+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Two men who saved the world

  1. Link to Post #1
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    34,268
    Thanks
    208,959
    Thanked 457,524 times in 32,788 posts

    Default Two men who saved the world

    Astonishing stories here. Many may already know about them, but maybe some don't.

    They were both Russian. Each one single-handedly stopped World War III.

    1)


    Vasily Arkhipov (October 1962)

    Arkhipov was flotilla commander and second-in-command of the diesel submarine B-59, stationed near Cuba during the 1962 Missile Crisis. Arkhipov refused to authorize the captain's use of nuclear torpedoes against the US Navy, a decision needing the agreement of all three senior officers aboard.

    Because he refused to comply, the nukes were not released. It's highly probable that if they had been, a nuclear exchange would have followed. On returning to the USSR, he and a number of others were all disgraced.

    The whole story of what had occurred came to light in 2002, when retired Commander Vadim Orlov, a participant in the events, held a press conference revealing the subs were armed with nuclear torpedoes and that Arkhipov's refusal to agree was the sole reason they had not been fired.

    Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., an advisor to JFK and also a historian, stated: "This was not only the most dangerous moment of the Cold War. It was the most dangerous moment in human history."

    Here's the PBS documentary. Recommended. An amazing story.2)

    Then Stanislav Petrov did the same again in September 1983.

    Petrov was the late night duty officer at one of the key Soviet nuclear early-warning systems. Suddenly, the system told him that a missile had been launched from the US, followed by five more.

    He had almost no time at all to make a decision. His clear orders were to report an event like this to his superiors without delay so that Soviet missiles could be launched in immediate retaliation.

    But he figured it had to be a false alarm — which it was. With only seconds to analyze what was happening, he judged that in a nuclear first strike from the US, many more missiles would be fired than just half a dozen. So he disobeyed his orders. It later became clear that the system had malfunctioned.

    Here they are. Both have now passed. Arkhipov is on the left, Petrov on the right.



    Last edited by Bill Ryan; 4th August 2020 at 21:32.

  2. The Following 77 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    7alon (6th August 2020), Alberto e Daniela (5th August 2020), Alecs (5th August 2020), Anchor (23rd February 2023), Anka (4th August 2020), Antagenet (7th March 2021), Arcturian108 (4th August 2020), Brigantia (7th March 2021), Chris Gilbert (7th March 2021), Cognitive Dissident (2nd March 2021), Constance (5th August 2020), DeDukshyn (5th August 2020), Delight (5th August 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th March 2021), DNA (12th September 2023), EFO (5th August 2020), Ernie Nemeth (13th September 2023), ExomatrixTV (28th February 2021), fifi (28th February 2021), Franny (4th August 2020), Gemma13 (5th August 2020), gord (6th August 2020), Gracy (4th August 2020), Guru Know It All. (28th February 2021), Gwin Ru (5th August 2020), happyuk (6th March 2021), Harmony (5th August 2020), holcaul (28th February 2021), Hym (28th February 2021), Icare (1st March 2021), Inversion (27th October 2020), Ioneo (4th August 2020), Johan (Keyholder) (3rd March 2021), johnji (13th February 2023), Johnnycomelately (4th October 2022), johnshen (26th May 2022), kfm27917 (5th August 2020), Kryztian (5th October 2022), kudzy (5th August 2020), leavesoftrees (5th August 2020), lisalu (4th October 2022), Mark (Star Mariner) (5th August 2020), Mashika (4th August 2020), meeradas (12th September 2023), Mike (4th August 2020), Mike Gorman (1st March 2021), Miller (26th March 2024), onevoice (5th August 2020), Open Minded Dude (6th August 2020), Pam (12th September 2023), Peace in Oz (1st March 2021), Pilgrim (1st March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), raregem (28th February 2021), rgray222 (25th October 2020), Rizotto (12th September 2023), Rosco1 (28th February 2021), RunningDeer (9th March 2022), Sarah Rainsong (4th August 2020), Satori (5th August 2020), Savannah (25th October 2020), selinam (4th August 2020), Star Tsar (5th August 2020), Strat (25th October 2020), Sue (Ayt) (28th February 2021), T Smith (22nd February 2023), thepainterdoug (1st March 2021), Tintin (5th August 2020), toppy (5th August 2020), ulli (9th March 2022), Victoria (8th March 2021), Violet3 (6th August 2020), Waldo (5th August 2020), Wind (5th August 2020), XelNaga (1st March 2021), Yoda (4th August 2020), Zirconian (6th August 2020)

  3. Link to Post #2
    United States Avalon Member Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    journeying to the end of the night
    Age
    46
    Posts
    5,777
    Thanks
    35,699
    Thanked 50,307 times in 5,692 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Unbelieveable.

    I've heard about these 2 gentlemen many times before, but the story never gets old. It's truly amazing.

    There should be an annual world-wide holiday to celebrate them. Absolutely.

  4. The Following 34 Users Say Thank You to Mike For This Post:

    Alberto e Daniela (5th August 2020), Anka (4th August 2020), avid (5th August 2020), Bill Ryan (4th August 2020), Constance (5th August 2020), DeDukshyn (5th August 2020), Delight (5th August 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th March 2021), EFO (5th August 2020), Franny (4th August 2020), Gracy (4th August 2020), Guru Know It All. (28th February 2021), Harmony (5th August 2020), Hym (1st March 2021), Icare (1st March 2021), Johnnycomelately (4th October 2022), kfm27917 (5th August 2020), Mashika (4th August 2020), Miller (26th March 2024), Open Minded Dude (6th August 2020), Pam (12th September 2023), Peace in Oz (1st March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Sarah Rainsong (4th August 2020), Satori (5th August 2020), Sunray (5th August 2020), T Smith (22nd February 2023), Tintin (5th August 2020), toppy (5th August 2020), Victoria (8th March 2021), Violet3 (6th August 2020), Wind (5th August 2020), XelNaga (1st March 2021), Zirconian (6th August 2020)

  5. Link to Post #3
    United States Avalon Member Arcturian108's Avatar
    Join Date
    9th August 2015
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    943
    Thanks
    9,910
    Thanked 8,329 times in 930 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    They look like father and son.

