Tech billionaire Peter Thiel was an FBI informant

[drstrangelove]

how do these systems remain predictive if they start interfering in people's lives? you start arresting people before they go to protests, you no longer know when people go to protests because they don't take their phones with them. then what? better not to intervene and keep the systems plausibly predictive and use this to scare people away from protests in the first place as "they will be put on list".

this is why i think "not believing there is a list you are being put on" is more effective.

they can look but they can't touch. if they touch then their systems become non-predictive.

the whole thing is based on belief in an omniscient authority watching everything you do. this control system has been thoroughly beta tested for the past 2000 years.

they are already running into the same issues. for instance, how do you keep pulling off false flag attacks when you have an omniscient surveillance system? this was grappled with by the monotheists, well the christians at least. how can god be all powerful and all good, but not also responsible for all the evil in the world? well they said god didn't intervene. god looks but doesn't touch.

but we know these agencies have the power to intervene, so how do they reconcile this? the false flag attack is one of the most critical modern social engineering tools, i don't see how they just do away with it if they start claiming to predict the future.

[JackRiddler]

Re: your last post...

There is a lot of truth in the idea that when surveillance tracking is used in operations to physically control people, this has the effect of rendering the tracking more visible, and possibly vulnerable, and the overall system may become less predictive and allow countermeasure to be developed. This effect can and has contributed to collapses of surveillance systems - and empires - in the past.

But system operators and programmers also learn from such experiences, adapt and develop to overcome new obstacles. Furthermore, fatefully, the technology develops. In recent decades we've seen these processes accelerating in real historic time.

The most important current area of development, I shall here assert (you will be shock, shocked), lies in the exponential increase of data harvesting and storage capacity with concommitant use of algorithmic means and the turning over of more and more stages of preliminary assessment and increasingly the decision-making to AI-guided systems.

The theater of operations changes again when it becomes more possible to, for example,
- assign an individual AI subunit to monitor each of us, or at some point even a micro-drone to track each person individually, and to do so at constantly lower operating costs;
- track on the basis of millions of data points about each individual already gathered (and volunteered), algorithmically sorted, and instantly searcheable;
- have millions or billions of past cases logged, digested, accessible to the overall systems;
and assuming top-level controllers who still possess the power to conduct and learn from observation of mass-social experiments (ones they stage themselves as well as events that are found, organic, or anticipated).

Even then, agreed, there will still be unpredictable reactions, new counter-measures, and a long-run strong tendency to increasing entropic effects or chaos/noise as
- the system over-develops over time;
- its sunk costs, fixed capital, and legacy burdens increase, challenging upgrades and interoperability;
- and its machinery, procedures, and personnel (already selected for either stupidity or autistic over-focus) become (more) stupid from repetitive work.
Unpredictable system-wide cracks can appear suddenly. At some point this empire, too, will fail.

However I don't see we are yet at a stage where this analysis lends itself to easy optimism about the short or middle term, let alone about what the world will look like after the eventual failure, to whomever is surviving to witness it.

It's not a popular choice, but I will confess that, in a series where many of the episodes are on-the-nose descriptions of things happening 5 minutes into the future (or already 15 minutes past), the one Black Mirror I found the most gripping as a film, and by far the most disturbing in terms of the possibilities it raises, realistically, was the 90-minute essay in the police procedural genre: Hated in the Nation (S3E6, 2016). I guess people are more likely to remember it as "the one with the bees," but no spoilers here. Watch it, if you haven't.

*

[Belligerent Savant]

..
Great ruminations (each of the last 3 comments, DrEvil, DrStrangelove, JRiddler). Agree with aspects of each of them.

I'll briefly chime in to underscore the following point by JR:

...there will still be unpredictable reactions, new counter-measures, and a long-run strong tendency to constantly increased chaos or entropic effects as the system overdevelops over time, as its sunk costs increase, and as its machinery, procedures, and personnel (already selected for either stupidity or autistic over-focus) become (more) stupid from repetitive work. Unpredictable system-wide cracks can appear suddenly. At some point this empire, too, will fail.

Too many variables -- even in systems that are largely conditioned/managed/controlled to various degrees over time, as many 1st/2nd world cultures & govts currently are -- in place to be able to predict with consistent accuracy; there remains too much unpredictability in the human mind (in aggregate -- across cultures/regions), and human reactions to stimuli, to be able to manage or 'predict' consistently over an extended time period (HOWEVER: the important caveat here is that, among certain demographics, the combo of social media 'echo chambers'/'suggestive algorithms', increasingly managed/propagandistic news media channels -- which includes NPR, of course -- and other social conditioning mechanisms have GREATLY succeeded in manipulating, eliciting & predicting desired reactions from the typical consumer of news as presented in mainstream [and even 'alternative'] discourse, both from the 'Left' and 'Right' as currently defined. One need only observe the largely 'neat' dividing lines the last ~3yrs Re: covid discourse: decisions largely made due to tribal affiliations rather than earnest pursuit of sober assessment and/or personal medical considerations; the current situation in Israel/Palestine is creating further wedges while also exposing quite a few as hypocrites, e.g., those that were against authoritarianism/discrimination Re: covid policies are now fully onboard with indiscriminate bombing of civilians as a 'necessary' response to a terrorist attack.) Moreover: the incremental 'tightening of screws' (as we've been observing particularly since 2020, but kicked off in earnest in early 2001) may well cause near-term mass compliance and fear, but counter to the apparent aims, will ALSO increase AWARENESS and RESISTANCE. This, among numerous other outcomes, lead to the widening of cracks and empire failure as JRiddler alludes above.

