Why we need to put the question-mark back

In opening this post today, I constructed the draft in Libre Office Writer under the title ‘2024/25turningpoint?’ When I pressed ‘Save’, an AI Bot panel told me “Invalid Format”. No help beyond that general hissy-fit was on offer, so it was an assertion devoid of help, and thus utterly pointless in that all it pointed out to the wannabe author of the post was that the title he wanted was not acceptable to some chunk of brainless metal.

Now obviously, I took out the question-mark and forward slash, and the Bot saved it without hesitation. But why are what is often called ‘special symbols’ not allowed? Other office suites do allow them…..and password Bots often insist on them being used.

The unwritten, silent answer hanging in the air is a robotic Nazi Ordnung as follows:

“Halt’s Maul Mensch, eet eez not necessary for you ter know zeess”

This is not me indulging in obsessive pedantry: it’s a humorist smiling at the irony of a post posing the question as to whether the end of the annus horribilis 2024 will or will not represent some kind of turning point in the fight against trans-human automation. Equally, at some time in the future I’ll be wanting to access the draft that follows via a Libre Office search….and at the time – perhaps years from now with various docs using 202425 to choose from – the [?] in my saved title preference will be key to accurate access to it.

All of which brings me to the recent post by prolific substacker Dr John Day on the very same subject – “are we at a turning point in the alignment of political Parties in the US?” The reason Dr John’s blog is always worth a visit is because he is possibly the most voracious reader on the planet, and is excellent in his discernment of the shit v sugar thing. He is also to be admired and respected because his licence to practice medicine was revoked by the Fauci gargoyles at the outset of the Covid19 scam: thus he is a bloke who has been unjustly deprived of income, his sole crime having been to refuse to administer Pfizer’s mRNA “vaccine” – a killer drug now at last so branded as I recorded on December 11^th last:

‘…you can go here to the official US medical output source and read this clearly stated debunking of the “no connection” falsehood:

‘The temporal relationship, internal and external consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis, its pathobiological mechanisms, and related excess death, complemented with autopsy confirmation, independent adjudication, and application of the Bradford Hill criteria to the overall epidemiology of vaccine myocarditis, suggests that there isa high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death from myocarditis’.

In his most recent post, John Day points us at an Albrt’s Blog post entitled ‘Twirling Towards Freedom?’

I had never heard of Albrt’s Blog until yesterday, but Doctor John never misses a trick. The post is a stunning analysis of whether the forthcoming Trump/Vance administration will produce real change in the American elite – a genuine realignment in US politics – or simply more of the same. Albrt sums up his essay as follows:

‘The first assumption this post makes is that a long-term realignment is in play. The second assumption is that the realignment has not yet been fully accomplished. The third assumption is that it should be possible for a non-expert (like me) to look at how the Trump-Vance administration implements its policies and tell whether they are serious about delivering concrete material benefits for working class citizens in order to consolidate the realignment.’

This is the Thing with Dr John Day: while the rest of us sleep, he highlights stuff of high quality and helps guide the Open Mind. This isn’t about agreeing with even half of Albrt’s hypothesis, it’s about informing the debate with which I commenced this morning, viz – will the Trump inauguration represent a turning point in the search for honesty, or will it simply comply with the status quo? [Yet another question mark, he quipped]. As I have stated on many occasions, this is not about partisan support, but rather Holding All Power to Account. I wrote last November 11^th:

‘In terms of control of Congress and a whopping Electoral College majority, on November 5^th 2024 American registered voters effectively gave Donald Trump a blank cheque. Now he and his team must use it, but not abuse it’

---

Ultimately, today’s Slogpost about revisiting and questioning the general direction of “scientific advance”, and returning the liberties being covertly stolen from Nation State citizens by the unelected over-monetised State.

Hence the relevance of the Albrt post in terms of political realignment. But there is also a view abroad in the World (allied to citizen apathy) at the moment that because we can do something, we should plough on with it rather than examining what the ramifications of it might be.

For example, an even more globally disturbing debate is whether (and how) we can stop, redirect and reverse the headlong progression from Artificial Intelligence [AI] to the sort of full-on dystopian transhuman obedience nightmare that seems to be the goal of the self-styled New World Order, and it’s hideous invention The New Normal.

Transhumanism can be defined as follows:

‘The belief that humans can enhance themselves through technology and thus create a Human/Bot hybrid species vastly superior to Homo sapiens’

On the basis of every last piece of empirical evidence I’ve studied, the entire basis and entropic nature of transhumanism as a goal harbours a near-inevitable dystopian outcome…and is of itself based on assumptions and rationales that are – to use the technical term here – utter tosh.

My bullet-point summary of support for that assertion is

* Over and over again, independent service industry studies show conclusively that human staff intervention produces quicker and better solutions to customer problems than AI.

* In an already under-employed world, AI exacerbates the problem.

* AI is a sort of unaccountable torres vedras behind which senior management can hide and become yet more unaccountable, enjoy lower employee costs and produce larger profits.

* AI is only ever going to be as good as the human nerd who programmed it, and by definition cannot grasp the emotional needs of customers because it has no right brain empathy – and never will have.

* Thus the idea that such emotionally blind robots taking ice-cold and obedient decisions are somehow preferable to Homo sapiens – admittedly flawed, but nevertheless using open-minded, non-ideological decisions about future issues on Earth – is a risible and dangerous fantasy.

* In the context of liberty and free speech defence, the transhumanists are antithetical to every aim we have of feeling empathy wherever it is required in the future. They represent a fanatical team very obviously batting for the other side.

* Such transhuman ‘beings’ would be deficient in key elements of the all-important five primary senses of our species – the ability to see, hear, smell, taste and touch. The absence of some of these senses from the Online Space already displays to us the unreality and serial mendacity of the contemporary internet….and why, for example, online dating only very rarely leads to successful long term relationships. Whatever scam might be in use, let’s face it people – the internet is a liar’s paradise.

* Last – but definitely not least – transhuman aims are a thinly disguised attempt by the NWO monopolists to become Gods in a Godless Universe.

That last observation reflects my own tendency towards the view of a designed rather than random Metaverse. But that’s another debate for another day.

Enjoy your weekend.

Source: https://therealslog.com/2024/12/28/why-we-need-to-put-the-question-mark-back/