  6. The Following 25 Users Say Thank You to Arcturian108 For This Post:

    Alberto e Daniela (5th August 2020), Anka (4th August 2020), Bill Ryan (4th August 2020), Constance (5th August 2020), Delight (5th August 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th March 2021), EFO (1st March 2021), Guru Know It All. (28th February 2021), Harmony (5th August 2020), Hym (1st March 2021), Mashika (1st March 2021), Mike (4th August 2020), Miller (26th March 2024), onevoice (5th August 2020), Open Minded Dude (6th August 2020), Pam (12th September 2023), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Satori (5th August 2020), Star Tsar (5th August 2020), Tintin (5th August 2020), toppy (5th August 2020), Violet3 (6th August 2020), Wind (5th August 2020), XelNaga (1st March 2021), Zirconian (6th August 2020)

  7. Link to Post #4
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    From Daniel Ellsberg’s The Doomsday Machine:
    Quote At the Havana conference on the fortieth anniversary of the crisis in 2002—before an audience that included Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy, and naval officers from the Soviet Alfa group of hunter-killer submarines—Vadim Orlov, chief of the special signals intelligence detachment on the B-59, described conditions underwater that Saturday afternoon from the point of view of men in a barrel, or rabbits in a cage.
    ‘For some time we were able to avoid them quite successfully. However, the Americans were not dilettantes either.… [Starting at 4:59 P.M. on Saturday, October 27] they surrounded us and started to tighten the circle, practicing attacks and dropping depth charges. They exploded right next to the hull. It felt like you were sitting in a metal barrel, which somebody is constantly blasting with a sledgehammer.…
    The temperature in the compartments was 45-50 C, up to 60C [113–122 degrees Fahrenheit, up to 140] in the engine compartment. The level of CO2 in the air reached a critical mark, practically deadly for people. One of the duty officers fainted and fell down. Then another one followed, then the third one.… They were falling like dominoes. But we were still holding on, trying to escape. We were suffering like this for about four hours. The Americans hit us with something stronger than the grenades [depth charges]—apparently with a practical depth bomb. We thought—that’s it—the end.
    After this attack, the totally exhausted Savitsky, who, in addition to everything, was not able to establish connection with the General Staff, became furious. He summoned the officer who was assigned to the nuclear torpedo and ordered him to assemble it to battle readiness. “Maybe the war has already started up there, while we are doing somersaults here”—screamed emotional Valentin Grigorievich, trying to justify his order. “We’re going to blast them now! We will die, but we will sink them all—we will not disgrace our Navy!”
    Orlov’s account continues:
    But we did not fire the nuclear torpedo—Savitsky was able to rein in his wrath. After consulting with Second Captain Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov and his deputy political officer Ivan Semenovich Maslennikov, he made the decision to come to the surface. But there was more to that story. At least two officers were required to agree on the firing of the special weapon: the captain and the political officer, in this case Maslennikov. According to Orlov, Maslennikov agreed with Savitsky’s order to fire. On another sub that would have been sufficient. These two each had half of a key that was required to fire the special weapon. (The special weapons officer next to the torpedo also had a key.) But on this submarine, a third concurrence was required, because the chief of staff of the brigade, Vasili Arkhipov, was traveling with them. In terms of command on the vessel, Arkhipov—who was of the same rank as Savitsky—was second to the commander, Savitsky. Nevertheless, for this decision, because of his role in the brigade, Arkhipov’s agreement was also required. And he withheld it. He did so on the grounds—which Savitsky and Maslennikov understood as well as he, but which they chose to ignore under the circumstances—that Moscow had not authorized it.
    Had Arkhipov been stationed on one of the other submarines (for example, B-4, which was never located by the Americans), there is every reason to believe that the carrier USS Randolph and several, perhaps all, of its accompanying destroyers would, within minutes of the agreement by Savitsky and Maslennikov, have been destroyed by a nuclear explosion. Or if not destroyed, then drenched in a lethal bath of radioactive water that would incapacitate crew members almost immediately and kill them soon after.
    The source of this explosion would have been mysterious to other commanders in the Navy and officials on the ExComm, since no submarines known to be in the region were believed to carry nuclear warheads. The clear implication on the cause of the nuclear destruction of this antisubmarine hunter-killer group would have been a medium-range missile from Cuba whose launch had not been detected. That is the event that President Kennedy had announced on October 22 would lead to a full-scale nuclear attack on the Soviet Union.
    Savitsky and Arkhipov are now both dead and cannot testify further; but Arkhipov’s widow, Olga Arkhipova, says he told her they came close to firing the nuclear torpedo. Had that happened, we would probably not be reading this. The fear of Robert McNamara on October 27, 1962, that he might not see another sunset would have been realized. Olga Arkhipova in 2012 was justly proud that her husband, Vasili Alexandrovich, had, since the Havana conference ten years earlier, become known as “The Man Who Saved the World.”
    Ellsberg, Daniel. The Doomsday Machine (pp. 215-217). Bloomsbury Publishing. Édition du Kindle.


  8. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Anka (5th August 2020), Bill Ryan (5th August 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th March 2021), EFO (1st March 2021), Guru Know It All. (28th February 2021), Harmony (1st March 2021), Hym (1st March 2021), Johnnycomelately (4th October 2022), kfm27917 (5th August 2020), Mashika (1st March 2021), Pam (12th September 2023), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Tintin (6th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021), Violet3 (6th August 2020)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Romania Avalon Member EFO's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th May 2016
    Language
    Romanian
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,776
    Thanks
    13,329
    Thanked 11,568 times in 1,716 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    The Man Who Saved The World - Full Documentary
    (1:45:18 hrs.)
    "Your planet is forbidden for an open visit - extremely aggressive social environment,despite almost perfect climatic conditions.Almost 4 billion violent deaths for the last 5000 years and about 15000 major military conflicts in the same period."

  10. The Following 20 Users Say Thank You to EFO For This Post:

    Anka (26th October 2020), aoibhghaire (28th February 2021), araucaria (2nd March 2021), Bill Ryan (25th October 2020), Deborah (ahamkara) (1st March 2021), Denise/Dizi (7th March 2021), Guru Know It All. (28th February 2021), Harmony (25th October 2020), Hym (1st March 2021), Johan (Keyholder) (3rd March 2021), Mashika (1st March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Rosco1 (28th February 2021), Sarah Rainsong (25th October 2020), Strat (25th October 2020), thepainterdoug (1st March 2021), Tintin (6th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021), Wind (25th October 2020), Zirconian (1st March 2021)

  11. Link to Post #6
    UK Avalon Member Guru Know It All.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    5th February 2021
    Location
    Penzance UK
    Language
    English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    160
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 385 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Awesome thank you Bill. Always Us Living Love.

  12. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Guru Know It All. For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th February 2021), Denise/Dizi (7th March 2021), Harmony (1st March 2021), Hym (28th February 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Tintin (6th March 2021), Zirconian (1st March 2021)

  13. Link to Post #7
    Avalon Member Hym's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th June 2011
    Location
    Eastern Pacific
    Posts
    938
    Thanks
    28,544
    Thanked 7,036 times in 911 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Many unknown military personnel and more than a few civilians have also saved humanity from destruction, but most of those accounts will never be revealed, if hidden only for the lack of humanity from those who build and profit by producing and deploying those weapons. There likely, maybe, should be, some more accounts given in these years of openings and closings, because there is no reason left in some cases to keep the details hidden......


