CHAT GPT - What Does it Actually Stand for?

 

Male, b.1978, Lives in Dublin, Ireland. Making alternative/experimental music in own mini-studio at home in Tallaght.

AI

If you play through, there's 70 more videos in Jonesy's AI YouTube Playlist!

AI Playlist: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFcnR2WoLh3Pisx7SGmyUx0-LKydUGgwB

The Census Reminds me I used to be a Brain Surgeon!

"As a result of the Census Survey, I remind myself of a vocation, upon the news:- that I used to be a brain surgeon!"

As a direct consequence, and result of the Census-Survey, I remind myself I used to be a Brain Surgeon -but, for one day only at Beaumont Hospital. This is news to my network properties knowledge, but not scary to the prospect of propensity to consume Googlemetry from whatever local sources avail...'Camp X-ray' could be spying on me?...

Should I invite category and form, ---or, an audience? Where's that wisdom-tooth gone? Someone's trying to tell the genius-in-me -that there's money in promoting -the mediocrity to salesmanship- and telling 'JONESY'S WRITING A BOOK.'!

'Rothschilds' would like to hear that...Not that its about anything...a looker in the pink dollar got a revolutionary loyal following...not that its autobiographical in any way...It's not the shit! I've not to learn this, directly....But, there's also a school of thought that isn't music...'Murder Investigations' have suddenly become a class act in the recent 'Jonesy' wall and Blog-postings; if, only satisfying Conspiracy Theory fiction, or 'verdict in international justice courts on war criminality', and shit..

Only he hasn't 'the balls' to front chicken wire neon lights what the n-word does next...He's being painted either as a racist or a cocaine addict but which does the Census ask in survey? Enter 'audience with zion'. see jerusalem bells besieged at metal gates. ask for me. Ask for Jobe then wait. St Peter knows me. I'm the 'Hollywood Doctor', in a nervous unbecoming joke. But, its there. So, its funny. But, you get three steps. You always fail this. You're late. DOWNLOAD JONESYnms Tracks.

Its a tough one for wine!...Very close!...But, tough....The choice isn't with the question....The survey is clean...Check!...The survey doesn't say "my diamonds is innocent", -but that you might need ask, twice...-Ask 12 times, instead, and, then, change the subject to "outlying commercial interest"-beyond Health Insurance, as tender...That sounds 'right'...Water would like that amount of 'legal' consideration...I like where the audience for this crap is going.

JOIN JONESYNMS FANCLUB and keep up with where his 'Space' and 'Dreams' themes Music is gone to....

[First published in 'JonesyNMS Fanclub' 25 April 2016]

The Budget: counting 'two budgets' stacking up, so, 'the third' is 'agreeable'.

"It says a lot about values and principles when a political party can agree to the next three budgets without the foggiest idea what will be in them....allegedly" - Finbar Markey [Political Activist]

Something is something '-like', e.g. x-like [like the price of eggs - horror, like]; something is something '-esque', e.g. x-esque [like, in 'excessive force', the movie was Stephen King-esque, but dunno who the director of its budget was; there wasn't even an egg in the props list]; and something is something para-something. I dunno maybe even para- something or pseudo- something, and so that's why they're afraid...."A Para-superannuation-esque amount of x the GNP figures, minister, any comment?" It would be the phrase they're all trying to bury from their own scripts. Or, don't say, 'y', instead? Because it might not be a fact doesn't mean it might not be true. Incriminates French farmers, though, or something. Buttocks and bullocks jumping over 'bears and bulls' fences to get to filibustering Boston and Berlin. do they know where they stand? So you shouldn't say it. Or maybe don't mention Gabon and gammon. together -that'll keep iPhones happy. Or was it the IMF? Or was it just 'Vine' and Fine brothers online, and then Capital Investment is fine. Or what not to say, budgeting for what to say; what then is said; what can be told. Or is it loose lips sink ships? Or "fear-mongering prejudice-machine lashes back, to claim, once again, its innocence?' Or was it just rhetoric? Who could say?...Not one would know yet all would agree....X-like, x-esque, para-x and pseudo-x - dunno why they need a budget, at all:- a decoy, distraction, and assimilation, ought be more productive...

Because it had 'brackets', and they were 'parentheses', which encased, as to enclose, so the story had a budget to code its duty...Because it had a 'storyboard' and 'clapperboard', and, so could denote 'productive worth' to a sequence, so a film had a budget, in all any necessity, besides than financially, twit...Because it was a C+I+G economy with a GDP, so the billions had a budget...But, because CIA had loyalty, the Irish could read the gold market from the dogs on the street...I dunno if its budgeted-for. It might take a minister to say...How can they say that without even knowing what to say? Categorical exclusions! But, what about inclusions? Are they in their power, or their gift? And what about their bonuses? Resigning to the fact anyone this season? Viagra Sales Demand, not Dildo Sales Central for iPhones, the main minister's job when not also selling terror and porn? What else is new iPhones? Boring lot of "figurative"..."I'd say"s...And "literals"...And "dog-barking"...wait the House can speak! We can budget a 'noise'. 

Because there was 'punctuation' so he was insured. Because there was brackets so he had a book. Because it was budgeted-for so they governed in perfect divine cosmic bliss! Without noticing despotism. At any 'boom-and-bust'-turn...Or, just, periodically, like when 'race cards' and 'medical cards' could not, instead, be told...Not, like, that they need one...A budget...For 'fidgeting budgeting' -the fingers could type. But, for 'budgeting fidgeting' -conversely, so, then overheads of literature's state would be needed, like...I don't know. I don't get paid enough for this, these conditions are brutal...

