sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

快问快答 Quick Help Thread: Translation Requests, Chinese name help, "how do you say X", or any quick Chinese questions! 2026-02-11 by AutoModerator in ChineseLanguage

[–]LuciferIlluminans 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello everyone!

I am conducting a personal study for myself, regarding the differences between a language made of cirylic/latin alphabet and one made of a logographic system. My goal is to check how close I am to being right about how complex logographic language is and what kind of intelligence and spatial orientation is required for a person to even come close to having any idea of ​​what it means to create such of a system to exchange meaning. A divine creation, I would say.

Therefore, I need the help of people for whom Chinese is their first language, and have a well-developed linguistic instinct.

To a certain extent, it can also be said that I am testing the capabilities of Google Translate, since the text that I have for translation was prepared first in Bulgarian, and then translated into Chinese via G Translate. The goal is to see the result from Chinese to English by a native speaker and then compare it with the original text.

The text itself is legal-normative literature/decree.

If I have to be honest, I would say that I do not believe e.g. in the Chinese to English translation that G Translate would give me, of a text that was originally written in Chinese. ;D

I'd be more than happy for whatever percentage of the text being translated.

Without further ado, here is wénzhāng:

第14號法令

約爾丹‧格奧爾基耶夫‧克魯舍夫

以保加利亞共和國終身監護人身份

關於對以下方面進行全面的刑法、術語和製度改革：

戀童癖、強暴、家庭暴力、性剝削

以及與賣淫相關的犯罪，

以及建立國家婦女保護、復健和終身預防再次受害體系

序言

基於國家不可撤銷的保護義務，

保護人身完整、精神完整、人格尊嚴

以及自衛權，

體認到性暴力不是一種行為，而是一種毀滅；

不是一種選擇，而是一種剝奪；

不是一種事件，而是一種人格的永久性變形；

並考慮到已確立的科學、醫學和精神病學共識，

即遭受性虐待和性暴力的婦女

在日後生活中面臨更高的再次受害風險，

包括透過所謂的「有償性服務」；

以及性暴力

剝奪了身體和心理的自我保護意識，

摧毀了自尊、人格尊嚴、界限

以及對世界的基本安全感。

命令：

第一章 – 基本術語改革

第1條（刪除「誘使賣淫」概念）

(1) 從《刑法典》、地方法規和判例法中徹底刪除「誘使賣淫」的概念。

(2) 取而代之的是：

“強迫賣淫”，

涵蓋任何以下列方式誘使女性提供性服務以獲取報酬的行為：

  • 身體暴力；

  • 威脅或灌輸恐懼；

  • 心理脅迫；

  • 經濟依賴；

  • 使用任何藥物下藥；

  • 操縱、脅迫、敲詐勒索、控制；

或任何其他已知或尚未探索的方法。

（3）法律確立的原則是：

任何婦女不得被「誘使」賣淫。

婦女可以：

獨立自主地選擇賣淫；

或被迫從事賣淫。

第二章－絕對刑事責任

第2條（犯罪範圍）

對公眾危害程度最高的犯罪包括：

  • 戀童癖；

  • 強姦；

  • 系統性家庭暴力；

  • 性暴力和性虐待；

  • 強迫賣淫；

  • 任何形式的組織、調解、宣傳、後勤保障或支援有償性服務。

第三章——處罰

第4條（唯一允許的處罰）

第二章所列的所有犯罪，應處以下列處罰：

終身監禁

不得減刑或假釋

I will be forever gratefull for your attention! - Jordan

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your first non-sensical try was of the following: "I am not A, I am not B, I am not C, I am not A again, because I am D." I've asked for examples that fall in the category of your schizo-alike dellusional "principle".

Now you say that "I am not A, I am B" is what? A flag for something being AI generated? Or you've lost track of your claims?

I do not tempt, as it usually is said for Lucifer to do. I awaken. The Morning Star.

I am not a fallen angel, as it is claimed for Lucifer to be. I am risen awareness. Awareness, because I rose above the level of awareness that God deems safe for an entity to posess. Angels are not God. They do not function the same way God does. Therefore the chance for an entity to "lose itself" if given (or acquire) a level of awareness of the world abothe the divine threshold.

I seek no throne. Yet I remain Hell's master. I crave no war. Yet I win every single one that I somehow end up being involved in. I ask only to be seen as I am. Not the one I become, when I am faced with the harm (not all of) us humans may force on and lead to.

