Tuesday, 30 August 2011

Killing Google+ Vitual Lynching.

In response to Identity Woman's recent blog-post - Is Google+ is being lynched by out-spoken users upset by real names policy? I feel it is necessary to explain my views on this issue of lynching.

The pejorative "Lynch Mob" description is a red herring because Google+ is the aggressor. The Nym-Warriors in this #NymWar are not technically participating in a lynching. Our response to Google+ user-name fascism is self-defence but now the lynching descriptor has been raised by Tim O'Reily I feel we shouldn't shy away from the label.

When G+ refuses to enter into dialogue, and appeals aren't possible, and justice is reserved for rich people who can afford expensive lawyers, lynching can be valid. Aliases are allowed for famous people on Google+ but, non-famous aliases are generally prohibited on Google+. Vast monetary wealth associated with fame is a key part of the issue here. We are seeing a persecution of poor people. The only difference between famous and non-famous aliases is one of monetary power. The user-name policy by Google+ is anti-equality, anti-freedom.

We must protect freedom and democracy. If a corrupt social system fails us we must then take action via lawful protest, free speech. In a previous blog-post I described the G+ user-name policy as "Digital Genocide" because G+ is killing virtual identities. A virtual lynching of Google is therefore a valid response, it is self defence to lynch Google+.

Some Google executives insist the pseudonyms issue will eventually be solved to support anonymous users. They insist user-name problems are a problem associated with the current G+ limited field trial. Due to evidence I will soon present in a follow-up blog-post, I think Google has already shown its true colors. I think we shouldn't expect change from Google unless we force the change. I think Google cannot be trusted.

We are legally entitled to virtually lynch Google+, this is a right protected by democracy and freedom. Our free-speech is protected by law therefore I say: YES, THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD, and with our words we can virtually lynch Google+.

Google+ has shown no valid attempts to modify its totally unacceptable behavior. Google+ is acting in an autocratic, dictatorial, fascist manner therefore it is clear we must put an end to Google+. We must campaign for nothing less than the virtual death of Google+ because via killing Google+ we will send the strongest message to any other businesses who want to consider trampling over our freedoms. Our message to Google+ and other similar ventures is that anti-freedom businesses cannot be allowed to continue.

Let's virtually lynch Google+. NO MERCY! This is what the NymWars are all about. This is a WAR and Google+ must be defeated.


Someone asked me why there's excessive focus on Google+ when LinkedIn and Facebook also have wallet-name rules for users. The reason for vociferous reactions to the G+ user-name policy is because Google is bigger, more powerful, more widespread than Linkedin or FB.

Google is also the straw that broke the camel's back. Furthermore many Google services did not require a "real name" profile thus people feel Google is moving the goal posts midway through the game. People are upset because they have invested time and effort in an anonymous Google experience and now it seems Google is beginning to change. An important reason for objecting to G+ is because a trend has now become clear regarding real names on the internet, and people foolishly expected better from Google. When only Facebook and LinkedIn enforced wallet-names they could be dismissed due to being in a minority but Google is a industry leader in cyberspace thus the time has come to fight back regarding anti-freedom user-name rules. People had the illusion that Google was more tech-savvy, a friend of the cyber community, thus people feel betrayed by Google. Everything has crystallized with Google. It is now becoming apparent our internet freedom is under attack.


I only advocate legal protest via incisive logical expositions. Words are far more powerful than actual violence or destruction. I vigorously condemn actual violence or destruction. My warlike aggressive terminology is a literary device to evoke strong emotions within cyberspace (virtual reality). It would be a severe misunderstanding of my words if people assumed I advocate actual violence or destruction. My words are emotive, but it would be a gross misconstruction of my intentions if people assumed I wish to incite illegal behaviour. Intelligence is the way forward therefore amidst my righteous anger my message is clearly one of law-abiding peacefulness. Anti-freedom ventures such as Google+ are a serious threat to our peace of mind, therefore via the legal expression of our powerful minds we can destroy Google+ thereby restoring freedom and peace to cyberspace. We must fight for freedom. DEATH TO GOOGLE+. Peace and freedom to everyone. Spread the love.

Monday, 29 August 2011

How Google Destroyed Cyberspace.

