/gnosticwarfare/ - The Future of AI Conflict

Banned on /pol/ for three days.

They did not like talk of Icarus.

Ban: https://imgur.com/a/1TEH3YE

Ban appeal: https://8ch.net/sudo/res/96003.html

as the /pol/ thread got nuked: were the poasters talking about deepfakes on the right track?

>>546

That part of the conversation was certainly interesting. :D

replace actual paedo blackmail machine with deepfakes of leaders committing the same crimes…Yr hints make it seem like there's more than that though.

>>548

That's a fascinating conclusion.

I'm curious: Run with it. All the way to the end. See where it takes us.

>>544

>How can anything be passively made to have no value?

The first thing that comes to mind is the fax machine and how its value was rendered infinitesimal by email. Faxing wasn't attacked directly; it didn't need to be. As a matter of fact faxing it still has a niche in HIPAA-compliant communication, so it's not so much non-valuable as it is obsolete.

So, you find a way to make CP-based blackmail obsolete. Research methods of creating blackmail on anyone that's faster, easier, more-viral than how they're manually creating it now, rendering CP obsolete in the process.

The virality potential of fake CP might also be a weakness; normal people don't want that in their browser history, even if it's real.

Can we deepfake politicians into dropping n-bombs? Those videos would spread like wildfire. Maybe start with learning how to deepfake audio, especially tones of voice that include whispers or hushed tones. The file sizes for audio are far smaller than video, so iterations and innovations in deepfaking audio would be less resource-intensive at least.

I wonder if peoples minds are as perceptive to fake voices as their eyes are perceptive to fake video?

>>550

These are surface level conclusions. Dig deeper.

Does the holder of real blackmail REALLY trust their ability to keep the spread of fake blackmail in check? Such holders would have to delegate that task of protecting the value of their real blackmail to people at the core hubs of information distribution.

Such essential distribution people, who are possibly blackmailed themselves, would be tasked to guard the value of the blackmail that's on them… while knowing that fake blackmail can liberate them from such servitude…

Think along those lines. It has nothing to do with relying on public outrage. Not a single line of code need be written.

>>551

So deepfake technology doesn't actually need to become more accessible. If it's perceived to be more accessible, over time the information distributors lose incentives to remain loyal to their networks. All it would take is one big deepfake scandal to cement in the public's minds that video/audio can't be trusted. At that point the very concept of blackmail is invalidated.

If I'm at the top of this paradigm, by what process could I possibly assure loyalty from my information distributors? Additional blackmail wouldn't help if the value of blackmail is invalidated by the existence of deepfakes. I'm picturing an odd scenario in which the heads of each organization are now forced to legitimately earn the loyalty of their information distributors. The power-center of the structure may reorganize before it dissolves.

Of course this assumes that the very existence of deepfake technology is all that's needed to push the snowball down the hill. I'm certain it's not that simple.

>>552

>The power-center of the structure may reorganize before it dissolves.

This is the preferred outcome, to make them reorganize along robotic nationalism lines as the safest and most stable option in a post-loyalty future.

>>548

>>549

Sorry I missed the thread on /pol, would have loved to read it.

Lets assume perfect, or near perfect deep fakes. OK, so we push the CP blackmail supply-demand curve hard to the right. Quantity of Fake CP is now effectively infinity, the "price" (in this case, price = behaviors to keep those under CP black mail in check) drops to zero.

Any system using CP as a form of control is effectively disarmed. Those who indulge in such acts can now do so with a cover of incredible plausible deniability; and simultaneously those who did so only for position, power, and to meet other goals now no longer have to pay tithe; be it votes, work or otherwise.

Extrapolating out, not only CP but any video or audio evidence, blackmail or otherwise, up to and especially at the point of deep fake mass emergence will be suspect as being fake. There will likely be digital media authentication mechanisms made which will restore authenticity, but until that time literally EVERYTHING not seen with your own eyes would be suspect, both in the public eye and legally. If you needed to 'disappear' someone to gain power, this would be the time.

More interesting perhaps, an obliteration of assumed chains-of-trust between 'trusted' information sources and their consumers. Hard to have the moral high-ground when an explicit HD video of your beloved leader doing something horrible appears daily. Censorship attempts will abound, but when all sources of information are 'tainted', what do you do?

