Thursday, March 22, 2018

Chief rabbi calls black people ‘monkeys’ (kushi)

Chief rabbi calls black people ‘monkeys’

Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef uses pejorative term 'kushi' for African Americans in weekly sermon

Sephardic Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef attends a ceremony in Jerusalem, October 22, 2017. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)
Sephardic Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef attends a ceremony in Jerusalem, October 22, 2017. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

The Sephardic chief rabbi of Israel called black people “monkeys” during his weekly sermon on Saturday evening.

Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef was addressing Jewish legal aspects of the blessing on seeing fruit trees blossoming, during the current Hebrew month of Nissan, and, specifically, whether one should bless one tree or at least two.
In that context, he mentioned a blessing uttered upon seeing an “unusual creature,” citing the example of encountering a black person who has two white parents on the street in America.
In footage aired by the Ynet news site, Yosef could be seen referring to black people by the word “kushi,” which in modern Hebrew has pejorative connotations, and then going on to term a black person a “monkey.
His office told Ynet that the comparison was a quote from the Talmud.
Yosef has been known to court controversy in his sermons.
In a sermon delivered in May last year, he appeared to suggest during his weekly sermon that secular woman behave like animals because they dress immodestly.
In March 2016, Yosef was forced to retract a comment that non-Jews should not live in Israel, calling it “theoretical.”
He said non-Jews could live in Israel only if they observe the seven Noahide Laws, which are prohibitions against idolatry, blaspheming God, murder, forbidden sexual relations, stealing, and eating limbs off a live animal, and which prescribe the establishment of a legal system.
Non-Jews, Yosef said, are in Israel only to serve Jews.
Israel has two chief rabbis. Yosef represents those with origins in the Iberian Peninsula, North Africa, and the Middle East, and David Lau represents Ashkenazic Jews, with origins in European lands of the Roman Empire.

New Algorithm & Whole-Brain Simulation

Powerful New Algorithm Is a Big Step Towards Whole-Brain Simulation

The renowned physicist Dr. Richard Feynman once said: “What I cannot create, I do not understand. Know how to solve every problem that has been solved.”
An increasingly influential subfield of neuroscience has taken Feynman’s words to heart. To theoretical neuroscientists, the key to understanding how intelligence works is to recreate it inside a computer. Neuron by neuron, these whizzes hope to reconstruct the neural processes that lead to a thought, a memory, or a feeling.
With a digital brain in place, scientists can test out current theories of cognition or explore the parameters that lead to a malfunctioning mind. As philosopher Dr. Nick Bostrom at the University of Oxford argues, simulating the human mind is perhaps one of the most promising (if laborious) ways to recreate—and surpass—human-level ingenuity.
There’s just one problem: our computers can’t handle the massively parallel nature of our brains. Squished within a three-pound organ are over 100 billion interconnected neurons and trillions of synapses.
Even the most powerful supercomputers today balk at that scale: so far, machines such as the K computer at the Advanced Institute for Computational Science in Kobe, Japan can tackle at most ten percent of neurons and their synapses in the cortex.
This ineptitude is partially due to software. As computational hardware inevitably gets faster, algorithms increasingly become the linchpin towards whole-brain simulation.
This month, an international team completely revamped the structure of a popular simulation algorithm, developing a powerful piece of technology that dramatically slashes computing time and memory use.
Using today’s simulation algorithms, only small progress (dark red area of center brain) would be possible on the next generation of supercomputers. However, the new technology allows researchers to simulate larger parts of the brain while using the same amount of computer memory. This makes the new technology more appropriate for future use in supercomputers for whole-brain level simulation. Image Credit: Forschungszentrum Jülich/Frontiers
The new algorithm is compatible with a range of computing hardware, from laptops to supercomputers. When future exascale supercomputers hit the scene—projected to be 10 to 100 times more powerful than today’s top performers—the algorithm can immediately run on those computing beasts.
“With the new technology we can exploit the increased parallelism of modern microprocessors a lot better than previously, which will become even more important in exascale computers,” said study author Jakob Jordan at the Jülich
Research Center in Germany, who published the work in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics.
“It’s a decisive step towards creating the technology to achieve simulations of brain-scale networks,” the authors said.

