Friday 29th of March 2024

evolutioning...

bomb 1959

Some people seem to equate evolution with pre-determination. The annoying cads... They believe that accepting the origin of consciousness as emanating from our body biochemistry would be limiting our desires and scope of “freedom of choice”. This misconception is at the source of much defence of religious and spiritual hullabaloo, which in itself is limiting the true freedom of choice, that of the real investigation and improvements of our bio-constructs with further possibilities — including investing in Artificial Intelligence — beyond silly rituals and the calcified imagination of dogmas. 

Evolution does not mean pre-determination. It means change. Dogmas resist change apart from the power of the new bullets. The prayers have stayed the same for millennium. God help us “being humble”. Bullshit.

Despite the very precise constructs of DNA and its reactivity to environmental factors over the last 4 billion years, there has been a diversity of uncertainty in evolution that provide an open scope of choices that are beyond simple biological reactivities but are now strongly related to our stylistic interactions and inventions, including deceit. And this is not exclusive to humans. This is where believers and atheists have differed. 

Sciences provide clear indications that our mind, our consciousness, our "soul" and our “spirit” are all but various interpretations of the same entity: the bio-brain in action. 

A simple test of our “spiritual” dependence to the bio-machine is to modify the various levels of our awareness with various biochemicals we call drugs. Here our lovely god-fearing spirituality can go completely blotto. Bigots feign to hate drugs.

The brain centralises our perceptions and modification of our activities through pain and hormonal adjustments. The decision we make are usually made to keep the machine, including making dosh, going in the best average conditions possible and protect this average condition investment. Under evolution, this animality characteristic does not mean less of our “humanity” or humanness. It means that we’re a work in progress, both in a social structure point of view or an individual growing up from birth to death. Should we become aware of this, which we can, we can make better or different choices to improve the machine, intellectually and physically — while liberating us from the straight-jackets of rabid beliefs and their traditions. We then can live in peace and caboose improvements under a tropical umbrella while drinking a well-deserved cocktail, full of vitamins and alcohol.

 

For many people accepting evolution is challenging. It’s like knowing that the charming noise inside a jingle-bell is only coming from an ordinary shrivelled dried pea. They prefer to believe that there is a little beautiful spirit inside the bell that gives us this heavenly sound. They prefer to believe we are made by god to become godly ourselves once we die like a dog. Fair enough, but completely idiotic. Sure dust to dust... That’s it. The spiritual delusion leads us to become painfully guilty about sins, while we should humanely be responsible to minimise hurt and pain. Rich people know the trick. Believe me! They make you feel guilty while they enjoy the spoils and, through their dedicated spruiking outlets, let you know that if you work harder, you could be able to join them in their little club of the one per cent. Dream on, cobber. At this stage you have as much chance of making it rich as winning a lotto jackpot with twodollarsfifty. Evolution favours the rich.

Underneath our birthday-suit envelope that we often disguise with pretty dresses, checked shirts or austere suits (depending on your station in life) — that manufactured image that we try to portray to the world — is an array of essential powerplants and bio-processors most of which work on automatic to sustain the thingy we call “our life” — even in their reactivity to our various decisions, such as choice of food and of companionship. 

Chance can play a role in our happiness while what is going to mostly influence our relative choices of activities in the maintenance, improvement or degradation of this assemblage, are our education, our origin in the social stack and our interactions with the immediate humans around us — as well as the present nearly incessant bombardment of information, from news to advertising which tries hard to make us behave, believe and buy. 

We know that our reactivity/activity can be modified by brainwashing. This is the very purpose of brainwashing: make people, us, submit to an idea, without knowing that we submit, surrendering our real freedom. The techniques of brainwashing are not new and they rely on our ability to believe something we do not directly perceive through our senses but through the interpretations of others, with repeat of information to reinforce the habit. 

