Dean Gotcher

I used to write computer programs (some 30 plus years ago) using assembler (DOS), i.e., pop, move, etc.,. The addiction of programing, and boy was I addicted is amazing. I would sit down at the computer (with the sun setting) to work on a program and the next thing I knew the sun was coming up, no bathroom breaks that I remember, although I am sure I did (maybe not, I don't remember). Those days are long gone. I would be a dinosaur in this age of programming.

While the complexity of programing has changed (and how) the basic logic has not.  Much of computer work is based upon algorithms with the language of If, Then, Else, Or, etc.,. The only one who is not taken captive to the program is its creator, as he is 'creating' it according to his desired outcome. All who use his program are taken captive to his outcome, i.e., are taken captive by his algorithms, guiding them to the programmer's desired end. You might be in control of some of your actions but in the end you are subject to his program with its if, then, else, or, etc., controlling you.

What makes the program even more controlling over the user is the programmer's use of constants to guide the user in his actions or reveal his thoughts or way of thinking. The programmer can evaluate the users knowledge or way of thinking by pre-determining which answers a person enters to a question can take him in the program. For example, if the programmer has three words for the user to choose from on a question and he has assigned an "If-Then" to each word, taking the user to another question assigned specifically to the word selected, he can progressively evaluate the user's interests or way of thinking. By categorizing the words or answers the user gives, i.e., the choices he makes a spectrum or continuum can be used to place the user in a classification pre-selected by the programmer.

Using the logic of "If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C," with the selection of words or answers for A being possibly three different outcomes (this is really a simple but basic illustration) the answers the user gives can place him in a pre-selected category, say, of thinking. For example if the user's answers equals one list (A), and A equals B, which is classified as holding to absolutes in a world of change, and B equals C, which is not healthy thinking, then A, the user is not a healthy person and needs to be remediated (re-educated). That is how algorithms can be used in computer programing, grading how fit or unfit you are by what you look at or do on your computer, iPhone, etc.,. It is just that easy. The programmer always determines the outcome when an algorithm is used. You are in the programmer's box, no matter how free you might think you are while in it.

Whoever controls the algorithms controls the outcome. If parents control the algorithm, i.e., the "if-then," then their children are under their authority. If socialists, i.e., 'liberals control the algorithm, i.e., the "if-then," then the children are under their influence and control, i.e., seduction, deception and manipulation.

Advertisement is money. What you look at will expose you to ads on what you were looking at, even when you do not want them—with those paying (and thinking like) the programmers getting the exposure. It is all about business, i.e., money (the love of it).

Also PC (political correctness) is of key interest to the programmer, who is interested in what you write or look at, censoring information (excluding "inappropriate information," i.e., information which gets in the way of his desired outcome, i.e., information which is "negative") or not censoring information (including "appropriate information," i.e., information which goes in the direction of his desires outcome, i.e., information which is "positive") according to the algorithms used to determine what you receive in your (and others receive in their) searches. Censorship should be in the hands of the parents, not in the hands of a few who lust after money and power

With what I know about those in control of the conveyance (selection) of information which is being promoted or censored over the computer, through the use of  algorithms, it should be (is) expected, despite their actions being wrong (which they can not admit—if they did, they would lose money and power, i.e., control over "the people" in their box), this website is being censored. .

Through the selection of information being presented to the user (via indicative reasoning where favored, i.e., suggested information is presented and reinforced, i.e., treated as being "positive," encouraging the users direction of thought and un-favored information is left out or if presented (brought up), unsupported or put down, i.e., treated as being "negative") in order to move the user to a predetermined outcome (which is desired by the programmer). It is the same procedure used by "group psychotherapists," i.e., facilitators of 'change,' i.e., Transformational Marxists (all three being the same) in order to 'change' how people think (who come into their box, i.e., who become subjects of their algorithms).

It is EITHER god's algorithm of preaching, teaching, and discussing: "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." (2 Chronicles 7:14)

OR man's algorithm of seduction, deception, and manipulation"If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, [then] the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "'[W]e can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled [the manipulated] though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement—there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises."(Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

Whoever controls the algorithm controls the outcome. After all BSTEP,  i.e., "Behavior Science in Teacher Education Programming" is a federal grant all about psychologically profiling (portfolioing) and tracking, evaluating and manipulating every American citizen for the purpose of 'changing' and then controlling his or her way of thinking and acting. Its algorithm is all about globalism, making sure all "educators" and "re-educated" (and un-educated) think and act the "right" (same) way, i.e., politically correct aka common-ism.

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2018