This article is based on this Dutch article of Martijn Benders

We need to talk about Finalspark.

These people design brains that they subsequently torture to “steer them in the right direction,” but it’s not considered torture “because these aren’t real brains.”
Can you still follow? We’re talking about FinalSpark, a new company collaborating with various universities to build biocomputers, check this out:

*The even more explosive claim is: these tiny brains in the lab have their performance improved by a SYSTEM OF REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS.*

*What?!*

*For “good work,” the brains get injections of pleasure-inducing dopamine. For “bad work,” random chaotic disturbing electrical stimulation.*

*Yet, FinalSpark claims these little brains aren’t alive or conscious.*

*If that’s true, how can reward-punishment work at all?*

*Can you reward a rock or a piece of a wall?*

This is what Jon Rappoport writes on his substack

Obviously, this is exactly the point where bureaucracy and its infamous “regulations” completely fail. Feel free to build a billion brains that you constantly torture, because “it’s not clear whether they have consciousness.”

The same argument recurs in the copyright debate. What you are fundamentally claiming when you say that AI cannot study someone else’s art is that you don’t believe AI exists.
You don’t believe AI is real intelligence capable of learning imitation. You think it’s some sort of trick, and you argue that someone who imitates Van Gogh’s style can be called a “thief.” Humans have the right to study others’ art, but AI does not, and you approach the courts with the notion that a computer creating works in the style of an artist should not have looked at that artist’s works in the first place.

Sorry, but that’s a really hopeless lawsuit. It’s not illegal to study Van Gogh’s works and create paintings in the same style. That’s not a copyright violation, I’m sorry. No, it isn’t theft either. Uninteresting art, maybe so: the copycat generally doesn’t produce very compelling works. I’ve seen little of interest in the streams of AI art, except when the person guiding it is already a refined artist themselves.

**Two Forms of Exclusivity Fascism**

Both examples above are excellent examples of very severe forms of intelligence-exclusivity fascism, a typical affliction of the human ape who believes he is the master of the universe and the only one who can claim intelligence and consciousness. This allows him to endlessly torture pigs and other beings, hence AI can never be true intelligence, and he can build bio-brains that he punishes with electrocution.

This is a very severe form of fascism. He doesn’t see that himself, of course, because he is the only truly living being in the Universe. Unfortunately for him, this is completely outdated, even scientifically. Science indicates that the size of a network determines intelligence and little else. The same idiot who claimed for a century that animals can’t feel pain because they seemingly have different kinds of nerves than humans now electrocutes brains in boxes to make them “more efficient.” Regulations? Forget about it.

**Cosplay as a Phenomenon**

Keukenhof used to be a place where you could admire cultivation arts in living beings. Everything the same pure color, barracks full of beings existing for decoration. It all became increasingly less popular, even threatening to become unprofitable. But then they discovered Cosplay.

I was at the 19th edition of Castlefest yesterday. My goodness, it was crowded. Whole tribes dress up as Vikings, Elves, Witches, or other fantasy creatures and are willing to pay 100 euros to walk around like that for a day. It has something endearing, yet also something psychotic. If you feel this is your true identity, why don’t you walk around like this all the time? If you want the world to look like this, why limit it to a reservation where you have to pay for it?

No, most of the people there are ICT specialists with a rather colorless appearance in “the real world.” But that’s a demonic inversion because according to them, this is the real “real world;” after all, this is what they live for.

The incredible popularity of dressing up and the Middle Ages, which apparently symbolize utopia for entire tribes—you see it on TV too, with the Game of Thrones series, Viking series, dragon series, and whatnot. Now, I want to briefly mention something I wrote on Facebook the day before yesterday:

*Apparently, some people think that female boxers are mainly delicate, fragile, and breakable women, and the more muscular and angular ladies should move to ballet.*

That’s what I wrote. Because yes, apparently, muscular women are no longer allowed to exist according to these creeps. Creeps, indeed, because who goes to watch shot put and starts projecting the ideals of some beauty contest? It’s all Foekje Dillema revisited:

*Shortly after her death, the KNAU recognized Dillema’s personal record in the 200 meters. In a personal conversation with a nephew of Dillema, the Athletics Union, through director Rien van Haperen, apologized for how Dillema was abandoned after her suspension.* Wikipedia

Especially note that dystopian “after her death.” A fully deserved title recognized only “after someone’s death,” what sort of sadist are you then exactly?

But no, the man-woman is not allowed to exist, whereas the effeminate man is not a problem at all. After all, he can’t gain any sporting advantage from his femininity. But why not? Can, for example, someone with better social instincts not play basketball better? There have never been any scientific studies on it. You’re just making stuff up; it’s all entirely arbitrary. And in that arbitrariness lies precisely the same fascism again: we use reward and punishment to breed a certain type of person. And the beauty ideals used for that are stiflingly stupid.

How cruel is it to call someone who was simply born female a converted man because she failed some utterly absurd test? The example of Foekje Dillema long showed that such women simply exist, and anyone with even an ounce of common sense knows that. But see them roar on social media about “men hitting women at the Olympics.”

Tomorrow, they expect a row of graceful ballerinas at the shot put competition.
No, brrrr, give me those ICT specialists and that reservation full of paganism, where you have to pay a lot. It might be a psychotic escape from the world of the psychotic braying donkey, but that’s a so-called double negation: and that’s why you see something of the real world emerge at such a Castlefest.

In memoriam Foekje Dillema, 1926-2007

Martijn Benders, 08-05-2024