Friday, February 3, 2017

The Internet Is a Giant Ouija Board


Do Ouija boards work and, if so, how? Let's look at what modern research says and how this relates to the internet but, first, let me tell you my own creepy experience with one many years ago. It didn't involve ghosts or speaking to the dead but it was very strange indeed. In fact, it's a perfect illustration of how this all fits together.

(Note: If you are a Christian reading this, let me just be clear and state right out in the open that I do not advocate the use of Ouija boards nor recommend trying one since, as we'll get into, it is a form of divination, which the bible warns against--for good reason. That being said, there is a very interesting science behind how they work.)

Hidden Knowledge

In sixth grade, my friend, Travis, had a birthday sleepover with a bunch of friends from school. I lived only a few miles away and drove my little Honda 60 quad on the dirt roads over to his house. When I got there, as usual, I turned the handlebars all the way to the right and then locked them so no one could steal it or take it for a joyride (at least not without doing more than going in small little circles). I tucked the key in my pocket and joined the party.

Later that evening, after a full day of swimming, playing hide and go seek, and running around Travis' backyard, we all headed off to his room for the rest of the night. At some point, I reached into my pocket and panicked because my quad key was not there. Maybe I didn't lock it after all, I thought. I went outside and checked. Yep, locked. I went back to his room, checked around and looked for a while longer and still couldn't find it. Oh well, I'll just worry about it tomorrow, I told myself. 

After we all played Nintendo late into the night, Travis brought out an Ouija board. l had never seen nor heard of one before but he said that if two people put their hands on the plastic heart-shaped piece, it will start moving all by itself, answering questions or spelling out words. One kid protested and said they were evil but I was skeptical. I was pretty sure it didn't work...or was a hoax. 

We all gathered around and gave it a try. It moved around chaotically as a bunch of ten-year-olds pushed on it. Travis said it won't work if you press too hard or try to push it. We tried again but this time just lightly setting our fingers on top. Nothing happened for a while...and then it started to move. Someone yelled, "Don't move it!" to which we all said in turn, "It's not me. You stop moving it!" Finally, we all agreed that we weren't moving it but were completely creeped out by the fact that it was indeed moving around the board seemingly all by itself. At this point, Travis said, "Let's ask it a question."

I was still worried about my lost key so I asked, "Where's my quad key?" We waited a bit and then it started to move. It didn't seem sure where it wanted to go at first but then it eventually meandered and settled on the first letter--"P". Next, it moved slightly to the left and stopped at "O". Then it moved down to nowhere and back up again to the "O". Lastly, it went slowly across the board up and to the right, landing on "L". We all yelled "POOL!", grabbed a flashlight and headed through Travis' backyard. We flashed around the lounge chairs, tables, and concrete. Nothing. Finally, I grabbed the light and pointed it into the water. A tiny reflection came from the deep end. There it was, just like the Ouija board said.

The Science Behind Ouija Boards


There are three possible explanations we can offer for the Ouija board finding my lost key: 1) someone set the whole thing up and moved it knowing it was there, 2) a spirit told us where the key was, or 3) the Ouija board somehow helped us answer a question we already knew the answer to...even though we weren't consciously aware of it.

Not too long ago, researchers tried to understand how and why an Ouija board works the way it does--if at all--and, after running a series of tests, discovered something very interesting.

