I Always Said Google Is Run By Lunatics

Planning To Join The Immortals? We Shall Be As Gods, Say Tech Billionaires

from Skywatch TV

Ray Kurzweil, Google’s transhumanism Tsar and the tech titans who founded Google, Facebook, eBay, Napster and Netscape are using their billions to rewrite the nation’s science agenda and transform biomedical research.

Their objective is to use the tools of technology — the chips, software programs, algorithms and big data they used in creating an information revolution — to understand and upgrade what they consider to be the most complicated piece of machinery in existence: the human body.

The entrepreneurs are driven by a certitude that rebuilding, regenerating and reprogramming patients’ organs, limbs, cells and DNA will enable people to live longer and better. The work they are funding includes hunting for the secrets of living organisms with insanely long lives, engineering microscopic nanobots that can fix your body from the inside out, figuring out how to reprogram the DNA you were born with, and exploring ways to digitize your brain based on the theory that your mind could live long after your body expires.

“I believe that evolution is a true account of nature,” as Thiel put it. “But I think we should try to escape it or transcend it in our society.”

Read full article and watch video

RELATED POSTS:

John Kerry Calls For The Internet To Be Placed Under The Authority Of The United Nations

US Secretary of State John Kerry, speaking earlier this week in South Korea, said that the Internet “needs rules to be able to flourish and work properly.” This, according to Kerry, is necessary even for “a technology founded on freedom.” Kerry made his remarks in the context of talking about how international law is applicable to the Internet.


Google a step closer to developing machines with human-like intelligence

Computers will have developed “common sense” within a decade and we could be counting them among our friends not long afterwards, one of the world’s leading AI scientists has predicted. Professor Geoff Hinton, who The Guardian reports was hired by Google two years ago to help develop intelligent operating systems, said that the company is on the brink of developing algorithms with the capacity for logic, natural conversation and even flirtation.

Is Everything Being Controlled By Computers?

One of the winners of the mobile revolution has been ARM Holdings, which designs microchips for a variety of devices, from smartphones to fridges to cars

ARM chips have become popular over the past decade for their relatively low power consumption, which is especially crucial for portable, battery-operated devices. (Intel, which is still the dominant chip company for desktop, laptop, and server PCs, has missed out on this boom but not through lack of trying.

And as the “internet of things” has expanded beyond phones to smart cards, wearable devices, and embedded sensors, the number of chips containing ARM processors has soared—to 12 billion in 2014, roughly double the units shipped in 2010 according to the company’s public relations counsultants.


ARM sales chart (via Blacklisted News)

ARM expects its saled to double again, to 60 billion chips in 2020, with tiny “microcontroller” computers, smart cards, and “embedded connectivity” chips—network access for the internet of things—leading its growth. “Everything is becoming an internet enabled computer,” the company says, “computers will control everything.”

ARM would say that, wouldn’t they. My life will not be controlled by computers and nor should yours be (unless you are one of those foos who thinks science is a religion and mathematics is God. The “internet of things” is just a catch-phrase to distract from the knowledge that everything you buy is being used by government and corporate businesses to gather data about you.

We can defeat this assault on our privacy and dignity by simply not buying internet enabled fridges, televisions, washing machines, vacuum cleaners and so on. If people don’t buy them, the manufacturers will have to stop making them, because selling this garbage is their first priority.

We don’t need internet enabled domestic appliances, how is the fact that Google know how often you vacuum your carpets or take a shower help them to make your life better. It’s just fucking creepy.

It’s a simple question of whether or not Americans can refrain from arming themselves with every stupid gadget the TV hangs in front of their faces.

Ministry Of Truth: Ofcom Sanction Russian Broadcaster For Expressing Anti – Western Views

Last week Little Nicky’s friends at The Daily Stirrer reported on Google’s attempts to set itself up as the internet’s Ministry Of Truth (in George Orwell’s 1984, the government department that rewrites history and twists the news so that nothing is ever published or broadcast that is not favourable to the ruling Big Brother regime)

from The Guardian

Media regulator to launch investigation into views expressed during Crosstalk programme on Kremlin-backed broadcaster.

An Ofcom spokesman said: “Ofcom has launched an investigation into whether this programme about the situation in Ukraine, which included anti-western comments, was duly impartial.”

Russia Today is to be investigated by media regulator Ofcom over anti-western comments in a late-night discussion on Ukraine – its sixth ongoing inquiry into the Kremlin-backed news channel following complaints by viewers.

The regulator, which threatened Russia Today, or RT, with statutory sanctions after repeated breaches of broadcasting regulations on impartiality last year, faces a new investigation over its Crosstalk programme broadcast on 23 December last year.

