DARPA-linked Cycorp "Predicted" the Anthrax Attacks - 6 months before they happened.

(Digg links to DemocraticUnderground version of this story. Fire away. -rep.)

From the Dept. of Say What?

Cyc-ing out the terrorists

Posted 3/30/03

Only sheer brilliance or a crystal ball could foretell the next terrorist attack, right? Nope, says the inventor of a computer program that predicted anthrax might be sent through the mail six months before it happened. Cyc (as in encyclopedia), a project that is now part of the Pentagon's research on sniffing out terrorist plots, comes up with scenarios that could help focus screening efforts. It works by applying common sense to an extensive knowledge of terrorism. "It's not like beating Kasparov at chess," says creator Doug Lenat, head of the Austin-based firm Cycorp. He compares it to "a person with average intelligence but a vast amount of time and patience."

Cyc's roots go back to 1983, when Lenat concluded that efforts to create computer intelligence had hit a wall. "Robots lacked the common sense of humans," he says. So he began feeding Cyc concepts like the difference between turkey the meat or bird and Turkey, the country. The database now holds almost 2 million such simple truths.

Under a $9.8 million grant from the Defense Department's Information Awareness Office, Cyc has acquired a trove of knowledge about past terrorist activities, tactics, and weapons. But it is still a work in progress. Once, developing a scenario for a terrorist attack on Hoover Dam, it hypothesized a school of 1,000 al Qaeda- trained dolphins bearing explosives. Another time, Cyc, which can learn by asking questions, inquired: "Am I human?" It's reassuring to know it still needs our help. -Dana Hawkins

This story appears in the April 7, 2003 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.

Continued below the fold...

Admiral Inman is linked to SAIC (among other things, SAIC is neck-deep in connections to digital voting machines). This article from 2003 is pretty informative;

""Currently on SAIC's board is ex-CIA director Bobby Ray Inman, director of the National Security Agency, deputy director of the CIA, and vice director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. According to the OC (*Orange County) Weekly, "Inman worked at the highest levels of American intelligence during an era (President Ronald Reagan) when it displayed a stunning lack of it. Inman's achievements include: failing to predict the peaceful collapse of the Soviet Union; prolonging violent, useless civil wars in Central America; and giving arms to terrorists in exchange for hostages (Iran Contra)."

"During the Bush administration, Inman, Perry and Deutch - while directors of Science Applications (SAIC), were also members of the National Foreign Intelligence Board (NFIB), an advisory group reporting to the President and the director of Central Intelligence, which deals with production, review and coordination of foreign intelligence," reports the Crypt. Both Inman and Deutch were former Directors of the CIA. William J. Perry was also a former Secretary of Defense during the Clinton Administration.

SAIC proudly lists DARPA in its annual report as one of its prime clients. DARPA is the controversial Department of Defense (DOD) subsidiary, which until recently employed Admiral John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame. Poindexter was forced to resign when it was revealed that DARPA was prepared to trade "futures" in terrorist attacks. DARPA has also developed a program to spy on American citizens, which has civil libertarians in an uproar."

SAIC in turn, is linked to Steven Hatfill and Jerome Hauer. Mr. Hauer is currently a director at Emergent Solutions, parent co. of BioPort, which in turn is linked to Bruce Ivins.

So, an artificial intelligence program with an uncanny knack for putting the pieces together "predicts" the anthrax mailings, and 6 months later they happen?

And the program, under "widespread deployment" is funded heavily by DARPA, and is hard-wired into the U.S. intelligence community.

Admiral Inman is a very connected individual;
http://www.namebase.org/cgi-bin/nb06?_INMAN_BOBBY_RAY

Including a maximum of 2 degrees of separation from all of the (known) players in the anthrax tango.

How detailed was Cy's (Cycorp) "prediction" about the mailings? Did it include variables like mailing the anthrax from different states to muddy the trail... stuff like that? How about a variable on creating false evidence trails to keep people guessing?

I'm not sure that Cy is any more humane than HAL ever was.

I call out to internet researchers everywhere for more info on Cycorp.