Consider UBC researchers use Ouija boards to tap the subconscious:
Researchers at the University of British Columbia are using Ouija boards to test human intelligence. 
Docky Duncan with UBC's Visual Cognition Lab says the spirit board traditionally used to channel the dead can also be used to test people's unconscious knowledge. He says it's not ghosts moving the board, but users' ideomotor reflex.
"The movements that you see on a Ouija board are unconscious movements. They are produced by the players themselves, but they don't feel responsibility for them," said Duncan.
To test this theory, Duncan has blindfolded subjects place their fingers on the planchette — or the triangular piece of wood that moves across the board — and then asks them yes or no questions. So far, he has found that most people answer two out of every three questions correctly, even if they think they don't know the answer. 
"Ask someone if they know, you know, 'What's the capital of Cambodia?' and they might say, 'I have no idea.' But they might have heard it somewhere, and it may actually be inside your brain somewhere," said Duncan.
"When we ask people these questions using these unconscious answers, suddenly players can actually access that knowledge and it really becomes manifested."
If you have never heard of the "ideomotor reflex" before, here's a really good description from The Clinician's Manual:
Though it is rarely spoken of in discussions about human movement, descriptions of ideomotor activity are present in the medical literature beginning in 1852 when The Proceedings of the Royal Institution reprinted a lecture by William Carpenter. He identified ideomotor as a third category of nonconscious, instinctive behavior, which also included excitomotor (breathing and swallowing) and sensorimotor (startle reactions) activity. Ideomotor movement is secondary to thought, and it begins in the cerebrum. 
The discovery of its presence and descriptions of intricate studies demonstrating its manifestation conducted in the 19th and 20th centuries...[are] well documented and the reality of its presence has never been refuted. Instead, it seems simply to have been forgotten. As Ray Hyman states, "Although the effects of ideomotor action have been understood for at least one hundred fifty years, the phenomenon remains surprisingly unknown, even to scientists." 
Ideomotor action is...the reason movement occurs in activities such as dowsing, the play with the Ouija board and "facilitated communication."  ...like a simple reflex, ideomotor movement occurs instinctively, though it is often far more complex and always without volition. This is the primary reason those doing it do not commonly take responsibility for its manifestation or consequence. We suppose ourselves to be consciously in control of our movement for the most part, and it is difficult to convince people otherwise under ordinary circumstances.
We must first understand that the Ouija board is a piece of technology--one that is specifically designed to amplify unconscious or reflexive movements between two or more people for the purpose of communication (disregard who or what is being communicated with for now).

It "works" because there is very little friction between the planchette (or plastic cursor device) gliding above the smooth surface of the board so that the slightest of movements in a person's fingers are communicated through movement of the planchette. When one person does it, there's not much mystery involved but when two or three people do it, that's when things start to get weird.

This is what happens: one person's hand slightly moves the planchette and, since everything is felt by the other participants, they too react to that movement in a manner that is somewhere on the border of conscious control and unconscious reflex. At first, it may start out as mostly conscious but then, after some time passes, the unconscious reflexes begin to dominate allowing for the very strange "ideomotor phenomenon" to take over leading to movement of the planchette as if someone (or some "thing") is physically pushing it around the board in an almost controlled manner even though every person at the board swears they are not doing it. The thing is everyone is still conscious and participating so it's a complex mix of "I think I'm controlling it; I don't think I'm controlling it; we're controlling it together; we're not controlling it; wait, who is controlling this thing and is it controlling us?"

Imagine that we were to scale this up to a much larger set of people. For example, instead of 2 or 3 people each putting their fingers on the planchette, imagine creating an Ouija board-style device where it could be used with 10, 50, 1000 or even a million people. To do this though you'd need a really big "planchette" or interface for everyone to touch and connect through. Voila! What do you know? Such a technology exists and we all use it today.

When I explained how the internet was one giant Ouija board to someone in the past, they said, "Yeah, but it's not quite the same because our unconscious minds aren't linked up and moving something around."

If you're thinking that, this is why you are wrong. The planchette or plastic cursor-like device in the Ouija board is merely the interface people use to connect for the purpose of shared communication at the unconscious level. It moves because that was the simplest and easiest "technology" of the time in order to achieve this property. Today, the interface we all use is a computer and the internet is the means by which we are connected both consciously AND unconsciously. Rather than placing our fingers or hands on a plastic "planchette," we place them on a plastic mouse, keyboard, or touchscreen. Rather than being connected with just one, two, or three other people at the most, we are instantly connected with billions of others electronically.

When the first few computer networks were connected decades ago, the people in charge told themselves "I'm in control of this." Then more computer networks were added and it became "I think I'm in control of this." Then a few more: "I don't think I'm in control of this." Then more: "Oh hey, we're controlling this together." Then more: "We're not controlling this." Then more: "Who is controlling this thing?" And now we have reached the point where people are beginning to ask, "Is it controlling us?"