The programme is understood to have featured a number of anti-western views in the discussion between the presenter and three studio guests, prompting one viewer to complain.

RELATED POSTS:

The Imperatives Behind The New cold War
The ‘new Cold War,’ against Russia, is something of a misnomer, because it differs from the original version, against the U.S.S.R., in that it’s already a hot war, which started in Ukraine as being the key proxy-state for the American Government’s chief foreign-policy aim, of defeating Russia.

Google attempts to become the Internet’s Ministry of Truth
We have always said the full version of Google’s corporate motto Don’t Be Evil, is Don’t Be Evil, That’s Our Job. Here’s the latest example, their plan to censor the internet and ensure that controversial or dissenting views from those approved by the government / corporate complex never show up in listings.

Germany Alarmed by Aggressive NATO Stance On Ukraine
As the US pro war rhetoric pumps up the tensions between Russia, its allies and the west in Ukrain we revisit once more the truth about which world power has been relentlessly pushing for war since 2009. It isn’t Russia or China, though they are not likely to back down.

Free Speech: Reporters Without Borders unblocks access to censored websites
It is surprising in view of what we now know about the collaboration between internet technology corporations and government security agencies that many people still think og the internet as a bastion of freedom. This page shows how easy it is for governments and corporations to censor web content.

350 million reason you should ditch Facebook.

Image source: 4bit News

Mainstream media in the developed world has tried to portray Mark Zuckerberg’s as a prophet and a visionary and his plan to get every human being online by means of his ‘ideas’ about how humans want to interact in the twenty first century as altruistic and ‘progressive’. The reality however, is somewhat more sinister. Facebook has already been revealed to be much more than a mere corporation run for profit by Zuckerberg and his business associates.

As for being a genius, Zuckerberg is really not very bright, like most new media billionaires a lot of his success is down to his obsession with technology and his irrational belief that everybody can be persuaded to share that belief. it is the philosophy of a religious cilt leader rather than a businessman.

But Zuckerberg did not build Facebook’s success alone, no matter what you may have been led to believe. His partner in creating the social network was none other than the US Government. Is it just coincidence that two other startup corporations with no track record, Microsoft and Google came from nowhere to achieve near monopoly positions in online market sectors? You may say so, I couldn’t possibly comment 🙂

Facebook is the epitome of social engineering, a seemingly benign communication tool that has been engineered to track, trace, document, and, if we allow it to manipulate half of the entire online population.

Despite its claims, when users who are not paying Facebook to spread their PR campaigns, attempt to use Facebook to connect and communicate with individuals and organizations of interest, Facebook turns its features against users, insidiously manipulating their timelines to show selected posts and updates while censoring others to manage public perception.

Is Facebook’s unethical approach to social engineering successful. In one study, the emotions of users were successfully manipulated by selectively posting only negative or only positive posts from individuals or organizations on users’ contact lists. In another experiment Facebook manipulated the news feed of some 2 million Americans in 2012 in order to increase public participation during that year’s US presidential election.

Facebook was also an official sponsor of the US State Department’s effort to promote political subversion across North Africa and the Middle East in the years before the so-called “Arab Spring”.

The rebellions news channels around the world reported had “spontaneously” sprung up across North Africa and the Middle East were in fact trained, funded, and equipped by the US State Department and various corporations including tech giants Google and Facebook years beforehand.

Why would you allow anyone to manipulate what you say or do or see without your or your friends knowledge or proper consent? And as for the political interference, this is the behaviour of tyrants and is unacceptable by any democratic standard. There are plenty of ways of communicating with others without having what others see of you changed or manipulated by business partners of The White House.

RELATED POSTS:

World’s largest supercomputers took 40 minutes to calculate 1 second worth of human brain activity

How many times have we told you to ignore all that blether from scientists about how they are building computers capable of thinking like humans? They might be able to build computers that think like scientists, but do we really need autistic computers?

Never Trust An Effing Technocrat

I get sick of articles on technology wanker sites praising evil corporations like Microsoft, Google and Apple, and especially the comment threads which are full of besotted fanboys queueing to sing the praises of demonic nerds like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and the Google script kiddies.

They say things like “The technology leaders are heroes, they have made everybody’s life so much better.” (Well they may have improved the lives of sad little geeks who spent all their time hunched over computers, but most people find the internet a decent way to communicate now there are fewer pubs to meet our mates in, convenient for shopping now there are so few decent shops left in the high street and a place to look at porn without exposing yourself to the risk of being seen emerging from shops with blacked out windows, carrying your purchases in a plain brown bag.

