Category Processing

Gimmee Data or Gimmee Death 0001001001001000 This is Binary code. It’s a modern binary numerical system. It’s calculus theology. It’s concept in part is that of pagans used to create the term “One, Zero or nothing,” which is a simple representation of God’s almighty power. The reason this is said is because “nothing,” can represent or demonstrate the power of numbers, but Only God can make something out of nothing. I will use this concept to explain a modern-day phenomenon called “category processing.” When people pursue categories to predict romantic inter-action, but do not pay attention to real communication, there are two outcomes: A) Avoiding Love from the right Individual B) Approaching the wrong Person They use superficial categories to define the self and others as well as predict the effectiveness of a possible relationship. It's a very dark day in society when people are being treated as objects but in this narration, I attempt to make the point that it happens to everyone. Being the target of a elucidate ingredients has shown me that either gender can misrepresent themselves or become attracted to unrealistic portrayals of each other. Ignoring affection from a real person you are attracted to is a form of dysfunction. This also known as emotional baggage. Fear, anxiety and or conflicts of past hurts in interpersonal relationships hurt you. It hurts your chance to develop a real relationship. People like me don't deserve to be the subject to projections that don't exist, but I will attempt to explain why this is happening. Broken hearts take time to mend and growth is a part of the process. A person can "Grow," or develop the mechanism to cope with a heartbreak. it is then and only then do they start giving themselves an opportunity for a fresh start Here is the problem with Category based processing versus Inter-action-based communication. Categories are just substitutes for Reality, not Reality Itself. Validation from a targeted attraction never develops because validation of superficial categories are all you have to work with. This kind of distorted cognation can only be rectified through regular and meaningful interaction because individuals find out they are worthy of love and appreciation through the communication process. Category-based processing does not heal the emotional pains and only the user conceptualizes the prediction of possible acceptance and or rejection by others. It's artificial intelligence. My annoyance with Category based acceptance is not about the rejection or acceptance of a real person, but of the magnified and perceived attributes of the categories. It's not real and when people use this form of interaction People never fall in love. Traits used as basis for matching do not represent the real human experience. Only real interpersonal communication can create the feeling of love. This disappoints me when mature people don't know this. When they somehow become blind to the process of common sense and genuine appreciation. Love is created and maintained by meaningful communication. New computer technology has greatly expanded a person's potential and their freedom to communicate. Some of which may generate love and romantic relationships, but Category processing in its current state, has restricted the freedom of Mr. Right or Ms. Right to find the best individual in one's own eye. If they prescribe to the artificial processing, they are doomed to fail. Someone approached me with this Category processing which is common online and it felt like genuine interest until I recognized the line of questioning. Working with data, I'm keen to understanding how one set of data points relate to the other. I've worked with artificial intelligence on a regular basis. Knowing the target scope an expertise of another's false intention is rather insulting. Much like the physical advances of an unwarranted sexual partner, it's a violation of trust between individuals. I make a distinction between online communications and online category matching. New computer technology has greatly expanded people's potential to do both, but when those two worlds collide, the collateral damage is degrading. To find real love, a person needs to cultivate and nurture physical, emotional, as well as, intellectual or spiritual wellness. In respecting, supporting, forgiving and accepting forgiveness through intimate interaction they release themselves to forgiveness and find unconditional love. Falling in Love is about the whole person not just the categories used to reduce them. I’m being careful not to unmask the platform where category matching takes place because to whittle it down to one violator misses the point. All I can do is warn you the combination is advertising. If something appears to be free and in the back of your mind, you think it’s free, it isn’t. API’s (Application Programming Interfaces) are set as defined functions and methods for interfacing with an operating system on the host computer. It is usually used by establishing a reference to a library in your importing function from a dll. (Dynamic Link Library) There is no need to pay attention to the acronyms I’m throwing around. All you need to know is categories are being matched and its intentional. I can relay its not obvious, but its happening on every website. You’re reading & sharing things yes, but it’s happening in the links and it's intention is much more devious than I can explain. You see for the sake of continuity websites design their interfaces to interact with the hosts, so that you never know your on a different website. This gives the user a fluid feel where everything seems to be on the up and up. The user is positive their data is safe. The reason this is possible is because the Dynamic link or DLL only needs to connect to the host once. From there the memory or the cache registers