At this moment in time of evolution, our little brains are getting more and more attracted — like moths to a lamp — to Apps with mostly vacuous functions. If you go to a bus stop, there is a chance that nine out ten people’s gaze is fixated to a small pocket-sized screen while “Waiting for Godot”, knowingly the 483 bus to the city — a place of mostly useless glorious employment, in exchange for credit-points called money. Some of us will go to factory and tighten some bolts on a conveyor belt of bolts. Happy bolting. 

 

The surrounds of brainwashing are well-provided with secure limits to give us enough variations to feel free to operate as long as we tighten the bolts on the conveyor belt, but feel out of sorts should we get out of our addictive comfortable “moral” bolt-tightening zone, which itself has been induced in our mind by years of brainwashing. It’s a control mechanism at social and individual levels which allows us to feel like an extra in The Truman Show, while we’re all actually like the main restricted character of the movie. We go home, but we’ve got to come back the next day and carry-on acting as decreed. Sometimes there are small hiccups or moral deviations that could appear outside the script and the shmuzak.

 

Desmond Morris, the philosopher zoologist, clearly explains in his book “The Naked Ape”, that homosexuality is not exclusive to humans. Homosexuality has been observed many times in other species. The flip-side is that homosexuality is not “pro-creative”. 

In humans, homosexuality can be procreative due to our variety of stylistic acceptances, from medical advances, artificial insemination, IVF and adoption. The latest dilemma on this subject being the need (or concept) of “marriage equality” designed to provide social and monetary stability to homosexual couples who so choose to live. Many “straight people”, including righterously devious Tony Abbott, who object to homosexuality and marriage equality are, more often than not, afraid of their own uncertainty on this subject. They are also conflicted by their strict tight-arsed moral codes that they have been brainwashed with since childhood by priests. 

In the past, before “Victorian times”, homosexuality was more tolerated, even in the upper echelons of society, including kings and cardinals. But this peculiar refinement of sexual enjoyment without pro-creation is only a sin in the narrow mind of the wowsers. And do we need to pro-create with vigour when a population crisis looming?

Procreation seems to be the main purpose of life: make more of us to replace us eventually as recently re-suggested by Jerry Seinfeld. Not a new concept which had currency with the Greek philosophers 2000 years ago, but at present there is an upward trend which tells scientists something called “overpopulation” is looming. We have been made aware of this problem since the 1960s by specialist scientists who have been called alarmists by politicians and rich people who need more of us to make capitalism spin more cash. And we’re cruising nicely. Since the alarm bells rung, we’ve doubled the human population. Though we don’t feel it in our neighbourhood, apart from apartment blocks growing like weed in our what-was-a-quiet-subburban-quarter-acre-blocks, we’re placing the planet under massive stresses that could become irreversibly dangerous. Some other species feel the pain instead. We’re counting the extinct species like roadkill. Cataloguing the damage is like the scoring in an amateur Bridge card game at a Bridge card game club. The roadkill score is kept by specialists who ring more alarm bells, but our rich politicians tell us that all is under control and that we need to destroy some more of the earth in order to protect ourselves from the wolves. 

Let’s face it, we live on the surface of a very small planet. It takes us around 24 hours in subsonic flight to go to the other side of it, including a pitstop for refuelling. It used to take us six months under wind power before we discovered kerosene, oil, gas and coal which now are placing us in the ferocious company of vandals in regard to the incoming destruction of the place. 

Not convinced? Yes I know, the Koch brothers, those rich loony penny-counting kings of the dark art of capitalistic legal robbery, make sure that you don’t know of the damage their operations do the planet. Global warming? Nupe. In their world, increase in population is a fair improvement because it’s an inarguable fact that you collect more pennies from more people...  Their paid-for disinformation services, even at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, make sure you’re none the wiser about reality. Being ignorant of reality is a blessing. Being poor is a blessing. Even Jesus Christ said it. Knowledge is a sure road to unhappiness and these unfortunate rich people are prepared to sacrifice their own happiness to selective knowledge and collecting unfortunate cash. You don’t need to know the true state of the garbage disposal, as they themselves take all the burden though they might reserve themselves a bit of happiness by being genuine in a total ignorance of bloody nature  — while they devote their life to the demanding and flogging god of cash — in which you and your arse-slaving mates are the providers of the toil and the flesh, for “their” sacrifice at the altar.

