Porky wants to insert needles in your brain

You forgot the third option.

Attached: Bikini.jpg (1280x720, 208.57K)

You poor fool.
ten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously
later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A
walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at
his own pace without observing any traffic regulations,
and was independent of technological support-systems.
When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to
increase man’s freedom. They took no freedom away from
the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn’t want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an
automobile could travel much faster and farther than a
walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport
soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly
man’s freedom of locomotion. When automobiles became
numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use ex-
tensively. In a car, especially in densely populated areas,
one cannot just go where one likes at one’s own pace;
one’s movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by
various traffic laws. One is tied down by various obliga-
tions: license requirements, driver test, renewing registra-
tion, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly
payments on purchase price. Moreover, the use of moto-
rized transport is no longer optional. Since the introduc-
tion of motorized transport the arrangement of our cities
has changed in such a way that the majority of people
no longer live within walking distance of their place of
employment, shopping areas and recreational opportuni-
ties, so that they HAVE TO depend on the automobile for
transportation. Or else they must use public transporta-
tion, in which case they have even less control over their
own movement than when driving a car. Even the walker’s
freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he conti-
nually has to stop to wait for traffic lights that are desi-
gned mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor
traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along
the highway. (Note this important point that we have just
illustrated with the case of motorized transport: When a
new item of technology is introduced as an option that an
individual can accept or not as he chooses, it does not ne-
cessarily REMAIN optional. In many cases the new techno-
logy changes society in such a way that people eventually
find themselves FORCED to use it.)"

Attached: 1559838198259.png (220x220, 93.25K)

spicy source pls.

Attached: index.png (225x225, 7.7K)

Look up neuralink

Thanks cutie pie.

Can't wait for them to try and execute order sixty six

Attached: 4a3.jpg (637x476, 36.98K)

UwU

start increaThe author goes on to describe how human agency is an illusionsing about 0.8 seconds before the voluntary finger movement.
Kornhuber and Deecke dubbed this activity the readiness potential (RP).
As shown in figure 2.7, this RP occurs widely in the brain—in the left and
right precentral regions (spots a bit above and forward of the ear, corre-
sponding to the motor area) and in the midparietal region (top of the
head), as shown in the upper three panels. This negative electrical impulse
peaks about 90 milliseconds before the action and then drops a bit in
the positive (downward) direction before the action. The ratio of the left
to right potentials shown in the fourth panel also reveals a bit of a blip
about 50 milliseconds before the action on the left side of the motor area
of the brain. Just before the right finger moves, the finger and hand motor
area contralateral to that finger—the area that controls the actual move-
ment—is then activated. This blip has been called the movement potential
(Deecke, Scheid, and Kornhuber 1969). It seems as though a general
readiness for voluntary action resolves into a more localized activation of
the area responsible for the specific action just as the action unfolds…The results were truly noteworthy, although in some sense this is
exactly what you would have to expect: The conscious willing of finger
movement occurred at a significant interval after the onset of the RP but
also at a significant interval before the actual finger movement (and also
at a significant interval before the awareness of movement). The time line
for the RP, W, M, and actual movement events is shown in figure 2.8.
These findings suggest that the brain starts doing something first (we
don’t know just what that is). Then the person becomes conscious of
wanting to do the action. This would be where the conscious will kicks
in, at least, in the sense that the person first becomes conscious of trying
to act. Then, and still a bit prior to the movement, the person reports be-
coming aware of the finger actually moving. 6 Finally, the finger moves." p.53 Daniel Wegner, "The Illusion of Conscious Will"
The author goes on to describe, with several examples, how the attribution of our actions is full of faults. The quote above shows that this phenomena is demonstrable in our neural activity. And if misattribution of our actions is so faulty, then giving any technology access to our motor-functions is to give technology the potential to control us directly and without our possible knowing. I view it as worse than death tbh because the second that you install a 'neural-link' into your brain, at that very instant you will cease to know whether or not your actions and thoughts are your own, wrt neural-link. You will not have the ability to tell the difference. There is nothing you will be able to do anymore. Your mind will literally be in the hands of Elon Musk, and Bill Gates will be sitting besides him with a fresh installation of Windows.

Looking forward to paying a hack doctor to install a bootleg chip with open source custom firmware.

