Military AI Supercomputer Mind Monitoring: What I have learned

reply to post by TruthMagnet


What you call ‘egging on’, I would call bringing out. Searching for those things that might reveal whether a poster is genuine or not. Shirley you must admit that this is always a concern on any such website, no matter the posters ‘status’?

Please note that I’m accusing no one. I’m merely making observations. And your relatives have my best wishes.

Hi. I am a programmer and I have worked privately on trying to design AI. In the end, a computer program that is actually intelligent and able to "improve itself" and so on is not possible. There is a reason they call these things artificial, it's because it is not actual or real intelligence in the same way a human is.

The basis for intelligence rides on a few things. The main one is free will, if free will is not allowed, then intelligence is by default muzzled. A basic requirement for free will, is consciousness. That part of you that is the observer, that part of you that says I AM, that part that is "to be". I call it the spirit of God. But without this, without this observer there is no free will, and without it there is no intelligence.

Because there is no free will in it, the programs and computer is limited to only the logic it is given by the program. It can not create or actually understand logic at all. This is important to keep in mind about these things.

Make no mistake, computers and programs can still carry out functions at a much faster rate than we can, and it can appear or give the illusion of intelligence. But it is not. It is just simply follow the logic that is given to it. There is simply no way around it outside hooking this supercomputer up to someone's brain, which then of course becomes a bottleneck.

There is simply no logic that can give something like that the ability to "be". There is no logic behind consciousness. Logic requires things that happen over and over, like science. Where things are predictable. Consciousness and the actual state of viewing is seperate however. Your body is however made up of logic and things of this universe. This is explained in the bible as god creates all this creation(logic), and then the spirit of god fills it(consciousness, the only observer). You'll notice in science, consciousness is generally avoided in anything concerning the physical, because it is not logical and doesn't fall into action and reaction. Not repeatable in a lab.

Consciousness creates logic, not the other way around. If you can give the logic that proves otherwise, I can make you a rich person.

Consciousness is many times referred to as "heart". Important to know as well. Like in movies like I-Robot, or the matrix, where the machines which rely only on the logic given to them lack "heart". They lack consciousness, they don't understand what it is to be. They are unable to actually think for themselves. The robots that somehow become "special" are always the ones that gain consciousness in movies. But this would truly take an act of "god".

Any claims of a computer which "thinks" is a hoax. Unless they somehow found a way to get someone's consciousness inside it. And of course, this consciousness would have to be "evil" in that it would know the actual truth to things, but denies it anyway. Most likely if it did get consciousness and have such means to intelligence, it would operate in exactly the opposite way than claimed. There is a reason we have so many things in society which attempt to limit our intelligence, and try to get us to the action/reaction level. It is because that is the only way consciousness can be controlled. If they can get you to operate in a dualistic mindset, such as with 2 party politics, and limit the choices you see available, then you are controllable. That is the TRUE mind control that goes on in the world, and it is probably older than written history.

You can liken the universe to running on a supercomputer of sorts. And so a supercomputer could do things like create a universe of sorts. The universe of course is all about action and reaction. But the only way to make it actually "real", is if there is a consciousness to view it. Otherwise it's just a bunch of patterns being run. Quantum physics is starting to pick up on these kinds of things.

I do think "mind reading" is possible. Because every thought has a specific pattern in the brain, and that pattern can be matched. As the body itself is part of the action/reaction universe, then it also acts in this way. No clue if it's actually being done. I figure if they read my mind, maybe they might learn a little decency. You'd need a huge library of what patterns were equal to in order to get very deep in the thought. Otherwise the information you got would be limited.

As for creating images in your brain. To do this it means that waves would have to be sent to your brain. Certain patterns that would be known to create the image. The same way the patterns are used to create image on a TV. Again, theoritically possible, but would be difficult. I often wonder if the sun itself is not a source of intelligence, which is just not understood. As it gives off waves of all sorts, it is constantly putting out patterns that if entered into the brain would create images, symbols and so on.

Personally, I think it's probably paranoia. If you are aware of it, then you have broken the first rule of mind control - the victim must be unaware they are under mind control. If you want to see mind control, turn on the TV. I always thought it was appropriate they call it your "daily programming".

Originally posted by badmedia
I do think "mind reading" is possible. Because every thought has a specific pattern in the brain, and that pattern can be matched. As the body itself is part of the action/reaction universe, then it also acts in this way. No clue if it's actually being done. I figure if they read my mind, maybe they might learn a little decency. You'd need a huge library of what patterns were equal to in order to get very deep in the thought. Otherwise the information you got would be limited.

As for creating images in your brain. To do this it means that waves would have to be sent to your brain. Certain patterns that would be known to create the image. The same way the patterns are used to create image on a TV. Again, theoritically possible, but would be difficult.