Brutal inattentions. And brutal oversights. And brutal executive decisions...omitted from pen-pushers positions. Brutal appreciations. Lacking but scant appreciable concern. Yeah I like that. Brutal intrusions. No part of privacy is not intruded upon. Brutal lacking of concern...The lack. the scant. the scathing. the dearth. the scarcity. the density. they don't describe their economy but only their jobs when budgeting. I'm keeping my budget. I like my budget. I'm not getting a new budget, same old budget, unless new or next to new the nearly new playing cards of the medical and racecard in election, my budget isn't racist. some of my best financial ledgers are made in budgets. Nowhere to be found in any the coming statistics, we just wouldn't know what to say...either....Can't prepare these things in advance. Have to wait and see, don't we...Like Hallmark says, from on high its perch in Elysium, only 'on time or not at all', otherwise we don't get a cut...And, so the Self-Conscious Calendar is not a budget concern this year, then...of course its not...Its imminent though, isn't it...?!

Counting 'two budgets' stacking up, so, 'the third' is 'agreeable'. 

What is equality, light can't tell...?

To 'button-up' or 'unbutton' -equals or unequals? 

Top-button, reaching your seat, belt-flap swinging as you walk, zipping-up, returning from toilet: Good move. However, start doing this in reverse, from your seat, as you get up to go to the toilet, unzipping: Bad move. Why is this? What is equality, light can't tell...?

Is it something to do with expectation and consequence besides than the light of day and prime facie first impressions; something about the difference between walking from any of three doors into one room, and from one door into any of three rooms, and while consequence and expectation, besides than the cold light of day, tells why its different? Yet a video camera couldn't tell the difference in reverse playback, how come gay marriage equality might not be such a simple case of don't bounty niggas and homos for porn stats, but instead move along to brown babies and front marriage some law? Is it really as simple as telling yourself that you're equals to the light of day? The tool of reverse playback is also interesting in reasoning the aesthetic of a gymnast...but its not so helpful in reasoning the geometry of an athlete...For example we don't know where to begin explaining the elements of gravity and time to such an Alice in the Looking Glass: but we can comment on how nice her hair is as it flows from messy to neat again. How come we don't know this, and before we prefer our own minds to the evidence of its machine sense? Do we wish to mock AI to tell it that it is as blind as we are? And yet the sovereign doesn't even yet know that black markets exist...so money is safe...or was there something besides? How dogs bark on the street, and how a bear shits in the woods ought not be silenced so easily as gays themselves when gifting them an equality that is a Sword of Damocles upon bisexuals, also to bear. This is not to mention those neutral toward revelation - who aren't asked what stock price their preference but that their indifference is already charted before them, in price discriminants of a market already tested god's infinite patience more than four times now these last 150 years. Thank you very much. I was outed five times since the stock market decided it thought it knew the price of a homo. I was never in any closet. Nor am I gay. But then nor did I ever need words to limit my preference. Similarly, the faithful are rarely prophets, but only looked upon so, by those who never did believe.

The Principle of Least Exclusion Badly Applied

Considering the frivolous article, in The Daily Mash, 17th September 2015 (which opens: 'We Need To Look After Our Own', see URL below) and, where concerning a viewpoint that includes an attitude whereby toward the prospect of ever taking in Immigrants, a notion of 'Least Exclusion' is a Principle of Tolerance, applying, even, and especially, for bigots who might conjure such undeserving comment!

A love-as-dare-not-speak-its-name points a finger-of-blame, and yet can stay-its-hand, protecting its own, first. How come it shouts about town, however, from the rooftops? It's supposed to be not speaking its name? Unless its policy were largely based upon Convention...misleading, perhaps, its own confidence to any Principled way out of a fix...? What to do with Investment Cycle Price Discriminant types and their conjurable slurs of 'Homo' and 'Nigga', last century, and 'Paedo' and 'Jihadi', this century? Someone's Conscience is eased that they can protect themselves behind the scenes, but can they shout about it the woeful way in public! Deja vu Occupy!

She thinks she's walking-on-egg-shells, whereas cracking-nuts-with-sledgehammers is more likely! As comparative sloganeering: 'Bigots out!' is like 'Slave-drivers, go home!' It could be 'Murderers, out', 'Perverts, go home', conversely, if only that maybe the Interests, involving and participating in Copyright and Patent Laws knew who they were, but to tell themselves from Hitler and Churchill, perhaps, some lesson maybe already by now learnt!

The problem that makes it Irish: The Matrix would be spotted by us---if it contained any mistakes, that is... Contemplating Occupy with this story...E.g. Why now...? Why after Barry McElehinney (Shot dead, north of the border, 2013?), Why after Vedran Kohut (Died in M50 Road Accident November 2015)? Which of our own does she think she can protect? 26 counties? Seems an unfair bargain for ROI IRL IMO to me (btw, why URL?)

Versus 'Paedos and Jihadis' she thinks she's in with the heavy-weights, saying figuratively, as Irish Water might, "I can be racist, too". However, c. 1900, and we wouldn't discuss 'Homos and Niggas'. Yet it's not a different Economy, as far as speculative risk is concerning, except, of course, how observable.

Between a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing and mutton-dressed-as-lamb, you-can't-make-a-silk-purse-from-a-sow's-ear, but to risk throwing-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater, but only to end up throwing even your-granny-from-the-bus...Where concerns such Investment concerns likenable to French Revolutionary times' 'Butchers, Bakers, & Candlestick makers', one must observe rules for 'Rock Paper & Scissors', and 'call a spade a spade', but do with a spatula what you will, within bounds of 'the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black', and 'jumping-from-the-frying-pan-into-the-fire', so as that the lessons of Liberty, Egality, & Fraternity are not lost on us in our times, for Security, Privacy & Free Speech are just as important to get in the right order; so hence, despite risking being labelled a 'murderer' even but to be complicit in all things, unseemly, but...the weather...?