 

Self-importance is our major driver. We soon discover at which level our self-importance can be developed to without becoming dangerously delusional or sociopathic. The Peter’s principle is well known, but sociopaths have the ability to by-pass this level and go way beyond their ability, by walking on other people... Our self-importance defines our acceptance of who we are. It is malleable and subject to mood variations including depression. This is a big subject in which I have become a lay “expert” over many years of evolving observations and drinking red ned.

 

Machines can challenge this complex status quo. Suddenly the machines can take over and erase all our illusions of grandeur which we have maintained to this day through the commerce of ideas. We buy ideas such as beliefs... Even if we get the belief system “free of charge”, the belief system is attached to mercantile activities which need the belief system to be sustainable with trust. 

 

Our place in the “collective” is defined by what we chose to do, considering the brainwashing that we were subjected to and the brainwashing we subject other people to. We are groomed to pull our weight in whatever capacity to make the collective workable with various degrees of agreed freedom. Sharing goods and experiences is part and parcel of this. There is a point a which sharing becomes a moneyable entity, an imposition or a control mechanism.

 

Machines can streamline a lot of our performances. So do we improve or stagnate while the machines improve? The warning of being redundant is clear but over the top. We’ve been redundant since the day we evolved and fell off our tree. 

 

Solitary men marry their robotic dolls that don’t do much else that give them a sexual experience that they would not otherwise have. Is there anything wrong with this? Is Shriek wife turning ugly, the answer? The Beauty and the Beast? Is the illusion of such possible outcomes too frustrating? Have we painted ourselves into a corner of beautiful make-believe? Is democracy part of this make-belief? Are the loos of the Koch brothers gold-plated?...

So many life-long questions still, questions that the machines can solve in a nanosecond, but then what do we do? Invent more delusions? Yes. Lovely. Meanwhile the planet becomes insalubrious, but who cares, we’re making MORE money. That's the only evolution that counts these days...

 

As I understood it, Jerome Allen "Jerry" Seinfeld proposed in his latest Sydney tour, that some people prefer staying poor out of principle and by gambling with hope of a jackpot rather than make money and capitalise on it... He apparently became a late comer to married life and he took a while to adjust the tone of his voice to suit his other half's demands. We, the old male foggies with a long history of successful marriage have practised such strategic gender capitulation for a long time. It's all part of the success of our evolution into old age and the preservation of our rights to drink red ned...

 

 

Gus Leonisky

Your local pauper...

love at first sight of silicone...

 

When the spark went out of Masayuki Ozaki’s marriage, he found an unusual outlet to plug the romantic void — a silicone sex doll he swears is the love of his life.

The life-size dummy, called Mayu, shares his bed under the same roof as Ozaki’s wife and teenage daughter in Tokyo, an arrangement that triggered angry rows before a delicate truce was finally declared.

“After my wife gave birth we stopped having sex and I felt a deep sense of loneliness,” the 45-year-old physiotherapist told AFP in an interview.

“But the moment I saw Mayu in the showroom, it was love at first sight,” blushed Ozaki, who takes his doll on dates in a wheelchair and dresses her in wigs, sexy clothes and jewellery.

read more:

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/true-stories/looking-for-love...

 

Picture at top of a 1962 Sydney Morning Herald. The movie shown on that night of the "hoax" at the State Theatre was "A Touch of Mink":

 

Cathy Timberlake (Doris Day) is en route to a job interview when a car transporting businessman Philip Shayne (Cary Grant) covers her in mud. He sends his assistant, Roger (Gig Young), to apologize, but upon meeting Cathy, Roger knows that she would be a suitable match for his boss. Despite their mutual attraction, Cathy and Philip want different things. Philip wants a fling, while Cathy wants a marriage. As they travel to exotic locales, their differing motivations are put to the test.