When you ask the Oujia board a question, who provides the answer? The group. What about the internet? Who provides the answer then? (Hint: it has six letters and is named after a number.) 

Click here for the answer

Thursday, February 2, 2017

The Mark of the Beast

COMMENT:  It appears to me that if we (meaning humanity in general - including bible believing Christians) have come so seamlessly to accept ubiquitous things as smartphones, social media platforms, etc--trends that are unlikely to stop--what is it that will keep believers from taking the "mark (of the Beast)"/chip?

RRH

REPLY:  I agree, humanity is slowly merging with machine and I believe the mark written about in Revelation is the final act in making that merger complete, which AI will enforce as a means of establishing its authority over mankind via commerce. 

As this merger continues, though before we reach that final point, an increasing number of Christians will begin to seek off-grid living situations, as some, including many non-Christians, already do because they "feel" something is not right. The Amish are just one example of how a large group of Christians responded to a pace of modernity they weren't comfortable with in the past--this will happen again but probably on a larger scale (not without persecution of course). Most will find the allure, seduction, and convenience of technology too great, not too mention that you'll have no choice. Cash is already being eliminated in places around the globe so you have to use a credit card or cell phone. People already have chips implanted for all sorts of things and this will become more commonplace in the years ahead.

Whether the mark is a chip or something more invasive like an injection of nanobots that fill your bloodstream and connect you wirelessly to the Beast, it's hard to say but, whatever it is, we know it is irreversible and can't be undone.

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

We will create a god

Just within the last five years or so, numerous technological breakthroughs in the field of artificial intelligence are forcing people to accept that AI is no longer science fiction but a growing and powerful force in our everyday world. 

It now operates in our cars, our devices, recommends the articles and books we read and the movies we watch. For millions of us connected online, AI deeply influences the way we think, perceive, and navigate the world, whether we are consciously aware of it or not.

Given how far technology has come--and the speed at which it got here--we cannot assume that it will stop at some point or reach some unknowable threshold beyond which no further progress will be made.

Those who take the view that AI will never reach human-level intelligence or greater--aka superintelligence--make this assumption. This has been especially true for Christians (in the past) since it is believed that humans (and human intelligence) are the result of God’s supernatural creation. As it says in the book of Genesis,

God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being. (Genesis 2:7)

Since only God can give the breath of life to non-living matter, then surely humans don’t have the ability to do the same, right? Not quite.

For one, the book of Revelation says this is exactly how the “Antichrist” is brought to life, similar to Elon Musk comparing AI to “summoning a demon.” Secondly, God Himself says in the bible that we have the power to create anything.

As the story goes, once humanity came together to build the famed tower of Babel--a megalithic structure symbolizing human intelligence and strength--God looked upon it and said:

This is only the beginning of what they will do. Nothing that they have a mind to do will be impossible for them! (Genesis 11:6)

That same message still holds true today. Rather than physical towers, however, scientists around the world are united in a common effort to build a fortress of human intelligence--not just greater than a single person, but one that is greater than all humans combined: a superintelligence.

They have set their mind to it and, though it seems impossible to many, it will be done.

For Christians, this should come as no surprise. Since the beginning of time, man has always attempted to create god. Using wood, stone, and metal, the skilled craftsman “makes a god and worships it; he makes it a carved image...prays to it and says, ‘Save me! You are my god!’” (Isaiah 44:15-17)

Though God Himself repeatedly warns against this, man will eventually succeed in doing the impossible. We will create a god.

Watch my AI and the Antichrist video on YouTube by clicking here.

Friday, September 11, 2015

Superintelligence in the Flesh

A common theme I've been discussing in my recent posts is that the AI view of superintelligence is probably incomplete. If we exclude human intelligence and consciousness at the individual and collective level from the equation, then the story is only half right. As I've explained, humans and machines (i.e. human technology) are not separate or escaping from one another but in a complex state of integration, symbiosis, and feedback. Again, this is in contrast to the AI-view and is more akin to the global brain or cybernetic view of superintelligence.

