The Next Web Bot Prediction- October 15th, 2008, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 21 times

reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 02:36 PM by N. Tesla

reply to post by JaxonRoberts

i did research the topic and im not laughing at anyone. i jsut have yet to belive that a program that searches the internet for keywords makes us psychic. people are connected but not to the point where a computer program can make prediction based on waht is written.

reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 02:46 PM by JaxonRoberts

Originally posted by N. Tesla
reply to post by JaxonRoberts

i jsut have yet to belive that a program that searches the internet for keywords makes us psychic.

The program doesn't make us psychic. It is based on the assumption that we are all a little psychic and are not aware of it. We express these unknown psychic impressions subconsciously through the language we choose to use. Also, it doesn't look for 'keywords', it searches for 'archetypes', which is a distinct difference.

ar·che·type (är'kĭ-tīp') Pronunciation Key

1. An original model or type after which other similar things are patterned; a prototype: "'Frankenstein' . . . 'Dracula' . . . 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' . . . the archetypes that have influenced all subsequent horror stories" (New York Times).

Dictionary.com

reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 09:24 PM by srsen

I'm gonna put it on the line and say it will be the first "e-terrorism" event.

This is a theory i have had for about 6 months now where, in order to censor and further control information and access to the net, an "e-terror" event will be staged where a major hack will occur bringing a country to its knees economically, logistically, etc.

If such an attack was to take place on a financial target of sorts, given the environment at the moment, it could completely destroy the stock market and instigate the changes to the internet and access to information they seem so determined to make.

It may not be 15 October, but i think such an event is coming regardless. It works too well into their agenda.

TIme will tell

[edit on 10-10-2008 by srsen]

reply posted on 11-10-2008 @ 07:43 AM by James Random

Well, to be honest, the webbot was 100% correct with its prediction. We had a waterfall of events that may not have been earth shattering, but were certainly very worrying and times of high emotion to those involved in these myriad small events.

First all, we had the end of Ramadan on October 7th itself. Having many muslim friends I know for a fact that this is a time of celebration, fun, and partying. A bona fide time of high emotion.

Then, over the following days we had Russia start selling weapons to Venezuela, namely two of their most advanced bombers, which was seen as worrying to certain people in the circles of the US political system.

We had Iran basically cut short the visit of the UN Nuclear Watchdog man and the re-opening of the Uranium Enrichment plant, which was of high concern to the UN indeed.

We had North Korea abandon its Nuclear Disablement program and they too sent the UN watchdog packing, again, something even more worrying.

Then we have the stocks continuing to fall, the dow to the 8K range, which is of massive concern to those in wall street and the general public of the US.

Then we had Iceland freeze its shares and the UK has had to send a Treasury Envoy to demand £1 billion ($1.6887 billion) from them which, frankly, they don't have.
Then Iceland accepted a large sum of money from Russia.

Now the webbot program isn't able to distinguish from a plethora of events or a single event based on the web chatter, it merely picks up on everything going on around that time and makes a compacted prediction. So, add all of these small matters up and we have a serious global concern on our hands.
So yes, I would say that the webbot is 100% correct, so far.

[edit on 11-10-2008 by James Random]

reply posted on 11-10-2008 @ 08:17 AM by ThatDGgirl

Originally posted by Aislin

I can understand how the web-bot can foresee an economic crisis and events caused by man, but how can it predict an earthquake? People don't cause earthquakes. What information does the web-bot gather that can predict an earthquake?

Well, as far as I know....and this is just an opinion formed after reading a godawful bunch of stuff that I can't reliably quote..........I'm thinkin that the HAARP project can produce earthquakes. There was a big discussion on my chemtrail group (not here) that was correlating HAARP activity to eathquakes. Having said that, please understand that I only have a very loose idea of exactly HOW the HAARP project works. But I have seen this arguement/debate in print. That may not make it true, but it IS out there in the webbage, so to speak.

I also find it very interesting that Sarah Palin, a relatively unknown persona in the politically elite arena, is governor of the vey same state where HAARP is located. I'm SURE this is just another weird coinkydink, but after all the craziness that has happened in the banking world recently, well, I'm just putting it out there.

