Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IC720 who wrote (1573864)	11/27/2025 10:18:07 AM
From: Maple MAGA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579702

Your entire argument is a confession, not a rebuttal. You are not defending Armstrong; you are declaring your dependence on him. You insist his writings must be read in totality, that his every utterance must be studied in context, that the fault lies not in the message but in the listener who fails to worship it properly. That is not how facts work. That is how dogmas work. It is how cults work. It is how every intellectual parasite excuses the bankruptcy of his ideas. You speak of a “True AI” as though reason can be replaced by a magic machine—an omniscient oracle that thinks for you. That alone exposes the contradiction at the root of your position: you claim to admire intelligence while surrendering your mind to an alleged super-intelligence you cannot verify, cannot examine, cannot question, and cannot understand. There is nothing more anti-reason than blind faith dressed up as technology. You babble about “the world’s largest database of human history,” “55 years of AI,” “global offices,” and “international agencies listening since 1987.” These claims require only one thing: evidence. And because no evidence exists, you retreat into mystical jargon about cycles, patterns, and hidden truths. It is the mentality of an astrologer with a microchip. When Rand wrote of mystics of spirit and mystics of muscle, she described your position perfectly: a man terrified to think, desperate for an authority to obey, wrapping his fear in the language of destiny. You believe Armstrong because it is easier than thinking. He gives you villains for every event, conspiracies for every failure, and a cosmic machine to absolve you of the burden of independent judgment. You call this “research.” In reality, it is evasion—an escape from the responsibility of reason. You say “facts are facts,” and yet every fact you presented collapses the moment it encounters reality. Armstrong did not invent after-hours trading. He did not build a billion-dollar AI. He did not predict every crisis. He did not single-handedly map all of human history into a secret machine. These are fantasies. But you cling to them because you need them. Without them, you would be forced to stand alone—with your own mind, your own judgment, your own responsibility. And that, clearly, is the one thing you fear. Ayn Rand wrote that the darkest form of cowardice is the man who renounces reason but still wants the prestige of intelligence. That is exactly what you’re displaying. You reject evidence, logic, causality—yet boast of “25 years of research.” Research requires thought. You are merely gathering excuses to avoid it. Armstrong does not liberate you from anything. He enslaves you to an illusion. You are not praising a thinker—you are genuflecting before a mystic in a business suit. And the tragedy is that you imagine this dependence is insight.

To: IC720 who wrote (1573864)	11/27/2025 10:18:14 AM
From: Maple MAGA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579702

If you are really interested in Martin Armstrong, you should study Nikolai Kondratiev. Martin Armstrong's entire system is based on Nikolai Kondratiev. Nikolai Kondratiev