It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Jill Stein's Real goal- the NPVIC

page: 3
29
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:07 AM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

There are just some things that duct tape and WD-40 just can't fix, such as your understanding of what you're talking about.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
a reply to: marg6043

No offense, but you're just plain and simple wrong. No two ways about it. If you indeed read that portion of the Constitution then you are not understanding what it is written or you are being willfully ignorant. It doesn't matter either way. Congress CAN NOT tell a state how to apportion it's electoral votes without an Amendment to the Constitution


There close to having a convention of states several have all ready passed the measure. So you may find out thus happens quicker than you believe possible.

There are several things they will vote on including term limits for Congress. These will automatically become amendments per the constitution.


No...they won't automatically become amendments. 2/3 of states call a convention, in which they can PROPOSE amendments. They still need to be RATIFIED by 3/4 of the states to become an amendment. The NPVIC doesn't require an amendment, because it technically follows the Constitution.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Arizonaguy

I understand alright, but you want to debate what right now is no a debatable subject, the legality as of today is not been challenged.

When the time comes to debate I will be here, waiting.

At least I took my time to read the article and the legalities that could arise once is brought to the table by the states.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: marg6043



There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

www.archives.gov...



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 01:31 AM
link   
I dont think many states would sign on to this. It gives up state power. But lets just say they did get enough states to sign on to reach 270 delegate votes. That would completely take away every other state and citizens in those states voting rights, and do so unconstitutionally.

Without a doubt this would trigger an almost immediate civil war, the hot kind with tanks and planes and bullets and millions dead. Do they even realize what they are doing? Have they zero foresight?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Arizonaguy

I see no problem with this. I don't like it...but voting is mostly determined by the states. If that is how they choose to send their electors, thats up to them.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Arizonaguy

I see no problem with this. I don't like it...but voting is mostly determined by the states. If that is how they choose to send their electors, thats up to them.


As I stated before, there is nothing illegal about NPVIC. It's completely Constitutional. I merely started this thread because I believe that this is Stein's motivation. If they can somehow cause enough ruckus to allow a total hand recount of either PA, or MI, there is a good chance that their electoral votes won't be counted on December 19th, making passage of the NPVIC much easier.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arizonaguy

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Arizonaguy

I see no problem with this. I don't like it...but voting is mostly determined by the states. If that is how they choose to send their electors, thats up to them.


As I stated before, there is nothing illegal about NPVIC. It's completely Constitutional. I merely started this thread because I believe that this is Stein's motivation. If they can somehow cause enough ruckus to allow a total hand recount of either PA, or MI, there is a good chance that their electoral votes won't be counted on December 19th, making passage of the NPVIC much easier.


Im not criticizing the thread at all.


How nice to have a thread that isn't promoting the circus.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   
What I'm wondering about is if this idea was due to Koza's 'invention machine:'


Koza was featured in Popular Science for his work on evolutionary programming that alters its own code to find far more complex solutions. The machine, which he calls the "invention machine", has created antennae, circuits, and lenses, and has received a patent from the US Patent Office.


Wikipedia

Regards the 'machine:'


Koza's invention machine uses genetic programming to come up with something new - ideas that were never thought of by the original code designers. Koza's genetic programming uses a Darwinian method with a twist; after an inital run at a problem, the software looks for the bits of code that were most successful in meeting the objectives of an assigned problem. The software thus does more than simply tweak parameters on a finished design; it can actually evolve a new design to best solve a problem, requiring in some cases hundreds of generations.


Invention Machine Evolved By Genetic Programming

Wasn't there a thread around here about this?

Anyway, what I'm thinking is this, Koza (or whomever put him up to this) posits the problem to his machine regarding transitioning to a national popular vote rather than an electoral college vote for president but it has to be done in such a way as to avoid the need for a constitutional amendment because they know they'd never get something like this passed through congress.

The machine then spits out this idea for a National Popular Vote Interstate Compact as a means to achieve the same ends (popular vote assignment of electoral votes) without having to amend the constitution.

What do y'all think?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

It is fascinating. There was a recent thread on a recent development....

But there is also this:

2006


He cooked up a batch of primordial data-soup by generating fifty random blobs of ones and zeros. One by one his computer loaded these digital genomes into the FPGA chip, played the two distinct audio tones, and rated each genome’s fitness according to how closely its output satisfied pre-set criteria. Unsurprisingly, none of the initial randomized configuration programs came anywhere close. Even the top performers were so profoundly inadequate that the computer had to choose its favorites based on tiny nuances. The genetic algorithm eliminated the worst of the bunch, and the best were allowed to mingle their virtual DNA by swapping fragments of source code with their partners. Occasional mutations were introduced into the fruit of their digital loins when the control program randomly changed a one or a zero here and there.


And a thread from Jan 2015

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

So, as expected, there are limits to what the code can accomplish.

I recall that thread you linked, but I don't think that is the one of which I was thinking.

This idea is something I've posited a while back in Heff's excellent thread, here:


originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Heff...wow!

I've been mulling all of this over ever since it broke and as the revelations keep coming, more and more bits and pieces assemble themselves and different patterns emerge.

The way you've brought all of these seemingly different parts together and expounded upon them helps to elucidate many of my disjointed thoughts.

Speculations?

All of this data about all of us is fed into these huge databases, and a simulation of our society is created within; an artificial construct of our world. And I'm talking about everything everything; all that you've listed in your thread here plus weather records, seismic data, market data, information from all of the space probes etc. you name it, if its recorded, analyzed or otherwise measured, it's included.

In short, they've built the Matrix

They can then design a desired outcome, say a society like is portrayed in Equilibrium or any other dystopian imagining and then let the computer create the plan.

It will lay out step by step instructions on how to get to the desired outcome including which laws to pass, the wording of the laws, which wars to start and where to add other pressures, what sorts of additives to place in food, what kinds of education is encouraged or not, what kinds of stories are covered in the news in which areas, the direction debates about different topics and how they are portrayed either for or against, every last nuance of what is needed.




Nah...couldn't be, could it?


Whether or not this is the case, I think it an interesting line of inquiry.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

That gave me the willies. Asking AI to tell us where to go with our lives, the Human Race?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Jill Stein's Real goal was to make money, which she has, especially that beefy check she got from Hillary.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Arizonaguy

Glad I'm not the only one creeped out by this.

This is the dark side of trans-humanism. More than a few dystopian stories take place in the aftermath of the rise of AI meant at first to benefit mankind. The most popular of which is probably the Terminator series.

The Matrix film trilogy is another example.

Even the Dune series has this common element, AI that was originally designed to benefit humanity but it breaks free of our controls and sets itself up as our overlord.

Again, no way to know if the NPVIC is a result of any such digital engineering. It just struck me as odd that the first non-computer science related publication this person is involved in also happens to deal with the issue of using the current system (electoral college vs popular vote) to basically circumvent that system.




top topics



 
29
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join