a token. This is all covered in the user's agreement. Every time the user takes a survey or tries to find out what flavor of cookie dough they will be re-incarnated in the next life, (oh yes, a tech joke) they have administered an API connection to a online profile. This profile builds and builds until categorized processes match your answers with a profile. Category processes don’t only work in one direction though. At some point the host site redeems the information in the form of data. This is my way of quick explaining legality. My disclaimer is, “Maybe the category processing happens on the host or maybe it doesn’t.” It does happen somewhere and you need to know is that it isn’t easy, convenient or simple. It doesn't make sense to go about a relationship this way. I think, "Maybe it’s habit or maybe it’s because we are creatures of habit." All I know is people can replicate category matching on there own and when it happened to me, it seemed exciting and inquisitive, but then I figured out what was really going on. Ask any woman. Being objectified is not a desirable experience. A person who does this is exhibiting narcissist tendencies in that they don’t care about you. They're only interested in how they see you and what it means to them about them. The important lesson is that when you reject someone based on the fact that you know they're vision is not based on reality, there are some consequences. How do you deal with it? Well that is an important question, but what is more important is “Why is this going on?” I just told you that it happened to me, but how do you know if it’s happening to you? "Trust Me," it's happening to you. it's just a matter of time before you find out. For one I want to point out and examine some of the ways we’ve arrived at this point. Basic marketing is the idea of selling a product. What could be more enticing than a happy & secure relationship? We see it in the movies & entertainment. It’s used to sell us every product from bath salts to prescription drugs. Buy the phone, get the car, have the boy or girl. You are constantly bombarded by this idea perhaps hundreds of thousands of times a day. The stark truth is that life is a struggle and advertising is an escape from reality. That is why I waited two years to release this document. It’s called sympathy and I hold that respect for those that misunderstand things because they need a false reality. They might be dealing with something because of guilt or obsession, but it's not their fault because these systems are designed this way. Compassion and truth aren’t always accepted like a friend request. When you reject someone’s romantic illusion it advances into obsession or stalking. This is very easy to do through social media because essentially the software is doing that already. Several platforms connect to one another in an attempt build a better experience. The user doesn’t need to build a profile and connect all the APIs because the system already does that. Category processing is meant to simulate things alike to behave in a manner that makes sense. The unfortunate miscalculation in the process is that AI (artificial intelligence) doesn’t recognize the difference between a pineapple & an apple. It just considers them both fruit and puts them together. Platforms using groups put individuals together based on location. Relative mapping increases ability to interact in real life thus making the algorithm successful. You weren’t born in a lab and tested in a facility. This is not happening of your own cognition. You had to learn social skills through a period of your life that may have left you with some social glitches. This is what shapes your character and makes you unique. The uniqueness of your personality is not anything that can be sorted into traits and lumped together. Real connections are tried & true based on our perception of reality not virtual reality. We make adjustments in a learning experience. “Is the dress Brown or Blue?” This a phenomenon exists because everyone is slightly color blind. The dress is the color you perceive it to be either because you lack the sensitivity wired directly to your brain or you recognize color with more accuracy. Either way that is just a characteristic that can change based on experience. Some people have extraordinary depth perception. Some don’t. for example your sight might be perfect, but that doesn’t mean you can pilot an airplane. The skill it takes to acquire a pilot’s license requires several hundred hours of logging flight time. Sometimes I believe the same should be said for social interaction. I’ll keep my opinion to a bare minimum in detail, but practice makes perfect. Practicing social interaction is a feat many do not master let alone virtual interaction. You are not a data point in the virtual world. Remember in the movie the Matrix where “The One,” broke beyond the virtual reality known as the matrix defied by quantum physics? Well that is every human being because we are not born into virtual reality. In essence, I might be short. I might be fat. I might be ugly or considered beautiful. In the real world I might have a speech impediment or I might suffer from autism and cannot communicate effectively. Again, in the movie the Matrix, do you remember the girl in the red dress? Of course you do because that was the idea of the designer’s code embedded in the program. Well that is categorical processing. Social Platforms attempt to make the individual standout so that they may receive as many connections as possible. Why do you think you might have 300 hundred connections while your friend has 3,000? That is a standout feature of the system. Erroneous connections require no vetting and are simply allowed. The user is unaware that they behave in a manner that is synchronized with the system. Otherwise they would filter the connections if they