The Trouble With Scale

Current supercomputers are composed of hundreds of thousands of subdomains called nodes. Each node has multiple processing centers that can support a handful of virtual neurons and their connections.
A main issue in brain simulation is how to effectively represent millions of neurons and their connections inside these processing centers to cut time and power.
One of the most popular simulation algorithms today is the Memory-Usage Model. Before scientists simulate changes in their neuronal network, they need to first create all the neurons and their connections within the virtual brain using the algorithm.
Here’s the rub: for any neuronal pair, the model stores all information about connectivity in each node that houses the receiving neuron—the postsynaptic neuron.
In other words, the presynaptic neuron, which sends out electrical impulses, is shouting into the void; the algorithm has to figure out where a particular message came from by solely looking at the receiver neuron and data stored within its node.
It sounds like a strange setup, but the model allows all the nodes to construct their particular portion of the neural network in parallel. This dramatically cuts down boot-up time, which is partly why the algorithm is so popular.
But as you probably guessed, it comes with severe problems in scaling. The sender node broadcasts its message to all receiver neuron nodes. This means that each receiver node needs to sort through every single message in the network—even ones meant for neurons housed in other nodes.
That means a huge portion of messages get thrown away in each node, because the addressee neuron isn’t present in that particular node. Imagine overworked post office staff skimming an entire country’s worth of mail to find the few that belong to their jurisdiction. Crazy inefficient, but that’s pretty much what goes on in the Memory-Usage Model.
The problem becomes worse as the size of the simulated neuronal networkgrows.  Each node needs to dedicate memory storage space to an “address book” listing all its neural inhabitants and their connections. At the scale of billions of neurons, the “address book” becomes a huge memory hog.

Size Versus Source

The team hacked the problem by essentially adding a zip code to the algorithm.
Here’s how it works. The receiver nodes contain two blocks of information. The first is a database that stores data about all the sender neurons that connect to the nodes. Because synapses come in several sizes and types that differ in their memory consumption, this database further sorts its information based on the type of synapses formed by neurons in the node.
This setup already dramatically differs from its predecessor, in which connectivity data is sorted by the incoming neuronal source, not synapse type. Because of this, the node no longer has to maintain its “address book.”
“The size of the data structure is therefore independent of the total number of neurons in the network,” the authors explained.
The second chunk stores data about the actual connections between the receiver node and its senders. Similar to the first chunk, it organizes data by the type of synapse. Within each type of synapse, it then separates data by the source (the sender neuron).
In this way, the algorithm is far more specific than its predecessor: rather than storing all connection data in each node, the receiver nodes only store data relevant to the virtual neurons housed within.
The team also gave each sender neuron a target address book. During transmission the data is broken up into chunks, with each chunk containing a zip code of sorts directing it to the correct receiving nodes.
Rather than a computer-wide message blast, here the data is confined to the receiver neurons that they’re supposed to go to.

Speedy and Smart

The modifications panned out.
In a series of tests, the new algorithm performed much better than its predecessors in terms of scalability and speed. On the supercomputer JUQUEEN in Germany, the algorithm ran 55 percent faster than previous models on a random neural network, mainly thanks to its streamlined data transfer scheme.
At a network size of half a billion neurons, for example, simulating one second of biological events took about five minutes of JUQUEEN runtime using the new algorithm. Its predecessor clocked in at six times that.
This really “brings investigations of fundamental aspects of brain function, like plasticity and learning unfolding over minutes…within our reach,” said study author Dr. Markus Diesmann at the Jülich Research Centre.
As expected, several scalability tests revealed that the new algorithm is far more proficient at handling large networks, reducing the time it takes to process tens of thousands of data transfers by roughly threefold.
“The novel technology profits from sending only the relevant spikes to each process,” the authors concluded. Because computer memory is now uncoupled from the size of the network, the algorithm is poised to tackle brain-wide simulations, the authors said.
While revolutionary, the team notes that a lot more work remains to be done. For one, mapping the structure of actual neuronal networks onto the topology of computer nodes should further streamline data transfer. For another, brain simulation software needs to regularly save its process so that in case of a computer crash, the simulation doesn’t have to start over.
“Now the focus lies on accelerating simulations in the presence of various forms of network plasticity,” the authors concluded. With that solved, the digital human brain may finally be within reach.