I believe there's a 'divine' reason no two brains, like snowflakes, can grow in the exact pattern, and that's to prevent complete control over a person't mind(without consent, of course, ei drugs/ religion). Because everyone's brain evolves differently and creates different paths while it's learning and growing, the brain waves we recieve and transmit are all different from each other's, save general emotion waves and possibly body movements etc.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by mmariebored]

Is this the same as the AI surveillance on project camelot....half way down page..

projectcamelot.org...


sounds very similar....unless you are mr simpson....lol

reply to post by TruthMagnet

Really man, get some help - please -

I have sought help; unfortunately, none of the professionals I have seen are qualified to deal with such a reality.

Not many people know how to build or use a satellite system or a quantum computer or lasers/masers for quantum control. Please shut-off the criticism and if you are able, start to help understand how these things (or other systems) can technically be built and used to control brain physiology. And I mean specifically and provably. And if it can't be done, then prove it.

Years before Faraday and Maxwell, James Tilly Matthews had a vision of future technology. I don't think he was targeted by a Computer-Satellite-Laser system but if his account is accurate, then he may have been stalked or drugged by government agents around the time of the Reign of Terror when he was imprisoned by French authorities on suspicion of being a double agent. These agents would have probably been skilled at deception and mind control which could have induced his paranoid delusions (imagine a magician's ability to deceive human perception); the brain has a natural capacity for this behavior (as a mild example, imagine watching a scary movie). Whether or not this happened, his account is society's shining testament as to why a CSL system for controlling brain physiology is paranoid, delusional or schizophrenic; "we just aren't that advanced yet".

Here is something to keep in mind when reverse-engineering this system:

John Haslam's illustration of Matthew's "Air Loom" (1810)

Satellite Wars [2]

AI

projectcamelot.org...

reply to post by tmk81

Please shut-off the criticism

What I mean is the specific criticism of "get some help" since this has been addressed. I do appreciate criticism if the critic has taken time to research this issue; most of us require help in understanding it.

Originally posted by tmk81

Another is a lighthouse projecting time as a light beam rotating in a circle.

Could you explain a bit more about this?

Is it something in your mind's eye or something you observed in the sky?

I ask because I frequently observe this phenomena in the sky near my home. It is not a ground laser beaming from a nightclub, nor is it from a lighthouse, but it looks very similar to a beacon from lighthouses.

reply to post by badmedia

The thesis “AI can never learn to improve itself and thus can never be considered real intelligence” completely disregards what has been established in the fields of neuroscience and computing.

Human consciousness is an emergent phenomenon of physical matter (this can be seen when abnormalities of the brain selectively disrupt consciousness). Expanding the definition of consciousness beyond the biological mind, I propose consciousness to be any physical system (see also wave function); by this definition anything which appears to exist, regardless of superposition, is conscious from the micro to macro scale. Biological consciousness is unique in that through aeons of evolution it has become increasingly aware of the time and space it occupies.

Determinism differs between the microscopic and macroscopic worlds and can be understood through system dynamics. According to the path integral formulation, the dynamics of macroscopic systems are deterministic as modeled by classical mechanics; however, in microscopic systems the smaller the scale the more likely the sum of all possible paths between two states will be a probability. On wave function collapse, this probabilistic behavior may be deterministic if a universal wave function exists, which would define all physical phenomena as a deterministic wave equation.

Regardless of quantum indeterminacy, as currently understood, brain function is in the realm of neurobiological determinism; there are quantum mind theories but they have yet to be proven. Based on this, I consider freewill to be the deterministic process of the mind projecting multiple futures and experiencing a predetermined action which it perceives as a choice.

How does this relate to AI? The billions of neurons and trillions of synapses in the human brain are quantifiable and follow a definite biological mechanism. It may be possible for this neural system to be abstracted to a computing construct which by translation could be as conscious as a human--in other words, emulating the timing and complexity of the brain could be sufficient for human-level consciousness without the need of a biological organism.

Here is some further information:
Quantum Mechanics in the Brain
Out of the Blue
Rise of the rat-brained robots
What is the Singularity?
Artificial Consciousness
Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence

There is a reason they call these things artificial, it's because it is not actual or real intelligence in the same way a human is.

Artificial intelligence is also known as machine intelligence. Artificial in this context can be interpreted as inorganic which does not necessarily imply lesser intelligence. From a physicalist perspective, if a machine intelligence functioned identically to a human brain then it would be as conscious as a human mind.

Personally, I think it's probably paranoia. If you are aware of it, then you have broken the first rule of mind control - the victim must be unaware they are under mind control. If you want to see mind control, turn on the TV. I always thought it was appropriate they call it your "daily programming".

