154- Infinite Data a Map of Your Life

Video Transcript:

All right, man. Welcome to the introduction of episode 154 for Crow 7 radio. James Lingerness with me today and we have the great Baldini, which of course, is a pseudonym. We're going to get into great depth about data collection and you might be surprised to learn that even your TV is a data collection device. We will begin to address what's done with data and what the collection of mass amounts of data allow the people who control the data to achieve. Anyhow, let's jump in with Jason Lingerness and the great Baldini. Cheers. All right, man. Welcome to Crow 7 radio. This is episode 154. I have Jason Lingerness with me and the great Baldini truth be told. That's a pseudonym. I'm sure you figured it out and just so you're clear, it has nothing to do with the movie from the Marine Corps, the great Santini or the movie about the Marine Corps. Anyhow, welcome Jason. Good morning, Crow. So how's it? Beautiful day after a rainy night. How about you? I actually got down to the beach for the first time. We were in the 60s yesterday. It's going to rain today, but let's just jump right in and maximize our time. We should probably do an update about shoot the moon in the film. Yes, I have been communicating with some folks down New Orleans. I have a few options and I should have that nailed down very shortly. Certainly by the time this goes out and we will add in an addendum for that. All right, on my end of the spectrum, I've tapped some old friends and I may have a viable streaming option. It's not easy because of bandwidth and other things, but I am very hopeful that we'll be able to stream the film out to people which will eliminate the worry of geography, no matter where you are. Well, that's not wholly true. This may not stream to some places. I've had a lot of trouble with Russia. So we will see whether I allow a live stream to Russia or not. And there's a little bit of concern about a couple other places because if they do underhanded things, Lord only knows what becomes of the film then anything else, Jason. Nope. We're going to be discussing technocracy, privacy, and the surveillance state with the great Beldeni. All right. I think we'll just cut that down to ball. Any but welcome, sir. Well, thanks for having me, Crow and Jason. It's a pleasure to be with you today. So Jason, why don't you go ahead and tear us up? So Baldeni, someone I have been communicating with for quite some time and has a very interesting and rich life that he has led. And we're just going to get right into this and let him present who he is to the listening audience. And I think you're really going to enjoy this. He's had a lot of experiences that will fill in the blanks for a lot of things that you're already aware of out there as far as this whole surveillance technology that's pervasive everywhere today. But go ahead, my friend. All right. So I think any thinking of where person is pretty hip already to the fact that there is a wide variety of censorship going on. You've seen it certainly in the modern day book, Burning Crow dealing with your channel and certainly anybody who's dealing with what we would call the truth movement. And really truth be told most of what we focus on is not the truth, but the lies that are propagated by we're called the powers that be here, the powers that ought not be. I had some early on had some experiences. I'm something of a auto-diagnactic polymath. I'm interested in a wide variety of interdisciplinary studies and thought that that was the best way to learn as much as I could about everything because many things are related. For example, the inverse square law applies in a variety of different physical disciplines. And I have work in a field of applied physics for the last almost 40 years now. Early on in my life, I scored very high on a number of different standardized tests, including some IQ tests. And back, they didn't even reveal the test results of those to me until well, much later I discovered it was actually too high for them to measure. So they had to estimate. So they were afraid that that would affect my social skills. As a teenager, after again, having scored high on a number of standardized tests, including a perfect score in a PSAT, I was given the opportunity to have a full scholarship to the NROTC, which is the Marine Corp. And I was interested in law school. And again, my interest at the time was I felt like, well, the laws are made by politicians. Most politicians are lawyers. So I started law school and go from there and change the laws from within. And of course, little did I know. So what happened? I took the Azabab test, which is the entrance exam for the military and set a score that was apparently record breaking there where I took it in Fort Texas in 1984. And so at that time, they extended the offer of the full scholarship they wanted me to change my MOS, which is your method of service, from Jag Corp, which is Judge Advocate General, to intelligent services. I declined for a number of different reasons, probably, which I won't get into here. But the interesting part of the story is that about three and a half years later, I received notice from my recruiting sergeant, who was unhappy that I had backed out at the last moment. I will specify that I did sign all the paperwork, went through the entire process up until the swearing and I backed out for, again, other personal reasons. So I was working in audio at the time. And so I was very familiar with some cutting edge digital technology. And again, this is in 1988. So as a root, so they offered, if I would be interested in working as a civilian contractor to do some forensic audio analysis on some audio information that they acquired through Serb Tissus memes, I was interested. So I agreed and it paid well. So I went to a field office in Dallas where I was met by some interesting gentlemen from a variety of different agencies. One of them introduced himself as being from the DIA. And I said, don't you mean the CIA? He was unamused. He said, no, that's the fence intelligence agency. When I said, I've never heard of it. He said, well, that's the point. They apparently don't spend anything on public relations. But the interesting part of the story, I spent about two full days working on a project. But most of the first day, almost the entire first day was spent on the disclaimers and the things that you can't say and what they were interested in keeping secret, which at the time was their methods and means of acquisition. And specifically, the method and means of acquisition of this particular data set had to do with how they got it. And that was, and again, you have to understand that this was in 1988 technology that they were using a television. And as anyone who's familiar with the physics of how audio works, a microphone