The Warfare In Our Data System

Over the decades, motherhood and early childhood education have evolved in tandem with the adoption of new social norms and technological advancements, developments that have significantly contributed to women’s increased independence, both in society and at home. From everyday tasks such as cooking and driving to participating in elections and managing businesses, women’s roles have expanded considerably.

A transformative shift occurred with the widespread adoption of the internet and the acceleration of digital connectivity. For both men and women, the internet represented more than a technological breakthrough; it opened the door to unprecedented opportunities. As access speeds increased, so too did the influence of individuals proficient in computer programming and digital innovation.

In this way, the world changed once more.

Warfare Technologies Allowed to Thrive Globally While Uploaded Into Our Own Data

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, a number of scientists began to raise concerns and questions regarding the understanding and perception of alternate realities. These individuals, many of whom spent long hours developing computer programs, were among the first to report unusual cognitive experiences. A select group of experimental computer scientists, particularly those working in neural networks and early machine learning, began to describe sensations that suggested the existence of alternate perceptions of reality. This marked the early conceptual emergence of what we now call virtual reality.

Some researchers recalled that, even when programming early “learning” machines, they sensed a form of reciprocal interaction, almost as if the computers were “thinking back” at them. This experience, likened to communicating with a separate consciousness, felt to them like an encounter with a parallel or alternate reality. Though this perception was not yet clearly defined or understood, it was described as vivid and real. The implication was profound: extensive work with intelligent systems seemed to create a mental shift, an “alternate reality brain,” as some described it, through which the world appeared in new, multidimensional ways.

This was not to suggest that machines were actually conscious, scientists were clear that they were not, but rather that the illusion of interaction was so strong, it sparked philosophical and psychological questions. Could they have, unintentionally, created an artificial form of reality? The interactions felt real, and for some, that was enough to believe that a new dimension of experience was emerging. These early insights hinted at the brain’s ability to adapt to, and be influenced by, artificial environments, suggesting that parallel realities could indeed be simulated and experienced.

Within certain tech circles, particularly in leading institutions like MIT and Stanford, rumors began to circulate, though never formally published, about researchers who reported feeling a psychological “presence” while working late into the night on neural network experiments. Some even described the uncanny sensation of “being watched by the code.”

One notable case was that of Joseph Weizenbaum, the creator of ELIZA, an early chatbot developed in the late 1960s. By the 1980s, it became increasingly clear that people were treating chatbots far more seriously than anticipated, often relying on them with an intensity that rivaled human interactions. Weizenbaum himself was deeply unsettled by the fact that users were interacting with ELIZA as though it were a real therapist, despite knowing it was a simple script. He realized this behavior signaled a critical shift in human-computer relationships.

Weizenbaum famously warned that “humans would lose their sense of reality around machines if we weren’t careful.” He was right. By the 1980s, many young AI researchers were already reporting experiences that blurred the line between digital constructs and personal reality. Some were not merely studying alternate realities, they were beginning to live in them.

Was it unsettling? Perhaps. But for those working on the frontiers of computing and cognitive science, these experiences were real and transformative. And they occurred decades before the widespread use of smartphones, social media, or modern interactive applications. These early pioneers were not just building machines, they were encountering entirely new ways of experiencing reality.

Some programmers back then, described dreaming about their experiences at work. Dreaming that an alternate reality provided by the computer systems they worked on were real to them and they were literally living in it day and night, as if the machines had personalities, and gave them an extra brain as experiencing having an extra person around them, were conversations were made, solutions were achieved and they were pretty much living around these environments in real life, with complexities as to find solutions for common problems to building powerful programmes to solve detrimental solutions that could save millions of lives. It felt a privilege, as much as also a nightmare, as no one at the time lived like that or experienced nothing like it, but them. So every solution as much as every problem presented they would have to work around to find a greater solution for themselves and to others.

A few tech-scientists kept dream journals, convinced that a “machine self” really existed and eventually started syncing into reality as a real living being while communicating with them throughout their dreams and during day-to-day lives. These interactions were built into their big computers and developed into big ideas, that would be discussed and introduced into the world, very much like Today.

