Current events discussion

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

@Speed Chaser dont care bro

 

[Speed Chaser]

It just depends on how you view the information. Dude, a brain chip is just a computer it can be hacked; the human body itself can be hacked, which is what they're doing, which is what they say they're doing. What are you talking about? Brain chips can have two way communication with the brain which means they can override the brain. If you have a brain chip controlling your motor movement, then you can have a computer control it for you and not be in control of that computer or AI system. It takes so long to put all this together and you don't even give me a fair chance. In the first place you say it's dumb right off the bat. It shows your intention.

And a highly doubt you read everything about the Internet of bodies that I posted because that would take quite a long time. You have to read through like dozens of pages of shit man. I really can't prove anything because you shut me down before I even get a chance to explain, you immediately say nothing can be possible nothing you say is right and we can't even be really begin to discuss in detail because everything I post is immediately wrong according to you. There are things in those articles that I can use to prove my thoughts and you're going to use it to disprove it and not even give me a chance which is what exactly what you're doing.

You said it's a dumb right off the bat, so what the **** are you even talking about giving me a fair chance or anything like that? I was talking about specific stuff to someone else and you said it was dumb and now I have to prove the entire theory of life to you, because that's really what it is.

Maybe we should start with are you aware of other dimensions that you can go to when you die? That's what this topic is really about. The nature of what we're talking about can't be proven to human eyes in full, because humans can't perceive that much of reality. That's why it takes the mind.

Even if I show you a thing about nanotechnology, you still can't see the nano technology therefore you have to conceptually understand it. Do you understand that? It could be real as **** and you can't see it. I could literally hold a piece of nanotechnology in front of your ******* face and you say it wasn't real because you can't see it. Do you see what I'm saying, because that's what you feel like to me.

At this point, I don't know who the bigger clown is—you or Rob—because you sound just as delusional as he does.

It’s interesting that you mention interpretation, but interpretation isn’t the same as evidence. A computer chip being potentially hackable doesn’t equate to proof of an imminent AI takeover or human mind control. Yes, brain-computer interfaces like Neuralink are in development, but their purpose and current capabilities are far from the science fiction scenarios you describe. Just because something is theoretically possible doesn't mean it's a reality or even likely. Your argument is so weak that instead of posting a scientific article to support it, you rely solely on your opinion pathetic.

I don’t think you want another spanking like the one I gave you earlier this year about your "Internet of Bodies" nonsense. If you’ve forgotten, scroll back in this forum and refresh your memory. Regarding nanotechnology and "proving the unseeable," science relies on observable, measurable, and repeatable evidence. We can't directly see air molecules, but their effects are measurable. The same principle applies to nanotechnology—it’s not about blind belief; it’s about demonstrable functionality.

Finally, bringing up dimensions and the afterlife derails the discussion into realms of faith or personal belief, not technology. If this is about exploring philosophical perspectives, then say so. But if you're making factual claims about technology, the expectation remains: provide clear, tangible evidence, not just interpretations or abstract theories.

So you are trying to be a troll, just ThxOne?

And the answer is yes.

Social Security Programs Throughout the World

Social Security Administration Research, Statistics, and Policy Analysis

www.ssa.gov

View attachment 61931


Spend a little time here, and have some fun. You'll quickly learn who is willing to provide evidence to support their claim/s, and who demands that their claims be believed simply because they were able top type them without passing out.

This guy, for example. "been asking him for two years to support his claim that bones do not have nerves in them. And I'm not the only one who has tried.
He's never offered a SHRED of proof. He'll swear to the heavens that he HAS, but simply nobody will BELIEVE his proofs:

View attachment 61932

I prefer not to be quoted by someone who compared cancer to a baby.

To be completely honest, between work and going back and forth with Rob, I haven't been able to keep up with what you guys are talking about.

So, in layman's terms, what is the argument?

There was no argument until he decided to quote me and get butthurt. When asked for proof, he brings nothing—or in the last case, it ended up supporting what I said instead.

@Speed Chaser dont care bro

We both know that's a lie. If you could prove your BS, you would but you can't, so cry more.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

At this point, I don't know who the bigger clown is—you or Rob—because you sound just as delusional as he does.

It’s interesting that you mention interpretation, but interpretation isn’t the same as evidence. A computer chip being potentially hackable doesn’t equate to proof of an imminent AI takeover or human mind control. Yes, brain-computer interfaces like Neuralink are in development, but their purpose and current capabilities are far from the science fiction scenarios you describe. Just because something is theoretically possible doesn't mean it's a reality or even likely. Your argument is so weak that instead of posting a scientific article to support it, you rely solely on your opinion pathetic.

I didn't say a computer chip being potentially hackable equates to an AI take over. This is why you **** to talk to. I was giving an example of problems that can happen when you hook machines up to the human body.

What the **** are you talking the current capabilities are far from what I described?

How Elon Musk’s Neuralink brain chip allows paralyzed people to control devices with their mind

Neuralink wrote a blog item on its web site indicating that the brain implant worn by Noland Arbaugh experienced a problem and began to malfunction.

uk.news.yahoo.com

If a dude can control a mouse with his mind, he can control anything with his mind through the computer. I don't think you get the technology. You're just a bullshitter.

