AI can correctly predict your political orientation simply by scanning your face

AI can predict political orientations from blank faces — privacy challenges. By Greg Norman at Fox News.

A study found that artificial intelligence can be successful in predicting a person’s political orientation based on images of expressionless faces.

A recent study published in the journal American Psychologist says an algorithm’s ability to accurately guess one’s political views is “on par with how well job interviews predict job success, or alcohol drives aggressiveness.” …

“I think that people don’t realize how much they expose by simply putting a picture out there,” said Kosinski, an associate professor of organizational behavior at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business.

“We know that people’s sexual orientation, political orientation, religious views should be protected. It used to be different. In the past, you could enter anybody’s Facebook account and see, for example, their political views, the likes, the pages they follow. But many years ago, Facebook closed this because it was clear for policymakers and Facebook and journalists that it is just not acceptable. It’s too dangerous,” he continued.

“But you can still go to Facebook and see anybody’s picture. … What our study shows is that this is essentially to some extent the equivalent to just telling you what their political orientation is,” Kosinski added. …

Kosinski told Fox News Digital that “algorithms can be very easily applied to millions of people very quickly and cheaply”…

The genetics revealed by your face:

“Participants wore a black T-shirt adjusted using binder clips to cover their clothes. They removed all jewelry and –- if necessary -– shaved facial hair. Face wipes were used to remove cosmetics until no residues were detected on a fresh wipe. Their hair was pulled back using hair ties, hair pins, and a headband while taking care to avoid flyaway hairs,” they wrote.

The left has banned all talk of genetics, because acknowledgement of genetic differences and trends are kryptonite to the left’s self-serving ideologies.

China’s next target is Vietnam, not Taiwan

China’s next target is Vietnam, not Taiwan. By David Archibald, excerpted from a more general article about defense and China here.

China has been making plenty of threats for over 20 years now but these have been ignored because it would be inconvenient to take them seriously.

Actually, China’s threats started before WW2. They have been in abeyance until they had the resources to act on them. [Here is] a map from a Nationalist primary school textbook in 1938, showing where they thought China’s borders should be:

 

 

The map isn’t completely correct. At their last meeting, Xi asked Putin to hand Vladivostok to China. …

Who’s first?

Now, having established that China is intent on war and that this undertaking is ill-advised, foolish and likely end in tears, which country will China attack first?

Not Taiwan:

China has said that it will be Taiwan but it should be borne in mind that China lies about most things, that deception is a big part of the Chinese modus operandi, and that China would prefer to practice on a country that doesn’t have defence treaties with third parties. If it is Taiwan, Taiwan will fight because China will kill the entire Taiwanese political class down to provincial council members. The rest of the population will spend their remaining lives having an hour per day spent on studying “Xi Jinping thought,” which will be a living hell.

Taiwan has two monsoon seasons and so there are two weather windows for an invasion — May to July and the month of October:

 

 

China says that it will invade Taiwan but has laid very little concrete to that end. There have been no helipads laid on Chinese islands in the Taiwan Strait despite the fact that such things would be very useful in an assault on Taiwan. China has built at least one expeditionary helipad in the Nanji Islands for an attack on the Senkaku Islands, but nothing opposite Taiwan.

Vietnam, again?

Not much concrete has been laid for an invasion of Taiwan but plenty of concrete has been laid for invading Vietnam. The prime example of this is this base built 10 kilometres north of the border:

 

 

Construction of this base started a decade ago. What marks it as being different from other buildings in the region is the fact that the roofs are red, while all commercial buildings have blue roofs. This means that they were built at the command of an authority from outside the region, which also organized the steel supply. The oldest roofs have now faded to grey.

The purpose of the complex is to shield PLA armoured units from satellite observation. Units would move in at night, with the troops barracked in the small, narrow buildings in the centre. China has also built artillery pads right along the border:

 

 

China is also building a SAM site [at Banxin] just 20 kilometres from Vietnam, within range of Vietnamese artillery:

 

 

The fact that they are building it so close to the border suggests that they think their invasion will go exactly to plan, so it won’t be in range for long. Note the running track that most PLA facilities come with.

China has been attacking Vietnam since 116 BC. The last time they attacked was in 1979. In that exercise China lost 30,000 troops in three weeks, then withdrew. They kept shelling Vietnam until 1991.

