Blog

The Singularity Has Already Happened

In mathematics, a singularity is where the equations go “non-linear”. Inputs go in, but the outputs are beyond understanding. In physics, it’s where the laws of three-dimensional Cartesian reality break down.

Ray Kurzweil hijacked the term and applied it to AI and exponential computing power: Moore’s Law would bring us all past the point where technology accelerates beyond human comprehension.

For Techno-Utopians, among them – the transhumanists, the Singularity will bring about a kind of eschatological event, a computerized “End Times” like a Rapture moment wherein technology acquires more brainpower than all of humanity combined, and deftly solves all our problems (unless the techno-doomers are right, and it annihilates us instead).

In Frazzledrip Overdrive, a recent piece that looked at ever-accelerating Future Shock, and the iterations of mass formation psychosis that causes – I was probably guilty of “burying the lede”.

It was that my current working theory is that “The Singularity” has already occurred:

I think that we are already in the post-singularity era. Right now. 

It happened within the last couple years with the AI wave – of third major technological wave of this century (internet, crypto, now AI) and the eighth major technological leap since the industrial revolution (electricity, radio/TV, telephones, semi-conductors, personal computers).

Now we’re past the point where the code is coding. The feedback loop there is already underway, and it too is accelerating…

What I mean by that is because we’re using AI and LLMs to cut code (create programming source code), and beyond that, those AI engines are producing computer code that is itself generating more code – we’ve essentially crossed the defining barrier of what the Singularity is supposed to be – which technology creating more intelligent versions of itself.

Granted – it has not resulted in an instantaneous Rapture-like moment of technological quantum leap across all aspects of our reality yet.

But if you haven’t noticed – since the advent of GPT 3 in 2023, itself an iteration of previous LLMs that were playing over at least a decade, the newer, faster, smarter iterations have been coming at a faster cadence and at shorter intervals.

Keep reading

Europe has gone mad

The EU’s obstinacy regarding the Ukraine issue is striking and demonstrates a profound disconnect from reality. The war is lost, yet Europe appears oblivious to this fact. Instead of acknowledging defeat, EU politicians, in their deluded state, seem to be plotting a second phase of the conflict. They claim they can win this war without U.S. support, but what if they fail? Will they then beg for a ceasefire?

Let us revisit history. The Minsk 1 and 2 agreements, signed between Germany, France, Ukraine, and Russia (2014-2015), were meant to halt the fighting and grant the Donbass region some form of autonomy within Ukraine. However, Zelensky, despite his election promises of rapprochement with Russia, had other plans. He aimed to reclaim Crimea and bring the Donbass under his control, escalating the bombing campaigns. By January 2022, the bombardment of Donbass intensified, resulting in numerous civilian casualties, particularly in Donetsk.

It later emerged that the former British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, and the U.S. (under the Biden Administration) had instructed Zelensky not to make peace with Russia. We recall the negotiations in Turkey that led to the Istanbul Communiqué, which proposed that Ukraine abandon its NATO aspirations, impose military restrictions, and secure Western support in case of aggression. The talks nearly reached an agreement, with both sides considering significant concessions, but abruptly halted in May 2022. The West, uninterested in peace, sought Russia’s downfall, and the process was derailed following the alleged “false flag” incident in Bucha.

With the arrival of the new administration under the leadership of Donald Trump, efforts are underway to broker a sustainable peace treaty between Ukraine and Russia – not merely a ceasefire, but lasting peace. However, Ukraine’s stance has stalled progress. While the U.S. claims it doesn’t need Ukraine or Europe for peace, this is, of course, nonsensical. The resolution must come from Ukraine and Russia, even if the U.S. (under the Biden Administration) instigated the conflict. A peace treaty or capitulation is essential.

Keep reading

French (Government-Owned!) Media: ‘How Could You Not’ Compare Trump to Hitler?

France 24 is a state-owned, taxpayer-funded TV news station that broadcasts French propaganda. That’s its explicit, intended purpose: In the leadup to its 2006 launch, then-President Jacques Chirac proclaimed, “We must have the ambition of a big, round-the-clock news channel in French, equal to the BBC or CNN for the English-speaking world. It is essential for the influence of our country.”

Which means, it’s not like a Fox News, an ABC News, or an MSNBC — i.e. a privately-held news organization that expresses the opinions (and promotes the causes) of its corporate owners. France 24 is a subsidiary of the French government. Its opinions and causes are reflective of France.

Or, more specifically, the French political leadership.