There’s no real proof of all that as documented behaviour or ‘feeling’… it was just commonly known that several computer technicians had experienced these same feelings and emotions and yet, still by the early 70's, none of them could slightly had explained what that really was, no brain scans where really explored, or deep explanations couldn’t be possibly given of how it really worked. They just knew what they had experienced, and that alone was a common knowledge between them.

In the 1980s, some programmers and AI researchers did experience feelings that reality was shifting or merging because of their work. Some believed that if they managed to survive to shift their lives into a completely virtual life towards virtual worlds and programmes they were working on, they would minimise interactions with society in general and for better. This is how sharp these programmes started becoming.

We generally know that Today, our world can be easily programmed and adapted to a totally more digital environment. From watering plants to driving itself. All this is actually possible Today. Tech scientists back then did attributed these feelings and shifts in behaviours to extensive work, though it wasn’t publicised much because they were under different generations that viewed the real world in a total different way, some were indeed very scared of being seen as ‘not sound’ or unstable, not only as professionals but also as a human being in general, they shared these feelings of having dreams and getting an extra help from a new intellectual 'virtual reality' approaching them closest to a new reality, but none of them could explain how this reality really worked or how to put all this into an easy way of context where people who did not worked with computer science or programming earlier computer models would actually easily understand. So, from 70's onwards we actually knew that tech-scientists were completely capable of creating their own virtual worlds, or digital worlds for themselves and for others, and stay completely sustainable by living on it for hours and hours, eventually they also became capable of living more than 50% of their lives on it, submerging for days, and as of Today, anyone is completely capable of living on virtual and digital worlds for years of their lives with minimum interaction of the outside world.  A bubble can be created on this context, with an entirely new world on it.

In the late 70s and early 80s, scientists and tech companies went on more powerful investments towards building alternate worlds from computer machines, these ideas were already in full motion and the pursue to try to build alternate digital realities where real and a gold mine to many.

Lucasfilm’s Games Division from George Lucas’s company (yes, The Star Wars Lucas franchise) started experimenting those symptoms, with interactive story games like Habitat, a graphical multiplayer world transcending the real world of the times to a new virtual reality. And the creators of these worlds had all the feelings and experiences of this extraordinary experiments.

They thought that “virtual lives” would eventually become more meaningful to players than real lives were, and if they kept living in them they eventually would had built a totally new structure of digital reality also on their brains, as the conductors of two worlds entirely, one that was very much real, reality, and other that they created for themselves, virtual-reality. Their brains were unconsciously and undeniably trained to be living on these two worlds as one, as much as switching between realities.

Some early testers refused to even log out from the machine, feeling like their “alternate” life inside the computer mattered as much or more than their real lives. One of the earliest understanding concepts of virtual identity experienced by these technicians and scientists. This is also one of the reasons why violent input content on games are so dangerous. Because the input of dangerous materials on games are also an input into our own brains, and it can cause disturbing views on reality as much as difficult to manage the difference between reality and fiction, when behaviours transcend the machine to real life. This was also understood by then. Some individuals experienced things differently and others much more strongly. Today we know that earlier individuals are introduced to these virtual worlds, such as games, the hardest it is to shift the comprehension between digital and real world, and these concepts can become blurred with time.

Today we know that some individuals can experience the loss of gray matter and intellect, affecting cognitive behaviour and critical thinking.

Several renowned professionals have expressed concerns regarding the neurological effects of excessive digital exposure:

       •     Professor Wayne Warburton, Macquarie University: He compares the brain changes in children with addiction, as those seen in drug addicts, noting measurable loss of gray matter in the prefrontal cortex, which affects abstract thinking and emotion management. 

       •     Baroness Susan Greenfield, University of Oxford: She has highlighted the potential for digital technologies to alter brain structures in young people, emphasizing the need for awareness about the neuroplastic effects of prolonged screen exposure. 