knew what was about to happen to them. In a virtual landscape you are like the Agent from the matrix. No Filter makes you unrecognizable because you fit the exact same profile as many others. The content is pushed toward you in a generic form. AI has a memory of your activity and rubber stamps approvals to get the maximum data flow. This is the effect the designer of the system wants for all users because it allows the free flowing data. In order to route a specific data point that touches every other data point its stored into memory and categorized. You become a candidate for data mining. All the selfies you take the tagged memories offer the ability to push your profile. This results in frequency that is based on artificial categories. It builds a flurry of activity that will be used to sell the system. Maximum connections from APIs to the advertisers returns bigger profits for your data and in turn you become the advertisement. You’re now like the green goo in the matrix fed back into the other embryos. This what Categorical processing does. It transforms the individual into an avatar by trait otherwise known as data. “I like coffee, I like tea, I like Starbucks inside of me.” You become the poster child of advertising. Only it's your privacy that is being bought and sold over the open market. If you could do it all over again, would you take the blue or red pill? Like Cypher most of us choose to not remember anything. This is a result of the cold world that has drove us to a virtual world. Illusions are powerful, but social engineering can be deadly. Take any popular superstar and how often do you hear? "He or she had everything going for him or her," and yet he chose to end it all. That is the cold hard truth. Thoughts and prayers are generally about as effective as they sound. Many people choose not to deal with reality. We see it time and time again. It's happening more frequently and more violently. Many times ending in bloodshed. Believe it or not, there are many entities that profit from your demise. The Betterment Industry has the opportunity to profit in the hundred of millions of dollars. All your flaws turn into categories, ripe and available at the flick of a switch. So let's look at some solutions. Key Sun, PhD, MSW, & MPH is a psychologist and social worker. He has taught at Central Washington University and Bastyr University. He is the author of Correctional Counseling: A Cognitive Growth Perspective. His book discusses, The cognitive growth model. The Second Edition employs the cognitive growth model to examine the major contemporary issues. By explaining how to use the model to fully understand effective counseling, we might have some insight into this world. (Chapter 11) Emphasis, understanding and treating substance abuse and has been added to address the increase issue of abuse populations. In my own words, I believe that dissatisfaction can be attributed to digital media and the level of a user experiences within it. In other words, you buy into your own illusion and that is why your so unhappy. By design, Social Media is programmed to be addictive. The amount of endorphins rushing to your brain is the same as cocaine. Its very addictive. You anticipate the rush of knowing a person has "Liked," or "Commented," on your update. In my own experience, I have observed this the time and time gain a person becomes disinterested in Social Media then the notification symbol appears. In that regard, I consider it to be intentional and by design. Its not an accident that browses search longer than originally anticipated. The platform is designed to extract the most time from you. This creates a cycle of use that results in addiction. (Chapter 12) restorative justice. This chapter examines the skills and principles of restorative justice and addresses the needs of the victim. I made the point earlier that I was the victim of another's obsession. I pointed out that the reality of the situation had pretty much nothing to do with me because i recognized that I was focus of another's unmet needs. "Happiness." You see, is a trap. Instead of seeing yourself as a victim, you require the knowledge of what is happening to gain the power to control it. From a professional assessment, focus and technique, I benefit from understanding the counseling processes I'm pointing out here that I have experience in this area. Mental disorders can be in the digital form for offenders and victims. (Chapter 10) expanded discussion research about mental illness and violence analysis. The debate between social cognitive explanation and the biomedical explanation for disorders gives the reader incite into what is happening. Readers gain a wide-range of knowledge about counseling, theories and practices and full disclosure, I minored in Chemical Dependency Counseling before receiving my Technology Certificate. Cognitive Growth centers around the role, the work setting and challenges. It is intended to help people balance their lives and form healthy relationships. Through developing accurate cognition and understanding the self, the client can recognize their own patterns. Patterns governing their interactions and examining contemporary solutions, we can identify addictive behavior. In this case, obsessive or compulsive behavior with media. Classification, assessment, intervention and through therapeutic technique it will teach a person how to respond to the behavior. "They need help to cope with an issue, but they must first identify it." Although comprehensive discussions remain so that a client can focus on learning, the most relevant knowledge needs to be allowance for independent growth. Assisting someone with newfound coping skills, you can teach them how to heal themselves. Rehabilitation enables people who have lost control to regain control, but further work needs to be done on understanding the