They plan to make AI brain interfaces 2 way where they can control your brain and manipulate your mood, and what not. Like using your brain chip to cure depression.

Brain implant may lift most severe depression

Sarah, the first patient to try it, says it has allowed her to enjoy life again.

www.bbc.com

They're already doing it like I told you. The stuff is already being used. It hasn't just been rolled out main stream. You don't know what you're talking about!

You can make self assembling nano technology that functions as brain chips (brain computer interfaces) and antenna systems that build them selves inside of the body wants to Nanotech is in there. That tech is being developed as well.

 

[Speed Chaser]

At this point do what my homie Vivek say and

@Speed Chaser dont care bro

Thank you for showing that you are a lier who clearly cares lol

I didn't say a computer chip being potentially hackable equates to an AI take over. This is why you **** to talk to. I was giving an example of problems that can happen when you hook machines up to the human body.

What the **** are you talking the current capabilities are far from what I described?

How Elon Musk’s Neuralink brain chip allows paralyzed people to control devices with their mind

Neuralink wrote a blog item on its web site indicating that the brain implant worn by Noland Arbaugh experienced a problem and began to malfunction.

uk.news.yahoo.com

If a dude can control a mouse with his mind, he can control anything with his mind through the computer. I don't think you get the technology. You're just a bullshitter.

They plan to make AI brain interfaces 2 way where they can control your brain and manipulate your mood, and what not. Like using your brain chip to cure depression.

Brain implant may lift most severe depression

Sarah, the first patient to try it, says it has allowed her to enjoy life again.

www.bbc.com

They're already doing it like I told you. The stuff is already being used. It hasn't just been rolled out main stream. You don't know what you're talking about!

Now for this garbage.
The Neuralink article discusses controlling devices through brain-computer interfaces—a promising development for individuals with paralysis. However, controlling a cursor or device via thought isn’t the same as ‘controlling anything’ through a computer. The functionality demonstrated is task-specific, requiring precise calibration and technology that is still in its infancy. Claims that this equates to broad, two-way mind control by AI are speculative at best.

The BBC article you linked highlights how brain implants can alleviate severe depression by stimulating specific brain areas. While this shows potential for therapeutic applications, it doesn’t support your assertion that these technologies are designed or used for mass manipulation or AI-led brain control. Therapeutic use to target disorders isn’t evidence of nefarious motives.

Development and targeted use in highly specific cases do not equate to widespread deployment with malicious intent.

Finally, you frequently assert that I ‘don’t get the technology,’ but fail to substantiate your own claims with evidence beyond theoretical possibilities. If this conversation is about discussing real-world implications of advancing technology, the focus needs to remain on what’s demonstrably true, not conjecture.

Want to try again? Maybe this time, put on the tinfoil hat so you can harness all the brainwave pyramid power around you to find something that actually supports your point.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

At this point do what my homie Vivek say and


Thank you for showing that you are a lier who clearly cares lol

Now for this garbage.
The Neuralink article discusses controlling devices through brain-computer interfaces—a promising development for individuals with paralysis. However, controlling a cursor or device via thought isn’t the same as ‘controlling anything’ through a computer. The functionality demonstrated is task-specific, requiring precise calibration and technology that is still in its infancy. Claims that this equates to broad, two-way mind control by AI are speculative at best.

The BBC article you linked highlights how brain implants can alleviate severe depression by stimulating specific brain areas. While this shows potential for therapeutic applications, it doesn’t support your assertion that these technologies are designed or used for mass manipulation or AI-led brain control. Therapeutic use to target disorders isn’t evidence of nefarious motives.

Development and targeted use in highly specific cases do not equate to widespread deployment with malicious intent.

Finally, you frequently assert that I ‘don’t get the technology,’ but fail to substantiate your own claims with evidence beyond theoretical possibilities. If this conversation is about discussing real-world implications of advancing technology, the focus needs to remain on what’s demonstrably true, not conjecture.

Want to try again? Maybe this time, put on the tinfoil hat so you can harness all the brainwave pyramid power around you to find something that actually supports your point.

I'm not a liar; I thought you were going to say something different. At least I can spell liar. I can also spell idiot, idiot.

You gotta be pretty dumb to think the government doesn't want to control your mind with technology. You're saying that technology that works isn't being developed to work better? What? That's literally what they say. They're doing it and you're like noooo that could never happen lolololololol

Neuroscientists Wirelessly Control the Brain of a Scampering Lab Mouse

With wireless optogenetic tools, neuroscientists steer mice around their cages

spectrum.ieee.org

Nano MIND: Scientists use magnetism to brain-control mice wirelessly

Using magnetic fields and nanoparticles, researchers were able to increase and decrease feeding behavior and appetite in mice models.

interestingengineering.com

Once again, you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

@Eggs you might like this one

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

You know what Rob's trying to do there

The entirety of the left tried to run on Trump = Hitler and got their arses handed to them. Trump & the GOP figured out that running on the singular plank of "stolen election" didn't work. I guess the left will be forced to come up with a new platform when Trump leaves office in 4 years despite the left's claims that Trump was is going to end democracy and become a dictator. I wonder what brush they'll try to paint JD Vance with?

