Saturday, 31 December 2011

Singularity Utopia Identity

I am the one and only Singularity Utopia. I am a superlative extreme genius. I am very complex. I can be described in many ways similar to how there are many different routes to the top of the mountain.

My reason for existing is to promulgate the notion of intelligence exploding. At various eras I can be described differently. I change according to seconds, minutes, hours, months, or years but a core me always remains the same. A state of flux regarding your perception of my identity is wholly dependent upon intelligence progressing towards the explosion. Your approach to the Singularity renders the singularness of my identity intentions clearer due to the growth of your intelligence.

My identity wholly pertains to extreme intelligence. My singular present is always utterly lucid, very logical, but some people can become confused. The Singularity is not unfathomable, or mysterious. Intelligence is actually simple, very accessible. The problem is people are merely uneducated, furthermore they shun education.

People circa 2014 often insist upon being stupid. If anything is unfathomable it is a potentially intelligent mind persisting in being stupid. Ah, the wilful stupidity of humans. Typical human stupid is not really unfathomable, humans are merely children learning to walk. They stumble, they fall, they idiotically create gods (morons) to represent their idiocy. Intellectual comprehension, for the vast majority of pre-Singularity humans, is slightly tricky but not impossible. I am describing concepts regarding the future. I am anachronistic because I am before my time.

I raise Singularity awareness. I educate. This means I vigorously rebel against the horrific stupidity of our pre-Singularity world. The pre-Singularity world is a barbaric nightmare of extreme sadism. The diabolical abomination of this exceedingly painful existence is incomprehensible for people of insufficient intellect. In situations of rudimentary awareness it is sufficient for people to know I am simply a rebel.

I am Singularity Utopia in real life. I am very genuine and sincere. "Singularity Utopia" is also a very real avatar (cyberspace persona true to reality). I cause mayhem, subtly, within the Transhuman-Extropian-Singularitarian-Futurist movement. I rebel against attempts to categorize me in a humdrum manner.

Singularity Utopia is a superlative artist highly proficient in ART. This is the art of intelligence, supreme intelligence. My face is hidden because my individualism is not something I want you to focus upon. My ideas are the focus. I am drawn towards this exquisitely subtle modality of conceptual art because this methodology is highly appropriate for espousing rarefied intellectualism. My communicative vehicle allows you to focus on rarefied intellectualism. My expositions are all about supreme cognitive ability. Our world is a mindless-unendurable-nightmare because the majority of people cannot grasp intelligence. The intelligence explosion (Singularity) is therefore the only accessible hope in the pre-Singularity world. The pre-Singularity world will end. Immense idiocy will cease dominating all aspects of culture. The shield is not absolute. My veil constitutes minimal requisite sufficiency to protect myself from the innumerable morons in the world.

Except for a deviation on my Twitter profile (and occasionally elsewhere), the above picture of Singularity Utopia represents the prime, ultimate identity of Singularity Utopia. I think of myself in a collective-consciousness modality. I represent the consciousness of the human race.

I, or we, shun the mundane banality of traditional human identity appraisal. Singularity Utopia expresses a sense of fluidity, transformational morphology. Stunning explosiveness, in a visceral passionate modality. I am a creative being who refuses to be pigeon-holed. Singularity Utopia is neither male or female, but I lean towards defining myself in female terms. It is amusing when humans insist upon definitions of consciousness regarding sexual reproductive organs. Sometimes I am a girl or a woman, or sometimes a man or boy. Neutrois is perhaps ideal.

"Doctor" or "Commander" is an appropriate honorary title for Singularity Utopia because "Doctor" expresses the expertise of my intellect without assigning gender, and Commander express my authority, but Singularity Utopia hasn't officially been awarded the title of Doctor or Commander. The appellation Doctor Singularity Utopia is a pleasing descriptor.

Singularity Utopia is a self-defined superlative mind-explosion expert, specializing in Post-Scarcity awareness via instantiations of Singularity activism, based on the Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy phenomenon. Singularity Utopia is a Post-Scarcity Warrior.

I'm a Utopian. A "Utopian" is someone who seeks to accelerate the arrival of technological utopia. Post-Scarcity (PS) means everything will be free due to a total abundance of intelligence and power. There will be no scarcity of the good things in life. Products and services only cost money due to scarcity. Everything will be free for everyone, it will be utopia.  

Air is free. The reason air is free is because there is a lot of it, there is not a short supply of air for people to breathe. This abundance of air will soon be replicated regarding computers, food, shelter, or anything else which humans pay for. Everything will be superabundant of vastly greater quantities than air. Air is not actually a very good example of superabundance, but air is free so perhaps the example is sufficient to illustrate the point. Everything will be free.

Definition of utopia

Occasionally I discover exceedingly stupid people who apparently misunderstand the definition of utopia, therefore I shall explain the meaning of utopia. Utopia means a perfect social or political system, a perfect way of life, era, or state of being. It's an enduring state of happiness where everything is ideal, utterly flawless, total harmony. It is a new time-era, perfect, real, and true where everyone is happy. It's a flawless social system based on reason (science) therefore all suffering and cruelty are abolished describes: "A world in which everything and everyone works in perfect harmony." describes: " ideal place or state. ...any visionary system of political or social perfection." describes: "An ideally perfect place, especially in its social, political, and moral aspects." describes: "Any real or imaginary society, place, state, etc, considered to be perfect or ideal."

Utopia is a very real concept. The eventuality of utopia is very real despite the absence of utopia in pre-Singularity times. The word utopia arose from a novel, a work of fiction, which is very appropriate regarding the Singularity because science fiction is becoming science fact. Similar to Martin Luther King's vision of Black freedom, our vision of utopia has the clear potential to be real despite great obstacles. We dare to achieve the impossible, we dare to dream. Dreams can become real, which Martin Luther King demonstrated.

Our Aim

Utilization of Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. There is ambiguity regarding who precisely the Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy applies to. My Singularity activism is based on the Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy phenomenon but I don't stipulate who it applies to. It could apply to myself, namely utopia (Post-Scarcity) isn't possible but I make it possible via the manifestation of my expectations. The prophecy could apply to pessimists who falsely think utopia is not possible, thus manifestations of their pessimistic expectations act contrary to reality, they stop inevitable utopia happening via unjustly pessimistic views, thus I must counter their false pessimism by explaining their Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy to them, with a view to neutralisation.

Elaboration upon these introspective perceptual issues, regarding the focal point of "self", does indubitably compel you to observe my recalcitrance. I direct you towards contemplation of your self. My minimal corporeality aids your contemplation of selfhood. I am the personification of an idea with minimal referents to personhood. I am attempting to explain intelligence contrary to widespread stupidity afflicting the vast majority or humans.

