Why I Dismiss the "Internet of Bodies"...

I don't dismiss existence of nano-scale things, or tech that uses them, I simply do not believe that human minds/behavior are controllable by anything other than words.

I can say this applies not only to politics, but just about any attempt to capture human attention, imagination and vocabulary, and from that position one can extract value in the form of making others act on this imposed belief structure. Change my mind by using nanodust.

As I discussed before, mind control is the vocabulary and word-vector control, nothing else.

Either YOU are in control of it, or someone else is. The latter can only happen when you are not paying attention or when you voluntarily surrender control to others. It is possible to classify various brainwashing techniques as involuntary capture of the word-vector space (especially in case of children as targets), but there is always a way out by becoming aware and re-taking the control. Even by children. In any case, human mind capture, control and liberation all happen in word space.

This post is a response to numerous questions I receive on “nanotechnology” and “transhumanism” or “mind control via nanobots” etc. General note: I respond to questions that are formulated with goodwill, and I try to be as informative as I can. I DO NOT tolerate bullying, entitlement, ordering me to do things, and general a-hole behavior in my direction. I don’t read long rants about “deep luciferian agenda, etc.” either, not because there is no evil agenda, but because I am interested in other things. And no worries, it does not upset me in the slightest, it’s a nuisance that comes with the territory, and sometimes those characters are funny so I get entertainment out of them.

I appreciate all engaged subscribers, and I thank you for your support. Special thanks to paid subscribers, and I do read your notes and thank you very much for good vibes and positive thoughts.

Back to my article. I will use some of the quotes from this post, for convenience and because the quoted Ted talk happens to be based on two technologies I am very familiar with. There are many sources of similar ideas around. Please don’t take it as me bashing Dr. Sansone, as he is a wonderful person (please subscribe to his newsletter), but I will bash some of the ideas expressed therein.

First, a definition:

The Internet of Bodies (IoB) term was coined in 2016. It describes connected devices that monitor the human body, collect physiological, biometric, or behavioral data, and exchange information over a wireless or hybrid network.

In a Ted talk from 2021 Mary Lee, a Rand Corporation researcher gets into what she called the exciting ‘benefits’ of The Internet of Bodies [IOB]. Mary Lee speaks about a hypothetical scenario where your smart watch picks up an arrythmia and paramedics come speeding to your house to rescue you before you have a cardiac arrest. Next you get a defibrillator that is wirelessly connected to your doctor’s office and now you can sleep soundly knowing that you are safe and secure and your doctor can monitor your heart in real time.

Honestly, when I read quotes from Ted talks used unironically I think of the good old 2017 (imagine SNL producing this now!):

Ted Talks of course are designed for the terminally gullible audience - over-educated, entitled, masked, jabbed, gender-and climate-confused utterly oblivious crowd. The IOB -spinners love the arrhythmia stories in the same way Hollywood and Netflix love the scary virus stories. The fable about arrhythmia monitoring has been around since the early 2000’s that I am aware of, but probably well before that. I happen to know a bit about this topic. The most egregious BS in the quote above is total disregard for false-positive and false-negative rates that are astronomical with all remote monitoring of biological signals, and this problem has no chance of being fully solved in the next 100 years or so. Especially when it comes to single-lead devices like smart watches or wearable patches. They can’t even get your heart rate correctly half the time! The second most egregious BS is the instantaneous teleportation of paramedics to the scene. Current paramedic response in major cities like Oakland, CA is approximately 45 minutes and is getting worse. So, ok! Your smart watch will totally save you.

The 3rd most egregious BS is that your doctor will be sitting and waiting for the signal from your stupid watch 24-7.

There are several quite successful companies that provide continuous ECG recordings via wearable single-lead patches. For example, Zio is one of them. They can record up to 14 days, and there is a version that will send an alert to your smartphone (if in range with sufficient bandwidth) and make a daily report. Again, all of this for 14 days only. The limitations of power supply/storage are quite significant, and if you make something transmit continuously it must be plugged into the wall like equipment in the hospital. Not much of the internet of bodies. Also, this is definitely not nano-anything. You can use an old (and more accurate) technology - a 3-lead Holter monitor and make a longer recording. And get a better analysis out of it. But it is a bulky and uncomfortable thing to wear for a long time. Internet of bodies it is not.

Then she speaks of a man that has several microchips the size of a grain of rice in his hand, and with it he can unlock his smart front door, scan his phone and pull up his personal website, and all types of fun things. When Mary Lee asked this man why he implanted the microchips, his reply was, “Because I could.”

Trues story: some years ago one of our employees got a chip from the key fob for the office door implanted in his hand (by his friend, a veterinarian). When asked why he did this, he said that he was prone to misplacing keys. Not IOB, not even close.

Another technology given as an example of IOB-is-just-around-the-corner is contact lenses. Another old urban legend recycled with new exciting vocabulary in 2021.