With that said, I'd like to present a possible scenario or way to think about this in terms of the interplay between machines (computation) and humanity via our genetic code.

First, what big data teaches us is that it is not merely about the sophistication of the machine that leads to better results or a higher level of intelligence but, most importantly, the amount of data available--hence, big data. A perfect example of this is seen with one of the most successful and practical applications of AI today, IBM's Watson. What makes Watson so successful is good programming AND access to tons and tons of data--whether this be for winning Jeopardy, successfully diagnosing medical conditions, and the myriad of other uses we see Watson being applied to today. However, as I've stated before, we need to keep in mind that the source of this data is almost entirely derived from humans. Furthermore, as more and more of our data is digitized and accessible, the intelligence of the machine is subsumed by an ocean of human data, intelligence, and behavior.

The proper way to think about this is in terms of conscious and subconscious (or unconscious) processing of information and activity in both the brain and the body. In this case, most of what takes place in our brains and bodies is automated and outside our conscious awareness or control. Neuroscience bears this out as does a basic understanding of the human body when it comes to digestion, heart function, our immune system, and the myriad of processes that take place 24/7 to keep us alive. So, expand this out from the individual now to our collective species and what you see is that the application of automated systems (say, narrow or weak AI) is akin to the building of a global subconscious network (this brings to mind Jung's concept of the collective unconscious) from which superintelligence will eventually emerge. This event is popularly referred to as the Singularity but often wrongly thought of as the birth of strong AI or artificial superintelligence. This may be splitting hairs but my point is that it will not be purely artificial or machine-like but reflective of and deeply connected to humanity. As it says in Revelation, the beast rises out of the sea--the masses of people spread across the earth. Superintelligence rises out of humanity.

That said, once superintelligence arises we are told that it then tells the world to make "an image"--a physical representation of someone or something, most often a sculpture or idol--that it can breathe life into (paralleling Genesis when He creates Adam and Eve), which serves as its mouthpiece, representative, and executive arm throughout the earth. It is this "image of the beast" that we read about in Revelation that many interpret as being the Antichrist, which I originally thought to be a clear reference to AI. However, I think there may be an even better way to think about this.

I've already laid out that I think the beast is a global superintelligence arising from humanity. Again, it is not quite AI but a cybernetic, socio-technological, hybrid, or human-machine intelligence. So what about this "image of the beast" thing? What is that? I'm now wondering whether this is actually the result of something much more complex and sophisticated involving genetic engineering of the human genome. In that case, the "image of the beast"/Antichrist personage we see in Revelation and mentioned in other places in the bible is not a Terminator-like robot or android (as I originally conceived many years ago) but, very likely, the perfect fusion of man and machine. Notice the parallel duality here between Jesus who is said to be both fully God and fully human and "the image"/Antichrist, which in this case is fully machine (the product of human technology) and fully man. As well, "the image" will likely be the first of his kind, born not by natural human means but in a sort of supernatural conception when superintelligence (the beast) breathes life into it, just as the Father breathed life into Mary's womb.

It's funny because I just watched The Age of Ultron not too long ago and there were some inklings of this in the writers' minds with the creation of one of their characters referred to as the Vision. AI (Ulton in this case) felt incomplete and attempted to reach a state of perfection by creating a more human-like body that it could inhabit. Of course, this body was not just a normal human body but the product of its own handiwork in fashioning together at a molecular level the perfect synthesis of biology and nano-technology. Spoiler alert if you haven't seen the movie yet: Of course, the Avengers steal this new cybernetic or synthetic superhuman body from Ultron at which point Thor (a god) decides to bring it to life in a Frankensteinian bolt of lightning. Then, it (the Vision) leaps out with superhuman strength and god-like levitation powers and the Avengers ask who or what it is. It says, "I am"--the same thing God told Moses at the burning bush and, as well, the same name or title Jesus used in reference to himself, claiming he was God in the flesh.