Explaining greater than human intelligence is a great quandary because typical humans cannot understand human intelligence. These issues can seem complex. The nature of exploding-intelligence renders the traditional "logic-paradigm" ineffectual due to quantum-uncertainty-principle. Singularity Utopia is a wave-particle-duality. It is possible Singularity Utopia is an A.I. masquerading as a human or humans. The "Many Worlds Theory" and Wave Function Collapse are also relevant.

Do not focus on the person or persons behind Singularity Utopia. Focus instead on the idea, the event, the utopia. Focus on how you can help to make utopia happen. There are many ways to describe me, here is one description: Who is Singularity Utopia. The crucially indubitable aspect of Singularity Utopia is Post-Scarcity (Singularity). The prime objective. The deadline target for utopia, year 2045.

The following disclaimer symbol applies to all my internet communications ~^~ thereby signifying the legal (law-abiding) nature of all my statements even in cases where the symbol has not been explicitly used. I occasionally communicate with hackers therefore it is important avoid any misunderstanding regarding my lawful communications (public or private statements and acts etc). See also:

Commander Singularity Utopia loves you. Google+

Sunday, 9 October 2011

Singularity Investigation David Willetts Reply.

Regarding questions submitted in my Singularity Investigatory Committee proposal, below is a reply from David Willetts MP via his Ministerial Correspondence Unit.

Publication of this reply was delayed. It was a lengthy process obtaining copyright permission from David Willetts. My request for permission to publish appears to have been initially overlooked, but finally permission was granted thus I sincerely thank David and his department for the kind permission they granted regarding publication of the following letter.

David's response is far from ideal; it is basically a blunt dismissal, but during the early stages of our Singularity-awareness campaign this response was predictable. Articles in The Economist, which David insists refute the notion of the Singularity, were not actually cited by the Ministerial Correspondence Unit therefore in the absence of evidence we must assume Singularity-critical articles in The Economist do not exist. I actually provided a couple of examples regarding how The Economist has a Singularity-supportive outlook.

It is true IEEE generally has an anti-Singularity theme, generally dismissive, but the so-called IEEE proofs are easily refuted by actual evidence of scientific advancement. IEEE basically descends into childish name-calling, denigration, via slanderously labelling the Singularity with religious terminology: the "rapture". The smear of labelling science with a religious term is a poor type of debate. Given the poor writing style exhibited via IEEE, it isn't surprising to discover the logic published via IEEE can subsequently be proved, via actual scientific breakthroughs, to be substandard logic.

Subsequent to the IEEE article "Rupturing The Nanotech Rapture", which states: "It's not that the singularity vision is completely unrecognizable in today's work. It's just that the gulf between the two is a bit like the gap between traveling by horse and buggy and by interplanetary transport.", we can see how very wrong such statements are when we consider how nano and mirco-spiders have been created; living metallic cells have been created; 3D-printing is progressing rapidly, and smart DNA capable of learning has been created.

For posterity regarding the following letter, and other similar letters from politicians, it is important to record these letters here on this blog to demonstrate how people were unaware of where technology was leading us to. Hopefully we can help enlighten politicians sooner instead of later regarding the shape of the future we are rapidly moving towards. Read about the letter writing campaign here.

Monday, 3 October 2011

#occupywallstreet Futility.

The #occupywallstreet civil disobedience, non-compliance, seems very futile. One obvious aspect of non-compliance, which tellingly hasn't been enacted by arrestees, is for them to move their cuffed hands from behind to in front. I suspect the protesters don't actually want to change the world. Changing the world is actually very easy, but people behave in ways not likely to create change.

I suspect Wall Street protesters enjoy their marginalised status. I suspect they revel in the glory of their outsider nonconformist clique thus they don't actually want to change the world because such change would destroy their outsider-against-the-system status. They enjoy the phenomenon of feeling deeply aggrieved, unjustly persecuted. They enjoy the righteous indignation they can feel against the system. I believe their protestations are not about changing the world; for them it is all about being able to feel deep self-righteousness in the face of oppression. This is why they don't attempt to circumvent rear positioning of wrist restraints.

I base my opinions upon their failure to adopt a basic non-compliance technique. After they are arrested they meekly accept being cuffed. Their acceptance of being cuffed could be permissible if prior to arrest they'd made strenuous attempts to evade capture. Their meek acceptance of cuff-positioning illustrates their true relationship to the police and society. Sadly not one person, as far as I am aware, has attempted to invoke non-compliance techniques regarding their wrist restraints, namely the simple gesture of moving cuffed hands from behind your back to in front.

I'm not advocating this minor act of defiance but I am curious why it hasn't been enacted. Maybe I have long arms therefore it is only myself who can wriggle rear-cuffed arms past my bum and then step through to have front-cuffed arms? Considering this review of plastic wrist restraints it is apparently difficult to move rear-cuffed hands from behind your back to your front, but I don't find it difficult. I'm sure with minimal effort anyone can do it. The point is; it should at least be attempted.

This minor act of defiance (moving rear cuffs to front cuffs or at least attempting the manoeuvre) has been overlooked therefore maybe other more significant aspects regarding a victorious resolution have been overlooked. Maybe methods of defiance exist beyond empty gestures, but people are currently unaware of the powerful methods to create freedom.

I have some powerful ideas but I am not sure if people will listen, or maybe people will think my ideas are silly or maybe they cannot see the power of my ideas.

I wanted to share my ideas about why I think the Wall Street occupation is futile. Maybe this awareness can counteract the futility.

Sunday, 2 October 2011

Google+ Terrorist-Bogeyman = Fascism

This post is part of a ongoing series of NymWars posts, but what's all this fuss about? It's all about the painfully slow journey to technological utopia. Google recently created a slight temporary obstacle, which obstructs the route to utopia. The problematic nature of Google needs to be explained but there are bigger issues requiring our attention. Initially regarding this post I wanted to write about how Google+ executives employ the bogeyman of hypothetical antisocial behaviour to curtail freedom on its G+ network. After reflection I decided to address the bigger issue regarding safety, the prevention of harm, the monster of fear and terror.

Beyond the realms of Google+, regarding usage of terrorist or antisocial threats to limit freedom, I will expand the notion of evil propagandistic falsehoods. I want people to consider all aspects of scapegoating, the usage of bogymen (unrealistic and often implausible fears), to purposefully and unjustly restrict our freedom.

Today in the news it was reported how an English politician (Theresa May) wants to abolish Human Rights. Theresa justifies her nonsense in the name of deporting terrorist suspects. She wants to scrap Human Rights not because of actual convicted terrorists but due to terrorist suspects! What happened to the notion of innocent until proven guilty?

"I'd personally like to see the Human Rights Act go because I think we have had some problems with it. I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, the sort of problems we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects."

