Does it bother you that a weapons manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, has been granted $37.2 million of your tax dollars to develop a new mass surveillance tool for DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), a division of the Pentagon, to clamp down on disinformation?

This mass surveillance algorithmic detector tool, SemaFor, has in fact been developed and is practically good to go. It claims that this project will be used to detect A.I deep fakes such as, for example, those used for fake news disinformation.

Considered by many to be untrustworthy, might DARPA be a major part of the disinformation problem…??

Bear in mind that those overseeing this want your acquiescence, wanting you to accept that they will be scanning every related aspect, including your personal data, to distinguish what’s real from deep fakery. After all, they want you to think that you don’t know any better…

They claim that they will collect the scanned data to look out for disinformation, particularly, falsehoods for example, in the form international “large-scale disinformation attacks.”

Take a look at this DARPA video promoting this mass surveillance project:

Defending Authenticity in a Digital World

DARPAtv

They further claim that this will be used to protect you, but how can anyone really buy into this?

In retrospect of government agencies and their history of untrustworthiness, won’t this tool be used to stop you from seeing things that they don’t want you to see or know about?

Won’t this prototype A.I tool be used as a dragnet, to collect information on US citizens for mass surveillance and introduce further unconstitutional censorship…? American citizens, either way, you have to make it your business to do something about this forever tightening censorship.

And so far, what about the government’s failure to protect us by not detecting disinformation??

Consider, for examples, Big Pharma’s claim that the vaccines would be “safe and effective” and that the vaccine would stop the spread of covid-19, labelling numerous well-researched documentary evidence to the contrary as “disinformation.”

-Where’s the governmental protection here?? The failure to protect had been done deliberately, as any evidence to the contrary, some of which contained vital life-saving information, was systematically suppressed.  

Then there’s the suppression of Hunter Biden’s laptop, falsely labelling it as disinformation… Or how about the Trump election campaign in 2016 claiming Russian disinformation involvement, which was later shown to be untrue and was in fact made up by Democrat opposition!

-The list goes on.  

Tied in with those individuals in high places for power, profit and political gains with their agendas, the control of what is or isn’t “disinformation” will continue to be manipulated as a means to an end, regardless of truth.

 The mass surveillance evidence problem – An Orwellian double-edged sword

 How can real harm deep fake disinformation be detected and accepted as irrefutable evidence? In as much as it could be used to detect deep fakery, this A.I technology could also create disinformation by manipulating genuine pictures and videos. -It’s an Orwellian double-edged sword.

Consider this as a hypothetical example: Zelensky has told us that the US government will be funding the Ukraine war for another 10 years. If there was an overwhelming citizens revolt over this, the government could then turn round and say to its people that Zelensky’s claim was a deep fake as an appeasement. Citizens wouldn’t realize that the claim was actually true.

-So, given that we would not we know whether or not the government is telling us the truth, shouldn’t citizens be greatly concerned that they could be targeted by mass surveillance and victimized through A.I manipulation having turned their genuine pictures or videos into deep fakes…?

Then there’s the problem of trying to stay ahead in the game or even catch up with the many other deep fake A.I technology developers in the world who could have a system that SemaFor project.

When the government steps in to do something

Finally, a number of us are well-aware that, in retrospect, when the government steps in to do something, instead of making things better, they get worse.

That’s because their handling of a situation, such as a crisis (real or fake), not only involves criminals in government, but also associated corporate crony crooks and the related crooked institutional agencies.

-All having vested interests, they end up better off as things turn out worse for we-the-people. 

-Why should allowing the government to do something about the control of disinformation be any different?