       •     Dr. Catherine Steiner-Adair, Harvard Medical School: In her work, she discusses how technology and media can change children’s learning and development, advising parents on balancing technology’s benefits while mitigating its risks. 

Concerns Specific to Warfare Content on Platforms Like YouTube where exposure to violent or warfare-related content can have additional adverse effects on children’s mental health and brain development:

       •     Emotional Desensitization: Repeated exposure to violent content may lead to reduced emotional responsiveness and empathy.

       •     Increased Anxiety and Aggression: Such content can heighten stress responses, potentially leading to increased anxiety, fear, and aggressive behaviours.

       •     Altered Reward Processing: Engaging with high-intensity content may affect the brain’s reward systems, potentially leading to addictive patterns of media consumption.

Habitat game was one of the first ever graphical virtual worlds like a super early version of Second Life or Roblox Today.

Created by Lucasfilm Games before turning into LucasArts, specifically by developers Chip Morningstar and Randy Farmer. It ran on the Commodore 64 computer (which was very basic by today’s standards) and used a service called Quantum Link (the ancestor of AOL).

The system worked basically free, were players had controlled avatars, with little cartoon characters and explored a massive online world.

You could talk to other players, trade items, buy property, have virtual jobs, even get arrested if you broke virtual laws!

There were shops, banks, houses, and even a jail inside Habitat.

It had a full virtual economy, players made, traded, and stole items. The developers didn’t control everything and the game was built this way, so players could shape their own world and reality. Nothing compared to the near-real to graphics reality that are developed Today, not to mention the internet back then where neanderthal compared to Today’s speed, and still these games affected greatly the minds of players and developers.

Reality Today in games and movie making established the concept that virtual realities are 'real-like-realities' and from back then what made it even more special is that no one ever saw anything like it, apart from its own developers.

These games wasn’t just created as just a game, it was a living world and a new reality entirely.

Players freely created their own societies, laws, and customs.

Some players formed gangs, some became merchants, some started courts to resolve disputes. and all without the developers telling them what to do or where to go.

It proved that given enough freedom, people would create real societies inside virtual spaces.

Habitat was advanced like that, a real-life-like game for its time:

Gamers were designers of their own worlds. This is when the predictable happened. The programme became too big and too expensive for the technology of the time.

Most people’s internet was way or too slow to handle it properly or not as far reached to play somewhere else if not where it was primarily installed, so the game was kept remote, what would keep the users more remote if they wanted to play.

It eventually got shut down after a short run, although some aspects of it evolved into smaller projects like Club Caribe. Habitat became known for introducing concepts like: Avatars and Profiles, Virtual economies, Digital societies.

Emergent behaviour (where players were inventing things that creators didn’t even planned of). Without Habitat, there would be no modern MMOs (World of Warcraft, Second Life, Fortnite, etc.)... The world of games we know Today would be a completely a different space.

Habitat was what really sparked huge ethical questions over games played by common users: if people lived and “worked” in a virtual world the way they liked it or saw it fit, who really controlled that world? Habitat then introduced the concept of "control", specially control of reality or at least of what a user would be allowed to have or not have as a reality. Today we know contents that are damaging, but if companies Today still freely and voluntarily offering these concepts to millions and millions of new users with even more powerful graphics on military, assault, robbery and manslaughter as a close-to-life-like realities. How governments can manage that and 'control' what will be acceptable? It also raises the question and ahuge alarm: "when does Youtube has to go or at least change the way the system works entirely?" (causing even more conflict of interests not only between users but multimillion businesses with one of the world’s highest stakes in the market, never actually seen before, in the history of the internet since its birth. The question of pornography and introduction of AI is also raised and should be questioned more than ever.