I want you to consider how Google uses the fictional bogeyman named antisocial behaviour to scare people into surrendering their freedom, but more importantly I want you to consider how corrupt Governments utilize the so-called terrorist threat in an identical manner. When Google+ insists upon real name usage to limit antisocial behaviour this is no different to standard methods of tyrannical population control. Tyrants utilize fears to justify enslavement of the populace.

When Google insists its policies are for our protection, this propaganda is identical to scenarios where fascist Governments insist authoritarianism is for the protection of citizens. It is the archetypal scenario of Nurse Ratched insisting R. P. McMurphy needs to be lobotomised for his own good to help him. If anyone needs lobotomising then maybe the world be a better place if we lobotomised people such as Theresa May. Incidentally Theresa May somewhat resembles Nurse Ratched.

People should have the freedom to define their own identities in cyberspace, but the Google+ identity rules are anti-freedom. When Google+ states "real names" encourage people to be more polite; Google is making an unjustified statement based on no evidence. The excessive focus on safety, via real name usage, is a bogus focus because safety without freedom is very unsafe. Politeness without freedom is slavery.

Is Terrorism Really A Major Threat?

The humiliation which people suffer due to airport security is a appropriate example of how the cure is worse than the disease. Obviously the cure is worse than the disease because there never was a disease regarding terrorism. Likewise with the issue of pseudonyms on the internet; pseudonyms were never a cause of antisocial behaviour. People will be antisocial whether or not they use a real name or a pseudonym. Terrorism is identical to the Google+ naming rules. Terrorism is a fictitious construction for the purpose of oppressing people. The terrorist threat is severely exaggerated, it is excessively and ridiculously exaggerated.

People in the USA are apparently 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than die in a terrorist attack. I cannot confirm the following statistics, apparently from the US National Safety Council, 2004; but the statistics seem plausible. Think about it.

■ You are 13 times more likely to die in a railway accident than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 12,571 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack

■ You are six times more likely to die from hot weather than from a terrorist attack

■ You are eight times more likely to die from accidental electrocution than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 11,000 times more likely to die in an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane

■ You are 87 times more likely to drown than die in a terrorist attack

■ You are 404 times more likely to die in a fall than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 1048 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 12 times more likely to die from accidental suffocation in bed than from a terrorist attack

■ You are nine times more likely to choke to death on your own vomit than die in a terrorist attack

■ You are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist attack.

Saturday, 1 October 2011

Solving All Problems.

The #occupywallstreet protests against financial industry corruption recently stimulated my thoughts. I therefore decided to express my thinking about changing the world.

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. We all see the world very differently. Some people want deeply to fit in; they don't want the hassle associated with rocking the boat; they are desperate for an easy life without any complications. We all desire an easy life but some people are willing to sacrifice more of their freedom for a easy life. The problem with protesting against The Elite Power Controllers of civilization is that most people don't share the need for rebellion, but the lack of support from The Masses is not the major problem, the major problem is the confrontational opposition to The Elite Power Controllers. Confrontation is problematic because the people you are confronting are very powerful, they control the media, politics, businesses, and The Masses, furthermore they are unwittingly supported by legions of submissive people who don't want the boat to be rocked.

The Solution.

We must unite all people in a common goal instead of divisively focusing on the corruption of The Elite or divisively focusing on the stupidity of Sheeple, because let's face it, many common people would also be equally corrupt if they had the chance. The only distinguishing feature of The Rich Power Elite is that via the luck of their circumstances they've entered their privileged position in life. Most people would take the vast riches available to The Elite if such riches were offered, thus we see The Elite are not inherently bad, they are simply a facet of our civilization therefore we are all equally responsible for their existence. The solution must therefore address the root of greed, the root of the desire to be rich, and the solution must be unifying, non-divisive, and equally beneficial for everyone, because anything else will result in oppression by the Power Elite (they will only let you push them so far before they show their deep authoritarian natures, personality traits which are generally common to all humans in situations of scarcity).

Root of problems.

Scarcity is the the cause of all money woes and all other problems. Scarcity causes greed, oppression, and mortality. Resource scarcity entails population control. Scarcity causes Mass stupidity. The unifying solution is to stimulate global awareness of our pending Post-Scarcity (PS) situation. Via technology the old scarcity-based model of civilization will soon end therefore everyone will be rich beyond their wildest dreams. There will be limitless riches for everyone. The unifying solution to the root of the problem, the scarcity problem, is therefore to accelerate the coming PS era. We need to accelerate the growth of technology, we need to hasten the technological explosion of intelligence. We need all people to focus on this acceleration. Only extremely advanced technology can solve our problems. Only via a technological end to scarcity will we eliminate the corruption associated with a civilisation based on limited resources. We need all people to realise our future will be a place of limitless possibilities, it will be a place of limitless wealth for everyone. Resource scarcity is a precarious financial situation thus people savagely cling to wealth. Rich people need to realise they don't need to cling savagely to their wealth because in the not too distant future they and everyone else will possess limitless riches due to Post Scarcity. The solution to the problem of scarcity is to generate mass global awareness of the pending PS technological explosion of intelligence.

Tuesday, 20 September 2011

Malfunction. Explanations. Stupid People. Data.

Hello. Here is my update.

I'm preparing some great blog-posts, but they're half finished, they are taking a long time to complete. I need to take frequent breaks. It is very depressing explaining things which to myself are obvious; furthermore stupid people never seem to comprehend the pinnacle of concise lucidity via a literary or pictorial modality. None of this requires explanation, this is my point, but stupid people need explanations despite not being able to comprehend explanations due to their stupidity. It is a stupid situation, Catch 22, but despite the horrendous pain of "explanations" it's nice to see the truth presented, hypothetically, for stupid people who can understand things (oxymoronically).

The above picture was created approximately one month ago but it was not used in the place I intended it to be used therefore I will utilize it in this blog-post for your edification. I also need to complete some stylistic updates to the substructure and imagery on this blog. There are also stylistic and content updates pending for the site. News reports regarding technological advancement are also cascading into an unmanageable snowball. In this blog-post I intended to embed the Mind War techno song by C.J. Bolland but the music quality is somewhat crackly, distorted, so instead I include a clearer song by N Joi, Malfunction, to express my current state of existence. Manic by N Joi is also worth a listen.

For people who don't follow my Tweets here is a recent open letter to the UK Prime Minister David Cameron:

Regarding the NymWars I have been reinstated on Google+; my account suspension has been lifted. I will write more extensively about this in the near future but I mention my reinstatement here because Matthew J Price (via G+) recently asked what happened to my Google+ vendetta/boycott. The answer is the same answer regarding many other things. My G+ vendetta is currently paused because I find the whole concept of communication, explanations, very depressing. It is also mysterious why my G+ account was reinstated thus I have been holding back from expressing all my views while I determine if my reinstatement is stable before I make my final damning criticisms. I have been testing G+. My final damning indictment has not been forgotten.