Not to be that guy, but how much of this is real existing science, and how much if this is Elon's "Rick and Morty" fantasies?

who tf knows? although i didn't watch the entire thing, there were a number of scientific discussions that went into detail on how the tech would work. through my rudimentary knowledge of circuits and digital signal processing, it checked out.

call me cute too please im having a bad day

Not him but

U CUTE

Attached: 1527189543728.gif (500x269, 575.83K)

No one knows. But the tech seems plausible unlike the mars colonization and hyperloop bullshit or the self driving meme. Reading inputs from the brain is already a real thing. But it could just be a scam as well. It probably is anyway

R u a tranny?

Elon doesn't even hide his ambition to turn his porky friends into ubermensch and leave poor proles even further in the dirt.

I have a dick, so maybe.

You guys want some more Ted?
struggle to overcome certain problems that threaten its
survival, among which the problems of human behavior
are the most important. If the system succeeds in acqui-
ring sufficient control over human behavior quickly en-
ough, it will probably survive. Otherwise it will break
down. We think the issue will most likely be resolved wi-
thin the next several decades, say 40 to 100 years.
163. Suppose the system survives the crisis of the next
several decades. By that time it will have to have solved,
or at least brought under control, the principal problems
that confront it, in particular that of “socializing” human
beings; that is, making people sufficiently docile so that
heir behavior no longer threatens the system. That being
accomplished, it does not appear that there would be any
further obstacle to the development of technology, and it
would presumably advance toward its logical conclusion,
which is complete control over everything on Earth, in-
cluding human beings and all other important organisms.
The system may become a unitary, monolithic organiza-
tion, or it may be more or less fragmented and consist of a
number of organizations coexisting in a relationship that
includes elements of both cooperation and competition,
just as today the government, the corporations and other
large organizations both cooperate and compete with one
another. Human freedom mostly will have vanished, be-
cause individuals and small groups will be impotent vis-
a-vis large organizations armed with supertechnology and
an arsenal of advanced psychological and biological tools
for manipulating human beings, besides instruments of
surveillance and physical coercion. Only a small number
of people will have any real power, and even these proba-
bly will have only very limited freedom, because their be-
havior too will be regulated; just as today our politicians
and corporation executives can retain their positions of
power only as long as their behavior remains within cer-
tain fairly narrow limits.
164. Don’t imagine that the systems will stop develo-
ping further techniques for controlling human beings and
nature once the crisis of the next few decades is over and
increasing control is no longer necessary for the system’s
survival. On the contrary, once the hard times are over
the system will increase its control over people and nature
more rapidly, because it will no longer be hampered by dif-
ficulties of the kind that it is currently experiencing. Survi-
val is not the principal motive for extending control. As we
explained in paragraphs 87-90, technicians and scientists
carry on their work largely as a surrogate activity; that is,
they satisfy their need for power by solving technical pro-
blems. They will continue to do this with unabated enthu-
siasm, and among the most interesting and challenging
problems for them to solve will be those of understanding
the human body and mind and intervening in their deve-
lopment. For the “good of humanity,” of course."