Cross-posted at the DailyKOS

Reply at Digg...

http://digg.com/general_sciences/Cycorp_the_Anthrax_Prediction

Scroll down to the post by "escudo";

"escudo" in turn links to this blog entry;

http://stephendevoy.blogspot.com/2008/08/xxxxxx-anthrax-prediction.html

"...Now, if a system can be used to answer questions like "What are the ways Anthrax could be delivered to targets in a terrorist attack?", and the system contains information about how things can be delivered based on their size and other properties, it can provide a list of answers to the question which, with enough base knowledge, would include mailing the anthrax. Such a system would be very useful to a terrorist, as it would provide new ideas on how to cheaply carry out attacks. If the system knew who has anthrax, it could also tell you where to obtain it, and so on. This all leads me to the conclusion: knowledge based systems designed to defend against terrorist attacks could be used just as easily to suggest methods of terrorist attacks. A government would have quite the "false flag attack" generating system in their pocket if they had such a system. As you can see in the article, our government does have such a system. Without my knowledge of this implication, I worked on that system, thinking it was helping to defend us against such attacks..."

Continued...
http://stephendevoy.blogspot.com/2008/08/xxxxxx-anthrax-prediction.html

Now this is interesting!

The blogger also claims

"I remember that around the time that "the system" inferred that anthrax could be sent through the mail, Mr. Corporate Welfare Recipient remarked to me about his personal connections with scientists at Fort Detrick and he mentioned that they were involved in bio defense research.

Now, if a system can be used to answer questions like "What are the ways Anthrax could be delivered to targets in a terrorist attack?", and the system contains information about how things can be delivered based on their size and other properties, it can provide a list of answers to the question which, with enough base knowledge, would include mailing the anthrax. Such a system would be very useful to a terrorist, as it would provide new ideas on how to cheaply carry out attacks. If the system knew who has anthrax, it could also tell you where to obtain it, and so on. This all leads me to the conclusion: knowledge based systems designed to defend against terrorist attacks could be used just as easily to suggest methods of terrorist attacks. A government would have quite the "false flag attack" generating system in their pocket if they had such a system. As you can see in the article, our government does have such a system. Without my knowledge of this implication, I worked on that system, thinking it was helping to defend us against such attacks.

Now, I am implicating Mr. Corporate Welfare Recipient in nothing. Lots of coincidences happen in life. But I find it interesting to think about the fact that in this case we do have someone with a system that generated scenarios for terrorists attacks on the U.S., one scenario being that of mailing anthrax, and this person is connected by zero degrees of separation from the lab that conducted the attacks. Corporation XXXXXX has profited greatly from the "war on terror."
http://stephendevoy.blogspot.com/2008/08/xxxxxx-anthrax-prediction.html

Is this true? I mean, the anthrax "prediction" was suspicious enough considering that such an attack by Al Qaeda is virtually impossible (assuming they didn't get it from an advanced lab--Iraq does not even possess the capability to make anthrax). Now, this guy who worked at Cycorp is claiming he worked on the project, and that the CEO of Cycorp had personal contacts with some of the people who made the anthrax used post-9/11? This looks like some pretty explosive information!

Arabesque: 911 Truth

I find it absurd to claim that a computer program predicted the

anthrax attacks six months before they happened! If any such prediction was issued six months beforehand, common sense dictates it was based on foreknowledge!!!

The people in this clairvoyant Cycorp need to be investigated!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consider mass emailing truth messages. More info here: http://www.911blogger.com/node/13321

Dugway Proving ground

Dugway Proving Ground looks more likely as the source of the weaponized anthrax. Is there proof that Irvins had access and capability to weaponize the anthrax?

How about this for a coincidence......

"For nearly a decade, U.S. Army scientists at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have made small quantities of weapons-grade anthrax that is virtually identical to the powdery spores used in the mail attacks that have killed five people, government sources say."
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bioter/anthraxmatchesarmyspores.html

"Dugway's Life Sciences Division makes the deadly spores in far, far smaller quantities, rarely accumulating more than 10 grams at a time, according to one Army official."
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bioter/anthraxmatchesarmyspores.html

"It has been estimated that the perpetrator used a total of about 10g in the letters."
http://911review.org/Wget/www.fas.org/bwc/news/anthraxreport.htm

Read

SAIC backwards.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

quicklink submitted to opednews, great article

9/11 Family Steering Committee Review of the 9/11 Commission Report:
http://911truth.org/images/resources/Family%20Steering%20Cmte%20review%2...

Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

FBI's Anthrax Media Strategy

FBI's Anthrax Media Strategy Explained
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=149373

CyCorp prediction seems like another one of those "coincidences"

How does one "predict" an Al Qaeda anthrax attack when even Iraq does not have the capability to make anthrax? Even a FOX (yes, FOX NEWS) report admits that, "Iraq probably will never have anthrax capability. As Jane’s Intelligence Review reported, '… the Iraqis would have to maintain rigorous First World standards and not their usual ‘make do’ efforts.'" source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,36330,00.html

Did I forget to mention that the post-9/11 anthrax came from U.S. labs? Yes, the U.S. government is blaming a single individual (actually the last two were completely discredited, so this is their third "suspect"--and the story isn't holding together very well). So this means the government lied when they said that the anthrax "may" have come from Iraq. This lie was repeated on MSM news reports. In fact, the anthrax came from U.S. labs, so why would government officials lie that it "may" have came from Iraq, when Iraq has no capability--let alone a bunch of guys with box-cutters. As one FBI agent put it, "you don't go from box cutters to anthrax overnight".

Given the fact that Iraq does not even have the capability to make weapons grade anthrax, how in the heck did the Cyc program predict an Al Qaeda anthrax attack? I would very interested to know considering the fact that Al Qaeda does not have the capability to make such an attack. The official anthrax story is now "inside job"--an attempt to blame someone inside the U.S. for sending the anthrax.

This means that someone must have "suggested" the possibility to the Cyc program, and it predicted that it could have been sent out by mail. Well, gee, do you need a computer program to figure that one out? The relevant point is someone predicted an IMPOSSIBLE Al Qaeda anthrax attack--when they do not have the capability.

So how did CyCorp predict these anthrax attacks? This is a very important story in my opinion, and it needs to be fully investigated.

Someone might want to start a new entry at the 911 timeline, because I did a search for Cycorp and there is nothing. This looks like a very significant story that should be investigated.
_______________
Arabesque: 911 Truth

Artificial Intelligence

Prestidigitation is sleight of hand. 'Prestidigitalization' is sleight of mind using the magic computer box to mystify the audience.

The computer can't predict anything that it isn't programmed for. At it's most basic level, the artifical intelligence system is merely a logic tree that consists of yes/no questions and a logical path defined depending on the answer. In order for the knowledge base to have an entry that says 'anthrax attack', somebody had to put that in the computer as a response to a yes/no question in the logic tree.

1's and 0's that's what the computer knows. On/off everything else is programmed by the human mind in layers upon layers upon layers of programs. There is no magic to it.

Just to play devils advocate...

...one can argue a similar thing about the human brain. Contrary to what rabid individualists would like to believe, everything we know, we did learn or have "input" at some point through some means--teaching, experience or experimentation. Most learning disabilities not solidly based in genetics (downsyndrome, etc), are garbage in/garbage out problems.

That said, I think you're spot on with this:

"In order for the knowledge base to have an entry that says 'anthrax attack', somebody had to put that in the computer as a response to a yes/no question in the logic tree."

At this point I see no evidence for true AI. It is far more likely the fascination of AI is being used as a cover to give cynical validation to a desired preconceived result.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Can't let that one slide

I agree with the person below that we shouldn't debate this here - but I can't let this one slide:

"Contrary to what rabid individualists would like to believe, everything we know, we did learn or have "input" at some point through some means--teaching, experience or experimentation." Col. Jenny

If that were true, we'd still be living in caves and grunting to each other. Granted, there is so much information in the world that it might be hard to imagine that somebody could have a completely new idea, but it does happen and it does advance knowledge for all.

From your response, I'd have to guess that you are a trained group-thinker, probably trained in the Delphi Technique to oppress the "rabid individualist". As a "rabid individualist" myself, I'll tell you that my experience with group-think is that if you put a bunch of morons in room to solve a problem, you'll end up with a moronic solution. The only time you get quality thinking from a group is when you have a group of "rabid individualists" who come together and they are in sync and they can communicate in leaps and bounds without having to slow up and explain the thought process step by step for the slow ones. And I'm not saying that because I think I'm a genius or anything. If you put me in a room with physicists - I'd be the slow one and it would be cruel and unusual punishment to make the physicists treat me like an intellectual equal.

And this is my last comment on that subject.

I've no idea what you're on about

I've made enough qualifications in my post that you know you are misrepresenting what I said.

Now lets see if that was really your last comment, luv.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Very interesting

In a nasty sinister way.

Even the name sounds dodgy--Cycorp> Psicorp? B5 fans will understand.
 ;-)
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

1000 Freshwater Dolphins?

How does a computer predict a terrorist attack with Dolphins and an anthrax mailing based on "past terrorist activities" when neither has ever happened before?