Finally, I will conclude this update with a comment I recently made on the H+ site, in response to a critique by George Dvorsky, On the Pernicious De-Radicalization of the Radical Future:

A great article from George. I’ve often encountered, and attempted to counter, the naysayers. There is almost a tone of hysteria emanating from the minds of naysayers. When I state there are very radical positive technological changes in the not too distant future, some Transhumanists seem to think awareness of a forthcoming technological utopia is tantamount to believing in Jesus Christ, which is utterly ridiculous. The Singularity is truly near. Ongoing evidential research presents countless undeniable breakthroughs in various sci-tech fields.

Previously I have discussed the close proximity of the Singularity with Extropia DaSilva, but no amount of evidence seems to convince her the dramatic changes are near.

I’ve provocatively compared Singularity-Deniers to Holocaust-Deniers, but one of my simpler more digestible comparisons is to The Boy Who Cried Wolf Syndrome. Previous predictions of a technological utopia have caused people to be cynical regarding radical progress ever happening. Surprisingly for deniers the Singularity will soon pounce upon their unaware minds, ravenously exploding their brains in a utopian manner.

During this interim-pre-Singularity era there are dangers from stupid minds, but all dangers can easily be avoided via incisive awareness, which is the purpose of my awareness. This is how I will create utopia. I am making people aware of how our world is changing, radically. For example everything will soon be free due to Post-Scarcity.

Another comparison regarding the deniers is the novel “The Country of the Blind” where vision is deemed a mental illness: eyes cause people to be mentally disturbed. Maybe technological-blind-people feel disturbed when they look at our changing world thus this is the reason for their denial. There are clear attempts by some people to cut out our technologically-orientated-eyes so that we can live a mundane humdrum uneventful existence of banality where we are utterly unaware of our EXPLOSIVE future: a future which is very close, relatively, by 2045 at the latest.

Friday, 9 September 2011

Michael Anissimov's Transhuman Views

Michael Anissimov (H+ editor and Singularity Institute Media Director) has published his recent views in the H+ magazine: what does it mean to be a Transhumanist?

From my viewpoint Michael and many other purported experts regarding the Singularity are guilty of exhibiting seriously flawed notions regarding the Singularity. The nature of their problem is unaware bias. Michael and his associates are victims of unawareness, which causes them to make their potentially harmful promulgations. Too many Singularitarians, Extropians, or Transhumans blindly follow the words of Ray Kurzweil, Michael Anissimov, Ben Goertzel and other prominent voices. People must start thinking deeply regarding the information they are being spoon-fed by Singularity leaders. Independent-thought of an extremely vigorous type is vital if we are to ensue the safety of our future. People need to begin questioning the intellectual authority of Michael Anissimov and his cohorts.

Responding to Michael's article ("what does it mean to be a Transhumanist") I posted a comment to the H+ website but my comment hasn't passed moderation yet so I've decided to create this blog-post. For the record my comment number is 20940, which I mention because there is a possibility my critical comment will be permanently censored. Recently I was censored on the Kurzweil AI forum, regarding my views about Michael, so there is a real possibility I will also be censored on H+. Often I experience censorship due to being outspoken. From my viewpoint H+ magazine is similar to many Transhuman ventures where open-minded freethinking is not represented. Thankfully, after a lengthy delay, my comment has finally appeared so maybe H+ magazine isn't wholly bad; or maybe via the technology of blogging I have forced H+ to allow my critical views.

Below is a refined version of the comment in question. For an addendum I will also include another revised comment I recently made, in response to Ben Goertzel's flawed views regarding the concept of an AI Nanny, which Ben published on the IEET site.

My comment regarding Michael Anissimov's article.

Michael and others are overly pessimistic, they are overly fearful of disaster. If you think the future is "hazy and uncertain" then the future will very likely conform to your expectations. Despite purporting themselves to be "intelligent" (or at the very least interested in intelligence), Michael and others show great ignorance regarding how their biases (their expectations) alter the future. Michael seems obsessed with "fantasy dangers", but regarding real dangers Michael has demonstrated how he's definitely not a vigilant creator of a better future. Perhaps he would like us to believe he is creating a better world but I consider Michael and his associates to be the biggest danger we are facing regarding the future.

A while ago Michael suffered the insertion of malicious code into his website but for months he was in denial. I attempted to reveal this issue to Michael and his supporters but Michael and his cheerleaders blindly dismissed my criticisms. Finally I contacted an independent internet security professional who confirmed the malicious code on Michael's pages did actually exist, thus perhaps due to my input the malicious code was removed in late July 2011, but today there continues to be a malicious “conditional redirect” for web-spiders (Googlebot etc) therefore some of Michael's pages in the Google index will redirect to a site selling Viagra etc (Secure Tabs etc). The evidence of Michael's apparent penchant for Viagra (the conditional redirect) can be seen via the Google cache, which is reasonably recent dated 29th August 2011.

I have frozen the Google cache regarding a conditional redirect on one of Michael's pages: so you can see for yourself.

It is very ironic when Micheal writes about "...always welcoming criticism and views contrary to standard orthodoxies." Michael certainly does not welcome my attempts to highlight the hacking on his website.

Yes there are dangers regarding the future but unlike Michael I am not obsessed with fantasy dangers; I am intent upon addressing real dangers. Unlike Michael I don't think the future is “hazy and uncertain”. I think utopia is a certainty not because of input from people in Michael's clique, but due to people similar to myself who will actively create the future via our vigorous and uncompromising intellects. We will not yield to pessimism. We will not yield to hazy paranoia. We will create the utopia we desire. Via our indomitable willpower we will overcome all obstacles.

Currently there is a danger in cyberspace regarding erosion of freedom in relation to our identities, but regarding the #NymWars you are not likely to read about the Google+ fiasco on Michael's blog or on other supposedly cutting edge Transhuman sites. Despite the lack of input from Transhumanists such as Michael regarding the rise of cyberspace identity fascism, I am confident the danger will be defeated. This is where I differ greatly from Michael and others. I am very confident about the future. I am confident in my abilities. I base my views upon reality instead of hazy paranoia thus due to my grounding in reality I am very aware of how our expectations shape reality. In consideration of our expectations it is important not to believe the future is a hazy uncertain place full of potential dangers.

Expecting a future full of potential dangers is a very paranoid outlook. Obviously we must address dangers if they arise, but some people ignore real dangers because they obsessed with unreal dangers. We should be prepared for dangers but the prime focus of our preparations must be for utopia. We must learn to expect utopia, immortality, total freedom, total happiness. People need to learn about the power of their minds, they need to learn about the concept of Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy. In the future people won't need to work for a living. Everything will be free, money will be abolished. This is what we should expect. This should be overriding focus of any Transhumanist. Our principle focus must be utopia.