That's all for now. When my brain warms up a little, I'll be back. I find this all very interesting.

Good thoughts to all...................................

reply posted on 11-10-2008 @ 09:02 AM by James Random

reply to post by ThatDGgirl

I've detailed this in the past. Yes. It's easier for HAARP to make an earthquake than it is for it to do its intended job.

reply posted on 11-10-2008 @ 09:07 AM by MorningStar8741

There seems to be this right or wrong interpretation here. Does it really have to be either or? How about the idea that the web bot is not so much right or wrong but a pretty decent indicator. Like weather forcasting tools, perhaps it is just a good guideline by which to decide to grab an umbrella but do not get all upset when you do not end up needing it.

reply posted on 11-10-2008 @ 10:48 AM by jtma508

There's alot of misunderstanding of WebBot and how it works and despite people's attempts to explain it, there are those that just refuse to 'get it' and, yes, those that take the high-probability position so they can make themselves feel smarter. Here are some key points that I made on the various Oct 7th threads. Again I'll point out that I have made my living doing sophisticated data modeling for a very long time.

First, WebBot is predicated on the fact that humans are individually and collectively precognitive (Cliff uses the term 'psychic'). We can sense the 'future'. This idea has been borne-out in a large number of published, scientific studies. See this paper for an overview of some of those studies and/or consult Princeton's Global Consciousness Project. These studies are carefully designed and rigorously controlled studies whose data is statistically validated. And for anyone about to parrot-back the pathetically cliched 'statistics can say anything you want it to' retort, save your effort. You have no clue what you're talking about.

Second, WebBot works by doing pattern recognition modeling around a pre-determined set of words/phrases. It looks for changes in liguistics around those target words/phrases (not specific values). We can't speculate on how those words/phrases were selected (since their methodology is proprietary) but usually in this kind of data modeling we look for data elements that are generally central to changing data spaces. There are statistical methodolgies for identifying and selecting these data points (in WebBot's case, words/phrases). The changes in the linguisitics around the target words are theoretically being brought on by our subconscious precognition. WebBot is using linguistic shifts as a proxy.

Third, when patterns are 'identified' they are scaled as to their importance statistically against the model space. Any 'value' (such as date/time) is determined probablistically. Remember the famous 'bell curve'? The 'bell' can be squat and long or tall and tight. But in any case it is centered on a singe data point. An equal number of data points lie on either side of that 'centroid'. It's a bit more complex than a simple normal distribution curve but the concept is similar. The pattern (or in this case the 'event') falls within the distribution with the highest probability and highest scale around the centroid. Oct 7th and Oct 15th are centroids. It's a time window.

The 'event' could be a single event (like 9/11 IF you can call 9/11 a single event. A single day maybe, but hardly a single event) or a cascade event (like the DotCom Crash). We talk about the DotCom Crash as if it was a single event but we all know that it was not. What we saw on the 7th was a cascade event of historic proportions. To deny that requires a truly remarkable level of denial.

Also, keep in mind that these predictions were made for the most part over a year ago. As data built-up over time the importance and intensity of certain time periods became more detaled.

Finally, making sense of the inter-relation of the patterns requires human interpretation. This is clearly a source of error but unavoidable in modeling exercises of this type. Even in my work there comes a point where the application of a model requires a certain degree of interpretation.

WebBot ins't a crystal ball. Nor a psychic. It's not going to be perfect but it has shown some remarkable abilities to serve as an early warning system. Over time, it will become even more accurate as patterns can be assessed after the fact to see where things can be improved and to identify where things were missed. But in general, you'd do well to not discard WebBot's predictions. Don't attampt to make them something they are not but pay heed. There is most definitely 'something there'.

reply posted on 11-10-2008 @ 11:25 AM by ThatDGgirl

reply to post by James Random

Could you please post a link or two regarding HAARP.....like maybe a good basic overview? I've heard many crazy things, so I'd like to get a better picture in my head of how it works.