symptoms. The issue of triggering a response desired is my expertise. I know all about triggers in digital form, but to understand reform we need to hear from an expert. Key Sun also received a PhD and MA in psychology from Rutgers University, where he also received a master degree in criminal justice. In addition, he has a Bachelor of Law degree. His research involves examining mental health. Cross-cultural approaches with multidisciplinary psychology, criminal justice, social work, and publications of his have appeared in psychological and criminal justice journals and textbooks. Some of the titles are Angel ready, BlackBoard,Desire to Learn, Instructor Manual & Moodle read. The assorted subjects cover Counseling Processes, Group Counseling, Anger Management, Mental Disorders, Understanding and Treating Substance Abuse, Restorative Justice and Overcoming Prejudice and Promoting Diversity. I have listed these topics as a framework around the subject of Digital Bullying & Objectify Obssessions, but let's take a look at Harrassment. I tell my children that no matter what, "I will always be there for you." When they complain about a slight insult, I always say: “Want me to come, form a picket line?” This implies that the action to take can be more severe than the problem. Many times it's healthy to have a perspective that measures the correct response. Anger and disappointment do not rule your life. Just the opposite, Be an optimist. The stories here are real, but only parts of people's lives’ have these atrocities. I have a wonderful loving family & friends. Being exposed to abuse and violence that people suffer is a window into war that is going on inside each one of us. Race, class, gender or sexual abuse have no place in this world, but in order to treat them, we must first acknowledge they exist. Although, I am not expert on this, my effort is to assist others and point them in the right direction. This has made me aware that no response is inappropriate. The lesson is to support others, speak up and organize change. If you don't your only lingering challenge maybe a hard time sleeping. I don't want to wake when the wind blows, trees moan and shutters rattle. My conscious tells me: be alert. It will take minutes for my heart to beat normal, but I don’t want to be beaten with the knowledge people have been abused. It's a war within a war our conscious takes it seriously. The Gotcha! moment sometimes happens when you feel invaded by these stories. The usual response is “I am glad nothing happened to you.” I think "What?" I gasp for breath when it happens because it shows how impossible people can be. We often turn a blind eye towards things we don't understand. We feel they are someone else's problem. I've got news for you, it's all our problem. The argument “yes, means yes,” regarding relationships is an argument about burden. The burden of making sure there’s consent — who should ask, who should make themselves clearly heard, who shoulders discomfort in an awkward position? It is based on a belief that the gray area exists. If you argue spontaneity, your arguing the wrong area. Women permit too much from men and gain less support from other women. This is some how the fault of the victim. Our current culture rewards aggression, testing boundaries, making unexpected and unwanted moves. Assault flourishes in this environment. On the other hand, we have stories like the one about the entertainer/comedian Aziz Ansari. Of the many stories in the news over the past few months involving well-known men committing assault, few have been as controversial as this one. “Grace” uses the term sexual assault to describe what others, including most famously CNN correspondent Ashleigh Banfield, described as a “bad date.” The #MeToo movement will lose steam if accusations like these are allowed. In some sort of reverse universe, people have become the subject of mob mentality and we have become the Judge & Jury of these issues. Let me go back to why I think this is happening. Remember the facts I submitted about category processing? Here we have the same issue only were not talking about hundreds of thousands of connections, were talking about millions. That’s a lot of pressure. Social media encourages brief exchanges, but they often come from polarized positions. There are many facets of structural sexism beyond what we are observing. The debate of what separates an assault from “a bad date,” is being reduced to an opinion, instead of fact and this is because of categories. When you label someone a feminist, activist, chauvinist or abuser, no amount of proper behavior relinquishes that person of the label being applied. Historically, men have had the freedom to seek, enjoy, and explore their sexuality in Bravado! Women only recently have found equality in this area. Today we recognize that women’s sexuality is connected to liberation. This is an unrealistic expectations and interaction because it is a categorical label. "The oppressor can never free the oppressed." A man can never be fair and unjudgmental of the women he has abused, but in order for reform the social norm has to change. Right now, the social norm is that all men are bad and women can never achieve justice. That is something we must change collectively if we want to move forward. To reverse course, we must put men in women’s circumstances. To consider this we must ask the following questions about acceptable behaviors. I ask, "Can men be violated?" Often, when this question arises the answer is "Yes, by other men." But that is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about cases that are not measured by interpretation, but by power & authority. I think there is a larger cultural conversation unfolding. We all seem to agree that men should be sensitive to the way that women are influenced by culture. A culture “ruled,” by men. So, to