That’s an important point to keep in mind, because three days ago, a méchant news story appeared on France 24: What parallels do historians see between the Trump administration and the Nazi regime?

The story began with one of the mainstream media’s favorite tricks: They repeat a lie over and over again, and then they do a story about it because “everyone’s talking about it.” You know the dealio:

Since the start of Trump’s second term as US president, comparisons between his administration and the Nazi regime are back in the spotlight.  

Yeah, that’s sort of true… because you’re repeating it!

Keep reading

Elon Musk Dishes About the Darker Side of a Tech Billionaire With Epstein Ties

If you haven’t caught up to why Elon Musk, tech billionaire and the man behind the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), accused a fellow tech founder of all kinds of nefarious business and personal practices, come a little closer and we’ll explain. 

Recently on an appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Musk alleged that Reed Hoffman, creator of LinkedIn, was behind bankrolling pre-election lawsuits against Donald Trump, bankrolled astro-turfed protests against Tesla through his big donations to ActBlue, and was involved with  Jeffrey Epstein. 

This is how that part of the interview went. 

During the interview, Rogan and Musk commiserated over the lawfare run against Trump before the election. 

Rogan It’s terrifying that they could do to a guy so brazenly to a guy who was the president for four years.

Musk: That lawsuit was funded by Reid Hoffman, a Dem donor, and also an Epstein client. The plot thickens. 

Rogan: It’s so blatant. It’s so obvious. The SpaceX lawsuit, the Trump stuff, it’s so obvious. 

Musk: Known Epstein clients who are obviously extremely powerful—they’re powerful politically and very wealthy—are Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, and Reed Hoffman. And some others, too. But those three—so, why was Reed Hoffman so intent on destroying Trump? 

Rogan: Do you think it’s because they’re worried about the list coming out?

Musk: Yeah. One of the reasons, yeah. 

Rogan: It’s so frustrating to be a situation where the list isn’t coming out…

Musk: Maybe it’ll come out tomorrow.

Rogan: Well, then why did they release bullsh*t today? 

Musk: I don’t know.

Rogan: Well, what’s the point of handing these people a happy folder to wave around in front of the camera when nothing in it is new? It doesn’t make any sense. It’s not encouraging. 

Musk: Like I said, the tough thing they’ve got is they’ve been made captain of a ship with a hostile crew. So, it’s not like you’ve got magical powers. You’re made captain of a hostile crew, but you still have a hostile crew. They’ve got to bring in people who are helpful rather than obstructionist. 

One case against Trump was obviously a patchwork, some would say fraudulently constructed, judge-shopped effort. Indeed, in the E. Jean Carroll case, the New York state legislative Democrats passed a bespoke, temporary law they called the New York Adult Survivors Act, which momentarily lifted the statute of limitations on sexual assault cases (though decades old), long enough for Hoffman’s bought and paid for defamation Carroll v Trump to be slid into the court process (P. Diddy victims used this opening as well).

Keep reading

Is Russia At War With Ukraine, Or With The West?

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock this week, on entering a “new era of nefariousness”:

I say clearly and across the Atlantic, what is right and what is wrong shall never be irrelevant to us. No one wants and no one needs peace more than the Ukrainians and Ukraine. The diplomatic efforts of the U.S. are of course important here. But such a peace must be just and lasting and not just a pause until the next attack… We will never accept a perpetrator-victim reversal. A perpetrator-victim reversal would be… the end of security for the vast majority of countries. And it would be fatal for the future of the United States.

Baerbock’s declaration that a “perpetrator-victim reversal” (a Täteropferumkehr, I’m reliably informed) would be “fatal” to the U.S. was historic. It was accompanied by a promise that “as transatlantacists,” Europeans must “stand up for our own interests, our own values, and our own security.” Although new leaders are ready to take the reins in Germany, she said, there can be no waiting for the transfer of power. Immediately, “Germany must take the lead at this historic milestone.”

A few years ago Baerbock pleaded for patience with a British conservative who demanded to know why Germany wasn’t providing Leopard tanks to Ukraine.

Now, with Donald Trump cutting off weapons deliveries and shutting down access to ATACMS missiles, Baerbock’s speech is an expression of more enthusiastic European support for continued fighting.

The war in Ukraine is often called a proxy conflict between Russia and the West or Russia and the U.S., but it increasingly looks more like a fight between Baerbock’s “transatlanticists” and those who believe in “spheres of influence.” In preparing Racket’s accompanying “Timeline: The War in Ukraine,” I found both sides articulated this idea repeatedly.

