The 'New World Order'
 
Digital ID Or Digital Prison
Home Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 God's Plan
The New World Order
It's An Evil And Sinister Conspiracy That Involves Very Rich And Powerful People Who Mastermind Events And Control World Affairs Through Governments And Corporations And Are Plotting Mass Population Reduction And The Emergence Of A Totalitarian World Government!   By Using Occult Secret Societies The ILLUMINATI Will Bring All Of The Nations Of This World Together As One.   We'll Have No Recourse But To Submit And Be Under Their Control Utilizing Their Digital Central Bank Currency Or To Reject This Ill-Fated Digital Identification.   The Goal Is UN Agenda 2030!   This Is The Beginning Of The End!

Coronavirus Could Spark GLOBAL DOWNTURN As Chinese Stocks Plummet

Coronavirus could spark GLOBAL DOWNTURN as oil prices plunge to one-year low and Chinese stocks plummet

Empty Shelves
 
THE coronavirus outbreak threatens to spark a global downturn as oil prices hit a one-year low and China’s stock market plummet.

An ongoing lockdown in the country has seen demand for oil fall 20 percent on normal levels, while the Shanghai Composite Index fell almost eight percent on its first day of trading after the Lunar New Year.

It has also left shelves bare as people stockpile food for their families.

The spread of the coronavirus, which was first contracted in mid-December in the eastern Chinese city of Wuhan, has accelerated in recent weeks.

The outbreak has seen travel restrictions put in place across China and the New Year holiday extended by three days to try to halt the spread.

The measures have seen demand for oil drop by approximately three million barrels per day compared to levels usually seen at this time of year.

The fall is thought to be the biggest shock to demand seen by the oil market since the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009, the Straits Times reported.

China is the world’s second biggest economy and its largest importer of oil, meaning the such dramatic changes in demand can have a significant impact on global markets.

Today’s stock market fall was also the biggest in one day for four years, hitting manufacturing, materials, and consumer goods.

By contrast, shares in healthcare providers and insurers rose.

Speaking to CNBC, Byron Wien, vice chairman of Blackstone, one of the largest investment firms in the world, said the outbreak is set to hurt growth in China and around the world.

“Right now, people are very confused about what the outcome of the virus is going to be, what the industrial and market response is going to be,” he said.

“We’re in a maximum level of uncertainty. Markets never respond well to that.”

“Global growth right now is projected to be greater than three percent.

“If this continues, and maybe even if it only continues for another month, you could knock that down below three.”

As part of an attempt to stimulate the economy and prevent a downward spiral, China’s central bank, The People’s Bank of China, has unexpectedly lowered interest rates.


Empty Streets and Shops

'We Can't Stop': Funeral Worker Says Wuhan Cremating Bodies 24/7


'We can't stop': Funeral worker says Wuhan cremating ‘at least 100’ bodies a day amid coronavirus outbreak

A crematorium worker in Wuhan, China, confirmed that officials are working at an alarming pace to burn the bodies of the deceased in the city amid the coronavirus outbreak.

"We need to pick up bodies when they call us. Every day, we need at least 100 body bags," a crematorium worker named Mr. Yun told the Epoch Times. “We can’t stop because we can’t leave the bodies outside for a long time."

Wuhan officials were accused of cremating the dead in secret last week, and Mr. Yun claimed the rumors are true as China adopts "draconian measures" to treat the outbreak.

Dramatic videos from Wuhan posted to social media apps this week show scenes of sorrow and panic as medical officials and police allegedly chase infected people through the streets and force patients, against their will, into ambulances headed to the hospitals. Other videos show officials spraying what is believed to be disinfectant spray from cement trucks onto deserted streets.

China has turned sports halls and exhibition centers in Wuhan into 11 temporary hospitals to treat the epidemic that has killed almost 500 people — although figures from the Chinese government have been contested by Western outlets.

Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton has called for a travel ban to China and noted that the "only biosafety level four super laboratory that works with the world's most deadly pathogens" is located in Wuhan.

Three airplanes have returned U.S. citizens from China in the past week, and one of the children aboard the first flight is being monitored for coronavirus after developing a fever.