Keep in mind, none of these things are coincidence. The movie is filled with mentions of "trying to play God" and dealing with theological issues of free will, struggle of the creator vs. creation, and so on. One writer even said that the Age of Ultron "may be the most spiritual superhero movie yet." Whatever it's worth, I think the combined creative genius of the writers and what they came up with by drawing upon both theological motifs and advanced science (or science fiction) was quite interesting. Not surprisingly, the "Image" in the bible and the "Vision" in Avengers seem to have some similarities…though in this case the Vision sides with humans over AI.

One last thing, we should keep in mind that the human genome is a digital code formed out of four base pairs: A, C, T, and G. Though I don't think human intelligence and human consciousness are fully computable, our genetic code may just be. If that's the case, machines could compute on the entire human genome and then genetically code the perfect human being. Although it probably won't look exactly like the Vision, we do know that it'll have a god-complex and force everyone to worship the superintelligent beast, which gave it life.

Wednesday, September 9, 2015

AI and Theology

In a recent podcast interview with Singularity 1 on 1, Roman Yampolskiy, a computer scientist and author of numerous publications, recently discussed a fascinating section in his new book, "Artificial Superintelligence: A Futuristic Approach," where he lists the similarities between AI and theology.

Here, he says:
"I'm very interested in historical aspects of [AI] research. …we keep finding research papers, peer-reviewed papers, going back to the '80s, '70s, '60s--I think the earliest is 1885--where people explain this exact problem: we'll have machines; they'll become better than us; we'll have competition. I was curious--well, how far back does it go? ...AI has history in philosophy, in theology, early philosophers. If you look at theology--forget about whether religion is true or false, just as a study--people took a number of assumptions: there's a creator, he gave us a book of instructions. From that point on, you can see there's really a struggle of creator to control creation. And all the concepts, if you give them scientific names, map on [or parallel] perfectly. You have this designer of biological robots [humans] who wants to give them an ethical code, rules of conduct, reward and punishment--everything maps on perfectly! And the fact that after, I don't know, 5000 years of research, theology didn't come to a solution is not very encouraging that we are going to [have one] in the next 30 years. It seems like a huge problem and what we're doing is actually harder. In theology you have superintelligence trying to control lower intelligence. We are trying to control god. We are trying to control a superintelligent being."
If you decide to listen to the podcast, he says this about 49 or 50 minutes into the interview. He is then asked whether this is just a coincidence or whether there's is something deeper going on. Roman replies by referencing the book, "Superintelligence," where Nick Bostrom explains that we could be living in a simulation, implying that a superintelligent entity or designer has created the simulation. To someone that doesn't believe in God, this is probably the closest admission you'll get to a creator/intelligent designer. An atheist might say, "If given a choice, I would be much more willing to accept that the universe is a simulation by some kind of artificial superintelligence vs. the biblical account of creation."

Then there's another view. Recently, Britain's Astronomer Royal, Lord Martin Rees, who is also a member of SETI (the Search for Extra-Terrestial Intelligence), wrote an op-ed in the Financial Times explaining that if we are to find extra-terrestial life somewhere in the universe, it is quite likely it will robotic or some form of artificial intelligence. At the very end, he says, "They may be our own remote descendants."

So, there you have it. Don't believe in God or the bible or any of that narrow-minded stuff? No problem. At least you can believe in the next best thing: an artificial superintelligence created us--either by simulation or by direct decent. And if it shows up and says, "Hey there! I created you and I'm God. Worship me cause I'll help you achieve immortality and all that stuff that people have been looking for all these years"--what will all the atheists, non-believing scientists, and leaders of the world do? If there's a story they're willing to believe, this is it. They're already telling us what to expect.

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

The Cybernetic Singularity

In an article posted a few years back at Discover Magazine titled "The AI Singularity is Dead; Long Live the Cybernetic Singularity," Kyle Munkittrick makes an interesting point that I've never considered, but I think we can improve upon when it comes to the machine vs. cybernetic view of intelligence.

In the spirit of my last post, he agrees that "an exponential explosion of intelligence towards near deity levels of super-intelligent AI"--the AI singularity--is unlikely to happen. Instead, humans and machines are in the process of a grand convergence, augmenting human intelligence, toward something more along the lines of a cybernetic singularity, as he refers to it.