    There have been a few good, insightful, awakened movies warning of the potential destruction of life as we know it, due to the threat posed by the existence of those weapons. Some of those movies are based on real life accounts, the details only slightly fictionalized to protect the guilty.

    The most well known is Stanley Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove", 1964, with Peter Sellers-in multiple roles, George C. Scott, etc.. Treating the apocalyptic topic of planet-wide destruction with some serious humor.

    Then there's "The Bedford Incident", 1965, with Sidney Poitier, Richard Widmark, et al, about an overly aggressive captain of a destroyer, hunting a Russian sub.

    Also, Henry Fonda, Walter Matthau, et al, in "Fail Safe", 1964, as a president dealing with the same momentous issue of preventing war, after early warning system technology failures sent attack codes to u.s. planes near the soviet border.
    Last edited by Hym; 1st March 2021 at 03:14.

  14. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Hym For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (1st March 2021), EFO (1st March 2021), Ernie Nemeth (1st March 2021), Harmony (8th March 2021), Mashika (1st March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), thepainterdoug (1st March 2021), Tintin (6th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021), Zirconian (1st March 2021)

  15. Link to Post #8
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    About Vasily Arkhipov, i remember hearing that he was bullied terribly, and accused to have done what he did just because he was a coward and knew that if they launched the nukes, they would die for certain and he did not dare.

    Even his family felt shame about him at first, but later on mentality changed and he was accepted for what he did. The most important part i think was that he managed to switch the mentality of "i'll kill you all because i'm about to die, you go with me" to "Rather not have anyone die today. Even if you call me a coward the rest of my life, humanity is more important"
    Tired

  16. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (1st March 2021), Bill Ryan (1st March 2021), Brigantia (7th March 2021), EFO (1st March 2021), Ewan (7th March 2021), Harmony (8th March 2021), Hym (1st March 2021), Johan (Keyholder) (3rd March 2021), Peace in Oz (1st March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Tintin (6th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021), XelNaga (1st March 2021)

  17. Link to Post #9
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by EFO (here)
    The Man Who Saved The World - Full Documentary
    (1:45:18 hrs.)
    This beautiful documentary inspired the following comment on another thread, on the subject of taming inhuman computers.
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    This entire discussion is of course of the utmost relevance to life on this planet when we consider what the man who saved the world in September 1983 actually did.
    What he did was decide – correctly – that a computer glitch (actually at least five hallucinated missiles) was way more likely than the sheer madness of an American first strike. The Cold War was a sham: neither side as it turned out was prepared to strike first. Lt-Col Petrov understood that intuitively. Although manned by many humans, this huge computer dedicated to stifling a hot war, did not. No one has worked out what went wrong. Almost humanly, it had this wet dream/nightmare of finally getting to do what it was built for; Petrov gave it a tranquillizer and put it to bed. You might say that it had strayed from real time into imaginary time. This goes to show that not only was a first strike sheer madness, but a second, defensive/retaliatory strike was also insane, whether or not it turned into an accidental first strike. In other words, Petrov made the only sane decision, which involved overruling the computer. Interestingly, this happened around the time when Van Vogt’s story had just been published.

    Not in any way to downplay the reluctant hero who ‘saved the world’, he actually only saved it from falling off that particular cliff. Nowadays the threat is just as bad and much more insidious, since it no longer simply involves military professionals but ordinary citizens. Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.

    And the next question is this: how many other areas of human endeavour are plagued by the same problem, and solvable in the same manner? And for historians who may think this is a recent issue: how many past crises were brought about by mechanical, i.e. over-primitive thinking in humans long before they were confronted with ‘thinking’ machines?
    We have a very primitive response: laughter, said the philosopher Henri Bergson, results from ‘something mechanical encrusted on the living’.
    How much less people have laughed in the past year is a statistic that we are not likely to see. Just in case, here is a website vaunting the benefits of Vitamin L.


  18. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th March 2021), EFO (8th March 2021), Harmony (5th October 2022), Hym (8th March 2021), Mashika (6th March 2021), Mike (6th March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Tintin (6th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  19. Link to Post #10
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Quote Posted by EFO (here)
    The Man Who Saved The World - Full Documentary
    (1:45:18 hrs.)
    This beautiful documentary inspired the following comment on another thread, on the subject of taming inhuman computers.
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    This entire discussion is of course of the utmost relevance to life on this planet when we consider what the man who saved the world in September 1983 actually did.
    What he did was decide – correctly – that a computer glitch (actually at least five hallucinated missiles) was way more likely than the sheer madness of an American first strike. The Cold War was a sham: neither side as it turned out was prepared to strike first. Lt-Col Petrov understood that intuitively. Although manned by many humans, this huge computer dedicated to stifling a hot war, did not. No one has worked out what went wrong. Almost humanly, it had this wet dream/nightmare of finally getting to do what it was built for; Petrov gave it a tranquillizer and put it to bed. You might say that it had strayed from real time into imaginary time. This goes to show that not only was a first strike sheer madness, but a second, defensive/retaliatory strike was also insane, whether or not it turned into an accidental first strike. In other words, Petrov made the only sane decision, which involved overruling the computer. Interestingly, this happened around the time when Van Vogt’s story had just been published.

    Not in any way to downplay the reluctant hero who ‘saved the world’, he actually only saved it from falling off that particular cliff. Nowadays the threat is just as bad and much more insidious, since it no longer simply involves military professionals but ordinary citizens. Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.