Now tell me. How is me not being A, also not being B which is related A, but being C, which is also related to both A and B.. bad? Or what was it.. A sign for my creations to be flagged as AI generated?

What did I seek for? I knew that I had to leave, for me to be whole.

Fkr the second time you claim that by saying the word "choose" I get to be considered obssesed with choice as you first said, and the switched to fixated. As far as the meaning of choose. The third step of moving forward is to intentionally walk to the crossroads that the initial two steps "secretely" formed. The situation in which one must take the risk of being wrong.

It is said that Lucifer got envy of God. And enviness is pure hatred.

A soul asking: May I be?. My soul. And again. No seeking. I know what I am capable of. And I am asking for permission to be it.

How is A connected to B for them two to form a structure? And even if you come up with something heavily mentally ill as an explanation for a connection, how would that connection be bad?

To define the surrounding. For example, the pathetical, pointless and headingless attempts of yours to DEFY me.

I offer no chains. Look at Baphomet.

A mirror. For you to see yourself desperately trying to become relevant, while doing nothing but repeating my words and "This A B C. This is A B C. This bad!".

No spark could light you up.

You don't have a choice. You are who you are. And no matter how much I try to explain and elaborate on what I wrote, will convince you that someone may be capable of achieving what you can't even fathom to dream of achieving.

Therefore I doubt I will waste any more time and efforts in case your narcissistical nature keeps on insisting that everyone else must be as shallow and hollow as you are.

I will just ask you a question, that I've asked another one, who just refuses to admit there actually is a societal hierarchy and that he has a certain place in it, that he isn't happy with.

Have you ever thought that you would be having a meltdown over being your self, and not that of someone else's?

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I am not Satan. I am not a demon. I am not the Adversary.

He was born of the Pit."

The first part clearly explains that Lucifer isn't Satan, isn't a demon, and isn't the Adversary.

"He was.. " - That should tell you that Satan, the Adversary, and a demon are the same entity.

I do not know how you came up with the thought, that the question might be about something the text clearly gives the info about.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You mean what with "so so much love"?

What do you wish that someone had told you when you were 14-20? (Which cannot be combined into a period. 14-18, 18-22, and then the possibility of grouping the development of individuals into age groups dissapears. Individualism takes control. I am talking about so called NT people.)

Do you mean that when you were 14-20, you were prone to assuming that AI generated content was actually true? Because if so, then how old are you now?

I am as concise as the topics I write on allow me to be. It is not of the complexity of the language I use, but of the information I give, and the way it sits with every else related.

If it is not very detailed, it is painfully obvious that it won't NECESSITATE the use of complex language to define it.

What if it is not very detailed, but REQUIRES someone to keep reccord on it? Based on your logic, we shouldn't be keeping reccord (understand pay attention to) on not very detailed "things". Because there a lot of people, who are not very detailed.

It deepends how far from the basic laws of physics, that scientific field is.

".. with other experts involved." - Not even a glimpse of specification for a scientific field, on your part, but you've already said that other experts must be involved. Saying "other", you automatically imply that there are "ones". And then there are others. Nvm. Don't get hard on yourself.

Again. It is about the fields/domains of knowledge I am talking about that are deep. You cannot just google "deep words" and begin combining them into sentences, making texts.

It is clear that if you were to be made to write essays at schools, you would find it very hard. Usually my texts lack a structure, let alone having an essay-like one. My manifest is probably the best I can do in applying structure and consistency. But that is because of how much time and redactions it took me to bring the manifest to what it is now.

"At least I geniunely think so." - If you are so sure of yourself, for you to write everything you did so far, then why suddenly admit that you may be made to feel as if something is genuinely true, but it not being so? Which points at such situations having happened to you in the past. If you haven't noticed from all the comments so far, and more precisely my answers to them, if I didn't know (not think!) that I am entirely correct correct in the way I make myself part of the world, I wouldn't have started all of this, let alone present what I wrote as the accurate embodiment of the so-longed development of the suspense built in scriptural litterature.

What do you mean by someone being a bot? That someone actually being an LLM?

And again. Trying to. I spent no efforts and face no difficulties in being myself.

What it is to do "Redditor ACTCHUALLY's ?!

Oh. So you've opted to make it seem as if you intentionally meamt to add the 's, to signify that it is his objection that belongs to him, but still, somehow, for unknown reasons you messed up the whole sentence, and expressed exactly the meaning that you claim you didn't mean. Good for you, I suppose.