Comrades, join the Freedom Club today!
Some of you might be wary of Kaczsynski because Zig Forums-tards say that Kaczsynski hated leftists. But he was more sophisticated in his thoughts than the average Zig Forums-tard is capable of comprehending. I guarantee you that Kaczsynski was more thoughtful than the average Zig Forums-tard. Example (that Zig Forums-tards will never show you):
a lot of crap. I know John and Jane who are leftish types
and they don’t have all these totalitarian tendencies.” It’s
quite true that many leftists, possibly even a numerical
majority, are decent people who sincerely believe in tole-
rating others’ values (up to a point) and wouldn’t want
to use high-handed methods to reach their social goals.
Our remarks about leftism are not meant to apply to every
individual leftist but to describe the general character of
leftism as a movement. And the general character of a
movement is not necessarily determined by the numeri-
cal proportions of the various kinds of people involved in
the movement.
224. The people who rise to positions of power in leftist
movements tend to be leftists of the most power-hungry
type, because power-hungry people are those who strive
hardest to get into positions of power. Once the power-
hungry types have captured control of the movement,
there are many leftists of a gentler breed who inwardly
disapprove of many of the actions of the leaders, but can-
not bring themselves to oppose them. They NEED their
faith in the movement, and because they cannot give up
this faith they go along with the leaders. True, SOME lef-
tists do have the guts to oppose the totalitarian tendencies
that emerge, but they generally lose, because the power-
hungry types are better organized, are more ruthless and
Machiavellian and have taken care to build themselves a
strong power base.
225. These phenomena appeared clearly in Russia and
other countries that were taken over by leftists. Similarly,
before the breakdown of communism in the, USSR, lef-
tish types in the West would, seldom criticize that coun-
try. If prodded they would admit that the USSR did many
wrong things, but then they would try to find excuses for
the communists and begin talking about the faults of the
West. They always opposed Western military resistance
to communist aggression. Leftish types all over the world
vigorously protested the U.S. military action in Vietnam,
but when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they did nothing.
Not that they approved of the Soviet actions; but because
of their leftist faith, they just couldn’t bear to put them-
selves in opposition to communism. Today, in those of our
universities where “political correctness” has become do-
minant, there are probably many leftish types who priva-
tely disapprove of the suppression of academic freedom,
but they go along with it anyway.
226. Thus the fact that many individual leftists are per-
sonally mild and fairly tolerant people by no means pre-
vents leftism as a whole form having a totalitarian ten-
dency.
227. Our discussion of leftism has a serious weakness. It
is still far from clear what we mean by the word “leftist.”
There doesn’t seem to be much we can do about this. To-
day leftism is fragmented into a whole spectrum of activist
movements. Yet not all activist movements are leftist, and
some activist movements (e.g., radical environmentalism)
seem to include both personalities of the leftist type and
personalities of thoroughly un-leftist types who ought to
know better than to collaborate with leftists. Varieties of
leftists fade out gradually into varieties of non-leftists and
we ourselves would often be hard-pressed to decide whe-
ther a given individual is or is not a leftist. To the extent
that it is defined at all, our conception of leftism is defined
by the discussion of it that we have given in this article,
and we can only advise the reader to use his own judg-
ment in deciding who is a leftist."
I think it's obvious that Kaczsynski had a very peculiar. non-mainstream idea of what a 'leftist' is.

Send FBI fren

*D I S C O R D UwU

An accompanying clip on how shitty the USSR became and why authoritarian movements are pointless and that as REAL leftists, it is our duty to find something else.

Attached: f99e6b9ec6ac100a188d4634dde5f8e7751b7ba36e70f1d71bb89c5eda5801e0.webm (512x288, 4.78M)

Do you have any long term studies about this, I agree that you might experience external control signals as your own will, it's just that i doubt that this would work for very long. I'm guessing that you'd have a similar habituation effect as with chemical neurotransmitters. As far as the ability to ignore stimulus from electrical signals goes, there's people sleeping in extreme environments, like soldiers sleeping inside of a Battlecruiser heavy-artillery-turret while it's being fired.

Yeah but human behaviour is not that variable, there are material limits that govern human behaviour that cannot be overcome. The falling rate of profit cannot be fixed by changing human behaviour. This seems like the story about the travelling merchant attempting to ween, the donkey that pulled his wagon, off food.

Just flash FOSS firmware on this thing.

Consider that most people that use any open source OS, despite their inherent greater potential of privacy, still regularly access and use sites that harvest and sell off data they've built individual profiles for, sites that can detect whenever you access them with a certain OS. Just imagine flashing your neuralink with Gentoo, then getting all your job and welfare applications passively ignored, be subject to a mental health exam, having your credit score plummet, be subject to surprise visits from the police to make sure you aren't up to any funny business. Maybe not even that, the Mother AI would just label you an untrustworthy person and you'd just get passively ignored by every other person with wireless neural microchips until getting cop'd to death.

You say that on a thread about a technology whose scientific basis proves the exact opposite is true. The ability of human beings to change their circumstances (even if limited) logically leads to the eventual overwriting of human being itself, even if it's not necessarily for the sake of virtue.

And people ask me why I’m going off the grid as soon as I can. Have fun, wage-slaves

Attached: 090B8737-4594-4D40-9D90-22D29F9EE7C0.png (768x514, 160.17K)

Ted is the perfect example of “you should have listened before it was too late”

...

