When I look at the 5g Wikipedia article, the most important criticism seems to be that possible negative effects have not yet been sufficiently investigated.
For those who don’t know yet, there is also the following topic on this forum: https://safenetforum.org/t/5g-gigantic-health-hazard/27431.
1 Like
I have a hard time taking that thread very seriously. In the thread they are going on about the dangers of EMF … So I guess you better stay out of the sun then as all radiation is EMF and yes, too much sunlight can cause cancer - acknowledged.
Some frequencies are worse than others however for biological life (e.g. what your microwave oven uses) … Looking at 5G however, it seems safer than others IMO … of course you never want to be too close to a high power transmitting antenna no matter what freq. is used. but the inverse square law informs us that you don’t have to get very far away as the power drops off exponentially with distance … so even with more 5G base-stations around, still not a problem.
Personally, I’ve been against older cell phone’s and putting them next to my head for any period of time - the older phones used lower frequencies that penetrated much more deeply and used higher power as well … seemed kinda reckless to me … but newer phones are using higher frequencies and lower power (generally) and it seems 5G continues that trend … so IMO people should be welcoming it as being at least potentially safer.
Do correct me if my facts are wrong.
3 Likes
4 Likes
If someone looked like they were a direct relative of Tony Blair and of Teresa May… if SAFE were up there would be no way that kind inbred royalism could get away running for prez.
Say what now
This is sad:
And this is sadder:
“The mutability of the past is the central tenet of Ingsoc. Past events, it is argued have no objective existence, but survive only in written records and human memories. The past is whatever the records and the memories agree upon (…) Who controls the past , controls the future : who controls the present , controls the past” - 1984
11 Likes
No way in hell Boris could be elected in the UK if SAFE were up.
Why on earth would you think that to be true?
You think the politicians will stop their well funded campaigns of lies , and vying for power?
I can see alot of good coming from our network, but I cant see that.
1 Like
I think it would seriously undermine their ability to lie and mislead masses of people especially about the self appointed ‘elites’ own net negative contributions. It doxes the system of corruption. I think it leads to their downfall as a class. Could the UK keep its shameful racist inbread monarchy with more transparency? Could idiot suicidal neo liberal economic policies continue? Can’t wait for the day when sports in the US die (replaced as a pass time- probably by video games) dust binned along with the UK monarchy and when other such bits of tribal nonsense are seen for the immaturity they are. People can have their games but the stupid game of power has to be limited. I saw a UK news anchor trying to shame a UK MP claiming that person and Corbyn waited to watch the queen’s speech- why in the hell would any one give a damn about what some irrelevant royal trash had to say about anything?
If any of the royal trash were worth listening to they would spend their time working to rid the world of of monarchical bs. No one is better than anyone else and people who don’t get that shouldn’t be free, they should be in a cell.
It is insane we allow organizations made of people and their relationships to be owned. Organizations can be membership based. That one change would eliminate the core of rent seeking and ill-gotten gain based on non contribution or theft. When the UK has royals its like based on accidents of history it has a sub class that claims it owns the country with a permanent right to rent seek on it and engage in parasitism. Corbyn has said he would bulldoze the monarchy. Perfect. UK election will have high turn out. I expect Torries and bs business will try to cheat in an already rigged system, but allowing Brexit vote itself shows some integrity still left in the vote system. But I wonder if the oppressor Tories get in if the UK people don’t actually rise up and tear down the state, there is only so much a people can stand. I think that point was probably reached in the UK around the time of OWS. Young kids without records were breaking into shops in mass riots crimimalizing themselves. And when asked why they were throwing their young lives away before they even started they said what difference does it make when there is utterly no future for us? The response on the part of cluess torrey elites was to increase the penalties.
As a Yank, if allowed to vote in the UK election it would be for Corbyn!
To be fair, I never used to vote, I’m in the UK. I thought it pointless, they would do what they wanted anyway.
I have started to now, as I’ve matured and realise it’s my only say, so I should use it.
I think as long as you have sponsoring of political parties, those parties will always try to please their contributors to make sure they get further funding.
I highly doubt the truth being out there somewhere (safenetwork) will have that much effect, I would like to be wrong there, but I just don’t see it.
I’ve yet to talk to one person outside of the crypto community in the UK, who even understands fiat monies and how they work…
Its a strange world we live in when alot of people get by ok, so enjoy their lives and never really ask themselves the important questions.