Thanks in advance.............

reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 08:04 AM by BcnDiamond

As for webbot predictions this weekend, they talked about 3 unwelcome guests making an appearance.
One involves an accident, real or proclaimed, possibly in the political realm.
I made a thread about how Jorg Haider could be one of these unwelcome guests, after reading urbansurvivals latest update.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

They also talked about ''terra intrusions'' around the 10th or 11th.
I wonder what they ment with that. World bank being hacked, intruded ?

reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 09:49 PM by nfotech

One thing I keep seeing over and over again is that the people who try to "debunk" the web bot project consistently fail to understand it. Most of them are basing their opinions on the incorrect postings of other "debunkers" and have not taken the time to research the project or how it works.

The science behind the project is sound. Those of us in the data and information mgt sector refer to the "precognitive" abilities of connected minds as "crowd wisdom" and have been building systems to utilize this which use a harvesting methodology known as "crowdsourcing". There is plenty of material around for those who are interested in delving further.

The web bot project is simply one way to sample the crowdsource of a connected society, using those who communicate via the internet. It's not all based on psychic abilities however. It also picks up on peoples personal and professional knowledge including those who are in positions to predict certain events or are privy to "insider" information. This data "leaks" out even if the people involved do not make direct references "in the clear".

This type of data harvesting system has been in use for quite a long time by various intelligence agencies.

The problem, and where the predictive data becomes fuzzy, is in the interpretation of the results. If I were one of the data architects of the project I would be working with data visualization experts to try and improve that part of the system. From what I've read, the results of the system are extremely complex and are subject to interpretation by one or two people who spend a great deal of time sorting through the data manually.

The use of some of the brightest data visualization minds would no doubt improve the accuracy of the system dramatically.

Looking at this graph of the stock market, what cornerstone event took place around the 7th of October?

For those playing from home, the 10000 / 9500 mark of the market is a critical psychological event with far reaching impact to those inside and outside the system.

[edit on 12-10-2008 by nfotech]

[edit on 12-10-2008 by nfotech]

reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 11:01 PM by JediK

I agree. This entire financial system is a mess of epic proportions. The only way to fix this is to overhaul the entire system, AKA a one world economy.

October 7 pretty much said that this thing is BAD, and will only get much, much WORSE...

This thing will be WORSE than the Great Depression!

[edit on 12-10-2008 by JediK]

reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 11:33 PM by ballast

Thanks, JaxonRoberts

urbansurvival.com...
"Something with a lot of 'military' aspect to it on October 15th, or thereabout."

I didn't realize that the "military' aspect was tied to October 15th specifically.

There is a possibility, a horrifying possibility that it could be tied to a terrorist attack. 9/11 read as military on the webot.

I've been doing this thread on the VM Deyanat and there is a possibility that there are two other ships with 16 shipping containers of radioactive waste rigged with explosives. The ships left earlier than the Deyanat and the containers may be here in America.

This link will take you to the page with the most current update from tbr. I placed a lot of research on the thread.

It's the 10/10/08 tbr update

www.abovetopsecret.com...

or here's the link straight to the article, The voice of the Whitehouse:

www.tbrnews.org...

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 12:08 AM by whiskeyswiller

With all due respect to the research undertaken, if people cannot easily explain how it works in an easy to understand fashion and yet insist on promoting it, one must be concerned.

The fact that it's basically a computer program that makes very vague predictions that are hard to verify make it no better than Dionne Warwicks Hotline.

They said October 7th was going to be like 9/11 and no matter how you interpret Oct 7th ... it wasn't.

You can spend the next 100 years researching it but it's very unlikely that a computer program can interpret the collective unconscious.

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 12:32 AM by JaxonRoberts

reply to post by whiskeyswiller

I think it's been done twice on this page alone. As for the 7th, there are a great many who would disagree with you. You need to do your own research before you dismiss anything. That's denying ignorance within yourself.

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 12:48 AM by Interestinggg

What makes the webbot useless is that about 3 months after they made the actual bot some other people made software to block it from crawling web pages.
So it cant go everywhere which makes its predictions stupid.