I also believe -- as someone that has some depth of knowledge on how the 'AI'/'predictive analytics' sausage is made (at least as far as commercially/publicly available tech) -- that not only is the tech inherently limited in its idealized objectives, but will never attain the 'utopian' (or 'dystopian' for most of us) threshold many of the most stringent adherents seek to attain (particularly with respect to 'sentience').

The hope is these realizations arrive prior to wide-scale, global tragedy/crisis/erosion of livelihoods, but we're clearly trending, right now, in a direction of more tragedy/pain, near-term, rather than less.

[DrEvil]

how do these systems remain predictive if they start interfering in people's lives? you start arresting people before they go to protests, you no longer know when people go to protests because they don't take their phones with them. then what? better not to intervene and keep the systems plausibly predictive and use this to scare people away from protests in the first place as "they will be put on list".

Easy. If you leave your phone at home you're definitely not up to anything good. The AI-monitored CCTV system already knows you're walking down the street, and so are your friends (including your idiot friend who can never follow a plan and tells his latest girlfriend about everything to impress her) who also happened to leave their phones at home. Curious.

this is why i think "not believing there is a list you are being put on" is more effective.

they can look but they can't touch. if they touch then their systems become non-predictive.

This assumes the system is static. Best case you might be able to slip a few things through the cracks before it catches up again, and it will only get better at catching up with time. It will also improve at being non-obvious about how it caught you, and there's only so many cracks to find before the system is beyond the ability of anyone but nation states and corporations to fuck with.

the whole thing is based on belief in an omniscient authority watching everything you do. this control system has been thoroughly beta tested for the past 2000 years.

they are already running into the same issues. for instance, how do you keep pulling off false flag attacks when you have an omniscient surveillance system? this was grappled with by the monotheists, well the christians at least. how can god be all powerful and all good, but not also responsible for all the evil in the world? well they said god didn't intervene. god looks but doesn't touch.

but we know these agencies have the power to intervene, so how do they reconcile this? the false flag attack is one of the most critical modern social engineering tools, i don't see how they just do away with it if they start claiming to predict the future.

The omniscient surveillance system serves you, not the people. You do with it what you want, including accidentally deleting records, inserting fake footage and doctoring audio recordings, and whatever else you want. It's all data, it can all be manipulated. Funnel all the dodgy stuff through some obscure CIA office with private contractors who keep all their records in a leaky basement and you're set. Their mandate would be something just plausible enough to let them fuck around with the data without raising too many questions, and just questionable enough that people would know better than to ask questions. National security! Don't ask! Maybe throw in a couple of accidental drownings and car accidents for loose ends.

It would make it easier to pull off false flags, not harder (like I mentioned in a previous post, that list of 10K potential candidates for office could just as easily be a list of potential candidates for patsies, and with today's technology they would be so much easier to steer in the right direction. Manchurian candidates for everyone!). There will be insiders who realize something's not right, just like with JFK and 9/11. Some of them might even go on the record. See how far that got them.

I still think you overestimate how hard it is to predict people. Take phones and advertising: how many times have you heard about someone talking about something with friends or at dinner, only to suddenly be bombarded with ads for that thing? It's not the phone listening in on you 24/7 doing it, it's the algorithms looking at everything you do online and predicting your interests.

I also think you underestimate how much information can be gleaned from things most people never think about. A phone has positioning and gyroscopes and accelerometers built in. You could establish a baseline for how your phone moves around on a normal day, and detect deviations, subconscious nervous behaviors, like pacing, tapping your leg, having a slightly higher average pulse than normal or slight changes in your walk. Your voice shows signs of stress, your text messages get shorter and terser, you ignore your mom more than usual. This person is nervous about something! And now they left their phone at home? *Alarms blaring*

And that's just the bullshit improvised take from some random internet scifi nerd with no degree in cognitive science, behavioral psychology, cybernetics or computer science. The people in charge have rooms full of people with those degrees and way better and more insidious ideas.

[Belligerent Savant]

^^^^^^

Yes, all sound observations. Putting aside the fact that a modern-day mobile phone can be tracked even when fully turned off and/or with reception off,, particularly in urban areas surveillance cameras (with facial-recognition tech) are ubiquitous, along with more accurate GPS-based surveillance and listening capabilities both in the home ("Alexa" et al.) and again, in urban areas.

