I'm convinced...now more than ever

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

Most definitely possible. I was merely just pointing out that there would 'also' have to be some human intervention (to pay the bills), that's all.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh my gosh, what ever is your point here? I only offered up that AI might work on the technical side, but AI wouldn't be very good at paying ATS's bills. And you responded with what appears to be a disagreement, and then some nonsensical jibberish about standards organizations and AI funding. So...?????

The bolded above would be....my point.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh my gosh, what ever is your point here? I only offered up that AI might work on the technical side, but AI wouldn't be very good at paying ATS's bills. And you responded with what appears to be a disagreement, and then some nonsensical jibberish about standards organizations and AI funding. So...?????

The bolded above would be....my point.

originally posted by: SchrodingersRat
a reply to: YourFaceAgain

As you noted, I don't think we're actually allowed to have this discussion.

Allowed?

Allowed by whom?

And what actual discussion are you referencing?

Quite clearly, the discussion I indicated in the very next line of the post you're replying to. Seeing who people think are the disinfo agents.

I said we're not allowed because I thought it was against the T&C to outright accuse other members of that by name. Maybe I'm wrong?

I just think it'd be funny because most people will be way off the mark.

a reply to: ksihkahe

Well, I guess I am not among the 'Nobody' which you started your reply with. I think your answer is certainly plausible.

I don't have a preconceived notion of the answer, I honestly don't. I just have a pretty strong sense that 'something' is going on, more than what meets the eye. The question is...'what?'.

As you know from our many previous conversations (here, off-line and elsewhere), I am pretty objective and generally don't just arbitrarily jump to conclusions with no basis.

I have specifically avoided suggesting something like some grand CIA (or like) plot, because as you have correctly pointed out, ATS isn't big enough to warrant this. But that doesn't mean some (other, possibly smaller) person / group isn't orchestrating the continued operation for some ulterior motivation. This is my underpinning theme more than anything else.

a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

Understood (now). Thank you, and I don't take exception to your hypothesis. As it stands right this moment, there are any number of possibilities which could be in play, and quite possibly a combination of several at the same time.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

Agreed. We're on the same page. I was just responding to your questions with my opinion of the answers.

As I've noted elsewhere, there are a whole lot of possibilities still on the table.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: YourFaceAgain

Most definitely possible. I was merely just pointing out that there would 'also' have to be some human intervention (to pay the bills), that's all.

I get what you're saying, I just disagree. If we're genuinely worried about AI developing some form of self-awareness and going off and doing things it wasn't necessarily meant or designed to do, I don't think it learning to make digital payments is all that far-fetched. But I'm not gonna keep going back and forth with you on it. It's a good thread, I don't want to disrupt it arguing over a relatively minor detail.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Agreed.

We could both be right almost as equally as both being wrong.

There's lots of money being tossed around. With ATS not drawing a profit let alone operating costs, as you said. It has to come from somewhere.

a reply to: ArMaP

Great info. And, thanks!

You have pointed out a good technicality issue. Yes, the certificate is indeed still in place (ownership wise), but it has not been applied to the website for whatever reason. Otherwise, you wouldn't get the lock symbol with caveat that some of the mixed content is not secure. So, I agree with your statement technically speaking, but from an operational perspective it is not fully in place. There could be variety of reasons why, but I guess my point is, most of these reasons are easily rectified. So, why haven't they been? (rhetorical question).

I am not completely closed to the idea the owner is simply just MIA. This is certainly possible. However, given all the other points I listed, it seems very unlikely.

Regarding your points on storage; I am glad to hear you don't have issues. I may be somewhat biased in my assessment here, but it is because in my line of work we are dealing with data sets which are exponentially larger than the ATS storage requirements (i.e. dozens of petabytes), which lives in an active-active environment with 100% redundancy, replication and disaster recovery (DR) storage at well. We have a whole team of people who do nothing BUT storage maintenance, both from a hardware and data integrity standpoint. The data in question is all 'mission-critical' data which the entire northern hemisphere would begin to see the effects of within a matter of less than 20 minutes if it were to become corrupted somehow. It has a ripple effect across North America in minutes, and spreads to Europe within an hour.

a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

It's funny, not 30 seconds after your post did I get a alert notification of an AI based cyber attack taking place to some of our users in one of our networks. Some sort of an AI spearfishing type attack. Pretty clever one too!

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

Fair enough, and understood.

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: nugget1

I appreciate that perspective. It holds water as they say. A liberal owned website posing as an arch conservative website in order to catfish loose mouthed conservatives for possible future hunting down. I can see that train of thought so why would so many solid conservatives not understand this and keep opening their mouths exposing themself to this future prosectuion?

'Another point about the ''liberals'' on this site, you say they are singing Biden's praises. I say, ''really""? Among those I read here who are labeled liberal I find none who ''sing his praises, instead I find most, like me find him a sad excuse for a potus ans wish he would just, go away.

The inability to understand consequences isn't specific to party affiliation. The number of people who openly boast about their 'prepping' cache astounds me. Why advertise?

If you haven't seen the post on just about everu thread dealing with Biden's mental and physical decline by two tag-teamers insisting the guy is sharp as a tack and going into their Trump 'whataboutism' then I think you may have missed quite a few threads.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
You have pointed out a good technicality issue. Yes, the certificate is indeed still in place (ownership wise), but it has not been applied to the website for whatever reason. Otherwise, you wouldn't get the lock symbol with caveat that some of the mixed content is not secure.

I don't see any reference to mixed content not being secure in Opera, Edge or Firefox.

What are ATS’s strengths? What can you use the information here for?

It’s certainly a think tank and a collection of minds.
It’s a treasure trove for books or movie ideas. Ones that are not necessarily copyrighted because we are “anonymous”
It’s a first step for possible whistleblowers.
It’s a false sense of anonymity.
It’s a social experiment/experience.

Now who could benefit from the above?

Of course an alphabet agency, but so could a writer or producer.

a reply to: TheLieWeLive

Of course an alphabet agency, but so could a writer or producer.

I find it very hard to believe Dorko has any affiliation with a 3 letter agency.

Your second statement is a good point. However, you’d think we’d see our content elsewhere, if that’s the case.

As a long long time lurker and to add onto this thread - it has probably been discussed here before - I have noticed something odd.

I have quite a large collection of bookmarks in a folder solely for ATS.

These bookmarks are anything I have found interesting, or too keep an eye on to look back at some point in the future and reflect.

That time is now.

A large proportion of the bookmarks link to threads that have been deleted. I still have the thread titles due to the bookmarks.

The majority of those threads lead back to a certain topic, can you guess what it is?

I have 250~ of these bookmarks spanning back to just before 2010.

a reply to: L.A.B

I'll take a wild guess. Assorted topics scrutinizing Obama and his connections to the globalist agenda, and how that spells doom for the republic?

a reply to: L.A.B

“A large proportion of the bookmarks link to threads that have been deleted. I still have the thread titles due to the bookmarks.”

If they were in the Mud-pit, that explains that. Everything in the pit was deleted by Dorko. He said he was archiving it - he lied.

a reply to: L.A.B

Well, we have no idea what would be in your personal book marks, so please do tell.

However, as KKLOCO noted, if they were all Mud-pit threads, then this would explain it, but if not I'd certainly be curious to know what they are. These are all pieces to the puzzle we are (all) trying to assemble here.

Thx.