In January, 2017, as he was preparing to relinquish his seat to Mike Pence, Joe Biden alluded to the recent election of Donald Trump in a speech at Davos. Describing the “dangerous willingness to revert to political small-mindedness” of “popular movements on both the left and right,” Biden explained:

We hear these voices in the West—but the greatest threats on this front spring from the distinct illiberalism of external actors who equate their success with a fracturing of the liberal international order. We see this in Asia and the Middle East… But I will not mince words. This movement is principally led by Russia.

Biden even then lumped Trump and Putin together, as enemies of the “liberal international order.” Russian counterparts like Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, meanwhile, spoke of a “post-West world order” where diplomatic relations would be based on “sovereignty” and the “national interests of partners.” These are two fundamentally irreconcilable worldviews. Was conflict inevitable, or could peace have held if Russia didn’t strike in 2022?

There’s no question who invaded whom. Hostilities began in February, 2022 with an angry speech by Vladimir Putin and bombs that landed minutes later in Ukraine. Little discussion of the “why” of the war took place in the West, however.

Phrases like “unprovoked aggression” became almost mandatory in Western coverage. Politico interviewed a range of experts and concluded that what Putin wanted was “a revanchist imperialist remaking of the globe to take control of the entire former Soviet space.” This diagnosis of Putin’s invasion as part of a Hitlerian quest for Lebensraum and a broader return to national glory might have merit, but it was also conspicuously uncontested. A differing article by University of Chicago professor John Mearshimer declaring the crisis “the West’s fault” made him, as The New Statesman just put it, “the world’s most hated thinker.” Few went there after.

Russians and Ukrainians don’t have the typical profiles of ancient warring tribes. They have a deeply intertwined history, with citizens of both countries retaining many of the same customs, jokes, and home remedies, while living in the same crumbling Soviet buildings, with fondness for the same cabbage soup and moonshine. There are huge numbers of mixed/bilingual families and many famous cultural figures (including my hero Nikolai Gogol) are claimed by both countries. They’ve fought before, but what jumped out reviewing this “Timeline” is how much it seemed that these old Slavic neighbors mostly fall out now over attitudes toward the West.

Keep reading

Elon Musk says X was knocked offline by ‘massive cyberattack’ that originated in ‘Ukraine area’

Billionaire entrepreneur and DOGE chief Elon Musk claimed Monday that X went dark as the result of a “massive cyberattack” that originated in the “Ukraine area.”

“We’re not sure exactly what happened,” Musk told Fox Business Network host Larry Kudlow about the apparent operation targeting his social media platform.

“But there was a massive cyberattack to try to bring down the X system, with IP addresses originating in the Ukraine area,” the world’s richest man added.

Musk, 53, did not immediately provide additional evidence of who may have been responsible.

Cybercriminals have been known to create false IP addresses to impersonate computer systems from different parts of the world, a practice known as “spoofing.”

Keep reading

Zelensky Must Prepare Elections, Cede Territory To End The War: Trump Admin

The Trump White House wants Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to begin planning elections or else consider stepping down as a condition for the resumption of US military aid and intelligence sharing, a fresh NBC report reveals. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also said Monday that Ukraine must cede territory.

Ukraine “would have to make concessions over land that Russia had taken since 2014 as part of any agreement to end the war,” The NY Times reports. “The most important thing that we have to leave here with is a strong sense that Ukraine is prepared to do difficult things, like the Russians are going to have to do difficult things, to end this conflict or at least pause it in some way, shape or form,” Rubio told reporters as he flew from the US to Jeddah – as quoted in multiple outlets.

American and Ukrainian officials are meeting in Saudi Arabia. The question of elections in Ukraine, which have been canceled indefinitely under martial law, has moved to the forefront also as pressure is still on for Kiev to sign the minerals deal.

“As President Trump demonstrated by reading President Zelenskyy’s message at the joint session, the Ukrainians have made positive movement. With meetings in Saudi this coming week, we look forward to hearing more positive movement that will hopefully ultimately end this brutal war and bloodshed,” White House National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes said this weekend when asked about Trump’s requirements.

Rubio in Riyadh has further explained, “The important point in this meeting is to establish clearly their intentions, their desire, as they’ve said publicly now numerous times, to reach a point where peace is possible,” Rubio said of Tuesday’s delegation meeting with the Ukrainians. “And then we’ll have to determine how far they are from the Russian position, which we don’t know yet either. And then once you understand where both sides truly are, it gives you a sense of how big the divide is and how hard it’s going to be.”

There’s widespread acknowledgement in Washington that Ukrainian forces will never be able to pry the four annexed territories in the east back from Russia.