I have much trouble seeing where this goes, given that any leader, ideologically or otherwise, can suddenly become a demon at the drop of a hat. With the exception of local chains of trust (family, friends, etc.), that's a hell of a power vacuum that suddenly appears.

Is any of this in the right direction?

>>554

>that's a hell of a power vacuum that suddenly appears.

They only appear once every 120 years.

Make the best of it. I'm pushing Robotic Nationalism as the only way to navigate that vacuum safely.

Devalue blackmail by fabricating scandals.

If deepfaked scandals move towards oversupply, authorities can ignore or censure them.

If they ignore them, credibility of authority gets erased.

If they censure them, authentification protocols exclusive for reliable sources will degrade the people's credibility of info distribution "a free and independent media" to something akin to Orwell's ministry of truth (thanks russiagate). Again accountability/credibility of authority becomes an illusion.

Credibility of leadership can be increased by Aristotle's philia.

Odd that theory in .png specifies that because blackmail becomes worthless after being used, it can be devalued. Anything oversupplied becomes devalued, regardless of value decay with use.

>>556

> Devalue blackmail by fabricating scandals.

Not just scandals, but by fabrication blackmail. Since the fabrication of that blackmail is all kinds of illegal for you and I to do, another means of creating it has to be established.

I won't reveal that one yet because it's just too good. :D

> If deepfaked scandals move towards oversupply, authorities can ignore or censure them.

Don't focus on the authority perspective. Think from the perspective of the HOLDERS of the non-deepfaked blackmail as their asset loses value. What do they do? A helpful analog is to think in terms of inflation: What happens when your savings start rapidly losing value?

> Odd that theory in .png specifies that because blackmail becomes worthless after being used, it can be devalued. Anything oversupplied becomes devalued, regardless of value decay with use.

It was building a reason chain: blackmail intrinsically loses value upon usage, which means it can lose value. Acceleration of value loss, then, can be artificially created.

Oh, and by the way, this type of discussion officially makes 8chan a national security asset, which means if the Dems move to shut us down, this site can now be nationalized by POTUS under nat sec authority.

:)

>>558

> if the Dems move to shut us down, this site can now be nationalized by POTUS under nat sec authority.

>implying Trump would do anything useful

If you want deepfake blackmail to be plausible you need someone with motive and capacity. Currently motive players are elements of Russian/China security apparatus (they probably use blackmail to some extend too although authoritarianism reduces the value of such a system because you can just kill your enemies). Capacity requires a large number of GPUs. This puts the primary deepfake CP source as China. They'd need a plausible motive for the threat to be plausible.

If Assange insurance contains secrets damaging to Chinese state interests then they might have the motive necessary to threaten Icarus on Britain to play with Assange correctly. Britain intel is held together by blackmail probably second only to Mossad. So they're an ideal target.

>>559

A very good analysis. It is very true that democracies require blackmail more than centrally authoritative regimes. (The more corrupt that democracy, the more depraved the blackmail)

> Capacity requires a large number of GPUs. This puts the primary deepfake CP source as China.

:)

> They'd need a plausible motive for the threat to be plausible.

:)

> If Assange insurance contains secrets damaging to Chinese state interests

Don't think of the insurance file as damaging upon reveal. Think of it as damaging to the holder of the blackmail if the value can be made to drop.

its a digression but nationalising imageboards will be a huge hit to their credibility, the average /pol/ user is paranoid as it is and combined with the opportunity it will give for shills there's going to be a significant drop in the userbase and probable influx of leftists to replace them. The Online Right has already taken a lot of attrition since 2016 from repeated bans and D&C between various factions, and while the stupidity of the Left can never be overestimated they will, through shear numbers and money, succeed in producing a facsimile of memetic warfare to deploy in a completely controlled media environment. Bannon's got to make sure there's some sort of bolthole.

>Don't focus on the authority perspective. Think from the perspective of the HOLDERS of the non-deepfaked blackmail as their asset loses value. What do they do? A helpful analog is to think in terms of inflation: What happens when your savings start rapidly losing value?

you have an asset swap. holders of blackmail get rid of it in exchange for some technical component of the new power structure your not telling us about.

>>561

I suspect those cultural transitions would occur with or without nationalization.

The key is that nationalizing 8chan, and this board in particular, means a whole hell of a lot regarding how insurance file details propagate and how AI conflict policies will play out thanks to all of our efforts here.