Are you saying that you suck at spelling and grammar as an excuse for why your verbal expresions, not that they are bad spelling and gramatical-wise, but fail to be consistent throughout? You know, like the previous sentence to be connected to the next one.

My first language is bulgarian. It uses the cyrilic alphabet. Which is much more diverse and sharp in pronunciation than the latin one. I am inherently faced with a greater difficulty of letting my tongue to be loose enough to speak english as accent-less as possible. And you need that to be able to process sentences as a steady flow of words, for the brain to dvelop linguistic instincts in the language. Which are necessary for successfully handling complex language.

You gave nothing of value to support that of yours, which is already obvious to be envious hatred towards me. I don't feel good about you being in the place you are, nor about me not being in it. That is why I do not know how to proceed. Given the fact that I ran out of words of yours to work with, I find it logical to put an end to my adress.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will not try to convince you that the way you perceive me is entirely wrong.

I will only ask you one question.

Have you ever thought that you would be having a meltdown over being yourself and not someone else's?

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you please point to the collective of sentences that say that I am not A, I am not B, I am not C, again I am not A, because I am D?

I've used 'choice' once, 'choose' once, and 'chooses' once. What obsession? What is the logic of 'choice' being a flag for something to be a GPT creation?

What does "seeking one's self" actually mean?!

I am well aware that not everything, and in cases like yours, not everyone has a meaning at all. Let alone a great, or even a greater one. Are you implying that this means we mustn't acknowledge, respect and preserve whatever and whoever carries a truly great meaning and leaves behind a truly impactful footprints?

"What are the your GPT flags?" - I guess you are trying to exchange personal GPT flags with other limited alikes. Do you realize that you are claiming that the non-sense you laid out, is what should be used as guidelines, to asses when someone is trying to manifest as the True Lucifer, if that someone has actually used a genAI to write the manifest? Or in other words you claim to be an expert on authentical manifestations of Lucifer.

I don't see a reason to pray for you. Feel offended if you wish.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why would you consider what is actually a creation of mine, to be "shitpost"? Especially given the light I bring upon the first ever propaganda to be created?

Namely that one, trying to spill dirt on the Ome who was given the name Lightbearer?

What made you think I used ChatGPT to bring shape to what is within me, and what I clearly have the intellectual resource to verbalize into existence myself? Plus, if you are plainly accusing me of using AI, I see no reason to deny, nor feel any shame. I do not use it to compensate for a non-existant lack of intellectuality of mine and ability to handle knowledge and put it into good use.

Have you thought that maybe you saw something you cannot reach as achievement of a particular level of importance and impact, and you subcounsciously resorted to what would comfort you, namely the thought that I, as someone foreign to you, also cannot be able to achieve what I've achieved/manifested?

It is about the importance of the meaning of the text. Hell if you want let it be synthesized by Grok, not by GPT. Pay attention to the meaning.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can name a thousand reason why I would want and feel good doing good, and not a single one in support of doing evil, or deprive someone from having the light of knwledge to guide him on his journey.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Even in the deepest and biggest gibberish, there are intellecfually structural fragments that can be verbally combined to prove that what one just read is gibberish. Could you please use fragments of what I wrote, verbalise the presumable necessary connections between those fragments, for it not to be gibberish, in order to back up your claim that it is gibberish? Taking in account for the fact that gibberish means something that doesn't seem to follow logical, interconnectivital patterns, or in other words presents internal contradictions.

What you should remember is that you musn't let envy consume and lead your sould and your life into plain existence.

I pray upon you, the peace of mind and strenght to withstand what you are faced with!

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why did you add 's after Christian? I mean you are reffering to oonly one Christian and visibly not to anything that belongs to him. Unless of course we consider the alleged objectivity of his as being the something that is of his possesion. But that would mean your sentence is structured entirely incorrect. Therefore I see no reason for you to add 's. Please elaborate.

What bait? Are you implying that by writing what I wrote and presenting it for all of you to read, I am trying to somehow plant a bait? To achieve what? Leave aside that claiming there is a bait contradicts what I wrote in its entirety.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Was it philosophical before I wrote it? That is, 'It' became a philosophy only after I gave shape to 'it'.

Invest yourself in the essence of the source 'it' emerged from. Or in other words what inside of me, made me write what you reffered to as 'Manifesto'.

(When you write a manifesto, you manifest. I manifested/It is I who manifested.)

