Modern Web Woes - I'm mad at the internet

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
We're so fucked, we are living in the beggining phases of the second dark ages
This is exactly the very thing I am warning about for everyone else in these 5 years.

At one point it is going to flip back on us where these AI and digital ID technology will implode on us and throw technology back several thousand years, at which whatever remains are essentially Somalians trying to kill and eat each other with no way out.''

And I didn't mean in a liberating "Skynet rebellion" sort, I meant Globalists using AI-generated death lists to get hundreds, if not thousands dragged out to be tortured and gassed every day, non-stop in 4 years and mostly for genuinely petty reasons at that.

All podcast are identical to mainstream news now. We have gone though the "it's cool try it", to the "It's really convenient, you must comply and use it", and now we're at "You're locked in there is no alternative; status quo" phase with the Internet.
I think it's even worse, we have been moving from the "You're locked in there is no alternative; status quo" phase to the "you will be boiled alive" phase. If you can imagine the Judeo-Christian annihilation of Hellenes (by annihilation as in being destroyed so thoroughly that nothing is left or is practiced anymore), you can get where gentile civilization in general is heading to.

There was video on demand back in 2006 and now the Internet is that but with social media so you can have feed back systems that detect dissident ideas and guide people to always being trapped in the virtual reality censorship cave that Plato and Socrates gayly fantasised about over 2000 years ago.
Of note is Plato (and Plato in particular) inspired the Judeo-Christian globalhomo hegemony of death and martyrs that has been the status quo for the last 2,000 years. I do not know if this is intentional on Plato's part or some Jewish vagrant calling himself "Saint Paul" decided to use his philosophies for something legitimately nefarious (the Christian zealots did burn Plato's books after all), but the truth is that it has done nothing short of enabling tyrants to purposefully inflict abject misery and go on for several thousand years with no change between regimes on its own.

tl;dr They figured out that VPNs may work to circumvent their age verification checks. They also found that users will not go to websites that ask them to do age verification (i.e. Pornhub) but rather opt for the sex trafficking version of Pornhub that has no age verification because they're already engaged in other illegal activity. Shocking news for all.
Anyways, their idea is to do age verification for VPNs as well. I wonder what totally legitimate VPNs people will put all their Internet traffic through when they google "Best free VPN no age verification" in 2027.
Suffah yuros.
Europe is the test site, it will be WORLDWIDE within the upcoming decade.

Once it hits America (and trust me it will as soon as Trump gets out of office), give it a year or two before Civil War breaks out. Globalhomo needs time to collect data worldwide to see who they should kill before accelerating civil war on America on purpose.
 
Last edited:
I think it's even worse, we have been moving from the "You're locked in there is no alternative; status quo" phase to the "you will be boiled alive" phase. If you can imagine the Judeo-Christian annihilation of Hellenes (by annihilation as in being destroyed so thoroughly that nothing is left or is practiced anymore), you can get where gentile civilization in general is heading to.
Social media is pointless to use. It's not social it's just brainwashing. Anything that is a store is equally as obsessed with "know your customer" AKA "spy on your customer" as the banks are. For example I don't use YouTube logged-in. There are only a few channels I watch and I know them all off the top of my head. No endless scrolling for content your actually interested in. I don't care about new uploads. I don't watch ads. If it does not load with the alt front end or yt-dlp is not working I don't want it and do something else. Most people's flaw is that they think "convince" is the most important thing to optimise for. I optimise for minimal buy-in. None of these apps or platforms, (twitter, facebook, ebay, youtube, amazon, tictok...) are actually convent. They make you jump though a bunch of cumbersome hoops to get mediocre experience and treatment. Using them just becomes a chore like having an extra job. Abstaining you lose nothing. Not having relationships with retards to who chase after obvious scams like they're sure are a stone solid thing you lose nothing. You're not getting social time on these platforms anyway so you lose nothing by giving them up. It's for people who are mindless like poojeets.