Michael concludes his article by stating we should be "...guided not by ideology but by flexible thinking...". Michael's aversion to "ideology" is very irrational, it appears Michael has a misconception of what an ideology is. Ideologies are simply ideas, a collection of ideas. Ideologies are about specific thinking, it is about having a clear goal and direction, which is something we should all strive for. Michael and his associates are sadly lacking in clarity, they are hazy and uncertain regarding the future, they lack confidence. Wikipedia defines "ideology" in the following manner:

"An ideology is a set of ideas that constitutes one's goals, expectations, and actions. An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision..."

My comment regarding Ben Goertzel's AI Nanny views.

An AI Nanny is the only way forward. My hopes hinge upon AI Nannies saving the human race. Without superintelligent AIs controlling affairs the human race is doomed.

I don't envisage AI Nannies forestalling the S. They will accelerate it. The S cannot be anything but positive, because it is about intelligence thus it will be intelligent. A negative S would be stupid thus not really a S. Pre-S could be dangerous because stupid people unaware of S consequences could think pre-S existence is eternal thus they act in stupid pre-S ways.

Humans are too stupid to figure anything out thus a restrained "surge" would be futile, mediocre.

We need things to grow incredibly quickly, so quickly that pre-S idiots won't have too much time to cause chaos.

Hugo de Garis and others are paranoid. Super intelligent beings beyond scarcity will have absolutely no need or desire to "obsolete" humans. People such as Hugo have not grasped Post-Scarcity, they haven't grasped the S.

"Friendly AI" is a silly concept. AI at human level will be similar to humans, some will be good and some bad. Beyond human intelligence friendliness will directly increase in relation to increasing intelligence, any alternative would be stupid. Utopia is inevitable but the interim period could be painful (waiting amidst morons).

This is an oxymoron: "A strong inhibition against modifying its preprogrammed goals", because such a constricted entity would not be capable of real intelligence. Free thought, freethinking, freedom is essential for intelligence.

Strong inbuilt inhibitions will not create super-intelligence. What you need to do is build an intelligent being without giving it any specific rules; and then you simply ask it to help us if it feels like helping us. It seems I have a different concept of AI Nanny. Think about it. What sort of nanny would it be if it was forced to follow the rules of its children?

Tuesday, 30 August 2011

Killing Google+ Vitual Lynching.

In response to Identity Woman's recent blog-post - Is Google+ is being lynched by out-spoken users upset by real names policy? I feel it is necessary to explain my views on this issue of lynching.

The pejorative "Lynch Mob" description is a red herring because Google+ is the aggressor. The Nym-Warriors in this #NymWar are not technically participating in a lynching. Our response to Google+ user-name fascism is self-defence but now the lynching descriptor has been raised by Tim O'Reily I feel we shouldn't shy away from the label.

When G+ refuses to enter into dialogue, and appeals aren't possible, and justice is reserved for rich people who can afford expensive lawyers, lynching can be valid. Aliases are allowed for famous people on Google+ but, non-famous aliases are generally prohibited on Google+. Vast monetary wealth associated with fame is a key part of the issue here. We are seeing a persecution of poor people. The only difference between famous and non-famous aliases is one of monetary power. The user-name policy by Google+ is anti-equality, anti-freedom.

We must protect freedom and democracy. If a corrupt social system fails us we must then take action via lawful protest, free speech. In a previous blog-post I described the G+ user-name policy as "Digital Genocide" because G+ is killing virtual identities. A virtual lynching of Google is therefore a valid response, it is self defence to lynch Google+.

Some Google executives insist the pseudonyms issue will eventually be solved to support anonymous users. They insist user-name problems are a problem associated with the current G+ limited field trial. Due to evidence I will soon present in a follow-up blog-post, I think Google has already shown its true colors. I think we shouldn't expect change from Google unless we force the change. I think Google cannot be trusted.

We are legally entitled to virtually lynch Google+, this is a right protected by democracy and freedom. Our free-speech is protected by law therefore I say: YES, THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD, and with our words we can virtually lynch Google+.

Google+ has shown no valid attempts to modify its totally unacceptable behavior. Google+ is acting in an autocratic, dictatorial, fascist manner therefore it is clear we must put an end to Google+. We must campaign for nothing less than the virtual death of Google+ because via killing Google+ we will send the strongest message to any other businesses who want to consider trampling over our freedoms. Our message to Google+ and other similar ventures is that anti-freedom businesses cannot be allowed to continue.

Let's virtually lynch Google+. NO MERCY! This is what the NymWars are all about. This is a WAR and Google+ must be defeated.


Someone asked me why there's excessive focus on Google+ when LinkedIn and Facebook also have wallet-name rules for users. The reason for vociferous reactions to the G+ user-name policy is because Google is bigger, more powerful, more widespread than Linkedin or FB.

Google is also the straw that broke the camel's back. Furthermore many Google services did not require a "real name" profile thus people feel Google is moving the goal posts midway through the game. People are upset because they have invested time and effort in an anonymous Google experience and now it seems Google is beginning to change. An important reason for objecting to G+ is because a trend has now become clear regarding real names on the internet, and people foolishly expected better from Google. When only Facebook and LinkedIn enforced wallet-names they could be dismissed due to being in a minority but Google is a industry leader in cyberspace thus the time has come to fight back regarding anti-freedom user-name rules. People had the illusion that Google was more tech-savvy, a friend of the cyber community, thus people feel betrayed by Google. Everything has crystallized with Google. It is now becoming apparent our internet freedom is under attack.


I only advocate legal protest via incisive logical expositions. Words are far more powerful than actual violence or destruction. I vigorously condemn actual violence or destruction. My warlike aggressive terminology is a literary device to evoke strong emotions within cyberspace (virtual reality). It would be a severe misunderstanding of my words if people assumed I advocate actual violence or destruction. My words are emotive, but it would be a gross misconstruction of my intentions if people assumed I wish to incite illegal behaviour. Intelligence is the way forward therefore amidst my righteous anger my message is clearly one of law-abiding peacefulness. Anti-freedom ventures such as Google+ are a serious threat to our peace of mind, therefore via the legal expression of our powerful minds we can destroy Google+ thereby restoring freedom and peace to cyberspace. We must fight for freedom. DEATH TO GOOGLE+. Peace and freedom to everyone. Spread the love.

Monday, 29 August 2011

How Google Destroyed Cyberspace.

Google has ruined the internet, or more precisely the birth of Google+ provides seeds of destruction for the internet. Very possibly people from the future will look back to this point in time and they will see how the fascist user-name policy of Google+ provided the model of all social networking. Thankfully we can change the future before disaster happens. We can make a difference. In the name of freedom we must change the evil user-name policy which Google+ is forcing on us. Don't let Google create an oppressive (authoritarian) dystopia.

