Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

It's pretty naive to think that just because Obama doesn't veto using drones on domestic suspects, which I know he did but hear me out, that the NSA wouldn't or hasn't already spied on domestic affairs without his okay regardless - doesn't mean they can't go behind his back without getting caught in some other other way.

The NSA was spying on us before-hand. They've had the ability to do all this, and have been doing this, for the past 40 years. NSA agents can be bribed, however illegally, and they can use their position and resources to spy, and it's very difficult to catch someone breaking the law when you are unaware a law has been broken in the first place. Listen;

The whole issue of the Demo-slander is that the Legislative Branch has the authority to accept bribes from the top 1%, legally. They do what they're told to do to suppress the middle class. You don't believe me because you think nothing in the constitution is with-held from a piss-ant's eyes?? OKAY you're a fool.

If Obama ever managed to abolish the Legislative Branch merely by successfully overrunning the House with democrats, which is impossible BTW, there would be WWIII as the Illuminati's world falls apart. With democrats in the executive branch at this time, it is an inconvenience for the 1%/Illuminati because you have to understand it's becoming almost impractical to keep the inequality of wealth this uneven. Which means they don't yet have the infrastructural sophistication or machine power to support the 6% wealthiest humans without these families having to work yet. Be assured once they do the nukes will go flying, and they'll be safe and sound, despite the mass genocide of 94% of the earth's human population.

At least with the NSA spying on all our activities, the Illuminati top 6% wealthiest American and non-American family-men not only have to bribe certain NSA agents to do what they want them to, but these corrupt lawbreakers in the NSA now have to avoid the rest of the NSA's surveillance on the people they're randomly infiltrating with no legal grounds. It complicates things for the Illuminati, as does Obama care, as does improving education, as does raising the minimum wage. Obama has done everything and more to bring as much liberty and justice, however insignificant, to this corrupt world as humanly possible. Lastly, improving immigration increases the population, also complicating things for Illuminati. Information overload is liberty's only chance to combat the Illuminati (so far; withholding advances and secretly utilizing new super-software systems to one's own ends will KILL them)

And he's a polymath for the odds he's defied.

I'm lucky, he made everything I'm about to do possible.

Now I will be the one to bring the hammer and watch control gurgle on its facial remains.

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p316/sjonathan02/joker-1.jpg

QxKB9hNvwX0

They almost deserve what I am about to do to their innocent children, making them watch, before I get to them. Advanced life-extension techniques can work with fungi-mutilation torture. Ancient Egypt, the Pharaohs would cut open the convict's belly, fill it with honey, and tie him to a raft, let him float down the Nile as maggots laid eggs and multiplied in his honey-filled liver.


Yet the Pharaoh's of ancient Egypt lacked the technology I will have, and they couldn't come up with the sick forms psychological and physical/grotesque transformations of the human form physically and mentally in which I will inflict upon them and their youngest children. I will animalcule and devolve these bastards for the hundreds and hundreds of years I will add to their terror-bound, unnatural lives. They've made their bed, I am not very forgiving, they've done things to my mind that I cannot explain with words, and they will pay.

Sounds like someone had a lonely valentines.

I never minded being alone.

Because I don't care to love at lower rate.

But I know why she's not allowed to see how she felt about me.

If there are logic holes in my idea about what's going on with the USA and the world's wealthiest humans, the 6% that hogs 60% of the globe's wealth, please, point them out.

I can't literally prove some of my ideas because I don't know what's not included in the constitution for a civilian or foreign power's eyes, I don't know the cash-made transactions or encrypted digital transactions that have been made for what purpose or by whom.

But sophisticated technology can allow me to obtain that information by infiltrating all digitized files and by logically deducing certain facts.

If it's all in my head the program I make will prove it and I will instead just patent the technology for the greater good, and maybe experience some virtual lovin. lmao

You use the word "polymath" a lot.

Originally posted by Robtard
You use the word "polymath" a lot.

I prefer polyhistor over polymath, any day.

That's. Like. The. Same. Thing. Bro.

Originally posted by Robtard
You use the word "polymath" a lot. It conveys one who's a genius on more than one level.

Super-polymath is unique, it conveys something we've never seen before in the history of the world.

Because one day it will be intelligence augmentation standing in the way of artificial intelligence's dominion.

We're about to see the smartest humans who've ever lived.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I prefer polyhistor over polymath, any day. Why?

S'cause it sounds like Hipster?

Lol.

I would drop all this, be a Hipster and have with you now. I want that more than a power trip off saving the human race. I want that more than anything 2, Lilith.

I'm scared, right now it's make or break. If I don't sit here and lose myself in learning, I'm scared there's no hipster life for me either...

In approximately 16 minutes it is go time. Make this homework disappear. Reassure me and I can break this path anytime.

Originally posted by Oneness
It conveys one who's a genius on more than one level.

Super-polymath is unique, it conveys something we've never seen before in the history of the world.

Because one day it will be intelligence augmentation standing in the way of artificial intelligence's dominion.