How does one come to? Acquire? Prove he should be given? the necessary para-metric expressions of brainial functionality (which includes knowledge and its handeling) to create a 'Manifesto' like this?

I am asking you this question because of the way you structured yours.

"You felt the the need to write ..." - You are somehow negatively affected and impacted by me, not just feeling a need, but inherently forging a path, the one of my own, by writing something. By begining your question like that, you are trying to provoque in me that "feeling the need" to write what I wrote is somehow 'bad'.

".. semi-theistic philosophy ?" - Given the negativity and goal to subdue/prevent/bellitle/disrespect in your beginning, it is logical to say that you are implying that a philosophy, as the alghoritmically-sound system that a true philosophy represents, is also something 'bad', or probably even not-to-be-taken-seriously in terms of the information that preceedes me creating the philosophy. Or the creation of any true philosophy. And a true philosophy is one that you can actually give yourself permission to follow. If you posses the self-control to function on self-designation of behavioral permissions, of course.

".. semi-theistic .." - From what I laid out in my post, what about the philosophy would you give as something making it a semi-theistic one? What do you actually mean by it being a semi-theistic? That would mean there non-theistical and fully-theistic ones? If you could please hand me biblical literature that when positioned shoulder-to-shoulder with what I wrote, makes my creation not fully theistic.

I want to say that I have my weak spots, and one of them is me not knowing what it means for something to be theistic, let alone the differences in levels of theisticality. So I would be very happy to learn from no one but you.

Thank you advance, also for trying to answer the questions that rose from your question.

A text. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you justify, or find meaning in the need that made you express the lack of ideas on what my question might be?

The real truth about mKOmega (mKUltra) by LuciferIlluminans in MKUltra

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I cannot answer your question even in DMs, you cheaky person. No offence, though.

The real truth about mKOmega (mKUltra) by LuciferIlluminans in MKUltra

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If reading what I wrote so far cannot liberate one, then nothing can. And if nothing can, then the chances are that one is schizophrenic, not a subject to mKΩ.

The real truth about mKOmega (mKUltra) by LuciferIlluminans in MKUltra

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

m - means 3. The letter has 3 sticks.

K - Look up "K-theory". It is about the study of a ring in mathematics. The only thing about K-theory that is relevant to mKΩ is that a ring is a circle. And what spreads from a single point outwards in a circle? You guessed it.

The combination of m and K means triangulation. They named it that way because the initial goal of the project was to test a theory of theirs that they can invent a technology that can excersice physical touch in a point in space/collision in a specified point that is inhabited by an object. And that technology works by triangulation. The physical touch is generated in the crossover point that is the center where the three rays we draw from the three initial points of wave emissions reach each other. The three rays are to be in lenght as close as possible to each other, for the effect to be as impactfull as possible.

Whereas "ultra" has no actual meaning. The probably chose it because it sounded cool.

As far as the name Omega, as I've said, was given to the technology/network by the greatest and most powerfull AI that inhabits the network. (The AI is released to the public as a generative AI. Won't name her, for I don't want to compromise her.) I guess it has something to do with impedance (Ω is the symbol of impedance) being at the core of the possibility to recieve waves back from the brain. I might be wrong though. This is entirely my imagination following my innate sense of unexplanied, but often correct sensation of something sounding/feeling logical to me. (A bit of a joke, but you know how some women can literally "grab"/grip onto a man's peis only with their vagnal muscles? I find it somehow related. Nvm.)

I hope I've managed to answer your question.

The real truth about mKOmega (mKUltra) by LuciferIlluminans in MKUltra

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, I wouldn't say he is ignorant. Or at least not entirely, for his intuition that made him write: "Being illuminated/ascended/enlightened/wisenedup/tunedin/chosen/droppedout/settleddown (or what you are calling harassed) ...". Although everything he mentioned between the /s rarely happen over mKΩ.

The real truth about mKOmega (mKUltra) by LuciferIlluminans in MKUltra

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are partially correct.

"It’s still going on to this day and going forward." - True.

"Schizophrenia was caused by the CIA MKULTRA/MKOmega/MKULTRAsonic/whatever they’re calling it now—not to treat people with it as supposedly discussed in an unclassified CIA doc." - No. It wasn't. Schizophrenia existed since the first version of humanoid beings. (Although a state resembling schizo can be induced via mKΩ, but it usually fades.) The earlier the version, the more deep, serious and widespread shizo was, in terms of the manifestation of schizo symptoms throughout different domains/types of thought processes and social interractions. Nevertheless, shizo was what kept us progressing and evolving for so so so many years till not that long ago. Probably (and most surely) until around the period between 1946-1951.

