dChan
Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:29 a.m. No.3713454   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3477 >>3497 >>3592 >>3621 >>3712

>>3713316

Question for Q

And something for anons to ponder…

I have observed a certain VERY BIZARRE phenomenon, and I just observed it now. It seems that what I would call "AI fakeness", as shown on the internet, somehow is responsive to HUMAN THOUGHTS…

A claim that could easily be deemed crazy, and which I don't make without extensive personal experience.

And the current example is right here. Just a few minutes ago, before logging in, I had an idea pop into my head for a possible meme. I was thinking about the negative nature of "the left" today, and thinking about Obama, and I thought of Mussolini's wacky HQ design, which had his face, and the Italian word for "yes" emblazoned in a continuous pattern [see pic]. I pictured shopping Obama's face into that, and changing the word to 'no'. Then, another thought occurred, and I thought maybe it would work better if I used the word 'if'… And then, mere moments later, I log on, open this thread, and see the post quoted… And I've observed similar effects over and over and over…

So the question is– if hints or more can be dropped– how the hell is this happening? What technology? And just in general: WTF?!

Thank you and Godspeed.

Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:34 a.m. No.3713508   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3713477

As I said, it's happened over and over and over. I don't need to explain what such patterns do with claims of "coincidence"– nor, for that matter, the general attitude towards coincidence here.

Meanwhile, what I am claiming is not that far-fetched on a technological basis.

Furthermore, in typical fashion, when "anons" chime in on every question only to throw cold water on everything, rather than exhibiting normal human curiosity and interest (particular in regard the sort of creepy, dystopian phenomenon I am referring to), it starts to seem quite unrealistic. I.e. shut up bot.

Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:38 a.m. No.3713562   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3713530

If the AI propaganda system wanted to make a fake meme that was

  1. divisive

  2. easy for the meme-limited AI system to mass-produce

would the obviously fake "NPC meme" fit both criteria? I think so.

Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:46 a.m. No.3713641   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3665 >>3807

>>3713621

And perhaps scaring anons away is part of the point… You aren't crazy, it is a real phenomenon. And I am relatively certain is based on technology (of some kind). Very creepy and bizarre stuff.

Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:49 a.m. No.3713664   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>The fact that ideas you have SEEM to be appearing, coincidentally, without any cue or advance notice DOESN’T necessarily imply that it’s ACTUALLY happening.

You're suggesting I hallucinated the 'if if if' post– but anons can see as plainly as I can that it actually exists, thus, your capitalization of 'SEEM', is quite irrelevant.

Meanwhile, your generic, "throw cold water on everything" attitude is typical, and highly unconvincing.

Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:51 a.m. No.3713681   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3722

>>3713665

WE aren't a movie. We are humans. Those aspects of thus "that are common" would best be described as 'spiritual', in the broadest possible sense of that word… But I don't know what you're even trying to imply, "anon".

Anonymous ID: 270e94 Nov. 3, 2018, 8:57 a.m. No.3713736   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3713722

Your jargon is meaningless unless you can demonstrate its translation into actual reality. If you claim that is impossible, then the overwhelming likelihood is that you are just blowing smoke. Show us.