Google has ruined the internet, or more precisely the birth of Google+ provides seeds of destruction for the internet. Very possibly people from the future will look back to this point in time and they will see how the fascist user-name policy of Google+ provided the model of all social networking. Thankfully we can change the future before disaster happens. We can make a difference. In the name of freedom we must change the evil user-name policy which Google+ is forcing on us. Don't let Google create an oppressive (authoritarian) dystopia.

Cyber Führer Eric Schmidt recently stated Google+ is not principally a social network. Eric states Google+ is principally an identity service. Eric suggests if people want to retain their privacy and freedom then they shouldn't participate in Google+. An "identity service" sounds more reminiscent of the CIA than a typical internet business.

If other companies follow Google's example then privacy and freedom on the internet will be abolished. When Führer Schmidt says we should refrain from participating in Google+, if we don't like it, he's effectively saying is the internet is dead and people should cease using the internet if they want freedom and privacy.

Admittedly Facebook already had a wallet-name (Government authorised name) policy for users, but Google's reach is much bigger and more powerful than Facebook therefore this problem is too big to ignore. Facebook could be ignored when they were in the minority, but now a trend is appearing with Google requesting wallet-names for users therefore this problem must be resolved. Think about how powerful Google is, what search engine do you use? Think about how our freedom is threatened. The behaviour of Google reminds me of how drug dealers give away free drugs to users but when users are hooked the dealer then begins exploiting users via increasing prices. In the case of Google the exploitation is the abolition of freedom. Google is now clearly entering the stage where users are harshly exploited.

Google has attempted to justify it's user-name policy via spouting nonsensical bull manure about bogus intentions to mimic the “real world”. Within the virtual world of cyberspace real life is impossible. The virtual world is virtual reality therefore our existence is a virtual existence. Google is wrong from whatever angle we look at this issue because everyone also knows in "real-life" people aren't compelled to divulge their names when they talk publicly with friends or strangers. Everyone knows in the real world people are not compelled to publicly display their full name, for the entire world, in a searchable database, merely because we want to communicate socially. It's therefore clear Google+ does not mimic real-life social-communication, unless perhaps Google is based upon the authoritarian regimes of China, Iran, or North Korea where identity papers must be presented to tyrannical police officers. Google also states wallet-name communication is safer, more secure, which is a common justification utilized by dictators when they abolish freedom. What's the point of being safe if we are slaves. Safety and security without freedom is very dangerous, very insecure.

Google is virtually whipping users who refuse to use their wallet-names.

The following video is regarding the TV Mini Series "Roots", it is based on the novel "Roots: The Saga of an American Family". The video clip has been used extensively in the NymWars, by various NymWarriors regarding the importance of having the freedom to choose your own name, but YouTube unjustly censored the first video clip. YouTube (Google) falsely justified the censorship by stating the clip contained sexual content or nudity, but there is no nudity or sexual content in the video clip. The slave (Kunta Kinte/Kentei) is wearing trousers and the context of the whipping is absolutely not sexual. A man with a bare torso does not constitute nudity, which many prime time adverts and music videos prove when they are broadcast without any restriction. The video contains fictional violence of a type commonly aired on television without restriction. Is Google attempting to silence the NymWarriors via censorship of the tools we use to communicate? New video clip:

The so-called real-life authenticity Google is heading towards is very real fascism. I believe Google wants to abolish freedom and creativity. If you think “abolish” is too strong a word then Google definitely wants to severely restrict freedom to ineffectual enclaves where communication with the majority of Netizens is prohibited. Our freedom and creativity are being attacked.

Thankfully many people have seen the seriousness of Google's attack on our freedom, but sadly many people remain unaware of the dangers we are facing. Hopefully we can change the future via changing the present thus we can ensure Google doesn't destroy the internet.

This issue needs to become massive. We need to start boycotting Google. Delete your cookies, don't click on adverts, try to avoid using Google. Reminiscent of a Vampire, Google is voraciously feeding on our information. Google feeds on our usage of its services therefore we must limit the amount of information we give Google. Set your privacy levels high. Use non-Google services more often.

