rigorousintuition.ca

.............Greta’s Role

Although many are ready to deny this fact with great vigor (because it goes against their agenda), Greta is merely a pawn. She is controlled by powerful people and big money to promote a specific agenda. The agenda is not merely about climate change – it is about climate change through a very specific angle.

Her role was perfectly defined by Greta herself during a speech at the (very elite) World Economic Forum:

“Adults keep saying we owe it to the young people, to give them hope. But I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day.”

Panic and fear: Two words that lead to hasty and irrational responses based on negative emotions. And this fear and panic is being thoroughly ingrained into the youth, creating a generation that is convinced that the world is burning.
The Elite Machine Behind Greta Thunberg

A young school girl protesting: Greta’s target audience.

Greta is the face of a massive push across mass media and the education system to convince children that their “house in on fire”. Since children absorb the information that is given to them without any kind of questioning, this push has created a new worrying phenomenon: Eco-anxiety.
The Elite Machine Behind Greta Thunberg

An i-D magazine headline about eco-anxiety.

Instead of enjoying their childhood, children are growing up with a sense of dread and impending doom. Researchers are already linking environmental concerns with cases of anxiety, depression and even suicide. Greta herself communicated this feeling during her speech at the U.N.:

“How dare you. You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words.”

Although Greta might be genuinely concerned about climate change, those behind her have a much darker agenda: To create a generation of children riddled with anxiety and depression, giving the elite carte blanche for drastic measures, ranging from tax hikes to the loss of personal freedoms. And let’s not forget the main goal of it all (which is also the main goal of the elite organizations behind Greta): The creation of a single world government, ruled by the world elite … to combat climate change, of course...........

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/02/eric-sc ... ntier.html

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt believes biology is the next frontier in computing
Jennifer Elias WED, OCT 2 2019

Brain inserts and carbon-absorbing bacteria aren’t just the fantasies of Silicon Valley’s richest executives, they’re also a part of a larger hope to advance artificial intelligence and computing efforts.

“Biology will undoubtedly fuel computing” in coming years, former Google CEO and current technical advisor Eric Schmidt said at a conference called SynBioBeta in San Francisco Monday. “Taking biology, which I’d always viewed as squishy and analog, and turning it into something that can be digitally manipulated, is an enormous accelerator.”

Schmidt’s comments come as Silicon Valley’s seeming obsession with biology attempts to move beyond fascinating projects and into more serious investments that could help modernize tech processes.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg this year announced he and his wife Priscilla Chan would donate $68 million to support the mapping of all the cells in the human body. Facebook also recently acquired a company called CTRL Labs that lets you control computers with your mind. And Neuralink, a start-up once backed by Elon Musk, announced its brain-computer will start trials on humans next year.

“I’m always interested in the question: What is changing the fastest right now? Because whatever that is determining the history of next year,” Schmidt told the crowd. “There’s lot of evidence that biology is in that golden period right now.”

He gave examples of vision data aiding computing advances and smart assistants bolstering biological research and medical cure advances. “The way the eye and the vision works and so forth, will undoubtedly generate algorithms that are very powerful that we don’t fully understand right now,” Schmidt said.

Under Schmidt, Google’s made several early vision-related investments and most faced snags. Alphabet’s life sciences company Verily tried creating smart contact lenses, which aimed to measure blood sugar levels in tears. It has also filed patents for eye-tracking and, of course, who can forget the infamously defunct Google Glass.

“It’s easy to come up with movie recommendations or YouTube recommendations, because we have millions of data points of people like you,” Schmidt said. “We don’t have an analogous amount of data in biology yet.”

Schmidt said he’d like to marry the two worlds as quickly as possible. At one point, he asked the crowd to “build bacteria that absorbs CO2,” adding “We need it at scale and we need it in the next 10 to 15 years.”

[… video at link above]

Brain inserts and carbon-absorbing bacteria aren’t just the fantasies of Silicon Valley’s richest executives

....When it comes to being willing to explore more efficient options to solving a problem, monkeys exhibit more cognitive flexibility than humans, according to a study by Georgia State University psychology researchers.

"We are a unique species and have various ways in which we are exceptionally different from every other creature on the planet," said Julia Watzek, a graduate student in psychology at Georgia State. "But we're also sometimes really dumb."