Also, there are only five species of freshwater dolphins, one almost extinct and the others in fairly inaccessible places. Can you imagine AlQaeda getting 100 of them and shipping them to the Hoover damn unnoticed? Lord...what won't the MSM publish with a straight face.

- omniadeo

ps: Col Jenny, You are wrong about human knowledge. It is not coded on binary relationships only. Different subject, so let;'s not debate it here, but that opinion has been solidly refuted. Just to get you started, though, look at two bodies of evidence: How does the human recognize distorted shapes as letters (the key to most sytems that distinguish robots form humans online)? So far, no machine can. When they do, it will almost certainly be based on complex programs that are not replications of the same human ability. Take an intelligent two year old and show her 100 vastly different cartoon frogs. She will recognize them all, without any training whatsoever. She needs one cartoon frog to get started. No computer can do that. Again, when they do, it will be by a much different process.

Ahem

"ps: Col Jenny, You are wrong about human knowledge. It is not coded on binary relationships only. "

I didn't say that.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Sounds like a confidence game to me.

Huge money from the bottomless military budget is the target.

Having a "success" like predicting the anthrax attacks would go a long way in justifying contracts.

Garbage in=Garbage out

What kind of real information was entered into this program? Does it know the frequency and likelihood of false flag operations perpetrated by the US? Does it know about the CFR? Does it know about the Gulf of Tonkin. Does it know about building 7? Does it know about who really killed JFK? Does it know the truth about Iran Contra? Does it know about the CIA selling cocaine? Does it know about Bush being a coke head, alcoholic? Does it know about Prescott Bush financing the Nazis? Does it know why Nancy Pelosi, John Conyers and the rest won't impeach Bush, even though he is the most corrupt criminal president in the history of the Republic? Did it know that the Bush Crime Family lied and lied and lied and forged and forged us into the illegal invasion of Iraq? Does it know about the Federal Reserve System being a license to steal? Does it know about the dancing Israelis? Does it know about thermite and thermate?

and so on...........

If it predicted the anthrax attacks, I would say that someone knew something, as is implied in the article above.

Did it predict that it was a psyop by the Bush Crime Family?

Weighing the odds

The only thing a computer program (Artificial Intelligence program) could do would be to calculate the odds of an event occuring based on the variables. The computer reporting back that anthrax attacks were likely would be highly suspect because the variables that would lead to that conclusion would make it statistically highly improbable. Those variables would be: controlled nature of the research; the relatively few people with the knowledge, capability and access; and the sophistication of the equipment and facilities to make the material.

Given the variables of an anthrax attack, I have to believe that the odds would be far less likely than other events - assuming of course, that we are talking about "terrorists" and not government initiated Hegelian Dialectics.

Who benefitted from the anthrax attacks? The media was muzzled (at least by appearances). The democratic leadership was silenced (at least by appearances). The Patriot Act was passed. No investigation of 9/11 was done.

Does anybody know when the post office operations were privatized? When Lockheed got the contract? Because if it was after, they would have benefitted too - big time. Also, UPS because UPS is now delivering UPS packages to mail boxes. That used to be against federal law.

Also, an infrastructure to manage bioterrorism and pandemics was built - with ongoing funding. Hospitals were sucked into the vortex of federal 'emergency management'. Hospitals, Police, Fire - and all related organizations of first responders are hooked into the centralized command and control communications and management systems. Whether they realize it or not, that's a federal takeover. In fact, Psychopath Secretary of HHS, Mike Leavitt, made a pronouncement a few weeks ago regarding the triage of patients in an emergency. His policy is "Let them Die" unless they are young and healthy.

I like that - 'Let them die Leavitt'. It's a handle he's earned.

Links
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/110055.php

http://www.harriscountyhealth.com/2007forum/HHS%20Pandemic%20Influenza%2...

It's funny - all the articles on the triage seem to be gone. There were several articles on the San Francisco Chronicle website that I can't find now. I'll have to keep looking.

Vicky

From one individualist to another ...

I always look forward to your comments, eyes, well researched and knowledgeable. You're observation bears repeating:

"The only thing a computer program (Artificial Intelligence program) could do would be to calculate the odds of an event occuring based on the variables. The computer reporting back that anthrax attacks were likely would be highly suspect because the variables that would lead to that conclusion would make it statistically highly improbable. Those variables would be: controlled nature of the research; the relatively few people with the knowledge, capability and access; and the sophistication of the equipment and facilities to make the material.