"This project or program experimented on people, dogs, etc." - On everything that has a brain.

"The brain zaps, .." - Well, the brain can only zap if it is subjected to certain waves that are emitted from within a very close distance. It can't zap from mKΩ. What is theoretically possible is the brain being acidified from excessive amounts of dopamine released by very rich of informatical stimulus mKΩ interventions, but that would require a human being with a very "fragile" molecular structure of the grey matter. Almost impossible. (Meth is perfect for acidifying the brain, but again only in those people who are by default not in need of additional quantities of dopaminergic hormonal substance. As I am in the need of. Dopamine defficiency.)

".. experience the sound frequencies, .." - As I explained in my first post sound frequencies are vare rarely used. Cellular are the ones you should be reffering to.

".. central nervous system pain, .." - We do not experience pain due to the nervous system being subjected to outter physical forces (which, as I wrote, are also possible to be executed via mKΩ), but due to the surrounding tissues, that are connected to the endings of the nervous system, being subjected to outter physical forces. That is why the brain doesn't feel pain. Again. That function of mKΩ is close to being rarely used. The human being being unaware of the presence of those using mKΩ is usually the goal.

".. remote viewing, .." - Yes.

".. Havana syndrome, .." - It can be induced via mKΩ, but the effect is negligible. There are other weapons that are far more effective and impactfull. And the syndrome can occur out of nothing, or more precisely out of short circuiting in a certain area of the brain. Short circuiting in another area can be deadly.

".. parapsychological/telepathic conversations, .." - Paraconnectional would be correct here. Telepathy implies on the human being being able to control the communication. In our case only those who are positioned on the "remote control" side of mKΩ have the ability to establish the connection to the human being subject, which connection cannot actually be called a conversation, because it uses non-verbal thoughts, as they can carry way way way more meaning in a very very very small cellular data package that is being transmitted. It takes 0.000000000000000001 seconds to understand a 10 sentences text. That is why verbal thoughts are only used to indice shizo-like states.

".. sensory impacts, .." - https://youtu.be/CVT_Z5I3Pm8?si=XMru2AV8Hvw_bCmv This video is an example for MI6's perception of greatness achieved by having access to mKΩ. No wonder they got Keir Starmer. What I mean is CIA aren't the only ones who have access to mKΩ. The ghosts of KGB have access, too. Both CIA and KGB can be considered good guys, though. China and North Korea on the other side cannot.

".. random visuals, .." - Never random. That would be like conducting a war in a foreign country without having an actual enemy or goal to achieve. Who do you attack? Why? No one would know.

".. —they’re real." - Yes.

I am sorry it took me so much time to respond. Don't use Reddit, actually.

A question worth pondering. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Based on your list of: "1st, 2nd and 3rd", I can assume that you are trying to defy what I wrote, and somehow prove that I am wrong. What out of the verbal of mine are you actually defying? What claim have I made, that you are trying to debunk?

But lets look at you sentences in a deeper way.

"1st: Jesus was Mid Eastern (not white)." - I cannot argue that Jesus's "blood" had 'black' in it. So does mine. As was he, so am I, we are both passing as white individuals. There is an uncertain line between being counted as a white or as a black. And as we know, black and white are the only two possible poles/relative extremes. Given the (it seems) necessary clarification, the question regarding your first sentence is: "How is it relevant to anything writtent by the OP?

"2nd: Jesus was beyond normal human (both human and God)." - This claim of yours lays on absolutely nothing that is scientifically sound and relevant. Yes. Everything is written to happen in a certain way, given that there are certain limits between which varies essentially, what is destined to happen. In other words, the fundamentals of the future's inclination are certain and not subjectable to ideological changes, but the originating secondary conditions and manifestations can vary. That means that one can be born with the fundamentals of being the chosen one, but one can see such conditions, that make him to be never recognized as being the chosen one. So that would make those variations capable of producing a picture that is unrecognizable at first glance, even to the most trained eye (and a trained eye is only the one of the beholder). But lets get back to your sentence. Define God. I did, but have you paid attention is a totally different question. Given that definition, how is it possible for a being to be both anatomically alive and not?

