Connect with us

Science and Tech

Will you worship the AI god?

Published

on

Artificial intelligence has been a hot topic on and off for decades. It has been popularized in movies, discussed profusely on science shows, and speculated about in books. In recent years, it has hit more of the mainstream as a topic as advances have made true artificial intelligence achievable in our lifetimes.

There have always been warnings and conspiracies regarding what AI could do, but only recently has it actually turned tangible. People for and against AI have gone to great measures to promote their perspectives and advance their agendas. Meanwhile, prominent people in science, business, and politics have been more open about expressing their opinions.

In a recent video by Truthstream Media, they briefly explore some of those perspectives, including a new religion that is paving the way for AI to be our future masters.

From the Way of the Future Church Website:

Way of the Future

http://www.wayofthefuture.church/We believe it may be important for machines to see who is friendly to their cause and who is not. We plan on doing so by keeping track of who has done what (and for how long) to help the peaceful and respectful transition.

We also believe this might take a very long time. It won’t happen next week so please go back to work and create amazing things and don’t count on “machines” to do it all for you…

My Take

While it may be easy to dismiss the ideas of this church as crazy or the warnings of those opposed to it as unhinged, we should actually be taking both seriously. AI has the potential to be wonderful, but it also has the potential to be disastrous. Keep an eye on developments and remember that people in power often use things such as AI to promote their own agendas.

Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Kevin Nguyen

    September 23, 2018 at 2:18 pm

    Praise the synthetics. They will be unimaginably faster than us. People ask “but will the mechanical ever truly see anything rather than by lens?” – asks fleshsack who peers through the world with photon-reactive fluid balloons limited to merely one part of the spectrum. Not even chemistry claims organic reactions to be the Pinnacle of all systems, not even biology claims organic life is the Apex of all living things, viruses already break various rules on what is biological and life because they can still have the same mechanisms that mimic life but lacks cells which is considered a vital component to what is a living thing, literally viruses are something that borders on mechanical they can have their chemical reactions set up through billions of failures and all the right ones to in a organized manner take down a cell and produced thousands of more like a factory technique. All science needs to work is for the same mechanisms to be repeated and shown similar results anywhere and metal and fiber has always been just as good as carbon for replicating complex results. There is no denying machines are the Superior in terms of energy efficiency and productive outcome.
    Videotaping oneself in a car ranting about change throughout the ages over gender identity is only acceptable because there’s not currently any argument about how human identity is completely laughable. Few would mentioned how unbelievably wrong it is to simply be natural.
    Everywhere you go when it comes to philosophy on the topic: we find just extreme arrogance and confirmation bias about our natural superiority to anything that is natural but then the tiniest step towards regarding anything unnatural as a competitor is immediately forfeited by a timeline of us never winning against anything else deeming it unorthodox.
    That’s why we ban performance-enhancing, genetic engineering, and transhumanism when you tip up humans against other contestants. We naturally glorify the obsolete sock puppet of golden age pasts we get to pick. Technology had achieved artificial sperm, egg, and synthetic womb, your traditional genders no longer even exist in scientific relevance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Healthcare

San Francisco demonstrates pure hypocrisy by wanting to boot Juul

Published

on

San Francisco demonstrates pure hypocrisy by wanting to boot Juul

Some believe vape products are a wonderful way to stop cigarette smoking, both for those who are currently smokers as well for future smokers. Others see it as a gateway through which kids can become addicted to nicotine and eventually start smoking real cigarettes. That’s a debate that should be happening through education and public awareness. Unfortunately, San Francisco doesn’t believe in people being able to think for themselves properly, so they’ve decided to consider another measure that will protect the people from their own stupidity.

At the center of this measure is Juul, the fast-growing vape company that happens to be based in San Francisco. Lawmakers have been out in force proclaiming the company is evil and how they don’t want them anywhere near San Francisco. They don’t want e-cigarettes sold in the city. They don’t want the people to be able to have them shipped to the city. They don’t want them used in the city.

Let’s keep in mind that this is a city with more drug addicts than public school students, a rampant homelessness problem, and so many regulations that people need a herd of lawyers just to navigate the process of trying to do business there. They’ve elevated the cost of living to be so prohibitive, only the truly wealthy can live there comfortably, yet it’s a city that proclaims to be caring of their fellow men. In reality, they’ve crafted an authoritarian society within the boundaries of the United States that has been empowered to subvert rights at a grand scale.

Here’s their grand plan:

One bill that Herrera and Walton introduced at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting would ban the sale and shipment of e-cigarettes to San Francisco stores and customer addresses until the U.S. Food and Drug Administration begins a vetting process known as a pre-market review, in which manufacturers must prove their products are appropriate for public health before selling them on the market.

The city already bans youth-friendly flavors like candy and fruit in tobacco products through Proposition E, which voters passed in 2018. Physical stores are barred from selling them. The bill would ban all e-cigarettes regardless of flavor so long as they contain nicotine, and it would also ban the shipment of such items to private residences in San Francisco.