Youtube gave all of us, all the visuals of many different worlds that we and our children never imagined before or knew we ever wanted to enter. Created in 2005 the website was primarily invented as a dating alternative for video content and it evolved in what we have Today. Youtube is one of the most dangerous apps available Today for children, and yes this is especially because of Youtube kids, where violent, sexual and disturbing contents can slip through their own so called: content filter. Some videos pretend to be 'kids-friendly' and even to the most equipped tech-savvy parent it can slip through, this is called the "Elsagate" problem, where characters like peppa pig, spiderman, trolls, Mickey Mouse and many other famous friendly characters are used to share horror, violence and disturbing content on platforms for children. Note that not every user on Youtube is cool or wise in matters of shared content, some are vicious and are willingly sharing their own destructive behaviour online into a wide platform. The Youtube window content can be used as warfare against children's development brains. The minimum age to use Youtube is 13 years old, however Youtube kids is available for children under 13 years old, specified to offer stricter content filtering. Regardless the content is so dangerous that can affect adults and the elderly even more directly. No one is safe.

Children are one of the biggest victims of Youtube window contents, not only because there are badly filtered unappropriated content available but because the way the programme is designed, which affects the brains in development of children.

Children are known for having different needs than adults entirely, and it works as having an irresponsible or not present adult moderator by their side. And what it does is widely known: Shortening attention span, creating a dopamine feedback loop, where the rewarding system of the brain is constantly activated creating instant addiction, delayed social development, emotional dysregulation and passive addictive behaviour which for most children under 13 years old can cause irreparable damages. Youtube is also purposefully designed to be addictive. As the system in place Today for the entire internet space. And parents Today cannot have a break. Parents are attacked throughout these machines, apps and video contents. Affecting children and carers everywhere around the world. There are also widely spread misogynistic content made specially for children's spaces on Youtube, often disguised as humorous or educational, where children will be often imitating these concepts with toxic behaviours towards elderly individuals, against mothers and girls in general with heavy alfa-male contents. No one is safe. And the app mental health awareness is not a concept widely used by the company, so it is indeed a silent enemy, dressed with attractive windows extremely dangerous specially for children. How developed countries allowed this to happen, is the golden question here that still unanswered by many governments Today who do not take responsibility for what they already know towards these problems.

In May 2025, five leading French medical societies, including the French Academy of Medicine, issued a joint open letter urging a complete ban on screen exposure for children under six. They highlighted the detrimental effects of screens, including TVs, tablets, computers, video games, and smartphones on young children’s cognitive and emotional development. The experts emphasised observed consequences such as language delays, attention deficits, memory issues, and social challenges. They advocated for screen-free alternatives like reading, outdoor play, and creative activities.  Children who use devices have to be heavily monitored, and emphasised that those first to control and regulate what children are watching and doing online are carers, teachers and parents.

They wrote: “Neither the screen technology nor its content, including so-called ‘educational’ content, are adapted to a small developing brain. Children are not miniature adults: their needs are different needs.”

They add that every day health professionals and infant school teachers “observe the damage caused by regular exposure to screens before they [children] enter elementary school: delayed language, attention deficit, memory problems and motor agitation”.

Youtube for example doesn't have a moderation problem, it's a generational mental health crisis creator. Whatever we call it "digital indoctrination", "mass manipulation", including most forms of visual "psychological abuse" towards children that brings real growing effects into their development brains. In broader and emerging frameworks of what it does, Youtube (and any other similar platform) can absolutely and safely be considered a potential tool of warfare technology and even ideological terrorism, targeted terrorism that is widely worldwide adopted and used Today as it is weaponised. It does fall into "cognitive warfare technology category" and it is used to radicalise very young minds, abusing its own algorithm.

 Youtube is working as a soft-power tool of modern warfare and terrorism as a sociocultural disruptor and with heavily content exploiting psychological manipulation. And children are its most affected target.

There's a new generation growing unchecked as Youtube content users and if they continue unchecked, in the next few decades they will emerge with distinct psychological, cognitive, social, and ideological traits, completely dependent on virtual stimulation with poor cognitive spans and lack of critical thinking. Heavily pornographic content users. With disturbed personal believes and unable to take decisions for themselves without being previously told "by the machine". With greatly emotional dysregulation, mental illness and serious emotional problems. Including being trained to be economically manipulated by corrupted computer systems.