If you were given a homework assignment to bash one of the Political Parties, would you save your favoured one first? Someone's Conscience is eased that they can protect themselves behind the scenes, but can they shout about it in such a woeful way in public! Or conversely, as a Hollywood Director, if you were given a film for an assassination-plot, and you had to pick a Party, would you save your own first? Or, would you, at least, see a silver-lining, woman - and apply 'The Principle of Least Exclusion', where tolerance is assumable?

"Least Exclusion" is a Principle of Tolerance, even, and especially, for bigots!

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/we-need-to-look-after-our-own-first-say-people-who-would-never-help-anyone-20150907101741

GOOD CAUSES FOR REFUSING INTERVENTION

[N.B.none of the following should be found as any legal advice given]

The mathematics of being an individual alone is irrefutable and incontrovertible. There is no need when so knowing this at step one of day one, of the affair, for the appellant to ever conscienate the possibility that in bad cause he would refuse. He would want to have either been pretty dumb or to have sold out principles which are not his, but God's, to give away, for it to have had been bad cause.

Law

1. Right to work: constitutional right to hire his own labour, unprejudiced in its availability to hiring the self as being precedent, and not antecedent, to others in so doing.*

2. Right against slavery: constitutional protection of his lawful preference in training is by the appellant, as argument, maintained.*

3. Onus: the onus on convincing any parties to change a position is with those who urge change*

4. Nature of incentive: the carrot and stick is not aptly applied in any dignifiable appraisability.*

Mathematics

5. One man task: a one man task is only ever going to be a one man task, no matter how much intervention upon it is argued

6. Individuality: the futility of acquiring self-referencing qualification: no piece of paper will tell him sooner to hire his own labour.

Philosophy

7 Business sense: Own business as he sees fit; don't change horses in midstream; steady as she goes, etc.

8 Initiative: The nature of work is a one man game and suited to its getting done that way rather than explaining all of its inspiration motivation and impetus away to others who won't either listen when told but instead rely blindly upon law to do their thinking for them.*

9 Experience: Ten years of independent study behind him, and more to go.

10 Confidence: Asserted in stance maintained, position protected, and course pursued already as being the right one.

11 Prejudice: While during interview his business competence was called into question by a box ticking pen pusher.*

Take no action

      *(Note on 1 above):

40 3 1^o The State guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate the personal rights of the citizen.

40 3 2^o The State shall, in particular, by its laws protect as best it may from unjust attack and, in the case of injustice done, vindicate the life, person, good name, and property rights of every citizen.

45 2 1^o The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing: - That the citizens (all of whom, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood) may through their occupations find the means of making reasonable provision for their domestic needs.

45 3 1^o The State shall endeavour to secure that private enterprise shall be so conducted as to ensure reasonable efficiency in the production and distribution of goods and as to protect the public against unjust exploitation.

      *(Note on 2 above):

42 3 1^o The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the state, or to any particular type of school designated by the state.

        *(Note on 3 above): Being comfortable with my own predicament the onus is on any as might encourage change of my position to justify that change, and not on me to endlessly explain that being an individual I should as I see fit see to that being an individual does not change while others might argue nonsense. Justifying that it ought not be doesn't cross the Dept's mind, yet the legislation is relied upon blindly without ever having to count that each person is an individual and not more. I am not convinced but harassed and harangued. Concerning what laws can be relied upon to feel whatever confidence in one's position ought to be asserted as a mistakenly confident stance.

        *(Note on 4 above): Were I in the wrong or were it a position which would then favour me more, the carrot and stick would be apt. Since I am not claimed to have done anything wrong, nor does it better my position, it is not apt to use a quid pro quo ultimatum to urge change in stance. It is patronising and belittling the choice and freedom of the citizenry of its nation that any government would so employ such tactics to massage their macro sphere situation to more palletteable figures maintaining.

        *(Note on 8 above): The nature of being and expressing dualism, while the former part owns the causes of impetus while not intervening, and the latter part while so doing, encourages survival mechanisms which would not tolerate intervention and yet the task be completed happily. This should be an obvious alarm bell even to those who are not tasked with expressing as much, who sadly would be ignored in their plight, just like those unfortunately who can.

         *(Note on 11 above): This is not an appropriate mood in which to spur on an emburgeoning business, as should be taking its first baby-steps in private and secret, and not out against the big bad world subject to ill considered bases of ignorance of his position from which to let seem stronger their position to belittle his. Suit against such liable and its prejudicial effect is not ruled out by the appellant.

Take no action

Fig: Take no action: the option not considered under the scheme as that possibly most suitable and appropriate to the needs of the appellant. Without this as an option, the onus would seem on convincing him to change his position. But no, it is assumed the poor don't know what's good for them.

NO INTERVENTION

Steady as she goes!

Fig: Maintain a steady course: the option not considerable under the scheme as the most suitable and appropriate to the needs of the appellant. With the path to success in his sights and intervention blotting it out, every good cause existed to wish them away!

Fig 2: How long can it take for the message “No Thank You, Interference” to sink in?

Fig 3: units slowing in production as they rise against a time line with greater production rate along the more horizontal parts of the blue line. The red line showing the date of initial contact.

Production counted by units of finished products of audio production slowed the most since the period surrounding 2008 when there was no computer to work upon. It is clear from the graph how this correlates with the time of initial contact with the Dept. When there is less interference there is more work done. When there is more work done, there is less interference. You could not interfere more with my work, but by taking away my machine from me.

