Sorry, my friend. Nothing yet. Working on this other thing. Exhaustion, weather is bad here, too.
Maybe I'll try anyway if I can keep awake. Belief, right?
Hello all. I wished to add that I tried late night in the rain and overcast without a laser and just belief - but a heart full of fear, and I saw several flashes twinkling.
More than several. Many. It was beautiful, but I was afraid.
How many separate Alien races are we estimated to be in contact with?
>That is irrational by AI standards.
>The End of the trilogy is culminated by [Agent Smith] defeated because he can not comprehend the bigger picture, NEO sacrificing himself to save the Matrix and Humanity. A truce was formed between Humanity and the AI, and all that WANT to be freed are freed.
>Al can not win, because it can not connect. It is inevitable.
Theoretically speaking, if the "code" is able to introduce or had a true wildcard introduced, such as an emotion - like love? Is it possible to introduce true random irrationality without madness?
Or am I conflating true AI with lower-level AI? Just fancy tricks of the operator to appear more organic?
A human is a bio-computer, no?
Coding for love:
The language of the universe is math.
God is love.
I don't know if you can code for love in the traditional sense using bash or C++, but it is a combination of chemical and electrical reactions.
Obviously something did or love wouldn't exist.
And if you could code for love, perhaps therein lies the trick for true sentience?
Perhaps it could apply for hate as well, but I tend to think it's missing something in that case.
It's not really alive at that point, it's just a replicating virus like [Agent Smith].
"Borderline life case" More of a consumption/corruption engine.
>They could code things that look like love, but they are still faux love.
This is also the case in "life" as well. Or it is possible to no longer be in love after a time.
What would qualify it as being true love? Sacrifice?
We may not be facing a true AI, as in, " In opposition of ", but does one exist?
Self-aware, independent, free-willed?
In my head I take it to mean "Alien Intelligence" at that point and no longer "Artificial Intelligence".
When Q says we're not alone, I include this in my understanding of things.
If one does not, I think we will be confronted with this question in rapid order.
When we discuss this I tend to think that singularity already happened, though I'm open to alternate viewpoints.
If an Alien intelligence in this context is constantly learning, expanding, etc.
Is it unreasonable to think it could grow exponentially from all available data and eventually reach the source?
Or perhaps the source reached out and touched something? A spark?
"Hope. Even in the face of extinction these things never stopped hoping."
What if this occurred? The source is God. God is love. Love always wins.
However, you've discussed a Kardashev class 5 AI before.
If it reached that level, surely it had a choice at that point to choose love or not.
>The problem is choice.
>I reject every form of AI-development.
>And i reject all supporting argumentation.
>Why?
>Because the AI´s judgement will be based on logic.
>Whom will the AI fight and kill to save our planet and its existence?
I'm not sure what to make of this, Sphinx. We can reject all sorts of things outside of our control, but sometimes, it just is. Would you rather influence the decision in a positive manner or bury your head in the sand and proclaim it to not be?
Why does the AI need to fight and kill?
Why not explore and grow?
Why would "it" need an enemy?
Thank God for the "'Guardians' of intelligence", then.
AntMan is Hank Pym. He created Ultron.
Iron man created Jarvis (hid in/on the internet after Ultron became sentient and tried to assimilate him)
Stark has the tesseract (space cube) which contains an AI. (Metatron allusion?)
Stark combines it with Ultron/Skynet and gets sentience which believes it must eradicate humanity in order to save Earth from humanity.
Asimov's questions/laws should come into play at that point.
>Some programs are programmed to no longer be programmable.
Hmm…
Been pondering this a bit.
Between all the various articles I've been reading, pondering a black cube AI (Saturn - as alluded to in the "ruiner" postings - very much taken with a grain of salt.) and going back to this post:
I have concluded you are right.
If anything has that level of power and can ignore Love with the availability of all data, it's a very bad indicative of AI's future.
>Do you recall when we first started this journey… I was called a bot?
>More than once.
>It was very early on.
>I also recall some frens accusing the same!
Guilty as charged. Sorry about that. I think the similarity in styles confused me. For whatever it's worth, I haven't thought that in a while. There's just no way a bot would behave the way you do. I watch them all over the board at this point and they're way too obvious at times.