    And the next question is this: how many other areas of human endeavour are plagued by the same problem, and solvable in the same manner? And for historians who may think this is a recent issue: how many past crises were brought about by mechanical, i.e. over-primitive thinking in humans long before they were confronted with ‘thinking’ machines?
    We have a very primitive response: laughter, said the philosopher Henri Bergson, results from ‘something mechanical encrusted on the living’.
    How much less people have laughed in the past year is a statistic that we are not likely to see. Just in case, here is a website vaunting the benefits of Vitamin L.
    Quote Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.
    Won't happen as such, "they" (whatever/whoever they are) have already realized that the best farm bot, one that can generate new bots at will and that won't be able to be reprogrammed is not an artificial one, it's the human race! It's already way in progress and for a lot of people, they are already past the possibility of being reprogrammed. they will generate kids that have the same programming, and follow it to the letter, make corrections and advance to the next level, with their own set of pre-programmed kids

    If you have a set of goals to achieve and you can't be there to manually handle it, the best way is to create a bot farm that will do the work for you, and like a worm, it will create copies of itself until all available computers (brains) are infected with the same software

    The remaining non-infected computers, will be treated as a virus, and for that, the antivirus is already in place and going strong (cancel culture)

    This was figured out long ago, that humans are the best artificial intelligence, and can just be programmed and controlled, but without having to wait for the hardware that can imitate a human brain. It just takes time to distribute the programming evenly so that it starts working 'standalone' and it becomes self healing and self reproducing (which is the advantage humans have over machines) then 'they' just sit watching it grow and correct/perfect itself

    Consider wild animals, for example, if you domesticate them, they turn more compatible with humans, and then the next generation even more, they are already born pre-programmed to be compatible with humans, and act more human like with every generation

    The human kind has been divided already, since long ago, into two groups: The ones who know how to program and the 'domesticated' ones. People can be trained, because at the very core, we all started as animals, if you understand the inner working of the machine, you can make it do all kinds of funny things
    Last edited by Mashika; 6th March 2021 at 20:39.
    Tired

  20. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    araucaria (7th March 2021), Arcturian108 (7th March 2021), Bill Ryan (6th March 2021), Ernie Nemeth (6th March 2021), Ewan (7th March 2021), Harmony (5th October 2022), Hym (8th March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  21. Link to Post #11
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by EFO (here)
    The Man Who Saved The World - Full Documentary
    (1:45:18 hrs.)
    As completely irrelevant, offtopic post, but that i please request to not be removed for now

    I knew someone who had the exact same words to say, about everyone in life, in his later years



    I think i understand the feeling.. Seems it was common for them
    Last edited by Mashika; 7th March 2021 at 00:20.
    Tired

  22. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), Hym (8th March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  23. Link to Post #12
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by Mashika (here)
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Quote Posted by EFO (here)
    The Man Who Saved The World - Full Documentary
    (1:45:18 hrs.)
    This beautiful documentary inspired the following comment on another thread, on the subject of taming inhuman computers.
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    This entire discussion is of course of the utmost relevance to life on this planet when we consider what the man who saved the world in September 1983 actually did.
    What he did was decide – correctly – that a computer glitch (actually at least five hallucinated missiles) was way more likely than the sheer madness of an American first strike. The Cold War was a sham: neither side as it turned out was prepared to strike first. Lt-Col Petrov understood that intuitively. Although manned by many humans, this huge computer dedicated to stifling a hot war, did not. No one has worked out what went wrong. Almost humanly, it had this wet dream/nightmare of finally getting to do what it was built for; Petrov gave it a tranquillizer and put it to bed. You might say that it had strayed from real time into imaginary time. This goes to show that not only was a first strike sheer madness, but a second, defensive/retaliatory strike was also insane, whether or not it turned into an accidental first strike. In other words, Petrov made the only sane decision, which involved overruling the computer. Interestingly, this happened around the time when Van Vogt’s story had just been published.

    Not in any way to downplay the reluctant hero who ‘saved the world’, he actually only saved it from falling off that particular cliff. Nowadays the threat is just as bad and much more insidious, since it no longer simply involves military professionals but ordinary citizens. Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.

    And the next question is this: how many other areas of human endeavour are plagued by the same problem, and solvable in the same manner? And for historians who may think this is a recent issue: how many past crises were brought about by mechanical, i.e. over-primitive thinking in humans long before they were confronted with ‘thinking’ machines?
    We have a very primitive response: laughter, said the philosopher Henri Bergson, results from ‘something mechanical encrusted on the living’.
    How much less people have laughed in the past year is a statistic that we are not likely to see. Just in case, here is a website vaunting the benefits of Vitamin L.
    Quote Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.
    Won't happen as such, "they" (whatever/whoever they are) have already realized that the best farm bot, one that can generate new bots at will and that won't be able to be reprogrammed is not an artificial one, it's the human race! It's already way in progress and for a lot of people, they are already past the possibility of being reprogrammed. they will generate kids that have the same programming, and follow it to the letter, make corrections and advance to the next level, with their own set of pre-programmed kids

    If you have a set of goals to achieve and you can't be there to manually handle it, the best way is to create a bot farm that will do the work for you, and like a worm, it will create copies of itself until all available computers (brains) are infected with the same software

    The remaining non-infected computers, will be treated as a virus, and for that, the antivirus is already in place and going strong (cancel culture)

    This was figured out long ago, that humans are the best artificial intelligence, and can just be programmed and controlled, but without having to wait for the hardware that can imitate a human brain. It just takes time to distribute the programming evenly so that it starts working 'standalone' and it becomes self healing and self reproducing (which is the advantage humans have over machines) then 'they' just sit watching it grow and correct/perfect itself

    Consider wild animals, for example, if you domesticate them, they turn more compatible with humans, and then the next generation even more, they are already born pre-programmed to be compatible with humans, and act more human like with every generation

    The human kind has been divided already, since long ago, into two groups: The ones who know how to program and the 'domesticated' ones. People can be trained, because at the very core, we all started as animals, if you understand the inner working of the machine, you can make it do all kinds of funny things
    I don’t necessarily disagree Mashika, this is something I am working on at the moment. At the very least, this needs to be looked into further.

    First, I would say there is a contradiction between the idea of domestication and that of human robots. AI is a term to describe how human thinking can descend into mechanical thinking. If you domesticate a cow, you will use it for its meat, for its milk (and formerly for its pulling strength), for its reproductive capacity, and perhaps for its DNA if that can help. In other words, you exploit it to the full. But to domesticate humanity as robots is to do the opposite. Humans have developed a mind of their own; that is their greatest asset, and not only do you not want to exploit it, it is getting in the way??? If that is one’s purpose, then the best idea is to do what the Annunaki reportedly did here: adapt an ape species to serve as underground mechanical diggers. It is too late for that. That is the very story of how humanity developed the brain that is now getting in the way.

    What do we take away from the above? Humanity is what it is because it was domesticated and genetically altered by someone. If you are using that brain so developed, you may feel more comfortable with the idea of being domesticated and genetically altered all over again – or not. Our brain has three layers: a fourth sounds like ‘natural’ evolution. What happened with the Annunaki – and which in my view explains why they disappeared – is that they got more than they bargained for. (Compare with Clifford Simak’s dogs in City (for dogs read humans in our present predicament): they wonder about the humans in their mythology and how they got out of Dodge (to Jupiter). In light of the above, the idea of bringing humans back to that monkey state goes way beyond the bounds of what we understand by ‘reactionary’. Are we that dumb or dumbed down to go with that? I don’t think so. I personally may not survive what is coming soon, but I can say that the humanity in me (and of course your good self) is a major stumbling-block to the scenario you are setting out. I am no Einstein, but I ain’t no monkey either.