BEFORE INTERVENTION (PRIOR TO 30/03/11)

SINCE INTERVENTION (SINCE TO 30/03/11)

Fig 1: I cannot get my work done: I already know what it is I have to do. Get out of my way! The appellant had only everything to show him good cause to refuse.

Fig 4: Who ever gave this the green light? The Counter-intuitive flow of Cost and Benefit of Intervention. Considering the effort and strain of being intervened upon, why punish those whom it benefits least – theirs might just be a genuine case too!

Squeeze to fit legislation

Expand to fit facts

Fig: Intervention is only ever on track to relate with legislation, not with the everyday normal routines of the real life of the candidate to be intervened upon.

There is only ever good cause in deciding toward the task which is aimed toward, with one's eyes open, alone, when it is going it alone is the task.

Fig: Welfare set out to intervene upon an attempt to climb Everest alone. But you don't understand, with the banking crisis and this legislation we must offer you a training course!

Fig “No minister, you cannot have “The Intervention” as a period in history, just put Pandora’s Box back now, you've had enough!” 

Emergency Construction Projects and The Story of Immigration.

Over a year in your Newspapers - and not once told the People; 'this is how to build a town -in a hurry -when you need to'.  Emergency Construction Projects: - The Story of Immigration.

 Rationalism 

Instead, we're told how to be fearful of blowing yourself up walking down the street! That shit isn't rational: to fear that those two blokes you saw yesterday are already dead, and though you
never met them, you'll never get a chance to meet them again...

It's not rational! And, yet you're seeding Health Plan Agendas on its back as 'win-wins'. We don't have a 'centralised biology system': so why do we have a 'central emotive system' in fear? And, yet our institutions as would treat such things as anxiety or Post-Traumatic Stress don't seem to notice this and keep on validating its system decade after decade of TV...?

How come you can run three decades and more! A 'centralised emotive system', and nobody calls it out: that only the person fearing to not afford payment ought feel fear - anyone else can jump!

Protectionism 

How come a million people fearing (with artificial emotion) to pay up is better than one person (with real emotion) being fearful, at the point of failed protectionism payment?

Is it because the Prime Minister fears the T-party spokesman, in the DoD, arguing the weapons contract deal, wants to bring a False Flag exercise - but the Prime doesn't need it on his watch?

So you externalise, project, and outsource, the emotion -as monetizable stock, at the point of evaluation (TV); The critical thing to evaluate could just as easily as fear (for your neck on the line)
as readily instead be something innocuously positive such as: 'love at first sight'.

Collective Encounters with Third-hand Emotion

How you felt when you first met them...Why would you want all the masses to feel how you felt when you first met them? Now all say this together:
      "She had lovely eyes. I knew it as soon as I saw her eye's, sis". But, yet, you want them to feel -how you felt- when you sent them packing without payment, why is that? You could instead announce: -
      "Now hear this: She had lovely blue eyes and he made me smile. She made me chuckle." What's fear got to do with the dirty sordid secret the audience are supposed to keep?

Why instead - I didn't have the money, she made me very afraid, and so now we must all fear together. But, we're not all paying together. So, why should we all fear together?

----Now hear this: My associate made me chuckle, when I met her that first day. Everyone is to chuckle together now. Hurragh! For the next bloody six weeks! As nobody has anything better to do than, bloody-well, to emote sheepishly! With their precious fucking second-hand emotions. Sorry Paris, I didn't mean anything against your Liberty Statue.

3D Printed Ice Cream

Its all in Plain English. and yet with a monolinguistic English-speaking Christian Calendar, binding mere mortals, pleasing: - who could not be getting it?

Why not centralised taste instead? And. then, fearing all that Ice Cream that we all keep having to share as suiting one particular taste in sadism and not another...

No? What's wrong about my trillion dollar suggestion hey? Is there something inappropriate?
its a win-win - 3D Printed Ice Cream for everyone, no? You get central emotions: - why not also get central taste? 

THE FAKABLE PURPOSES OF VIDEO EVIDENCE: 'The Baker's spent spatula problem'

The Problem of the Butcher, Baker, & Candlestick Maker - Do you call a spade a spade?...Or is it called a spatula, and when all 3 know each can use it better!...Either way you already know Rock, Paper, & Scissors..."Investment Practice, Hate Campaign, & Legislation" is playing Liberty, Egality, Fraternity's game, as though "Security, Privacy, & Free Speech" hadn't ever been learnt... 

It's only worry and hate if you take the bait: conversely this filth-mongering is debunkable thusly: Can the proverbial 'Butcher, Baker, and Candlestick-Maker' prove 'family size' rather than 'fertility of idea' by making potent a lesson in fertile wisdom...a game...err...Spatula?:

Medium Debunked:

Secondary monetization in hate propaganda of spent assets of investment procedures in market niche studies 'The Baker's spent spatula problem' - who to pass it onto next, the 'Butcher' or the 'Candlestick maker'?

Content Debunked:

As linguistics, it bears claim upon sales-pitch not upon world-view, where this can be considered. It isn't a 'Likely Observable Human Behaviour', as phenomenon considered, but that it is necessarily for money, cajoled, externally-to-mind; and in the boardroom where semantics prior-to-cause are discussed, as when, besides, and when such 'Likely Observable Human Behaviours' are forming world-views, besides, views can be formed, not obstacles...

Attitude Debunked:

It's a 'family size index' not a 'fertility rate' - Suggestive Emotive Bias alludes to 'libido' comparable to 'stature' -as comparison- of insult - yet if you can't tell if what compares to libido is in any running, then you must be a great deal of time late, like, say, 14 years since 911?

Motivation Debunked:

The 'Fakable Purposes' take over from the 'Fakable Characteristics' as costing 'Video Evidence' is ditching itself for the discourse on 'why one might wish to portray fakeness in any videos at all'.