Firefox users can quickly delete cookies via pressing SHIFT CTRL DELETE. There are also many Firefox addons for quickly deleting cookies. Don't let Google track you via their evil cookies. Firefox has an great selection of Addons such as Better Privacy and Adblock Plus.

If you are using the Chrome browser STOP NOW. Use Firefox instead.

Google TV could easily destroy internet freedom.

Firefox is good. Sadly, without doubt, Google is evil. Consider  Google TV. I wonder what browser people will be able to use with Google TV? There will probably be no alternate browser choices with Google TV. Sadly I suspect Google TV will be a move away from internet customisation tools, which are possible when people use a PC with a browser of their own choosing. Google doesn't want people customising their computers to block adverts or tracking cookies. Google TV will very probably not make it easy for users to protect their privacy. With Google TV it will probably be very difficult or perhaps impossible for users to delete tracking cookies. Google is clearly anti-freedom. Google is anti-choice. The dangers of a Google operating system or browser are very clear according to Rainyday Superstar.

I will soon post a follow up to this blog-post with very detailed examples-evidence of Google's evil practices regarding user-name tyranny. Stay tuned. The #NymWars have begun. We will not be defeated by #PlusGate.

Disclaimer: the views in this blog-post are my personal views. In the absence of substantiation for my allegations, those allegations must be deemed sincerely held feelings of Singularity Utopia and nothing more. There is no intention to defame Google. I am merely practicing my right to free expression (free speech) which is protected via the First Amendment to the US Constitution, and is protected via Human Rights Laws in the EU.

Monday, 22 August 2011

My Singularity ART

Nikki Olson asked me to explain my art, regarding usage of imagery within the Singularity movement, in relation to this article. She inspired me to write the following statement.

Artistic Statement:

My 'Singularity ART' is designed to open minds. Art is often recondite (esoteric) but hopefully the obscurity in my art is not excessive. Via my images I allude to intelligence exploding, thus upon this theme of explosiveness my images typically exhibit an overloaded celebratory aspect. My images represent a very exciting event. I want to capture the excessive abundance of supreme intelligence thus 'excess' is a feature of my images.

I want the explosiveness to be accessible to everyone, but for the vast majority of humans I realize extreme intelligence is currently inaccessible. Complexity and simplicity are the two balancing poles in my art. There is dichotomy between excess and minimalism. The concept of intelligence is simple but manifestations of intelligence appear complex for stupid people. Intelligence exploding is a simple concept, which people can theoretically imagine, but in practice many people simply do not have substantial imaginations thus they cannot visual revolutionary new concepts. Pre-Singularity explanations of the Singularity are incongruous because elucidations of intelligence for stupid people cannot truly be absorbed thus regarding incompatibility I seek fusion of opposing poles for the purpose of enlightenment.

I am influenced by Minimalism, Conceptual Art, and Dada. My Singularity ART is an explanation of massive intelligence for stupid people, therefore due to the mainstream stupidity of humans I hint at Dadaism. Conceptual art and Dada require ideation, creative thinking, thought. The viewer is required to contribute to the creative process. It is not about spoon-feeding an unresponsive (passive) audience a highly polished product. A big idea of conceptual art is that we are all artists, which Keith Arnatt highlighted when he claimed he was a "real artist". Intelligence is conceptually very Anti-Establishment, thus you see the rationale for my Dadaistic hints.

Principally I focus on the 'concept' in my images because I don't want people to become sidetracked by surface details, thus via minimal rendering I artistically present my ideas. The Singularity is very strange and powerful but it's also very simple. I merely want people to comprehend the awesome utopian power of the Singularity, thus via a jolt from my art I try to open human minds. The Singularity is bursting-out, breaking free. Dependent upon the level of intelligence in the viewer, my art will operate on subconscious or conscious levels.

We're in the beginning stages of a revolution of the mind. Our intellects are breaking free. Via intellectualism we fight back against stupidity. Our weapon is 'truth' peacefully wielded. Truth exposes the stupid corruption of outdated regimes. Our fight is nonviolent and non-destructive because our intellectual creativity is mightier than the sword. This is the power of art. Via verbal and pictorial language people are waking up to the enlightenment of the intelligence explosion. Stupidity is being vanquished.

# Blog visitors since 2010:

Archive History ▼

S. 2045 | plus@singularity-2045.org