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 12:51 AM by JaxonRoberts

reply to post by Interestinggg

That's funny because they are out there crawling even as we speak. And if they were 'blocked', then Google and other search engines would also stop working, and as I've used Google several times today, I'd say they are working just fine!

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 01:07 AM by whiskeyswiller

reply to post by JaxonRoberts

I think that I will take five seconds of common sense rationalism over your research and self proclaimed freedom from ignorance. Those who claim not to be ignorant, generally are.

Researching things on the internet doesn't make it any more true.

I think any responsible adult is cautious and asks questions and anyone sold on this thing is thinking irresponsibly

When those guys quit promoting themselves on Coast or Rense I'll worry. When those guys sound worried instead of amused, I'll worry. When those guys say October 7th is going to be like 9/11 and more than a small country in the middle of nowhere going bankrupt happens .. i'll worry.

It's been around since for 7 years, so there should be more of a list of predictions don't you think? What did your much ballyhooed 'research' tell you about that?

And just out of curiosity I wonder why a program that was built to predict changes in the stock market didn't have much to say about the economic problems that have been on CNBC since January 08 and much earlier.

I'll take common sense ignorance over guys that take everything written on the internet with no proof as gospel and bask in my ignorance.

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 01:08 AM by nfotech

reply to post by Interestinggg

Do you have a source for this? As someone very familiar with the technology I can tell you the report, if real - is false. If you and I can access a website then so can a crawler.

The web bot is not a crawler like Google and other search engines use. They build an index of web pages and most (if legit) will respect a "robots nofollow" command embedded in a website http access file. Since this web bot is not being used to build a public index it is not limited in that way.

The only way to "block" it would be to be able to identify it and then block any IP's it runs from. I sincerely doubt the user agent string in it says "web bot" or anything else a sysadmin could discern. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if it uses "google" or similar as it's agent string. Tell us, who would want to block it and why? It's not a hacker's program breaking into websites which are blocked from public access, it simply crawls online sites where people discuss the world. ATS probably contributes a great deal of "noise" to the system.

I find it fascinating that people continue to try and "debunk" this using false or unreliable data as justification.

Data architecture and Visualization
(check out the "ninjas of the net" posts.

Cyber Geography

The Wisdom of Crowds

“No one in this world, so far as I know, has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.” —H. L. Mencken

H. L. Mencken was wrong.

In this endlessly fascinating book, New Yorker columnist James Surowiecki explores a deceptively simple idea that has profound implications: large groups of people are smarter than an elite few, no matter how brilliant—better at solving problems, fostering innovation, coming to wise decisions, even predicting the future.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by nfotech]

[edit on 13-10-2008 by nfotech]

reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 01:28 AM by JaxonRoberts

Originally posted by whiskeyswiller
I think that I will take five seconds of common sense rationalism over your research and self proclaimed freedom from ignorance. Those who claim not to be ignorant, generally are.

And those who do no research always are.

Researching things on the internet doesn't make it any more true.

Or any less true.

I think any responsible adult is cautious and asks questions and anyone sold on this thing is thinking irresponsibly

I was cautious and asked plenty of questions.

When those guys quit promoting themselves on Coast or Rense I'll worry. When those guys sound worried instead of amused, I'll worry. When those guys say October 7th is going to be like 9/11 and more than a small country in the middle of nowhere going bankrupt happens .. i'll worry.

And this 'small country in the middle of nowhere' happens to be affecting banks and markets all over Europe, which affects US banks and markets. Snowball effect and we still have no idea where that snowball will stop.

It's been around since for 7 years, so there should be more of a list of predictions don't you think? What did your much ballyhooed 'research' tell you about that?

There is a long list of predictions and results, and that's just the ones they have released to non-subscribers of their websites.

And just out of curiosity I wonder why a program that was built to predict changes in the stock market didn't have much to say about the economic problems that have been on CNBC since January 08 and much earlier.

They have been screaming about this for almost two years and many have saved their investments by listening to them.