Keep reading

Is This the Beginning or the End of a New Cold War?

When European Union leaders met in Brussels on February 6th to discuss the war in Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron called this time “a turning point in history.” Western leaders agree that this is an historic moment when decisive action is needed, but what kind of action depends on their interpretation of the nature of this moment.

Is this the beginning of a new Cold War between the U.S., NATO and Russia or the end of one? Will Russia and the West remain implacable enemies for the foreseeable future, with a new iron curtain between them through what was once the heart of Ukraine? Or can the United States and Russia resolve the disputes and hostility that led to this war in the first place, so as to leave Ukraine with a stable and lasting peace?

Some European leaders see this moment as the beginning of a long struggle with Russia, akin to the beginning of the Cold War in 1946, when Winston Churchill warned that “an iron curtain has descended” across Europe.

On March 2nd, echoing Churchill, European Council President Ursula von der Leyen declared that Europe must turn Ukraine into a “steel porcupine.” President Zelenskyy has said he wants up to 200,000 European troops on the eventual ceasefire line between Russia and Ukraine to “guarantee” any peace agreement, and insists that the United States must provide a “backstop,” meaning a commitment to send U.S. forces to fight in Ukraine if war breaks out again.

Russia has repeatedly said it won’t agree to NATO forces being based in Ukraine under any guise. “We explained today that the appearance of armed forces from the same NATO countries, but under a false flag, under the flag of the European Union or under national flags, does not change anything in this regard,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on February 18. “Of course this is unacceptable to us.”

But the U.K. is persisting in a campaign to recruit a “coalition of the willing,” the same term the U.S. and U.K. coined for the list of countries they persuaded to support the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. In that case, only Australia, Denmark and Poland took small parts in the invasion, Costa Rica publicly insisted on being removed from the list, and the term was widely lampooned as the “coalition of the billing” because the U.S. recruited so many countries to join it by promising them lucrative foreign aid deals.

Keep reading

Good Riddance! Crews Erasing Black Lives Matter Street Mural Near White House

Workers started removing the massive “Black Lives Matter” painting in the middle of a street just a block away from the White House on Monday.

Last week, Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) introduced legislation demanding Washington, D.C. either paint over the BLM street or lose federal funding and that “Black Lives Matter Plaza” be renamed Liberty Plaza.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser posted to 𝕏 last week, announcing the mural would be removed to avoid being “distracted by meaningless congressional interference.”

“The mural inspired millions of people and helped our city through a painful period, but now we can’t afford to be distracted by meaningless congressional interference. The devastating impacts of the federal job cuts must be our number one concern,” she wrote.

Keep reading

Digital Deception: How Social Media Helps Corrupt Politicians Stay in Power

In today’s world, social media is everywhere. It’s how we connect, share, and get our news. But what if I told you it’s also one of the most powerful tools corrupt politicians use to stay in power? That’s right. Behind the memes, the viral videos, and the endless streams of posts, there’s a darker game being played. It’s a game of misinformation, fake support, and online manipulation. And it’s working better than ever.

Let’s break it down. How do they do it? And why should you care?


The Misinformation Machine

Misinformation is the fuel that keeps the engine running. Politicians, especially those in power, know that controlling the narrative is everything. Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are perfect for spreading half-truths and outright lies. Why? Because these platforms are designed to keep you scrolling. They reward sensationalism, not accuracy.

Here’s how it works: A politician or their team plants a story. Maybe it’s about a rival. Maybe it’s about a policy that sounds great but is actually terrible. The story gets picked up by bots—fake accounts programmed to share content. These bots make the story look popular, so real people start sharing it too. Before you know it, the story is everywhere. And once it’s out there, it’s hard to stop.

The goal? To confuse you. To make you doubt what’s real and what’s not. And when you’re confused, you’re easier to control.


Astroturfing: Fake Grassroots Support

Ever heard of astroturfing? It’s when politicians create the illusion of widespread public support for something. They make it look like regular people are rallying behind an idea, when in reality, it’s all staged.

Here’s an example: Let’s say a politician wants to pass a law that benefits big corporations. They know regular people won’t like it. So, they hire a PR firm to create fake social media accounts. These accounts post messages like, “This law will create jobs!” or “This is good for the economy!” They might even organize fake protests or rallies, complete with paid actors holding signs.

The result? It looks like there’s a groundswell of support. News outlets pick up the story, and suddenly, the law seems popular. But it’s all a lie. And social media makes it easy to pull off.

Keep reading