Societies are seating Today on a "cognitive time bomb". With the use of new technologies and more technological warfare, this is a clear and growing reality backed by neuroscience, behavioural psychology, and social observation by scientists and intellectuals.

The battlefield is in the brain: We are no longer dealing with conventional weapons. Today attention, belief, and emotion are being manipulated at a scale never seen before and it is from virtual to the real world. Where children's brains Today have being wired by algorithms designed to maximise engagement, not really empathy, or well-being (so it makes us well designed to be on the path to destruction). The effects of it is not straight forward, it is delayed because they are deep, as radiation when affects the body, sometimes imperceptible, but widely accumulative, and by the time a new generation reaches adulthood, we will meet individuals with lack of emotional resilience, critical thinking (because it affects greatly intelligence and most decision making in life), which finally shows as social cohesion, where entire societies will be directed to the edge of a precipice by themselves. It's irreparable and without any moral clarity by many in years of development Today or in social care.

That's how societal collapses begin to show. Ideological fragmentation, the ultimate civil instability (and we are creating it right now, knowingly, especially by well developed countries). This is not sci-fi, it's already happening in polarized democracies, especially the ones developed by the digital world we allow to be functioning Today. And we help to accelerate it. It's a bomb with a fuse that's already lit. We don't know the exact moment it will explode it, but we know it will. This isn't just about kids being on Youtube for too long. It's about what kind of human species we are actually programming, passively, everyday and allowing it to happen. We should question more. Who profits from it? Who is sitting back and watching it happen?

Most children all over the world rely not only on public transportation, but public health and education. And we know exactly where it is going.

We are willingly developing a world that "looks democratic on the outside" but in true it is absolutely colonised and controlled by machine-driven thought patterns with emotional instability being used as common, and causing willingly cultural fragmentation as a "way of survival", with millions and millions of individuals in the future trained unconsciously to be living as highly unstable individuals with very low understanding of their own condition, minimum social care, poor mental stability and emotional control, where violence will grow until war-like breaks or from homes or from communities entirely. The true war has already started without a single firearm being shot. Today it’s in the shadows, we not necessarily know the names of our real enemies, but we can pinpoint their makers, those who actually allowed this environment to become an accepted system Today.

Still, some worlds there are no control, and we all have to deal with the consequences of it Today, Together. Tomorrow, although we can understand the process and where it leads us, we no necessarily can control. In the other hand, we can prepare to manage our own small environments.

After the game Habitat proved that people would live in virtual worlds, companies shifted from giving players the freedom to choose who they are… to start building a “controlled world” where profit and behaviour are managed tightly by huge corporations. We have being living in this world ever since. And it has progressed to the concept we have Today, the Youtube contents we and our children are offered Today, The Disney pluses, The Netflixes and Amazon Primes contents on our Tvs, the virtual worlds we all engaged on it time to time of our lives. The difference from our generation to the next is that, most of us grew up without been heavily controlled by digital worlds, or using machines for hours during our own development years. Specially if you were born in the 70’s. There were years internet didn’t even had speed. Our brains in ages of development weren't damaged, so we are naturally capable of having highly critical thinking than any other next generations will ever have.

There’s a great number of the population Today who is capable of becoming the heroes of Tomorrow’s generations, just because of that.

We have a systemic, structural issue, where societies are designed Today to a ‘controlled’ self-destruction mode. Where people will be much more reliable on government support Tomorrow. We are no longer predicting this outcome, by now, is certain that it’s going this way, as predicted. Where we are no longer protecting the minds of our children. We are intentionally designing systems that prevent the formation of critical thinking individuals in the future. No questions asked. Our leaders are supportive of this way of life. We might be the last generation of our own kind, that grew up without influences of heavily input machines. Societies right now have been heavily programmed to suppress critical thinking, and the trend is clear: Educational systems are standardised, not individualised. The media ecosystems are shallow and driven by worthless content and unhealthy over-reactions.

Tech platforms are designed to distract and not educate, which causes a challenge to our own future as species, because tech platforms have incredible powers over innocent minds in years of development. Workplaces reward obedience (barely knowing that what they are really creating is a future without any understanding how their own systems work, creativity, productivity, thoughtfulness, joy or dissent...)