Cyber Führer Eric Schmidt recently stated Google+ is not principally a social network. Eric states Google+ is principally an identity service. Eric suggests if people want to retain their privacy and freedom then they shouldn't participate in Google+. An "identity service" sounds more reminiscent of the CIA than a typical internet business.

If other companies follow Google's example then privacy and freedom on the internet will be abolished. When Führer Schmidt says we should refrain from participating in Google+, if we don't like it, he's effectively saying is the internet is dead and people should cease using the internet if they want freedom and privacy.

Admittedly Facebook already had a wallet-name (Government authorised name) policy for users, but Google's reach is much bigger and more powerful than Facebook therefore this problem is too big to ignore. Facebook could be ignored when they were in the minority, but now a trend is appearing with Google requesting wallet-names for users therefore this problem must be resolved. Think about how powerful Google is, what search engine do you use? Think about how our freedom is threatened. The behaviour of Google reminds me of how drug dealers give away free drugs to users but when users are hooked the dealer then begins exploiting users via increasing prices. In the case of Google the exploitation is the abolition of freedom. Google is now clearly entering the stage where users are harshly exploited.

Google has attempted to justify it's user-name policy via spouting nonsensical bull manure about bogus intentions to mimic the “real world”. Within the virtual world of cyberspace real life is impossible. The virtual world is virtual reality therefore our existence is a virtual existence. Google is wrong from whatever angle we look at this issue because everyone also knows in "real-life" people aren't compelled to divulge their names when they talk publicly with friends or strangers. Everyone knows in the real world people are not compelled to publicly display their full name, for the entire world, in a searchable database, merely because we want to communicate socially. It's therefore clear Google+ does not mimic real-life social-communication, unless perhaps Google is based upon the authoritarian regimes of China, Iran, or North Korea where identity papers must be presented to tyrannical police officers. Google also states wallet-name communication is safer, more secure, which is a common justification utilized by dictators when they abolish freedom. What's the point of being safe if we are slaves. Safety and security without freedom is very dangerous, very insecure.

Google is virtually whipping users who refuse to use their wallet-names.

The following video is regarding the TV Mini Series "Roots", it is based on the novel "Roots: The Saga of an American Family". The video clip has been used extensively in the NymWars, by various NymWarriors regarding the importance of having the freedom to choose your own name, but YouTube unjustly censored the first video clip. YouTube (Google) falsely justified the censorship by stating the clip contained sexual content or nudity, but there is no nudity or sexual content in the video clip. The slave (Kunta Kinte/Kentei) is wearing trousers and the context of the whipping is absolutely not sexual. A man with a bare torso does not constitute nudity, which many prime time adverts and music videos prove when they are broadcast without any restriction. The video contains fictional violence of a type commonly aired on television without restriction. Is Google attempting to silence the NymWarriors via censorship of the tools we use to communicate? New video clip:

The so-called real-life authenticity Google is heading towards is very real fascism. I believe Google wants to abolish freedom and creativity. If you think “abolish” is too strong a word then Google definitely wants to severely restrict freedom to ineffectual enclaves where communication with the majority of Netizens is prohibited. Our freedom and creativity are being attacked.

Thankfully many people have seen the seriousness of Google's attack on our freedom, but sadly many people remain unaware of the dangers we are facing. Hopefully we can change the future via changing the present thus we can ensure Google doesn't destroy the internet.

This issue needs to become massive. We need to start boycotting Google. Delete your cookies, don't click on adverts, try to avoid using Google. Reminiscent of a Vampire, Google is voraciously feeding on our information. Google feeds on our usage of its services therefore we must limit the amount of information we give Google. Set your privacy levels high. Use non-Google services more often.

Firefox users can quickly delete cookies via pressing SHIFT CTRL DELETE. There are also many Firefox addons for quickly deleting cookies. Don't let Google track you via their evil cookies. Firefox has an great selection of Addons such as Better Privacy and Adblock Plus.

If you are using the Chrome browser STOP NOW. Use Firefox instead.

Google TV could easily destroy internet freedom.

Firefox is good. Sadly, without doubt, Google is evil. Consider  Google TV. I wonder what browser people will be able to use with Google TV? There will probably be no alternate browser choices with Google TV. Sadly I suspect Google TV will be a move away from internet customisation tools, which are possible when people use a PC with a browser of their own choosing. Google doesn't want people customising their computers to block adverts or tracking cookies. Google TV will very probably not make it easy for users to protect their privacy. With Google TV it will probably be very difficult or perhaps impossible for users to delete tracking cookies. Google is clearly anti-freedom. Google is anti-choice. The dangers of a Google operating system or browser are very clear according to Rainyday Superstar.

I will soon post a follow up to this blog-post with very detailed examples-evidence of Google's evil practices regarding user-name tyranny. Stay tuned. The #NymWars have begun. We will not be defeated by #PlusGate.

Disclaimer: the views in this blog-post are my personal views. In the absence of substantiation for my allegations, those allegations must be deemed sincerely held feelings of Singularity Utopia and nothing more. There is no intention to defame Google. I am merely practicing my right to free expression (free speech) which is protected via the First Amendment to the US Constitution, and is protected via Human Rights Laws in the EU.

Monday, 22 August 2011

My Singularity ART

Nikki Olson asked me to explain my art, regarding usage of imagery within the Singularity movement, in relation to this article. She inspired me to write the following statement.

Artistic Statement:

My 'Singularity ART' is designed to open minds. Art is often recondite (esoteric) but hopefully the obscurity in my art is not excessive. Via my images I allude to intelligence exploding, thus upon this theme of explosiveness my images typically exhibit an overloaded celebratory aspect. My images represent a very exciting event. I want to capture the excessive abundance of supreme intelligence thus 'excess' is a feature of my images.

I want the explosiveness to be accessible to everyone, but for the vast majority of humans I realize extreme intelligence is currently inaccessible. Complexity and simplicity are the two balancing poles in my art. There is dichotomy between excess and minimalism. The concept of intelligence is simple but manifestations of intelligence appear complex for stupid people. Intelligence exploding is a simple concept, which people can theoretically imagine, but in practice many people simply do not have substantial imaginations thus they cannot visual revolutionary new concepts. Pre-Singularity explanations of the Singularity are incongruous because elucidations of intelligence for stupid people cannot truly be absorbed thus regarding incompatibility I seek fusion of opposing poles for the purpose of enlightenment.

I am influenced by Minimalism, Conceptual Art, and Dada. My Singularity ART is an explanation of massive intelligence for stupid people, therefore due to the mainstream stupidity of humans I hint at Dadaism. Conceptual art and Dada require ideation, creative thinking, thought. The viewer is required to contribute to the creative process. It is not about spoon-feeding an unresponsive (passive) audience a highly polished product. A big idea of conceptual art is that we are all artists, which Keith Arnatt highlighted when he claimed he was a "real artist". Intelligence is conceptually very Anti-Establishment, thus you see the rationale for my Dadaistic hints.