The Chinese modus operandi is to launch a surprise attack and call it a defensive pre-emptive strike. The attack routes used in the 1979 war are shown in the following figure. They will use the same ones again, constrained by the difficult topography.

 

 

There is another reason why China is likely to attack Vietnam first. China claims the whole of the South China Sea while Vietnam has 47 bases in China’s claim area. This graphic also shows the Chinese, Malaysian, Filipino and Taiwanese bases:

 

 

… While China has been attacking Filipino ships supporting their bases on the eastern side of the Spratly Islands, and this has received a lot of public attention, they have left the Vietnamese bases alone so far. This is because they know the Vietnamese will shoot back. In fact, all the Vietnamese manning these bases have been told that it will be a fight to the death when China attacks.

 

 

Vietnam’s bases in the Spratly Islands show a wide range of building styles. One particular style is quite interesting. They are small bases in shallow water. Each bases has two arms coming out so that the defenders can fire down on Chinese forces in the water. A second base is built 100 metres from the first one, with an elevated walkway in between, so that the two buildings provide each other with mutual fire support:

 

 

Photos of these bases show a lot more dogs than you might expect. It seems that the dogs are used to warn of PLA attacks by frogmen at night. When China’s war starts, each of these bases will have its own fate. They will absorb some of China’s initial missile salvo, so they are protecting us too.

Vietnam has another attraction for China. While the result of an attack on Taiwan is binary — it will be obvious whether or not China has won — an attack on Vietnam could be like the last one. China may call it off after a few weeks and announce a victory. China and Vietnam are both repressive communist dictatorships. The animus between them is racial rather than based in philosophy.

When China’s economy was only ten times larger than Vietnam’s, Vietnam was reasonably confident that they could hold China off. With the temporary liberalization of China from 2000, the economic disparity widened and Vietnam became concerned that it would be overwhelmed. So Vietnam liberalized its economy too and its economy has been growing rapidly. The extra cash has enabled Vietnam to spend more on its bases in the Spratly Islands. For example, this satellite photo from late 2023 is of the base on Namyit Island:

 

 

The green area on the lower right is the original island base. Being enlarged [by cutter-suction dredging] will enable the base to absorb a far greater amount of Chinese artillery. Given that Vietnam is expanding bases on islands that China says are rightfully theirs, Xi would consider this to be the height of insolence.

On the 8th March, 2024, Xi announced that the PLA “should coordinate the preparation for maritime military conflicts, the protection of maritime rights and interests, and the development of the maritime economy.” This opaque language has been decoded to mean war over the South China Sea.

In Vietnam’s case, China’s attack will be supported by an armoured assault into northern Vietnam. China will undertake not to withdraw until Vietnam gives up its bases in the Spratly Islands. If it does so, Vietnam’s ships will have to hug the Vietnamese coast to get anywhere. This would add 3,000 km to a voyage to Japan, for example. The Chinese boot would be stomping on the Vietnamese face forever. Vietnam would rather fight.

Vietnam is handicapped by its constitution, which doesn’t allow defence treaties with other countries. The good news is that Japan has started talks with the Philippines about basing Japanese troops there. Japan knows that its best chance of survival is being involved in China’s first war from day one, so it wants to have tripwire troops there. The Philippines has also clarified that the trigger for invoking its defence treaty with the United States is the death of a single Filipino soldier by any foreign power, meaning China.

2027 is the rumored date the Chinese are working with, but the Chinese are big on deception.

Wakeley is merely Islam’s latest attack against Christianity

Wakeley is merely Islam’s latest attack against Christianity. By Henry Ergas.

What the [stabbing of Sydney Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel and three others at Wakeley’s Assyrian Church of Christ the Good Shepherd last week] confirms, were further confirmation needed, is the continued vehemence of Islamism’s hostility to Christianity.

Islamist attacks on churches are scarcely isolated incidents. In France alone there were more than 600 attacks on Christian places of worship in 2020, culminating in the murder of three parishioners at Nice’s Basilica of Notre Dame by an Islamist carrying a Koran.

Meanwhile, violence against Christians remains endemic in the Arab Middle East, where the share of Christians in the population has, over the course of the past century, collapsed from around 14 per cent to barely 3 per cent.

Seen in the longer term, the eradication of Christianity from its regions of birth appears even more starkly. In AD732, when Islam consolidated its hegemony over what later became the Arab lands, Christians were by far the majority of the population in the Oriental patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, as well as in North Africa.