and a speaker are essentially the same transducer engine. Sound waves propagate. It's a pressure wave. It hits a medium. We call it diaphragm. It starts to move. We use an electromagnetic field to tap that movement. And then we can get a small electrical signal and amplify that and do interesting things with it. Like record speech or music. Well, speaker works just the opposite. A modulated DC voltage is pushed into a diaphragm. It moves and that moves air and we hear it. So any speaker can be rewired to be used as a microphone. So they were using a standard one-inch television speaker and tapping off the back end to pick up sound in the room. And they were also using at the time they would use a light sensing diode, which basically it's function or at least it stated function was to modulate and adjust the light levels of the TV. So a dark room, the TV wouldn't be too bright. In a brighter room, the TV would light up that sort of thing. But I could be used as a crude camera. You couldn't tell much. You could tell shapes in the room movement. You could determine certain features and probably the gender of a person whether or not they were in the room, that sort of thing. But it was fairly crude. But they could at that time tap into any location but had cable television. They could easily tap into that. And if they were in close proximity, they could use a variety of dipolar antennas from outside to literally sucking off the back side, regardless of whether television was powered up or not. And that was the means and method of acquisition for that data set. I will say that it was fairly benign. It was uninteresting to me. The people being monitored either had no awareness that they were being monitored or full awareness and therefore didn't mention anything. But that was the first opportunity that I had in the first exposure I had to working with the intelligence community. So Paul Dene, let's just blow this out a bit. So we're talking back in the 80s. Those were tube televisions. Basically, what you're stating is that each one of them could be a microphone to pick up the audio in the room. And a crude, let's call it video that's probably not the right word. A crude imagery could be deduced when the television was on. We're a long ways from there. What's your estimation about what the TV's today are doing? Well, certainly with the internet of things and smart products, not just televisions, but every product that you have that has a chip in it, and what can be, and certainly is being monitored to aggregate a number of metadata sets from every individual. So whether it's your television, whether it's your smartphone, your tablet, your device, the brilliant part of this is what they have done is gotten us to become in love with technology. And so we readily and greedily purchased the next newest thing, and the more technology it has, the more we grab it. And so we're offering up our information for free to those who want it. And everyone should be aware that if you get a product or service for free, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If it's for free, you are the product. Not only are you the product, but I would point out it's one thing to go into a deal like that where you want to use some new tech and just say, okay, I don't give a damn what data they get, but what you're laying down here is it's complete snapshot of your entire life. That's correct, bro. And that's really the purpose of this conversation is to make people aware that not only is there data being gathered, but what kind of data and how that data is being used. And I should probably point out a couple of things here at the outset, the first being that I think it's notable that none of the information that we're going to talk about here is really in any way at this time classified the classification of the sensitive information that they had again, what they wanted to prevent was be discussing the means and method of data capture at that time that has long since expired. Most of the data that we'll talk about today is easily accessible. Much of it actually is gathered directly from their website, cia.gov and s a.gov, d i s.gov and some of it from the electronic freedom foundation. But this is all easily accessible to anybody. In fact, it's not even being censored by Google. And that's how really how little they think of our awareness. There it is. Let's lay down what you just said. Nothing here that we're going to talk about is top secret or anything that any person who's not lazy couldn't go online and research and just to make a fine point so much of what we see going on the world is predicated on the laziness of us all. There is so much you can do through research. This whole podcast is based on that. You can do research to know things. But most of us have families, jobs and a number of other things that just by the time you're done with everything life requires of you, you're not interested. But it should be well understood that everything we're laying down here could be researched by any individual listening. Jason, you want to jump in? Well, just a thought here that has been in my mind for the whole time here. Cathode Ray Tubes, the televisions have been around for quite some time. So I'm taking a wild guess here that for decades before the 1980s that some agencies may have been able to use those as surveillance devices. Do you think that's a good hypothesis? Absolutely. Jason, so it's again published information. Again, this is no longer secret. But the information community has since the mid 1940s since the end of World War II been gathering information, non-military, non-sensitive information from every US citizen, including, for example, they had a program where they monitored every single telegraph that was sent both domestically and internationally and captured that data for use later. What really has changed and has been a remarkable import since the early 1990s is that that aggregates a lot of data. So it takes time and effort, don't really store the data, but to go through and analyze it. Most things aren't that interesting to them, frankly. What do you buy at the store, that sort of stuff, until recently hasn't been of great interest. They were interested in what they considered and what they call threats, but that's a misnomer. I mean, you've got to understand that they don't consider anybody really a threat. It's a joke to them. It might be an inconvenience. It might be something that there, it's kind of an irritant, but it's not a threat. You should also bear in mind that really since the early history of the intelligence community, and that's largely staffed by military personnel, right? So they're already kind of compromised in that way. And then the rest are a few mathematicians and research scientists, but they early on since the 1950s adopted many aspects