To start with, thank you all for reading, and also to those who chose to comment on the ‘introduction’, either publicly or privately. I realise there was a lot to absorb and some of you have had the advantage of previous explanations or teachings on points referred to. As I mentioned, I’m happy to go into things as we move along, but the emphasis is on ‘doing’ what we can in our own ways, with what we feel is appropriate to us and sharing our views and experiences on points of interest as we move through this transition. As the initial e-mail stated, you are most welcome to do this privately or publicly. Although, at some point, I hope that we can all participate more openly with each other. You’re opinions, views and insights are valued and that’s also the purpose of this blog and how and where we find solutions.
I’ll begin with the title here ‘AI; old problem in a new format’. What do I mean by that?
AI has been barging its way into our lives much like every other dominating influence of yesteryear, institutions like; religion, royalty, government etc., which are now being steadily replaced by big businesses who own the new way of doing things – ‘technology’. It’s not so much a change in tactic, more a change in outfit and to a certain extent, a slightly different approach to how they do it, too. The modern-day world can’t relate to the controlling customs of the old order anymore so they have changed it to a more acceptable, relatable one. Meaning, the format has changed but the underlying problem hasn’t. There still remains, as we leave Yang, hangers on to a time where frightening us into line with corporal punishment worked, and there are many countries who still endorse that approach. But generally, the old dogma and those embroiled in it can’t do what they once did, so others who can adapt have stepped to the front instead. Make no mistake, this is the same aim in a different guise - it’s about control. And it’s quite telling that even the Pope is warning us about it in relation to the church’s appalling behaviour. And that’s what AI is, a new format for control. A smoke and mirrors hypnotic trick into getting human beings to desensitise away from themselves and their own born talents and skills and into a space where AI, and its orchestrators, can brainwash the population into believing that technology is superior and holds far more value than the natural formulae that creates every living breathing creature on the planet, including human beings. And the majority of the population have lapped it up.
Firstly, let’s look at AI itself, and remind ourselves that this technology is not an identifiable, living, breathing natural creation with an umbilical feed to the life force energy between the universe and soul matter. It does not contain natures elements, organs, cells, arteries, morals, values, ethics or compassion. It is, in effect, a ‘dead’ obscure sect of technologies devoid of the God/universal coding from where all living creatures derive and, therefore, has no actual identity. We can’t spot it in a crowded room, we can’t have a logical reasoned conversation with it, we can’t take it to court for infringing upon our rights, and we can’t appeal to its good nature - it doesn’t have one. It has no conscience and no ability to tell itself right from wrong. If it did it wouldn’t be in violation of our liberties in the catalogue of ways that it is. It is simply a modern ‘tool’ that some will argue has its uses but it is predominately governed and forced upon us by those who lack morals, values and ethics to such an extent that the force to do good with it is completely absent. Maybe that will change, I hope it does – in fact I’m sure it will as far as the planet and this component dimension is concerned. How far humanity wants to take that lesson is another matter entirely. As everyone with any wisdom knows, and has said; this tool, out of human hands, is not going to be one that we get on with very well in the long run, and that point has been proven repeatedly, yet we continue. And it is this pattern and cycle of ignorance that darkness relies on.
New ideas don’t necessarily start out with ill intent. The issue tends to stem from lack of consideration concerning risks and problems that create gaps for darkness to plug into and corrupt, all the while sowing seeds to convince everyone that this is a good idea. Once they’ve got enough on side, through whatever means, it’s very hard to detach from that position. Even when doubt comes in, and if often does, pride is the hurdle to which many people are reluctant to overcome. The inability to admit we’ve made a mistake is a major flaw in humanity at this time, and it can be directly traced to ego overload and overuse. Inevitably, there comes a point when whatever tool-it is-this-time, is suddenly everywhere causing chaos, leaving people scrabbling about in a vain attempt to pull the plug without knowing where the socket is. This is no different from how religions operated. Whereby ‘they’, once having stolen others knowledge, went about the business of twisting everything to suit themselves and made sure to present themselves in a ‘nice’ way whilst doing the exact opposite. They always conform to this pretence initially. How many people would you entertain who presented themselves with the underlying energy of bile and hatred laid bare for all the world to see? That’s not how darkness operates. It turns up as your friend, as a solution to a problem you didn’t know you had (because it didn’t exist) and then goes about the business of completely altering your state of mind and freewill to get what it wants from you. It’s a parasite that feeds off of healthy energies because it has precious little of it. Technology, AI – is an extension of that hence; old problem in a new format – and it has been working in exactly the same way it always did.