rephrase the question, "Can men be held accountable for blatant disregard of boundaries?" Silence…, obvious answer, “Yes.” now "Can the same be said for women?" Long pause…. See when you reverse the roles, it takes on a different perspective. It’s as simple as putting yourself in another’s shoes, but why can’t we do this? The historic origins and beliefs about the appropriate roles of women in society has always been from a male point of view. I looked up Chauvinism and this is what I found: a form of extreme patriotism and a belief in national superiority. Whoa, does that sound familiar? For the last twenty years we've seen a proportional change in gender of the workforce. Actually, during World War II women were the work force, so much so that Hitler derided Americans as degenerate for putting women to work. The Axis powers, on the other hand, were slow to employ women. The workforce earning wages or a salary are part of a modern phenomenon, one that developed at the same time as the growth of paid employment for men, but women have been challenged by inequality at work, at home and in the political landscape. Higher paid women are actually hit harder by discrimination than their lower-paid counterparts. Economists studying the issue have found that -- even when controlled for education, experience and profession -- women in the U.S. are paid less than men. Along with women who work in highly paid fields, the worst hit are women with children, older women and women of color. At the very highest levels, there is prejudice against women as leaders compared with their overall competency. Yet most top-paying professions lack mechanisms to help trim the pay gap. Some lawmakers are debating how history may hinder women from achieving wage equality with men because historically they have been paid lower. This is the first sign that policy makers, men are denying the fact that there is discrimination. What does this have to do with harassment? Female supervisors are less likely to report harassing behaviors and to define the experience of their counterparts as sexual harassment. Women of power have fought long and hard for their chair at the table and they’re not about to give an inch to a counterpart who threatens that position. They know that sexual harassment can serve as an “equalizer” against men, motivated by control and domination sometimes more so than desire for equality. This makes the woman in power the obstacle of the women in the workforce. Social isolation then becomes a mechanism linking harassment to gender and women’s authority, particularly in the work place. This makes not only women discriminated against by their own gender, but all efforts to tip the scales of justice are corrupted. That in itself is the definition of harassment and discrimination being denied by women for women they employ. So, the male dominate role survives not because it’s enforced according to gender, but because it exists because the power dynamic in the work place is a male idea adopted by a female. Therefore, it doesn’t matter what gender violates your personal space or reduces your value as an employee. To answer the question, I asked this earlier framed as, “Can the same be said for women,” concerning violating a man? The answer is yes because we are talking about people rather than male or female. To drive home the point of gender neutral aggression, I’ll use an eighties genre of film known as “Romantic Thriller.” Does anyone remember Michael Douglas in the movie Basic Instinct? "Basic Instinct" began with two naked bodies, a mirrored ceiling and an ice pick. The ice pick was wielded in the heat of passion. The default reaction to this is "She makes a nasty mess of her unsuspecting lover." This is the mentality of men. Especially powerful men. They view aggressive behavior as a characteristic that only a man can promote. by having a female character adopt that aspect of aggressive behavior through a violent attack like a man, the message is basically revealing that men only respect a woman that has male tendencies. Paul Verhoeven made Robo Cop & Total Recall and he will never be accused of not knowing how to get an audience's attention. Mr. Verhoeven winds up being assailed for this film because its violent and misogynistic. "It's sexually frank, he doesn't pull any punches." That opening murder scene serves as warning that the women are not bound by the rules of decorum., but it's also a statement about how they view women of power. Do women of power view themselves this way? I don’t know. I doubt it. Do the women they employ view women of power this way? Again, I don’t know, but I’m leaning towards maybe. Now let me explain. Quantitative and qualitative speaking, there are three hypotheses to form an integrated model of sexual harassment and or violent behavior towards women. Testing whether supervisor authority, gender identity, and sex are linked to experiences of harassment says using a strong statistical control for reports predicts whether a respondent’s report was determined a harassing behavior. The number of harassing behaviors they report and whether they subjectively interpret their experiences as harassment is subjective to power & authority. This is all from a man's point of view. "Economic, social and political developments during the last five decades have resulted in some improvements for women. One area of progress has been in literacy and education." "Women’s empowerment is an important goal in achieving sustainable development worldwide. In most fields, women’s empowerment is defined as the process through which women acquire the ability to make strategic life choices in a context where this ability was previously denied to them." I'm being as careful as possible to stay away from personal opinion, as I am not an expert in this field, but according to the barriers that women