    Talking of Albert, I know of a horse nicknamed Einstein because of his ability to detect the current in his electric fence. He worked out the time (three seconds) he had between pulses in order to make his escape. However, it did not bring freedom, only extra constraint. The moral of the story is that the best place to be, even with a decent brain, is where we have to be: maybe in the dentist’s chair, or on planet Earth in AD 2021, it is rarely a matter of choice.

    Where did this extra quality, which we now call human, come from? From the Annunaki. It is specific to humans as opposed to manufactured robots, and yet it is an imported attribute, inherited by a domestic animal from its ‘owner’. The Annunaki got out, not because they got more than they bargained for (perhaps they did), but because they had parented a whole new species. Anyone who has had children knows the feeling: they do their own thing, and if it is not what we had hoped or expected, then so be it. But of course, many children are made to defer to their parents: that may be the key to humanity’s problem: who, more than princes and princesses, defer to their parents? Right now, even the House of Windsor is creaking at the seams.

    Deference is an absolute value when one is a robot. What makes a human not a robot is that we do our own thing, which can be advantageous, although not altogether precise: on the contrary, it is adaptable. For example, at the beginning of Kim Stanley Robinson’s Mars Red, the already semi-independent Mars colonists haven’t been on the surface five minutes when their computer system starts misbehaving because of all the dust. In the same novel, a Japanese concept helps them understand something basic: ‘shikata ga nai’, which translates as… ‘c’est la vie’. Trying explaining that to a computer/robot. A computer/robot works when everything goes exactly according to plan. Unless I am mistaken (increasing entropy?), this is not the way the universe works.

    In other words, we are all drawn to others for what they have that we don’t have. What it is to be human includes this autonomy in the face of the unexpected, which is no more in the line of AI than it was in the line of the Annunaki: the French word is ‘débrouillardise’. Dealing with entropy is something in the human skill set, and not in others. Even a Libran will decide the undecidable, when a computer would just go into a sulk


  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), EFO (20th March 2021), Mashika (7th March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  25. Link to Post #13
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Quote Posted by Mashika (here)
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Quote Posted by EFO (here)
    The Man Who Saved The World - Full Documentary
    (1:45:18 hrs.)
    This beautiful documentary inspired the following comment on another thread, on the subject of taming inhuman computers.
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    This entire discussion is of course of the utmost relevance to life on this planet when we consider what the man who saved the world in September 1983 actually did.
    What he did was decide – correctly – that a computer glitch (actually at least five hallucinated missiles) was way more likely than the sheer madness of an American first strike. The Cold War was a sham: neither side as it turned out was prepared to strike first. Lt-Col Petrov understood that intuitively. Although manned by many humans, this huge computer dedicated to stifling a hot war, did not. No one has worked out what went wrong. Almost humanly, it had this wet dream/nightmare of finally getting to do what it was built for; Petrov gave it a tranquillizer and put it to bed. You might say that it had strayed from real time into imaginary time. This goes to show that not only was a first strike sheer madness, but a second, defensive/retaliatory strike was also insane, whether or not it turned into an accidental first strike. In other words, Petrov made the only sane decision, which involved overruling the computer. Interestingly, this happened around the time when Van Vogt’s story had just been published.

    Not in any way to downplay the reluctant hero who ‘saved the world’, he actually only saved it from falling off that particular cliff. Nowadays the threat is just as bad and much more insidious, since it no longer simply involves military professionals but ordinary citizens. Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.

    And the next question is this: how many other areas of human endeavour are plagued by the same problem, and solvable in the same manner? And for historians who may think this is a recent issue: how many past crises were brought about by mechanical, i.e. over-primitive thinking in humans long before they were confronted with ‘thinking’ machines?
    We have a very primitive response: laughter, said the philosopher Henri Bergson, results from ‘something mechanical encrusted on the living’.
    How much less people have laughed in the past year is a statistic that we are not likely to see. Just in case, here is a website vaunting the benefits of Vitamin L.
    Quote Also, the computer itself is kept very much in the background, behind an over-friendly user interface called Facebook, Twitter, etc. In 1983, it took someone to decide that no human politician would bring the world to nuclear Armageddon. There may or may not have been some human agency involved, but either way, the computer could and had to be overruled. The question this time is the same: when and how will some very ordinary saviour find themselves with the task of calling out this insane machine? The response we are beginning to see may be truly democratic: a massive walkout.
    Won't happen as such, "they" (whatever/whoever they are) have already realized that the best farm bot, one that can generate new bots at will and that won't be able to be reprogrammed is not an artificial one, it's the human race! It's already way in progress and for a lot of people, they are already past the possibility of being reprogrammed. they will generate kids that have the same programming, and follow it to the letter, make corrections and advance to the next level, with their own set of pre-programmed kids

    If you have a set of goals to achieve and you can't be there to manually handle it, the best way is to create a bot farm that will do the work for you, and like a worm, it will create copies of itself until all available computers (brains) are infected with the same software

    The remaining non-infected computers, will be treated as a virus, and for that, the antivirus is already in place and going strong (cancel culture)

    This was figured out long ago, that humans are the best artificial intelligence, and can just be programmed and controlled, but without having to wait for the hardware that can imitate a human brain. It just takes time to distribute the programming evenly so that it starts working 'standalone' and it becomes self healing and self reproducing (which is the advantage humans have over machines) then 'they' just sit watching it grow and correct/perfect itself

    Consider wild animals, for example, if you domesticate them, they turn more compatible with humans, and then the next generation even more, they are already born pre-programmed to be compatible with humans, and act more human like with every generation

    The human kind has been divided already, since long ago, into two groups: The ones who know how to program and the 'domesticated' ones. People can be trained, because at the very core, we all started as animals, if you understand the inner working of the machine, you can make it do all kinds of funny things
    I don’t necessarily disagree Mashika, this is something I am working on at the moment. At the very least, this needs to be looked into further.

    First, I would say there is a contradiction between the idea of domestication and that of human robots. AI is a term to describe how human thinking can descend into mechanical thinking. If you domesticate a cow, you will use it for its meat, for its milk (and formerly for its pulling strength), for its reproductive capacity, and perhaps for its DNA if that can help. In other words, you exploit it to the full. But to domesticate humanity as robots is to do the opposite. Humans have developed a mind of their own; that is their greatest asset, and not only do you not want to exploit it, it is getting in the way??? If that is one’s purpose, then the best idea is to do what the Annunaki reportedly did here: adapt an ape species to serve as underground mechanical diggers. It is too late for that. That is the very story of how humanity developed the brain that is now getting in the way.