Just like its predecessors, the orchestrators ‘message’ to us here is that; AI in particular is the answer to all of our problems and woes rather than what it actually is – a new problem that has created a great many woes, and is now so invasive that the only space we can truly escape it is in nature. Another reason they are busily attempting to destroy our natural environment with unnatural and completely unnecessary useless forms of technology. I’m not an enemy of technology; I do see the use in it. But I have always seen technology as a tool. And, like any other tool, it has its place but it is not here to be at the helm and decide how life on earth is going to be. AI is an unnatural creation; it did not arrive through the natural framework of the molecular structure. That’s the matrix, an invasion of the molecular structure, an entirely different framework. Yes, we can argue that it’s here by design as all dark to light is in order to reflect the point and purposes of black and white energies, and all that’s in between, so that every living creature here can determine the difference between the two and exercise their learnings accordingly. That’s all very clear. However, it is not here to ‘take charge’, and it won’t be able to do that either. Just like the minds of Stephen Hawkins and the Dalia Lama cautioned us on this point well over a decade ago, as have many others since, about the capacity AI has to destroy all we hold dear to us - if we let it. But it isn’t in charge of the universe, God coding (formulae) and the vastness of the galactic tract (s) and the infinite time and space well beyond our understanding and comprehension. In short, it can ruin us, but only because we allow it to. And that’s the real danger here. It is humanities willingness to leave critical thinking at the door, and consistently give up its freedoms to collective harms that are very difficult to break down into individual identities and, therefore, assign responsibility to. It’s a repeated pattern that has one aim to its arrow; Control. AI is yet another mask that a group of people utilise and hide behind in a non-specific, non-physical manner which allow them to continue to cause harm to the masses without being able to trace it back to the source. Just like the old dogmas of yesteryear and the corruption they’ve caused, by interfering with scriptures of genuine faith and good intention, AI is not independent in thought and mind. It has only the answers it has been programmed to have, and the ability to mutate the direction of its navigation on that basis. It has the potential to do both good and bad, therefore. At the moment, there is not a lot of good coming from it and the reasons as to why that might be can be found at the ongoing court cases in the US with litigation against those who front the whole technology shebang. The collection of individuals who are in charge, yet remain elusive to the point of it being almost impossible to pin down individually for their collective crimes, are all but running the world. For almost 3000 years now, we have chosen to adopt their philosophies, play their games and conform to their rules. The only difference from one time span to another is the masks they adorn, appropriate to the current culture, and the change-over of witless wonders they employ to stand behind.
Most forms of social technologies, including AI, are simply an old ‘grooming tool’ wrapped up in a new package; one that gets us to change the way we think about things to suit others who profit from it. It’s a brainwashing exercise with bits of plastic instead of bibles. You’ve only got to look outside to see the endless stream of people with their heads down, staring at these things like their lives depend on it; to know this is a problem. There are very few places left where our human senses can be free of this intrusion. I do not see this trend, that has been steadily increasing over the last 20 years, as a positive argument for these sorts of technologies. And the arguments for AI in the positive sense are also pretty thin on the ground. And this is the danger of not looking at the bigger picture. Just because we can do something doesn’t mean that we should do it. That sort of thinking is very primitive. Some of you have long since heard my words on the ‘big desensitisation program’ that is currently running everything, including the debilitating effect that AI is having on our EI (emotional intelligence), and being in cahoots with abhorrent behaviours – that are not new to this world, but which are being silently and very successfully weaponised against us on mass. But it goes a lot further than that, and will go a lot further than that if it is allowed to continue on this path. And that choice lies with us and what we choose to do about it. We need to pay attention to our own use of technology and, in particular, consider how much information we impart or share with others through the use of technologies. Because it’s certainly not private that’s for sure, no matter what they say to the contrary. Sharing innocent pictures of loved ones may seem harmless but the things AI is being ‘blamed’ for doing with it such as; hacking, fraud, theft, abuses of every variety you can think of, and selling it on to others to do even more harm with, is now at obscene levels. And I use the word ‘blamed’ here because the truth is that someone somewhere has taught it how to do these things.