Robert “Robbie” Burns

Robert “Robbie” Burns

Let us pay tribute to a fellow poetic soul

Robbie was born January 25, 1759 on a Scottish knoll

This writer instead was born January 25, 1957 on Canadian soil

Loving so too Sherlock Holmes and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

A painting of Robbie’s home is placed upon my bedroom wall

Reminding me always of his chivalrous call

A man whose loyalty was to country and not distant royals

Whose enchanted quill rewarded Robbie with many literary spoils

Auld Lang Syne remains novel with each passing year

So let’s celebrate with Robbie by lifting high a pint of Scottish beer

Tam O’shanter is an eerily tale at best

The devil playing bagpipes nearly gave Tam cardiac arrest

But what of witches and Halloween 

One can only imagine shivering kilts and a haggis filled cuisine

In closing let us celebrate in Robbie’s honour the mystical unicorn 

And let Robbie’s magic prick you as would a Jerusalem thorn

Thank you,
Joseph Pede

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

I Wish

To Wish

Upon the water, I wish I could walk

Against the pull of gravity, I wish I could win

To travel to the end of time, I wish 

Within the skies, I wish I could fly

Deep inside the ocean, I wish I could breathe

To experience death within life, I wish

Atop the soil, I wish I could be as the seed

Among the clouds, I wish I could bathe

To be as the majestic elephant, I wish

Naked atop the highest peak, I wish I could sit

To be as the fetus, I wish I could remember

To sit with God on the first day, I wish

To be as music, I wish for such eternal harmony 

To wish, and know that every wish will come true

To look inside the mind of God, I wish

Thank you,
Joseph Pede

Monday, March 19, 2018

How To Wield GOD-FORCE (Chi, Kundalini, Prana, Lux)

How To Wield GOD-FORCE

Dear Mage:

Rosicrucian lore explains we live in a vast ocean of vital life energy emanating from the
Sun and stars. Without this vital energy, no life on Earth could survive.

In the East, Taoist sages call this life force Chi. Ancient Tantric Masters called it Kundalini. The Gurus of Yoga call it Prana.  Here in the West, Hermetic Masters and Rosicrucian Magi call this energy LVX (pronounced Lux). Master Christ simply called it Life, and claimed we can all have this Life  energy in hitherto unknown abundance.

This LVX-Force has been known by initiates since the dawn of time. Although it has been
called by diverse names around the world, the best way to understand it - is just to call this divine life energy what it really is: GOD-FORCE!

GOD-FORCE energy is the fabric of the Universe. Blazing like galaxies of stars, GOD-FORCE energy flows within you and without you.

GOD-FORCE is the vital life energy that courses through every living thing, from the green
sap of plants to the life force in every cell of your body.

And guess what? You can have all you want of this vital life energy. It can bestow many things - from health and longevity to eternal conscious life - and best of all, GOD-FORCE energy is absolutely free!

GOD-FORCE energy is right here. All around you. Lots of it. Right now. All the time.

Unfortunately, we live in a completely materialistic culture. Not that there’s anything wrong
with materialism per se, but we also need spiritual life force to feed our energetic Soul. Your Mother taught you how to feed your physical body with material food. Why did no
one teach you how to feed your energetic Soul with GOD-FORCE?

Once you get a direct experience of GOD-FORCE energy, you will want to learn more. By strengthening your energy body so you can shine more and more GOD-FORCE, the Magick of Light awakens the sleeping powers of your Soul - Clairvoyance, Telepathy, Psychic Ability, Astral Projection, and ultimately, Conscious Immortality.

Once you learn to feed your energy body (Soul), you will see positive manifestations happen and occur, blockages begin to be removed and abundance as well as welcome opportunities in all forms start to appear for you.

The ancient prophecy of the Masters has come to pass. The Evil once defeated by the Magi and the Initiate-Adepts of Ra has again returned. There is no sugar coating this.

Our situation is dire. The human race has been betrayed!

It was Black Magician Aleister Crowley and his Thelema sex-cult followers who betrayed
humanity, when last century first Crowley, then his disciples Jack Parsons and L. Ron Hubbard ripped open an interdimensional Portal, through which the ancient Evil has today again returned.