While the internet and its many technologies have their benefits, those benefits come at a cost to our freedom and privacy. And the fanboy’s favourite object of worship is actually the most evil of all technology corporations that makes money from the net.

Apple has installed security backdoors on 600m iPhones and iPads, claims security researcher

Apple has been accused of intentionally installing security backdoors in some 600 million iOS devices that offer surveillance-level access to data including photos, browsing history and GPS locations.

The vulnerabilities were uncovered by security expert Jonathan Zdziarski, who presented an academic paper on the subject at a hacker conference in New York last Friday.

Apple has issued a statement in response to the allegations saying that the company’s “diagnostic functions do not compromise user privacy and security,” but Zdziarski has responded by noting that these services “dish out data” regardless of whether the user has agreed to diagnostics.

“There is no way to disable these mechanisms,” Zdziarski writes on his personal blog. “This makes it much harder to believe that Apple is actually telling the truth here.”

The backdoors reportedly cover a range of hidden tools and protocols that activate with “paired” computers – machines connected to an iPhone or iPad via USB that the user has granted security access to.

Read all: The Independent

The really weird thing is that the fanboys continue to insist technology firms would never do anything like this, a year after the US and British government surveillance agencies NSA and GCHQ and all the major tachnology companied admitted allegations of covert data gathering were true.

Wannabe Humandroids apply here

I have written many posts in the past couple of years about the ambitions of some corporate evil empire fantasists (particularly among Google senior management) to merge human with machine, the better to gain complete control over us.

This may seem like science fiction stuff and the chances of it becoming real are remote to say the least. What is not fantasy however is the ambition, the creepy geeks who advance such ideas are deadly serious. Take a look at this for example:

Want to become a CYBORG? Apply Here; The technology that could give you super vision, let you pick up a car and even plug yourself into your computer are being developed.

Technology has the potential to augment, improve and even replace every aspect of our body, from our vital organs to our legs.

A new remake of the movie RoboCop (out February 12) shows us a future where technology and humans become one – but experts say the age of the cyborg is already upon us.

With everything from smart contact lenses that could improve our vision to exoskeletons that give us superhuman strength, cyborgs are set to become a big part of our future. So says Ray Kurzweil, director of engineering at Google, who believes the biological parts (i.e. the fun bits) of our body will be replaced with mechanical parts and this could happen as early as 2100.

He believes technology will be able to boost our brainpower, giving us true superhuman capabilities.

‘Based on conservative estimates of the amount of computation you need to functionally simulate a human brain, we’ll be able to expand the scope of our intelligence a billion-fold,’ he claims.

This last proves he’s a dickhead.
First: We have no idea as yet how the human brain processes data;
Second:scientists have a lot of difficulty getting their little adolescent brains round the idea that the physical organ, the brain and the mysterious entity that is the human mind are very different things.
Third: If we increased the power oif out most powerful computer a billion times we would still not even be close to emulating the power of the mind.

RELATED POSTS:
Google’s Brave New World Of Artificial Intelligence – And The Destruction Humanity
Is the Universe helping you to think
Google’s real motto? Don’t be evil, that’s our job
Brain In A Bottle Or Thinking Machine
Insane is the new normal

Coming Soon To An Internet Near You: Government Censorship

There is a bill presently making its way through the labyrinth of the American legal system, originaly it was called the PROTECT-IP bill and besides an unfortunate name change, the bill has been altered by the US House of Representatives in such a way that it would potentially allow the government and/or various corporations that feel their good name / intellectual property / right to rob us poor punters blind without fear of legal consequence being curtailed, the ability to censor the Internet in whatever way they see fit.

Should the United States government (and be sure wherever they lead on the goosestep to fascism, other will follow) be allowed to censor the Internet to fit their own whims and desires?

OK, for now maybe the last paragraph is hyperbole, but after reading portions of the updated bill, as well as some of the reactions to it on web professionals forums, it’s pretty clear that if the bill becomes law American public could soon be the first to use a very different version of the Internet than what we have all become familiar with.

The sad thing is, besides a small section of informed reactions to the bill, very few among the American public seem to know and/or care about the implications of PROTECT-IP, which, thanks to the ineptitude of House of Representatives technology committee now goes by the unfortunate name the E-PARASITE Act.

Here’s an version of the document, although, it’s doubtful anyone outside of the tech/Internet sector will actually concern themselves with it until they find the only stuff they can read online apart from government propaganda will be the inane drivel and verbal diarrhoea generated by the cast of idiots on sites like Facebook and Google +.

When bureaucrats are handed a power two things are inevitable: That they will never give it up and that they will find a reason, however flimsy why it should be used.