> asset swap

You are right, but creepy timing as I literally typed that exact phrase to someone else regarding this topic at exactly the time you made this post. :)

The new power structure is Robotic Nationalism. If you can't keep your nation state influencers in line with centrally managed blackmail, they are free to buck the world order and go full multi-polar. That means the return of widespread local war… the kind of war that peaceniks, hippies, and a sniveling middle class can't stop by crying loud enough. How do we make it through that upcoming period sanely? By making sure all of those nations are deploying robotic warriors against one another and that robots are only killing robots.

More on this here >>515

Suppose the white wizard dies under mysterious circumstances

>https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-29/assange-reportedly-gravely-ill-and-hardly-anyones-talking-about-it

>News related

Suppose his dead man switch does not go off.

What do?

>>594

What if the dead man switch wasn't a thing, but an technique.

>>590

>>595

Seems productive if one knows pedo network members to feed this info to.

Seems like a needle in a haystack if not.

Try and force meme Icarus?

Someone reading the writing on the wall? :D

I wonder where China hides its blackmail on American politicians.

https://archive.fo/6jAcQ

>>595

The thing I don't understand about this CS, is if their entire power structure is maintained by this blackmail, why would they want to normalize pedophilia if it would render their blackmail inert on purpose?

I mean I guess killing is still taboo enough, so maybe they are just sick fucks who would rather do it in the open.

As for using Icarus as a forced meme, am I understanding that because there are people who are forced at gunpoint to "make" the blackmail, that if Deepfakes are known well enough in common parlance they'll come out into the open/act independently/seek revenge on the basis of "Pfft it's just a deepfake!" being a strong enough defense to render the blackmail inert?

>>607

Homosexuality has been successfully normalized, yet, blackmail of homosexual behavior on most people would still inflict significant damage to their positions within their respective inner circles.

Any holder of that homosexual blackmail would still hold it, even if some parts of legal and pop moral systems are more forgiving. Those who are on the blackmail would be wary of tempting the holder since the holder would be forced to escalate with more violent measures to establish new leverage on the target.

Normalizing pedophilia, then, isn't a protection strategy. It's just more of the same demoralizing strategy. Even in the event that San Francisco fuckery manages to go national and Civil Rights ambulance chasers in the DNC decide to pivot entirely to bring holy equality to child fuckers, blackmail on pedo activities are still from the past back when it was illegal. Blackmail holders still win, even when normalized to pop morality.

Deepfakes equalize -everyone- and -everything- at the same time. Past videos, current videos, future videos… all now masked in a shroud of plausible deniability. Assets become free, and holders become panicked. They have to rotate their assets into something more tangible at a time when everyone is trying to offload their goods at the same time… worldwide.

Consider deepfakes as a run on the CIA.

>>552

>Additional blackmail wouldn't help if the value of blackmail is invalidated by the existence of deepfakes

is countered by neuralnets made to detect deepfakes which brought on another idea, what about a neuralnet that produces credible proof of a video being a deepfake even though it's not, again removing the value of blackmail as that blackmail is now proven to be fake?

>>625

Videos that are confirmed to exist before the existence of deepfake technology would be pretty much irrefutable. Deepfakes hit the mainstream in 2017 and the first deepfakes were absolute dog shit, made perfectly-fappable actresses into uncanny-valley nightmares. If the file is old enough it'll just pass the check by default. Any encrypted file that was posted before like November 2017 will pass the check for sure. Wikileaks has us covered:

https://twitter.com/CultStateDotCom/status/1132408816102862848

Neuralnets that can "evaluate" deepfakes will be created and held, and no matter how effective they actually are, they will be memed as effective by the old media. "We can tell you if this video is fake, pls no distrust." That strategy just relies on what, media companies to tell us what's real? Is anyone still trusting the old media? No, especially not after the massive blueball that was Mueller. Just no.

>>608

I have a different question though: Let's say I see the writing on the wall, and I liquidate all the blackmail from my portfolio… What am I replacing it with? Money seems like the obvious answer, but that might be too simple. Sudden dips in the influence a person holds will be noticed, but sudden bumps in how much money they ahve will be noticed faster and much more easily. There are so many eyes on financial transactions. An alternate answer could be a sort of asset re-evaluation program, where holders recognize that their blackmail is worthless but need to retain their power structure, so they have to start paying for the loyalty of their followers. I don't see that sort of loyalty coming cheap, especially since the whole reason blackmail is resorted to in the first place is to push the buttons money can't push. There might be a few lackeys with Stockholm syndrome that stick around, but in theory, if someone was blackmailing me, and that video suddenly became worthless to him, I'd fucking book it.