Now, after centuries of persecution, those ancient churches are becoming an insignificant presence …

Whether that persecution has a clear basis in the Koran is controversial. It is, however, indisputable that the Koran directly condemns Christianity, claiming that Christians “accept two gods”, will not “tolerate you (Muslims) until you follow their religion” and wilfully lie about the Bible.

 

 

Moreover, the so-called “verse of the sword” — which, according to many Islamic scholars, abrogates the Koran’s more tolerant affirmations — enjoins Muslims to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them”, sparing them only if they “repent, perform the prayer and pay alms”.

And according to a tradition authoritatively reported by Malik ibn Anas (711-795), the Prophet’s last words were “May God fight the Jews and the Christians! Two religions will not remain in the land of the Arabs.”

It is therefore unsurprising that the Muslim conquest was viewed by Mesopotamian Christians as an apocalyptic disaster, with the first substantial Christian commentary warning that there is “no truth to be found in the so-called prophet, only the shedding of men’s blood”. …

But Sydney? Really? Who let these people in?

Islam’s bloodthirsty foundations have never been reformed:

No doubt, some attacks on Christians are the work of extremists; but many are not. All too often they are sustained by the rhetoric of highly regarded clerics who demonise reformers (such as Egyptian Farag Foda, who was assassinated after being denounced by Islamic scholars linked to al-Azhar) and condone, or refuse to firmly condemn, religious violence. As Turkish intellectual Mustafa Akyol recently argued, “Islam’s problem is not just the Islamists; it’s the mainstream.”

Bernard Lewis famously stated some years ago that “for Christians and Muslims alike, tolerance is a new virtue and intolerance a new crime”. The great historian was only half right: Christianity has changed, but tolerance has scarcely made its mark in the Islamic world, and when it has, it has invariably struggled.

Islam will either reform (perhaps under pressure from everyone else) or conquer the world. Crash through or crash.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton Takes Pro-Civilization Line on Gaza

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton Takes Pro-Civilization Line on Gaza.

The October-7/ Gaza contrast is driving many Jews and pro-civilization people from the left to the anti-left. It’s a major turning point that has red-pilled millions.

This will have major implications throughout the West, especially for the donations driving left activism:

Rich-lister Naomi Milgrom rethinks support for teals, by Yoni Bashan in The Australian.

Shy rich-lister Naomi Milgrom [whose father is a Jewish refugee from Romania] lavished a substantial donation on Climate 200 and the teal independents during the 2022 election campaign, and from what we hear that tap’s about to be turned off real fast, this being surely one of the most serious cases of philanthropic remorse we’ve diagnosed in a while.

Milgrom and her three children gave $500,000 to the teal independents via Simon Holmes a Court and his Climate 200 initiative (don’t call it a political party!). Seems like Milgrom’s generosity may have gone even further than hard currency, too. Last year C200 moved its operational headquarters out of Sydney and into a building owned by the Milgrom family in the inner-Melbourne suburb of Richmond. …

Our concern … is whether or not C200 will survive its tenancy through the winter, given Milgrom’s feelings of immense betrayal.

Margin Call understands the Sussan Group owner has made it clear, privately, that she’s ceasing support for the teals as a consequence of how some of the MPs responded to the October 7 massacres in Israel.

Those with short memories might recall North Sydney MP Kylea Tink and Mackellar MP Sophie Scamps joining with Greens leader Adam Bandt and Tasmania’s Andrew Wilkie to white-out parts of a motion condemning terrorist group Hamas over the attacks.

What ended up happening was that Tink and Scamps voted to erase a reference to Australian support for Israel and its “inherent right to defend itself”.

In its place, they called for a ceasefire and wanted to add a line ­denouncing “war crimes perpetrated by the state of Israel, including the bombing of Palestinian civilians”. This was nine days after the massacres took place.

And that was followed up by Kooyong MP Monique Ryan, who went online in early November posting about the suffering under way in Gaza – without mentioning the role of Hamas in that suffering, or the 240 hostages being held captive at the time by the terrorist group. You bet that cheesed off a large number of people.

Whiplash.

WEF, Censorship, and Julie Inman Grant in Australia

WEF, Censorship, and Julie Inman Grant in Australia. By Michael Shellenberger.