of stagecraft and misdirection from professional performing musicians and notably the ability to misdirect, deceive and create sort of this illusionary experience. So it's often largely based on the desire of the audience to want to believe the illusion. So we want to believe we live in a free and open society. And you know, irrespective of the wealth of evidence, the contrary, that we can see every day, even directly from those who are performing the task of just pervasive and a whole cell spying on just common people, most are going to argue vociferously in order to protect the illusion, which is really more of a delusion for themselves and others that they believe that they believe they live in this free and open society. And we don't. No, we never have. And when it comes down to brass tax, what you basically just said is world affairs based on basically pen and teller. So next time anyone out there turns on the television, whatever hell night that these guys are on. And they're telling you we're dishonest. How many people actually listen to what we're being told, but Baldini, I think we need to expand a little bit here because so many people out there are going to be saying, I love my iPhone. I don't give a damn if they're collecting my data. Matter of fact, it's pervasive. That attitude that I just described is pervasive. So how about we take a shot at demonstrating the power of what you just called metadata gives the holders of that that have the technology to deal with it in volume. And before I hand it over to you, I've said this a number of times, they're poking you in the eye constantly. The Winter Soldier, Big Marvel, one of the biggest movie franchises in the world, Winter Soldier pokes you in the eye all day long with what the massive collection of data does. And you know, in that movie, you're presented with some dude back in the 30s told us how to do all these high end algorithms, but we didn't have the data. Guess what? Now we have the data. The 21st century is an open book. And now we know how to read it. That's told you in one of the most popular movies in the world. And it's not a lie. So Baldini, let's take a stab at it. Let's try to demonstrate to people what mass data collection actually means. Absolutely. And you're spot on with that. There's a ton of information of truth that gets sort of again dropped in movies and modern pop culture. They tell you the truth, but they also lie. And one of the biggest lies, and again, the misdirection that they play is the idea that military or intelligence is inept that they couldn't find Osama bin Laden in a cave. Right? That's garbage. They want they want you to believe that they're either disinterested or inept and that's simply not the truth. So what here's what data means. So I guess one of the things is understand where that data is coming from. And the data is everywhere. Everything that you do and say. So again, back up a little bit that we love our technology. So any opportunity that we have to get new technology, we try to be early adopters of it. The cool kids on the block with the latest thing. So this is evidence in spades with the beginning of what started as compie serve and then later AOL and chat rooms. We begin expressing our thoughts and recording our ideas electronically. Right? Wimbin and storing those things never even once thinking about who else might be looking at it was private to us. And you know, there's a couple of things that you guys have spoken about before, including the Overton window, which expresses what's acceptable within society. Another one is the broken window theory that we have a tendency to self monitor or behave differently when we think we're being observed than when we're not. And that's really one of the biggest psychological keys that we have here in terms of the idea that I have nothing to hide. It's okay. And you really should really re-examine that position. So we'll back up a moment and kind of point out this that the kinds of data that are being gathered is not just all your email. And again, this is all easily accessible. This is on nsa.gov. You can find it right there almost on their front page. Right? The kinds of things that are being gathered. So I'm kind of just go back to a list of things here. These are the things that they openly admit that they gather from everyone. All your website visits and searches, I think that's pretty pretty easily understood. All your phone Skype messages calls when you carry your phone. GPS and movement are our accelerometers. So it's not just GPS, but every move that you make can and is being monitored. And not just monitor, but that data is being collected. And we'll talk a little bit more about that. Voice and camera monitoring, even in sleep or powered off mode. They have full access to turn on the camera, turn on your microphone, and listen to what you're saying, and monitor what you do. Again, all your emails and texts, including all your unsent drafts, personal documents, everything, all your credit card information, purchases, your entire financial information, history, all your legal documents, travel documents, personal information, records, all medical information, and health records are not being all done electronically. And even though that violates HIPAA, all that information is collected and aggregated. But again, here's the issue that has been previous to about early 1990s. Is it again, unless somebody was interested, there was no reason to go through all that data and make sense of it? Let me jump in here. Because I'm guessing the average person listening will say, what the hell ever happened to any of the privacy protections that we were told we had, we should probably address that as we get into the power of what data can actually do for people who collect it. Have all the laws changed? Were the laws never what we thought? I mean, how do we explain to everybody, is this just done because they can or have they actually put a legislative firewall behind them, which protects them? Saying, hey, man, the laws don't protect you anymore. What's the game? The truth, the crow is both. There have been a number of lawsuits and legislation passed that is intended, at least on the surface, to protect the average citizen from domestic surveillance. But two things occur. One is that they lack teeth. They're written in an eventually obfuscated way as many legal documents and statutes are. And they don't care. They're going to do whatever they want. And again, we can point out a couple of issues of that specifically. But I'd like to just kind of wrap with, again, some of the additional data. Those things seem the ones that previously mentioned seem pretty direct and easily understood. But the other things that people often don't consider, is that they are doing a number of things. In fact, this is openly known, for