Given the variables of an anthrax attack, I have to believe that the odds would be far less likely than other events - assuming of course, that we are talking about "terrorists" and not government initiated Hegelian Dialectics."

SPOT ON TARGET. Thanks for the reminder.

DARPA and TIA

Recommended reading:
http://epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/#introduction

This is a gold mine for information on DARPA. They even have FOIA information requests here.

“The Department of Defense's… (TIA) program, a five- year effort, has committed $260 million so far to develop tools for large-scale data mining. But it ran into a public-relations fiasco after Vice Adm. John Poindexter of Iran-contra fame was named to lead the project. Its Orwellian name and a logo (since dropped) showing an all-seeing eye atop a pyramid didn't help. Congress recently voted to require the Pentagon to justify the program and seek approval before monitoring citizens… the database could be a virtual one, created by linking records already gathered by companies and the government. The government routinely draws on data collected by other groups, after all.”
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/030407/7data.htm

"Meanwhile, contractors and researchers told The Associated Press that they have already been developing pieces of TIA. For example, Doug Lenat, president of Texas-based Cycorp, said his researchers had already built a system to identify phone-calling patterns as they might exist among potential terrorists overseas... The project has met some resistance in Congress because of privacy concerns... Cycorp... was awarded $9.8 million to work on a prototype database. The company specializes in searching data."
http://archive.seacoastonline.com/2003news/02132003/news/12700.htm

“Under a $9.8 million grant from the Defense Department's Information Awareness Office, Cyc [i.e. Cycorp's A.I. Program] has acquired a trove of knowledge about past terrorist activities, tactics, and weapons.”
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/030407/7data.b.htm

A document obtained through FOIA by http://epic.org reveals that Cycorp’s project title for this approved contract was entitled “Terrorism Knowledge Base.
http://www.epic.org/foia_docs/tia_contractors/cycorp_sow.pdf

So let's review this information:

DARPA funded Cycorp “predicted anthrax might be sent through the mail six months before it happened."
An ex-FBI official remarks, “[Al Qaeda] couldn't go from box cutters one week to weapons-grade anthrax the next.”
DARPA director John Poindexter was “forced to resign when it was revealed that DARPA was prepared to trade ‘futures’ in terrorist attacks.
Apparently, betting on "terrorist" attacks was not a new idea. Insider trading after the 9/11 attack was described as having “no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda” by the 9/11 commission report. (page 499)
_______________
Arabesque: 911 Truth

Cy-ops

Computer systems and technology are at the heart of everything that is going on in our country - and in fact, the world today. The leaders at the top of the technology industry are psychopaths. The vision is for a completely managed world using computer systems and surveillance technology to "maintain order". If you use that as the central thesis for your research, you can begin to make sense of seemingly unrelated events.

I went to the Cycorp website and as I expected, it's full of technospeak that is designed to make you think - that their program has the capability of human thought. It doesn't. It just parses words that you enter verbs, adjectives, nouns - and it constructs queries into the knowledge base and then may respond back with a question based on the number of hits it gets in the knowledge base. I've used the AI system at the Microsoft website to try to get answers to technical questions and frankly, it sucks. And it's highly unlikely that Cycorp's AI engine is any better than Microsoft's engine because they are doing the same thing.

Did you see the video that was made of Senator Ted Stevens floor speech on the Internet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtOoQFa5ug8

The truth is that while most members of Congress wouldn't have tried to explain the Internet and technology in public, for most of them - and the public at large, their understanding of the technology is no better than Ted Stevens understanding and because of that, people are easily fooled by techno-smartasses, techno-crooks, and techno-traitors.

I just did a search on Admiral Bobby Inman, upon seeing this:

"After a stint as director of Naval Intelligence, he was appointed to the top spot at the National Security Agency." President Ronald Reagan "tapped" Inman "to be the deputy director of the CIA in the warming years of the Cold War.

"He retired in 1982, putting his skills to work in the business world, seeing companies like Dell and Oracle through their initial public offerings as a member of their boards of directors, and investing in start-up technology companies."

That tells me a whole lot more than the observable words. Both Dell and Oracle (add CISCO) are part of a core group of technology corporations that are engaged in the global electronic prison project (my words). This project includes full surveillance technology integrated into our transportation systems, B2B global supply chain management for control of the supply lines so to speak, "emergency command and control centers" - for data collection, surveillance and management of first responders (and terror teams), etc.

The CIA and military have been the major funding sources for technology corporations for a long time - like since almost the beginning.