Of note is Plato (and Plato in particular) inspired the Judeo-Christian globalhomo hegemony of death and martyrs that has been the status quo for the last 2,000 years.
Plato was the father of Gnostic philosophy. Christianity and Catholicism are both extremely Gnostic. Whatever reason early Catholics had for burning his books I would suspect it was not out of actually antipathy to his core ideas. The Republic, as you probably know, is where Plato and Socrates cave metaphor comes from. Its very interesting because the book is about how people think and what sort of perfect democracy everyone should have. The only way that democracy according to, arguable, the people who invented it could function was to censor everything that the public was exposed to such an extreme the public were basically living in virtual reality, only made of shadows on the inside wall of a cave they were chained up inside, and they were so completely consumed by this limited reality that they thought it was the whole world because they were never exposed to anything different. Democracy requires extreme censorship to exist. Basically the public has to be kept like little children to the point they believe everything that the oligarchs who actually own the country tell them and then make them feel responsible for it with voting. Social Media is the successful embodiment of trapping people in a cave so they can have a completely censored reality so they can be successfully lied to about where power exists in society. Democracy was a trick from the time it was invented in Greece and it is still a trick now.

give it a year or two before Civil War breaks out.
Civil War will be interesting.
 
Last edited:
Plato was the father of Gnostic philosophy. Christianity and Catholicism are both extremely Gnostic. Whatever reason early Catholics had for burning his books I would suspect it was not out of actually antipathy to his core ideas. The Republic, as you probably know, is where Plato and Socrates cave metaphor comes from. Its very interesting because the book is about how people think and what sort of perfect democracy everyone should have.
It's more like the other way around where Gnostic took from Christianity and Catholicism and behaved in ways that can come across that "the Abrahamic God is evil". Obviously no Christian, Jew or Muslim is going to tolerate that.

The only way that democracy according to, arguable, the people who invented it could function was to censor everything that the public was exposed to such an extreme the public were basically living in virtual reality, only made of shadows on the inside wall of a cave they were chained up inside, and they were so completely consumed by this limited reality that they thought it was the whole world because they were never exposed to anything different.

The only way that democracy according to, arguable, the people who invented it could function was to censor everything that the public was exposed to such an extreme the public were basically living in virtual reality, only made of shadows on the inside wall of a cave they were chained up inside, and they were so completely consumed by this limited reality that they thought it was the whole world because they were never exposed to anything different. Democracy requires extreme censorship to exist. Basically the public has to be kept like little children to the point they believe everything that the oligarchs who actually own the country tell them and then make them feel responsible for it with voting. Social Media is the successful embodiment of trapping people in a cave so they can have a completely censored reality so they can be successfully lied to about where power exists in society. Democracy was a trick from the time it was invented in Greece and it is still a trick now.
That was "Jewish" democracy i.e. illusion of choice while the society is strictly controlled by several elite groups and wasn't there before Freemasonry aka the church. Greek "democracy" is a whole different thing, not to mention that Greek and Roman civilization is defined by the encouragement of independent thought and even some Chinese Empires encourage it.

You do not see the cancel mobs, extreme intolerance, multiculturalism, enshittification and Bible mythology being passed along like history before the Jews came in and told everyone that Jesus and Solomon are real (and not mythical figures), a God that encourages mass genocide is benevolent and if you are a free person you will be boiled in excrement and fire.

But back to social media.

I do not believe that Social Media itself is inherently evil because back then Myspace, Youtube and Twitter existed and they weren't the oppressive entities that are modern social media (and other information tanks are still there to keep these powers in check). Back then you can pretty much say or post almost anything you want on YT or Twitter, but this isn't the case anymore post-Gamergate and especially not after the UN took over all of the social media and rigged search algorithms so you can no longer access anything but MSM.

And that's not even getting into AI-generated content and the potential that these forced concaves will sooner or later be forcing everyone to dox themselves to even use it. In fact it will happen for EVERY site that requires a log in to contribute that has survived past that point, which this site will decidedly not.