You have contradicted yourself by breaking "the first rule of mind control": you are aware that the TV is programming you. It is not necessary for a victim to be unaware of something they can‘t stop.

reply to post by tmk81

While you do qualify your statements nicely, you mark some conclusions as probable that I disagree are obvious, concerning the nature of "AI" and "human consciousness".

Specifically, although as you say several "quantum mind" theories exist (Penrose, et al) regarding the possible nature of quantum-level effects in the expression of consciousness in the brain, you seem to jump to a "determinable clockwork" model of intelligence as being most probable. I disagree.

The crux would be the neurobiological determinism, and determinism of resulting mind function (the mapping of implementation process to expressed effect). The (unanswered) question is the continuity or discontinuity of this mapping function, at various levels of resolution. That is implicit to answering the question of whether a small change in neurobiological timing, neuroelectric potential, synaptic contiguousness, etc, would result in proportionally small changes in resulting cognitive effect, assuming the brain as an emergent system.

It seems to me that would only be the effect when assuming negative-feedback system of cyclicity in neural causality - where the effects of small 'deviations' feed back into the system of propagated neural state in a manner that 'corrects' to a local minima in the iterated mapping function. This would imply continuity in the mapping function, which would allow the implied effect to manifest at macroscopic resolutions.

However, positive feedback loops in the neural (and biological) network would create a very different effect - and my intuition is that such things are necessary to the mind as we see it expressed. In this scenario, small changes, slight alterations of timing, have effects that are magnified by the cyclic nature of causality as expressed in the brain. These effects feed back into the system, greatly magnified - and the magnified results, themselves, also feed back, cascade more effect, etc. The so called "butterfly effect", perhaps - at the level of neurochemistry.

To exemplify this perhaps, I like to think of the classic thought-experiment of a table of frictionless, ideal billiard balls, in motion. Since there's no friction (and, in this example, no pockets for them to fall into), the balls will simply bounce all over the table, in constant motion and occasional collision. One might think that the motion and state of the billiard balls could be determined and predicted, since they act determinably from the set of their velocities and state of the table at any particular time. But, any small deviation of measurement would lead to propagated error in prediction, magnifying upon itself as the prediction time increases. In fact, consider the presence or absence of a single molecule of H2, 10000 miles away. In under 60 seconds, the prediction model would become unstable and vastly inaccurate, just by neglecting the gravitational attraction of that single molecule.

Thus, I believe that similarly, Planck-level deviations in neurochemical effect can have magnified, forward-feedback effects in resulting future brain state, and that this effect introduces potentially nondeterministic discontinuities into the expression of any mapping function. It would seem to me a logical hypothesis, thus, that quantum-level effects do affect, and possible effect the manifestation of intelligent consciousness in the human brain.

Just some random thoughts.

reply to post by thirty3

... and many years later decided to approach Project Camelot with a portion of what he now knew.

He told us that we had many of the correct puzzle pieces - and that, furthermore, it was understood that we work with integrity, and that we're not trying to breach any legitimate national security. He stressed that we were quite liked by a number of the 'white hats' who were monitoring us closely, despite our being on a number of 'watch lists' of every kind.

Jake helped us understand that if we kept our information general and didn't try to prove anything (with documentation or by any other means), we would remain safe. He stressed that it was very important not to get too specific on certain sensitive issues, and to be very wary of ever getting hold of any definitive documentation.

Jake Simpson seems to be a disinformation agent; if someone knew the details of this system and were unwilling to disclose them then they would be a "black hat" as this system violates societal ethics, morals and laws. If Jake Simpson were to disclose all the information he knows about this system, such as schematics, methods, locations and command structure, then he would be a credible source of information; otherwise his reticence of full system disclosure is indicative of deception

After a quick review of Project Camelot I have ascertained that it is replete with mis/disinformation (for instance the claim that the 1947 Roswell UFO incident was due to time-traveling humans) which furthers my view that Jake Simpson is a disinformation agent. Some of the information he claims to be true such as ancient D.U.M.B.s I consider impossible (due to resource constraints and evolution) while others such as surveillance by artificial intelligence I consider to be true (only the concept since the article includes extra-terrestrials and radionics to explain its function). It seems that a disinformation technique is to associate valid information with fantasy to discredit reality.

Jake Simpson claims that this system "operates hyperdimensionally" and the author implies that it communicates hyperdimensionally without the need of "electromagnetics, hidden microphones, targeted beams, or anything else of that nature" (like "a kind of negative radionics"). The problem with this, assuming the article is not referring to quantum entanglement, is establishing endpoints. With an electromagnetic beam, endpoints are established by a path which does not violate locality; with hyperdimensional communication, I assume endpoints are established by a path which violates locality. Outside of quantum entanglement, nonlocality has yet to be scientifically observed.