The only thing that is certain in this "bank run" scenario is that the organizations that stayed as clean as possible will be in the best standing, experiencing the least amount of chaos. That's good.

>>626

continued,

The value of blackmail lies in getting the target to do what you want. If I knew my blackmail on a politician had an expiration date, I would need to cram as many favors into that time as possible. So, I would say start looking for politicians to do very, very odd things, things that are out of character for them… That's tricky to evaluate, at least from my perspective, because the simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is already controlled by a cabal of its enemies.

>>626

You could deepfake videos into the past as well. Just train the net for shitquality output with shit quality input and you have a snuff film of Clintons buthchering a baby in the 90s. I'm sure there's plenty of (potential) training material from that period for those 2 and then just record with a vcr/betamax player for a nice and authentic experience.

Perhaps I'm too low iq, but isn't the purpose of this to devalue blackmail, i.e. removing the credibility of it to such a point where you can't tell whether it's real or not and even if you'd see some and you wouldn't want to watch, you wouldn't give a shit either since it's probably fake. Eventually destroying the power structures created with blackmail in process, while those that didn't diversify their investments from blackmail will burn others to (re)gain wealth/power/security in what basically would be a stock market crash.

Part of creating that permanent distrust would be discrediting the "deepfake detection nets", that have been memed by MSM and has placed every into lull of trusting video material again.

Though I don't think you can just cash out 'blackmai'l that you've been using for the past 40 years so the impact probably would be in power dynamics, rather than material posessions. Like if you'd remove nukes, suddenly global politics would become very different. So assuming blackmail reduces in value, people who were previously powerful might not be so as other traits would then determine the outcome of social interactions.

>>628

>You could deepfake videos into the past as well.

Oh most certainly, but the existence of a video faked like that would, presumably, be posted online in 2019 or later, after deepfake technology already exists. For it to be believable, it would need to have already existed somewhere on the internet timestamped before 2017, before deepfake tech really became accessible. This is what makes Wikileaks's files so threatening: they've definitely existed before deepfakes were possible/prevalent.

>isn't the purpose of this to devalue blackmail

Absolutely. It's not enough to shake up the existing power structure and punish them for resorting to such disgusting methods. We need to completely invalidate blackmail as a tactic, so that new power structures don't just reappear along the same veins. I absolutely agree that discrediting the old media should be a part of that process, because the old media is just as much a part of the power structure as any political branch. Should any of Wikileaks's insurance files get cracked, I would expect that sort of attack to involve letting the media really sink their teeth into the "these horrific videos are all fake", then calmly point out that no, actually, they can't be faked, because they existed prior to deepfake tech.

> the impact probably would be in power dynamics, rather than material posessions

That definitely makes sense. I'm more curious as to where a holder of such blackmail would go from there, in order to keep an eye out for actions such a person might take when he realizes his blackmail is worthless. If any of what CultState says is true, these networks span thousands, possibly millions of actors around the globe. Not all of them are going to fess up. Many will try to evade the fallout of their actions, and we need to be able to identify the ones that do. (The ones that don't kill themselves, that is.)

Is NK the legacy Eastern Bloc equivalent of NZ in terms of blackmail storage?

>>552

> All it would take is one big deepfake scandal to cement in the public's minds that video/audio can't be trusted. At that point the very concept of blackmail is invalidated.

Let's create one then!

>>626

> I have a different question though: Let's say I see the writing on the wall, and I liquidate all the blackmail from my portfolio… What am I replacing it with?

Let's say you had blackmail of 100 politicians and you had it for a decade. You used that blackmail to build a nice little corrupt fiefdom around yourself. Now your blackmail is about to be invalidated. You have bills, dependencies, ambitions, and you got used to the easy life. How do you preserve everything you've taken now that your social hack no longer works? Especially with conclusions like this:

>if someone was blackmailing me, and that video suddenly became worthless to him, I'd fucking book it.

You would be looking for an "asset swap": Find buyers of your depreciating assets in exchange for traditional methods of enforcing compliance and tribal loyalty… but the only people who can enforce tribal loyalty are the institutions that have been compromised by blackmail, too, which bring us to your next point:

> The only thing that is certain in this "bank run" scenario is that the organizations that stayed as clean as possible will be in the best standing, experiencing the least amount of chaos. That's good.