Free thinkers are few and far between imho.
4 Likes
When the vast majority of people can’t even accept that states operate against the non-aggression principle, I doubt transparency will help much.
Life is full of people motivate by their beliefs, whether they valid and consistent or not. It isn’t worth the stress of trying to change them; it will fail. People are rarely driven by logic and selflessness, but frequently by the opposite.
Be more like a pebble in a river and let such nonsense wash over you. Concentrate on providing the tools to help people learn and evolve, but there is no point wasting energy on telling them why they are wrong. Those who want to learn will find the tools themselves.
6 Likes
The concern here IMO, is that if a State like China has majority control over a network, then they can use their forces to take control over it or manipulate it.
This won’t happen on Safe.
5 Likes
Worried the UK is headed for a bloody revolution.
There is a limit to the amount of oppression people can handle. If the UK can leave the EU why can’t Scottland leave the UK? Seriously doubt these election results. How do you get the highest turnouts because of the young and get this?! When they cheat in elections they end up manufacturing a catastrophe to distract from it.
Hope they get caught.
1 Like
Well absolute freedom could also bring absolute chaos, as entropy increases.
Sometimes I want to drink water from a cup, not from a bunch of plasma.
What do I mean by this? The information age has shown a glimpse of the effects of the decentralization of knowledge.
We dreamed a revolution in education by the free access to the library of libraries, the superhighway of information, or whatever name that people gave to the internet.
Production of content and distribution was disrupted and we all cheered about the decentralization of content creation and the elimination of “centralized” institution of curators, editors and producers.
Now everyone can produce content and publish it, and we all cheered for the absolute democratization of information.
I share that sentiment, the mission was/is noble.
But now it is a nice reminder that there isn’t ever a free lunch anywhere, there is always a side effect and consequences… and the sad consequence is that now the concept of truth is being eroded, nobody seems to know what is true and what is not, can’t differentiate what is relevant, what sources to follow, who is who and what is what. The populace gives the same weight to an absolute clown to a scholar who has been researching with cold true facts for most of their lives, and can’t really tell them apart.
A teen blogger who spews misinformation might have the same weight as a journalist who have actually studied and lived the subject.
Flat earthers who started trolling just for fun, ended up creating a freaking movement from idiots who took it seriously.
Deep fakes are going to destroy the only lasting bastion of reliable digital evidence, to the point to be indistinguishable from real video sources.
There is a flood of data and people seem to be drowning in it.
“Democratization” of biohacking is going to cause a chaos from the DIY kits that will allow crispr-cas9 genetic engineering at home, DNA evidence will be also thrown out of court as it will not prove anything anymore.
Some scholars are calling this as a
the post-truth era…
Before, institutions were actually providing a structure that produced information accesible to lay people, an authority to lay on in case of doubt.
People trusted the Encyclopedia Britannica, Webster, National Geographic, PBS, etc…
People trusted investigative journalism, researchers and scientists.
As much as I rebelled against authority all my life, I can see how useful it has been for the organization of society.
So I disagree that it would “seriously undermine their ability to lie and mislead masses”.
Definitely the SafeNetwork will be of immense help to whistleblowers, but also for the dirty politicians who will be able to use it to spread misinformation in psyops campaigns, astroturfing.
The SafeNetwork will probably fuel both sides of crap and quality content, amplifying both noise and signal at the same time.
There will be nobody to censor Alex Jones, Flat earthers, and Neonazis, but at the same time there won’t be anyone who will prosecute future Snowdens, Binneys and Mannings.
The problem that I foresee is… even though it may enable absolute radical transparency, will people be able to notice it? Will people actually believe it is the truth? How? What evidence will be now trusted? How will people actually believe you are the real deal and not yet another bullshitter?
Well I better end it here haha, sorry for continuing this derailing from the thread.
14 Likes
I cant remember which year it was, could have even been fake news.
One year alot of ballot papers were found in a truck that were for a completely different constituency. (Supposedly)
As for Europe, joining in the first place was not legal under the magna carter, as the country cant give power away with no war.
1 Like
Our best hope is that AI will somehow be able to sort through the rubbish for us and shine a beacon on truthful analysis.
1 Like
Automagically?
1 Like
Some effort will still have to be made on our part 
1 Like
So maybe the tripple ledger was an attempt to build a way around that, but same problem of in ability to distiguish.