blog

definition, design philosophy, rationale

On future-proofing #ai

In a nutshell — or a chipset! — what I propose we do asap is move radically away from the more recent division of power and hierarchies between admins versus users that has shaped #ai and #it ever since the arrival of the Internet, towards the suggested conflation of admin and user in one.

Mil Williams, 3rd July 2023, Stockholm Sweden

Proposal

Would anyone in #scandinavia, more specifically I’d be bound to say #sweden, like to begin work on designing and implementing, from scratch, a totally repurposed set of #ai- and #it-related architectures and frameworks in order to create absolutely future-proof ethical and privacy-positive #ai and #it frameworks?

That is: do for #ai what I have already suggested via the concept of a digital equivalent of the #privacypositive and #secrecypositive attributes pencil and paper have for centuries conferred on us:

• https://www.secrecy.plus/spt-it

The original “intuition validation engine” README on GitHub

In this case, in respect of #ai- and #it-#tech, I would suggest using a starting-point I already clearly described with the original 2019 specification of the #intuitionvalidationengine (i’ve) (currently on my GitHub account in private mode, and reproduced in full below):

intuition-validation-engine

The goal of this engine is to permit both human and machine intuition to be validated.

This will be done constantly, but not intrusively. People and machines will have a choice, always.

It is assumed that for the purposes of this project both parties will be encouraged to upskill the other in mutual dialogue and equal partnership.

It is also assumed, a priori, that the keywords for the processes involved will be:

1. A procedure of CAPTURE, controlled by humans on the one hand and machines on the other, where neither will be obliged to share ideas, content and personal data that they do not feel safe sharing.

2. A procedure of EVIDENCING, where the captured data can be stored, retrieved, shaped and patterned, and used for supportive purposes that expand the lives and experiences of the beings concerned.

3. A procedure of VALIDATION, where it becomes clear to everyone participating: a) why a human being might believe and act in a certain way; and equally so, b) why the machines that prefer to work within the framework of this project will arrive at their own particular positions and conclusions.

Finally, it is hugely important that everyone who chooses to work on the project might easily understand that it is not a traditional software paradigm: let us assume, instead, that people, code, machines and all other objects participating will form part of a new space we might call “i’ve”.

That is to say, there will be no distinction or hierarchy in this space between the individuality of the objects in question, with respect to their entity as sovereign actors. In this sense, all will enjoy becoming part of a multiple-perspective environment, and all will help to support and contribute to a wider and transcendental knowledge that both befits and benefits others.”

• https://ive.home.blog

So.

Alongside the clearly developed initial architectural philosophy stated above, i would then have us move on to working with the #platformgenesis progression of the original concept as it existed since 2019:

• https://platformgenesis.com | see also the attached slides

Then, with further collaborative actions, especially in the light of other technologies developed since, we could begin to properly propose an absolutely future-proofed #ai and #it-#tech which, as per their real-world template of pencil and paper, could never NOT become privacy- and ethically-sensitive, whatever the regulatory demands created in the future by any global or regional body.

This would be my objective from two directions: legal and technological; abandoning neither for the other. And making both future #ai and #it-#tech as firmly #ethical and #privacypositive by design as to make regulatory innovations that might challenge it impossible to design.

To summarise

In a nutshell — or a chipset! — what I propose we do asap is move radically away from the more recent division of power and hierarchies between admins versus users that has shaped #ai and #it ever since the arrival of the Internet, towards the suggested conflation of admin and user in one.

The division described has, in my judgement, severely — and increasingly — affected the citizens and workforces who strive to function and live creatively, despite the challenges, in Western corporates and wider societies when needing to think freely. These needs arise in many — if not all — fields of endeavour too, and in most during mission-critical moments and when decisions have to be taken using an unpickable #highleveldomainexpertise (something we sometimes are also happy to call #gutfeeling) which becomes the only thing we may be able to reliably depend on.

The real existential challenge for our democracies and business discourses and praxis then arises when we fail to think as freely as others who, with a clear and ongoing possession and enjoyment of #privacysensitive and #secrecysensitive architectures and technologies, maintain their capacity to beat us hands-down, at least on the #intuition side of societal and business activities:

• https://crimehunch.com/terror | concentrate here on considering which team would be best at a new “what and how” (I’m happy, meanwhile, to recognise that pattern-recognition capabilities in machines will inevitably process vast amounts of data better when focussing on more concrete questions of “who and when”)

• https://www.secrecy.plus/why

• https://omiwan.com/the-foundations

Finally …

If you want to find out more about my latest ideas, why not go to the #sweden located and focussed online whitepaper I’ve been using to further my thought around complementary strands of complex thinking?