American–born Julie Inman Grant [the current eSafety Commissioner of Australia] is a key architect of the multigovernmental “Global Online Safety Regulators Network” to censor the speech that politicians and government bureaucrats fear. …

 

 

Violence is not the only thing the Australian government has told X to remove. It has also targeted political speech. And nothing can justify the Australian government censoring the entire global Internet of content it does not like. …

Here is Julie Inman Grant, boasting of her extraordinary censorship powers:

“…We also have some pretty significant ISP blocking powers. We just had some new powers given to us… in addition to be able to compel that takedown, to be able to fine perpetrators as a deterrent effect, and fine content hosts that don’t take down this content …”

She goes on to say that she is already working with Ireland, the UK, France, and other governments around the world.

At the World Economic Forum, Inman Grant said she had launched a global censorship body called “the Global Online Safety Regulators Network” to unify governments around censorship …

This global censorship body gives governments extraordinary power to invade privacy, explained Inman-Grant:

What this legislation will give us is the ability to compel basic device information and account information. And more and more and more social media companies are starting to collect phone numbers and email addresses so that our investigators can at least find a place to issue a notice or a takedown notice or infringement notice of some sort.

Inman Grant may be working with other governments to create identity requirements and to stamp out Virtual Private Networks, which millions of people in China and other totalitarian societies use to access the free Internet. “You can use VPNs, you can use burner phones,” she said, “different SIM cards every day. So it’s going to be a challenge for a long time because, again, the internet’s global. If there is no such thing as a kind of global identity system or even a piece of identity everybody can agree with, you know, should we all be sharing our driver’s license or our passports?”

At that same World Economic Forum meeting, one of the European Union’s top censors, Věra Jourová, called for censorship to avoid “events like January 6”, and to fight hate speech. … Who is Jourova? Why she’s the same person that public caught spreading disinformation about a new Russiagate hoax two weeks ago.

 

 

The karens have been unleashed. Bossy girls regulate what we can say.  (So human progress will grind to a halt, like it did under the matriarchy for the million years before the agricultural revolution started, about 10,000 years ago.)

The Spectator:

For the ludicrous eSafety Commissioner, the American import and World Economic Forum aficionado Julie Inman Grant, to ban the footage of the attempted assassination by a young terrorist of a prominent church bishop is as disgraceful as it is idiotic. What next? Ban the Zapruder footage of JFK’s murder? Ban the photos of the attempt on the lives of Ronald Reagan or Pope John Paul?

What is crystal clear is that this attempted killing of a prominent figure is being cynically used by the left to impose completely unacceptable government censorship on this nation. It must be resisted at all costs, and it is imperative that the Coalition immediately change course, or watch themselves sink into oblivion.

Stabbed bishop is ok with the video of his stabbing online:

“… noting our God-given right of freedom of speech and freedom of religion, I’m not opposed to the videos remaining on social media. I would be of great concern if people use the attack on me to serve their own political interests to control free speech.”

Cannot criticize Islam, because that might in turn lead to criticizing the massive immigration to Australia.

Brendan O’Neill:

They don’t want Australians having an open, frank discussion about radical Islam and the social disarray it springs from. Hide the video, stop the debate.

Mental Freedom: The COVID vaccine damaged our body’s ability to produce cells responsible for decision-making

Mental Freedom: The COVID vaccine damaged our body’s ability to produce cells responsible for decision-making. By The Full Measure.

Dr. Michael Nehls is a molecular geneticist and former CEO of a biotech company. His new book, “The Indoctrinated Brain,” offers a novel explanation for why he says some people seemed to blindly do as they were told during the COVID pandemic — even when the advice was questionable or bad.

Nehls argues that the COVID vaccine damaged our body’s ability to produce cells responsible for decision-making.

Nehls: Conscious thinking requires these cells to be produced, and if they’re not produced, conscious thinking is not possible, and then we are just sheep following the herd.

Nehls says both COVID and the vaccine cause measurable brain changes that can affect people’s ability to think clearly and critically. And he argues that’s by design.

 

 

Nehls says research shows that COVID and the vaccine target the hippocampus, a complex brain structure that plays a major role in learning and memory. Every night when you sleep it makes new brain cells — a “mental immune system” of sorts — protecting your ability to remember and think clearly. But COVID and the vaccine, Nehls says, disrupt that process.