example, in China, that traffic and security cameras include facial recognition stuff where that picks up a person as soon as they get out of the house and follows them all day, monitoring every move they make, the internet of things, which is the IOP scraping and analyzing every aspect of your life, your refrigerator has monitoring it. They know what you eat, what you do purchase. Every time you go out to the store, it has been for the last two decades. You join a member of the Safeway Club or Fred Meyer or Walgreens or Wright Aid. They tempt you with offers, right? So you're going to get a better deal on it if you join their club. But now they monitor everything you purchase. And this can easily be seen when you go into the store and you open up your app for the shopping experience and you've got a list of products and goods on there that you normally buy. And you're like, hey, that's convenient. Again, that's part of the trick is that it seems convenient. And that's part of what Google did, right? So this is all an attempt to get you to give up your information. Facebook does this all the time. A lot of people don't understand. Facebook is a data capturing center from its outset. That was the entire thing because now they can not only monitor the things that you put out there that you want people to see. I'm on vacation. I'm looking at mine to cool new. Oh, here's my dinner, right? But also the interactions that you have with other people. And that's kind of critical, especially in this modern day where, and this is kind of where we'll end up wrapping is the purpose of how this data is being used. So it's not just a data capture. It's how the data gets used. And in large part, this monitor's not only the things that you do, but now really what you think and who you associate with. These are going to be critical aspects as we come forward because I'm telling you that there is nothing that's in the media that is not intended to be there. Again, at the CIA.gov website, you can go there yourself and look. They have an enormous wealth of papers, documents that have been previously leaked. And therefore, they call it quote, air quotes, transparency. They publish those documents. Some redactions, yes. But they're putting out all this information. It's not there unless they want you to know it. So that includes the Snowden leak 2013 when Edward Snowden provided information about this massive data collection. He may believe that he did something on his own, but I guarantee you that it did not happen without their acceptance of it. Let me jump in there. I've got to address WikiLeaks. It was the biggest put up of all time. I did these. I saw it coming. And basically what happened is if I remember correctly, I think it was Time Magazine and it was the evening news is that actually told people how to use the new WikiLeaks site before there was any news on WikiLeaks. That whole thing was a put up designed to do one thing. That if you were a person out there who knew things that wanted to blow the whistle, you were blowing the whistle on yourself. If you submitted it to WikiLeaks, that's what the whole game was. And people are going to complain about it. I'm not not even going to bother to argue with you. I know damn well what WikiLeaks was about. But let's get back to the data collection for a second. On many previous podcasts over years, I have said things about the power of data collection to try to print on the audience at large what can be done with massive amounts of data over massive numbers of people. One of the things I have stated, and by the way, my first gig out of college, getting an internet technology degree, had people data mining. And that was when the internet was so new that the first banner ads and video ads were just happening. They had not been a thing yet. That's how long ago we're talking about here. And some of the statements I have made is with the correct data set, they can tell you when you're going to die, the hour you will die, the cause of your death, and geographically where it will happen. Can you leverage off that to try to start to imprint on what it means to have, I mean, right now you could say the data set is infinite, right? It basically is because you can't quantify that much data in a day. And guess what? There's more on the way. So what we're talking about here is an infinite worldwide data set. And I'll let you go from there to try to figure out a way to communicate to average people what that means. Well sure, Crow, and you're well ahead of the curve. The whole idea again of the WikiLeaks is if you're if somebody had it in mind to blow the whistle, here's controlled opposition, here's the gatekeeper go there first. And as you said, they've blown the whistle on themselves. That's right. The entire premise of, for example, being in the news that Apple wouldn't give up your encryption to law enforcement, that's horsepucky. They do it. So you believe that your data is secure and it is not. And so let's cover just a few of the things that, again, these are publicly known things. They publish this. So the things that are classified, again, one can only imagine how far this goes. But a couple of things to be aware of. A couple of buildings, for example, is what's called Titan Point and that's in New York. And it was originally an AT&T building that was built beginning in the early 1950s. And since the certainly the early 1970s, about 1972 is best I can tell. They began. That's really the switch platform for all domestic and international telecommunications in the United States. So they began monitoring, the NSA began monitoring that on private citizens beginning at least as early as 1972. I can't verify prior to that, but certainly I would expect it given the other forms of data mining that they did. So they gather that information. They collect it there. And then it goes to, primarily, there's a place in Draper, Utah. It's codename Bumble Hive. Again, it's at NSA.gov. And for a time, I lived about six miles from it. And they have, they're the largest single storage data in the world by orders of magnitude. And they actually claim that they have more data storage than all of Russia, China and Western Europe combined. So they exceeded yachtabytes and setabytes, exabytes, it all sounds funny, but now they're just saying it's a lot of bytes. And I said, the exact the exact amount is classified. But they use a cascade system of Kray XC30 supercomputers developed at DARPA. And they're performing over a hundred TETA flops or 100 trillion calculations per second. And this allows them to use artificial intelligence. And there's, you can tell there's been this big push for artificial intelligence. That's how they're mining your data. They don't need somebody to sit there and listen to your phone calls. There's voice attacks, text the voice, all