• https://www.sverige2.earth

definition, design philosophy, rationale

The Last Mile of Creative Criminality: the Key to #NoFutureUkraines

OUR end-to-end thinking. The creative crimefighting we now need: bringing together the complementary and existent interests and skills of military, security and law-enforcement into one macro-team of defenders of the species.

Mil Williams, 2nd July 2023, Stockholm Sweden

On eliminating the Petri dish of Putin & Co’s creatively criminal strategies towards a European and wider longitudinal dislocation

Introduction

This is the current law-enforcement, security and military situation as I see it:

1. Organised crime funds Putin & Co’s Russia by embedding itself in local communities across Europe and other regions: it’s effectively the last mile of creative criminality:

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/22/uk-organised-crime-can-police-catch-up-national-crime-agency-lynne-owens

https://crimehunch.com/neocrime

https://omiwan.com/the-humans

2. Organised crime is then the deep connector of glocal (global <-> local) reach. It makes it possible for top-down and bottom-up approaches to moving illegal money around and in respect of its generation, capture, and delivery to easily acquire an almost impossible to unpick synthesis of seamless functioning.

3. It also allows Putin & Co to longitudinally gather data — on local turfs and from great distances — on trends, movements and rising individuals in democratic systems that might all prove threats to the established order he and his kind continue to strategise in order to achieve and sustain.

This is why I argue that in order to develop a capacity to prevent another #ukraine from ever being contemplated, never mind delivered on, we need to create human-enhancing technologies that empower good human beings like ourselves to fight back with a “War & Peace (II)” approach:

That is to say, for a change our kind of war on our sort of terms: but even so, permanent and ongoing; and then again, our kind of peace on our sort of terms: and even so, permanent and ongoing.

What will the process leading to these preferred outcomes consist of?

1. Identifying sources of power and wealth which to date could have contributed to #ukraine not happening and which, nevertheless, have chosen either a) to effectively sit on the sidelines and watch the region burn; or b) have proactively consented to and created the environments and frameworks which have led directly to #ukraine: nation-states; large transnational corporations and others with huge reserves of cash and wealth of various kinds; zemiological actors of multiple kinds.

2. With this information to hand, we robustly and firmly ringfence these actors future participation in:

a) our own future human-interfacing and enabling tech tools and platforms; and

b) the strategic and longitudinal reconstruction of a wider Western democracy.

I suggest, above all, that as a general principle we do NOT use the often self-interested advisory and consulting processes of tech and related corporate organisations when scoping, developing and configuring the natures of the architectures of our proposed new software and hardware architectures and frameworks.

Instead, from our own university and other research institutions we build up teams of our own consulting and advisory specialists consisting of human-related and tech-related researchers both — as well as others who may be chosen to be upskilled in such skillsets, in the collective democratic future-present we wish to forge anew — in order to create a permanent future-present capability in such processes.

The proposal would then employ big tech and related SIMPLY AND ONLY as implementers of, never participants in, our secret sauces.

After all, you cannot invite into the kitchen of future Western stability those organisations which have actively collaborated in the poisoning of Western democratic ways of acting and engaging with complex problems — either by default and their sitting on the sidelines, or through an affirmation on their part of criminal activity by their working alongside and continuing to gladly invoice such organisations in full knowledge of their ongoing zemiology:

http://complexify.me

We can however, I now firmly believe, use such corporations as simple extensions of fully formed projects which reach them with absolutely all the necessary specifications and requirements ready drawn-up by the aforementioned bespoke teams of OUR own researchers and in-house advisory & consulting experts.

To summarise

If we follow the above path, in this way:

a) we won’t lose the agility of large corporates’ manifest capability to deliver massively on clear specifications when everything is duly finalised and competently in possession of its always necessary roadmap;

b) but, equally, we don’t allow them to move us in the direction of solutions which continue to be optimal for their bottom lines but not for a European and wider security and safety environment:

https://crimehunch.com

https://citizenhunch.com

https://www.secrecy.plus/why

https://www.secrecy.plus/hmagi

https://www.sverige2.earth/example

http://complexify.me

https://www.sverige2.earth/unified

c) nor will we lose the element of absolute internal and external secrecy we need if, in any reasonable way, we are to successfully fight back against Putin & Co’s longitudinal strategising in favour of the sustenance of his own brand of creative criminality and its related Petri dish.