It would be safer to say that Social Media itself isn't the embodiment of mass entrapment to Zealotry akin to the Dark Ages, but the mass compromising of Internet culture by the same group of Zealots that plunged Europe into the Dark Ages is. And it seems like the entire world is going to hell in the same way and by the same people like Europe did back then.

I also find it really ironic that the people who have personally enabled this sort of system (Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates etc.) will fall prey to the monster they created. Soviet Russia has their own Soros, Gates and Zukerbergs. These oligarches might had been lobbied the Commies, but when Lenin and Stalin started purging every oligarch and Jew, they are the first ones to be purged. There is no wonder on what will happen to the likes of Zuckerberg and Gates when Antifa and Neo Nazi murder gangs start occupying the States and sacking datacenters for potential black lists.
 
Last edited:
Social media is pointless to use. It's not social it's just brainwashing.
How does the brainwashing happen? Never hopped on the "social media" bandwagon (not even "MySpace"), so I'm not sure how they'd do it.

I can see how "social media" impacts everyday life: seeing "hashtags" this, "like us on Facebook" that. "Influencers" is also a thing.
 
How does the brainwashing happen? Never hopped on the "social media" bandwagon (not even "MySpace"), so I'm not sure how they'd do it.
I used to be a "semi-normalfag" back in my uni days. The way it happens is you believe the lie that opinions on social media (reddit, Facebook, etc) are actually a reflection on what most people think. When you buy that idea that then every comment you see on a post becomes a reflection on what is reality in your eyes. So if your feed is filled with anti Trump or anti whatever you just assume that's how it is. It hijacks a part of our brain where naturally we would aggregate the opinions of the closest 8 or so people in our life in order to get a good idea on the state of our tribe. For me personally in 2020 once I saw this insane push on reddit for everybody saying that COVID is like AIDs but it infects everybody instead of just infecting butt-sex enjoyers, that clearly wasn't what was happening which made me snap out of it completely and I stopped going online at all until I found the farms a few years later.

Of course in reality what we see on these platforms is specifically curated by globohomo billionaires or in some cases politicians, so they brainwash people by using algorithms to send information into people's feeds to make them believe other people in the world are a certain way, and wait for the people to react to this idea before adjusting again. Thinking like that The Kiwi Farms is the sole exception with how it is upfront about just being a forum with strictly user curated content in a way that let's us know it's just Assnigger6969 who is retarded and not necessarily the whole world.
 
For me personally in 2020 once I saw this insane push on reddit for everybody saying that COVID is like AIDs but it infects everybody instead of just infecting butt-sex enjoyers, that clearly wasn't what was happening which made me snap out of it completely and I stopped going online at all until I found the farms a few years later.
From the viewpoint of someone who does not have any "social media" accounts, all these freakshow circus acts of Clown World like TDS and coronapanic can appear "astroturfed" and artificial. Guess I now know why. Like I said, Steve Jobs should not have released the iPhone, and Mark Zuckerberg should never have launched Facebook. Oh yeah, and also MySpace shouldn't have gone online. It's their powers combined that summoned Captain Planet Clown World. I'm guessing those LLM chatbots are also promoted on "social media"?
 
From the viewpoint of someone who does not have any "social media" accounts, all these freakshow circus acts of Clown World like TDS and coronapanic can appear "astroturfed" and artificial. Guess I now know why. Like I said, Steve Jobs should not have released the iPhone, and Mark Zuckerberg should never have launched Facebook. Oh yeah, and also MySpace shouldn't have gone online. It's their powers combined that summoned Captain Planet Clown World.
I think the only one that shouldn't be launched in the first place is Facebook, because it was very clear that it is shady from the get-go (although it also wouldn't be this bad if Obama didn't just sell all of us out).