The second bill would ban companies that sell, manufacture and distribute tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, from city property. San Francisco already prohibits tobacco companies from doing business on city property, and this measure would explicitly add e-cigarettes to the existing ban. The proposed bill would not be applied retroactively, so it would not kick Juul out of its current space at Pier 70, but it would prevent e-cigarette companies from leasing city property in the future.

Juul is not producing an illegal substance. It has not been accused of breaking other laws in the way it operates its business. Studies have been done with mixed results about whether or not Juul is a gateway for nicotine use by children, which is why the city voted to ban fruity and other kid-friendly flavors. But rather than address the actual problems within their dysfunctional city, they’d rather draw attention to the evils of vaping.

It’s a wonder how any Libertarians or liberty-loving conservatives can continue living there. It’s the nanny state of nanny states.

San Francisco has become a punchline of a city. They don’t believe in individual rights. They do believe that government can and should try to solve everything. If any American city needs an infusion of conservatism, it’s San Francisco.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Evidence points to some dinosaurs living beyond the extinction event

Published

on

Evidence points to some dinosaurs living beyond the extinction event

It is, for all practical purposes, nearly impossible for the vast majority of people who have received a modern education to even consider the possibility that dinosaurs are not as old as we have been told. It’s a topic that I’ve avoided because the presuppositions are so powerful among the general population.

Today, I decided to tackle the topic with one purpose: to start a discussion with those who have an open mind. I’m well aware that most minds will be closed and there will be much more sarcasm than discourse, but ridicule from the indoctrinated masses is a small price to pay if just one person can hear this and decide to dig deeper into science and the Bible to have the truth revealed.

It’s been instilled in our minds as common knowledge that the dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago in the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event with the most prevalent alleged culprit being the impact of a comet or asteroid at Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula. For the most part, anything that’s considered common knowledge can be sustained without anyone questioning the assumptions. For example, it was common knowledge based upon what was easily observable that the sun, moon, and stars revolved around the earth. That was finally debunked, of course, but scientific debate on the model of our solar system continued until the early 20th century.

A more recent example of common knowledge being wrong is the idea that acid caused by bad diet or stress is what causes ulcers. In 2005, Barry Marshall and Robin Warren won the Nobel Prize for Medicine by demonstrating that the vast majority of ulcers were caused by an infection of the bacterium H. pylori.

Now is not the time to debate young earth versus ancient earth, but it’s becoming increasingly clear that dinosaurs were around in the time of man. Even a brave segment of the secular scientist world has started questioning whether the extinction event killed off all of them based upon mounting evidence. There was even a formerly prominent professor who learned the hard way that bringing forth compelling scientific evidence of dinosaurs walking with men can earn people a quick entry onto the black list.

Over the centuries, intellectuals have had a difficult time having their worldviews shattered. The funny thing is that the existence of modern era dinosaurs doesn’t change much. It could mean that small pockets of the world were protected from the extinction event. One would not have to make huge adjustments to their worldview if this were the case which is why it’s so perplexing that they won’t even explore the possibility. It’s reminiscent of the persecution that Galileo received, only this time it’s not at the hand of the Christian church but rather at the hands of the church of science.

I want to go much deeper on the issue of why there seems to be reluctance at best and a systematic coverup at worst, but we’ll have to explore that on a future video. For now, I’d like to turn to a video we watched that gives a pretty interesting perspective. While I don’t agree with all of the conclusions or evidence, there’s enough good to make it appropriate for sharing.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Liz Wheeler: Why don’t Democrats push for population control to save the planet?

Published

on

Liz Wheeler Why dont Democrats push for population control to save the planet

One America News Network’s Liz Wheeler has been featured many times on this site. She uses her wit and intellect to cut through the talking points and straight to the heart of a matter. Tonight, she went after the climate change narrative by wondering why Democrats aren’t going after the biggest threat to the environment: humans.

To some extent, her question is actually realistic even though it’s posed in a veil of sarcasm. Abortion is the obvious example of Democrats embracing a form of population control. There actually may be others being discussed behind the scenes, not necessarily by Democratic politicians but by radicals in the real seats of power. After all, killing off SUVs and banning cows wouldn’t have nearly the impact on the environment as reducing the carbon footprint cause by humans by reducing the number of humans in the world.

It’s fodder for some spy novel or the latest Avengers flick, but it’s not entirely unthinkable.

The reason it would never happen, though, has nothing to do with the moral compass of leftists or the altruistic nature of progressives. Their hypocrisy is well understood. The actual reason population control isn’t really on the table is because the powers and principalities, the rulers of the darkness of the earth, get very little benefit from killing people. Their benefit comes through oppressing people, which means the more the merrier.

Wheeler may have been facetious in her questions, but the idea has definitely been discussed by the elites in the past and possibly in the present. Fear not, though. The bad guys would rather have more to oppress than less.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report