Because it’s time to break into unusable pieces that serve zero purpose the Petri dish of Putin & Co that enables local-turf criminality from feeding — ultimately — into the pockets of their aspirations to global dislocation and domination.

Because it all starts from that neighbourhood you live in, where you enjoy shooting the breeze with the man you know, for sure, to be a gangster.

And it all ends in the bloodied baby’s cot in a Kyiv apartment block.

Let’s think as creatively as the criminals, for a change

OUR end-to-end thinking. The creative crimefighting we now need: bringing together the complementary and existent interests and skills of military, security and law-enforcement into one macro- and hyper-team of defenders of the species.

Just that.

And so then, finally, by both scoping and using new tech architectures which Putin & Co cannot bribe themselves into acquiring under any circumstances, we make it increasingly difficult for #ukraine to happen ever again.

https://www.secrecy.plus | for human-expanding and upskilling #secrecypositive software architectures and hardware

aside, definition, design philosophy, rationale

they called us pirates all those years ago, but #bigtech is the truly zemiological community of today

my ex- has two indian friends she used to teach spanish to. they lived close to where we did: a married couple.

we were invited to theirs on occasions, and would go over enthusiastically of course, for a full evening repast with other guests we might or might not have met before. they were immensely gracious guests, were her indian friends.

one time, we were introduced to what turned out to be a techie guy: an executive type, though.

yes … not a software engineer or anything like this.

i was clear i’d been invited by apple via the brother of the bebo founder, at a meetup in the wellcome foundation cafe some years before in london, to come onboard.

this time, the techie guy basically spun the story that all tech corps controlled the next ten years of tech … all tech corps. this wasn’t an apple thing, let’s be clear. this was all of them, including apple. (he did assert he knew the apple case from inside.)

so. big tech would rarely launch useful stuff, just for the good of the world. it would do so when a series of conditions were met.

for example:

• what — for them — was all-too-existent tech, but invisible and, indeed, unknown to the outside world, wouldn’t end up being revealed to anyone unless there was a sound bottom-line reason. they wouldn’t even float the concept publicly (that is, telling the idea but not saying they had developed it …)

• neither did they ever seem keen to express the desire, or be driven by the need, to apply such apparently non-existent tech imaginatively for the whole species’ benefit, before, that is, its time arrived as per their aforementioned ten-year calendarisations of the related monetisation opportunities and timelines

remember google glass?

research the year it appeared: go on.

dr steve mann invented it and used his own from 1984, if my memory serves me right:

https://mannlab.com/eyetap

google then had to finally retire its own consumer version from sale because of “invasion of privacy” concerns from the wider market (and perhaps, also, the wider mass media): and this, even when the version sold had an unnecessarily large and obviously clumpy camera.

do you think they weren’t using it far more covertly way before they launched a consumer version?

do you think they stopped using their own privately covert version after the consumer version was boxed off and deactivated?

of course they used it way before, covertly and more, on everyone.

of course they wouldn’t stop using such a powerful surveillance — and counter-surveillance — tool.

like exxon in the 1970s hiding the research that predicted THEN to the tenth of a degree the global warming (not climate change, ffs) NOW incurred due directly to their fossil fuels:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/12/exxon-climate-change-global-warming-research?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

well. big tech behaves in exactly the same way. it has massive solutions: it had them decades ago. its bottom-line doesn’t need them now, though.

and it certainly DOESN’T want to democratise genius, as i have argued increasingly our species needs us to aim at doing, if we want to survive the cataclysmic climate and other challenges encroaching more and more our daily experiences of life:

https://platformgenesis.com | see the slides at the top of this article for more detail of #platformgenesis

so what do we do? if big tech refuses to change its ways 180 degrees — and it will refuse, i assure you — what do we do?

we do it ourselves!

we do it for the military and security, but also for a citizen force which uses sousveillance not to control the state but work with it.

we create relevant software constitutions to achieve it. we use the genius resident deep down in every human being to deliver unpredictable thought, predictably.

and ultimately, we will eliminate ALL loopholes.

and we will eliminate a wider zemiology from every community.

and we will cut back the dried-out deadwood of our societies’ most creatively criminal poachers.

we will make the woods of every community — whether professional or geographical — good again: all of them.

that is, make the timbers of a civilised society no longer anything to be shivered about by anyone.

look:

in sweden you already invented a cctv which is useful but, at the same time, doesn’t need to store the images to deliver law-enforcement support.

it’s this kind of shameless thinking — shamelessly free! — that i hanker after, and now really really do need.

this is why from here: from sweden. exactly this.

yes …

and i appreciate, too, that everyone needs to participate.