And:

China orders families of coronavirus victims to cremate them and keep funerals low-key to stop the virus spreading



Chinese ministry said funerals should be held in 'simple and expeditious manner'

Officials told families to 'avoid gatherings of people' to contain the deadly virus


More than 360 people have already died, all but one of them in mainland China 


The figure is now higher than the number who died in mainland China during the 2002-03 SARS crisis.

However, there have also been claims that hasty cremations are minimising the death toll - meaning the true scale of the outbreak could be worse.

The civil affairs ministry said that staff handling funerals should wear protective gear and carry out temperature checks to avoid risking infection.

The ministry has also urged couples to delay their weddings in order to prevent large gatherings. China has ordered families of coronavirus victims to cremate their relatives at low-key funerals to stop the further spread of the virus.

Beijing's civil affairs ministry says funerals should be held in a 'simple and expeditious manner to avoid gatherings of people'.

The country's National Health Commission said bodies should be 'cremated close by and immediately', state-run media said.

The bodies must not be buried or moved away from the area where the person died, authorities say.

Yesterday, February 2, had been a popular day for wedding bookings because of the palindromic date - 02/02/2020.

Officials in Hubei province announced on Saturday that they would suspend all marriage registrations until further notice from today.

China has introduced drastic travel restrictions and pushed back the end of the Lunar New Year break - when hundreds of millions of people travel across the country to visit their families - in a bid to contain the virus.

The holiday - originally scheduled to end last Friday - was extended by three days to give authorities more time to deal with the crisis.

But some major cities including Shanghai have extended the holiday again, and many schools and universities delayed the start of new terms.

Officials have also urged factories to delay their return to work and the public has been asked to avoid large crowds.

More than 50 million people in Hubei province, where the virus was first detected, are effectively locked down after authorities severed transport links.

A growing list of foreign countries and airlines have also halted or reduced travel links with China.

The US, Australia, New Zealand and Israel have banned foreign nationals from visiting if they have been in China recently, and they have also warned their own citizens against travelling there.

Russia has halted most of its air and rail traffic with China, shut down its land border with China and Mongolia and temporarily stopped issuing work visas to Chinese citizens.

Authorities said today that Russia was suspending the last operating train that connects Moscow and Beijing. 

Mass. State Police Test Out Boston Dynamics’ Spot The Robot Dog



Cops have long had dogs, and robots, to help them do their jobs. And now, they have a robot dog.

Massachusetts State Police is the first law enforcement agency in the country to use Boston Dynamics' dog-like robot, called Spot. While the use of robotic technology is not new for state police, the temporary acquisition of Spot — a customizable robot some have called “terrifying” — is raising questions from civil rights advocates about how much oversight there should be over police robotics programs.

The state’s bomb squad had Spot on loan from the Waltham-based Boston Dynamics for three months starting in August until November, according to records obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and reviewed by WBUR.

The documents do not reveal a lot of details on the robot dog’s exact use, but a state police spokesman said Spot, like the department’s other robots, was used as a “mobile remote observation device” to provide troopers with images of suspicious devices or potentially hazardous locations, like where an armed suspect might be hiding.

“Robot technology is a valuable tool for law enforcement because of its ability to provide situational awareness of potentially dangerous environments,” state police spokesman David Procopio wrote.



State police say Spot was used in two incidents, in addition to testing.

Boston Dynamics vice president for business development Michael Perry said the company wants Spot to have lots of different uses, in industries ranging from oil and gas companies, to construction, to entertainment. He envisions police sending Spot into areas that are too hazardous for a human — a chemical spill, or near a suspected bomb, or into a hostage situation.

“Right now, our primary interest is sending the robot into situations where you want to collect information in an environment where it's too dangerous to send a person, but not actually physically interacting with the space,” Perry said.

Spot is a “general purpose” robot, with an open API. That means customers — whether a police department or warehouse operator — can customize Spot with its own software. (State police say they didn't use this feature.) It has a 360-degree, low-light camera, and an arm.

For all of its potential, Boston Dynamics doesn’t want Spot weaponized. Perry said the lease agreements have a clause requiring the robot not be used in a way that would “physically harm or intimidate people.”

“Part of our early evaluation process with customers is making sure that we're on the same page for the usage of the robot,” he said. “So upfront, we're very clear with our customers that we don't want the robot being used in a way that can physically harm somebody.”