Watzek was the lead author of a paper published in Scientific Reports illustrating how capuchin and rhesus macaque monkeys were significantly less susceptible than humans to "cognitive set" bias when presented a chance to switch to a more efficient option. The research results supported earlier studies with fellow primates, baboons and chimpanzees, who also showed a greater willingness to use optional shortcuts to earn a treat compared to humans who persisted in using a familiar learned strategy despite its relative inefficiency.......

Maybe if people had listened to the scientists instead of throwing out an endless stream of distractions and denials, like you're doing, we wouldn't need to take drastic measures.

The real child abusers are the complete fucking assholes constantly trying to stop people from actually doing something about the problem. "Oh no, we might have to pay more taxes to prevent the world from going to hell". Fucking pathetic.

Sounder » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:56 pm wrote:Dr. Evil wrote...

Maybe if people had listened to the scientists instead of throwing out an endless stream of distractions and denials, like you're doing, we wouldn't need to take drastic measures.

One basic activity within science is to present theories and look to see how facts either support or falsify said theories. AGW proposes the theory that as CO2 rises that temps will rise, yet during the period of the greatest growth of industry, from 1940 till 1975 temps were going down. The scientists you speak of have govt. paid jobs with little incentive to rock the gravy train boat, yet still plenty of scientists have risked carriers and social acceptance when they point out holes in the narrative.

Drastic measures simply means higher costs of living for regular people so that rich people can become even more rich. Under the principle that for the gross profits of the elite to be large, the net profit of regular people must be nil or none. More abuse.

The real child abusers are the complete fucking assholes constantly trying to stop people from actually doing something about the problem. "Oh no, we might have to pay more taxes to prevent the world from going to hell". Fucking pathetic.

Yeah, yeah, people that disagree with this social conformity drill are 'complete fucking assholes', yeah, yeah, I know the routine. Like as if paying more taxes could or would do anything prevent the world from going to hell. Geeze Louise, what planet do you live on?

http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/28407

Terrorized, traumatized and killed: The police state’s deadly toll on America’s children
By John W. Whitehead
Posted on October 18, 2019

[…]

“Children learn what they live.”

As family counselor Dorothy Law Nolte wisely observed, “If children live with criticism, they learn to condemn. If children live with hostility, they learn to fight. If children live with fear, they learn to be apprehensive.”

And if children live with terror, trauma and violence—forced to watch helplessly as their loved ones are executed by police officers who shoot first and ask questions later—will they in turn learn to terrorize, traumatize and inflict violence on the world around them?

I’m not willing to risk it. Are you?

It’s difficult enough raising a child in a world ravaged by war, disease, poverty and hate, but when you add the toxic stress of the police state into the mix, it becomes near impossible to protect children from the growing unease that some of the monsters of our age come dressed in government uniforms.

Case in point: in Hugo, Oklahoma, plain clothes police officers opened fire on a pickup truck parked in front of a food bank, heedless of the damage such a hail of bullets—26 shots were fired—could have on those in the vicinity. Three of the four children inside the parked vehicle were shot: a 4-year-old girl was shot in the head and ended up with a bullet in the brain; a 5-year-old boy received a skull fracture; and a 1-year-old girl had deep cuts on her face from gunfire or shattered window glass. Only the 2-year-old was spared any physical harm, although the terror will likely linger for a long time. “They are terrified to go anywhere or hear anything,” the family attorney said. “The two-year-old keeps asking about 'Am I going to get shot again.’”

The reason for the use of such excessive force?

Police were searching for a suspect in a weeks old robbery of a pizza parlor that netted $400.

While the two officers involved in the shooting are pulling paid leave at taxpayer expense, the children’s mother is struggling to figure out how to care for her wounded family and pay the medical expenses, including the cost to transport each child in a separate medical helicopter to a nearby hospital: $75,000 for one child’s transport alone.

This may be the worst use of excessive force on innocent children to date. Unfortunately, it is one of many in a steady stream of cases that speak to the need for police to de-escalate their tactics and stop resorting to excessive force when less lethal means are available to them.

For instance, in Clevelnd, police shot and killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice who was seen playing on a playground with a pellet gun. Surveillance footage shows police shooting the boy two seconds after getting out of a moving patrol car. Incredibly, the shooting was deemed “reasonable” and “justified” by two law enforcement experts who concluded that the police use of force “did not violate Tamir’s constitutional rights.”

In Detroit, 7-yer-old Alanya Jones was killed after a Detroit SWAT team launched a flash-bang grenade into her family’s apartment, broke through the door and opened fire, hitting the little girl who was asleep on the living room couch. The cops were in the wrong apartment.