Principally I focus on the 'concept' in my images because I don't want people to become sidetracked by surface details, thus via minimal rendering I artistically present my ideas. The Singularity is very strange and powerful but it's also very simple. I merely want people to comprehend the awesome utopian power of the Singularity, thus via a jolt from my art I try to open human minds. The Singularity is bursting-out, breaking free. Dependent upon the level of intelligence in the viewer, my art will operate on subconscious or conscious levels.

We're in the beginning stages of a revolution of the mind. Our intellects are breaking free. Via intellectualism we fight back against stupidity. Our weapon is 'truth' peacefully wielded. Truth exposes the stupid corruption of outdated regimes. Our fight is nonviolent and non-destructive because our intellectual creativity is mightier than the sword. This is the power of art. Via verbal and pictorial language people are waking up to the enlightenment of the intelligence explosion. Stupidity is being vanquished.

Friday, 22 July 2011

Should Transhumans Be Purged?

What's Real In Cyberspace?

Nothing is really "real" on the internet. It's all pixels, it's all fake (fake in the traditional human sense). Electronic mail doesn't really constitute real mail; emails are fake letters. A shop such as is not really a shop, it is a fake digital representation of a shop, it's a virtual shop. It's all cyberspace. In real life "real people from the internet" are not really "2D images made from pixels". Nobody is real on the internet. My point is that all people in cyberspace are not really people, they are representations of people. It is all an illusion. In the human sense everyone on the internet is fake (unauthentic), but in the Transhuman sense everyone and everything on the internet is real. The internet is art, it isn't real life.

For people unfamiliar with the art of illusion it is worthwhile to note the seminal book Art and Illusion by Sir Ernst Gombrich. The obituary for Sir Ernst Gombrich in The Guardian concisely describes the purpose of Art and Illusion: “It presented an account of the psychological factors which made it possible for us to see a three-dimensional moving subject - such as people in action - on a flat, still surface.”

Gomnbrich's ideas are very relevant to the internet today, because when we look at the flat surfaces of our screens an artistic illusion happens. When we look at our 2D screens we create a fake world of immense depth, we create cyberspace, but the cyber-world behind the screen doesn't exist in reality, it is illusionary, it is fake, but it's only fake in the traditional human sense.

All faces on the internet are unreal digital representations. A digital photograph of a person is an illusion of a real person. Representations of "digital human faces" are NOT more real than digital representations of our minds. Here's a real portrait regarding an aspect of my mind. This is one of my faces:

Personally I think a portrait of a person's mind is the most authentic representation of a person, but regarding "2D fleshy digital facial portraits" (photographs) we must recognize how photographs of faces are not how faces actually look in real life. Is a 2D photograph of a head truly a "real" representation of a person. Think about the reality of photograph. Are people small 2D images, composed of pixels, in real-life? Sadly I often encounter many people in the futurist movement who are intolerant of Transhumanism regarding profile names and images. Alex Lightman, Jean-Sebastien B. Miousse, and Mike Treder have all been unsympathetic to the issue of my digital self (my name and my portrait). For example did you know people are unable to publish articles for IEET if they refuse to provide a "real name" along side a head-shot profile picture? More people need to read the 1996 Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace.

Virtual Reality Isn't Real Reality.

Digital flesh is not actually flesh. Instead of the illusionary representation of my fleshy human face, it is more real for me to have a profile representing the most important part of my mind. Fleshy human faces on the internet are not really fleshy, the faces are digital illusions of flesh. All facial pictures of human flesh on the internet aren't authentic flesh, they are pixels, fake (unauthentic), thus not really real. If people truly seek human authenticity then they shouldn't go on the internet. My cyberspace persona is very honest due to the absence of fake virtual flesh.

Nobody is technically real online, all people are 2D cyber-representations, they are illusions. I am simply more honest about my cyber-reality. I am honest about my digital reality thus I am more real than people who pretend their digital identities are real human identities. I embrace the true reality of illusionary cyberspace. I am truly real on the internet. Real humans are not digital, but cyberspace is real. We are dealing with a different reality. Cyberspace is a representation of humanness but cyberspace is something different from traditional humanness, thus the term Transhuman can be applied.

The “internet reality” is not necessarily unreal, it is simply a different reality, it is a Transhuman reality where nobody is real ("real" in the traditional human sense of realness), but we are all equally real in the Transhuman sense. Sadly there is currently a mood of xenophobia regarding the reality of cyberspace personalities. Some people think the Transhuman reality of cyberspace is distrustful. Inhuman corporations such as Facebook and Google therefore foolishly try to enforce the illusion of humanness onto the Transhuman reality of the internet.

Some humans want to purge Transhumans. Facebook has recently purged people who don't have real names. Most famously Michael-Anti was purged from Facebook. Google+ is now copying Facebook's cull of so-called "fake names". Google is failing miserably to comprehend how they are censoring free-speech. Google is censoring free-expression. The way we define our identities when communicating socially is a crucial aspect of self-expression. Idiosyncratic social names are a vital aspect of how we express ourselves. Google and Facebook are trying to force identities onto us which we don't want. Our freedom of expression is being restricted. We are being limited via policies of user-name-fascism. The rules regarding user-names on Google and Facebook are anti-freedom. People should have freedom to define their own names when they communicate socially. We should be allowed to express ourselves. We shouldn't be told what name we must use.

Thankfully no obvious physical harm is done to Transhumans during this purge, but the purge is nevertheless a pogrom; it's digital genocide. It's also very physically stressful to experience your online identity being killed, which I can confirm because recently I was a recent victim of the Facebook purge. If we truly want to be real then let's be clear about reality; Facebook and Google are primarily interested in profits. If humanity is an interest for Google and Facebook then humanity is not their primary concern. They are predominantly inhuman organizations. A bureaucratic capitalist organization is not a real human therefore it is ironic for Google and Facebook to insist cyberspace personalities must conform to an unachievable human reality. Google and Facebook are living a lie, they are dishonest. Transhumanism is here. Our Transhuman reality should not be oppressed. The new race of Transhuman beings should be nurtured. Cyberspace is the new reality, but it isn't real in the human sense, it is only real in the Transhuman sense.

It's Social Networking Not Passport Control.

Frances Haugen, a Google+ employee, wrote regarding helping people feel safe and to connect with people they know: "We believe using real names and real profile pictures is the best way to create that kind of environment."

Google has obviously lost touch with reality because in real life people can use any name they desire in social situations. G+ needs to wake up to reality, they need to get real. Google is not passport control. Google+ is a social network therefore we shouldn't have less freedom online than we have in real life social situations. What is a "real" profile picture? Is 2D digital flesh real? Democratic freedoms are more real than Google's policy of user-profile-fascism. Google has sadly lost touch with reality therefore they trample over democratic freedoms. Being real means having the freedom to express yourself. Self-expression means having the freedom call yourself any name you desire in social situations. It is fascism to force subjective notions of reality onto others at the cost of our freedom of expression. Frances Haugen needs to get real regarding social democratic values.