these kind of things that allow them to really quickly sort through your data and understand and sort it into groups. And groups are very important. The Oak Ridge facility, which is another NSA facility that originally was where the fraudulent and hoax of the atomic weapons were developed. They're using exaflop in excess of an exaflop that's one quintillion instructions per second on their computer array. And they're now able to decrypt 256 AES encryption in almost real time. So one of the things to understand, and they have a project called Divid Dream, which does VPN penetration. So anybody who thinks that they're getting away with something or they're going to be able to protect themselves from this kind of invasive intrusion is not only kidding themselves, but everything that you do to try to protect yourself from it really only raises a red flag. If you try to hide it, they're going to be interested. So at this point, and I can just kind of jump ahead here, about two years ago, a whistle blower from Intel came out and said that there was a backdoor, a hardware backdoor in the Intel chipset. It was sort of largely blown off by the mainstream media, but now researchers have come out and they've discovered that it is actually there. It's in the Intel management engine. And they call it Visa, which is a basically a visualization of the information system processing. And so using a hardware, it's below the bias, it's below the boot set, it's all the way at the at the bottom of the system. It is below even as long as I think is in some way powered has power connected to it. Even if it's a laptop, it's unplugged, we'll have some battery life, even a desktop that's unplugged, has some power remaining in the capacitors. They can monitor everything that's ever been done on that computer. So even if you're trying to use something like Tails, which is a single instance flash operating system that you use on a flash drive and leaves no trace of it on a computer that uses tour for every internet instance. It doesn't do anything to protect you from it. They can pull it. And it's been proven in the last about two months. It's been proven by researchers that this is on the Intel platform. And now every computer pretty much commercial like available to the public anyway in 2006 Apple began using Intel data sets instead of the Motorola. And so there's nothing you really can do to protect yourself from this gathering of data. We should actually qualify that. So the average person who's not technical can think about it. It's almost like what would be a good way to explain this. So you've got a car and your car is like your computer, right? It's sitting at your home. But when you want to get on the internet or when you want to get in your car, you got to get onto a road. Well, who owns those roads? It's basically an analogy like that, right? There's no way for you to get on the internet without using infrastructure that is owned by somebody. Baudini, is that even a good way to describe it? Would you describe it better than that? Sure. I would say it's not just the internet. The internet is certainly an easy way for them to collect that data. But that's not required. Even so, for example, my wife had almost no digital footprint. And really until she met me, she had no Facebook presence. She had no Twitter account, no smartphone. She had a dumb phone that still didn't protect her. I found, you know, I'm capable of data scraping. And again, I mostly keep my head down, but I'm still capable. And I found all kinds of information related to her. And she had even changed her name legally. And at one point, for personal reasons, disappeared and changed cities. I found that trail easily. It's not that difficult. And if somebody wants to know, again, I would say it's like this, locks on doors, don't keep out a determined thief. They only keep on us, people on us. If you're encrypting your files, if you're using things like different kinds of operating systems, non-traditional means of storage, that sort of thing, you're probably protecting yourself from somebody that you know snooping on you. But you're not protecting yourself from really the criminal enterprise that is the military industrial complex and the intelligence community. They want to know everything, and they will know everything. And any steps that you take to try to prevent it only makes them more interested. You know, we should do a logical assumption exercise here and leverage it off last two episodes. We did the cover to calculation. So part of all the data collected, which is easily collected and violates HIPAA regulation as far as I know, unless there's some super secret law or other thing I'm not aware of that allows HIPAA regulation to be violated. HIPAA regulation, just so people know basically, is supposed to defend your medical information from being snooped into. But anyhow, all that medical data is collected, which means if we did a logical deduction, whoever collects all that medical data would absolutely be able to see the autism and Alzheimer's epidemics. Further, with what we've already laid down here within data collection and the categorizing of data sets, they would know that certain kinds of people are more susceptible or this type of genetic factor is getting these children who end up being autistic after being inoculated, these types of things, do you see what we're getting at here? If you have that much data with that much foresight into basically world society, you can't deny the things that we try to cover here. The things that we try to demonstrate, what would you say about that, Paul Deany? Well, you're dead on with that crow. Again, the thing that you mentioned before, and this is what I was moving to, is once this data is now collected and you aggregate the data, you need a way to process it and to make a value of it. Artificial intelligence is really where it's out. So it's not just artificial intelligence, but you would have to picture that as your own personal guardian angel, except consider like two dozen of them, two dozen AI bots who are doing nothing all day long 24, 7, 365 of gathering and colliding your data and sending it to appropriate groups, some of which is sold off the corporate interests for the, you know, the nine purpose of taking your money, but much of it is done moving on to the next bit, which is simulation. And that's really where the key to all this is is in what they call global simulation. Many of the intelligence community will still call it by game theory and starting in the year. Again, early 1970s, congruent with project Blarney, they first called it the building, the hotel, they were creating a worldwide simulation data set, taking all the aggregate information from all these data points, putting it together and anticipating responses. What are you going to do? And