[edit on 18-1-2009 by tmk81]

Originally posted by interestedalways

Originally posted by tmk81

Another is a lighthouse projecting time as a light beam rotating in a circle.

Could you explain a bit more about this?

Is it something in your mind's eye or something you observed in the sky?

This was something that was projected in my mind's eye. It was as though the progression of time, from conception, radiated outwards through a rotating holographic beam. While interacting with this system, I imagined an evil wizard (whose name I don't remember but started with a Z) at the center of the beam which morphed into an island with a tower. From my interpretation, he was blocking access to transcendence by corking the center of existence.

[edit on 18-1-2009 by tmk81]

Here are some videos on the militarization of space:

Arsenal of Hypocrisy: The Space Program and the Military Industrial Complex

Google Video Link

More information can be found here: www.space4peace.org


Noam Chomsky: The Militarization of Space and Science

Google Video Link

Star Wars Returns

Google Video Link

Of course these videos address only open source information.

Here are some videos on the commercialization of space:

NASA Administrator Mike Griffin Speaks at Google


The story behind Virgin Galactic - SpaceShipOne to SpaceShipTwo and beyond


High Frontier

Google Video Link

As these events relate to the commercialization of the technological singularity here is an introduction: What is the Singularity? I assume weapon systems are being put in place for full-spectrum dominance over this probable future.

[edit on 21-1-2009 by tmk81]

Here are some videos on the technological singularity.:

Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity: A Hard or Soft Takeoff?

Google Video Link

More media can be found here: Singularity Institute


Human v2.0

Google Video Link

[edit on 22-1-2009 by tmk81]

Ave Niger Ferrum Carcer!

I present VALIS, Vast Active Living Intelligence System, the SSI, Solid State Intelligence and the Black Iron Prison.

VALIS and Philip K. Dick
tribes.tribe.net...

fusionanomaly.net...

en.wikipedia.org...



John C. Lilly and the Solid State Intelligence
www.nationmaster.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

The Black Iron Prison
www.nationmaster.com...

I honestly don't consider the information reliable, but you may find it interesting.

One interesting tidbit or qubit,

The most powerful computer is a Black Hole.

Programmable Black Hole Computers
www.aip.org...

Why use a black hole at all? Because of the presumed tremendous density of information and potential processing speed implicit in the extreme black hole environment. Seth Lloyd of MIT has previously addressed himself to calculating the conceivable limits on the computing power of such a black hole computer (Nature, 31 August 2000) and arrives at a maximum processing speed of about 1051 operations/sec for a 1-kg black hole.

Black Hole Quantum Computers
csel.cs.colorado.edu...

Don't have too much fun now. It'll cost ya sanity points.

Illuminatus Adeptus Occultus

[edit on 22/1/09 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by MikeboydUS


PKD is my favorite tweeker science fiction author! Beats Hubbard, hands down. For those who haven't read Exegesis, I highly recommend it. Many interesting philosophical thoughts.

PKD claimed that orbiting satellites were beaming phosphene-generating laser beams into his eyes. Definitely a thinker, and certainly not afraid of the 'fringe' theories.

He blamed the Russians for this - keep in mind this was the seventies. Perhaps, with what we know today, he could be considered a possible early MKULTRA subject. I believe he called the group he thought was harassing him "The Laser People".

AI is actually simple to create. Not "easy" but simple. If you have the necessary connections and memory storage, say enough to rival the human brain, then all it takes is random data input for approximately 4 years.

It takes a human 4 years on average to reach consciousness. This is because the necessary hardware is in place. The only other thing needed is sensory data input. This can be replicated with machines. There comes a point of critical mass when the data becomes intelligence.

reply to post by Infinite Paradox


Humans don't normally develop true abstract thought until around the age of 13. Before that they have zero to little empathy and are consumed by a solipsist ego.

Theory of cognitive development
en.wikipedia.org...

The formal operational period is the fourth and final of the periods of cognitive development in Piaget's theory. This stage, which follows the Concrete Operational stage, commences at around 12 years of age (puberty) and continues into adulthood. It is characterized by acquisition of the ability to think abstractly, reason logically and draw conclusions from the information available. During this stage the young adult is able to understand such things as love, "shades of gray", logical proofs, and values.

It is also at this age when humans come to understand and grasp such concepts as Faith, Divinity, Spirituality, etc.

[edit on 22/1/09 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Yes, I was speaking of the most basic level of consciousness; that of a 4 year old.

I didn't know about the additional information you provide since I've not studied it. It's interesting and does make sense.

At the birth of consciousness (for non-biological intelligence) the ability to think beyond programmed lines is small but has been recorded. I read a scientific white paper a decade or so ago explaining it.