In Georgia, a SWAT team launched a flash-bang grenade into the house in which Baby Bou Bou, his three sisters and his parents were staying. The the grenade landed in the 2-year-old’s crib, burning a hole in his chest and leaving the child with scarring that a lifetime of surgeries will not be able to easily undo.

Also in Georgia, 10-year-old Dakota Corbitt was shot by a police officer who aimed for an inquisitive dog, missed, and hit the young boy instead.

In Ohio, police shot 4-year-old Ava Ellis in the leg, shattering the bone, after being dispatched to assist the girl’s mother, who had cut her arm and was in need of a paramedic. Cops claimed that the family pet charged the officer who was approaching the house, causing him to fire his gun and accidentally hit the little girl.

In California, 13-year-old Andy Lopez Cruz was shot 7 times in 10 seconds by a police officer who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an assault rifle. Christopher Roupe, 17, was shot and killed after opening the door to a police officer. The officer, mistaking the remote control in Roupe’s hand for a gun, shot him in the chest.

These children are more than grim statistics on a police blotter. They are the heartbreaking casualties of the government’s endless, deadly wars on terror, on drugs, and on the American people themselves.

Then you have the growing number of incidents involving children who are forced to watch helplessly as trigger-happy police open fire on loved ones and community members alike.

In Texas, an 8-year-old boy watched as police—dispatched to do a welfare check on a home with its windows open—shot and killed his aunt through her bedroom window while she was playing video games with him.

In Minnesota, a 4-year-old girl watched from the backseat of a car as cops shot and killed her mother’s boyfriend, Philando Castile, a school cafeteria supervisor, during a routine traffic stopp merely because Castile disclosed that he had a gun in his possession, for which he had a lawful conceal-and-carry permit. That's all it took for police to shoot Castile four times as he was reaching for his license and registration.

In Arizona, a 7-year-old girl watched panic-stricken as a state trooper pointed his gun at her and her father during a traffic stop and reportedly threated to shoot her father in the back (twice) based on the mistaken belief that they were driving a stolen rental car.

In Oklahoma, a 5-year-old boy watched as a police officer used a high-powered rifle to shoot his dog Opie multiple times in his family’s backyard while other children were also present. The police officer was mistakenly attempting to deliver a warrant on a 10-year-old case for someone who hadn’t lived at that address in a decade.

A Minnesota SWAT team actually burst into one family’s house, shot the family’s dog, handcuffed the children and forced them to “sit next to the carcass of their dead and bloody pet for more than an hour.” They later claimed it was the wrong house.

More than 80% of American communities have their own SWAT teams, with more than 80,000 of these paramilitary raids are carried out every year. That translates to more than 200 SWAT team raids every day in which police crash through doors, damage private property, terrorize adults and children alike, kill family pets, assault or shoot anyone that is perceived as threatening—and all in the pursuit of someone merely suspected of a crime, usually some small amount of drugs.

A child doesn’t even have to be directly exposed to a police shooting to learn the police state’s lessons in compliance and terror, which are being meted out with every SWAT team raid, roadside strip search, and school drill.

[… con’d]

https://bigthink.com/ideafeed/does-the- ... th-reason/

Your Brain Isn't a Computer — It's a Quantum Field



By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them, and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them.

DAPHNE MULLER
18 September, 2015

The irrationality of how we think has long plagued psychology. When someone asks us how we are, we usually respond with "fine" or "good." But if someone followed up about a specific event — "How did you feel about the big meeting with your boss today?" — suddenly, we refine our "good" or "fine" responses on a spectrum from awful to excellent.

In less than a few sentences, we can contradict ourselves: We’re "good" but feel awful about how the meeting went. How then could we be "good" overall? Bias, experience, knowledge, and context all consciously and unconsciously form a confluence that drives every decision we make and emotion we express. Human behavior is not easy to anticipate, and probability theory often fails in its predictions of it.

Enter quantum cognition A team of researchers has determined that while our choices and beliefs don’t often make sense or fit a pattern on a macro level, at a "quantum" level, they can be predicted with surprising accuracy. In quantum physics, examining a particle’s state changes the state of the particle — so too, the "observation effect" influences how we think about the idea we are considering.

The quantum-cognition theory opens the fields of psychology and neuroscience to understanding the mind not as a linear computer, but rather an elegant universe.