We're about to see the smartest humans who've ever lived. Know the meaning

That's just a made up word

Or it could just as equally not be

A safe statement because it can't really be refuted, since you've left it open to what "about" implies. Tomorrow or 127 years or...

Originally posted by Robtard
Or it could just as equally not be

No I mean there's a graphical relation to a programmer's cognitive capacity and human's control over the will of AI.

IA(AI) = n

Any word on how this will affect the long-term outlook of foreign exchange rates so I can make money off of it? Otherwise, overreaction and conspiratorial paranoia are, tautologically, overreaction and conspiratorial paranoia. Good luck to you.

Yes, I'm paranoid, idealistic, irrationally hostile towards those with wealth, and irrationally loyal to very few I love the world over, and possibly incredibly intelligent.

That makes me threat #1 in their eyes, the most dangerous mother effer on the planet to them. If I ever built the aforementioned resources I'd be an extremist who can actually do things to them, and them alone.

Morally selective, of course I'd sacrifice my wants for the majority, and of course I'd accept whatever facts I have, I'd actually be reassured but you're not me. I have more propositions than statements here. As always, I'm not a step closer to actually proving anything. Yet at least.

The empirical man you'd like me to be is drowning in a sea of pondering.

Too distracted to act. In action, my mind wonders away from the work. It's repetition, always going back to the same thing.

Yet I understand and can see the circumstance and I have become better at filtering to get what needs to be done, done. As has been shown of late. That's because I'm of age to do things that matter.

Let me puff out my chest some more, a threat that can't be taken seriously. The clown is a guise keeping me insidious.

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

Originally posted by Oneness
No I mean there's a graphical relation to a programmer's cognitive capacity and human's control over the will of AI.

IA(AI) = n

An AI has no will.

Originally posted by Oneness
Yes, I'm paranoid, idealistic, irrationally hostile towards those with wealth, and irrationally loyal to very few I love the world over, and possibly incredibly intelligent.

That makes me threat #1 in their eyes, the most dangerous mother effer on the planet to them. If I ever built the aforementioned resources I'd be an extremist who can actually do things to them, and them alone.

Morally selective, of course I'd sacrifice my wants for the majority, and of course I'd accept whatever facts I have, I'd actually be reassured but you're not me. I have more propositions than statements here. As always, I'm not a step closer to actually proving anything. Yet at least.

The empirical man you'd like me to be is drowning in a sea of pondering.

Too distracted to act. In action, my mind wonders away from the work. It's repetition, always going back to the same thing.

Yet I understand and can see the circumstance and I have become better at filtering to get what needs to be done, done. As has been shown of late. That's because I'm of age to do things that matter.

Let me puff out my chest some more, a threat that can't be taken seriously. The clown is a guise keeping me insidious.

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

It's your tone. And the fact that you jump around too much. And it doesn't give equal purchase to arguments that may counter your position. Let's look at each individually.

Tone: You're preemptively calling people fools in your OP, before hearing a word of response. Everything is accusatory and defensive. The best rational analysis is done with a sense of detachment. Entirely removing one's emotions is impossible, and probably not preferable, but you're at the worse extreme. Your approach doesn't invite discussion, it invites derision.

Jumping Around: Illuminati (tacitly accepted as fact in OP), 9/11 conspiracies, suppression of the middle class, and probably 2-3 other ideas all wrapped into two posts. You're, at best, flitting between topics without fully exploring them and, at worst, conflating ideas together that have nothing to do with one another.

Counter-arguments: I hope you don't expect full rebuttals on such arbitrarily strewn-together topics. You're the OP, and the one most invested in this discussion. To understand a topic, you should understand all sides. What is the best literature in the field that disagrees with you? Does your opinion hold up to its scrutiny? Why? Because I'm not an expert on this stuff...I can barely follow your train of thought at times. But you...you're the one purporting specialized knowledge, and the one most emotionally invested. I would expect to see a summation of the rebuttals in your own work, if only to debunk them. At least it would be a better start to the discussion.

And lastly, on your most recent post...wut? I'm an English major who writes for a living (well, partially). And much of that is nonsense, intelligible only to you, I would presume. You may consider yourself intelligent (scratch "may"...you're quite obvious in thinking that), but your ability to impart your thoughts with coherence is lacking. Your intellect, it seems, finds other outlets.

Originally posted by Digi
It's your tone. And the fact that you jump around too much. And it doesn't give equal purchase to arguments that may counter your position. Let's look at each individually.

Tone: You're preemptively calling people fools in your OP, before hearing a word of response. Everything is accusatory and defensive. The best rational analysis is done with a sense of detachment. Entirely removing one's emotions is impossible, and probably not preferable, but you're at the worse extreme. Your approach doesn't invite discussion, it invites derision.

Jumping Around: Illuminati (tacitly accepted as fact in OP), 9/11 conspiracies, suppression of the middle class, and probably 2-3 other ideas all wrapped into two posts. You're, at best, flitting between topics without fully exploring them and, at worst, conflating ideas together that have nothing to do with one another.