Contact lenses is a topic I am also familiar with. I am a co-founder of a company that works on ophthalmology medical devices including using lasers to micro-machine contact lenses. By the way, I can call it nano-machining if I want to be hip, but I don’t.

Here’s is Mary Lee:

In the future we may have contact lenses to tell the weather, the name and title of person you are about to meet, control your smart phone from your eyes, have videos beamed to your eyes, and even a personal assistant transplanted into your brain. There can be a brain computer interface that automatically types your words when you think.

LOL! LOL! LMAO!

Again, without going into many technical issues - I will sooner believe in the flying carpets being shipped by 2025. To implement any of this in a 100 micron thin polymer that sits on your cornea - beaming all this from where and using what power source and what light source? Military helmet that weighs 20 lbs and includes a Tesla battery? Can I get mine with Prada logo? That is if you could actually implement this at the scale, precision (and speed!) that’s required to make contact lenses, and beam the data into the lenses without frying your cornea, retina and everything in between. Remember that you will need to be able to manufacture this for 1-3 pennies/lens. And if you put a chip in your brain voluntarily, I have no help for you, but I hear Musk is looking for volunteers for his clinical trials.

Suffice to say that Google had attempted roughly this plan in contacts (and glass) for many years and it failed. Utterly. Despite unlimited Google money and the best scientists those dollars can buy. Facebook has a less ambitious goal for doing all this in glass, and last I checked (a few months ago) it was in a Ted talk shape - a solid BS narrative to keep funding for a few more years.

Dr. Sansone correctly identifies this as a scam:

This of course is another transhumanist scam to enslave humanity.

I agree, it is a scam! I just went through several examples plus the SNL skit.

Yet, somehow, the people who can see through the old BS fall for the new, more exciting versions of it. As I discussed in the Word-to-Vector article, people are controlled by words. If you use the “right” keyword, they typically fall for it, even when they are perfectly capable to see through the same scam described in different words!

Watch this: we say “nanotechnology” and abracadabra! Thoughts are transplanted into your head (no microchip needed!):

Imagine a world where human beings no longer have personal autonomy. A world where biological processes are continuously monitored with zero privacy. Imagine a world where thoughts are transplanted into your head. Imagine a world where a heart attack can be induced internally through The Internet of Bodies. In short, imagine a world where if you don’t obey, they simply unplug you from life.

What if we imagine a world where this is not technically feasible, and where Mary Lee is another narrative spinner from Rand attached to the nourishing government teat, and leave it at that?

At this point I am typically assaulted by - you don’t understand! It’s NANO-xxxx, super powerful, trans-electro-magnetic, MAC addresses, the patents, quantum dots, yada yada… Do the research! Read this website with 50,000 pages!

Please observe that the most effective scam story is the one about an invisible threat: climate change, catastrophic levels of CO2, flying ebola “outbreak” in a remote jungle, and nano-scale things!

Do nanoparticles exist? Yes, of course! Everything can be ground into nanoparticles. Asbestos is dangerous because it sloughs off nanoparticles that can be inhaled and scar the lungs. Does graphene oxide exist? Yes! Is it in the covid injections? Could be! As I wrote previously, my current educated guess is that GO is the “new asbestos” that can be legally used in making of food and drugs (because there are no regulations of it). Among new materials uses as drug carriers, graphene oxide has been widely used due to its high biocompatibility with a high drug loading capacity. It is likely used in filtration or as a component of hydrogels used in the injectable mRNA vaxxes and possibly other injectable drugs now. Specifically, GO is well dispersed in an aqueous solution, which significantly enhances the interfacial bonding within the components, and transfer stress efficiently. These advantages make GO an attractive nanocomposite material as a drug carrier in the field of biomedicine and biotechnology, while being combined with a polymer or inorganic matrix (which is what DARPA hydrogel is - a polymer matrix). Lack of any regulations around it, and pretending that this is a totally biocompatible inert substance makes it easy to hide in all sorts of applications. Yes, this is very concerning, I agree!

Does having it in your system make you a remote-controlled human attached to the central server? No. It can injure you and even kill you, but it won’t make you remote-controllable, unless you agree with the WORDS that you are.

Trans-women and trans-men are mentally ill men and women who, instead of seeking healing (spiritually, psychologically) are instead encouraged in their mental illness into self-mutilation and self-destruction. By the same token, trans-humans are a form of a sick, (but tempting!) anti-life sci-fi imaginary concept that can lead active minds astray from critically examining the true state of reality. There is no technology today or in the foreseeable future that can make a human into a thing plugged into the internet of bodies and remotely controlled. I personally believe this is impossible to do in principle, but I do check my own assumptions from time to time. With new technologies, the gap between tech and human is growing larger not smaller, nothing is being physically “merged” at all.

Or else, why spend trillions on propaganda, censorship, perversion of law, buying and blackmailing politicians, targeting dissidents via thousands “internet research centers” when you can just sprinkle nanobots on them, feed them some graphene and voila! - no more dissent from the official narrative.

To be continued.

Art for today: Lilac, oil on panel, 12x12 in.