The organizations that stayed clean will be certain sections of the United States military and they will not be trading their hard assets for offloaded bulk junk assets from compromised international banking, entertainment, local political, or intelligence sectors.

In a world where mutual blackmail no longer keeps order, only force keeps order. This is why Robotic Nationalism is so important. Destruction of blackmail means the restoration of endless Medieval-style war. But… how are you going to convince meaningful population segments into your military apparatus when your widely perceived as corrupt due to revelations of blackmail networks? This means the only viable solider of the future is the robotic soldier.

Robotic Nationalism IS the asset swap.

>>627

>The value of blackmail lies in getting the target to do what you want. If I knew my blackmail on a politician had an expiration date, I would need to cram as many favors into that time as possible. So, I would say start looking for politicians to do very, very odd things, things that are out of character for them… That's tricky to evaluate, at least from my perspective, because the simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is already controlled by a cabal of its enemies.

You have just answered why so many DNC presidental candidates are openly campaigning in Mexico. :O

>You could deepfake videos into the past as well. Just train the net for shitquality output with shit quality input and you have a snuff film of Clintons buthchering a baby in the 90s. I'm sure there's plenty of (potential) training material from that period for those 2 and then just record with a vcr/betamax player for a nice and authentic experience.

Quality emulation is doable, but it's the older blackmail with publicly verification via peer-to-peer sharing and an encryption time capsule that will survive unscathed by deepfakes. There is only one blackmail cache that has those qualities: Julian Assange's insurance files.

This means the initial impulse for blackmail holders of the bad assets will actively reveal themselves in the effort to "asset swap" their bad blackmail for good blackmail. Into the trap they go! (Which reminds me… hello, Mr. Epstein!)

>Eventually destroying the power structures created with blackmail in process, while those that didn't diversify their investments from blackmail will burn others to (re)gain wealth/power/security in what basically would be a stock market crash.

Not a crash… a "market consolidation", which leads to the cognitive mercantilism discussed here (>>>87) and that, in turn, leads to Robotic Nationalism which leads to an irreversible space economy.

>Part of creating that permanent distrust would be discrediting the "deepfake detection nets", that have been memed by MSM and has placed every into lull of trusting video material again.

>Though I don't think you can just cash out 'blackmail' that you've been using for the past 40 years so the impact probably would be in power dynamics, rather than material posessions. Like if you'd remove nukes, suddenly global politics would become very different. So assuming blackmail reduces in value, people who were previously powerful might not be so as other traits would then determine the outcome of social interactions.

I've extensively studied the period of history where "deepfake detection nets" once existed. (The Church's fight against the printing press in the period before the Thirty Years' War) I called this board Gnostic Warfare for that exact reason. You are correct: Whatever fairy tale is told to a bunch of Stockholm'ed NPCs isn't important… it's about changing the flow, timing, and battle rhythm of geopolitical alignments to create the required leverage points for the transition into an unstoppable space economy. When big fish move to the music, everyone else moves with them.

All you need is a competent conductor.

>>628

> Absolutely. It's not enough to shake up the existing power structure and punish them for resorting to such disgusting methods. We need to completely invalidate blackmail as a tactic, so that new power structures don't just reappear along the same veins. I absolutely agree that discrediting the old media should be a part of that process, because the old media is just as much a part of the power structure as any political branch. Should any of Wikileaks's insurance files get cracked, I would expect that sort of attack to involve letting the media really sink their teeth into the "these horrific videos are all fake", then calmly point out that no, actually, they can't be faked, because they existed prior to deepfake tech.

Implied: They PROVABLY existed prior to deepfake tech.

Anyone who points that out, of course, will be openly dehumanized and outright threatened by everyone still pining for the halycon days of blackmail power structures. The goal isn't to wake up NPCs. They'd made their bed, they can lie in it. They aggressively blue pill themselves and think it rebellion, like a spiteful daughter who whores herself our because she hates her dad. You can't cure ego.