He says there are a number of factors that can trigger that same brain disruption, and are the reason we’re seeing an explosion of certain brain disorders.

Nehls: Depression and Alzheimer’s have the same cause: a lack of production of new nerve cells in the hippocampus.

Nehls says there are largely-ignored treatments that can turn the tide for some brain issues. Lifestyle changes like exercise, engagement in life, and nutrition, which includes proper amounts of dietary lithium and vitamin D that most Americans are low on, can prevent or reverse the effects of Alzheimer’s, depression, and COVID. …

Nehls: The German Cancer Research Center published a paper, and in its title, it says nine of 10 COVID deaths can be prevented by just increasing vitamin D. And there are hundreds of publications out.

Lisa: So there are hundreds of publications out that validate that research.

Nehls: Absolutely. …

Nehls: It was never about health. If people are not able to think clearly — consciously think — and have the ability to choose between two things, then there is no democracy anymore. And this is all happening right now.

I hope someone authoritative follows this up so we can get to the bottom of it, because it sounds very important. But “authoritative” is going to mean hired or funded by government, and governments are complicit in both covid and the vaccine mandates. So don’t hold your breath waiting for proof or disproof.

A cultural revolution from Red China is now here

A cultural revolution from Red China is now here. By Yuri Bezmenov. A powerful new meme.

Feel that crowd energy!

The leftist virtue-signaling spirals always go too far, then burn out because they are so damaging or because their political objectives were achieved. For example, US students were burning down university buildings in 1968 to protest the Vietnam war. Though, it took the US, Commonwealth, and Russian armies to stop the leftist craziness that spun up in 1930s Germany.

Hard to say when the current anti-Jewish craze in Western universities is going to end. It’s spreading, fanned by critical race theory and its obsession with equality of outcome. But given that Islam was founded with the idea of sacking Jewish merchant caravans, that Islam was founded on hatred of Judaism (and Christianity), and there are now many Muslims in the West, we have to ask whether this will ever stop.

A very serous moment is suddenly upon us. Perhaps the West needs to change direction on immigration and how we are indoctrinating our young, fast. Or we’ll end up like the cultural revolution in China, above.

 

Australia is rapidly becoming the most censored “democracy” in the world

Australia is rapidly becoming the most censored “democracy” in the world. By Martin Armstrong.

 

Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel is an Orthodox Christian priest with a massive online following. …

Everyone is aware that Australia has a migrant crisis no different from other developed nations. A few weeks ago, Mari was delivering a sermon when an Islamic extremist approached him with a knife. Australia does not want the people to bear arms but that does not deter attacks.

The 16-year-old terrorist, who was clearly motivated by religion, rushed the altar with a knife and attempted to repeatedly stab Mari. The unarmed bishop held his crucifix up to the attacker and miraculously prevented the switchblade from fully opening, saving his life. The video of the attack has gone viral across the internet, met with an outpouring of sympathy from people around the world. The Australian government is angry that this video is painting migrants in a poor light and is demanding that it be scrubbed from the internet.

“If he [the bishop] didn’t get himself involved in my religion, if he hadn’t spoken about my prophet, I wouldn’t have come here. … If he just spoke about his own religion, I wouldn’t have come,” the attacker said. It took the Australian government time to investigate whether this was a religiously motivated attack. After all, Christians are not a protected class and acts of violence against them are dismissed. …

Australia is livid that Elon Musk will not remove the video. “We know, I think overwhelmingly, Australians want misinformation and disinformation to stop. This isn’t about freedom of expression,” said Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. …

 

Bullshit by Mr Albanese:

“This is about the dangerous implications that can occur when things that are simply not true, that everyone knows is not true, are replicated and weaponized in order to cause division and in this case to promote negative statements and potentially to just inflame what was a very difficult situation.”

What disinformation? It is a real video of an attack that occurred as a direct result of hatred against Christians.

“I’d like to take a moment to thank the PM for informing the public that this platform is the only truthful one,” Musk responded, adding, it is “absurd for any one country to attempt to censor the entire world.”

The World Economic Forum has praised Australia for their extreme censorship efforts, deeming the eSafety Commissioner Grant “the world’s most influential leaders revolutionizing government.”

One must ask – why are they afraid of this particular video circulating? We must recognize the content that the globalists do not want us to see in order to understand the larger agenda.

hat-tip Stephen Neil