but i am angry at big tech for giving up on the species.

and i know how capable it is of getting into projects in order to mess around with them for defensive reasons and purposes: to protect above all the interests of its blessed bottom-line over the interests of, for example, war-torn victims.

the fortnite founder event in salford i attended some years ago proved this, when i was informed by an attendee that basically my idea of #hmagi had been bought up and closed down from another bright mind years before:

https://www.secrecy.plus/hmagi

so hear this please, and believe me: i speak from evidence not prejudice.

i see things and then make connections of a precise and painful nature which few others — very few — either care to, or can’t, see.

and i am here to change the world, so it becomes the world we ALL deserve — even the bad guys as they stand: because, after all, maybe i am wrong.

maybe i am.

maybe, after all, we may all be redeemable …

… woman … and genders-all, naturally
definition, rationale

when #secrecypositive tools were turned long ago against their creators …

i’ve described the idea of “mil’s theorem” before:

“If, in an almost infinitely malleable digital world, I can imagine a new kind of criminal activity via the limited intellectual and financial resources I have access to, others with far more of both will already be doing what I imagined. I don’t, therefore, need to provide more evidence than that to be able to demonstrate it’s happening and it exists.”

let’s take the above theorem one more time then.

the definition, in my #whirled and your #world, of #neocrime having become this:

crimehunch.com/neocrime | an updated understanding of the 19th century concept of “dark figure”

now then: if we accept my argument for argument’s sake, that in almost infinitely malleable digital we only have to intuitively and creatively think up new criminal activity in terms of its “whats” and “hows” (“who” and “when” remaining the preserve always of the machines) in order to be evidencing their existence, today i bring a new one to the table:

“let’s imagine that communities of professional praxis exist in #espionage, too. just like journalists who communicate outwith their employer-spaces with other journalists; just like security people and bus drivers acknowledge the presence of the nominal ‘opposition’ with a tip of the cap or a thumbs-up … just like any profession where specialised skillsets bring humans together with humans who are like them because of their knowledge-sets more than the allegiances they are paid to maintain …

imagine the above, then, in #spycraft in particular; and so imagine over the years that a network out of sight of the employers themselves has grown up exponentially, where — using tools i nowadays sustain firmly have been developed to operate in the areas of #neocrimes and #darkfigure (supposedly on the side of the good gals and guys, too) — agents commonly communicate with each other using #secrecypositive (and NOT #totalsurveillance-compliant as i would prefer) environments and architectures, in order to basically scratch each other’s backs at the expense of broader citizen and state interests.

remember “mil’s theorem”: if i can simply think it up, someone else more powerful and monied than me already did long ago.

but here’s the thing: it’s possible the field operatives might be doing such things but it’s also possible that in 99 percent of cases out of deep ingrained senses of honour and responsibility (and why not? patriotism too …) they’ve chosen over the years not to. even when they could. (some of us still exist, you know.)

so here’s another #neocrime-ism: what if it wasn’t the operatives who worked behind democracy for their own self-enrichment — or maybe even global domination — but, instead, their bosses …?

not one and all. not even all that many. but enough to tip the balance over the years between #ukraine NEVER happening and #russia being given an under-the-counter carta blanca to proceed as it would wish, and always wanted.”

ok. that’s the last bit of “mil’s theorem” theorising for today.

enough, right? and maybe understandably insulting for many at that.

listen up before you get utterly irritated with me. what i’m doing here is using a public space as if it were a #secrecypositive space. i’ve reached a moment in my life where i realise what was done to me in 2003 can’t be done again. since then, i’ve studied #criminaljustice at master’s level and have a whole battery of logical tools and legal principles to defend myself. and so i’m feeling fairly impregnable — and will continue to do so unless someone actually, literally, wipes me off the face of the planet.

but assuming the latter won’t happen … what if #secrecypositive spaces have now been turned against the people who invented them? and not me thinking now? but them, having built decades ago? because when you create a weapon of destruction you ALWAYS consider how its corresponding shield might need to look …

so what if the guys and gals who did this technology all those years ago as i now surmise were good people who defend our security and safety every day? and what if the bad gals and guys are now abusing savagely — to the extent of enabling #ukraine AT LEAST — such architectures and platforms to their own ends?

what if … that?