As George Orwell put it in his novel of an authoritarian state, 1984; “Who controls the past controls the future and who controls the present controls the past.”

Orwell needed to add nothing to that but modern readers are not universally sophisticated so I’ll explain; the unwritten subtext there is, “Who controls the information controls the present.”

RELATED POSTS:
Cybercrime threatens UK
Smarphone – The Cyber-crime perpetrator in your pocket.

Don’t Google It

Are we becoming too reliant on computers and the internet and what is the point of having at our fingertips so much poor quality information?

“Oh just Google it.” is the all too familiar response when somebody is asked a question of moderate difficulty.

Well no, we shouldn’t just Google it’. A number of studies have shown that the internet’s way of putting quick, simple answers at our fingertips is changing human intelligence. As somebody better known than I but whose name escapes me for the moment said, “First we traded wisdom for knowledge, now we are trading knowledge for information”. The problem is that information supplied in quick snippets does not enrich because it doesn’t stick …

Read all: Don’t Google It

Are Google In More Trouble Than We Thought

We hve blogged here many times on the lack of substance in internet giant Google’s business model, the predatory and exploitative nature of their way of doing busness and their “Evil Empire” tendencies.

Only a few dats ago I read a respectable industry journal alleged that Google is inflasting traffic figure to pressure advertisers into paying more. Now I read Google are to invite bids on well established trademarks for Ad Words. Thus Tesco would be able to bid for the Sainsburys and Morrisons names and steer searches on those names to a rival site.

It does not make Google criminals but it does prove they are bastards. Which is what Little Nicky Machiavelli was telling you three years ago. Rwad the ful story Google – new rules to play by

Don’t Be Evil, That’s Facebook’s Job.

Ask anybody about a year ago “Which website is the evil empire,” and they would have said Google. But things are changing.

Some time ago, after being invited to join Facebook by one of my contacts from here, I posted a blog on the subject of how pointles the site is. There were already rumours about the more sinister aspects of Facebook, their intrusive gathering and publishing of personal data, their plans to sell members proflies and information on online activity to advertisers and a general disregard for the ethics of business.

Since that post was made, more information has been leaking out about Facebook’s dubious business methods and the connection their founder and financial backer has with certain neocon and it would not be exaggerating to say neofascist right wing organisations in the USA.

It is all pretty unpleasant. But you don’t have to take my word for it, read With Friends Like These, a damning analysis of the Facebook culture. Its a long artcle and scarey stuff, but its worth the effort.

Talking Bollocks About You Tube

Don’t technology journos talk bollocks. I yearn to seen some quality journalism in this field but all I see is sychophancy towards Google and Microsoft, the two corporations that have bludgeoned us into acceping that “totally useless utter crap” equals “fit for purpose.”

Follow the link to read Web Pundit John Harris waxing lyrical about the Google takeover of You Tube and then check out the response as Little Nicky Machiavelli tells the hapless writer a few home truths.

Your Country Needs You Tube

"Don’t Be Evil" – Unless There’s Money In It.