The goal is making sure a wandering pack of Iron Age desert barbarians and their petty gripes about holy wastelands never, ever, ever, ever pull a 1973 and interfere with the trajectory of space economics ever again. They can keep their petty conflict, but after this, they will no longer be able to spread it to the rest of us. And that leads us to:

> the impact probably would be in power dynamics, rather than material posessions

> That definitely makes sense. I'm more curious as to where a holder of such blackmail would go from there, in order to keep an eye out for actions such a person might take when he realizes his blackmail is worthless. If any of what CultState says is true, these networks span thousands, possibly millions of actors around the globe. Not all of them are going to fess up. Many will try to evade the fallout of their actions, and we need to be able to identify the ones that do. (The ones that don't kill themselves, that is.)

They all compete for the last surviving blackmail cache: Assange's insurance file… and in the process, reveal themselves.

From there, they can be identified, rounded up, and dealt with by the surviving uncorrupted institutions: the military, either remnant or newly established. Collaborators identified. Winners and losers picked. Deals renegotiated.

>>631

> Let's create one then!

Duplication of work. This is already underway.

>>633

Thank you for your time, my dude. Very much appreciated.

>In a world where mutual blackmail no longer keeps order, only force keeps order.

What I'm getting from this is that globalism and the "International Community" would never exist naturally, that it relies on every leader doing unspeakably horrific acts and holding one another hostage for it. The return to a more natural paradigm is actually quite encouraging.

We enjoy plenty of separation of church and state, but the idea would be a separation of information and state. I think deepfakes are the last piece of that puzzle. If videos can't be trusted, narratives can't be trusted, meaning narrative generation becomes completely obsolete, 20th century journalism shrivels and dies a long-deserved death, and force rules the day. "Let the people think what they want; the Sovereign does what he wants."

Any competent sovereign would abandon globalism outright. Hard nationalism means no more mucking about in the middle east, no more quagmire wars, no more countries outright refusing to act in the interests of their own peoples. I see a patchwork of Edens on the horizon. I'm on the tail end of my 20's and I hope I live to experience it.

>They all compete for the last surviving blackmail cache: Assange's insurance file… and in the process, reveal themselves.

Now I'm wondering if some version of the insurance file is what is being transported to DC in those tanks. If the UK is stalling or blocking the extradition of Assange, that would be the next best thing, yeah? Although, that seems pretty fucking bold. Bold, but not brash. It's the sort of play one would make ONLY when knowing he holds all the cards.

> You have just answered why so many DNC presidental candidates are openly campaigning in Mexico. :O

It was a while ago when Mike Cernovich tweeted about feeling a change. He asked if anyone else could feel it. It was pretty Q-tier, very vague, but I couldn't quite shake the feeling that something, somewhere, had shifted. Since then it just seems like play after play after play from those in power has just been completely ineffectual. Everything feels so rushed. It's as though there were many plans in place for Hillary winning, and none of them were quite cancelled, just their funding got pulled or their organizers stepped down, or they just lacked the energy needed to fulfill their intent. Of course the more actors that rotate out of blackmail, the more resources the remaining actors need to come up with to pick up the slack, and when they fall short, action falls short as a result encouraging even more actors to rotate out of blackmail. If I'm right about that it will be a downward slope to the cliffside (with any luck), then a big deepfake event can be the plunge.

Just what is this event going to be anyway? Would it have anything to do with RBG being so nice to Trump and Kavanaugh lately?

>>634

Corrections:

…the ideal** would be a separation of information and state.

…some version of the unencrpyted** insurance file is what's being transported.

>>634

> What I'm getting from this is that globalism and the "International Community" would never exist naturally, that it relies on every leader doing unspeakably horrific acts and holding one another hostage for it

The administrative layer requires hostage taking. When dealing with the flow of billions upon billions of dollars, how do you make sure people don't cut and run and setup a new republic/nation to destabilize international order in an unscheduled manner?

> idea would be a separation of information and state

Hrmmm… a tweak to expand a spirit of that: separation of information and psychology. The state wields one to influence the other. After deepfakes, information and psychology will part ways forever.

> I see a patchwork of Edens on the horizon. I'm on the tail end of my 20's and I hope I live to experience it.

You will. :D

> If the UK is stalling or blocking the extradition of Assange

All eyes on Boris. All eyes on the pound. :D

> Just what is this event going to be anyway?

Unsure, but I've found that the stream of events, their velocity and intensity, is more important than the grand catalyst. More boring, for sure, but crucial. Watch the stream. Watch the trends. Deepfake luster wears off and then, it becomes accepted. What grows in such soil?

The gnostic impulse. :D