Counter-arguments: I hope you don't expect full rebuttals on such arbitrarily strewn-together topics. You're the OP, and the one most invested in this discussion. To understand a topic, you should understand all sides. What is the best literature in the field that disagrees with you? Does your opinion hold up to its scrutiny? Why? Because I'm not an expert on this stuff...I can barely follow your train of thought at times. But you...you're the one purporting specialized knowledge, and the one most emotionally invested. I would expect to see a summation of the rebuttals in your own work, if only to debunk them. At least it would be a better start to the discussion.

And lastly, on your most recent post...wut? I'm an English major who writes for a living (well, partially). And much of that is nonsense, intelligible only to you, I would presume. You may consider yourself intelligent (scratch "may"...you're quite obvious in thinking that), but your ability to impart your thoughts with coherence is lacking. Your intellect, it seems, finds other outlets.



You write very well. I myself am an aspiring writer.

I'm still waaaaay more worried about the Republicans than the Democrats.




Uh, not really? I mean, conspiracy theorists come almost pre-discredited, especially if they do tie in lots of different things. Remember, you only need to be wrong on *one* major factor to make that a pretty damning nail to use against you... and as you do not actually have the inside look, you're probably wrong about a lot more. No matter how much things fit together in your head, you are ultimately *guessing*, and just because you can picture a puzzle going together one way, doesn't mean it's the only way for it to get together.

In order to be an actual big threat to a major conspiracy, you need to have a compelling argument that convinces a large number of people, preferably the majority of people. Otherwise you're really not something that even needs dealing with.

Originally posted by Digi
And lastly, on your most recent post...wut? I'm an English major who writes for a living (well, partially). And much of that is nonsense, intelligible only to you, I would presume. You may consider yourself intelligent (scratch "may"...you're quite obvious in thinking that), but your ability to impart your thoughts with coherence is lacking. Your intellect, it seems, finds other outlets. There are many different types of intelligence.

I can develop argumentative techniques, but in the end those skills won't surmount to a different "brain type".

Cumulatively, yes, some IQs are more cumbersome in totality than others.

We need to work together by fully developing our fortes to produce maximum results.

Originally posted by Q99

Uh, not really? I mean, conspiracy theorists come almost pre-discredited, especially if they do tie in lots of different things. Remember, you only need to be wrong on *one* major factor to make that a pretty damning nail to use against you.. I'm not talking about my ability to entice an army.

I'm talking about my ability to create transcendental technology that can allow me to exclusively overcome an army of humans.

Originally posted by Robtard
An AI has no will. What tasks it carries out are based on its programming/will. Which on its own becomes more complex because it can alter its own script based on what would logically be better for it to carry out its original programming.

This is how the human mind works as well, but in a different way.

Originally posted by Oneness
I'm not talking about my ability to entice an army.

I'm talking about my ability to create transcendental technology that can allow me to exclusively overcome an army of humans.


Uh, you think you, on your own, without a big organization, can produce status-quo changing technology?


Rather... high opinion of yourself there. Most big technological advances involve many geniuses working together, and of course it also requires expensive devices to make most, especially in any quantities.

Originally posted by Q99
Uh, you think you, on your own, without a big organization, can produce status-quo changing technology?


Rather... high opinion of yourself there. Most big technological advances involve many geniuses working together, and of course it also requires expensive devices to make most, especially in any quantities. The most important thing, that you didn't mention, is the underlying technology to build off of.

Originally posted by Oneness
There are many different types of intelligence.

I can develop argumentative techniques, but in the end those skills won't surmount to a different "brain type".

Cumulatively, yes, some IQs are more cumbersome in totality than others.

We need to work together by fully developing our fortes to produce maximum results.

Yay for ignoring all criticism. Glad this tripe got booted to the correct forum at least.

Originally posted by Firefly218


You write very well. I myself am an aspiring writer.

Good luck. But develop other skills as well. I said "partially" a writer, which is an understatement. I write a LOT, and it's usually on interesting topics. But I also edit, do print and web design, some coding, photography, video editing, social media, marketing, PR, and corporate partnership management in my job. Writing alone doesn't get you much. I don't actually know anyone whose job description can be summarized as "just writing."

Originally posted by Oneness
What tasks it carries out are based on its programming/will. Which on its own becomes more complex because it can alter its own script based on what would logically be better for it to carry out its original programming.

This is how the human mind works as well, but in a different way.

A computer's programming isn't will. Something like Skynet becoming sentient is what you're taking about. That for the time being is science fiction.

Originally posted by Oneness
The most important thing, that you didn't mention, is the underlying technology to build off of.

No, I mentioned the resources needed to buy that underlying technology.

New advances need advanced gear. You can't make a better computer without equipment to build microchips and smaller, for example.

Big Bama has shoved everything that libtery and justice stands for for everyones' throat's and NOW no one is listening to Liberty and justice anymore.