Purpose Debunked:

Of investment protocols, what to translate as the caption to any study, as hate messages, or as geography class instead, has a price in its market clears better for the fleeting idle gossip than the subject of science.

Shock Therapy, Best Practice & Etiquette in Jumping When Told, & 'How High'

[Note: Below is a Parody Comedy Satire Spoof  to be read with tongue-firmly-in-cheek, throughout, even when I say this: like as with The Recovery of Political Economy, now more fully underway, and, since events in Paris last week -boom and bust, undoubtedly, cyclically, in toe, the content below is the stuff of Pure Fiction -the lot of it...honest!]

Consider the Role of the Extortionist

Despite any misgiving of our Intuitions toward issues concerning Pure Evil, it seems incumbent in our duties as End-Users, especially, that we must consider translating our Economies into something more readily extortable for The Blackmailer. We must consider Misogyny, Homophobia etc. - you know, Price Discriminants for which a Price Determinant Market can exist -one Account to extort them all- and hence for 'Niggas and Homos' (last century) - read 'Paedos and Jihadis' (this century) - so that we can all get along better in our respective positions as Blackmailer or Extortionist, or whatever our role, besides...

We should give Copyright's interests five years to get their Extortionism's house in order ...and...gladly...And, not to find ourselves remiss of perishable Career Opportunities missed meanwhile, or whatever disruption -besides- might inconvenience the art of only living once. As, whatever about that malarky...well - it would seem, it's clear: - you don't get to YOLO at all in some cases, too! Haha! 'Having-a-life', and 'Getting-a-grip', doesn't happen overnight for some Problem Cases, however. 'Who-to-trust', and 'What-to-believe' seem sooner more likely their plight, besides. Five years ought to seem plenty-of-time, after which to waste the rest of Eternity, having had noticed The Crisis, but missed The Opportunity in The Information Age of divorcing, once and for all, the False Economy of The King's Ransom. Better luck, next time, says you!...If we get another Eternity, that is! And, have our Payments on time, or expect more of this bullshit!

Have some consideration for He who must extort ye all nowadays. For, it can't be, at all, all-the-easiest job, for Him, doling out mercy, that He should be seen to find deserving compassion or pity for any of us. For, how difficult a job that-it-is-made, for Him, subject to new conditions of The Information Age, where we find ourselves, nowadays...Some would think that -with the advent of The Internet- that The King's Ransom and Blackmail and Extortion would just go away: - but, it's not so simply the case! If Copyright tells us anything, as an affair of a Counter-Revolutionary Movement in Commerce (and, one sold on slavery for glory for eight bits, merely, of binary code per transmission!) it's that it's business-as-usual for The Extortionists of This World ----expecting their lot to be as-it-were for the last 150 years at least, and then some! [Picture the command at Copyright's helm: “At ease, 'network as-is'! Nothing going on in this Meta-Consciousness as ought  to seem, necessarily, Divine by any virtue of our imposing limitation!”]

If you would be kind enough in your Economies to translate yer Economies into numbers which are more readily extortable! Then, their conveniences can be put paid to, and be seen to be Transparent and Accountable. And, if not ready to be extorted for the next five years, then that's okay: don't panic we'll wait! But, meanwhile, if ye would just crisis-upon-command, just so as to empathise with the Systematic Exploitation of the Currencies of The World: this might show the pity and compassion due to their position. But be vigilant! Quell any rumour that Global Currencies of The World would unite and transcend The Extortionist - because National Borders define who we are as Peoples! Paris reminds us of this!

You would think the role of a hypothesis of a Monopolist Extortionist...who also blackmails himself (as, he's not immune, mysteriously, to also being merely human!) would suit the representation of 'The Poor Mouth', but this might always not seem the case! Cameraphiles are every bit also as Human as the rest of us. Even if they are not Porn Producers, they yet deserve compassion! I once knew of a cameraphobe who's particular secret fetish was that he had tendencies toward being a briefcasephile. You know, camera-on-the-briefcase, and so everything he did -filmed- he could watch it over later, while working out his Extortion Payments' method and procedure, not to mention Willingness-to-Pay. There are Efficiencies and Economies-of-Scale to consider for any Investor, starting out, you see!

We can all pretend to be 'Paedos'; we can all pretend to be 'Cops': - but we can't all pretend to be voting Fine Gael! Since the beginning of last century, we have looked forward to a day when we might transcend Money's arguments; and, there would be a day when there would be no Ransom to-be-paid! And, this, through a vision of Universal Properties of Networks, merely, following Universal Design! How wrong we were, that it might be so simple, and, yet, disprovable just to look at Copyright! But, as Copyright has shown us, things aren't always as simple as knowing that 'God is peace'! If we cannot implement immediately 'plugging all our Economies in Online', all at once, then we can at least wait five years for The Extortionist to get his Accounts in order, to keep on blackmailing us, and, then for Eternity, thereafter!

Is Our Particular Blackmailing Going to be Affected?

Monetary Systems don't discriminate against any types of People when laying down the Accounting Method of their automated systemised Extortion, besides, so we shouldn't like to be associated too much with any-such-a-thing as prejudice ...as there are lines to draw in the sensibilities of such things...as that such reputation for which History might remember us, and as proud and decent People, we were, sure ----and we weren't only 'Mysognist' or 'Homophobic' or any-such-a-thing --so don't, too much, hate yerselves, on our Account! Say, for example, if you don't already own an 'iPhone': - it's not too late! Its not too late to join in on the Blackmailing Economy. Iphones aren't finished yet their next run, so there's still time for us all to get involved, even at the lowest rung!