face: empowerment and equity lie ingrained in culture. Although there are many benefits empowerment and participation can have, many women are scared of disrupting the status quo. Gender-related barriers involve sexual harassment, unfair hiring practices, career progression, and unequal pay. Right about now you should be asking yourself, "What does all this have to do with Categorical Processing?" In response "It is very important to focus on shifts in gender relations as well as to address the process where gender relations are re-negotiated." This allows traditional gender roles to be reversed or at least redefined. Stalkers who stalk online will assist their activities with digital technology. How ever abusers will use many different types of technology to torment their victims. What I'm saying is that with role reversal or In my case, what seemed like platform coincidence turned out to be harassing behavior. You see, I put out this information in front of you, so that you can decide for yourself, but I already know what the statistics say and I'm still letting you decide. This the only way we can reverse values & principles thrust upon us by discussing it in a clear and thoughtful manner. I hope you come to the same conclusion as I have and see role reversal can defeat category processing by confusing artificial intelligence. GPS tracking devices or mobile assistance to help a seeker track me was used. A person who imagines a relationship is called an intimacy seeker. People who exhibit social ineptness or odd behavior are called Incompetent suitors. They want to reconcile their past, but become resentful and often fluctuate between the two. The stalking creates an opportunity for contacting the target and the focus becomes a substitute for a relationship. A person can be motivated by the feeling of power and control and can become addicted to this behavior. Sometimes they suffer from delusions or jealousy. They convince themselves that you're a partner that left them or you're going to find a new partner. They view themself as a victim of circumstances, society, family etc. Most of all they need others to give them an identity or sense of "self," that is what I mean by your only important in how they see themselves and it really doesn't have much to do with you. Self is the keyword in the entire scenario. You see it's the false interpretation of self that begins the cycle of odd behavior. It's listed in the ways that woman are told things about themselves by society. Culture attempts to devalue their role in society. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying women don't stalk because evidence shows they do. The thing to understand is that men stalk a person they had a relationship with and women stalk a person they want a relationship with. I spend so much time online that even people who know me would say things like, "Your stalker or your stalkers," but I never thought twice about it. I just figured because I'm so transparent with communication that I could see how others saw things I didn't. I really do have a bad habit of thinking I can help people. I started changing my behavior. I started using stealth techniques to go undetected. This is when I began to understand it wasn't my imagination, but something peculiar was really happening. I thought that I could help this person with their feeling of exclusion and show them that constraint can be overcome. It was my strategy to form a partnership, so that I could show them one's own power could be successful. I thought if the pressure was released, I would be released with it. I guess I felt guilty for the things like what society had done to them in effort to devalue their role. I didn't realize that I was dealing with a person I had under-estimated. I didn't realize it until I was told I had fallen in love with the wrong person and it was because someone cast a spell on me. That kind of scared me. It was schocking. They had no right to speak to me like that. We had no history together and I was concerned for their mental circumstance. The next day, I got a text saying that “it was all okay,” but after further reflection, I decided I felt uncomfortable about what was said to me. Now I don't know if you know this, but Aziz Ansari went through the exact same thing almost word for word. That is why I dropped everything and really thought about what was happening. Two years ago I thought It blew my mind, but he's is a famous person and got trapped into a situation like mine. The difference is his situation was very public and mine was private, but it concerned me and I started wondering if I was reacting like a victim or that reaction was calculated I decided to do my own research and after that. I felt something was a miss and something seemed shady. How could something like this happen two years ago when the #metoo movement wasn't until now? Is it the same person or was this some sort of copy cat? The odd thing at the time was I thought, "Maybe they aren't real." or "Maybe someone is messing with me?" I could ask questions to make sure they weren't misrepresenting themselves. People knew I had recently ended a long term relationship not a lot of people, but some knew. I thought "I'm being paranoid?" So, I decided to confront this person. I asked specifically, "Why did you go about enquiring with questions and why did you mention spells?" It seemed they sort of confessed right away that they knew I thought they had crossed a line. I told them I wasn't mad, but I needed some time to reflect on what had happened. They left me alone after that. I thought, "What motivates a person to get weird like that with another person?" I felt sorry for them. I felt like they probably didn't know what they were doing. I was confused because I didn't know this person well enough for them to talk to me like that. That's when I started to piece