    What do we take away from the above? Humanity is what it is because it was domesticated and genetically altered by someone. If you are using that brain so developed, you may feel more comfortable with the idea of being domesticated and genetically altered all over again – or not. Our brain has three layers: a fourth sounds like ‘natural’ evolution. What happened with the Annunaki – and which in my view explains why they disappeared – is that they got more than they bargained for. (Compare with Clifford Simak’s dogs in City (for dogs read humans in our present predicament): they wonder about the humans in their mythology and how they got out of Dodge (to Jupiter). In light of the above, the idea of bringing humans back to that monkey state goes way beyond the bounds of what we understand by ‘reactionary’. Are we that dumb or dumbed down to go with that? I don’t think so. I personally may not survive what is coming soon, but I can say that the humanity in me (and of course your good self) is a major stumbling-block to the scenario you are setting out. I am no Einstein, but I ain’t no monkey either.

    Talking of Albert, I know of a horse nicknamed Einstein because of his ability to detect the current in his electric fence. He worked out the time (three seconds) he had between pulses in order to make his escape. However, it did not bring freedom, only extra constraint. The moral of the story is that the best place to be, even with a decent brain, is where we have to be: maybe in the dentist’s chair, or on planet Earth in AD 2021, it is rarely a matter of choice.

    Where did this extra quality, which we now call human, come from? From the Annunaki. It is specific to humans as opposed to manufactured robots, and yet it is an imported attribute, inherited by a domestic animal from its ‘owner’. The Annunaki got out, not because they got more than they bargained for (perhaps they did), but because they had parented a whole new species. Anyone who has had children knows the feeling: they do their own thing, and if it is not what we had hoped or expected, then so be it. But of course, many children are made to defer to their parents: that may be the key to humanity’s problem: who, more than princes and princesses, defer to their parents? Right now, even the House of Windsor is creaking at the seams.

    Deference is an absolute value when one is a robot. What makes a human not a robot is that we do our own thing, which can be advantageous, although not altogether precise: on the contrary, it is adaptable. For example, at the beginning of Kim Stanley Robinson’s Mars Red, the already semi-independent Mars colonists haven’t been on the surface five minutes when their computer system starts misbehaving because of all the dust. In the same novel, a Japanese concept helps them understand something basic: ‘shikata ga nai’, which translates as… ‘c’est la vie’. Trying explaining that to a computer/robot. A computer/robot works when everything goes exactly according to plan. Unless I am mistaken (increasing entropy?), this is not the way the universe works.

    In other words, we are all drawn to others for what they have that we don’t have. What it is to be human includes this autonomy in the face of the unexpected, which is no more in the line of AI than it was in the line of the Annunaki: the French word is ‘débrouillardise’. Dealing with entropy is something in the human skill set, and not in others. Even a Libran will decide the undecidable, when a computer would just go into a sulk
    "But to domesticate humanity as robots is to do the opposite. Humans have developed a mind of their own; that is their greatest asset, and not only do you not want to exploit it, it is getting in the way???"

    Really? We still live inside a bubble, that has limits and rules, meant to keep people in check around the true complete capabilities, a human can do way more but if the second group finds the person too advanced or 'difficult', it gets cancelled (the antivirus clocks in)

    Quote Where did this extra quality, which we now call human, come from? From the Annunaki. It is specific to humans as opposed to manufactured robots, and yet it is an imported attribute, inherited by a domestic animal from its ‘owner’
    But that's why i said that animals, on every next generation, are more 'human like", ad we are animals at the very core.. "Once you reach a high level of technology, manufacturing turns into breeding"

    We live in a bubble created for us, we are cows, that think we are smart and can figure things out, the only thing we can figure out so far is that we can think, and this thinking is leading into some paths, a cow knows when to eat, and we do. A cow doesn't rely on 'work' to be able to eat, we do, it's a lamentable situation. We are just cows in the end, but most people won't accept that

    Even the smartest person on this planet has to pay their taxes at the end of the year.. lol

    ETA:

    You talk about Annunaki, what if some information would come forward next day that completely proves Annunaki were fake all along, the entire world would be swipped away for millions, and then what? That's how fragile the bubble is. Same with Christ or any other religion like concepts

    "shikata ga nai"

    Lo que sera, sera

    Quote A computer/robot works when everything goes exactly according to plan. Unless I am mistaken (increasing entropy?), this is not the way the universe works.
    Old ones did work like that, current ones are able to correct and reprogram in real time, so they work just like a lesser, but smart person. The failure of a situation pre-programmed in a robot can be handled by a 'health service' built into it, then it finds the case and knows how to deal with it

    It's built on the image of how a human mind works

    Get hurt on your knee:
    - Fall down
    - Cry in pain to relieve stress
    - Press the injury because pain goes away
    - Clean injury
    - Put some medication or fix it with stitches

    Humans are robots, at the very core

    ETA: look into what an Expert System is, on computer science, also look into a State Machine

    We are, and act like State Machines, basically



    Hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still Hungry? No
    Stop eating (out of the loop)

    And so on..
    Last edited by Mashika; 7th March 2021 at 21:02.
    Tired

  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    araucaria (7th March 2021), Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), Ewan (7th March 2021), pyrangello (9th March 2022), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  27. Link to Post #14
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Thank you Mashika (before the added section)
    Quote We live in a bubble created for us, we are cows, that think we are smart and can figure things out, the only thing we can figure out so far is that we can think, and this thinking is leading into some paths, a cow knows when to eat, and we do. A cow doesn't rely on 'work' to be able to eat, we do, it's a lamentable situation. We are just cows in the end, but most people won't accept that
    Even the smartest person on this planet has to pay their taxes at the end of the year.. lol
    I don’t mind paying taxes for community benefits such as roads, schools, hospitals… I do object to paying when others with greater means do not. In other words, I am no unemployed cow. The boot is on the other foot. This animal is explaining ethical living to its ‘superior’. It is certainly earning its living.

    And so is the cow: it produces milk, calves and meat, and you say it doesn't rely on 'work'??? We still have the (limited) opportunity to walk away: the cow does not. We are not just cows – even though cows have likely inherited a dose of consciousness which will one day serve them in good stead. How many of them would there be today if they were totally uninteresting and useless? Or financially so: traditional capitalism at least (granted, not any more) had this one virtue, namely that you invested (stood to lose) money before you ever earned any; cows had value. In other words, they pay taxes; which is why farmers pay less tax than city workers.