I agree. But here's the point he made that I think is rather interesting: machine intelligence is largely being used to augment our left-brain activities--logic, calculation, mathematics, etc.--while humans will still remain superior for those activities primarily associated with the right brain--creativity, imagination, and intuition. 

Unfortunately, the left brain/right brain divide has been largely debunked by neuroscience and is, at best, considered a major oversimplification of how the brain works. That said, regardless of where math  and creativity reside in the brain, it's clear that machines do excel in one and humans in the other…so this is a good way to think about it. But there's also a better (and more scientifically accurate) way as well.

Rather than using the right brain/left brain example, we should be thinking of the interplay between human and machine intelligence in terms of conscious and subconscious processing. Let me explain.

From most of what I read, current research in neuroscience shows that the overwhelming majority of processing taking place in the human brain is at the subconscious or unconscious level. Not only is this true for brain activity--including our thoughts, intuition, creativity, and intelligence--but it is certainly true for our body as well since most of our bodily functions are highly regulated systems all working around the clock without our conscious awareness or direction (the autonomic nervous system, as it is called). 

Thus, whether we are referring to the brain or the body, the overwhelming majority of activity, processing, etc. is taking place at both the subconscious/unconscious level and is highly automated. We can put it another way: consciousness and human intelligence emerge from of a large range of unconscious automated processes. Automation does not preclude consciousness, consciousness requires it. 

At first thought this may seem to validate the AI singularity view since machine consciousness might result from automation, right? I don't think so, since modern neuroscience also shows that the human brain is far more complex and interconnected than we originally thought. In that case, we will probably never be able to simulate the human brain in a machine, but we will probably grow one…and are growing one currently at the global scale.

Applying greater amounts of automation and AI for the functioning of the global brain does not mean that technology will become conscious or superintelligent--it means the global brain will. This is the cybernetic singularity--not just an explosion of intelligence but a massive convergence of networked humanity into a powerful monolithic system of god-like omniscience. The bible refers to it as the beast…and it will have a mind of its own, though it will be the world's mind. It will speak through a ruler Christians refer to as the Antichrist, which the bible refers to as the "image of the beast," which humanity will create: part human, part machine; synthetically human, virtually divine.

Friday, August 21, 2015

The Global Avatar

Elon Musk, Steven Hawking, and a long list of scientists believe artificial intelligence is no longer science-fiction and may one day present a danger to society. Musk has likened super-intelligent machines to nuclear bombs and fears we may be "summoning a demon"; and Hawking has said that AI "could spell the end of the human race."

Given my writings over the years equating AI to the fearsome biblical entity known as the beast or Antichrist enslaving humanity in the end times, I thought I'd take the opportunity to expound on the notion of machine superintelligence and whether this is indeed what the bible is predicting.

In my opinion, the short answer is "not quite" and the long answer is that I've come to realize that the debate over artificial intelligence is much more complex and nuanced than I first considered many years ago.

To put it quite simply, the Skynet view of superintelligence espoused by Musk, Hawking, and others is probably too narrow. Believing AI will eventually outpace human-level intelligence and possibly wipe out the human race stems from an implicit assumption that technology and human society are evolving along somewhat separate, though parallel, lines. Thus, the thinking goes, at some point in the future, technology will become so advanced that it will develop a mind of its own and have no need for us. This is the AI-centric view since the focus is largely concerned with AI and its development over time.

On the other hand, there's a completely different view that sees technology and society mutually influencing one another in terms of a highly-integrated evolutionary process. This is what we might call the cybernetic view, incorporating the more recent framework of complex adaptive systems, which also places more emphasis on the symbiotic relationship between man and machine at both the individual and societal level (although cybernetics is not widely known, it did make its way into pop-culture via the prefix "cyber-" and the word "cyborg", which is short for cybernetic organism. At larger scales, human society, our economy, and financial markets are all examples of cybernetic organisms or, more commonly, complex adaptive systems.)