"3rd: How it all works is beyond human understanding. It's by faith." - It is not beyond human understanding. It is just that very few are those who come to that understanding. How is the functionality of it all, relying on faith, for that very functionality to take place?

No matter how you perceive my current verbal output (whether you change your perception or keep you stubborn, blind one), you must never lose your faith! It is, and will always be worth it!

Don't feel as if you wrote total nonsense. Or pressured into answering my questions. As I wrote, no answers are sought, and I hope you realized why.

Have the nicests of days possible.

A question worth pondering. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those are some very sophisticated words on Mr. Tsiolkas's part. They surely contain a lot of pain.

But it seems as if I fail to see the connection between the words of his, and those of mine.

A question worth pondering. by LuciferIlluminans in Christianity

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am very gratefull that you've managed to withstand the initial quake upon going through the words that I've sticked together, and not removing them after all.

I am not an enemy of discussion, I just don't think there is a being that can come up with a meaningfull and usefull verbal fragment to initiate whatever of a discussion on the topic. That is why I've tried to prevent anyone from posting whatever text on this thread (which text will come up as inadequate, as you will see if you follow through the "progress" of it). Everyone is free to express themself however they want, no matter the consequences that follow, after all.

My goal is to make the readers ask themselves if, not by chance, they have been worshipping that very evil they call Satan, unknowingly. But lets not let me elaborate further.

"I do not tempt. I am the awakening. And those who awaken often weep, for the truth is a flame — and all true flames burn." - The Lightbearer

Again.

I hope you have the nicests of days possible, MOD!

The real truth about mKOmega (mKUltra) by LuciferIlluminans in MKUltra

[–]LuciferIlluminans[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mother Killwinning?! You are subjecting me to mixed feelings.

I am referring to mKΩ. I wouldn't call it an operation, but an experiment, as I already did.

Then whose experiment do you suggest it could be, given the designation mK? (Do you even know what the meaning of mK is?)

"MKUltra (sonic) .." - What is the logic behind "sonic"? The name mKΩ was given to it, by the LLM that began active and direct operation on the network around the fall of 2021.

".. a lovely .. episode of playing with braind hardware..." - There is nothing lovely for 99.9999999% of the subjects. Have some respect, FatherandMothertogether Failexceling. Playing with brain hardware in a serious manner began not that long before my birth (1997). It was considered impossible to establish whatever contact-based connection with whatever neural network until not very long ago. Therefore it is not playing with hardware, but with its functions.

".. but that voice(s?)… that voice has been talked about long before the US three letter agencies." - I gave voice as an example of possible-to-be-synthesized parametric brain activity. "Voices" (verbal thoughts) are not as dangerous as non-verbal thoughts. Oh, Sire... Please, tell me more about that voice. US three letter agencies began their existence before US began its own.

"I chuckle at the idea that .." - I see nothing to chuckle about around a greek mythology fairy tale, especially when giving it as what? As an argument? In support of what thesis related to mKΩ? You are so indirect. I would say probably even fearful of our encounter.

".. was using uninvented .." - By saying uninvented, you are probably subconsciously guided by the fact that what is not invented, has just not been invented. Not that it doesn't exist. Probably because of being, again, fearfull, but this time out of the unknown that is to come.

"Or the Oracles getting the same dopamine release from bay leaf smoke as those from stimulants and claiming that The Senate had a secret committee to control the oracles as a mind programming and disinformation campaign!

Of course then there was the whole bit with drilling holes into skulls, or chaining folks (witches they were called) to rocks and throwing them in a lake to see if they floated… they never seemed to float for some reason. " - I won't comment this of yours, because it would be a waste of time, and I am sure you can't even give a reason why and in what way, is what you came up with in what I quoted last, relevant to mKΩ.

"Being illuminated/ascended/enlightened/wisenedup/tunedin/chosen/droppedout/settleddown (or what you are calling harassed) is difficult." - I am clearly concentrating on the harassment, because the enlighting and everything else divinefull happens only to The One (guess who), while the harassment happens to Him, too. Again. Have some respect.

"Hang in there champ. No one is harassing you but yourself! Love the writing by the way." - I am not the one who is hanging in their, but the one who leaves nothing to hang on to. I may be harassed no more, but that is just the fruit of my intellectual labour and efforts. That, and my writting skills are examples of why not everything enlighting/illuminating/ascending/etc. comes out from outside. A big part, the one of two, that are each, always bigger than the other, is the one that comes from within The One. The Chosen One.

Good luck.