I feel like there are a few iterations left in this cycle before it also hits its limit.
However, as I think we are both saying, before it does hit its limit it will be used to convince humanity of its superiority and all of humanity must submit to its guidance (and thus, the fact that there is no real advancement after that point won't matter).
The way I see it, this current round even more so than the others, has little to do with technology and nothing to do with scientific principle. The old saying is, "spot me one miracle and I can prove the rest".
The LLM tech and anything else they care to point their fingers at are only to dazzle the population long enough to get that one free miracle. If you can get headhunters to believe that your Bic lighter is the power of fire given to you by the gods, the real power that gives you is limited only by your imagination.
The key observation of the miracle is apophatic: they carefully fail to define what "AI" is, and never even describe it's distinguishing characteristics. "AI" is that which they point to when they say "AI", having those properties that they declare it to have at that time. None can say differently by definition because, recall, there never was a definition.
So many people talk about occult magic: symbolism and dusty old books and what various fake-ass personas had to say. But they fail to see magic being done right before their eyes in 2023. Seriously, does magic need to be more "real" than what I just described?
Yeah, that's all accurate.
The only point I would highlight is that the current round actually has also been a series of incremental improvements, and is real tech, and is a legit, standard hype cycle curve.
The difference is they are also using this as one of the cornerstones of their magic "show".
Article is worthless.
…worthless.
a) Office; noun - "secular position of responsibility; divine service"...ones response-ability (free will of choice) implies a secular (Latin seco; to divide) position aka choice (reaction) divided within balance (action).
Being implies as reaction (life) within divine/divided service to action (inception towards death) aka as odds (growth) within even (loss).
b) Others suggest elections to tempt ones free will of choice to "select" the choice of others, which establishes others through ones permission as "chosen ones" aka ELITE (French élite) - "selection, choice".
c) Ones consent to anything suggested by another implies a transfer of office based on license (formal authorization, official permission, permit). Those authorized for office will then utilize that position to revoke ones license to participate in government (control of mind).