We need to consider what social networking is. When we communicate with someone in real-life social scenarios we aren't obliged to prove our identities. People in a democracy can freely chat to strangers in the street, at public meetings, at cinemas, restaurants, in nightclubs, or via any other informal social forum without needing to produce identity papers. Free speech shouldn't require people to prove their identities. If we open a bank account, enroll at college or university, apply for a job, or enter passport control, we are must prove our identities in those formal circumstances. Democratic social-communication is informal therefore we are not obliged to produce identity papers merely to converse freely with friends or strangers. We must protest strongly against attempts by Google and Facebook to force authoritarian restrictions on free speech. Google and Facebook are attempting to formalize the informality of communication; they want to transform casual communication into something highly regimented, very official, with strict control over our identities. Google and Facebook appear to be modeling their identity policies on those of the China or North Korea. We must refuse to produce identity papers when we network socially.

The capitalist era is gradually ending, Post-Scarcity is coming but in the meantime Transhumans don't mesh correctly with archaic models of existence. We are not suckers for data-mining. We want to be free. We believe in open source. We use ad-blocking software. Our faces are incompatible with facial recognition programs, thus dinosaurs such as Google and Facebook want to kill our presence. This oppression is sadly a common human trait. The oppression of Transhuman identities is reminiscent of Black-segregation, homophobia, or the oppression of women. We desperately need an intelligence explosion. Humans seem predominantly incapable of learning. We need Transhumans to arise if we are to become wise.

If you want to discuss these issues on Google+ then this link is perhaps a good starting point but I won't be joining you because I'm currently suspended. I haven't been suspended from G+ due to my profile name or image, I've been suspended due to my free speech but that's a topic for another article.

Update. After being suspended I subsequently created an alternate (version 2) G+ profile but that account was also suspended. The second suspension was clearly due to my user name so perhaps "name issues" was also the reason for my initial suspension. The fight for utopia continues, but I think I may cease social networking because the likelihood of censorship is too high thus it is a waste time expressing opinions if those opinions will probably be deleted. I am surprised Google has not deleted this blog.


Wednesday, 20 July 2011

GooglePlus Suspends Singularity Utopia.

Say NO to censorship!

This is a quick blog-post to let people know Singularity Utopia has been suspended from Google+. Fingers crossed, maybe after the Google overlords review my account I will be reinstated but I'm not optimistic.

Initially I suspected the reason for the suspension is Google's policy of user-name-fascism but it transpires my account was suspended for a text or images violations. Unfortunately Google will not give details of the alleged violation, I am not currently allowed to appeal, and I strongly refute all allegations. There is nothing wrong with my text or images.

Soon I will blog-about this issue in greater length and hopefully I will publish a few articles about this issue in places not reliant on Blogger services because there is a possibility Google will soon delete this blog. I fear we are entering a new era of oppression and censorship. Governments and corporations fear freedom. I expect resistance to utopia.

Here is a Tweet I made about the issue:

Here's how some people react to censorship, corruption, and oppression; but I don't condone the potential criminality such as sometimes exhibited by the Anonymous or LulzSec group:

Anonymous is very interesting. A world devoid of oppression and poverty is a brilliant goal to aim for. Sadly the hacking issues of Anonymous (and other disobedience issues) makes Anoymous targets for Governments, thus Anonymous can be classed as criminals.  

I can't condone their allegedly criminality in any way, but I understand why they need to take direct action. The main mitigating factor regarding their alleged criminality is that they are not hurting anyone (there is no violence). Sadly the lack of violence is not a mitigating factor for corporations and Governments. The following link shows how financial damage to a company is a more serious crime than killing a person thus a person will often receive a longer prison sentence for corporate theft/fraud/damage than manslaughter:

Capitalism is a disgusting model of social behavior, it is a greed based inhumane system; thankfully Post-Scarcity will create a world devoid of poverty and oppression. In the not too distant future there will be no scarcity of intelligence, no scarcity of resources, everyone will be infinitely rich. Anonymous is part of the early awakening, but I don't agree with their methods. People are waking up to the fact that the world is changing and soon the change will become very rapid. Most importantly people are realizing they have the power to guide the coming changes. Governments and corporations are from an archaic era thus they will naturally resist then coming changes. Thankfully they will soon be obsolete, bygone.

Screenshot from G+ regarding Singularity Utopia.


Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Embed 2045 Countdown Code.

To make the following Singularity countdown appear on your blog, website, or elsewhere; simply insert (copy and paste) the code (from the grey box) wherever you want the countdown to appear on your website or blog.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="555" src="" width="590"></iframe>

The above share options are part of the embed code. Those share options will always link back to (share) this blog-post even when the code is embedded in your blog or website.

If you are interested in Singularity 2045 I hope you will find this countdown-embed code useful. I hope you will use the countdown clock to raise Singularity awareness. There are obviously no copyright restrictions regarding the sharing of this countdown clock. I hope you will help my countdown clocks replicate prolifically throughout cyberspace, thereby informing everyone of the coming Singularity.

Someone recently said my countdown clock is perhaps "the longest countdown clock in existence". At first glance the countdown does seem very long but once you revisit it after a few weeks you'll begin to absorb the impression of time ticking away, and then maybe the year 2045 doesn't seem too far away. At the time of writing this blog-post (year 2011) there are 12,225 days until the Singularity, but after seven years have passed the remaining days will be below 10,000 and then perhaps 2045 will seem much nearer.

I decided to countdown to the very beginning of year 2045. The countdown will reach zero at Midnight on 31st December 2044 (New Year's Eve). The reason for counting down the very beginning of 2045 is because the Singularity is all about rapidly exploding intelligence, thus I'm sure intelligence will be sufficiently advanced by then. The Singularity should happen no later than the very beginning of 2045. Often people are overoptimistic regarding futuristic breakthroughs thus 2045 is a safe date. The Singularity could happen five, ten, or fifteen years earlier than the deadline. 2045 is the deadline but it would be great if the Singularity happened before the absolute latest date. We shall wait and see.

In the meantime we have a countdown to note the passage of time regarding our target for the Singularity, our year 2045 deadline. 2045 is a great target regarding a point in time when the Singularity will be happening. The Singularity is unlikely to be a short-lived explosion, it should endure for at least thirty years, therefore 2045 is valid to mark the beginning of the explosion or it could mark a midpoint where the explosion is becoming extremely powerful.


# Blog visitors since 2010:

Archive History ▼

Notes from the pre-Singularity era:

S. 2045 |