There are monstrosities going up in their droves, littering our lands in support of the use of these technologies. If you haven’t heard about it yet, you might want to take a look at them; ‘data centres coming to a field near you!’ People are fighting it - quite rightly so – but we shouldn’t really be surprised by this. The sheer volume of data that has been produced, shared, stolen, pillaged, used, misused, abused and sold on as valueless commodities – as we are to the entities who do this every time - all requires storage facilities in which to hold it in. The word ‘cloud’ for backup systems was never a cloud; it was a building or a collection of buildings designed to store all of our information on, and very quickly became the replacement for other, far safer and more reliable physical back up disks that we keep under our own watch. This illusion was created for us to think that it was a good idea and a very handy place to put sensitive information, our sensitive information. This is akin to giving someone we don’t know a back door key to our house and allowing them to rummage through our private life whenever they feel like it. Whether you feel this is the real reason behind building these monstrosities or not is a personal opinion, and it will make very little difference to their arguments anyway – because that’s one of the reasons (excuses) being given. One we are going to be hard pushed to argue with if we keep producing endless data for them to store away. The main argument being used against these data centres is environmental, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg, and a clear message that this was their plan all along. Nature and creativity go together like peas in a pod. Divine creativity is what we are and, therefore, we have the ability to create really wonderful matter whilst we are here. Take our natural environment away, and we take our natural creativity away, too. That’s what they want – empty robotic shells to do as instructed.
Darkness doesn’t have the ability to be particularly creative, certainly not natural creativity that God/universal formulae provide us with. What they see is the opportunity to destroy it. It’s a classic case of irony if ever there was one. These forces for doing-no-good have zero interest in nature and the importance it plays in the lives who depend on it, beyond the destruction of it. Nature is us and we are nature. But this isn’t just about how we use it for our very survival in the physical sense; it is how we function whilst just being in the presence of nature and the other species we share this space with. If ever I am unsure – I retreat to the trees and the open spaces and the sounds of nature that reach my soul far quicker than words ever can. It’s just there; instantly sometimes. AI can’t touch that, never will be able to, for the reasons I have outlined and many more besides. Nature is AI’s enemy in that sense, and that extends to us, which is why the orchestrators of AI are always so keen to find ways in which to destroy our natural world.
Nature has a conscience, it has compassion, it has love and it has understanding and we need to do a lot better than we have done to protect it. The natural formulae, in all of its various and wonderful forms, have the right to reside in this world. But this right is being removed, without our say so, without our permission and without our knowledge to some extent. But we can’t make these excuses anymore. We are now very aware of the damage, the dangers and the cost to others who live on this planet who have played no part in technologies ‘progress’. And the onus is on us now to take a really good look at our own relationship with technology, particularly AI, and see how we are contributing to the destruction of this planet. We cannot bemoan the existence of the symptomatic issues that AI (and its orchestrators) are producing, including data centres, whilst blindly participating to the existence of them. I’m not suggesting we stop using technology – it has it’s uses of course it does but the use of it needs to be measured, it needs to be moderated and it needs to be used appropriately. These questions are not asked by that many people from what I can see. But these are the very considerations that we need to take stock of, and be brutally honest with ourselves about them in our own worlds. That’s what will stop AI intruding into every area and aspect of our lives. Stop feeding it.
Maybe my relationship with technology, particularly AI, is more on the cynical side to those of you reading this, but I fail to see what is so remarkable about training an unnatural invention to do something that we, a natural creation, can already do. I’m not talking about mechanics and the sort of engineering that has been useful overtime. I’m talking about programming a machine to perform functions that humans are supposed to carry out. Jobs that require our born intuition, instinct and emotion. Afterall, this is precisely what’s involved in passing down important knowledge to others; others who have the atoms to absorb it, to understand it innately, and to do good utilising it with heart and soul in mind. That holds real value. Asking something that has been programmed to answer a question by somebody somewhere, without knowing the identity of it is not something that I can relate to at all. And I certainly can’t trust it. For me, the identity or the source of the identity is far more important than the answer itself. That’s how I discern the difference between fact and fiction.
Synthetic cannot compete with Sensory. Automated cannot compete with Autonomy. And Artificial cannot compete with Authenticity.
That’s my view on the matter – what’s yours?
Answers on a postcard, comments box or keep it private in an e-mail if you prefer…