together what I knew about Category Processing. The more i thought about it the more I realized the signs were right there in front of me and I might have played a role in the situation. This is the type thinking I'm sure rational people consider. I've heard so many renditions of victims recalling things. Sometimes they think they had done something to become a target. They think they could have done something different. I thought, " I'm not going to take that route. I think it's time someone needs to stand up and call things out for the way they really are." There is a whole industry out there using people. They're using people and they'll continue if there aren't any real consequences. Roger McNamee a previous advisor to Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg, gave a unrehearsed interview about category processing. He was outraged with the idea of manipulation. He denounced the idea that Russia "Hacked," the election because he proclaimed the platform was already dividing people by category. He explained that people are most engaged when they are either upset or in fear They are shown images and news that increases their activity because they've reacted. I was discussing how in the Matrix the agents are genetically identical for category processing. Now I'm going to explain how artificial intelligence tries to diversify the data points (online Profiles) and group them. I mentioned your human traits. These aren’t characteristics like hair, eye color and height & weight, but more activities or circumstances. For instance, when did you graduate? What school did you attend? Did you go to college? Where? It’s things like this that an algorithm can use to match you with others on the platform. Emerging data starts to design levels to determine individual preferences. You might volunteer some information, but mostly it is extracted from you. We supply the platform with an email address. Many of these sites are categorizing. They might promote users that have had their data analyzed. Taking online surveys is one way to have your data analyzed. Have you ever clicked on a box with an “X,” to make something go away? Immediately after closing a question pops up. It’s a simple format where the information is delivered to the host and it travels to numerous websites. Was this message relevant? Is usually what the message asks. After closing the message not just your answer is analyzed, but your whole profile and this sets up the next step. The advertisers are tracking you across platforms to evaluate your searches. They are building a profile on your name and any additional information that can be used. They’re selling the information and in legalize "its theirs not yours." Let me compare this subject to the issue of harassment, so that we can identify what is feeding this construct. At first, information sharing and harrassment seem to have no obvious connection. While we generally acknowledge the societal benefits of a reckoning, much of the focus centers on the pathos of the accused. Experts on this subject warn that efforts to make things “100 percent safe” could lead to a kind of “police state” that would attempt to regulate the activity itself. The grounds that the harassment victims accuse a stalker instead of a system could lead to dismissal of the activity but on the grounds that the harassment itself is not as bad it could have been, undermines the whole premise. Truth of reasonable, fact-based discourse in response to people scrambling to erode Enlightenment, is a "Tit for Tat mechanism. The defense posture, however, is often its own sweeping argument. This employs not a mere endorsment of a double standard, but also intimidation to make the point that platforms gathered information therefore it is theirs. In other words, you relenquish the rights to the information once you utilize their software. Often portrayed as a movement of sound voices, the collective of people who enable technologies are premised on the value of telling many stories rather than a single one. It is arguing against failures not only of justice, but also of the vision itself. Whose perspective will be valued? This is their argument with justification that more stories are postive in experience, so they should not be judged on a few negative ones. Women, for so long, have come second in the story: Adam, and then Eve. Mr, and then Mrs. History’s plus-ones, decorative and nameless and expendable. Now, I am coming forward to tell my story, but to insist on the validity of my perspective is like treating my experience like its the only one.It might seem unrelated, but I will put this together in an understandable way by putting forth the following information. Effort Reward Imbalance The concept of ERI allows us to better understand how a sense of fairness and justice affects health There are two versions,” It says. “You can either do too little and receive too much or do too much and receive too little." The second condition, not surprisingly, is far more common and has been the subject of my research, but the first we know a lot about it. Studies follow thousands of people in different countries and the evidence shows that Americans reflexively connect hard work with deservingness. Effort and Reward become more disconnected in America though. This is highlighted by the following question, "what happens when labor is met with little money, or reward comes effortlessly, sometimes via inheritance?" “America’s ruling class,” populated by Astors, Vanderbilts and other uniformed retainers are underwritten by ironclad fiduciary trust. The American dream promises that if we work hard we will be rewarded, and that those who have wealth deserve it. The problem is many fail to realize wealthy people were born into wealth. The narrative goes that big corporations have "Earned," the rights of average citizens. We don’t