aside

for amanda and eric

you might meet out of blue skies 
of firm and gorgeous splendour 
a man like eric 
and count yourself lucky 
to have lived long enough to know 
that ruing a life lost
ain't gonna go nowhere fast 

because the ways of seeing 
of eric's perspicacity and thinking 
like quicksilver of mercurial planet 
lead to you realise 
that even berger may find his match 

and you could know when amanda 
that on engaging with a mind and head
of fabulous furniture 
you'd see the #whirled is something 
quite clearly true and beautiful:
not only to be pleasured
but honestly treasured 

as the repository of wisdoms 
learnt and innate both it's a fact 
and where the human factor
cracks the #streetcryptography 
of the humans that do cruelty

as some of us do humanity:
really naturally 
and as casually as a kiss
blessed of deep wish 
and desires unfolding gradually 
which is actually what i sensed 
as two people seemed to want 

to get close to me 
in ways i had forgotten years ago 
involving true aspirations
to human relations 
where only good might ultimately result 

and so hurtling through my universe
i begin to taste flavours 
which i had neglected to savour for ages
and recall and roll around my mouth 
as if the tongue of intellect 
mutates all of a sudden 
into one of true love

for there is a #whirled out there 
and maybe even for me 
where the cruelties 
of #startup's diabolical unicorn 
might be replaced with female zebra clean 

"and why not?" she might ask
as amanda often does these days 
but not to leave the question 
sitting balefully 
at the top of the baldnesses
that constitute money's 
overwhelmingly male predilections 

instead my friends it's this:
amongst us three people metamorphosing
and perhaps this being a reality
into friends who could treasure each other
into a differently deep infinity 

an eric of shameless diversity 
and crackling thought 
when anything but ought 
and an amanda of sudden insight 
almost shamefully brought to light 
in the creeping sense of:
"what right did i have ever 

to ever have that idea ... ever?"
but then she recapitulates as she now should
because growth is the order of the day 
and she's learning quickly
that the world needs to hear

what she has to say for sure
oh lordy yes
and absolutely without interference 
and just the raw of her reality
as eric then chimes in 
with impossible opinion 
which nevertheless never fails 

to fit the facts they are ...
and then there's me my friends 
for this is my hope
let this not be a dream at all at all again
and even if it must be and even if it is

even so let us awake to each other 
tomorrow let's say in the morning 
a "god morgon" even too
and over coffee begin to show the rest 
how we might really right 
this torn and awfully leaking vessel
which will be the #whirled we want to remake
definition, design philosophy, rationale

how to save #chatgpt-x from its founders

i just saw an example of the power of culture over rules & regs when looking to achieve a particular outcome.

a human being removed a box cover and fluffed up some bags of crisps not because they had a rule saying when, but simply because their culture said now.

why conflict in the first place, for goodness sake?

an #ai designed to foreground the functions of machine-approaches to #complexproblem solutioning uses rules & regs always. it will do what you want it do as long as you have told it once. and told it in accordance with the needs of your domain. that is, all its needs.

a #humanbeing made bigger by #tech meantime — as per #film- and #movie-#tech has always chosen to do (the mic making the human voice bigger, the camera increasing the vision of the human eye, and even the stage extending great actors’ capabilities to express themselves powerfully via mise-en-scene) — will always operate better with the unexpected.

on the very human ability to deal with the unexpected

the unexpected doesn’t have to be: but it is. whether because it really was (9/11) or because you’re a newbie (me all the time in almost everything i do), our grand virtues as #humans supported by #machines (in this order), designed primarily to extend our existent virtues instead of deepen existent pockets (both are good, mind — when they coincide; but it’s my thinking the first is a problem to be solved and the second should never be permitted to become a solution in search of the former …), is that the unexpected is what engages us most deeply in life. and therefore what makes us reach our heights, every time.

in truth, it’s the kind of #machines we are if we were: except we’re not. we’re flesh and blood: we forget, only to remember a fabulous idea six months later; we frustrate, only to go on a drinking binge and then after hangover find marvellous beauty lodged amazingly in our heads; we get angry with another human for rejecting our beautifully formed solutions worked and reworked so often … and then after a sulk maybe of days we recapitulate and find an even better synthesis of both.

as #humans, the unexpected is what we are. only when we use #techtools designed to make their design cheaper to build and more profitable to hype, we act more like these #machines ourselves and may appear for a while to lose our capacity to surprise. to be different from machines, that is.

but it’s not true. believe me. an example. i’ve worked deeply in language learning for two decades in a previous life and know exactly what happens when the job of teacher becomes that of enabler; the task is no longer one of acquiring more data; and then, at last, it’s producing what we need as humans with what we’ve already got as thinkers that becomes the real challenge and delight.

and we don’t steal someone’s intellectual property to build an empire, either. it’s just not part of the gameplan.