as you alluded to earlier, they not only know when and where you're going to die, where it's going to be, but every daily interaction. See, the thing is people, we're not as intuitive as we imagine ourselves to be, and neither are we that spontaneous. So they can easily ascertain and anticipate where you're going to go for lunch. Some of it is driven, right? So they'll send you an ad, oh, here's some burgers, right? So they know that you like a burger every couple of weeks and sell those in units. So some of it is driven. They're driving the action, but much of it is inferred, and according to the CIA, this is again, at their website, that they are currently at about 98% accuracy and they're pushing for 100% accuracy in prediction. So I mean, I don't even think people can fowl, even though you've laid it down so succinctly. So I'm going to step way back from the level you're talking about, and I'm going to tell people with an interest. First of all, look up game theory, Jason and I included it in one of our Tabestock shows or something. It goes back to, I don't know, the 30s or the 40s. I don't really remember when game theory became a big thing, but it's been around long before the data sets that we now have. But look up wisdom of the crowd. It is absolutely the lowest level of using data to make an accurate prediction. And probably if you go online and look up wisdom of the crowd, you'll hear something like this. It was originally some state fair somewhere and there was a big ox that was going to get auctioned off. And everyone at the fair had to guess how much does the ox weigh. And so by the time 100 people had guessed the weight of the ox. And by the way, some of those people guessed five pounds when clearly that's at least a 2000 pound ox, right? But some people wildly guessed, oh, it's 10,000 pounds, a few people guessed, oh, it's only five pounds, okay? Keep that in mind because that's real. So when 100 people had guessed the weight of the ox, when you average all those guesses, you're almost always within 10 percent of the actual weight of the ox. And this is called wisdom of the crowd. So if you get 10,000 people, you see where this goes at 100, you're usually close to 10% accuracy. You get a thousand people think about how much closer you've come to perfectly correct. And when you get a world wide data set, now you're starting to get insight to what Baldenia is laying down here. And I'm sorry for interrupting, but for a lot of people, these are nebulous ideas to try to wrap their minds around if there's no technical bend. And you're absolutely right with that. You're exactly right. So the wisdom of the crowd has been proven time of time, time of time again in statistical analysis. They've done it over and over again. And the similar story I heard is how many gumballs in the jar at a state of air over and over again and the larger the data set, the more accurate they can be in those results. So this is exactly where we're going with this and exactly what the intention is from these people. We'll call them people for lack of a better word, although they don't behave like it. And that's another conversational together that they behave in very inhuman ways and for purposes that don't seem, well, they seem outside the imagination of most people. And the why is often the trip people will question these things and go, well, why would they do that? That's sometimes a horrible question to ask because if you can't think like they think, you're never going to get there. You just simply can't imagine that people would do these things. But that's that's not the information. The data set, the information for us is right in front of us. For any, for any of your listeners, you want to you want to play with this? Try it out. Right? So simply take your iPad or your tablet and talk to your spouse in the bedroom and say, gee, our mattress is worn out. I think we should buy a new mattress and then go to Google Maps, open it up and start typing in and the auto predict, you can you will get two letters in MA and you'll get a list of mattress stores. How many words start with MA? Lots of them. It could be mammogram, could be maternal. It doesn't matter. You're going to get mattress and you say, gee, I'm hungry. Maybe what do you feel like? Maybe a burger, type in BU and you'll get a list of burgers. Right? For most people, they, wow, how convenient is that? Right? It's awesome. The predictive text and auto fill, even in Google searches, is uncanny to the point where I don't even have to say it anymore. I can look for something really obscure. I mean, really obscure, like optics and it will fill it in within the first two or three letters. Exactly what I'm looking for. There's something really important here that is obvious but may not be clicking with everyone out there. The governments of the world couldn't be doing this on their own. This is the direct example of how the corporations are directly in bed with governments. You're doing it willingly. You're giving it to those corporations. Today, you can't give it to them fast enough through Facebook and Twitter and everything else. Absolutely. And many of the current challenges that you'll see, for example, on Facebook, is they have the thing that came out a couple of years ago, throwback Thursday. Post a picture of yourself from a long time ago. Clearly, what this is doing is feeding facial recognition algorithms. The little quizzes will tell you what kind of a potato you are if you answer these questions. They're filling in gaps in preferences and your decision making type. People process information differently and so they're filling in those gaps in information. Well, this whole conversation really kind of underscores why government doesn't matter and pretty much really never mattered at the highest levels because those people are here. There's a reason why a corporation is called a multinational. It's because they're every damn aware. And not only that when you start to consider maybe the idea of free speech, which is a bit of a joke at this point in our existence, every law you've ever seen in the United States about free speech is going to tell you how the government cannot in French. Well, whoever wrote those damn laws and believe me, when you're writing laws, those people are dotting eyes and crossing teas and tailing cues. They know what they're about. So when they wrote those laws, they were playing the long game. Yeah, the government isn't supposed to do these things, but guess what? A corporation can do it to you all day long without violating a rule. And by the way, the government's going to back the very corporations that are breaking the rules. They're not allowed to do to you. It is technically a corporation. Right. And so then we have to go down that road when we realize at some point, Jason knows the exact