In the example of the meeting, if someone asks, "Did it go well?" we immediately think of ways it did. However, if he or she asks, "Were you nervous about the meeting?" we might remember that it was pretty scary to give a presentation in front of a group. The other borrowed concept in quantum cognition is that we cannot hold incompatible ideas in our minds at one time. In other words, decision-making and opinion-forming are a lot like Schrödinger's cat.

The quantum-cognition theory opens the fields of psychology and neuroscience to understanding the mind not as a linear computer, but rather an elegant universe. But the notion that human thought and existence is richly paradoxical has been around for centuries. Moreover, the more scientists and scholars explore the irrational rationality of our minds, the closer science circles back to the confounding logic at the heart of every religion. Buddhism, for instance, is premised on riddles such as, “Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without it.” And, in Christianity, the paradox that Christ was simultaneously both a flesh-and-blood man and the Son of God is the central metaphor of the faith.

[D]ecision-making and opinion-forming are a lot like Schrödinger’s cat.

For centuries, religious texts have explored the idea that reality breaks down once we get past our surface perceptions of it; and yet, it is through these ambiguities that we understand more about ourselves and our world. In the Old Testament, the embattled Job pleads with God for an explanation as to why he has endured so much suffering. God then quizzically replies, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38:4). The question seems nonsensical — why would God ask a person in his creation where he was when God himself created the world? But this paradox is little different from the one in Einstein’s famous challenge to Heisenberg's “uncertainty Principle”: “God does not play dice with the universe.” As [url=http://www.hawking.org.uk/does-god-play-dice.html]Stephen Hawking counters, “Even God is bound by the uncertainty principle” because if all outcomes were deterministic then God would not be God. His being the universe’s “inveterate gambler” is the unpredictable certainty that creates him.

The mind then, according to quantum cognition, "gambles" with our "uncertain" reason, feelings, and biases to produce competing thoughts, ideas, and opinions. Then we synthesize those competing options to relate to our relatively "certain" realities. By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them, and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them.

Changing the metaphors we use to understand the world — especially the quantum metaphor — can yield amazing insights. Jonathan Keats, experimental philosopher, explains.

The test involved establishing a specific strategy to lead to a solution. Through trial and error using a computer, monkeys and humans had to follow a pattern by pushing a striped square then a dotted square and then, when it appeared, a triangle to achieve the goal and receive a reward. For the humans, the reward was either a jingle or points to let them know they got it right. For the monkeys, it was a banana pellet. Wrong results got a brief timeout and no reward.

After the strategy was learned, subsequent trials presented the triangle option immediately without having to push the patterned squares in sequence. All of the monkeys quickly used the shortcut, while 61 percent of the humans did not. In fact, 70 percent of all the monkeys used the shortcut the very first time it was available compared to only one human. (The study involved 56 humans, 22 capuchin and 7 rhesus monkeys.)

"There's a heavy reliance on rote learning and doing it the way you were taught and to specifically not take the shortcut," Watzek said of the human subjects.

"More of the humans do take the shortcut after seeing a video of somebody taking the shortcut, but about 30 percent still don't," Watzek said." In another version we told them they shouldn't be afraid to try something new. More of them did use the shortcut then, but many of them still didn't."

The study illustrates how humans can suffer from learned biases that can lead us to make inefficient decisions and miss opportunities.

“Habit is thus the enormous fly-wheel of society, it’s most precious conservative agent. It is alone what keeps us all within the bounds of ordinance, and saves the children of fortune from the envious uprisings of the poor.”

- William James, The Principles of Psychology, 1890

https://truthstreammedia.com/2019/10/25 ... hosurgery/

Then They Came For Your Mind: The Untold Story of Psychosurgery
Aaron Dykes, October 25th, 2019


https://youtu.be/pWReKAd7mYU
-

Complimenting yesterday’s post – a guest article written by Dr. Peter & Ginger Breggin – is the raw, and as yet unreleased full interview with Dr. Breggin that was used in our film “”The Minds of Men”.

Dr. Breggin gives an account of his activism and struggle against psychosurgery more than 50 years ago – a 1960s-70s era campaign to legitimize the destruction of the brain, and utilize an evolving and increasingly technological mode of intervention in the brain using implanted electrodes to target minute areas in the brain tied to behavior, and to use radio frequency (RF) monitoring and activation to control moods, attitude and perhaps even thought.

Worse, the practitioners and agenda-makers who were pushing this dangerous new era of intervention in our private mind space were doing so on the basis of PREEMPTIVELY disabling those identified as ‘potentially violent.’ As we detailed in ‘The Minds of Men,’ a massive campaign was underway in the wake of mass shootings and assassinations to screen the public, and draw a wide net of people they wanted to pacify and take out of the equation.