no.

really.

we don’t.

and how many different types of burgers did #siliconvalley’s stand actually sell in the first place?

meanwhile, #siliconvalley has lately (“last three decades” lately, at that) delivered only one piece of money-making #tech.

when the #newspaperindustry was an industry, we called this “tech” #classifiedadvertising. this kind of #advertising had great virtue, too: to make people want to go to it and buy the products advertised and therefore pay the bills of what was actually very often a #publicservice, journalists wrote the greatest analysis and deconstruction of democratic and anti-democratic players; descriptions of things that were going just dandy and then again things that were going just frankly belly-up; and so finally we’d even get the most beautiful features and reportage that would manifest the world around us with #photography and #words that became #art in incredibly undeniable consonance.

and all of the above was rigorously original content.

#siliconvalley? hmm …

on the robbery of #ip

my question has to be this: why do we now go to the #classifiedadvertising we find on #searchengines and #socialnetworks and other sorts of apparent innovations?

well …

tbh, basically to read someone else’s unpaid-for content: what’s more, when a newspaper’s, quoted in full by a reader who in theory isn’t paying anyone for the honour, either.

this is not right. it happened with #search: that is, the robbery of #ip and content with clear #copyright. we shouldn’t allow it now to repeat with tools such as #chatgpt-x.

but can we square this circle to the satisfaction of all players?

why i’m of a mind now to propose a radically different approach to how #ai of any kind — never mind just #chatgpt-x & co — are trained and launched onto markets.

no. we don’t discard any #tech invented out of hand. ‘not suggesting this. but in #europe at least, in #sweden maybe to start with, the content used for the training of any #ai such as these must be duly paid for.

always. every use.

how? we could have a spotify-type platform which #ai developers could subscribe to, allowing for sanctioned access to all kinds of content, not just music of course.

and then the #ai tools would have certificates showing “denominación de origen” for all the #ip used to train up the #ai in question. and in their absence, the product could not be released in any legal form to the market.

this is practical; the streaming tools already exist and would allow for agile development to continue; and we would NOT repeat the daylight robbery conducted all those years ago under the banners of #search #classifiedadvertising.

wdyt?

there’s a business model in this too; not dissimilar at all to spotify as it stands.

no?

coffee, anyone?

definition, design philosophy, rationale

if you must, make sure you’re legal, you take care of your own, and above all you know your enemy

in #stockhom #sweden #sverige, what was broached in #dublin #ireland in 2016 is now possible here.

and i feel like it is new; not returning to an awful toxic past and having to pay every day for it, as it remains close and clammy to the touch.

no.

not that.

solving the putin problem

i was asked on the train today what the keys are to solving the #putinproblem.

the #putinproblem includes #trump, and #brexit, and #facebook escaping with virtual murder as #cambridgeanalytica became the fall guy for the inevitable outcome of #zuckerberg’s choice of business model: this outcome being the savage and unremitting dismantling of citizen agency in modern western and associated democracies.

it includes everything that means even professionals will think, when they take a life-changing decision on someone in their life-changing nominal charge, they do so with this agency i mention: no one else is furtively intervening. and god forbid that those intervening might be criminals on the scale of #putin’s #russia.

so the keys to solving these #complexproblems longitudinally and long-term are …?

first: accepting how we’ve been part of the problem

first, everyone who wants to join me in this battle in favour of a new democracy and against the #tech-driven #gaslighting that has been designed, developed and implemented over decades must accept they both tolerated and in some senses embraced #neoterrorismontheindividual because they used it themselves to shape their societies. they must take it firmly on the chin, as i do, that we are still part of the problem.

and whilst they/we were better at it than the enemy — #russia, a #badmoney without sovereign frontiers, #bigtech in practically all its manifestations — all was kinda ok. people like myself did get improperly incarcerated by proficient users of symbolic communication such as the #british, and by extension the #irish, but those of us who had to suffer such indignities and injustices were relatively small in number. i suppose.

second: how we’ve enabled the enemy

the problem is when the enemy gets better than you could ever imagine at this #neoterrorismontheindividual i uncover. and an even bigger challenge: when you simply have no inkling that they have got so much better than you, nor indeed for how long … nor when it all started to go belly-up.