Every month when the Moon goes dark just before New Moon, Dark Entities rush through the Crowley-Parsons-Hubbard (CPH) portal; wave upon wave of a Evil army invading our Astral Plane from Dark dimensions beneath our own.

The forces of Darkness began to gather on the Astral again about one year ago now, and so far, despite our desperate circumstances, we have been holding our own against them.

For over a year, Magi of Light from the most diverse Spiritual traditions have faced down this evil as best we could!

The Angels have kept their Covenant with humanity and in our hour of need are coming to our aid as they always have for the Magi. Tonight, with Michael now providing now air support for our Cavalry with four full Angelic legions from above, we can finally go on the offense to dislodge the Dark Riders and hopefully drive them back through the portal.

Each month, we are a diverse and unorganized group of independent magicians, shamans, witches, Christian prayer warriors, etc. each working with their own magick, spells, drumming, prayers, etc. but all sharing the common intention to:

"Liberate Humanity From Bondage And Dark Enchantment"


In abundance, chivalry, and truth,
David Griffin
Rosicrucian Imperator LVX ex Septentrionis
Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn®

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Facebook and Cambridge Analytica

Edward Snowden: Facebook Is A Surveillance Company Rebranded As "Social Media"

In a nutshell, in 2015 Cambridge Analytica bought data from a University of Cambridge psychology professor, Dr. Aleksandr Kogan, who had developed an app called "thisisyourdigitallife" that vacuumed up loads of information on users and their contacts. After making Kogan and Cambridge Analytica promise to delete the data the app had gathered, Facebook received reports (from sources they would not identify) which claimed that not all the data had been deleted - which led the social media giant to delete Cambridge Analytica and parent company SCL's accounts. 
“By passing information on to a third party, including SCL/Cambridge Analytica and Christopher Wylie of Eunoia Technologies, he violated our platform policies. When we learned of this violation in 2015, we removed his app from Facebook and demanded certifications from Kogan and all parties he had given data to that the information had been destroyed. Cambridge Analytica, Kogan and Wylie all certified to us that they destroyed the data.” -Facebook
Of note, Cambridge Analytica worked for Ted Cruz and Ben Carson during the 2016 election before contracting with the Trump campaign. Cruz stopped using CA after their data modeling failed to identify likely supporters. 
Cambridge Analytica has vehemently denied any wrongdoing in a statement. 
In response to the ban, Edward Snowden fired off two tweets on Saturday criticizing Facebook, and claimed social media companies were simply "surveillance companies" who engaged in a "successful deception" by rebranding themselves.
Facebook makes their money by exploiting and selling intimate details about the private lives of millions, far beyond the scant details you voluntarily post. They are not victims. They are accomplices. 

Businesses that make money by collecting and selling detailed records of private lives were once plainly described as "surveillance companies." Their rebranding as "social media" is the most successful deception since the Department of War became the Department of Defense.


Cambridge Analytica (CA) is a privately held company that combines data mining and data analysis with strategic communication for the electoral process. It was created in 2013 as an offshoot of its British parent company SCL Group to participate in American politics. In 2014, CA was involved in 44 US political races.[4] The company is partly owned by the family of Robert Mercer, an American hedge-fund manager who supports many politically conservative causes. The firm maintains offices in New York CityWashington, DC and London.
In 2015, it became known as the data analysis company working initially for Ted Cruz's presidential campaign. In 2016, after Cruz's campaign had faltered, CA worked for Donald Trump's presidential campaign, and on the Leave.EU-campaign for the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. CA's role and impact on those campaigns has been disputed and is the subject of ongoing criminal investigations in both countries.
On March 17, 2018, The New York Times and The Observer reported on Cambridge Analytica's use of personal information acquired by an external researcher who claimed to be collecting it for academic purposes. In response, Facebook banned Cambridge Analytica from advertising on its platform.The Guardian further reported that Facebook had known about this security breach for two years, but did nothing to protect its users.