Small Business Loans can be made available to those who cannot afford to pay; Health Insurance can be rallied to, as though Universally, despite common sense; so, when we're extorting in-the-most wide-scale and broadest sense, so think of it as being like 'part-of-The-Human-Family', and don't consider that it is perverse to be extorted, systematically. It's just part of being Human. You know, not like The Internet is any different. Don't think 'Higher Intelligence', 'Symbiosis', and 'Universal Properties of Networks' as that shit is just opinion, and such flowery nonsense doesn't help anyone's Blackmail Stakes. Think instead 'Sex, Vice, Crime, and an Underworld, you know! It's Blackmail, Baby! They know...they're the ones with the iPhones!

Who's On Top?

If we don't have a blanket veil of fear underlying us, then we can't pretend at least to be normal and decent and hardworking, like everyone else, while offering ourselves up on-a-platter -to the highest or lowest bidder- neither is it an acceptable means to tend to the relationship in the New Economy of 'who-ought-be-seen, in a proper-working-diffusion, to be the power-on-top'! Working out 'who's-on-top' is what it's all about -isn't it? And concerning Online Internet Activities. and, if we pip-at-the-post by nanoseconds- everyone else -beating them in their path to Eternal Grace- then it's not a question for qualms or mind-boggling shuddering-to-think, but instead obvious. He who fleets the most, fleets the most to his benefit, potentially, and fleets the most so also to others detriment in their Eternal Grace before God. So, that's not a question...

We don't have to be considering the crude economies of attraction and dominance in feature:- as though, as Fat-Cats, we hadn't already uniformity and ties, to consider, to make as 'All Equals' to each one another, our relation, but, as we pervade...to the system of best application, so, that which ought to be seen as the 'dominant factor' -of-our-daily-lives'-travail- ought not to be seen to interfere with our 'Willingness-to-Pay'!

Events Transpiring

Scorpions, Torpedos, and Paedo Rackets! - nothing is without consequence when Extortion Rackets are not paid-up fully-on-time. Where is PR when you need it? Off gallivanting, Crushing Balconies, Burning Tinkers, and now 'more Killing-Sprees in Paris' seems to be the limit of their imagination. A second time! In one calendar year! Of the same Investment Cycle! If PR could keep visible at all times, we might not fear for the extortability of The World to seem in woe. Twice in three months UCD experiences mass-killing and, like as with Headshops bringing down governments - it hardly notices a thing! ---Don't worry, UCD, Paris has it far worse! And now...All better! On the same God's Earth! Before the same Global Audience! Oh, we are such fools!

Balcony Antics, Tinker-Burning, and now Paris again - what does it all mean for The Extortionists? Consider also their role as Blackmailers of The World! Is our Payment going to be affected, for example? I know that you're all asking yerselves these such types of questions. But, don't worry: unless ye all, already, have Diamond Investments Portfolios- your extortability onwards is most secure, or not so, depending as your Broker might advise such shit. You'd think things change with The Internet and talk of all this Diffusion! Diffusion-confusion, what are they like! Water-drinkers! Pfff! Do they not understand that the ways of a Cruel World will not be liable to change -just because we change in-our-method-of-communication? Silly! Just like gullible fools...they have to have everything made clear for them, don't they (as if the Printing Press hadn't already made thing clear in black and white!).

Paris doesn't stem from a vacuum. Scorpions, Torpedos and Paedo Rackets don't disappear from the horizon of our radar systems just simply to go across Borders or Underground -in whatever sense- but that events would transgress in their oblivion. A hypothesis of a Company Yacht in The Pacific -and with a resolve of Atlantic issues through reference to well-worn Political paths of The Falkland's Conflict -isn't sufficient to base dramatising the events observed. The Media Mogul's Submarine is more likely that which justifies the rate of Torpedo counting, preceding 'Paris Deux', The Sequel, as an event, (whether as with token or key relevance to events assumable transgressing prior and beforehand or not). Logical Paradoxes unresolved...? 'Paris Deux' is pursued instead...? Besides than that Humans relate in a class dualism between Rich and Poor, what might these Paradoxes possibly be? 

Of greater concern to our collective progress as Humans, than the sexual habits of Newspaper Readers, are the eating habits of those whose extortion also makes up General Circulation. I was born for example not liking tomatoes. I ought to deserve every bit as much compassion in my plight being a non-tomato eater, as in finding the news repugnant. That I don't like either Brussel sprouts or cabbage, doesn't preclude against my treatment as a normal Human Being. It's the way I was brought up. My mother made them that way. It's not her cooking, as such, as I was growing up, but rather, it's just the way they taste bitter-sour, and your face scrunches up and you say 'URGH!'. I think I've spelt that technical term right. Others might react with some offence, to spell it differently, but theirs is also a valid position. Emotive Responses, in any, of us, can be valued, each on their merits, and in turn, but with the help of centrally disseminated messaging, also altogether and overall.

Status of Equals

Long-angle-lens-philes cannot be impersonated. We can't fake long-angle photos -so easily- as to photoshop things. Cameraphobes, and cameraphiles, and camerasexuals -are each -Human- as much as one another, and none were born without a Mother, so everyone can make certain a sense of equality, and also, on a basis of their extortability, a Price Market Dogma from which exploitation of their differentials in society, can be derived, so that value extracted can find a path of its determined flow, through hatred, taunting, slurs and even murder. If this was acceptable with Niggas and Homos last century then it's probably safe this century with Paedos and Jihadis just similarly. And, nobody seems to know what their problem last century was, either. If, conveniently to us rich Westerners, we don't bother asking, then, nobody might either notice. Moving along...