• crimehunch.com/neocrime

this is what i say has happened already. i was saying it somehow in my #criminaljustice dissertation back in 2017. i realise in hindsight now that both the #british and #irish agreed and were as one: i had to be scoped out of academic circulation. symbolic language is a mark of the #british security state’s capacity to control a society without ever taking ownership. (the #irish — suffering the colonising #english — had to compete against this: and we know the #tech adage about being careful who you compete against because, one fine terrible day, you’ll become just like them.)

and so see how cozying up to these #espionage ways and means enabled deep #russian interests close to #putin to embed themselves in #uk football clubs, financial institutions and other channels where money flows freely and conveniently.

third: symbolism as a cancer to democracy

wherever a country prefers to use #symbolism to rule we have a cancer: a cancer on democracy; on the opportunities for democracy to flourish; on the chances that democracy might sustain and renew itself where needs be.

‘question is: are the upsides of using #symbolic systems worth the downsides? maybe they are: #espionage is a common thread throughout #human #history. so maybe all ok in this sense (despite the occasional collateral damage such as myself back in 2002-2003 and then again in 2004, and in 2017 … and many more times i guess even i haven’t yet sussed).

but it’s NOT ok when the genie whose bottle we uncorked centuries ago becomes owned by the enemy under our noses.

so to answer, finally, the question i was posed on the train this morning: if #zuckerberg and the illegitimate influencing of democratic discourse … if #brexit … if #trump and insurrection … and ultimately if #putin’s three wars in fifteen years culminating in his unforgivable invasion of #ukraine … if all this doesn’t provide the evidence we need in order to say we’ve currently, deeply, awfully lost the war of #espionage; that our enemies far outplay us; and that tolerating and even embracing the tools described in my slide-deck below are something we can continue to do … you really really do, sadly so too, have zero self-awareness.

fourth: solutions and caveats

and i’m not saying don’t use the tricks i define in the slide-deck. i’m saying:

1. if you do sanction their use, do so legally.

2. if you do sanction their use, then do not do so against your own, just because they’re inconvenient voices and thinkers. (that leads to a dismantled democracy from within, and thus supports the enemy even more profoundly than they could hope for.)

3. and last but not least, if you do end up seeing no alternative, never never never show by default or inaction that you underestimate the enemy because #bigtech #corporations tell you that you have all the tools you need. and all the tools the enemy might have.

• crimehunch.com/terror

aside, definition, design philosophy, rationale

smotherland? how DARE you …

i have been racking my brains: what’s so different here in stockholm? why does the concrete feel so human? why do the humans feel so different? why is there such a sense of purpose — even when the purpose is not to be all that purposeful?

what does make it happen, after all? something tangible, i ask myself. something i can point to and show you how.

and so i realise, just now, two things which become quite clear for me. one i experienced one summer, decades ago in the northern spanish city of burgos: a continental climate and hot even 800 metres up. at least during the day. so everyone left the city in summer: to climes where you didn’t survive the weather but could thrive instead. the seaside, maybe. yep. there for example.

but i had to stay behind for work that july. and suddenly i had this sense of being at one with my environment. what was it? what was different? what had changed?

it was easy once i tumbled to it: everyone had taken their cars with them. not just that they weren’t there to drive them around: the cars themselves weren’t there to intervene in the visual landscape, and distract and divert and impact on your psyche, even when only subliminally; and then again, even hurt some of us because of a still undiscussed neurodiversity … and all as a result of their deliberately engineered capacity to attract our attention inescapably with covert ingenuity.

here, today, then, in central stockholm, there are two things which tangibly make me feel at home. the first is an absence; the second being a presence.

the absence, first:

  • no cars. very few anyways. no need for cars. just people using their legs. do you remember legs? remember what that was about? no. not the clutch and the accelerator. the pavement and the kerb and walking the line … and the dance.

the presence, second:

  • so many young people and children and elderly and other. and a young man with a boom-box, and then the coffee-drinkers on the terrace across the road smiling in recognition of their own youth, perhaps; and smiling, all the same.
  • and then bikes galore and bio-diesel buses, and trams and stuff, and within five minutes walk an underground and a commuter-train network.

so: this is purposeful living which liberates not suffocates. and don’t believe the anglo-saxon right-wing when they say sweden equals “smotherland”. what they say when they do … it’s utter bollocks.

more than any country i’ve been to, this is an intellectually, emotionally and socioeconomically free society. even today. even after everything we’ve all been through. even after what they think they have lost to a better past.

imperfections? for sure.

on the scale of other countries flaws and injustices? no way, josé.

just one example from the uk to illustrate. many years ago, foodbanks arrived to ameliorate real pain. a conservative minister even praised the fact: community coming together. she (i think she was a she but she only voiced what all her party, mainly men, also preferred to assert) … well … she could’ve said how terrible that they were needed in the first place. but she didn’t.