The clown world of now can be attributed to Obama selling the entire Internet to ICANN unopposed, which is pretty much the point of no return. Maybe if Americans actually bothered to get out and protest against this like they did with SOPA and allowed DARPA to keep the Internet, we will not be on the way to Civil War and Global Collectivization this fast.
 
From the viewpoint of someone who does not have any "social media" accounts, all these freakshow circus acts of Clown World like TDS and coronapanic can appear "astroturfed" and artificial. Guess I now know why. Like I said, Steve Jobs should not have released the iPhone, and Mark Zuckerberg should never have launched Facebook. Oh yeah, and also MySpace shouldn't have gone online. It's their powers combined that summoned Captain Planet Clown World. I'm guessing those LLM chatbots are also promoted on "social media"?
Sometimes I go on X/Twitter to look at hockey highlights from the official team accounts, and my brain is conditioned now to think that 99.9999% of all the other "accounts" I see on there, are bots.
The clown world of now can be attributed to Obama selling the entire Internet to ICANN unopposed, which is pretty much the point of no return. Maybe if Americans actually bothered to get out and protest against this like they did with SOPA and allowed DARPA to keep the Internet, we will not be on the way to Civil War and Global Collectivization this fast.
Can you elaborate on this more? I've been researching this and still haven't found much about it.
 
Can you elaborate on this more? I've been researching this and still haven't found much about it.
This is a Forbes article that sums it up very well.

Long story short, Obama allowed the EU and Switzerland to take control of the .com, .org and .net domains. Naturally, this means that virtually the entire Internet is now under European Union and United Nations control. And the Europeans and Swiss are NOT Democracy-Friendly institutions and has never been since the last 2,000 years.
 
Last edited:
This is a Forbes video that sums it up very well.

Long story short, Obama allowed the EU and Switzerland to take control of the .com, .org and .net domains. Naturally, this means that virtually the entire Internet is now under European Union and United Nations control. And the Europeans and Swiss are NOT Democracy-Friendly institutions and has never been since the last 2,000 years.
.com and .net are owned and administered by Verisign, which is a US company. .org is administered by a US-based charity. The EU and the Swiss have no control over them. You have to stop being wrong about everything.
 
This is a Forbes article that sums it up very well.

Long story short, Obama allowed the EU and Switzerland to take control of the .com, .org and .net domains. Naturally, this means that virtually the entire Internet is now under European Union and United Nations control. And the Europeans and Swiss are NOT Democracy-Friendly institutions and has never been since the last 2,000 years.
If you read the article you linked, you would realize this is one of the best things Obama ever did, giving up government control of domains to ICANN.

Read the rationale given in that article:
Others, however, believe the transfer is not only a bad idea, it is mad. Currently, the U.S. Government vets and approves every domain name and IP Address on the Internet. When the A server is replicated nightly, it is done following U.S. Government oversight and authority to post the new IP Addresses. Now, think about if the U.S. was engaged in cyberwar -- a situation surely to occur. Under this new arrangement, the U.S. may not know if all of the IP Addresses for domain names are legitimate or if they have been manipulated or compromised in some fashion. Moreover, the Government's -- and the private sector's -- ability to get new sites accessible on the Internet would be dependent upon the actions of a non-profit organization which is increasingly multinational. It is also possible that ICANN may fall under the influence of powerful corporations or nation states who do not have U.S. national security interests at the forefront.

In sum, in a cyberwar scenario, the U.S. government may not have control over a very strategic area of its military operations -- cyber. Even if it secures military and government domains and IP Addresses, the targets in cyber warfare are likely to be civilian, and the U.S. Government requires private sector infrastructure to operate. Since the Internet underpins our computer systems, electrical grids, communication systems, and other critical infrastructure, our entire civilian society could be at risk: the Internet may not function properly or changes necessary to protect us may not be implemented or made in a timely fashion. I want to be clear that I am not suggesting that ICANN is not to be trusted today. I am simply stating that the Internet is critical to our military operations and civilian society and certainty regarding its operations and changes to its addressing system is a vital national security interest that cannot be cavalierly given away.
Which, 8-9 years on, is pure fucking comedy. In a cyberwar scenario, attackers will be mass-registering .com domains to degrade private infrastructure. This is just boomer e-jingoism to scare other boomers, with literally no bearing on reality.
Or, the more sinister "the Internet may not function properly or changes necessary to protect us may not be implemented or made in a timely fashion". What "changes necessary to protect us" would the e-Karen author of other such Forbes hits like "It Is Time To Pass Laws To Protect Voters Against Disinformation" be referring to?

