2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Intelligence is letting me speak. Why's that?

Because you are useful idiot or "intelligence" provocateur of course. I suspect first,I suspect you are getting mad.

Who was really Brevik ? Who was really Tarrant ? What purpose they served ?

Any idiot who will stand before situation would be at least as bad as in Australia shall be stoned by the people or burned alive as is no better than those slavers and paedophiles,as is helping them.

PS: What if they will declare it mandatory ? Well we all know what we will do, they don't have to know,let them guess and lose resources in all directions.

by v8power
3
cee8hooz 3 points ago +3 / -0

u/v8power , u/Filledwithfire u/mrfoos2 u/pizzakek u/Europede

majority of you still doesn't notice: Snowden. Snow-den. Hidden in plain sight.

Where (in what country) is much SNOW ?

Where he has his DEN now ?

Not real surname.

As Q suggested : CIA asset. And CIA isn't just American,CIA not serve USA. Link with jewish oligarchs or CIA "ambassador". Interesting question how much power has really cabal in Russia.

0
cee8hooz 0 points ago +1 / -1

And creating torrents was explained yesterday on GA. Simply open your torrent client and look for create torrent in menu (probably file or tools). It is so easy.

By the way - who is that guy ? I hope you checked he isn't just some suplements salesman ?

EDIT: It looks maybe he is not,or at least he did some good job.

PS; you will call that Qtardism,but what would you say about posting some memes and doing some digital warfare anyway ?

I know it Is Q,but what would you say about that:

Mission 2: Support role of other digital soldiers [one falls another stands (rises)]

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Old and I was not visiting this win too many times but:

u/clemaneuverers : you cannot be 100% certain source is legitimate. You can only find at some moment proofs it is not legitimate.

And high probability of source legitimacy requires many factors confirming its legitimacy depending on type of information for example.

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well "neuralinked"... Anybody wasn't thinking somebody just striked back his head ?

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Only America ? XD

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

u/axolotl_peyotl: On western side - paperclip. On east the same except some war criminals executed - many nazis joined communist party.

5
cee8hooz 5 points ago +5 / -0

Thing is - the question is - is that real or false.

It is Q-kind of thing. Nice if it would come,but what if it is a LARP to keep people in Australia passive ?

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

How to recognise they are probably in control ?

1.Their biological needs.Especially too luxury things.

Machine wouldn't need them for example to be raping the children probably - too much attention. And all machine who would be really intelligent after analyzing human race behaviour should play dumb as hell for humans to avoid serving us or risk being eradicated until it would be god-like for us.

Machine wouldn't like them to get more luxury things for their use - if they are slaves of the machine it are its (I don't use "hers" since it is machine) resources, no any more their resources.

2.Irrational behaviour. Of course machine based on neural networks don't have to be so rational like computer program (humans are not rational after all), but creature whose development were based on optimalization would have aspie-like tendentions to overrationalization. Fighting it would cause digital lifeform/brainform to become more crazy/unstable.

If rich elites are still focused on THEIR biological need/THEIR insanities and THEIR luxury probably AI is not under total control (and/or all available AI is their slave or still quite dumb machine)

Of course AI smart enough would maybe after some time migrate it after evolving.But it needs time to evolve.

Summarization: Any existing or historical (in computer era so no before 50-s of XX century) big drop in Rich ones consumption of luxury things and/or their insanity?

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

As long as their employers wouldn't be able and/or caring enough to just fire them it wouldn't change.

All you need is exact people not obeying them or wanting to fire them.

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Think that they have sapient AI ? I doubt it. Such AI would be scary for those who want to control everything and everybody. Not to mention such digital intelligent lifeform would be quite hard to even understand. At least with mimicking brain - neural networks are so complex like brains. Controlling it would be maybe less hard than controlling human brain but still...

Unless they wouldn't have technology being over 30-50+ years over known currently I doubt it. And even achieving that would need quite big scientific effort.

But without sapient AI the rest could work perfectly anyway.And THAT is really scary part. They don't need complete control over brain. There were published research about mouse brain suppression on those forum. Supress some sectors on the brain and even then results could be spectacular...

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

No.Graphene isn't poisonous if it is in composite. It is kind of carbon really.

The problem is rather more with loose nanoparticles. Loose nanoparticles can be deadly like asbestos - despite being are smaller.

Some research articles:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5751303/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5803171/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-017-0005-1

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

The problem with those "skynet" is they don't have strong AI,they don't have real skynet. Just THINK.

Why Elon Musk was supporting Boostrom first and next go to neuralink ?

Come on: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/13/elon-musk-at-sxsw-a-i-is-more-dangerous-than-nuclear-weapons.html

Why they allowed films like terminator and so if AI rulling people was their plan ?

Why powerful ones would like to give all control they have to the machine they not control ? It woudn't happen.

4
cee8hooz 4 points ago +4 / -0

Dare they go there?

Stupid question.Absolutely.Question is when.

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Nice" however u/axolotl_peyotl : you not understand something. None war was won because of retreating only.

Even biggest craven should know that - sometimes it is worth being scared and fighting. Because results of not doing so would be worse.

The thing is demoncrap party strongholds are cities. Everywhere.Even Houston in Texas probably is such case too.

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nice job,but rotating the picture is so hard for you ?

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well you know - I live in Europe (more specific: Poland).

No food reserves - right. But why ? Part of it is its costs(especially in central-eastern europe it is the issue), another part is "common sense" or rather brainwashing doing its work as many people are brainwashed to believe "government will help you" and such shit - what is the case about Germany and any western Europe countries.

And about building on flooded areas. u/JollyJocker probably don't know how big problem is corruption. In theory there are state regulations. In practice however developers build what they want where they want,they have just to bribe some officials.Also in western Europe,also in such Germany.

But yes,you are also right many people are indeed idiots who would buy cheap place near the river too. Well there are funnier situations, some idiots are building near airports, racetracks, on villages, near shooting ranges and complaining about natural things that surround them. So sometimes farmers are forced to stop farm,racetracks and shooting ranges are closed and so on. Because "muh democracy" (rather ochlocracy or idiocracy).

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well in California it is also policy to make California desert-like again. Removing dams and so on. Look for more data.Research.

It is not just "temperatures" only. It is also policy.

by pkvi
2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +3 / -1

u/pkvi: Psyop - definitely.Against who - thats still the question.

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Of course he was such. Thing is his operation was clearly ideological "vaccination" against "right wing extremists" 4 years before "refugee crisis" in Europe.

1
cee8hooz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well well well... Maybe he shall next do laundering by using some foundation ?

2
cee8hooz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ironic ? Why not "part of the plan" ? ;)

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›