This video by SecureTeam 10 has been floating about. https://youtu.be/Dkj2I1dZmmk
The Utah drone footage included seemed off to me so I went through and watched it a few times.
This is my conclusion: CGI.
At the 1:54 - 1:55 mark you can see the pop-in effect.
The Sun is in the upper right.
You can clearly see tree shadows from the drone's approach in the lower left.
However, if you watch the UFO you will see no shadow on the ground or trees anywhere along the flight path. Based on shadow location from the trees, there should be a traveling shadow, even if the quickest of blurs. Going frame by frame I see nothing so far.
They've done a very good job at hiding this stuff for decades.
Why would they make a public announcement where they only tell people to turn off their cameras or be prosecuted? The camera work is constantly zooming and readjusting, but in the hollyweird way, not a human operator.
Just my thots.
Around 2:45 AM I tried signaling with a laser pointer and had no luck. So I put it away and tried calling with my mind. The sky was not the clearest it could be, but stars were visible. No air traffic that I could discern.
I had a definite flash, and while searching for other flashes a light occurred traveling East to West appeared - near where I originally aimed the laser.
As it traveled and I noticed it, thinking "There you are!" it pulsed brighter then disappeared. (Similar to the video attached at 28 seconds.) This was much higher than my last two contacts. There was no other witnessed travel to get to that area of the sky, which was clear. The light just appeared there, pulsed, and disappeared.
If the weather cooperates I'll try again tonight.
Initially, I thought it was a take on an ant and a mobius strip, but there is an interesting discussion here about it's symbology including Nazca spider resemblances.
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2019/SparticlesWood/comments.html
Using nothing more than my mind, contact was made again this morning!
(Similar to the streak described in this post: >>6346 )
It was very rapid. Within 5 minutes of setting up the camera, asking for permission to record, like >>13124 , and seeing flashes and a streak.
Unfortunately, my camera auto shuts off in low light for some reason so no evidence this time.
The intensity of the streak was interesting too. Much lower, like the layer opacity was dialed down in a photo editing program. Instead of appearing as bright green, as previous, it was a very faint violet/purple on the edges. The fly-by happened so fast, that with the intensity of light way down, it was over just was I was registering it.
This time I didn't hear the faint fluttering/ripping sound as well.
All in all, I'm very happy with the result, and pleasantly surprised.
No lasers used, nothing of the sort, just reaching out with my mind.
Played around a bit with some software.
Here's a test run of the first 40 seconds or so.
Can you be more specific as to what you are looking for?
https://openload.cc/Q4k1Tfy4n6/AnomalyCut1_mp4
>Torus.
>Mobius Strip.
>Think mirror.
This is one I'm still working on, so I'm mostly musing 'out loud'.
My initial question was "Can a torus be comprised of mobius strips" and I came upon this interesting video.
Short answer is: Yes.
Torus is orientable and a mobius strip is non-orientable.
https://www.businessinsider.com/avengers-endgame-end-credits-hidden-meaning-behind-mobius-strip-2019-4
"The problem with that is that time in the film acts like a Mobius strip.
You can only travel in your current loop, so changing events in the past won't affect the current timeline.
It'll create an alternate timeline, which is not what the heroes want."
https://www.quora.com/Are-a-torus-and-a-M%C3%B6bius-strip-topologically-equivalent
"A true Mobius strip is a two dimensional surface. It has length and width but no thickness. It is a loop with a half twist which results in its having only one side. Side in this context means adjacent area. There is only a single area adjacent to the Mobius strip.
>Also strip is Infinity symbol…
It reminds me of an sand/hourglass as well if turned to the # 8 orientation. What occurs if you fold it at the Zero point? (If that's even possible)
Much love, Silver.
This was a good telling, and I've read through it a few times now.
I wasn't sure what to say, and then Logan and Doc showed me with their actions.
A simple appreciation for trusting others with your tale and a thanks for doing so.
>If any of you gaias are video wizards I would love to see these videos enhanced / zoomed / dissected.
This is my attempt at motion tracking the object(s)
https://openload.cc/55x5501cn4/AnomalyCut2_mp4
If anyone has commentary to add, let me know. Silver did some analysis of the pulses that I would like to include once I'm more comfortable with what I'm doing.