Sunday, 30 October 2016

Do Those Things That Intuitively can be Considered Beyond a Computer's Capacity to do

Cartoon impression of mind control

Ever wondered what would happen to a mind control computer if we stopped responding to it?

If we stopped tricking it into thinking we are going right instead of left, if we stopped being spontaneous, would it get any better at all?

The fact of this matter is this, that those controlling it would not put the thing out there unless they were sure those who could help it actualise its potentials would do so. Otherwise it would be doomed to simply remain an untested piece of hardware and software and, maybe, this is the best way to leave it.

It would seem to me, after a reality check yesterday afternoon left me feeling I was in the wrong business, that it's when it is in this state that it is least harmful, least likely to predict thought as such corner somebody.

I have done programming before, and I know a thing or two about the code that goes into allowing a machine to learn new things. Such lines of code are never initially written into the whole of the program. However, the provision is made for the machine to add to the very code it runs on, new lines as it encounters new scenarios.

I discovered accidentally that it was a better idea to let sleeping dogs remain asleep after spending some time on the wierd social networking site called Facebook, when it became clear to me that friends who wanted to respond to my cries for help were having their decision making influenced. If I pushed it, I would most likely find It near impossible to communicate with them.

Feeling I needed to find a way to distract the beast, I set out on a quest to defeat it so completely, backup forces would become necessary.

subdermal injuries can sometimes be taken for unknown causes

The task I gave myself involved doing my best to prevent the computer predicting my movements, as such making it fail to encumber motion and progress by making a subdermal injury caused using high intensity directed energies as I slept, act up as I walked, as such encumber motion.

Now, I have already spoken about how this is done in articles that have gone by.

Preventing the computer from predicting movement may not seem to be the same as preventing it from predicting thought, unless the impulses that turn into thought and those that enable muscle movement and control are understood to be the same, apart from the fact the one is a curtailed variant of the other.

Nothing better than a path in the bush

Now, nothing's better for this than the criss-crossed pathways found in Africa. Pathways like this are beaten into the earth by the heels and shoes of walkers, meaning the path itself, the part that is walked on usually sinks lower than the surrounding soil.

What I wanted to be doing the most as I walked along was to keep dodging the clearly discerned directed energy beam from a military satellite focussed on the injury, as such test the computer's capacity to keep a beam focussed on the injured part of my leg despite the side to side, up and down movements I made.

As I made my way from village to village, I realised I was defeating the computer every step I made that could not have been predicted because it had not been encountered. I was losing the beam more and more and, if I suddenly decided to get on top of a raised surface, I could actually feel the beam bypass me, then attempt to catch up with the new position.

Up and down movements were obviously the most problematic.

I was feeling good, spurred on by my successes, and in part by the fact I didn't feel enervated because I was walking in the clear today. But part of me started sensing reactions that pointed to the fact the computer was compensating by broadening the beam, for example. This suggested that something more sinister was happening ... The thing was learning.

Now how it was doing this is easy to put in words. The thing was writing a new kind of code for every new scenario encountered, and adding that to the number of actions to look out for, or predict. Each time I walked along, the number of these actions written into code increased, decreasing with this my options.

And there it was, clear as daylight, I was inadvertently making the thing cleverer, much more capable of controlling some other unsuspecting mortal who is unlucky enough to be picked on by those wishing to engage all of humanity in service to a fool's plan.

And so I urge you, do everything you can to defeat this evil mainframe, but avoid that which ends up making it better at the task of thought control. I advise shielding, shielding and more shielding as the best way to cut off the capacity to create a remote, wireless connection to it, or with it.

Also do those things that can be considered beyond a computer's capacity to do, things you can term human things, but always keeping in mind that once it gets frustrated, it will pick organ destruction as the surest manner of lowering your guard, leading you back to shields and shielding.

1 comment:

Mukazo Vunda said...

If you have just read this article, then you came here in error as I have removed all links to it. It is still visible here on the home page, but will be removed as soon as opportunity gives.