Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 5:35 a.m. No.9978193   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8204 >>8220 >>8254 >>8528 >>8835

>>9978079

You just haven't yet acclimated to the new reality of you being free from a master control program's narrative that up until recently has given you an excuse your entire life not to have to think for yourself.

This is what increasing individual freedom feels like in the mind after using it truly for the first time.

Whereas some who are freed will fight to protect those who kept them in the dark their entire lives, most will accept the pain and accept the responsibility.

I too was tired but I realized the reason I was tired was because subconsciously spending a lot of mental energy yearning for the psychological fix of just believing whatever fake news told me to think.

I wasted energy looking for more fake news opium to not have to think.

The plan needed years. Can you see why?

It needed years because WE needed the time to adjust into a new reality where truth is no longer perceived as coming from Fake News/Fake Academia/Fake Pedowood movies.

Truth is now at your fingertips.

You are in control over your own mind and what you look at and what you think.

 

That yearning you have to finally 'rest', to finally 'relax', is precisely what mathematician Igor Shafarevitch described in "The Socialist Phenomenon" as "The Death Drive", the drive to end the ceaseless Flux of life, which a Satanic cult of Communist pedophiles have only been too happy to provide you with.

 

https://archive.org/details/SocialistPhenomenon

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:01 a.m. No.9978342   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8360 >>8373 >>8395

>>9978254

The message is not young, it is as old as the human race.

Identifying a any statement or idea as either Older or Younger alone does not speak to its fidelity to reality, to truth.

There is in fact a cult. Anons and the world know it by detecting a pattern in the statements and activities of seemingly 'independent' 'competing interests'.

"The NWO worships Satan" - Vladimir Putin.

Stoicism, of which Marcus Aurelius's writings is perhaps the acme, in my view is a philosophy of retreat, of passivity. This is not a denigration but a compassionate understanding that human life during Marcus' time was brutal, painful, and dark.

Stoics went so far as to accept that brutality as inevitable, and hence searched out 'the truth' by turning inwards and letting the world be what it is.

Truth is in fact at our fingertips, because the idea of 'information' is now digital, it is not paper, nor television nor projectors in a theater.

Truth is not hard fought for. Truth is always around us whether we look at it or not and whether we understand it or not.

What is hard fought for is a world without intentional disinformation to mislead, control, and exploit children (who grow up to be you and I).

Truth is not and never was exclusively limited to 'philosopher kings'. F.A. Hayek has already shown that truth is dispersed, decentralized, it is 'in' the minds and information storage devices of billions worldwide.

The Age of "Philosopher Kings" is dead.

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:18 a.m. No.9978453   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8479 >>8487

>>9978395

>Correlation of pattern does not equal causation.

Mathematically by probability calculations can REVEAL an underlying causation as the driver for the correlations between 'independent' events.

For example, Q has proven itself as working closely with the President by deliberately correlating the timestamps of 'independent' events, Q drops and POTUS tweets/Fed actions/News.

Indeed, correlation of timestamps is often how large scale companies IDENTIFY two data points as references to sams underlying event. I would know becauseI am a developer and I work with databases. I work with timestamps in different 'tables' to actually link the two as driven by the same real world event. I can do this safely and accurately because the mathematical probability of the same datetimestamp at billionths of a second, at that many decimal points, as referring to two separate events that 'coincidentally match' is so low that it never happens (in the context of what our business does for clients).

Now you're right, correlation alone does not EQUAL causation, but, what correlations can do is help us determine whether seemingly 'separate data points' are referencing the same real world 'HUMAN ACTION' or 'choievent.

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:24 a.m. No.9978487   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8525

>>9978453

Post was sent before I was finishedโ€ฆ

 

'HUMAN ACTION' or 'choice event'.

 

All the digital information I agree does not 'equal' truth of reality as it is. But, it is from that digital information that 'truth' as we know it is being stored/collected/REFERENCED as where the idea of truth now resides.

It used to be newspapers, television, movies. Now it is controlled by everyone collectively online.

Oppositions are not 'inevitable'.

What you are doing is introducing a 'dialectic' as not only a method, but as a description of reality itself.

Plotinus to Hegel to Karl Marx all followed this same idea of there being a metaphysical 'schism' in all of reality and in and around all human beings.

I am not your opposite. We may have differing ideas, but we share the same LOGICAL STRUCTURE in our minds, e.g. A is A.

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:31 a.m. No.9978532   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8582

>>9978479

Neither is 'more important' because they are both needed. In order for me to DO SOMETHING NOW IN THE PRESENT, I cannot wait for the future to arrive.

To put ALL stock in 'predictions' risks turning people into beasts in the present, because then the framework becomes anything is permitted provided 'outcomes' go as expected.

The means are just as important as the ends.

Yes, if utilizing correlations EVENTUALLY turns up a false positive, then provided those false positives are themselves predicted to be as infrequent as they actually ended up being, then it is still not wrong to continue to utilize correlations.

What is the probability that two people out of 10 at the same company would click the same button at the same exact time down to BILLIONTHS of a second?

At my company that has not happened EVER in the company's entire existence.

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:36 a.m. No.9978569   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>9978525

That is again a 'dialectic' conception of reality. You may not be willing to accept that your framework stems from Plotinus, Hegel and Marx, but it does.

Your reference to a 'differentiation' between 'relative truth' and 'absolute truth' is literally straight out of literature on dialectics.

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:43 a.m. No.9978629   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8643

>>9978582

Oh for sure, I was anticipating you or someone mentioning HFT.

The context of my particular example of correlations and probability analysis was HUMAN actions and HUMAN choices.

I would never in a billion years use this analysis in an HFT scenario, where it is highly probable that two separate events can have equal timestamps down to billionths of a second.

GOING BACK TO THE context, again, in our entire company's history it had never happened where two people make the choice to click the same button at the exact same time down to billionths of a second.

In fact, the probability is so low that we use datetimestamps as UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS for such events the same way a SSN is viewed as a UNIQUE identifier of an individual taxpayer.

Anonymous ID: 32e5d8 July 16, 2020, 6:55 a.m. No.9978723   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>9978643

>Unless it is not a human but a script.

Ah but we have security/access AND username/password event log controls that make it maximally improbable that the datetimestamps are anything other than human driven.

But it's even more significant. In order for the datestimestamps to be script driven, there would have to be someone with access to one of the datetimestamps so as to match it up with a script.

That would actually increase the probability Q is legit working directly with POTUS so as to know when POTUS would tweet before he tweets.

That would require interaction/'knowledge transfer'/'discussion' between Q and POTUS.

But going to the world as a whole, the probability that so many 'independent' MSM outlets would be writing the same simultaneous narratives as 'coincidental', and not coordinated in a controlled hierarchy, i.e. human directors, is so low that we can reasonably and thus far not inaccurately assess MSM as a single controlled organization of human directors.