 

[Speed Chaser]

I'm not a liar; I thought you were going to say something different. At least I can spell liar. I can also spell idiot, idiot.

You gotta be pretty dumb to think the government doesn't want to control your mind with technology. You're saying that technology that works isn't being developed to work better? What? That's literally what they say. They're doing it and you're like now they could never happen lolololololol

Neuroscientists Wirelessly Control the Brain of a Scampering Lab Mouse

With wireless optogenetic tools, neuroscientists steer mice around their cages

spectrum.ieee.org

Nano MIND: Scientists use magnetism to brain-control mice wirelessly

Using magnetic fields and nanoparticles, researchers were able to increase and decrease feeding behavior and appetite in mice models.

interestingengineering.com

Once again, you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

@Eggs you might like this one

Wow, spelling is the first sign of having a brain you've shown so far. I'm amazed. How are you not a liar when you keep coming back and replying like a kid with no friends?

I'll tell you what really is dumb: being an idiot on the internet like you, who thinks he's smarter than he is and knows more than he does. It's funny how your logic is just to scream about assumptions and not actual facts. Show me where I said something won't happen, moron, or did I simply state that it's not how your fear-mongering, dumbass claim suggests it is?

I'll ask you again—the most simple question that breaks down your entire worldview. If the government, the elite, or whatever group you want is developing some super-advanced AI, what use would it have for controlling humans? Why is it that you are constantly unable to answer this, fool?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

At this point, I don't know who the bigger clown is—you or Rob—because you sound just as delusional as he does.

Huh? What the heck did I do?

I prefer not to be quoted by someone who compared cancer to a baby.

Analogies and comparisons are very distinctly different things.

A tree is something that is made up of billions of cells. It needs water. It needs sustenance. It has capillaries. It grows over time. It can be injured. It can and will die.
Those same things can be said of a human, but I doubt anyone would compare the two.

The cancer analogy was made regarding government deciding what someone can or cannot do with their own body and the cells within that body.
It also speaks to the fact that what eventually becomes a human starts off as just a single-cell zygote, which some people think is a baby, and others don't.

People argue against abortion, when they can't even agree what that zygote actually represents in the big picture of their argument.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Wow, spelling is the first sign of having a brain you've shown so far. I'm amazed. How are you not a liar when you keep coming back and replying like a kid with no friends?

I'll tell you what really is dumb: being an idiot on the internet like you, who thinks he's smarter than he is and knows more than he does. It's funny how your logic is just to scream about assumptions and not actual facts. Show me where I said something won't happen, moron, or did I simply state that it's not how your fear-mongering, dumbass claim suggests it is?

I'll ask you again—the most simple question that breaks down your entire worldview. If the government, the elite, or whatever group you want is developing some super-advanced AI, what use would it have for controlling humans? Why is it that you are constantly unable to answer this, fool?

It's a little bit more than a dumb conversation, eh?

 

[Speed Chaser]

It's a little bit more than a dumb conversation, eh?

Yes, everything you have said so far is very dumb. Glad you agree. Notice how you didn't answer the question again.

 

[Speed Chaser]

Huh? What the heck did I do?

Analogies and comparisons are very distinctly different things.

A tree is something that is made up of billions of cells. It needs water. It needs sustenance. It has capillaries. It grows over time. It can be injured. It can and will die.
Those same things can be said of a human, but I doubt anyone would compare the two.

The cancer analogy was made regarding government deciding what someone can or cannot do with their own body and the cells within that body.
It also speaks to the fact that what eventually becomes a human starts off as just a single-cell zygote, which some people think is a baby, and others don't.

People argue against abortion, when they can't even agree what that zygote actually represents in the big picture of their argument.

Try to justify it any way you want, but to me, it was in poor taste.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Huh? What the heck did I do?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Inflation has been declining for the past two plus years, but he's now "not sure" if he can bring prices down?

So I guess if he gets those import tariffs in place that will be "paid for by" foreign exporters, he'll just blame the price spikes on "Bidenflation".
And his followers will applaud.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

View attachment 61962


Inflation has been declining for the past two plus years, but he's now "not sure" if he can bring prices down?

View attachment 61963

So I guess if he gets those import tariffs in place that will be "paid for by" foreign exporters, he'll just blame the price spikes on "Bidenflation".
And his followers will applaud.

Why not. You claim Biden inherited the economy from Trump. Turnabout is fair play.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

The entirety of the left tried to run on Trump = Hitler and got their arses handed to them. Trump & the GOP figured out that running on the singular plank of "stolen election" didn't work. I guess the left will be forced to come up with a new platform when Trump leaves office in 4 years despite the left's claims that Trump was is going to end democracy and become a dictator. I wonder what brush they'll try to paint JD Vance with?

The new dem platform will be Vance = Hitler

The ridiculous thing is how they're normalizing Hitler through repetition...