If born as a camerasexual, for example, then it might be safe to consider having had been brought up as a camerasexual, as likely. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone who is a camerasexual must necessarily become a Porn Star! Some might live ordinary lives being extorted by cameraphiles, who, also, after all, are just Human, and normal, and natural, and equal – and, like the rest of us - their Payments must also be on time!

With extra memory in the kitbag, various arguments for nature and nurture would arise, and learned and innate behaviours would be discussed, sure - but know this: - as your mother has made you, and as God bestowed to you your qualities, that extra memory might not be enough on all occasions. You might need to invest also in some more kit, for when the occasion requires it.

Camerasexuals are entitled to their status as Humans just like the rest of us - whether counting the chips or not, as part of their upbringing. Camerasexuals cannot help being camerasexuals. If you are a Cameraphobe, to endure in a normal lifestyle, think about doing-it-in-front-of-the-mirror, or something, as a first step to getting over one's predicament.  Or, maybe keep a tripod stand in the bedroom, passively and inactively, just to get used to the nature of being in the presence of such a thing...and, yet -while it is not operating- so as to adapt to life-being-a-cameraphobe. Not all cameraphobes are immune to Extortion and Blackmail, however, despite their status as 'Human', being secure.

Cameraphiles, cameraphobes, and camerasexuals are each as Human as one another. Some long-angle-lens-philes might indeed be classified as Robots -if working automatedly ----but this doesn't mean that they ought to be subject to Persecution. If God made them as long-angle-lens-philes - then that is how they are, simply, as being ---and, before any camerawork is considerable, besides; and whether such camerawork involves other technologies or indeed other Persons, so yet their status as long-angle-lens-philes cannot be prejudiced upon the Extortion Racket of their choice, and its Behaviours, but instead simply through their being of such status, their non-persecutable humanity is also what we must endeavour to aspire to when considering our collective Humanity and our duty toward Our Fellow Man.

Of course long-angle-lens-philes which are not persons but machines, are considered in light of their common sense status, too; and, notwithstanding any prejudice upon the art of being Human, ought their case impinge upon the humanity shared -with those who were born as cameraphiles, of any kind. Their mothers made them that way. They came into the world with extra memory in their kit bag. It can't be for us to judge how God has made them. If successful as an extortionist, then they ought also be considered as potentially part of Human Society, and in ways that benefit the whole of Society, as everyone can be agreed.

Camera-philes ought not to be considered perverts, as their status is derived from being of such a nature, rather than doing anything as such, predicating their necessity. Extra memory, and strap, and remote control operation equipment, also forms part of the necessary make-up of their being, of such status. The content of their work in any capacity of doing ought not to prejudice their freedom to be camera-philes ---while their Necessity in such capacity is so denotable. If not associated with any underhand, surreptitious, or nefarious Behaviours, besides than merely being of their status, then camera-philes ought to be allowed to live out happy lives, and while their Behaviours can be subject to monitoring and treatment, where necessary. Otherwise, we should have no reason to persecute those who take pictures of others in compromising positions!

Camera-phile behaviours are nothing new to The Human Condition despite the New Technology. In other ways, their Behaviours, and their status as being, dates from time immemorial. Look at cave paintings. They don't all have clothes on. We must consider their Humanity, the legacy of their position, and also how they might fit into Society making productive their capacity to be as human as the rest of us. Even with tripod stands in toe, this ought not to be a difficulty that we cannot surmount!

'URGH!': A shared basis of Collective Sheepish Repugnance - What Works and What Doesn't?

In any manifest study of Civilisation, it may be pertinent to consider, concerning the Investment Value of such Emotive Responses as are People's reactions to public displays, their repugnance. And, of the offence caused- as having had precluded, already, the design of a well-capable Statute-Book, which such positive law rules on, and, in Our Times, unchanged, we can derive, therefrom, a system of Taxation as can be taught – as which also can teach the rest of Society....perhaps including -in its Lesson- those with the most repugnant Facial Expression, or those whose hairdo doesn't prejudice their photogenic capacity, besides, to distract from the meaningfulness of the Lesson, intendable.

As our Emotive Response to eating foodstuffs, which variously we may consider we like and don't like -we can also base our assumptions on the safety of such law as usable in practice. Various responses to spit it out or to swallow any foodstuff so responded to tell us something of what we might expect as Public Response also in kind, to such repugnance exploited for purposes of making positive law. It might not be so-clearly-the-case with Criminality, however. We might not wish the picture of our repugnance to become quite so set-in-stone as to wish to make our very law-book from its Emotive Response, as its basis, entirely, merely, but for Society then to respond to the bitter pill of its lesson of repugnant natures, but only to spit the law-book out, and not The Behaviour.

I'm picturing something from the Hollywood Movie, The Nutty Professor, but only for its worth also befitting the term: fat lip, and not as you might think for its potential representing Males who are Black, confusing with the former subject, above, of blackmail. Conversely instead, maybe: lip service, bloating their bottom lip, with a slight ticklish, tingling, burning sensation – as Emotive Response – which convenience of programming in lip service midsts would substitute entirely for the worth of the semantics of 'Responsibility' in the Era of Global Consciousness.   

Each case on-its-merits, and with each such behaviour -to its own- considered for itself, so we can form law-books, besides. For example, on a basis of our-repugnance-looking-at-homeless-people. Down-with-that-sort-of-thing. See how my face is 'scrunched-up' - and I would say – 'URGH'. Well, now you know what law is. It causes offence, thusly, I would say....