I just started researching back in history to find information about a man named Wassily Leontief (Harvard Professor of Economics). The reason is because of his 'InPut-OutPut Analysis'. He was the first one to purport to be able to predict economic trends using tables of materials (Bill of Materials) extrapolated throughout the economy for the purpose of being able to plan the economy. Leontieff is linked to Howard Hathaway Aiken and his Mark I computer built at Harvard - which is also the link to the Navy.

(I don't know if the 'Hathaway' is connected to Berkshire-Hathaway - but I suspect it is). And the way I see this is that a con game has been played out for a long time. I see GE being a big player, the media is a tool of market manipulation (NBC was caught fabricating a news story that could potentially have cost GM a lot of money and bad press during a lawsuit). Simple formula - Sell short before a bad news story; Buy long before a good news story; If no news is forthcoming - make some some news. (They got caught on 9/11)

Leontieff's InPut/OutPut Analysis is the basis for the B2B supply chain management systems that are being implemented. This software and the sharing of production and sales information is enabling cartels (Trusts) to be built - putting competitors outside the supply chain out of business. This is what allowed Walmart to grow into the monster it is today - and it is how Walmart forced it's suppliers to move offshore to produce.

I've written 3 commentaries in the last week - and there will be more to come:

http://www.channelingreality.com/The_Coup/taking_our_country_back.htm

http://www.channelingreality.com/The_Coup/inputoutput_analysis.htm

http://www.channelingreality.com/The_Coup/supply_chain_cartel_in_action.htm

How is all of this relevant to Cycorp? Does anybody remember Charlie McCarthy? He was the puppet of ventroquist, Edgar Bergen. Charlie could say anything to anybody that a real person couldn't say.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_McCarthy

Cycorp AI system can make "predictions" that the CIA behind Cycorp can make happen - completely mystifying the ignorant (Congress and the multitudes).

It serves the purpose of a perfect tool of terror - essentially blackmail. "If you don't do thus and so, the program says this or that will happen".

"Cycorp AI system can make

"Cycorp AI system can make "predictions" that the CIA behind Cycorp can make happen - completely mystifying the ignorant (Congress and the multitudes).

It serves the purpose of a perfect tool of terror - essentially blackmail. "If you don't do thus and so, the program says this or that will happen".

Yes, we get it. That's the point of the article that started this thread.

Except I wouldn't assume manipulating politicians worked because the tech "mystifies " Congress. (They do have advisers). That can be explained by good old fashioned politics and fear--they have loads more effective tools for politicians. This bit of over hyped scifi is aimed at the non tech crowd.

And could we kindly not be dismissive about the "multitudes" that --hello--we are trying to reach? Try "misinformed" instead of "ignorant".

Unless you really have contempt for your fellow human being's ability to improve.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

You can only be misinformed

You can only be misinformed if you had a basic understanding to begin with. The vast majority of people don't understand anything at all about computers. They can't even tell you the difference between a hard drive and memory. And how messages are sent across the internet - and how networks work - forget about it.

Politicians are precisely the people to fool because they are the decision makers. And who are their technical advisors that you put so much stock in? They come from industry and academia. Their advisors are advising them on 'Global Warming - climate change'. The tech advisors give advice on schools, health, drug war, etc. etc. Enough said on the tech advisors of Congress.

What I've said has nothing to do with contempt for people who don't understand technology. I have contempt for the people who misuse it, contempt for the people who use superior knowledge to lie to others, and most of all, I have contempt for people who avoid truth because somebody's feelings might get hurt. If honesty was a trait that was valued in this society rather than political correctness, I don't think we'd be in as much trouble as we are.

Computerized Voting Systems

Did you get the computerized voting system fraud Col. Jenny? How many people got suckered by paperless voting? How many states replaced their systems with Diebold?

But I guess they were all just misinformed too right? And the people who wrote the systems and sold them, they were just misinformed too.

Focus

"Misinformed", as you know, was a response to your assertions of ignorance among the multitudes re: cynical computer predictions being passed off as genuine AI.

That point had nothing to do with computerized voting.

Now, you want to ask me if I think that applies to computerized voting too, fine--just be polite about it.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Club of Rome

Look at the home page of the Club of Rome.

Systems Integrators - study that diagram and look at the 'programmes'.

http://www.clubofrome.org/

Priceless....

"[Al Qaeda] couldn't go from box cutters one week to weapons-grade anthrax the next."

;-)
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/