One problem with geeks is their tendency to leap in the air and clap their hands when any new technology is announced. Another problem is that given the slightest scent of power they go off on a world domination trip. The guys at Apple have tried it as have the Microsoft people, Adobe, Oracle and Cisco all tried it in their own modest way and many others have tried too. “Hey, the world will be a much better place if everybody abandons independent though and buys one of my widgets,” goes the pitch. But a computer, a web browser, an i-Pod and a web-cam are no substitute for a life.
This does not discourage the nerds of course and now we have the inventors of Google trying to jackboot their technology into every aspect of our lives. OK the metaphor might be distasteful but don’t forget, Hitler was a nerd.
With “Don’t Be Evil” as their slogan from day one Google managed to ooze into the public consciousness as nice chaps who only wanted to help us get better results from our web searches. It was so easy to miss the fact that they were totally focused on the aim of making technology in general and their technology in particular our master and so they are not capable of being anything but evil. And addiction to the web is causing us to help them every step of the way. You should pay more attention when you watch Austin Powers movies.
The first question we should all ask ourselves is “how good is this technology really?”
Back in 2001, just as Google was attracting effusive praise from industry pundits for the way it was elbowing aside other search engines that used different criteria for rating pages by relevance rather than the number of other pages linking in to them, I recall one maverick, an Information Technology veteran of twenty – five years experience saying in his weekly radio slot “Google is the worst search engine possible – except for all the others. The obvious problem was that people were being impressed by sheer numbers of search results and forgetting quality. To reaffirm this for the current article I ran a search on P.C. Plus, a well known UK mag. Google gave me 900,000 search results; one of its rivals that uses similar technology gave 950,000 (figures rounded). Because on the Google search the PC Plus homepage came at the top of the list Google might use that as proof of their efficiency. But on Google the top link was trying to sell me PC Plus, the next twenty were advertisers in PC Plus trying to sell me other stuff. One way or another the owners of these pages had paid money for their high position in the listing. On the rival search engine I found information telling me what kind of readers might choose PC Plus and what other mags covered the same ground. I do not consider an advert can ever be as relevant as an impartial review. Google is therefore not about “not being evil” but making money. And the company is making money – sort of. Ad-words mini adverts that appear alongside search results and ad-wise targeted ads that appear on web pages are pulling in a very respectable revenue stream.
Most business ventures that depended on the web for revenue generation have so far been abject failures (Amazon being the most outstanding exception) and yet the slightest hint of possible future success is enough to ignite the same kind of hysteria as fuelled the dotcom bubble.
Google went to the stock market and was rejected because their figures did not add up. They tehen decided to directly market their own shares and despite warnings from banks and experienced dealers, since their launch stock in the big G has gone through the roof. The financial warnings were based on the fact that Google’s initial share offer was overpriced. Even the most optimistic projections showed the shares would take around two hundred years to repay the capital investment. At the present trading price that is closer to a thousand years. The “don’t be evil” boys didn’t pay a penny for their shares of course and are currently worth around $10 billion each. “Don’t be evil” unless there is serious money in it perhaps?
Another problem is emerging for Google through its method of gathering revenue. This is “click fraud.” At its most basic click fraud involves people visiting their own sites and clicking on the Google ads, so that they and Google earn a few cents for the referral. The flaw in the Ad-wise business strategy then is that it provides an easy way for the greedy to render it totally ineffective as an advertising medium as there is no chance of a sale resulting from the vast majority of referrals. When the simplicity of automating these fraudulent clicks is considered it quickly becomes clear that advertisers are not getting much for their money.
Like the lead character in a Shakespearean tragedy, the seeds of Google’s downfall are sown in the flaws in its own character. The people behind the company have built much on the fact that Google is cool. Now the idea that technology can be cool may have some currency among the nerdier students in the world of further education but “cool” is a quality always in thrall to fads. And a new generation of nerds may easily latch on to a new fad.
At the heart of the Google technology is the Page Rank algorithm which as already mentioned is determined by links. When, sometime in the next month, Google gets round to indexing this article it will pick up on the phrase “Shakespearean Tragedy” because a lot of pages already contain that phrase, even though my article is of no interest to fans of Shakespearean Tragedy. Thus Shakespeare readers, irritated by the bizarre results their Google searches throw up (!!!) will start looking around for a way to search the web that is relevant to their interests. Such search technology is already well along the development path.
The continuing success of Google really depends on our willingness to delegate all our personal decision making to a piece of computer software. If we can be persuaded to do that however, current development projects which would put Google in a position to destroy the publishing, newspaper, T.V., movie and music industries and replacing their products with an infinite stream of dross. Anyone in doubt about this only needs to take a look at Google Video. Can one company be allowed to weild so much power?
Finally there are the privacy issues some of Google’s business methods raise. Side-stepping those extremist lobby groups who praise the heroism of resisting the U.S. Government’s reasonable requests for access to databases we ought to be questioning why Google think they have a right to gather and store information on all of us who use the search engine. While the United States Government (and European Governments on this side of the Atlantic pond) only desire to identify web users whose use is connected with pornography that involves criminal atcs (child abuse, violent sex, torture, rape etc.); fraud and terrorism and not the pattern of web use by individuals (Governments can already track us as individuals without our knowledge) Google is busy building a profile on each one of us in order that they may better target us with advertising material. That in itself poses a far greater threat to the privacy of anybody who is not a sex criminal, fraudster or terrorist.
The whole business model is built on unproven and very inefficient forms of advertising and the only way to make those ads more cost effective is to identify the users who are likely to respond. So if you use G-mail, your messages are scanned, keywords extracted from what you say to your friends and the information added to both your Google profiles. Thus you can be targeted for a constant stream of unsolicited ads.
For similar reasons your searches are stored and may be kept indefinitely. It is known also that systems are being created to search your desktop and suck up information to the great database.
And people think this organisation is cool.
Web addicts of course are always ready to believe the latest Geek Mythology. The business community is more hard headed however and last week’s near 10% drop in Google share prices should have sent warnings around the world. The Google people may still say “don’t be evil” but in the cloud – cuckoo land they inhabit how can evil be defined in a way relevant to any kind of reality.