That’s one of the reasons why the company is opting for lease agreements, rather than a sale, Perry said. Boston Dynamics wants to be selective in which companies get access to Spot — and have the ability to take the equipment back if the lease is violated.

Worries About Weaponized Robots

Through Procopio, state police said the department never weaponized any of its robots, including Spot.

But while Spot and other tactical robots aren’t designed to kill, they still can. In 2016, Dallas Police sent a bomb disposal robot armed with explosives to kill a sniper who had shot at police officers and killed five. Experts said it was the first time a non-military robot had been used to intentionally kill a person.

That deadly potential, and lack of transparency about the state police’s overall robotics program, worries Kade Crockford, director of the technology for liberty program at the ACLU of Massachusetts.

Crockford said they want to see a policy from state police about its use of robotics and a conversation about how and when robots should be used. State police didn’t say whether there’s a current policy about the use of robots, and the ACLU’s records request to the agency didn’t turn one up.


“We just really don't know enough about how the state police are using this,” Crockford said. “And the technology that can be used in concert with a robotic system like this is almost limitless in terms of what kinds of surveillance and potentially even weaponization operations may be allowed.”

“We just really don't know enough about how the state police are using this." Kade Crockford

Beyond an agency policy, the ACLU is urging state and local lawmakers to enact laws or regulations at the state level to govern how increasingly advanced robots can be used. Nothing like that exists in Massachusetts now.

“We really need some law and some regulation to establish a floor of protection to ensure that these systems can't be misused or abused in the government's hands,” Crockford said. “And no, a terms of service agreement is just insufficient.”

Others, like Ryan Calo, a professor at the University of Washington School of Law who specializes in robotics and cyberlaw, agree that police agencies like state police need to put more thought into how robots are used and publicize that plan. They’re not equipment people are familiar with, like a car.

“There’s enough of a visceral reaction to the use of robotics that the smart thing to do is come up with a policy,” he said. “How is this going to be used? And compare the actual use to the stated policy. And they can weigh whether those uses are appropriate.”

Thor Eells, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association and a former SWAT commander in Colorado, reiterated that, in most cases, robots are used in critical incidents — barricaded suspects, hostage situations or active assailants — not routine surveillance.

“Normally, when these types of tools are being deployed, it's pretty risky operation,” he said.

Eells said he recognizes the need for more information about how these robots are used and the concern about how they might infringe on people’s privacy or civil liberties. But he contended that police have to reach the same legal bar for, say, sending a robot into someone’s house. They would need a warrant.

“Normally, when these types of tools are being deployed, it's pretty risky operation.” Thor Eells

“Those protections still exist,” he said. “They're not something that can be circumnavigated by the utilization of robotics. Law enforcement still has a responsibility to ensure that they're used legally as deemed so by the courts.”

Sometimes, though, technology used by police outpaces the law — like GPS tracking. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled police couldn't place a GPS tracking device on a suspect's car without a warrant. The court ruled again for privacy in 2015, declaring that police must get a search warrant to access someone's cellphone location information.

Eells believes there’s a way to balance the community’s right to know about police tools used by law enforcement, and any necessary secrecy about specific tactics.


The Future Of Robotic Law Enforcement Is Already Here

Other than Spot, state police has a permanent fleet of robots. As of 2017, the bomb squad had 18 robotic platforms worth $1.8 million that are used on a weekly basis, according to police records. Most of those are tracked robots, not a legged robot like Spot.

But there’s something different about Spot. Calo, the professor, acknowledged there’s not a big operational difference between the robot dog and something like a more typically robot-looking PackBot. But, he said, Spot feels different. He pointed to a statement animal-rights group PETA put out, saying that it’s not cruel to kick Spot, because it’s not a real dog.

Robots and police departments are no strangers. In this photo, a member of the Cambridge police bomb squad used a robot during a search for the Boston Marathon bombings suspect in 2013. 

Robots in general fall in an area between machine and person, Calo said, even for robots like Spot, that are remote-controlled.

“There’s a social valiance of robots that affects our perceptions of them, and these are particularly evocative robots,” he said.

And there’s something about Spot that even excited state police troopers.

In one email in June, a lieutenant on the special tactical operations team wrote to a colleague, “Dude, it’s time,” with a link to a New York Post article headlined, “Boston Dynamics’ creepy dog-like robot is about to go on sale.”