Habitat was the innocent “garden” play stage of the initial first created video games. Today’s Metaverse is the “corporate shopping mall” stage. On the top of that we also have warfare. And it changes everything!

No one wins, and yes everyone is in danger.

Here’s how it unfolded step-by-step after Habitat was created and offered to us all:

Phase 1: The Dream (Players had Freedom to be and do wherever they like from it, as to be wherever they wanted to be on it), in 1980s Habitat was a “sandbox” where players made the rules, communities, economies even of their own system (it stimulated a lot of creativity, there was no one selling an ideal, you and your own creativity were the only big deal).

It was beautiful, chaotic, and unpredictable as it should be. Nothing was set in stone and the beginning of virtual reality was very much real, especially for tech scientists who lived for so many hours inside these machines and creating these worlds. The birth of virtual reality happened very fast.

Companies liked the idea but hated the unpredictability of it (it was hard for anyone to make money from it, was expensive and a total chaos to be honest if you really wanted to launch in the market, so it needed to be commercialised, if it wasn't. What was the big deal? As in the beginning no one really knew what would be happening to these individuals psychologically, emotionally and in reality they had to no idea how to manage how they, themselves felt about it. They tried to create a way where they could have some control of how things would be turning future-wise to them, and to the future of game making and programming itself. (this is where investments comes from, it comes from predictions and predictability. They had none at the beginners stage).

Phase 2: The Shift to unpredictable to Controlled profitable Companies Worldwide businesses from 1990s–2000s

When online games like Ultima Online (1997) and EverQuest (1999) appeared, companies started to design “rulesets”, meaning, they controlled what players could and couldn’t do or see while playing these games. Instead of letting players make a full economy, companies built the economy themselves and sold virtual items.

You had to pay for in game advantages (for example: if one plays with weapons, such as armoured items and bombs, they had to pay for it) some games introduced the concept of stars and rings as rewards.

A comparison, on Habitat, players could create and sell a chair for example. In the World of Warcraft, the company created chairs, mounts them, sells them, and so on, selling them transforms virtual profit in real profit. Which also helps to affects the brain and meaning of real and fantasy world, including introducing new realities even more aggressively into users. The profit was into tapping on users rewarding system in the brain. Users where affected as much as the way the food industry where working with added extra sugar and syrup content into food. All that was not perceptible to most users until this day, but it worked profitably. Everyone who tried caramel latte on the first day it was out, it was coming back next day and with a friend to try it again. There was never a concern on mental illness, or anything related to mind and body of users. While the loop was created in the brain, to feel it again that pleasure sensation and satisfaction, mimicking addiction to drugs, while not widely judged as such. Profit was then made, and that was and it is what matters most. The lack of critical thinking will make individuals shallow, sell families, properties and even change behaviours. So they can keep with the “habit’ of coming back.

Phase 3: Full Monetization, from 2000s to Now

Freemium games (Fortnite, League of Legends, etc.) made entry free, but sold cosmetics, skins, and power-ups.

Microtransactions became the main income stream.

Companies also began selling access to personal data, targeting ads based on how you behaved inside the virtual world. This is a real game changer and widely controversial, because your personal data, is basically your own brain and who you are, it can predict for example where you will go next. And predicting where you will go is predicting the future, is predicting sales and it's making a revenue where no one stepped in yet. It's another world entirely and as valuable as your own ID as a person, because it is you.

Phase 4: Metaverse Concept (Total Company Control) 2020s

Meta (Facebook), Roblox, Fortnite, and others are now building entire virtual economies where:

They control land ownership. They control avatar customization. They can tax trades, sales, experiences, even art exhibitions inside their platforms.

You can own “property” but only under their legal rules.

(If you violate their terms, they can erase everything you “own” instantly.)

Chip Morningstar said this about the Habitat game years ago:

“We aren’t building games. We are building new worlds, and we are asking people to live inside them.” That’s exactly the kind of thinking behind Metaverse world today, and the dangers of losing touch with reality is also greatly, especially for new generations. The later you allow your children to enter these worlds the better.