Being “off the grid” means nothing more than not being hooked up to public utilities. The Amish, for example, are pretty much off the grid. I’d rather live in a shack in the woods with a modicum of independence than be a wage-slave. I know Zig Forums thinks this is “individualist” but I really don’t care

Attached: FAB97CB7-B31F-4EAE-8A32-94ABA725899B.png (406x395, 157.67K)

Primcom gang?

Of course, brother

This is a fair question. I'll look into it and get back to you.

Just install a package that includes the desire and skill for flashing at least 10 other people with gentoo brain-ware.

You treat people as over-unity machines that are just to stubborn to let capitalist use them fully. It doesn't matter how much you mind control people, that doesn't even enter the equation, because the contradiction that breaks capitalism are prior to human will.

You are getting too sci fi. Baseline level you are inserting a wirelessly controlled medical device. It's like willingly signing up to have a Battle Royale bomb collar surgically implanted in your brain. Whoever controls this device will control you whether they can control motor function or implant ideas.

Attached: hqdefault(2).jpg (480x360, 13.41K)

My computer runs Linux and nothing like that happens to me.

Reactionary samefag

Attached: 888.jpg (600x641, 51.33K)

...

Attached: dinosaurs.jpg (1328x896, 232.94K)

dude, we are literally undergoing the 6th mass extinction event, through climate change (aka tech and greenhouse gasses). quit posting cringe.

We can have a world with all the benefits of modern technology and none of the horrid corruption of capitalism, that's kind of the point of the communist movement as a whole.

So you are saying we need techology to protect against meteors?

The Mesozoic lasted 185,000,000 years wothout an extinction level meteor impact.
Vs.
15,000 years of human history and we are already facing extinction from technology.

Technology is a death cult.
15,000 years

Attached: hqdefault(3).jpg (480x360, 17.98K)

What if it turns out that is nothing but idealism? Prmitive communism is proven, technological communism is only a hypothesis.

It’s industrialism that’s the problem, it doesn’t matter if it has a red coat of paint on it or not. Fucking technophiles

Except "technology" as an abstract concept is not the problem here. The invention of the harpoon is not what lead to the extinction of the Stellar's sea cow, it was our unmediated predation on them.

You do realise that Sun is not eternal? And don't forget about heat death of the universe.

Who gives a fuck honestly? That is beyond hypothetical. Those are evolutionary time scales. We will probably have naturally evolved into beings of pure energy if we last that long.

what if the sun explodes tomorrow? Then this conversation would be pretty useless huh? We can piss on about hypotheticals till the cows come home, but an argument they shant make.

If your mental image of industrial society has not moved past 1930's steel mills, then that is not my issue. This is a non-argument.

It's not. The reason we have a workweek of x hours is because profit needs to be made. Same can be said about the reason you have to specialize in one job.

Attached: 53354b4a9bd9f5a3e7f1d9c6bb1dd53f6a18634be4f63c8a6806507658acb56b.png (631x395, 595.39K)

The hell are you talking about, I'm the one saying the health and lifespan of the sun are factors beyond our control and are not worth discussing.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (640x640, 307.78K)

Non-sequitur. I’m talking about society as it is following the industrial revolution and why it is going to destroy humanity and all life on it if it is not destroyed

Yes, and you also introduced hypothetical what if's into the argument, so why not tear the ass out of it if we aren't being serious anymore?

It was halfway a joke. But honestly any predictions the most evolutionary scientist could give you of the human race 5 billion uears in the future would be just as speculative. It is a stupid point to even bring up. The death of the sun is beyond a non factor in our or our great great to the power of a hundred granr children's lives.

And your view is flawed. This is due to your limited understanding of development, capitalism's interaction with the physical world , and Fetishization of your specific brand of collapse cult.

As a rebuttal pointing out the fallaciousness of bringing up the eventual death of the sun as having any effect on mankind.

Enjoy your brain implants, wage-slave

Meant to post

Wait hol' up, I missed heat death. Are you claiming technology will save us feom the heat death of the universe?

I get you, but then what was the point?

Yeh, it was silly for that user to bring up. Hypotheticals are a dangerous game for the health of a discussion.

We will be like space-gods, bro, tech will save us from everything!!!!1

no one rails against shit like this more then me m8. I'm a huge preacher when it comes to the dangers of myopic empiricism in my psychology department. I'm just saying you'r busting your balls the wrong way around, and, worst of all, posting cringe.