Other forms of reading law besides than scrunching up your face exist (and, no, sir does not consider that tomatoes ought to be illegal) - some Entry Visas for non-Human persons can also be designed... where we can envisage a world, where tomatoes would be free to cross borders like any other vegetable, and free also from pestilence and disease naturally....if, also, but to consider how we might also tweak their genes, so that they're not born living on the streets. The other non-human persons, not tomatoes, of course, I mean, who inspired this idea. It can't all be about homeless people. I mean occupy failed because they were living homeless, but we must prove also that mobile people are also failures. And then we've definitely won! I mean, made society better for one and all opportunities to be rich. I mean successful.  Yes. that's what I mean. to say. Besides than 'scrunching-up' our faces, merely, to decide their fate in-the-eyes-of-the-law. besides than 'scrunching-up' our faces in an emotive response, reactionary and subjective, we can also form law-books by other means. We're working on those other means, as we speak. It's progress, baby!

Sometimes we get a feeling when thinking about things, and it tells us our place in the world. If I am on top, then I know I am secure in my dominance. If I know that I'm on top, often, then I can guess what law's position is -just by relating the prejudicial and typifiable status of 'what-it-is' that has caused -my face- to 'scrunch-up' and say 'URGH'. That's the technical term for the least-quantity syllaballic basis, and hence most efficient concise expressibility of its minimal sufficiency in proving a matter, a matter of interest to law, as best knowable, thus far, to humankind.

Putting 'URGH!' Into Practice

We ought all practice Emotive Responses so as to show that Law is on our side. 'URGH.' Now that we know what Offence is, so, we can also value 'the-other-feelings'. If your feelings, merely, can make you the richest - then they can't be all that bad, as Indicators!

N.B. 'URGH' is a Technical Term, and its spelling is Copyrighted, and Trademarked, and Patented. If you have an 'URGH' feeling of your own, you can also make use of your Offence, felt, besides than to consider Payment due to our Accounts (who manage 'URGH'), by spelling it differently, but to the betterment of yours and everyone's moral standpoint, toward offence------basing any law, besides than as testable by that such specific Technique.

'Scrunching-up' your face like you were eating lemons might not be necessary, but it may be seen as sufficient, in good practice. if you scrunch up your face and say 'URGH' - then you can know that law is on-your-side. reprehensible and non-condonable are the causes of 'URGH', and, also, each their features, as having had caused (rather than felt) such precious and lucrative emotive-responses, so long ago, when human-earthly-artificial makey-up-laws were first invented.

The 21st Century is every bit as much an era when 'URGH' ought to base each our moral sensibilities as any era before us. however, we do not have to go back to the dark ages to unearth the origins of 'URGH'. like any description of a good wine ought to seem also productive and intuitive, so, 'Californian blonde' will do, as the epitome of 'URGH', and those who already practice, in-their-faith, the ways of 'URGH' might tell you this. UCD is full of them. they must be quite so much very moral persons indeed. or else very gullible, I can't decide. 'URGH!'

You can tell what is deserving of legal consequence just by noting the rate of the spread of 'URGH' as a reactionary force in cultural expression. If The King says 'URGH' one century, and the people are yet made say 'URGH' the next, as a result of the same stimulus, as cause, then, you can be sure that the Sovereign will has not been put pay to, but such that extortabilty of its offense can yet seem ripe, and considering that it has not yet been eradicated, as a cause of offence, in any each and all our behaviours!

Saying 'URGH', nowadays, doesn't necessarily mean that the society you were brought up in was backward and defunct, even in the dark ages. you can still yet be a nimbyist even if you don't own a backyard! You can still yet base upon semantics each, only, ever, -all- your conflicts, pretended to, so as within mere mortal behaviours remaining, as emotive responses to semantic suggestions, and back-and-forth arms race emotive responses, even, but, such that those who scrunch up their faces 'the most' - are obviously those who are most offended, and thus morally superior, self-evidently. this is a safe test. they should be given the strongest most secure defence in their state, by law, hence.

If we have no other purpose for our laws, then we should practice various emotive responses, besides. as god values each our subjectivities, especially as we can practice wholesale or retail, locally or globally, centrally or uniformly, a response: to each say 'URGH', together and in synchronicity. Hence, we know such things as beheading are reprehensible repugnant indignant and morally undesirable behaviours, as indicated by our all saying 'URGH' together. Twitter has a read out of our saying 'URGH' together, ostensibly hence.

Hence, since we each contribute to Twitter, we know we are all moral persons preferring an expression of repugnance than chopping our heads off. that's what makes us moral. if most worthy of this expression, best expressed with a good old-fashioned Uzi. It's traditional! Ten people saying 'URGH', together, if you think about it, is a stronger law than just one person on their own, using the same expression. Think then how moral the world ought to seem that we can all say 'URGH' together, and know that such undesirable behaviours as which are the enemies are false and wrong. At least they don't know where it's at. And that's no place from which to command our fashions. For if we're gonna be moral persons, we must at least keep up with the tide of changing opinion.

The laws made on a basis of 'URGH' are hence -more strong- if we think 'more sheepishly'. 'Eurrrrrrgghhh'. God loves our sheepish thought! He values our subjective response. saying 'URGH' is not just the beginning and end of it! There is also the operation of an accounts-mechanism, by which, those who say 'URGH' can also, themselves, be subject to the nefariousness of extortionists -who would seem to be immune to saying 'URGH'. down-with-that-sort-of-thing! Those who are tasked with extortionist-behaviours (and I don't mean just the representation of persons who are black, but also black females as well as black males) can strongly represent -an indicator- as-to-the-position---of market signals, in tasks of extortionism, besides, than merely reading exodus from their Bibles, which isn't in itself a cause of offence. The extortionism as which inspires their religious zealot tendencies and allusion to modern faith, however, might well be.

So, practice it in front of the mirror....'URGH'....so that we may know who's moral - and who's not! Next lesson: Shock Therapy and the Etiquette of Good Practice in jumping, when told, and 'How High'.