date, the United States becomes a corporation. We're not even really talking about government anymore. If I had to state the most harm that was ever done to this world was the implementation of corporation. Game theory, by the way, was in episode 57 on transhumanism where we did touch into a lot of these concepts. And if you look at everything that's being discussed here, it's obvious that that is exactly where this is going. Again, everything as I stated in a very recent episode is leading to the transhumanist agenda. One thing, Baldini just laid down and I want to make it perfectly clear is I'm sitting here telling you, look, if they wanted to, they could calculate the exact cause, moment, geography and everything about your death, which is something you'll never know. But Baldini took it a step further when he introduced Game theory and these other things. They can know to a 98 or a 99% certainty where your person, your car, your mom, your dog will be 60 days from now on a Thursday at 10 AM. That's what we're talking about. But it is what we're talking about exactly. It's even worse than that. Suppose there was some unhealthy additive in milk, hint, hint, hint. And it is known that 86% of every American drink three glasses of milk a day, do you see what we are talking about here? So it's not just the prediction of it at this point what we're talking about is the programming of it. So earlier in the conversation, you mentioned the tapestock institute and they're intrinsically involved in this entire process. And I think it would be, well, it would be silly for, again, the rational thinking person who backs up. Now again, I realized that part of my skill set has to do with seeing outliers and data sets and I'm very good at pattern recognition. But it doesn't take an expert in pattern recognition to see that the cover story of the antithesis between governments is a sham. It's a lie. And the governments themselves are owned by people who are owned by people and ultimately everybody is somebody else's bitch, ultimately. They're taking orders from somebody else. And compartmentalization is a key here. That's a key aspect and key component to, not just the intelligence community and the military, but pretty much every aspect of secret societies going back as far as we can tell, that everyone plays their part, the role that they're given for the reasons that they do, whether that's a characteristic. They play the roles that they're given for the purposes that they're told. And often those purposes are a lie to them. They're behaving in a manner that is a lie. For example, some of the guys that I met during 1988 in doing this forensic examination, they're true believers. They had no ethical or moral reservations about what they were doing because they believed in Maraca that they were doing it for God in country. And so none of their actions were in any way opposed to their morality because their morality was for the greater good. As silly as these terms are, this really is the real new world order or illuminati or whatever silly term you want to throw out. But this is it. This is what it really is. When you look at these things at the highest levels, it's just all these interwoven corporations running the governments that are just window dressing for us. Well, and that seems to be a bit of a front Jason in that if you look, for example, many of the boogie men that were given, whether that's George Soros or whether it's the Rothschilds, they're great stories. And there's probably some basis in truth there. I mean, certainly there's historical records, for example, of Rothschilds. But that's a boogie man. That's somebody for you to throw your angst at. So if there is ever a real uprising and people really do wake up, which seems unlikely given where we're at currently and where we've been, you're never going to know who the real boogie man is. Right. They've always got somebody out in front to take that heat. It's just what politicians are. They're actors and theater, they're a cab, right. And so it's all to create division and the entire Hagueleian dialectic of divide and conquer. And here are two choices, problem reaction solution. Here's what you need to fix it. We're being programmed into behaving in particular ways. And that's ultimately the use of this information is not just to understand what you're going to do, but to drive it. And many of the things that you see, for example, in the news, whether these are false flags or disingenuous distraction, as I like to call them events, you see over and over, there are things that are preposterous that cannot possibly make sense. Clearly no airplane flying into the Pentagon. And yet some people believe it, some people clearly don't. It's not because they're inept, right. They would like you to believe that they're at app door or they're failing when you see a passport fall out of an airplane that's supposed to be disintegrated into, you should nothingness, yet there's a pristine passport that falls to the ground. These things are not mistakes, right. What they are are elit must-test. The every bit of information that's put out there, even though it's supposed to be a leak like the Snowden stuff is designed intrinsically to see if you're going to wake up or not. See, are you divergent? Are you going to go along with the programming that the 80-20 rule 80 percent? You've got to reach that tipping point, 80 percent have to be on one side at least to shout down the other 20 percent. So you're going to wake up and if you do, they're monitoring every move that you make and they put you in an electronic fence. And so they're going to let you congregate with other like-minded people. Right. We can all get together and listen to Crow and you pontificate at Infanitum on the things that are creating the problem. But ultimately, is that voice really being heard outside the community of people who already believe it or not? And I suggest not. In fact, what it's doing is it's reinforcing and cementing the ideas that we already have. They're going to feed those. So, I strongly suggest that those of us in the truth community, a good amount of what we believe is based on what we see and everything that we see as part of the show. If you want to see a great example of that 80-20 rule in effect, and I think you did this yourself, if I ever call correctly, it's the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11. And I will click on ads on the shirts that they're touting Buzz Aldrin out there holding up. And I'll read some of the comments. And I don't know if it's exactly an 80-20 split, but you will see the dissenters saying, oh, this is ridiculous. And then of course, the majority of people are shouting them down. You're stupid. Of course, we want you're a moron. They do the job that needs to be done for them. Let me point something