    Quote We still live inside a bubble, that has limits and rules, meant to keep people in check around the true complete capabilities
    Sure we do; even if you don’t believe in old-fashioned marriage, we enter into such relationships with each other all the time, and find them beneficial precisely to the extent that we invest in them. If you ignore your spouse, your relationship is dead, you can wash your own dirty linen/eat your delicious meal alone etc. People keep each other in check by enlightened consent. What cows don’t have (yet) is that enlightenment, which is consciousness as opposed to instinct.


    Edit:
    Quote Hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still Hungry? No
    Stop eating (out of the loop)
    Try this:
    Hungry? Yes
    Think
    Still hungry? Yes
    Think some more
    Still Hungry? Yes
    Never stop thinking (endless loop)
    Last edited by araucaria; 7th March 2021 at 21:24.


  28. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), EFO (20th March 2021), Ewan (7th March 2021), Mashika (7th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  29. Link to Post #15
    Scotland Avalon Member Ewan's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th February 2015
    Location
    Ireland
    Age
    62
    Posts
    2,435
    Thanks
    51,899
    Thanked 18,951 times in 2,389 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Mashika, that is two very disturbing posts you just made in this thread. I pray you are wrong, I fear you may be onto something.
    I've often imagined scenarios where I try to explain something, sanely, to someone pre-programmed and every time I see failure. It is very uncomfortable to realise that other humans could be so fixated on their beliefs that reason has zero effect, but I know this to be true regardless.

  30. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Ewan For This Post:

    araucaria (7th March 2021), Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), EFO (20th March 2021), Hym (8th March 2021), Mashika (7th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  31. Link to Post #16
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Thank you Mashika (before the added section)
    Quote We live in a bubble created for us, we are cows, that think we are smart and can figure things out, the only thing we can figure out so far is that we can think, and this thinking is leading into some paths, a cow knows when to eat, and we do. A cow doesn't rely on 'work' to be able to eat, we do, it's a lamentable situation. We are just cows in the end, but most people won't accept that
    Even the smartest person on this planet has to pay their taxes at the end of the year.. lol
    I don’t mind paying taxes for community benefits such as roads, schools, hospitals… I do object to paying when others with greater means do not. In other words, I am no unemployed cow. The boot is on the other foot. This animal is explaining ethical living to its ‘superior’. It is certainly earning its living.

    And so is the cow: it produces milk, calves and meat, and you say it doesn't rely on 'work'??? We still have the (limited) opportunity to walk away: the cow does not. We are not just cows – even though cows have likely inherited a dose of consciousness which will one day serve them in good stead. How many of them would there be today if they were totally uninteresting and useless? Or financially so: traditional capitalism at least (granted, not any more) had this one virtue, namely that you invested (stood to lose) money before you ever earned any; cows had value. In other words, they pay taxes; which is why farmers pay less tax than city workers.

    Quote We still live inside a bubble, that has limits and rules, meant to keep people in check around the true complete capabilities
    Sure we do; even if you don’t believe in old-fashioned marriage, we enter into such relationships with each other all the time, and find them beneficial precisely to the extent that we invest in them. If you ignore your spouse, your relationship is dead, you can wash your own dirty linen/eat your delicious meal alone etc. People keep each other in check by enlightened consent. What cows don’t have (yet) is that enlightenment, which is consciousness as opposed to instinct.


    Edit:
    Quote Hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still Hungry? No
    Stop eating (out of the loop)
    Try this:
    Hungry? Yes
    Think
    Still hungry? Yes
    Think some more
    Still Hungry? Yes
    Never stop thinking (endless loop)
    Regardless of reasons to pay taxes, you are still following rules placed on yourself..

    The cow exists because it exists, not because we need it to exist, it was around already, we just found a purpose for it and then made the next generations slaves for our benefit. Cows, if able, would go away on their own and eat whatever they can eat, i don't think most humans are willing to go eat wild grass, so they slaves to the rulers, in the very end, no matter what

    Money, taxes, economy, all those things are human concepts invented to control and have rules, there was a time when those concepts did not exist, yet humanity still managed to grow and be around until now. Considering that without this system the world would end, just means we are unable to escape the bubble created for us


    Quote Try this:
    Hungry? Yes
    Think
    Still hungry? Yes
    Think some more
    Still Hungry? Yes
    Never stop thinking (endless loop)
    A machine, just like i said...

    ¤=[Post Update]=¤

    Quote Posted by Ewan (here)
    Mashika, that is two very disturbing posts you just made in this thread. I pray you are wrong, I fear you may be onto something.
    I've often imagined scenarios where I try to explain something, sanely, to someone pre-programmed and every time I see failure. It is very uncomfortable to realise that other humans could be so fixated on their beliefs that reason has zero effect, but I know this to be true regardless.
    I'm not sure if i'm right or wrong, and i think it mostly would not change anything anyways

    I have seen this behavior for a long time, even with close friends, and when i try to explain or talk to them about some behaviors they have, they act like NPCs, robotic in nature. It's bothersome and sometimes causes personal issues beyond repair
    Tired

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), Hym (8th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  33. Link to Post #17
    Scotland Avalon Member Ewan's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th February 2015
    Location
    Ireland
    Age
    62
    Posts
    2,435
    Thanks
    51,899
    Thanked 18,951 times in 2,389 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by Mashika (here)
    Quote Posted by Ewan (here)
    Mashika, that is two very disturbing posts you just made in this thread. I pray you are wrong, I fear you may be onto something.
    I've often imagined scenarios where I try to explain something, sanely, to someone pre-programmed and every time I see failure. It is very uncomfortable to realise that other humans could be so fixated on their beliefs that reason has zero effect, but I know this to be true regardless.
    I'm not sure if i'm right or wrong, and i think it mostly would not change anything anyways

    I have seen this behavior for a long time, even with close friends, and when i try to explain or talk to them about some behaviors they have, they act like NPCs, robotic in nature. It's bothersome and sometimes causes personal issues beyond repair
    We are going well off-topic, my apologies Bill.

    BUT, in response.

    I came to understand/believe many years ago that a persons identity is tied with their beliefs. What a person believes to be true can become part of their identiy, their ego. When you challenge that belief system it triggers an uncomfortable feeling, their very identity at a core level is potentially under attack. It goes back to a primal response, fight or flee. The problem is millions of us believe things to be true that are not actually TRUE.

    You will be well aware of the current meme of "fake news". Such a simple concept but so many - dare I say sheep? - accept it at face value. It would seem, despite history, we, as a species are destined to repeat our mistakes again and again.