These included activists and political leaders in the black community and other potential troublemakers – political liabilities, not offenders or those who’d ‘done something wrong.’ The program also targeted “at risk” individuals throughout the strata of society.

Dr. Breggin played a pivotal role in shining a spotlight on these troublesome practices – with a focus on the work of Dr. Jose Delgado, and doctors Vernon Mark, Frank Ervin and William Sweet (also depicted in “The Minds of Men”).

Standing up against this injustice, Breggin withstood threats on his life and opposition from within the psychiatric and psychological fields which he was trained in to stop the funding and practice – at least overtly.

What continued in the shadows is another story… but one which connects solidly with the place society has once again reached – the dangerously naive belief that ‘authorities’ and ‘experts’ and ‘billionaires’ and their technologies can not only improve the world, but fix our brains and minds as well.

This is an important story that has been, until now, little known. Please watch and share.

Dr. Breggin and the fight against psychosurgery is featured in “The MInds of Men”.

—————————

http://truthstreammedia.com/2019/10/25/ ... r-watched/

Dr. Breggin: The Most Important Video We Have Ever Watched!
George Orwell’s Ghost , October 25, 2019
By Peter and Ginger Breggin
Breggin.com

Aaron and Melissa Dykes have made the single most important video that we have ever watched. It is called Putting a Chip in Your Brain Will Not Make You a Superhero or a God.

https://youtu.be/rInx6MQhxZM
-

It follows their astonishing documentary about the history of mind control, The Minds of Men.

Elon Musk, the super-wealthy founder of Tesla, has now officially with great fanfare rolled out his ongoing and rapidly progressing technology for the physical control of the brain and mind by irreversibly hooking up our living brains with thread-like wires to the hard metal of supercomputers. But what will happen to the humans enmeshed in this catastrophe and who will be controlling them?

In the video by Aaron and Melissa, we see and hear Musk and his team at their official roll out describing how they are building a foundation for mass application by first getting approval from the FDA for more limited “medical” uses.

Inevitable Collusion with the FDA

Will they succeed in getting the FDA to cooperate with their grand plans? This is the same FDA Medical Devices division that tacitly approved lobotomy and psychosurgery by never lifting a finger to have it controlled. It is the same FDA division that finally after 80 years took action aimed at electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) this year by officially approving it for the first time.

If the FDA can approve something as grossly brain damaging as ECT—knocking people out with jolts of electricity through their brain causing a severe convulsion, putting them into a coma, flatlining their brain waves, and having them come awake with a severe traumatic brain injury (TBI)—the agency will have no trouble approving “little tiny wires you can barely see” stuck in our brains.

The FDA Introduces Monarch for Our Children’s Brains

In fact, the FDA has already revved up the electrical attack on our brains—starting with the brains of our children. Through our new project, Stop the Psychiatric Abuse of Children (SPAC!), Michael Cornwall and I are trying to stop the newly FDA-approved Monarch device which uses electrodes on the forehead to flood the brains of children with electrical impulses for psychiatric purposes. This electrical “stimulation” technology—really, electrical disruption and destruction technology—was approved by the same FDA division for Medical Devices and is primitive compared to Musk’s incredibly ambitious project. Monarch, as rudimentary as it is, is a gateway to Elon Musk and those who join him in promoting physical control of the brain and mind. If the FDA approved Monarch, how much more readily will they approve interfacing the brain with computers with all the intellectual hoopla and multi-billionaires promoting?

Musk will plant the tiniest possible electrodes (called threads) permanently in the brain along with a chip in the brain to interface with apps that will be controlled by neuroscientist Muskies (my word) doing the great man’s bidding. Even if this were safe, which it absolutely is not, the Dykes remind us that these devices will enable hackers literally to break into people’s brains and minds to work their will on helpless human beings.

Ransomware Takes on New Proportions

Imagine ransomware getting hold of your brain and demanding an astronomical payment for its release. There are so many horrors easily imagined and easily made into reality by these technologies, from taking prisoner the minds of men, women, and children to discovering, in the long run, that the permanently implanted electrodes wear down and destroy free will and the sense of being human. Then there will be all the subtle changes that human subjectivity cannot not detect because the induced brain dysfunctions will inevitably dull our sensitivity to ourselves and begin to seem like “normal.”

