BUTTERFLY WAR


I can't stop them. I don't even believe we can stop them. But there is still hope because they are still susceptible to deception. You can trick them and redirect their desires and efforts into an outcome that they cannot fathom.

Deceiving the powers that be seems like it will be quite the task. You're going up against a collective that wants to achieve their own post-human ends at our expense? I can't really wrap my head around a deception deep enough to fool a group that powerful, but we'd fail the moment we decide that they're infallible so I'd like to believe it's possible. That's what demolishing Civil Rights is about right? 

The plan gets crazier from here, and the next paragraph alludes to it:

Well, you're not wrong there. This all reads like a sci-fi dystopia novel, and it sounds too fantastical to be true. It sounds like you invented a worst-case scenario and just hobbled a bunch of cyberpunk tropes together. In any case, anything is possible and maybe in the coming decades we will see if shit really hits the fan. From the way you talk, you seem to think it's inevitable. Is that why you keep bringing up the necessity of space travel?

>Bonus points if you can tie that last part into Rene Girard's work.  If I may toot my own horn a bit, it really is my magnum opus. I'd prefer not to spell it out because it is so incredibly wild that it will send anyone who reads it into a shock of anger and fury.  You're already familiar with my work and influences, so I think you can piece it together and, honestly, it will mean more to you if you figure it out.

I've never read any of his work, and my knowledge of philosophy is an undergrad level at best, but I'll look into him. If it can help me gain some perspective on the breadth of your ramblings then maybe I can start to piecing things together. 

>We were designed to not only survive the chaos of the universe, but thrive in it and find happiness.

I'll agree to that. Moral bondage will only cripple our ability to survive as a species if our oppressors decide to clean house. Man is a noble savage after all.
Assume the Eye of Sauron is on you at all times, that your phone is tapped, that your devices are compromised, and that the devices of those around you are compromised, and accept that you will never have a time advantage over the Eye.

I accept the rules of the game.

This is a mistake. The game is rigged - no matter how good your hand is, you're up against an Ace and a King. But that's only when you choose to play the game, which is where proper OpSec protocols come into place.

The IC first and foremost collects metadata. The most advanced computers they have access to are incapable of mass collection of anything more complex than that. This is all assuming the internet as it is at the most basic level - without any further encryption to get in the way. It takes massive amounts of tax money and resources just to support all of this, and unless you allow yourself to get put on a watch-list of some form, there are no means by which they can get a read on you.

How do you avoid playing the game? You have to maintain a distance. Unless you need one for work, don't own a cellphone - and if you do, consider that a flip-phone may be more desirable (it can be easier to encrypt with certain smart-phone apps, but it's harder to get data directly out of a flip-phone). When you're in your house, throw that thing in a faraday bag. Don't use social media. Minimize attendance in public events. Keep work and pleasure separate - have a completely separate, professional persona for business, and do everything else off-line. TOR, VPNs, and the like are not foolproof - but they can help more than harm, if you're responsible with them.

Don't ever mail anything to your house - get a P.O. Box that you go to pick things up. Use PGP encryption for all of your e-mails. Don't give away private keys and keep a tight network. You can be friends with people online, but never take the deepest steps until you've actually met someone face to face, and can confirm they're trustworthy.

Almost counter-intuitively - keep a camera on yourself when you're at work. Consider a few at home as well, mostly for monitoring outside, which are hooked up to a computer with no internet connection. It has a slight risk associated with it, but the benefit of being able to have video evidence in court should something go wrong, greatly outweighs the danger. On a similar note, consider a carry permit if one is available in your state, and make your house at the very least is well protected.

The concept of a cash free world is a meme. Physical, paper money is the one thing that's very difficult for the state to keep track of. When purchasing anything, use cash. Try to avoid purchases of more than about $80 whenever possible. Don't go through a big bank - join a credit union or other smaller organization, and do your banking through them, including your credit card (the thing you have for major purchases - and do keep a good credit). Admittedly this is less OpSec and more a matter of not getting yourself screwed over.

In short: There are a few circumstances where abandoning OpSec can be useful. When you're in a Trump-like position, with money and influence, and a public face large enough that they can't fake your suicide or risk an assassination attempt, then you can act much more freely. Having full documentation on yourself can also sometimes have benefits greater than blocking it out. But that should be the minority stance - not the majority.

The simple fact is, the more people practicing good OpSec, the better. The more people encrypting emails, sending calls through apps that help block things off, that use TOR - the harder the job gets for the IC. One encrypted message takes the same effort as 1000 unsecure messages. Don't make SIGINT's job any easier - protect yourself, and encourage others to do the same.
This is both possible and impossible at the same time.

Emotions are not independent existences. Every emotion can at its most basic core be classified as a reaction to something else. People people feel sadness, fear, and the like in response to certain distresses. They feel happiness, pride, and the like in response to certain things that they consider positives. Based on these feelings, people will then react as their emotions dictate. You can call it what you want - human nature, a biological imperative, the influence of demons, etc. But what cannot be denied is the absolute nature of emotions as a reaction.

In this regard, you cannot create a new emotion, but a new emotion can be created. This is because at a fundamental level, the answer is not the creation of a new emotion, but the creation of a new action which is capable of causing a new reaction. And even this is not so simple, because circumstances also play a factor. "A person dies" is considered a "sad" thing to many - but "this person dies" could mean sadness from his wife, pride from the young gang-banger to whom he was a 'first kill', anger from his brother, and happiness from a man whom he despised. And in all of these, a mix, along with other emotions not listed.

The thought experiment is therefore flawed in that it is missing this core. Before the new emotion is to be created, both "the action which elicits the emotion" and "the circumstances which cause the emotion to be elicited" must be defined. Once you have done this, it becomes possible to postulate what new sort of emotion is the result. Or more specifically - you would be able to look at the reaction, and in doing so, give a name to it. And that would be your emotion.

Incidentally, this is to an extent what the end-game of Christian theology speaks of when discussing Heaven. The idea being that "having left the mortal body" is the action, "absolute closeness to God" is the circumstance, and that the emotional state is something we can only approximate. Some people use "happiness" as a descriptor, but the Buddhists give a much better definition - enlightenment. In this case, the absolute and most purest form of it. Of course, even then, it's arguable whether or not this is an "emotion" or a "state" from which other emotions may be derived.

False - conventional OpSec blocks you off from social media. This is not the same thing as social paralysis, no matter how much Silicon Value would like to deceive you into thinking so. The majority of social interaction is still happening in the real, physical world, and it is there where the majority of major impacts happen.

A few ways that (You) can actively participate in the world:

1. Join a local fraternal organization. The Masons are an example but are far from the only one. These groups give you access to a very strong network, and in some cases can even serve as a second home. Military veterans can take advantage of veteran groups as well. All of these groups provide a very strong base of people - usually with a greater percentage of whites, if not completely white - who you can get to know, and perhaps even influence. They also tend to be very active in the community, allowing you to get to know even more people.

2. Organize events with your co-workers. Go out and do a bowling night together or some other inane thing. Go out to the bar. Hang out a lot with people that you find match you in some regards. Influence them. Use a higher position in a company - or just start a business yourself - to have an impact. Let someone else manage social media/PR stuff, and keep all contacts to yourself done via business e-mail and the like.

3. Work at a university. Research and instruction alike are both good places for someone to hide themselves away while still getting a lot of good work done, and having a lot of people around they can influence. Research is also nice in that it gives you the chance to look into things and get them published where your name is just one of many, allowing you to blend into the background, while your work is free to live on its own.

4. Church. Self-explanatory, applying the same concepts from above.

Unless you are planning on pursuing a career in politics or to become a celebrity, you do not need to have a public image. This is not social paralysis - it's social liberation. Maintaining a fake image of yourself requires extra work. Keeping your true image clean is nearly impossible if someone really wants to spread dirt. Not having an image at all, and merely letting your work speak for itself - or better yet, influencing other people to spread it for you - is the ideal you should actively be striving to reach.

And if you are planning on going into politics? You're going to want to keep all of that shit bottled up inside, leaking out only what you need to steal yourself an election. Play it the way JFK did - and try not to let yourself get blasted in the same manner. You probably will anyways, of course, but only go about handling that shit when the time comes.

The idea of security causing isolation and social paralysis is a meme. If you actually take more than a few seconds to think about it, you'll come to understand that good OpSec doesn't block you off from doing absolutely anything that a reasonable person wouldn't be doing. The very worst thing that can happen is that you don't know about whatever meme happens to be circulating around on Facebook that people are sending each other - and if your social skills are so poor that you need that sort of crutch, you're not going to be able to help the cause much anyways.

The basics of higher learnings begins with a simple concept, emotions = energy and by emotions, we are set free and enslaved totally. But what are they? The fedora will tell you that they are base chemical reactions, just small blips of electricity racing across a meatbrain and down through the rest of the sac of meat. And while that is how the body manifests emotion, emotion is a little more than that. 

We are familiar with the word demon. In higher learnings, demons are negative emotions (unrighteous anger, sadness) that haunt us. And when we feel such emotions, we act in a way that is not normal protocol. In a way, someone who is suffering from depression could be said to be demon possessed. This harkens back to Medieval times, where mental illness like schizophrenia was considered demon possession. In modern times,the assertion of demonic possession in the place of mental illness is laughably outdated. But from this perspective of understanding (demons = bad feels), then the old fashioned thought still exists, it's just under different terms. (And we know about the power of language from the Oera Linda Books, language = culture)

What is the purpose of a demon then? As it turns out, the demons are specifically set up in the system to prevent the rise of a God figure. Which seems contradictory to the current system of evolution (atoms -> molecules -> chemicals -> minerals -> bacteria -> plant -> fish -> reptile -> mammal -> ape -> human -> the white man -> beyond), which is one that fosters unending and unlimited growth. To some, the purpose of demon would be to create a negative feedback loop (Despair Code as the meme is called), which would lock the victim in a trap and drain their loosh. To use the human as a battery so to speak. While the system is good, there are outside forces that will act within it. 

But what about the positive emotions? Jealousy, ambition, confidence, etc.? If we are familiar with the concept of a demon, then we call these angels. Where as the negative emotions will lead one to the negative thought feedback loop, positives will lead one to a feedback loop that fosters growth and truth. Much like demonic possession, angelic possession will make you act in a way that is not part of your norms. 

But why would the system have positive and negative emotions? Another basic concept of higher learning is "The Strong Force Eats the Weak Force (or more accurately, The Positive Eats the Negative)" The strong will always beat the weak. It is in the nature of both. The strong will always defeat, it is in the nature of the strong. It is the nature of the weak to always be defeated. Treat it like a test, if you are devoured by the evil, then you were weak. If you overcame, you were strong. If you were trapped in the cycle of samsara, you were too weak. If you escape samsara, you were strong enough to overcome. The system fosters strength, but you must strong to use it and overcome. (For what it's worth, even in the event of total white genocide, the world would keep spawning white people. It's going to be hilarious shit when the breeding results in people with white traits being considered beautiful, so the beautiful people keep white traits going. Which results in mutts getting less muttier as time goes on. Even in the event of total kike takeover, the inherent rebellious nature of man will destroy their special crystal castles, assuming the kikes don't kike themselves. you stupid demonic possessed idiots. Your whole race is nothing but demons masking as men.)

So the emotion you wish to seek OP is not one that has yet to be created (as the emotions themselves are from beyond space and time), but one that has been forgotten by humanity. And I wonder (((who))) is behind that forgetting? And I wonder what language the gods themselves spoke.
What you've suggested is fine for conventional approaches to politics, but they are naturally limited as conventions. They are predictable and controlled. And if an anon were to start having a substantial effect through one of these avenues, they already know how to shut them down.

We're talking paradigm change. Going from shying away from being recorded, to making those records work for you. The use of data for punitive control and expropriation is a 20th century mindset.  are stupid (<125 IQ) and only know how to follow rules someone else wrote for them. This is about changing the paradigm so they are forced to react to anons, rather than anons being reactive.

Tactics like OP is discussing represent the 21st century's form of civil disobedience. It doesn't even break the law, but by intentionally acting against the standards and expectations established by elites for their own purposes, some power is restored to the individual over how data about them is used.


Doing this on an individual level is effectively meaningless. It's a greater amount of effort for a lower amount of reward on a persona level. In terms of facilitating secure connections, it's nearly useless. And yet, you are correct in stating it can be used as a sort of civil disobedience - but not in the way you're proposing.

If you truly want to poison the well of data collection, you need to not merely make some of the data bad, you need to make it such that all of it appears to be bad. Once data collection takes on the appearance of being meaningless, it loses much of its value. In this case, a carefully cultivated fake persona shares value with a shoddily thrown together one - and is of much lower value than mass produced ones.

Effectively, if you want to weaponize this, the answer is here:

Except taken to the next level. Not merely one "liberal roommate", but the creation of multiple fake personas. Envision, perhaps, an artificial intelligence that can use just a name and perhaps some images skimmed from Facebook to create fake people by the dozens. Ones that an attentive human could tell were fake, but would appear to all algorithms as real. And then the next step - making this known, while leaving no way to stop it.

At that point, once it becomes known that data collection is a poisoned field, its value begins to drastically lower.
The idea is defeated the moment you consider that real life activity would be used to correlate online ones to validate data. That's why they absolutely love smartphones and IoT smart technology and want to implement 5G. You can also find indirect ways to correlate data validity, like using Google Streetview in conjunction with other data sources to predict an area's voting demographic (which was done by Standford University with an AI). That makes identifying data poisoners or suspicious people much easier.

For instance the moment facial recognition software on a surveillance network notices a fake online persona not corresponding to a real person's activity, they can immediately figure out that the data is poisoned, and focus their efforts to figure out who or what the poisoner really is. To truly evade such a measure would require intimate knowledge of the target's habits and timing activities just right. In that case another approach would be infecting target devices with AI viruses which generate poisoned data by spying on the target and mimicking their behavior while doing so. Bear in mind the government and corporations could do the exact same thing to humanize AI shill personas almost flawlessly.
The skepticism of the Chans is what I love the most.  Masks within masks, schemes within schemes… the person behind it all might as well not exist since all that matters is what is within the text and nothing more.  The natural gnostic impulses that arise in such an environment are something I would like the world to have, but that's a lower priority goal of mine at this time.

I have been told many times that I'm a natural storyteller.  It's useful and fun, but it helps you understand that showing people something new isn't as simple as just typing text and dumping it on a screen.  People need to think about what is going on here and, most importantly of all, explore what they discover on their own.  I can't hold everyone's hand all the time, I can only reveal insights that move things along accordingly.

I'd also recommend a deeper dive than what you found as my internet presence dates back to well before 2000.  It's not surface level stuff, but with some elbow grease, you can find the good stuff.

If a house is on fire, I say "Put out the fire!" and people will scour about, looking for heat and flame to douse.  They can successfully put out the fire, but they have not changed how flammable the house is.  To safeguard against future fires, one would have to be eternally vigilant.  We have all kinds of tools and mastery of science and cameras and people everywhere, and still fire spreads quite regularly.  Fire isn't even intelligent and eternal vigilance still can't prevent the house from occasionally burning!  Dumb fire is already a problem, but now imagine a fire that is not only intelligent, but charming, seductive, adaptive, cunning, silent, and ruthless.  That kind of fire is going to be off-the-charts impossible to stop.

As you might be able to deduce, I am talking about the ancient meme of usury.  Once unleashed, it is contagious and it is all-consuming.  It is subtle and magnanimous at the same time.  It burns out everything it touches and even those who were harmed by it still resurrect it over and over again and have done so for 5000 years.  The tribe has codified this cycle into their religious doctrines; a sort of primitive but effective form of civilizational alchemy.

You can say the house is on fire as much you like.  You can stamp out the fire where ever you see it.  You have offered nothing to reduce the flammability of it all.  When I have done what I set out to do, we will be able to run from the fire.  Usury has no power when there are no humans around to enslave.
It helps to understand the history of powerful people.  You'll see how they fail over and over again throughout history.  Often, they themselves are trapped in a cycle or power they did not invent and cannot escape.  The truth they loathe is that power is a circle.  The deception they are susceptible to is that power is an escalating line.

Civil Rights provides no meaningful solution to AI or robotics or new emotions or posthumans other than a militant "tolerance" that deliberately eats away at financial foundations of a nation espousing those ideals.  It only sees reality in terms of political identity.  It is myopic and inadequate for what is coming.

It's a shame you aren't currently able to piece together the Girard play.  You're sharp enough.  I suspect you'll get it in time.  I have left many, many clues and alluded to it fairly heavily.
Central banks feed primary dealers.  Primary dealers control loans.  Loans control businesses.  Businesses control employees.  Employees control consumption.  Consumption controls profit.  Profit controls interest payments.  Interest payments controls primary dealers.  Round and round we go.

If that consumption part falters, central banks inject money to primary dealers who invest in cryptocurrency instead of the above cycle.  And if a law is passed that forbids that type of usage, primary dealers invest in businesses who, in turn, invest in cryptocurrency instead.  And if a law is passed that forbids that type of usage, businesses invest in employees who spend that money on cryptocurrency instead of retirement funds that can be inevitably put back into the cycle.  All three tiers allocate funds away from consumption and into crypto.

Yes, everything is still in tact and people are playing by agreed upon rules.  When the next ground of bailouts hit, crypto is going to significantly cripple the central banks ability to influence this cycle to the point of uselessness.  They're dead men walking and they're doing everything in their power to prevent the next bailout.  They will fail in that effort.
Perception, in my usage in my text, refers to how a person thinks. Not the particular act of sensing or observing information, rather the structure of a person's mind that then interprets that data. Perceiving, psychologically speaking, is the act of interpreting data. A less formal way to put it is that perception is simply the way a person thinks. Consider two people staring at a cloud. One person thinks it's a pig, the other thinks it's a slug. The cloud is an objective piece of information yet the individuals' interpretation of said cloud differs. The way one person sees and thinks about the cloud differs from the other. The phenomenon responsible for their differences is their perception i.e. how they think.

This applies to emotions as well. Consider the difference between an anon and a normie when viewing gore. The normie most likely will be repulsed, feeling disgusted. Anon on the other hand will feel no such things. This is because of how their interpretation of information differs. 

So to reword my previous text, emotions are consequent to how we think. Thus, if you want to change how you feel about something, you have to change how you think about it. Further, if you want to feel something new altogether, you have to think in a novel way. Developing novel ways of thinking, by nature, takes priority over feeling new things or experiencing new emotions because of the relationship I've described (emotions consequent of thinking). Therefore, I believe in order to reach your goal, you ought to refine it under this understanding.

There are clear examples of how the different ways people think can lead to encryption. For instance, anytime you have to explain a word to someone they don't know of. By having a large and versatile vocabulary you distance yourself from those you would not want to understand. Of course this is just an example and not the end goal. 

A more accurate example to highlight the disconnect that occurs between individuals would be "le current year". Here we have individuals who's thinking are so devolved they literally cannot comprehend the arguments presented to them. 

This leads into a question I have for you concerning your methodology. Why are you focused on the fight or flight mechanism when doing so is counter intuitive? Your end goal is progressing man, to further his evolution. Yet, the fight or flight mechanism is a primitive function in our being. It's akin to wanting advance technology by reverting back to using rocks as hammers. So again, I think you might have a faulty premise or two concerning human nature. 

As I said before, man's purpose to is refine and use his gift of intellect and rationality and by doing so he will be able to overcome the obstacles and limits inherit within himself. The goal of the opposition is to stop this at all cost. Consider Franz Boas' and other jews involvement in the destruction of modern anthropological study. Or the secular church within psychology spearhead by Freud and the jewish psychoanalytic movement. When one has the ability to question what they're told they become uncontrollable. Thus, (((their))) goal is to literally prevent man from doing so.
Yes. Intellect is limited by and enslaved to emotion. Even the most brilliant is enslaved to his basic nature and motivations. Finding new emotions means new motives related to new environment and new potential actions. It means ascending the human perspective. The highest feat of intellect may be to defeat itself and lay itself in submission to reality.  This means what we are doing is bridging heaven and earth. 

Again cultivating organic mind to mind capacity and the hivemind is probably the bridge.

Basically, while some emotions may seem to be dualistic in nature (such as happy and sad), thus some anons are thinking creating new emotions must come in pairs, this is no more than a simple misconception caused by improper terminology. The proper way to label the apparent relationship between inverse emotions is that they contrast one another. Basically it goes like this, happiness feels super good when you've been really sad and vice versa. However, could you be happy without ever feeling sadness in the first place? Of course. Emotions are mere feelings that are caused by either desires or our interpretation to our self and our environment.

The dualism concept arises from Aristotle's theory on virtue (not emotion). He described a virtue as the mean between two extremes e.g. love would be the mean between obsession and apathy (this is just an example, not necessarily true). Thus the confusion occurs as many virtues, especially in post modern society, get labeled as emotions, such as love. Thus this debate gets triggered by association.

All in all, I'm just trying to clear up and possibly explain the misunderstanding that seems to be going on here. 

Yes, altering the direction and focus of cognition can change how we encode emotional data into our behavior.  But even with a finely tuned focus, we still often encode emotional data into behavior that occurs beyond conscious cognition.  Heart rate, eye blink frequency, sweating… these are behaviors you emit without your distinct conscious approval and they do encode emotional data into the behavior they generate.  Sometimes, they even betray our cognition without us even knowing it!

The fight or flight mechanism is, indeed, ancient and very suppressed as of now.  In our current world, the operating paradigm is “fight or capitulate”.  You either engage in self-balancing violence or you intentionally serve who can inflict violence upon you long enough in the hopes you get a chance to engage in self-balancing violence against them.  saw how their child-like worship of easily-digestible revenge fantasies turned them into the type of animals that ironically justified their bondage.  I was the mathematical type of Marxist, the kind that could recite the influence of Gresham's Law on Das Kapital or could explain how gold distribution throughout the British empire paradoxically limited their imperial ambitions.  (The more land you conquer, the more gold you liberate, the more available gold becomes, the cheaper gold becomes, the more gold you need to pay for a conquering army, the less land you conquer, and eventually, you settle for geopolitical borders because that is as far as your purse could take you)  I never believed in infantile narratives like the rich vs. the poor.  I always believed it was the rich vs. the rich and the poor get suckered in.  I still do to a degree, ergo, my concern for the “fight or capitulate” model.

If ethnostates and tradition and cultural preservation are your imperatives, “fight or flight” is not only a way to establish them, but a way to ensure the powerful you flee will never enslave you again.  I want a planet dedicated to some weird SJW Marxist interpretation of twinkies.  I want a /pol/ planet where the economy is based on how the descendant of Tay values a shitpost.  Whatever works works.  When I look at the stars, I can envision millions of civilizations too busy scratching out a living upon extremely harsh conditions to invade one another.  Your enemy will become nature itself, and the only way to defeat it is through each other.  In doing so, the human condition is restored to a domain it excels at: interpreting the very edge of chaos.

Progressing man is a linear trap.  Progress is always circular and we rotate who pays for the sins of everyone else.  Civil Rights is a highly efficient means of managing this rotation, but I no longer have any interest in pretending circles are lines.  I don't think any of us do.

For clarification, the destruction of Civil Rights legislation isn't necessarily a repeal of the legislation.  In fact, DOJ and AGs and DAs willfully turning a blind of an eye to the types of cyber phrenological violations I have pointed out is, technically, behavior I am seeking from them.  That's the legal side and you are correct in pointing it out.  The legal side, in my opinion, is always the last to fall, however, and is usually done as a byproduct of combined pressures from other domains.

To initiate the destruction of Civil Rights legislation, I am targeting the cult of Civil Rights first and foremost.  The essence behind it.  The collective utopia it describes and the spiritual journey individuals embark upon when they drink from that magical Kool-Aid of equality.  I want Silicon Valley employees to personally justify to themselves why they ought to keep building the means of enforcing cyber phrenology.  I want database and internal document leaks flooding from well-meaning “resisters who want to do the right thing” being aggressively blocked by journalists who get their spiritual marching orders from Civil Rights cult leaders.  I want NSA employees to have a crisis of conscious as their techniques become more reckless in the impossible hope to gain an advantage against adversaries in meta data battle space.  I want the tech talent that makes the panopticon possible to make a personal moral decision about their role in destroying the Civil Rights of those they claim to want to protect.  In short, I want Winston and O'Brien to meet.  Many times.

Cyber phrenology is the redpill that critical bluepilled tech actors cannot shake.  I want the very soul of that Civil Rights cult cracked into fragments of itself.  And the best part is that, because all of this is now public, they will know what the desired outcome is and shout, “We must ignore this because of our need for political expedience and continue to fight the nazi frogs!  Let collateral damage be damned!” which will only exacerbate the severity of their phrenological actions and take out more incorrect targets… all while so-called Civil Rights advocates and federal agencies intentionally sit on the sidelines and ruin their credibility.  Eventually, political pressures will boil over and perhaps people like our friendly neighborhood lawanon  might stake a claim. :D  But long before that, Silicon Valley will hemorrhage at the worker level.  With this approach, SJWs can become our weapons against our opponents.

The technicalities of the state of Civil Rights legislation will come last.

NSA is already showing signs of susceptibility to this form of attack.

Our behavior shapes how photons reflect off of our bodies, and emotional data is, in turn, encoded into the photons to be received by an observing eye.  We already transfer emotional data as fast as the universe will allow and have since primitive brightness receptors evolved.  Symbols of other social members exist within our head and, as we simulate the person based on those symbols, we can correctly guess the quality of emotional data that may appear within future behavior of that person.  This sort of guesswork is essential to our survival and is a core part of the pattern detection that makes logic, math, and science possible.

Emotions already encode across all time domains.

Their core mistake is aiming to use AI for censorship, which in turn sabotages their own data analysis by limiting environmental factors it can learn from. Their current tools will never be 100% effective no matter what they try due to this problem of self-interference. Even shadow-banning won't work because an AI can't learn evolving cues argument progression would provide. To put it simply, they can't eat their cake and have it too when it comes to censorship and datamining respectively.

The future cyber war would be focused on data integrity and validation, instigating poisoning and antidote methods to manipulate the reliability and exposure of data. You're sort of seeing the beginnings of it with adversarial attacks being tested on neural networks. This is slightly different because in this case you're developing methods to directly target how the neural network itself behaves in order to exploit it, instead of just feeding them misleading data to throw their operators off.
he vast majority of people observe the world using Newtonian physics, even if they don't realize it. As in, something exists if I can hear/smell/see it, if something has mass, it must be real. But Newtonian physics begins to falter when you start getting into nuclear and astrophysics, so rather than defining things based on mass, we begin to define everything using energy. An object is solid because the atomic forces of said object are so powerful they refuse to allow other particles pass through it. When two solid objects touch, their electrons repel the electrons of the opposing object, thus repelling the atoms within said objects, even if just far enough on the atomic scale that on our macroscopic scale it appears they are butted together. It is these atomic energies that shape and control matter, and from E=Mc^2, all energy has mass, but inversely, all mass has energy is equally true. A fedora tipper may say we are just biochemical reactions in a meat husk, but what if we go beyond that? If all matter has mass, and all mass has energy, or rather, all mass IS energy, then are we not sentient energy? And if we are sentient energy, could we change the form of energy we exist in? This theory of thinking could also sufficiently explain afterlife, ghosts, chakras, chi, aura, or any other kind of spiritual energy often derided by Newtonian physics. If we could alter our perceptions from mass-centric existence to energy-centric existence, understand how to control and change our energies, then theoretically nothing binds us to this planet anymore or to the machinations of the Jew. 

I believe this ties back to the creation of man, and how we were made in God's image. If God has the power to create things as such as he did, then surely he must also exist as a being of energy rather than one of mass (As in is limited by energy physics rather than Newtonian physics, not necessarily saying God has no mass). Thus it would be reasonable to conclude that man once had, or was intended to have, a similar ability. I still don't understand how this relates to emotion, but there is also the strong possibility I'm way off base and entirely wrong.
The key to successful metadata insurgency is scale.  To get there, we must focus on the individual level.

Creating accounts and engaging in metadata spoofing behavior until you see ads for the desired demographic is the most important step.  This will be manual at first until people find tricks and shortcuts and begin sharing them.

Once minor success is had, advertisers, black hats, and political operatives will want a piece of what you are doing and you will easily secure a revenue stream to refine and achieve even greater efficiency.  By that time, the intended recipients will have prepared the groundwork for you.

I subscribe to a unique theory of what I call Schrodinger’s nation security: When all panopticons observe a target, that target is both a threat and an asset at the same time.

That means 8Chan is the first order recipients of my theory and you have done very well with the Jewdar approach.  The global observers who collect data on 8Chan are my second order (and intended) recipients who will have no choice but to take these efforts to the necessary scale.  Cyber warfare requires perpetual escalation and I have given them a superior weapon.  Free of charge.  For now.

Over time, Google's complete failure to understand what AI is (and, by extension, emotions) will compound and it will be much more difficult for them to hide their incompetency as insiders, saboteurs, and former supporters begin to sour.  Damore and O'Keefe will soften them, but the SJWs priest class who runs their corporate culture will only double down in a safe “resistance-friendly” manner.

They lost before they even started. The problem is that google is too big to innovate. They have adopted the GE failed business model and did not realize it. Sure they have some smart people, good talent, and good tech and tons of money. But they are held back by politics and design by  committee. By the time they get started, the project will be obsolete. This is why they will lose. They will lose because they became the very thing they claimed to hate. 

The 1960s until the period just after GamerGate is full of rampant abuses of mass media to promote a cheap labor regime.  Lying and changing and hiding facts is the very least they will do.  They will aggressively jam bullshit perspectives down your through, normalize self-destruction, and pit your peers against you for not repeating what their media machines say.  What makes things different now is that YOU can exploit these efforts as well.

Remember: the emotional addicts and the feelies use empathy as their immutable compass of all moral decision.  In the old days, this empathy is subjectively established via experience… but centrally coordinated via mass media, keeping the 1960s-now regime firmly in tact.  With Butterfly War, you can hijack the legitimacy of that false empathy.  How can an “empathic soul” who loves all things human and love and equality justify protecting the rights of a bot wearing a human disguise while their living flesh neighbors suffer?  And more importantly, how long will that “empathic soul” be allowed to have a bullhorn when they consistantly back the wrong bot?

Butterfly War is an industrial-scale poisoning of the foundation of modern humanism…. even if no one makes a single bot.  The idea that it's possible is enough to send fear directly into the heart of the mouth component of the dominant methodology of social control.

As the social justice “empathic soul” is forced to defend their paycheck and their nerd culture and their progressive mythology, they become more psychopathic in their rationalization on why cyber phrenology is a necessary evil.

The power of the tech worker is in their leaks.  The vast majority of Google and Facebook employs are amoral ladder-climbing salarymen.  The Obama years were a hell of a drug and they loaded themselves up to the gills with social justice activists at all layers of the organization.  With the Butterfly War, those activists and their penchant for endless purity spiraling will metastasize. 

Ask yourself: Why are those on the “right side of history” and who love “speaking truth to power” never leak anything about Google or Facebook?  Odd, right?  Well, that's going to change soon.

Even the self-proclaimed alchemist George Soros has recently had a change of heart at Davos.  His models on direct democracy work in a world where TV was god.  He experimented with social media and he ran face first into the anti-SJW backlash caused by our efforts.  When Milo made noises to try to recover his image via Playboy, I gave an advanced copy of how the Butterfly War worked on a distant node of his OpenSociety network before I put it on CultState.  :D

All the Butterfly War needs is one insider to admit that civil rights violations are rampant in big data.  Just one.  The whole house of cards will come down since civil rights violations can be vigorously pursued by the executive branch up to and including a fully authorized deployment of the military.  (Thank you, Little Rock Nine!)


Have you ever noticed physical surveillance though ? 

I've had private eyes sent after me and I've caught them before.  I also suspect someone has been in my home without my approval as of a few months ago.  This is the price I have to pay.  I am part of the generation that wrote all of the code for social media and their many panopticons and to pretend as if I can hide from them actually weakens my efforts.

> Do you have a reading list and did you ever read Ted Kaczysnki ? 

I was first exposed to Kaczynski in my late teens.  The spirit of Industrial Society and its Future was not only correct, but predictive.  His activism was insufficient and ineffective.  Furthermore, his trial establish an investigative precedent of utilizing linguistic forensics, a technique of dubious rigor that was never tested at the time due to a guilty plea.  These days, properly trained AI can manufacture linguistic forensic evidence very easily.  I'm sure that court case isn't too far off from happening.

Concern trolling has its place and is contextually useful.  Good luck with your efforts, anon.  Nothing drives the snobs into a rage harder than being forced to admit fallible humans are also their equals.

My timing is partially my own and partially owned by the forces I target.  I do what I can when I can, but do understand that when you hunt dragons of this caliber, it takes years of preparation, and most of that preparation is focused on studying your own motives and biases and faults because, in the end, when they come for revenge, it will be those factors that assist them.

Qanon, true or not, is representative of something I had previous mentioned that I am currently relying on.  It is inspiring to see there are people within the system willing to finally go after the Saudis.  I just hope Trump can put the pressure on them and get them to fold.  A good chunk of my plans depend on that and Butterfly War is my contribution to influence those negotiations.  I hope it works as intended.  The alternative is not pleasant for most of us.

Nature is rejected, because nature is positivism. Nature is barbarism. Nature, ultimately leads to the same conditions that forced man to arise above his animal state. Man must be kept separate from nature, and his environment must be changed to keep his mind on his newfound suffering. 

That's very correct and a key motivator behind other projects of mine.  Sadly, my definition of nature isn't utopian or idyllic.  Instead, it is the empty, unforgiving void of space and harsh planets where a single mistake kills you and everyone in your habitat.  This is similar to arctic and desert cultures, both of which have had significant impacts on our collective journey thus far.  We have long histories and texts that explain how to endure in such places.

If our destiny is the stars, we will have to change how we think about ourselves.  What you are describing is the lost emotions that dominated antiquity.  These emotions will be essential to resurrect at the later phases of my operation and, if all goes sort of well, those lost emotions will resurrect on their own out of necessity.

If another anon wishes to make one, have at it.  I'm treating this one as an AMA for now and have little interest in a fecund spreading of the word.

It's possible that the medium of communication may have a heavy influence on underlying emotional hardware..  I certainly don’t rule out that.

That's very correct and a key motivator behind other projects of mine.  Sadly, my definition of nature isn't utopian or idyllic.  Instead, it is the empty, unforgiving void of space and harsh planets where a single mistake kills you and everyone in your habitat.  This is similar to arctic and desert cultures, both of which have had significant impacts on our collective journey thus far.  We have long histories and texts that explain how to endure in such places.

If our destiny is the stars, we will have to change how we think about ourselves.  What you are describing is the lost emotions that dominated antiquity.  These emotions will be essential to resurrect at the later phases of my operation and, if all goes sort of well, those lost emotions will resurrect on their own out of necessity.

Our destiny cannot be the stars until the Weltanschauung is restored, in which case, will prepare the races of humanity for their future of prosperity in the stars. 

The Germanic EN-S worldview of "We will create our own destiny without the need of others" was fueled by this emotion that you are looking for, because it will transform the current man from the position of "how we think about ourselves" to "how do we think for ourselves." 


Someday we should have a beverage atop a mountain.

The idea is nice and very smart, but i think will backfire and wont have the outcome you want.

Also, i disagree with the idea of needing to flight, therefore needing to become a hive mind and creating a new emotion and for some reason going to space (i believe we can mantain our individuality and still advance).

I do that because i think mankind will simple fight its way to the truth, against the evil who consumes society, in a spontaneous and free way, realizing what is the real shit and overcoming the fears produced by manufactured motives.

I believe that because i think:

The majority of people dont like having their lifes being regulated, majority of people dont like the points of the left and social justice. But we live in a world where majority of people believe in a reality created by media (social network, MSM, government) where they believe that most of the people love social justice and leftism shit and they fear that, they fear a manufactured reality and so they fear to talk. But that reality is collapsing slowly. There is a entire book about this effect of mass alienating ongoing today, just need to search.

I understand the governments and other big institutions by the idea of the meta-intelligence proposed, so this big powerful people you talk are just part of a system who become to big and developed a meta-intelligence, but it needs to self-preserve and so, will not be forced by individuals inside it to fallow a pat of death, not easily 

So, if you understand my reasoning, i believe that we cant run, if we run we are going to die, or else the stem will never feel threatened, and this powerful people who got lots of power in this institutions will keep pushing they shit until kill us all. So we need to fight, fight to bring normal people out of the manufactured reality, away from the fear, to the truth, that the law has no power against the people, not the elites, not the jews, the state cant do nothing when its people is all united to stand against the lies of the hired leftists. It the only way to take our freedom back, its the only way for other countries have the chance to fight for a true free country without kikes. And most important, the system who feels threatened will end choosing to avoid death paths or else, if pushed by the kikes, will inevitably commit eat itself (this is already happening).


Regardless of the structure of our universe, the fact remains that an emotion is equally as real in a dream, simulation or waking life.  For years or decades now I've tried to share a certain emotion I have, I described it as "something like a fusion of wisdom, resolve, understanding, caring and an orgasm".  I've spent a lot of time and focus trying to figure out how to share this emotion, but thus far I've been unable to.  I can try to describe it, like describing the color of ultraviolet fusion of white and purple, but closer to white and sparkly but unless you've had the experience yourself it's just words.  Eventually I stopped trying to describe the emotion or do anything to provoke it in others, but I still use it daily.  It actually overrides fear, and in fact consumes it as an energy source.  Also it's pleasant enough that it supplants the desire for meaningless sex, because it's more enjoyable, larger in scope and more sustainable than an orgasm.  A lot of times I just let it run at a moderate level as I go about my daily business, I can only imagine that if one could see energy fields I'd look a bit out of place.  

 attempt to reconstruct the pressures, contributors, and events that led to the new emotion thought experiment.  I'm writing up what I can recall each night and soon, I'll release the body of work for you all.  It should help establish a comprehensive context.


To understand the wetware mechanics of understanding: Psychopharmacology, neurology, social biology

To understand how we understand understanding: psychology, sociology, economics (game theory-centric), European history (1500 and up), ancient history (Babylon and up)

To understand how to organize your understanding: philosophy, epistemology, computer science (specifically, lexers, abstract syntax trees, and functional programming)

To understand how non-human processes understand understanding: machine learning/data science and all of the prerequisite mathematics, animal behavioral studies, theology, political science

AI could can read all signals responsible for market movement and extract the emotion behind those signals to predict where the market was going to go next.  Such a machine would be quickly repurposed as a platform to provide civil-war-as-a-service to any nation.  I had envisioned that, instead of invading Iraq, the machine would calculate a convoluted investment pathway that bounces all over the world, disguised as legit macroeconomic activity, and results in the target nation's currency being completely destabilized.  No WTO violations, no IMF penalties, no aggressive PR flak, no upsetting delicate diplomatic ties, and no America being required to invade everyone everywhere all the damned time.

That is a concept I have invented to explain a problem with AI development today.  The naive assumption of a Kurzweilian singularity assumes exponential scaling of mythical neural network derivative.  Mitosis is the original exponential technology and neurons don't go through it despite having a nucleus.  Surely, evolution would have rewarded exponential scaling of cognitive hardware to solve problems of survival, correct?  That's effectively what we are saying when we assume the singularity to be inevitable… but biology has played a different game regarding neurons.  Exponential scaling is not on the menu because the more you scale cognitive ability, the more energy it takes to maintain it.  If you have a neuron for every photon a single light bulb could generate per second, you would die of asphyxiation due to all oxygen you breathe being routed to your brain.  For the numbers, a 100W light bulb generates 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 photons per second, but the human brain only has 86,000,000,000 neurons.  You aren't seeing all of reality, but biology has determined that accurate representations of reality it is not necessary for survival.


This problem first presented itself in our robotics research.  Adding more sensors and CPUs to a robot doesn't make it better suited to perform meaningful behavior.

The REAL issue is knowing what emotions AREN'T and how they're actually motivated (as in, moved; removing the E out of E-MOTION). It's more evolution than otherwise (which is funny that you mention it). I think you are in fact asking how to create new emotions in the collective, which its conscience permeates around us as some sort of field and emissions. Have I ruined the magic?

An exotic dancer: sexy, persecuted, wanted, capable, self-reliant. Already the 'thoughts' are provoked! Her key suggestion somehow sees into your soul and realizes that you are in fact a sociopath, Oy Vey! Such a connection! You are the answer to your own question! Such flittering flattery. You are a special prize that can recognize what's alien and rejected inside of her, s-senpai ~ ! Flail around with me baka ~~

Because an exotic dancer doesn't become one being a prime manifestation of the well-adjusted values and character ambitions of popular society, does she? There's something ROGUE about her. She's MISUNDERSTOOD LIKE SOCIOPATH-SENPAI, AMIRIGHT? Cool cat anon here is the SIGMA to the ALPHA, like a black panther to the lion, finding a nice pussy cat to call mate. I'm ready for a new 'perspective'!

Ready to feel the emotional impact of some new, evolutionary novel circumstance or experience… I can see why the exotic dancer's suggestion hit you harder than others. In a limited sense, you 'mimicked' something by someone ostracized and viscerally attractive, in which a category of people possibly even more ostracized were named in response, coyly in direct relation to whom she was speaking (you), whilst simultaneously being placed in a positive connotation (ooh ~! I think she's flirting!), and she was mimicking you meanwhile since she imbibed you in good mindful conversation and thought experiments by pulling the answer from right in front of her ("You were what you were looking for all along ~ !"). The situation was a sort of fractal palindrome lubricated by pre-cum.

So the REAL question is, "How do I lubricate a reorganization of mental-concepts-positions-attitudes-as-abstracted-emotion-as-abstracted-sexuality-as-abstracted-instincts into one(s) I like more, one that is much more aesthetically attractive to my evolutionary path? Aesthetics being a higher order of data processing for higher volumes of data."

Fitness, Preparedness, Contact. Dimensions as Point, Line, Shape, Volume. Pythagorean philosophy. These have been circulating in my mind.


Keeping the totality of emotions in tighter contact so as to switch between differing passions near-instantaneously will permit meta-emotion network patterns to surface all the easier in consciousness and sustain the pattern long enough to study. Creating a first+ degree meta-emotion network based on what you learn will permit greater sophistication of emotional patterns, thus becoming a dynamo for a new emergent emotion from this novelty. This will permit abstraction to new logic, new math, new science. The new emergent emotion must be made fit and be prepared to fight for life and death in order to become self-sustaining. It's 0D existence will abstract to a mental 3D one, where your new way will be sustained as organs and systems in a body. Recreating this in others will be understood by then. In the emotional layer it will be 3D, and must be… what's the word… inversely abstracted? Incarnated (?) into the physical and instinctual. At this point you will understand it inside and out and will be granularly integrated into your totality and evolutionary pathway.

I see mathematics as a limitation in metamathematical questions and thought experiments. Your question of Create a New Emotion is due to the emotional and mental rigidity of those in STEM and even mathematics; repackaged in a digestible format. "How the do we get these guys to stop being hard nosed dumb ass bastards of whores and be creative and shake the whole of mathematics at its core?" It's a matter of intolerance for philosophy and true abstract thinking. There's no sense of adventure left. No sense of exploration and ingenuity. It's catalyzed by our inhabiting the globe and bringing space down from divine terms to basic physical terms. A crystallization and materialization of the soul or spirit. Spiritual materialism. Even the territory staking you pointed out hits on this point; there's just this oppressing sense of NO WHERE TOGO; over-socialization, scarcity of resources of the entire god damn globe, war war war. It feels like we're all butting shoulders. Just to make the world seem bigger, STEM  have to hit themselves over the head and keep their eyes on the smallest of problems. If you think about micro-problem solving long enough, and look up at the world quickly, you get a sense of air and space to breath for 30 seconds! Then you have to stare at the tiny logic problem apportioned to you (we only have so many you know!) for another 8 hours to get another 30 seconds of relief.

Changing the paradigm of our instincts is where we're heading.