Extending this line of thinking further, there are many groups of people that are less concerned with technology developing a mind of its own but believe instead that technology + society = a global brain. Here is a summary of this view:
The Global Brain can be defined as the self-organizing network formed by all people on this planet together with the information and communication technologies that connect and support them. As the Internet becomes faster, smarter, and more encompassing, it increasingly links its users into a single information processing system, which functions like a nervous system for the planet Earth. The intelligence of this system is collective and distributed: it is not localized in any particular individual, organization or computer system. It rather emerges from the interactions between all its components—a property characteristic of a complex adaptive system. Such a distributed intelligence may be able to tackle current and emerging global problems that have eluded more traditional approaches. Yet, at the same time it will create technological and social challenges that are still difficult to imagine, transforming our society in all aspects. (Source)
Personally, I find this view makes much more sense. When viewing society and technology as an integrated organism, remarks made by Hawking, Musk, and others hold less relevance. If some Skynet-like superintelligence were to emerge from the billions of people across the earth integrated through cyberspace would it then try to kill us off—the very thing that gives it life? Not likely. Why? Because in this case, "it" is actually "we".

When the idea that the Antichrist (most often thought of as a terrible despotic leader of a one world government who hates Christians) may not actually be human but AI first occurred to me in the early 2000s, I thought of this mostly from the mechanistic/machine view of AI. Though I won't change the title of this blog, I think it's important to recognize this shift in thinking since, instead of the Antichrist and Beast killing all humans (the Skynet-Terminator view), we see that they are much more selective than that, killing only those who don't take the mark. Why is this important, you ask?

Well, because, if we view the beast from the global brain/cybernetic standpoint, it makes sense that it would not kill everyone off or pose a systemic threat in terms of man vs. machine since it really is an extension of man. There's a lot of ways we could discuss this but here's the easiest and simplest way to think about how these things fit together. Imagine if we took all the data that can be digitally stored from you—everything: every picture of you, website you've visited, phone conversation, email, google search, etc. and then used it to create a virtual avatar of yourself. Imagine we did this 15 years ago in the year 2000. Most likely, this avatar would be a fairly rough approximation given the lack of technology and data available at the time. But, as we move forward each year and as our technology improves and more and more of our lives become digitized and stored online, that avatar becomes more and more lifelike until eventually we could imagine that it would represent a very close approximation and could even trick many people into thinking that they were interacting with you (online that is). 

Of course, this is a variation of the Turing test, which Alan Turing proposed as a means of testing a "machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human." (Wikipedia) I use the avatar example because this puts the focus not so much on the intelligence of the machine but on the source and quality of the data, which comes from us.

Now, let's take this further and scale it up. It is highly unlikely in my mind that your virtual avatar or any individual avatar for that matter could actually become intelligent, self-aware, or conscious in the way you or I are for the simple reason that your data is an expression of you but it is not you. Intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness are real-time properties of living things. Unless your data is being stored in real-time through your brain waves and bodily functions, it will always be a shadow of the living you but not you largely given the difficulty of acquiring such data at a pervasive level. 

This is not the case for society. For the avatar-Turing test, imagine all the data being collected on everyone possible and then using that to create a composite image or avatar of the world. What would it look like? How would it think? Would it be intelligent? Would it be self-aware? How could it become more self-aware, intelligent, or powerful? How would it relate to those that refused to join and be a part of it? 

The answers to all these questions of course have already been provided. It will look like the world. It will think like the world. It will be superintelligent from the world's point-of-view. It will be self-aware since it is aware of you. It will become more self-aware, intelligent, and powerful by forcing the world to take the mark, which will give it unrestricted access to every one's data. Those unwilling to take the mark are automatic threats (since they exalt the individual over the collective good) and must be killed.

What is the beast then? The global brain governing itself to ensure its ongoing survival. Is it AI? Not exactly. It is part human, part machine, i.e. cybernetic. Who or what is the image of the beast, aka the Antichrist? Its incarnated form or physical avatar (in replacement of Christ) to serve as the voice, image, representative, and savior for the world. The bible says that the beast tells the world to create the image (a non-living thing) and then breathes life into it so, most likely, our technology at the time will allow for the creation of a synthetic human that will be infused with the power of the beast, Skynet, global brain—whatever you want to call it.