 

Awards: Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy...

The bomb hoax — a publicity stunt? Who knows... I've seen worse publicity stunt than this... Or the phone call could have been made by a bigoted wowser who did not like the premise of the movie...

 

 

less sex enjoyment under free market conditions...

 

When Americans think of Communism in Eastern Europe, they imagine travel restrictions, bleak landscapes of gray concrete, miserable men and women languishing in long lines to shop in empty markets and security services snooping on the private lives of citizens. While much of this was true, our collective stereotype of Communist life does not tell the whole story.

Some might remember that Eastern bloc women enjoyed many rights and privileges unknown in liberal democracies at the time, including major state investments in their education and training, their full incorporation into the labor force, generous maternity leave allowances and guaranteed free child care. But there’s one advantage that has received little attention: Women under Communism enjoyed more sexual pleasure.

A comparative sociological study of East and West Germans conducted after reunification in 1990 found that Eastern women had twice as many orgasms as Western women. Researchers marveled at this disparity in reported sexual satisfaction, especially since East German women suffered from the notorious double burden of formal employment and housework. In contrast, postwar West German women had stayed home and enjoyed all the labor-saving devices produced by the roaring capitalist economy. But they had less sex, and less satisfying sex, than women who had to line up for toilet paper.

How to account for this facet of life behind the Iron Curtain?

Consider Ana Durcheva from Bulgaria, who was 65 when I first met her in 2011. Having lived her first 43 years under Communism, she often complained that the new free market hindered Bulgarians’ ability to develop healthy amorous relationships.

 

Read more:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/12/opinion/why-women-had-better-sex-under-socialism.html

 

less freedom?

 

Humans are losing their freedoms, self-identity and free will, Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek has told RT, noting that a recent biohacking experiment by a team from the University of Washington is just another sign of the dawn of a post human era.

A team of scientists from the University of Washington successfully managed to hack into a computer using custom synthesized strands of DNA.

In their study, which is to be presented at 2017 USENIX Security Symposium Thursday, researchers said that it is potentially possible for a molecular code to take over machinery by exploiting weaknesses of gene sequencing software.

“We designed and created a synthetic DNA strand that contained malicious computer code encoded in the bases of the DNA strand,” researchers from the Paul G Allen school of computer science and engineering at the University of Washington said ahead of their presentation.

More coverage of Ney et al.'s paper, which'll be presented on Thur afternoon at #usesec17.https://t.co/8w4fTQKl84https://t.co/o3H1GkGIek

— USENIX Security (@USENIXSecurity) August 14, 2017

“When this physical strand was sequenced and processed by the vulnerable program it gave remote control of the computer doing the processing. That is, we were able to remotely exploit and gain full control over a computer using adversarial synthetic DNA.”

While the researchers led by Tadayoshi Kohno and Luis Ceze admit that at this point, the threat is only theoretical, Zizek noted the sinister side of this experiment.

read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/399627-is-there-hope-for-freedom/

 

Freedom?.. Most of our freedoms have been eroded long ago by being subjected to brainwashing in the most subtle and despicable ways by State, industries and religions — these entities that still rule our lives whether we like it or not... We have surrendered the right to be free and be more intelligent and creative, to become "a free slave" in the States and religion mediocrity, at the bottom of the barrel. I know this status of most of us provides the necessary fodder and manufacturing back-up for profitable little wars, but...

The "sinister side of the experiment" can actually give freedom to many people who have been down-trodden by our shoddy system. There are pitfalls of course that new "brainwashing" could overtake the bio-computer-brain assemblage, but it also could liberate us from plodding in the dark pool with a mediocre future. This new experiments could also help a lot of disable people. We thus need to develop a new strong and exciting ethic standard around these "machines" but not reject them altogether. The "bio-machine" could actually give us the ability to eliminate our dependencies from the State — and from its restrictive religious mechanics — to understand ourselves better than ever before. The State and its religious agents will of course hate these machines and try to destroy this challenging new concept.

Read from top...