think much about why a hedge-fund manager would “deserve” exponentially more than a doctor, scientist or teacher – or whether the measure of a person’s “worth” should be economic. Here is an example from a man who came from a multi-million dollar oil fortune and his grandparents paid for his full ride to Brown University. “I didn’t know what work/study was,” he says, recalling classmates discussing loans and financial aid. His previous social experiences had primarily been with people who had more than he did – not less. Then there is another scenario called "Marrying into money." Where a person becomes wealthy or financially secure by marrying someone who is wealthy or has a wealthy family. The biggest difference between these folks and wealthy people is how they view their time and money. Here is a quote from a lady who married into money. She said, "I recently bought my sister's friends a meal because "I remember what it's like to be a college student." When asked about how her husband viewed the activity, her reply was "He couldn't relate and wouldn't have even thought that college students could have some sort of financial hardship." My point is being a wealthy individual is much like being a member of a technical corporation. Even though the individual experience is that of an average worker, the focus becomes the abundance of wealth of the entity. I'm using these examples to emulate details about experience with wealth. Now this relates to my discussion on Categorical Processing in the same way I explained how Artifical Intelligence cannot distinguish the difference between an Apple or a Pine Apple. Except this time my comparison is Apples to IBM's. (Yes, I managed a another cliche reference) What I'm getting at is this. People who marry into money are treated like an Orange while if they were from a wealthy family they would fit in as an Apple. The nuance or tone of persons actions cannot be measured categorically by artificial intelligence. 99% of a group would instantly understand what I am describing, but 1% would never get it. That same one percent is designing, categorizing and making groups for the other 99% so that is why grouped by category is flawed from the beginning. Bourgeoisie is a polysemous French term that means "those who live in the borough." Most of us (99%) live in rural or humble areas of the Metropolis. Most wouldn't understand the concept of Bourgeosies in the same way millenials wouldn't understand a rotary telephone. Wealthy people don't understand the experience of poverty. That is changing with the influx of technology. Even though we may not have personal experience or understand wealth, we at least understand the concept. and that allows us to tell a story so that everyone can understand. The connection is centered on money though. More importantly it's the greed that is advancing these platforms use. So I'm comparing the understand of these things to the broader meaning of how we use technology We don't fully understand the platforms we communicate on. The bridge to understanding something is to discuss it further. You might not get it at first or even the next couple of times, but you'll eventually get it. One example I can currently point to is that hyper-privileged clubs have butlers and waitresses which are being main streamed by renaming similar services Personal Assistants. Advisors like Echo, Siri or Alexa are artificial intelligent agents that provide the average person a peek into sophistication. Not knowing "about," something is not the same as not knowing something. In this instance, Platforms have plausible deniability on their side. However, the suggestion that they don’t know if they collected your information and shared it is false. I feel that is proven by the detailed accurate description I've laid out. As for the assailant in my personal life, they might have known a lot more about me than they led on. Maybe they tracked activity using artificial intelligence or maybe they didn't. One thing is for certain. We are going to start seeing more of these cases. What unfolds from there is anyone's guess, but I think we are seeing the preliminary development right now and this will be effective through changes in Net Neutrality. I did not write this to advocate for or against anyhting. I only wanted release myself from holding onto an incident. What I discovered was that some forms of communication are innocent and others are being manipulated. We are finding these things out and the court of public opinion will eventually decide where to draw the line of being spyed on. If I frame the discussion around mental illness or wealth, seeing that they are the only two subjects that have laws, it doesn't do much good. People can't get a fair shake from an institution that profits off of both. I mean, that's a different issue. But looking at digital privacy restrictions purely from the perspective of a challenge ignores countless factors, including access to devices & technology. The US is pretty common on making internet access available to everyone, so the net neutrality argument goes out the window. If we want to address this issue as a whole, we must first try to pre-emptively define what signs make an individual vulnerable to acting out behaviors that are based on category processing. Where are the "signs?" Is it connected to mental illness? If so, wouldn't that be partially the failure of a society that doesn't provide for some way to address it? Beyond villifying a person before or after they do anything, why don't we examine the means in which they do it and decide if it should be allowed. Another possibility is to be aware through education and policy. For the sake of addressing this issue and trying to at least make it less common. In life, if it is not okay to stalk and make advances towards a person than why do we allow technology to do it?