Data miningdata analysis
HeadquartersLondon, England, United Kingdom
Key people
Alexander Nix (CEO)
Robert Mercer (investor)


Friday, March 16, 2018

John Perry Barlow died on February 7, 2018 - Songwriter and internet Utopian

Obituary: John Perry Barlow died on February 7th

The songwriter and internet Utopian was 70

Feb 22nd 2018

IT WAS late, 1985, before John Perry Barlow got into computers. He’d bought a word processor to keep things efficient as he ran the family ranch, and because he wanted a machine that would print out his lyrics for the Grateful Dead really nicely on paper. (Two jobs, two hats.) But then he procured a Macintosh and a modem, the first ever seen in Sublette County, Wyoming, and discovered that, through this little blinking box and the tendril of a landline, he could join an extraordinary community. In the WELL (for Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link), one of the first virtual bulletin boards, he moved like a cave fish, blindly, among entities without bodies. They were things of words alone, free-floating wisps of thought, in a perpetual town meeting of unleashed opinions. Everything was possible, and almost everything allowed, in a suddenly limitless world. As he wrote for the Grateful Dead in “Cassidy”, his most famous song, he was “a child of boundless seas”.
He saw what other people had not yet seen, that this was a new space—one to which he quickly applied an existing term, cyberspace, and his own metaphor, the electronic frontier. Here was a land that was unmapped, unregulated, crammed with unimaginable resources, up for grabs. Notions of trespass did not apply. There was nothing material here, and thus no property, intellectual or otherwise; no context, no fixed identity. Early settlers could well turn out to be sociopaths or outlaws. But the wild, rowdy liberty of this place had to be protected.

Latest stories

See more
From 1990, when he co-founded the Electronic Frontier Foundation in response to Secret Service raids on games companies and the homes of hackers, digital rights became his life. In 1996, with Congress hunkering down to defend national security, privacy, copyright and “decency”, all those obsolete guard-posts, he flung out in fury “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace”:
Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather...I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us.
Having started off as a stout Wyoming Republican, then a libertarian, he was an anarchist online. No government was needed, because there was governance already: the good behaviour of most people who used it, and the freedom-loving intentions of those who had designed it. In this vast community, where real-space coercion couldn’t hold, order flowed from collective ethical deliberation. There was nothing to fear. He had met hackers like Phiber Optik, with their pumped-up diatribes online, only to find that over dinner they looked as dangerous as ducks. His mission, therefore, was to lead the doubters and internet-oppressors gently into the new territory, disarming them with his cowboy hat and beard and with language which a poet or a cowhand could understand. He proselytised all over the world.

Permanently rewired

As it turned out, the internet resembled the most transforming moments of his life. As a boy in the Bar Cross ranch house, isolated in 22,000 scrubby acres, he had devoured a 20-volume children’s encyclopedia in which, as on the Web, all knowledge seemed contained. Sitting a decade later on the floor at Timothy Leary’s ashram in Millbrook, watching fractals bounce off the walls after dropping acid for the first time, he realised the complete connectedness of everything. His work with the Grateful Dead, who let fans freely record their concerts, convinced him that the best way to raise demand for a product was just to give it away. When writing some 30 songs for them with his childhood friend, Bob Weir, he came to see that songs had their own life, independent of their creator, changing each time the band played them, and gathering accretions of meaning from the whole community of Deadheads. Back on the ranch, he helped ensure the free flow of water round his irrigation district.

He saw all these capabilities in the Web yet also, as years passed, limitations. It did not float quite so sublimely free of the material world as he had claimed in the “Declaration”. At the same time, the information it spread lacked the spark of physicality: looking folk in the eye, making yearling cattle scatter like mercury hit with a hammer. He had to give his lectures as a material being to get the impact he wanted. Meanwhile that enlightened community of Web-users, that civilisation of the Mind, seemed slow to form, to say the least.

As for whether the voyage into cyberspace marked a new age, a turning-point in history after which nation states would wither and humans would be permanently rewired, he hoped it was. He had hoped before, in 1967 in Haight-Ashbury, where the Summer of Love shed all constraints social, legal and sexual and he found himself in a world falling apart, longing for authority of any sort to reassert itself. But he trusted that everything in the universe tended towards the good, that total liberty was the only climate in which men and women could flourish, and that, if he was wrong, a free cyberspace would still have been worth battling for.