    [Bill: Please seperate these posts, despite the work it entails, and find a place for them. Thank you.]
    Last edited by Ewan; 7th March 2021 at 22:27. Reason: spelling

  34. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Ewan For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), EFO (20th March 2021), Ernie Nemeth (7th March 2021), Hym (8th March 2021), Mashika (7th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  35. Link to Post #18
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by Ewan (here)
    Quote Posted by Mashika (here)
    Quote Posted by Ewan (here)
    Mashika, that is two very disturbing posts you just made in this thread. I pray you are wrong, I fear you may be onto something.
    I've often imagined scenarios where I try to explain something, sanely, to someone pre-programmed and every time I see failure. It is very uncomfortable to realise that other humans could be so fixated on their beliefs that reason has zero effect, but I know this to be true regardless.
    I'm not sure if i'm right or wrong, and i think it mostly would not change anything anyways

    I have seen this behavior for a long time, even with close friends, and when i try to explain or talk to them about some behaviors they have, they act like NPCs, robotic in nature. It's bothersome and sometimes causes personal issues beyond repair
    We are going well off-topic, my apologies Bill.

    BUT, in response.

    I came to understand/believe many years ago that a persons identity is tied with their beliefs. What a person believes to be true can become part of their identiy, their ego. When you challenge that belief system it triggers an uncomfortable feeling, their very identity at a core level is potentially under attack. It goes back to a primal response, fight or flee. The problem is millions of us believe things to be true that are not actually TRUE.

    You will be well aware of the current meme of "fake news". Such a simple concept but so many - dare I say sheep? - accept it at face value. It would seem, despite history, we, as a species are destined to repeat our mistakes again and again.

    [Bill: Please seperate these posts, despite the work it entails, and find a place for them. Thank you.]
    Yes, i think the entire 'cancel culture' thing is just that, it's the antivirus to prevent people from going out of the way, we don't need a dog to keep the sheep in place, instead we can just rely on the group preventing or rejecting the 'failures', LOL

    It's seems very simple, but mostly, simplest approach is the best approach. As i'm not very much into 'western' culture (beyond being on this site i love much) i have been 'canceled' lots of times in the past years, i lost friends because of that, so yeah My ideas/culture are not very compatible to western ones, when out on the street or other sites. So i get rejected a lot

    Cancel culture or 'fake news' are mostly non existent on my world view, but i do get how it works, we have brainwashed people too (lots), it just happened under a different mechanism, our brainwashed people, seem to at least be able to reject or oppose concepts like 'canceling', even though they would also go and do the same, under different ways of behavior, the end results always the same
    Last edited by Mashika; 7th March 2021 at 22:37.
    Tired

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2021), Ewan (7th March 2021), Hym (8th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  37. Link to Post #19
    On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    3,411
    Thanks
    10,548
    Thanked 27,828 times in 3,335 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Thank you Mashika (before the added section)
    Quote We live in a bubble created for us, we are cows, that think we are smart and can figure things out, the only thing we can figure out so far is that we can think, and this thinking is leading into some paths, a cow knows when to eat, and we do. A cow doesn't rely on 'work' to be able to eat, we do, it's a lamentable situation. We are just cows in the end, but most people won't accept that
    Even the smartest person on this planet has to pay their taxes at the end of the year.. lol
    I don’t mind paying taxes for community benefits such as roads, schools, hospitals… I do object to paying when others with greater means do not. In other words, I am no unemployed cow. The boot is on the other foot. This animal is explaining ethical living to its ‘superior’. It is certainly earning its living.

    And so is the cow: it produces milk, calves and meat, and you say it doesn't rely on 'work'??? We still have the (limited) opportunity to walk away: the cow does not. We are not just cows – even though cows have likely inherited a dose of consciousness which will one day serve them in good stead. How many of them would there be today if they were totally uninteresting and useless? Or financially so: traditional capitalism at least (granted, not any more) had this one virtue, namely that you invested (stood to lose) money before you ever earned any; cows had value. In other words, they pay taxes; which is why farmers pay less tax than city workers.

    Quote We still live inside a bubble, that has limits and rules, meant to keep people in check around the true complete capabilities
    Sure we do; even if you don’t believe in old-fashioned marriage, we enter into such relationships with each other all the time, and find them beneficial precisely to the extent that we invest in them. If you ignore your spouse, your relationship is dead, you can wash your own dirty linen/eat your delicious meal alone etc. People keep each other in check by enlightened consent. What cows don’t have (yet) is that enlightenment, which is consciousness as opposed to instinct.


    Edit:
    Quote Hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still hungry? Yes
    Eat
    Still Hungry? No
    Stop eating (out of the loop)
    Try this:
    Hungry? Yes
    Think
    Still hungry? Yes
    Think some more
    Still Hungry? Yes
    Never stop thinking (endless loop)
    Possibly best way to explain the situation is this one, i probably should not talk about this, and i can't remember if i posted it before here on Avalon, but anyways...

    Long ago, i was with my grand father and he was asked to intervene on a local issue among two cities that were claiming farm land as their own, but since it was rained hard and it was all flooded, the marks places to identify the city limits were gone, so ever city claimed to own more land than they did

    So, my grand father joined the group and went there to inspect, then he ordered some of the people to build a wood house (cabin?) on the side of the land he knew belonged to 'our city'. So they build the thing, then we go away and come back like 2 weeks later, and someone had burned down the cabin, all people went crazy like apes and started yelling and creating a group to go deal with the other guys

    And then we went into a meeting, my gf did but i was with him because i was not supposed to be alone out there, so i had to be with him all the time, and this is what happened

    + So they burned it down
    - The did
    + So now we make the call?
    - Yes, let's bring them on
    + Ok, it worked nicely, as hoped
    - It did

    Turns out it was all prepared before hand.. People's reality, and the ones that control/govern you, are not the same realities

    That people, on that small town, probably still don't know they built a cabin so that it would be burned down and have an excuse to send the army and take over the land, so that it would not be taken away from 'our' people....

    They were so happy, and all kids running around, and we were supposed to have weekends there to play and eat and all that cool stuff, and music and such! Such a great idea, and it was all perception and fake, and mind control


    'You don't get to chose what the choosers have chosen for you to be able to chose from'
    Last edited by Mashika; 7th March 2021 at 23:39.
    Tired

  38. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Mashika For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (8th March 2021), East Sun (8th March 2021), Ewan (7th March 2021), Hym (8th March 2021), Victoria (8th March 2021)

  39. Link to Post #20
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: Two men who saved the world

    There would appear to be a third man belongs here: the American Leonard Perroots, whose secret 1989 report has just been declassified, according to Le Nouvel Observateur. Unfortunately the details are behind a paywall. Maybe someone has the document?


  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (9th March 2022), EFO (20th March 2021)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts