正在加载视频...
视频加载失败
Project Looking Glass? Going Forward in Order to Look Back. Q ---------- I believe Project Looking Glass is/was an ancient AI technology capable of predicting future events - that likely came with very specific "rules" for its' use, and it's user/s. 👉🏼 at some point in human history -... show more
11,511 次观看 • 4 个月前 •via X (Twitter)
0 条评论
暂无评论
原始帖子的评论将显示在这里
![Yuval Harari: We may be 5 years from the end of human history. This is the first time in history where nukes could decide to launch themselves. “Power is shifting from humans to an alien intelligence” INTERVIEWER: You said [AGI was possible] in 3-5 years. So, in 2028, what does the world look like? Mustafa Suleyman (Google DeepMind founder/Inflection CEO): The frontier model companies are going to train models that are over a 1,000x larger than GPT4. We predict … models will be the ability to plan over multiple time horizons ... Artificial Capable AIs - AIs that don't just say things, they can also do things. [Current models have already] … arguably passed the Turing Test. I've proposed a test which involves [AIs] going off and taking $100,000 investment, and over the course of three months, try to set about creating a new product, researching the market, seeing what consumers might like, generating some new images, some blueprints of how to manufacture that product, contacting a manufacturer, getting it made, negotiating the price, dropshipping it, and then ultimately collecting the revenue. And I think that over a 5 year period, it's quite likely that we will have an ACI, an artificial capable intelligence that can do the majority of those tasks autonomously. It will be able to make phone calls to other humans to negotiate. It will be able to call other AIs in order to establish the right sequence in a supply chain, for example. INTERVIEWER: So, Yuval, does this fill you with horror, and do you agree with it? YUVAL NOAH HARARI: I would take it very seriously. When I hear this as a historian, this is the end of human history. Not the end of history, the end of human dominated history. History will continue with somebody else in control, because what we just heard is basically Mustafa telling us that in 5 years, there'll be a technology that can make decisions independently, and that can create new ideas independently. This is the first time in history we confronted something like this. With every previous technology in history, from a stone knife to nuclear bombs - [the technology itself] could not make decisions. The decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima was not made by the atom bomb, it was made by President Truman. Every previous technology in history could only replicate our ideas, like radio, or the printing press. It could make copies and disseminate the music or the poems or the novels that some human wrote. Now, we have a technology that can create completely new ideas, and it can do it at a scale far beyond what humans are capable of.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1734685184593653905/ext_tw_video_thumb/1734684309435408384/pu/img/weDm-ih8gyzSQ8d7.jpg)
![Whitney Webb: "It's probably a couple hundred ['oligarchs' who run the world], probably smaller than that...especially with the technology they have today, it's never been easier for the few to control the many....and they have their men...in every government everywhere." This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), author of One Nation Under Blackmail and contributing editor of unlimitedhangout, is taken from an interview with Glenn Beck (Glenn Beck) posted to YouTube on October 11, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "At most, I would say it's probably a couple hundred, probably smaller than that, but. Well you know, especially with the technology they have today, it's never been easier for the few to control the many. And they want to make it so that you know, the peasants, yeah, the serfs can't you know, fight against their rules anymore. And again that's why we have to resist this as much as possible. "But I unfortunately think that to try and get us to consent, because again they need our consent, they will throw the kitchen sink at us. To try and get us to consent. They, they could make life very difficult. They could, I mean, you know, use acts of terror like they did in something like Operation Gladio to make people so afraid for their lives that they will give up all of their liberties. "[And] I would argue too that this is bigger than just national governments. This is... I don't know what to call them, but oligarchs. Again, it's a small number of people and they have their men, as it were, in every government everywhere."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1977155413083881504/amplify_video_thumb/1977153463336550400/img/Iqpb1AbpBB_pyVj-.jpg)
!["If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world." ~EB Did Burlison See a Craft at the Location He Visited? Umm, No. (Long one here with a transcript and my comments in ( ). Work today so I was a little limited with this stuff. Looking forward to the Davis interview tomorrow!) In 2025, Rep. Eric Burlison spent "almost the entire day" with the White House staff as they negotiated various aspects of the Big Beautiful Bill. While he was there, he requested help with the UFO topic because the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets kept getting blocked and struggled to get access to certain information and locations. So, he asked for a White House-level briefing, "the same briefing the President... If you're taking the request, that's my highest request." (He didn't say if he ever received that briefing.) Burlison: "Furthermore, I would like to be able to have a green light to go visit some of these locations. And the gentleman that I was asking kind of smirked. And I said, 'Is this comical to you? I mean, do you think that I'm not a serious person?'" (I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? 😀 ) Burlison: "He said, 'No.' he goes. 'I just want to go with you.' And so, it turns out he did. He was able to go with me. He had to follow the proper channels as well. And we visited the first of many sites, hopefully. I'm gonna be cautious in talking about that because I don't want to jeopardize the ability to go to the remaining locations, if you will. I truly think that, for them, this was a test of whether or not this would become a circus for them. And so, I think that I'm just treading cautiously before I release too much information about what I've learned and where I went." (I understand not giving out the location to avoid a "circus" of UFO people trying to visit, but I don't see why he can't tell us what he learned right now. Hopefully, when all the visits are done, he can share the details with us.) James Fox: "Congressman, when you say you went to visit the site, are you implying that the alleged site that could, potentially, be housing non-human technology? Is that kind of what one is alleging here?" Burlison: "Yeah. Or, once did house non-human technology, right? Now, from my insights from Grusch and others, they had...it was pretty obvious that that first site that we were going to did not have active material, but, potentially, could have in the past. So what was important was to see the facilities and the structures, and to try to ascertain for A), first and foremost, did those facilities exist? And then were they designed in such a way that would have been, you know, one could easily see that that could have been utilized for reverse engineering." (Saying that a location/facility could have been utilized for reverse engineering craft not made by humans is not enough to make the waves we need to force the tidal wave of Disclosure. We need for Burlison (or someone else) to be able to visit a facility that has a craft there now, and folks working on it who are willing to speak about their experiences there. I don't see that happening any time soon.) Leslie Kean: "May I ask If the people at the site were cooperative and helpful for you?" Burlison: "Yes." Leslie Kean: "Or were they resistant to having you visit?" Burlison: "No, they were very cooperative. What I kind of interpreted from this is that a lot of what's happening today is that you have things that have happened in the past, and the people today, you know, you're talking about personnel that have changed over many times. And so, a lot of times they're not aware of the history of some of the things that you're talking about because that's not something that they're working on, currently. But they certainly were extremely helpful." (They were either not aware of the history or, they were, and lied about it. Can't rule that out. And the fact that they were helpful/cooperative doesn't really mean much. If you want to avoid unwanted attention, you put your best face on. Or, maybe they really were ignorant and wanted to do their best to help Burlison and the other folks? No way to know.) Burlison: "I had specifically wanted to meet with a particular individual that works at that location, and I actually expected them to turn me down, but was surprised that they actually arranged a meeting in a SCIF with the person that I requested. So, I do think that they're being cooperative." (Hopefully, when all of these locations have been visited, we get to learn this person's name. Full transparency, right?) Burlison: "And now that the President has [posted on Truth Social about UFOs], I think it gives everyone all the way down the line an understanding that this is to be taken seriously and to follow through." (We shall see.) Burlison: "On the way back after the visit, the White House staffer and the other person that had made it happen both said to me that they loved doing this. This was one of the funnest things they've ever done in their job, and that these other future site locations are not at all gonna be a burden to them. If anything, they're excited and looking forward to it." (Are we going to learn who those people are? Transparency? If not, why not? We pay their salaries.) James Fox: "I had a really quick follow-up question, Congressman. If you did find what you're looking for, is there a particular protocol, or what's the directive if you find what you're looking for?" Burlison: "If I find what I'm looking for, I'm gonna be very careful to protect any kind of national-security interest. But at the same time, I've been very clear that it is not the right of this country to withhold basic, fundamental evidence that we may or may not be alone. And so, if we have any kind of evidence of that, we should be telling the world and not holding back. And give as many details as possible, and release...be as transparent as possible without jeopardizing our secrets and national security. Or secrets that pertain...that our national security is dependent upon." (For now, keep the method of propulsion (energy source) secret and away from our adversaries and tell us everything else!) Burlison: "Well, I'm just gonna speculate, okay? If we have a type of technology that we have reverse engineered, that gives us a strategic advantage that our adversaries have not? I think that, for example, letting the world know that we have this craft, here it is, here's a photo of it, but you don't have to tell the world how exactly the...what you've reverse engineered, or how that operates." (Photos aren't going to cut it. If they exist, we need to see these craft (and bodies?) in person, with our own eyes. Put them in the Smithsonian and let us see all of it. And allow independent scientists to do their own analysis so we can verify that it's non-human or anomalous.) Burlison: "In the same way that when the nuclear bomb first was invented and utilized, the world knew, we revealed to the world that we have this capability, but we certainly are not gonna tell people how to make one and the specifics behind that. So, I think that for me, that's how I would answer that question. If you were asking me, 'What would you be willing to protect as far as national security?' That would be the nature of it. "Now, I think if the technology that's derived has nothing to do with changing our threat dynamic with an adversary, and it might benefit society and the world, by all means, let's release it. Let's let the world scientific minds utilize anything that we might have discovered. And so, that's where I personally stand." (But we all that it's not going to be that simple. Most likely (if this is all legit), we'll have craft and bodies, and the tech from the craft can give us an advantage over our adversaries, while at the same time, potentially, be used to change and improve the world and human condition. So what do we do? Keep it secret? Tell the world and take our chances?) Burlison: "I don't know, I couldn't tell you what Hillary meant by that." (EB was referring to the recent interview/deposition about Epstein where Hillary Clinton said that she would release UFO files but they would be "subject to any national security implications" and it should be done so that "no national security information is disclosed." She didn't get specific.) Burlison: "If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world. If we, you know, if what Eric Davis said to me - and now that was not in a hearing in which he had been sworn in, and I'm not saying that he was telling me a falsehood - when he said that there are four alien species - and that kind of went viral - I mean, if we, if we do have evidence of that, I want the world to know. I don't see why that would be of national security interest to withhold that from the world." (Unless, the people who have seen the bodies say something like, "Their skin is something that can be used as armor and we can't allow our adversaries to learn about that. Just trying to think of reasons why the gatekeepers will tell us that information needs to be kept secret.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2030480027666747596/amplify_video_thumb/2030373285926694913/img/_-25iW0LmiKeRcjI.jpg)