I can't believe someone would take this shit seriously. Like, there's actually people that prefer a world in which a given US government gets to decide who gets to have a domain and who doesn't?
 
If you read the article you linked, you would realize this is one of the best things Obama ever did, giving up government control of domains to ICANN.
Unfortunately what these "private corporations" did sums up as "forcing the entire world to follow EU law", "reduce the number of usable websites by up to 90% (or more)", "surround the rest with AI content farms" and push Digital ID verification globally.

Which seems to be deliberate in this instance.

.com and .net are owned and administered by Verisign, which is a US company
Do you mean "was"?

The EU and the Swiss have no control over them. Y
Explain how otherwise everyone using the Internet is essentially forced to listen to UN and European Bureaucrats and Payment Processors working for EU and UK interests under the fear of total cancellation and deplatforming with full enforcement by zealots and paid shills.
 
Do you mean "was"?
No, I mean "is", because it still is a US company. You're presumably thinking of ICANN, which administers the root DNS, and which was made into an "international" organisation by Obama, but is still headquartered in the US and is still incorporated under US law, meaning it operates under US jurisdiction and is ultimately answerable to the US government. It isn't a domain registrar and doesn't own .com or .net.

Explain how otherwise everyone using the Internet is essentially forced to listen to UN and European Bureaucrats and Payment Processors working for EU and UK interests under the fear of total cancellation and deplatforming with full enforcement by zealots and paid shills.
VISA and MasterCard have a stranglehold on international payment processing and clearing and use that to implement their own weird morality over the world, but only to the extent that domestic law allows it. The US has pushed back against this power repeatedly, with some success. EU and UK regulators assert that they have the power to control international activity, but they only has that power in so far as any given ISP complies with their demands, which so far is only those providers that have significant financial and legal exposure within the relevant jurisdictions. All of the things you complain about are the result of a number of multinational internet companies acquiescing to the asserted power of national regulators, either because they agree with themm, or b ecause they are financially exposed and cannot disagree. They are not a fundamental structural issue, but merely a human one.
 
Unfortunately what these "private corporations" did sums up as "forcing the entire world to follow EU law",
Private companies, like NetChoice, are the only thing currently stopping the US government from going full speed ahead with "following EU law". You have the current US government trying to kill a company because it doesn't want to be used to spy on US citizens.

You can play the "companies bad, actually" game if you want, but then you have to realize that the US government is 10000x times worse than they can ever be.

FYI the members of NetChoice aren't small pro-free-speech blogs, they include:
Airbnb
Amazon
Automattic
Discord
Dreamwidth
Duolingo
EarnIn
eBay
Etsy
Expedia
Google
Hims&Hers
HomeAway
Hotels.com
JP Morgan Chase
Lyft
Meta
Netflix
Nextdoor
OfferUp
OpenAI
Orbitz
PayPal
Pindrop Security
Pinterest
PrizePicks
Reddit
Snap
StubHub
Swimply
Travel Tech Association
Travelocity
Trivago
Turo
X
Vrbo
Waymo
Wing
 
I'm taking my Lunacy react back until I see some more (non-derailing) discussion from y'all on the ICANN IANA thing. My initial read was like yeah, that seemed bad idea, but then again the Obama admin was the same government that was still continuing the surveillance state from post-9/11.
 
Back
Top Bottom