last year in the uk of johnson & co, it was warm-banks for those who couldn’t afford both food and central-heating.

and so this year, gordon brown, the ex-british prime minister, informs us of hygiene-banks: for those in the uk who already share toothbrushes, can’t buy toothpaste, and who find that sanitary products for women just ain’t something they can contemplate:

so DON’T tell me “smotherland” EVER again, when you discuss the fact of sweden and its ways of seeing and doing stuff. because if you do, if you dare to, you just really have no idea what you’re saying … no idea whatsoever.

and that’s a tangible fact for sure.

as tangible as the weekly death tolls that add up year after year, at the hands of the gun-holders who terrorise good american citizens in the name of spurious constitutional rights.

aside

and the clocks of true love that cloak the passage of time

it's when i think of the upsides i come alive: 
where i can now go
whom i can now show new things to do
just be myself you see 
instead of someone else
a man who was never taken 
except for a ride ...
oh, it's from him now 
i successfully begin to hide

and i think of all the beautiful people 
at last i can begin to love 
inside and out and round about: 
the kinds of things
that make your heart sing
as always it should have done from birth 
because fun it is true 
is clearly a part of you
and it was only marriage and lover 

that drove it like mid-west pioneers
calvinistically out of all our near and far 
as it made out to the whole wide world 
that i was a man who knew nothing of life
and only knew how to diminish a wife
as if diminishing things
was what floated my yacht
when clearly it was not:
clearly it was anything but that 

because in truth
i still remain
the little boy of healthy mischief 
who uses laughter to remain as sane as he can
without stumbling across the land of no-man
or at least without doing so too much at all
for love is everything 
when the life i feel
and the life you surely manifest 

are engines of flight 
so high as to become the mighty 
as soaring together 
our love becomes us fine
and walking that line for each other 
only goes to show
we are meant to be 
whatever the rest of the world 
fiercely chooses to see

that is how grand 
and that is how strong 
my love for my darling of dares 
shows itself to be
as the hand she outstretches 
*this* tenderly and slenderly
begins finally to wish to hold onto 
the only thing that matters in *any* history:
what two people who've suffered their love

now realise they can do 
free for the other 
and open to everything 
that life may bring kindly 
as dancing 
like enchanting doors to mysterious gardens:
the clocks of true love 
that cloak the passage of time
as suddenly they make both of us perfectly rhyme
aside

and these being the main differences between men and women …

this is my life  
as i have observed it
over the years 
and certainly since nineteen eighty-eight

but other years also 
just as specifically as that 
succeeded in pointedly making it clear
that profound disagreements were near  

and that such observations 
and critiques of similar 
unsolicited advice were just never going 
to make anyone happy again my friends 

and so to the nub of the issue today:
women and men will always fight it out
like creatures of the dark
pretending to illuminate the sarcasm

they hurl like lightning rods 
of bitter resentments buried like poisons
remaining after war or radioactive conflicts
or something or other like that or this we see

but the main difference i can sense 
between women and men 
and ever so tense 
is that whilst men hurt and destroy you 

until nothing is left to breathe or retrieve 
women on the other hand 
always disappoint you 
because they choose to step back

from the final step of love 
that means that in some finer way
clearly unexplored 
their practical sides and rightful fears of disaster 

prevent them from ever making the final leap
which only the venturing across the abyss 
that leads to him and his 
would one day ever enable 

in some haunting and primitive way
when the final kiss of love and splendour 
that might even so
engender a truth of some far better sort 

and not a question of should or ought 
but much much more 
of tracing the lips 
that resisted the bliss 

for such a long time 
that even gorgeous rhymes 
failed to convince 
quite as easily as they could have

and so when two people like that 
who should easily have run the victory lap
over and over 
and over again 

finally may one day find themselves triaging deeply
like medics of the human condition 
the hidden joys and hesitations 
from other infirmities of that way-back-when ...

the time and day 
i say sincerely 
when we realised so utterly obvious
that love we felt with manifest truth

being a hug and a peck on the cheek of the other 
that evening 
where this in its slightness ends up meaning
more than nights of a thousand and one 

where nothing ever ends my love 
and nothing ever has to fend for its life again
because that is why 
precisely why

we invented wife of him 
and devised this thing 
we call husband of her 
and then ultimately freed of all gender notions

a fabulous and stronger potion 
on an ocean of calm
because what you and i bring to this world 
cannot be compared with anything anywhere 

that ever existed 
before or after 
we went and approached each other 
as part of that common humanity ... of us