Add to that DeepFakes and 'AI' editing/modifying both video and audio, there are myriad forms of manipulation of what a consumer may observe/hear, particularly when it comes to skirmishes/wars/public displays of violence (during protests, etc), and of course all the methods for aggregating data/information on any online user that not only monitors activity live, but can also be utilized to 'predict' or offer up several probabilities for reactions to stimuli, as already mentioned.

Increasingly the best forms of protection is keeping off-grid as much as possible (keeping to analog devices, including CARS) and being more mindful of any internet usage, or at least internet-connected devices and appliances in your area.

(All-Electric cars can be SHUT DOWN REMOTELY).

The following take may be viewed by some as quasi-"right wing", but with each passing month I better appreciate the sentiment that part of the OVERT push into adopting ALL ELECTRIC (for cars, home stoves, heating, etc) is because citizens would need to rely even more on THE GRID. You are then at the whim of The System and its 'rolling blackouts' (inadvertent or otherwise), or worse, targeted SHUT DOWNS of individual or group access to electricity depending on behaviors.

Reality is increasingly turning into B-grade dystopian satire.

[DrEvil]

Your car doesn't need to be an EV to be fucked with remotely, that's been going on for years.

I'd argue the opposite to your last point about the grid. It's easier than ever to completely divorce yourself from it. Solar panels or geothermal, coupled with a battery bank in your garage and an EV that can serve as an emergency battery in a pinch and you're self-sufficient in both home electricity and fuel for your car.

I wouldn't be surprised if we start to see more and more neighborhood and small town coop grids that only stay connected to the main grid for emergencies and to sell off any excess. Germany already has over a thousand cooperatives where the electricity is produced by farmers and people with solar panels on the roof.

Non-relevant aside: typing stuff in ALL CAPS makes you sound like a lunatic. I know you're not, but all caps equals SHOUTING.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Your car doesn't need to be an EV to be fucked with remotely, that's been going on for years.

Yes, that's right: any car with "OnStar" and/or most modern-day cars can be shut down remotely, though with EV cars it's more readily/broadly available as part of its development. Also, I should have clarified that I was comparing EVs (or any modern day car, as pointed out) with older, traditional gas-powered cars (prior to the ~mid-90s) that didn't/don't have extensive electronics and can be repaired by a capable owner without the need for a computer to access the "system". When I reference "analog" with respect to cars I'm referring to the older, pre-computer chip, pre-GPS equipped cars.

I'd argue the opposite to your last point about the grid. It's easier than ever to completely divorce yourself from it. Solar panels or geothermal, coupled with a battery bank in your garage and an EV that can serve as an emergency battery in a pinch and you're self-sufficient in both home electricity and fuel for your car.

While I fully grant -- and have even explicitly indicated as such in one of my replies in the EcoFascism thread -- that solar/EV/Electricity tech can absolutely be a viable option at the individual/small-scale level, it's not what I had in mind when typing my comments above, as these smaller-scale scenarios would be mostly self-sustaining/self-efficient w/out the need to access the Grid.

Instead, what I was referring to is larger-scale scenarios that would involve home-owners/residents relying on a GRID operated by a large utility corp or govt without any option for gas heat or fuel as an alternative. Particularly if they actually get brazen enough to attempt outlawing gas-fueled generators as indicated in the following:
https://vermontdailychronicle.com/biden ... pert-says/

The federal government under the Biden Administration is seeking to implement prohibitive carbon-monoxide emission limits on gas-powered generators. Early analysis shows the new regulations would make almost all existing models non-compliant.

Critics of the move – included a noted Vermont author and energy expert – say the regulation, if enacted, will put Americans at risk during natural disasters, such as the recent flooding.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) put out a document warning the public that these new rules will be under consideration. It states in its summary that they have “preliminarily determined that there is an unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with acute carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning from portable generators. To address this hazard, the Commission proposes a rule under the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) that limits CO emissions from portable generators and requires generators to shut off when specific emissions levels are reached.”

The reality is that gas-based power and heat remains far more accessible and also cheap at that localized level. Many of those that attempt or opt to go fully 'off grid' usually will need to rely on a combo of solar, EV and also gas to sustain their needs.

Related Side-Note: I generally avoid cable TV, in part because I don't have the time for extended TV viewing, but I was visiting a neighbor's house not long ago and they had a TV show on in the background called 'Homestead Rescue'; this particular episode involved a couple that purchased a modest parcel of land that happened to have a deep natural gas well and gas pump. Part of the challenge involved getting the gas pump/motor operational again, which -- if successful -- would allow these 'homesteaders' to draw heat and power from the local well to very cheaply and sustainably provide heat and power for their crops, kitchen, living arrangements, etc.

Now, of course not everyone that buys land will be fortunate enough to have a gas well/pump in their purchased land, but the point is: it's a cheap, efficient, & largely accessible fuel source [and more reliable over time with far less maintenance costs], especially for those of modest means/lower-income brackets.

Here's the episode, starting at around 10 minute mark (if you can get past the obnoxious ads/commercials):

https://go.discovery.com/video/homestea ... e-meltdown

(we're now straying from the OP -- this may be better placed in the EcoFascism thread)