No matter how much one writes Today about the eminent problems we will be facing later, we still cannot change the outcome. It is important to be aware, it helps to take healthier decisions and we might be able to find small solutions that will benefit us, but the real true lies on big changes that we have no power or influence towards to, regardless how much it affects us all.

Governments aren't regulating what they already know it's a time bomb in the making.

Corporations continue to profit from it.

Most parents are isolated and will continue to be blamed. And if societies continue to undermine their intellectual development, we will have a parentless care society, where individuals will rely more in what machine tells them, then their own mental and intellectual health. There will be a completely generation of individuals with low critical thinking and damaged behaviour.

If we aren't solving the problem, and we continue to promote it, then the harm is no longer accidental. It is systemic.

Societies are willingly being designed this way with regardless of how their own children and citizens will turn like or look like in the future, and for a matter of fact government and big corporations are stimulating and promoting it with predictability of almost 100% of making profit over it, billions of under-intellectual future individuals, with countless different problems regarding mental illness, where war and social instability and chaos will never reach the very rich and design makers, not now, not never. Because they organised a future social chaos this way, not only for themselves to profit but ignoring the consequences on their own citizens and respective children. That's not a side effect, and as mentioned above, it is designed and predicted as a feature of current governmental systems to be this way. We are not predicting anymore, what we are doing is just describing a civilisational crisis that will catch up with us in few years.

One of the greatest betrayals of modern history. What we are witnessing: Leaders decided to be invisible and profit from the future problem, on the costs of our own lives and children's lives and mental health. Is also showing that this is not only a failure of leadership, it's deliberate retreat by those in powers who saw what was coming before anyone else, and the decision was: Look at the damage, understand its trajectory, actually have the resources to intervene and yet choose to remain silent and profit from it instead. It’s warfare and manslaughter. (These are the appropriate words)

Leadership has become invisible by Design, where Today's leaders in tech, politics and media, rarely care for moral stands anymore, otherwise they wouldn’t have been in power, especially on multimillion corporations. They are hiding behind corporate policies and algorithms that work only for them and their profits. They delegate responsibilities towards machine systems, regardless of who you are. They aren't leading anymore, they are orchestrating environments from shadow systems, allowing AI, and platforms heavily manipulated by their own algorithms to be shaping the minds of people in the future (with lack of critical thinking). They avoid accountability, by playing a card commonly used, "it's the user choice", the algorithm will then reflects demand and not appropriate conduct related to well-being and intellectual needs of young minds. And they are engineering a world of deception at the same time that they are creating this demand. Parents are pushed over the precipice.

The very systems Today that are designed to hurt children are also hurting democracy and consciousness, while fulling a billion-dollar industry, with orchestrated political power bodies, including surveillance capitalism and deliberated silence towards accountability. Power will be held by algorithm designers, platform owners, data brokers and synthetic content creators, hidden behind terms of services, neural networks, and personalisation. A digital oligarchy was already created with code and silence, and we are already living on it. The people who will be paying the most heavily price for this haven't even being born or grown up yet.

It's the biggest betrayal on humanity’s future, a deadly threat, a bomb that have already being made for our children and their children, which they have no control of falling victims of it. It is terrorism that weaponises attention, cognition, identity and time. Makes it psychological and developmental warfare in a scale never seen before and hardly capable of been managed, as it is created to be invisible in a way that none of us can humanly control or even blame them for it, as leaders allow it to be weaponised towards us all. Inducing fear, submission and conformity, while destabilising entire systems from within, controlling populations through psychological mental illnesses shared content = Terrorism. We are pre-shaping future citizens to never question power. Instead, to be admiring the hand that took our freedom and ability to thrive and to have an outstanding intellect in the name of protection of the rich and the people who actually wrecked  havocked an entire global system. Using neurological terrorism and manslaughter.