out here real quick before I hold it back over to you because I agree with everything you said except the Apollo mission is a great example. We are so far beyond the 80-20 rule, almost nobody accepts the moon landing anymore. And what that demonstrates is, yeah, we live in a system where almost everything seen or even the things we do ourselves are playing to the choir because the table's been set. But at the end of the day, and this is why I do what I do, we're human beings. We have the ability to rise above this nonsense. And so if you give up that hope, then what's the point? Get up out in a bed every morning and go do whatever the hell you're going to do because it doesn't make a damn difference. And before I throw it over to you, Baldini, I would point out you mentioned Titan point earlier. The address of that building is 33 on Thomas Street in New York, but back to you. Yeah, it is. In fact, if you can quickly Google that and look at Google Maps, it's a 37 story building with no windows, six floors below. It's always been something of an enigma and fairly creepy to those who live in Manhattan. So again, most of these facilities, again, all the information really we're discussing here is pretty easily discovered. It's not a, they're open secrets. And again, they rely on apathy and laziness and the desire of people to believe that their world is okay. We need to make sense of it. And I would agree, Crow, that we don't want to lose hope, right? We don't want to take a look at all this and say, oh my gosh, it's all pointless. There's nothing that we can do. I do accept that in a vacuist that there's nothing, well, I've put it this way. If you want to change the world, that's a pretty big task. The best you can do is change the world around you, right? So if you want to be a higher minded person, start looking inward first. If you're going to rail against the powers that be, all you're going to do is just be out there shouting and getting nothing done. You've got to really start internally and bring yourself into a higher minded state. So you can actually be of help to other people. That's right. It's a bit like the old drowning idea. You can't save someone from drowning unless you're not drowning yourself. That's a fact. And to put it in perspective, what you just said, I can tell you why it matters for human beings to not just give up like there's no hope. And here's why because it is a fact that every created thing will see its end. Every single created thing will see its end. That is the nature of this 3D reality. And not only that, if you want to make a living out of hiding the truth, that's a full-time gamegig. And that full-time gamegig is going to be driven by men and women. And one thing we know certainly is that men and women do not make perfect systems. Not like we see nature, we go outside in nature and something needs to happen. It will happen when it needs to happen, without fail, whoever puts this world here that we call nature. Men and women do not make systems at that level. Although technology will attempt to fool you into thinking it can do so much more than it actually can. But at the same time, data is a magical damn thing. What you can derive from data. It's basically a time machine. It's what it is. You can, to 98 or 99% predict the future. And when the data set gets big enough, which we probably are now, you can do it 100 years from now if things continue on this trajectory. My point being here is that I think the Apollo missions are a perfect example, but not a great example. Because even though so many of us don't accept the Apollo missions, it really didn't dent anything. Did it? It's just a thing we make fun of now. Has it changed anything really significantly about our world? No. So on the one hand, it's a good, observation to say, hey, man, the 80, 20 thing fell to hell here. But on the other hand, what Baldini's pointing out is also a damn important thing, even though probably 50% of the world understands the Apollo missions were nonsense. What has it actually done to change anything? And that's food for thought, man. And I'll piggyback and springboard off a couple of things you said there. Crow is the first relating to natural systems, right? And to kind of just congregate and distill everything that you said there, this is kind of how I put it, right? Is that everyone lives, or everyone dies, but not everyone lives, right? So everything is going to reach its natural end. Everyone will die. But there are a few people who actually have the temerity to live. And that is, I think, in part, our opportunity to surprise those people who are trying to control us is to be not asleep, to not go quietly into that good night, and to not accept the programming that we receive. And so if you go with any of the official narratives, and I would also point out not just the official narrative, but you can't just go 180 degrees out of phase with that. You can't just go with the complete opposite. They're tricky enough to kind of put it at like 160, right? So you have to sort of deduce and learn from experience what the smell in the fingerprint is. Like, I know from listening to you, Crow and for myself and for others, we don't have to deeply investigate any of these disingenuous distraction events. We can look at it on the surface and immediately notice the smell of these people, of these people. We don't have the rest of it only verifies what we already know. Yeah, it's there's no getting it. When you reach a certain level, it's a bit like that old song that programmed us all, ooh, that smell can't just smell that damn smell. It's that. And no one can come into the room and tell me that I'm wrong because I can smell that something is not correct here. It doesn't give me all the details, but it does tell me nonsense. But anyhow, Baldini, we're going to wrap up hour one. We're going to take a short break and we're going to come back for hour two. There's so much here we can get into, but for those people who don't make it over to hour two, look, we're human beings. We're the apex here. If you don't fold your tent and lay the hell down and give up, there is always a thing called hope because we have the potential to be so much more than any damn technology is ever going to provide. Technology is not the magic you've been convinced it is. In many cases, there are no rockets leaving this place. But by the same token, it's a hell of a thing when the game field you're on is one sided because the other side of that game can predict where you're going to be in 10 moves. So yeah, man, we're in a tough corner here. But to give up hope is to become a damn cow from my perspective. Anyhow, that brings hour one of episode 154 to a close. We hope to see you all over at Crowtriple7radio.com for hour two. We're free speech still rules, man. There it is, cheers.