Agreed, i'm just working from the assumption that such technological developments are (if we don't all die from the heat, that is) signs of a possible progression from capitalism to a sort of Landian neo-feudalism, where the way capitalism has worked up until now is no longer necessary for the reproduction and accumulation of capital to continue. But i realize that's schizo techno-dystopianism so i'll stop now.

Using Linux is not considered an inherently transgressive act, but using FOSS hacked Neuralinks to avoid surveillance might be in the future.

Fuck off faggot

What? Did you want me to respond to his post with some kind of well thought out and articulated essay? He didn't care, why should I? If anything I already went over what I should have done just by writing as much as I did. Sorry if the bants where just too much for you son.

Attached: 0beafe28cd16361c8e48513dbd9a120a86e768547bd80f6660ba884bbc3657ac.jpg (275x200, 9.74K)

Attached: little intellect.png (338x654, 349.33K)

lol
best new meme

Because it is not even about solving global warming. It is for my own personal enjoyment and well being. Nature is exponentially more advanced and perfected than anything humans have ever made. Technology is nothing more than a childish scrawl defacing a masterful painting.

What is the other factor?

The hell does that mean?

I beg to differ but enjoy your disease riddrn rat infested, smog filled concrete jungle by all means.

If being a selfish and cruel asshole is your goal in life, who am I to judge?
Sure, if you define "advanced" as "pleasing to my hippy dippy sense of aesthetics".
Technology is the reason my grandfather is alive. It's the reason so many people are alive who would have otherwise died. Go fuck yourself.

>2943837

No,just objectively. Ask any scientist andthey will tell you every living organism is more complex than any invention mas ever made by so many magnitudes it is astronomical.>>2943837

It probably is tivoized to prevent you from doing that in the first place, most smartphones already are.

Not him but I'll polay the devil advocate since I'm bored
Well yeah. It's much easier to catch a sickness in a primitive world and life expectancy is much lower. If you managed to get past childhood you could expect to live around let's say 50-ish.

Complain all you want about urbanization causing alienation and depression by separating humans from their God-given nature or whatever, surely dying from malaria, measles or the common cold objectively caused a lot more pain and suffering than brutalism ever did.

ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/life-expectancy-myth-and-why-many-ancient-humans-lived-long-077889

Linus is such a dumb cuck. GPLv3 could have prevented this.

This article kinda shits on your point.
bbc.com/future/story/20181002-how-long-did-ancient-people-live-life-span-versus-longevity

...

To all the luddites out there, pics related is why primitivism can’t work in the twenty first century, or any time after 1800. It doesn’t matter how sustainable or free you are when you reject technology if you can’t win a war.

It dosn’t matter if you abandon technology or not, their are others who won’t and they have tanks.

It’s also been proven then primitives don’t do well when fighting wars against modern states.

Attached: Object279.jpg (1200x538 128.49 KB, 547.19K)

What these really point out is that primitive lives varied in life spans and severeness depending on circumstance. Is is no single "ideal" state of "primitive communism", just scattered existences living in varying degrees of shittyness.
This is also why primitivism is inherently reactionary, it constructs a false image around an idealized "pure/non-corrupted" past state that we must "return" to for salvation.

*There is

To play devils advocate here, their not planning to win some "war". Similar to us, they are relying on the collapse of our current order to "win". Tank war fair is meaningless if we have reached peak oil, and cant even run the things.

I mean obviously people lived less since there wasn't much healthcare. Doesn't mean people lived just 35 years; both of the articles disprove that; just that people generally didn't live as long.

It was a classless society, you just don't want it because your would lead your position as middle class. Urbanite intellectuals are what stands between us and communism.

Attached: DSC00094c.JPG (1152x864, 560.13K)

Okay, I still sounds undesirable from my (and many other) point of view.

p.s it's "leave" retard

Wrong flag, desculpa

I honestly wonder what Zig Forums pot was thinking. He seriously is in the top 10 of most evil people who ever lived.

He sounds like a faggy leftcom. Muh totalitarianism, ebil Stalin, gorrilians, commies are rubes.

Who would win:
1 strong muscular anprim living on the land like spooks intended
or
this weird little bacterium in his unfiltered drinking water?