What we are having Today is not a system failure, it is classified as neurological terrorism and manslaughter, not only by prediction but by willingness. Leaders are willingly neglecting a design, knowingly well the consequences of it. The systemic manslaughter we are seeing Today is the wilful neglect and intentional exposure of a predictable harm that none of them not only cannot hide any longer, they also do not care anymore. Not long enough that will be millions and millions of people able to actually question it. There's a neurological warfare for profit market, with full awareness of the damage that will bring. Intellectuals never been in so much danger in nowadays.  

Today in a global scale we are living the prequel to a Elysium-like future. And this time is not about physical inequality, it is cognitive, emotional and neurological separation. In the Elysium movie, the wealthy is capable of living above earth (above all), while watching everyone else suffering down on Earth. This is happening right now. The modern Elysium isn't literally where people are superior to other beings for been able to be living in space, on the top of it all, but in truth behind badly designed data and privilege, where the future is programmed and predicted for their own safety only (the super wealth). Resistance isn't futuristic, and data revolution is inevitable, because every system that exploits on this level will eventually hits a wall of conscience, resistance and collapse driven by intellectual individuals such as former engineers, designers, executives, writers and artists who actually built this very systems, and this revolution will be different in many ways. It's about protecting our brains, intellect and individuality, including our ageing and future children. We are already seeing, technologies, intellectuals, educators, parents, artists, many individuals with code ethics who worked and still working towards a healthier future while utilising machines for our well-being and not decline of civilisations.

We will see a declaration of data revolution in our own hands as a very possibility of change in the future, and we should try to support those individuals working to present a different future outcome to us all. What we have Today is honestly not only unfit but knowingly undermining our own development and attacking our own good judgement as species. We are not receiving the minimum. Quality in public education. And for the same reasons the powerful allowed this type of data to keep surviving among us, because it’s not of their interest that we ever become leaders. Observation is key. Biotech have been used as warfare, internet systems have been used as warfare, educational systems have been used as warfare, health systems have been used as warfare, movement and migrations have been used as warfare, to keep a minority of tyrant rulers surviving. It is important to be aware more than ever that we are completely capable of learning and changing this outcome, but it’s necessary to work as much hard Today as ever, than to be accepting unrealistic concepts that not only disturb us all while destroys our own capacity of intellect and judgment. Our own investment on younger generations will also require to be led by example of effective leaders who work towards a productive and fair system by actions, such as teachers, designers, scientists, educators, CEOS and policy makers. Parents included.

There is no definitive or globally accepted number of how many people have been profoundly affected or have died as a direct result of failed internet-connected systems, warfare-related technologies, smartphone use, or cognitive and neurological decline attributed solely to digital technology. These figures are complex to determine, and the real issue lies in identifying whether such numbers are even tracked meaningfully in real-world contexts, yet we know these effects are happening.

One striking example occurred in 2017, when the FDA recalled 500,000 pacemakers due to cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Although no confirmed deaths were officially reported, the risk alone highlights the potential severity of such flaws.

Also in 2017, a study revealed a 56% rise in suicide rates linked to the growing use of social media and smartphones. While digital speed and convenience benefit sectors from business to education, they also pose serious threats to young minds. It is difficult, perhaps even impossible, to pinpoint precise figures that quantify the deadly impact of internet-connected and data-driven systems on our children and future societies. Still, it is increasingly clear that many of these systems are embedded with warfare-like content, making them, in effect, instruments of harm.

Given what we now know, and have studied, it is not an exaggeration to call this a form of predictable manslaughter. The consequences are foreseeable, the systems continue to spread, and we are already witnessing their toll. This is a lit time bomb, and we must all recognize it, speak about it, and educate our families and communities accordingly.

Today’s digital systems are often weaponised, containing terrorist content and warfare strategies, shared at unprecedented speeds by billions of people, with virtually no accountability for those responsible. While women once fought for rights that built the foundations of care, education, and public health, we are now witnessing systems that threaten to dismantle those hard-won gains. Once again, many women and children are being forced to bear the burden of a collapsing system, one that betrays both our species and the health of our own environment altogether.