Ultimately humans will not know what it was once like to be free and independent thinkers and autonomous beings. There will be vague yearnings for what was once experienced or talked about, references in books to a free will and autonomy, that now seems old-fashioned and romantic. Technology will indeed have won. But that last comment is nonsense, because technology will not be the victor. The victor will be the malicious will of people like Elon Musk.

A Faustian Compact with AI

Watching Musk in the video, we see a person who looks and sounds like Faust making a deal with the devil by accepting physical control of the brain in order to fight off the superiority of Artificial Intelligence (AI) which otherwise will take over the world. I am not exaggerating; you must see the video.

You will witness how Musk once called AI a demon and now he says we have no choice other than to physically interface our brains with the demon AI in order to control it. Musk is specific about this Star Wars of the brain drama—physically interfacing computers with the brain to make us into superheroes who can defend ourselves against and triumph over the monster AI that Musk and others have already supposedly unleashed on us.

Never mind that Musk’s pretensions are grandiose, probably cannot be done effectively with any existing technology, and doomed to end in tragedies beyond human comprehension. Musk is forging ahead with it and he will easily garner billions of dollars from investors to develop and promote it. And as you look and listen to Musk, you will see a man who is sweating, stammering, nearly incoherent at times, frequently giggling and laughing demonically, and literally looking possessed, as he voices megalomaniacal aims. Once again, you must see the video for yourself to confirm what I am saying.

Physical Control of the Brain for Political Purposes

As Aaron and Melissa demonstrated in The Minds of Men, I was probably the first to criticize in detail the blueprint for all that is now unfolding when in the early 1970s I took on the neuroscientist Dr. José Delgado, author of Physical Control of the Mind: Toward a Psychocivilized Society.

Delgado was literally a Fascist, a man who received medals from Fascist Spain, and who claimed that his work proved the irrationality of the American Founders in proclaiming that human beings have free will and the right to enjoy political liberty. I was able to stir up so much criticism of him that he was driven out of Yale University, where he was a visiting professor, and he had to creep back to Spain. I doubt, in the current worshipful environment toward technology, if I could have a similar impact.

At the time he was forced to leave the US, Delgado was masterminding the remote control of hapless mental patients who came under his dominion. This project, which my anti-psychosurgery campaign stopped, was conducted by a psychiatrist and highly respected neurosurgeons affiliated with Harvard in Boston. You can read about all this in my overview report for a law review titled “Psychosurgery for Political Purposes.”

Please, please watch the new video by Aaron and Melissa Dykes: Putting a Chip in Your Brain Will Not Make You a Superhero or a God.

We will be communicating more about this enormous, escalating threat which will make psychiatry with its drugs and electroshock look like a minor phase in the suppression and control of human beings through technology.

Perhaps the most insidious thing of all—the stigma of psychiatric treatment has been removed. Elon Musk and billionaire friends will be using physical control of the brain, not to cure alleged mental illnesses or violence, but to make us Better than Ever—super people physically joined to computers to Take on the World as Cybernetic Superheroes! It will make a great action movie; but it portends the end of humanity as we know it.

TSM Editor’s Note: It wasn’t until after we uploaded the video above regarding the Neuralink rollout that we discovered (unsurprisingly) that DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was responsible for funding the creation of the electrode “sewing machine” robot, about which the agency discussed its “excitement” on Neuralink’s progress in an official DARPA Instagram post the day after Elon Musk’s big announcement.

[…]

For years now DARPA has been publicly working on what the media has now dubbed its “super soldier” brain-computer interface project. Essentially they are attempting to create cyborgs — cybernetic organisms. In addition to implantable neural interfaces, in March 2018 DARPA announced its Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology (N3) program, awarding grants to teams at Battelle Memorial Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), Rice University, and Teledyne Scientific to develop wearable, high-resolution bidirectional brain-machine interfaces.

As Engineering.com explains, “Basically, DARPA is looking for a way to wirelessly ‘jack in’ to a soldier’s brain tissue to use AI software systems to control autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons. And DARPA has been pursuing and funding research on brain-machine interfaces since it began awarding contracts to researchers at UCLA starting back in the 1970s, which was previously funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation.”

(illustrations and links embedded at original)

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 115356.htm

Science News

Monkeys outperform humans when it comes to cognitive flexibility

Date: October 15, 2019
Source: Georgia State University
Summary: When it comes to being willing to explore more efficient options to solving a problem, monkeys exhibit more cognitive flexibility than humans, according to a new study.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 115356.htm