In a different email in May, other troopers shared a YouTube video of Spot dancing to Bruno Mars and navigating a construction site.

A few months later, the troopers were behind the remote, using Spot in the field.



Boston Dynamics' Spot Mini Is A Clever Robotic Canine


Boston dynamics’ redesigns the ‘spot mini’ quadrapedal robot and now it certainly has a few canine qualities. the masachussettes-based engineering company unveiled its first iteration of the giraffe-like robot in june 2016, that moved and looked like a cartoon character. the new model is more refined and has a smooth animal-like motion that could be mistaken as the real thing.


The latest evolution of boston dynamics’ ‘spot mini’quadrapedal robot replaces the giraffe-like claw/head with a headless design and bright, yellow plastic. the robotic dog has a softer and more compact design, which combined with a face-style sensor system where its face was originally, creates a machine that could become a new robot pal, or a guard dog that can fend off unwelcomed guests — particularly as it stops, crouches and stares straight down the camera lens.

The Eerily Lifelike Robot Dog 'Spot' Is Now Working With The Police



The array of robots from Boston Dynamics often appear in sometimes silly videos that the company publishes on YouTube.

Like most of Boston Dynamics' robots, the company's dog-like robots — Spot and Spot Mini — are in ongoing development, but commercial sales via lease agreements have begun.

The Spot robot is already being used by the Massachusetts State Police. The Massachusetts State Police borrowed a Spot robot from Boston Dynamics for several months in 2019, and it was used by police in two unnamed "incidents."

It seemed like only a matter of time before the sometimes silly, sometimes terrifying robots from Boston Dynamics made their way into police work. That time has come, apparently: The Massachusetts State Police employed the dog-like Spot from Boston Dynamics from August until early November, Boston public radio station WBUR reported on Monday.

So, what was the Massachusetts State Police doing with a robot dog?  The loan agreement between Boston Dynamics and Massachusetts State Police explains it's being used, "For the purpose of evaluating the robot's capabilities in law enforcement applications, particularly remote inspection of potentially dangerous environments which may contain suspects and ordinances.

Videos of Spot in action depict the dog-like robot opening doors and performing surveillance — it was used by the Bomb Squad and only the Bomb Squad, according to the lease agreement.

Though Spot was loaned to the Massachusetts State Police for testing, a representative told WBUR that Spot was deployed in two "incidents" without specifying details.

Both Boston Dynamics and the Massachusetts State Police say that the agreement didn't allow robots to physically harm or threaten anyone.

"Part of our early evaluation process with customers is making sure that we're on the same page for the usage of the robot," Boston Dynamics VP of business development Michael Perry told WBUR. "So upfront, we're very clear with our customers that we don't want the robot being used in a way that can physically harm somebody."

State police spokesman David Procopio echoed that sentiment. "Robot technology is a valuable tool for law enforcement because of its ability to provide situational awareness of potentially dangerous environments."

Moreover, that's how Boston Dynamics is handling the first commercial sales of Spot.

"As a part of our lease agreement, for people who enter our early adopter program, we have a clause that says you cannot use a robot in a way that physically harms or intimidates people," Perry told Business Insider in a phone call on Monday afternoon.

Those sales have already begun through the company's "Early Adopter Program," which offers leases to customers with certain requirements. If a customer violates that agreement, Boston Dynamics can terminate the relationship and reclaim its robot — it also allows the company to repair and replace the Spot robots it sells.

Perry said the Massachusetts State Police is the only law enforcement or military organization that Boston Dynamics is working with currently.



Boston Dynamics' Spot Mini Is A Clever Robotic Canine


Boston dynamics’ redesigns the ‘spot mini’ quadrapedal robot and now it certainly has a few canine qualities. the masachussettes-based engineering company unveiled its first iteration of the giraffe-like robot in june 2016, that moved and looked like a cartoon character. the new model is more refined and has a smooth animal-like motion that could be mistaken as the real thing.


The latest evolution of boston dynamics’ ‘spot mini’quadrapedal robot replaces the giraffe-like claw/head with a headless design and bright, yellow plastic. the robotic dog has a softer and more compact design, which combined with a face-style sensor system where its face was originally, creates a machine that could become a new robot pal, or a guard dog that can fend off unwelcomed guests — particularly as it stops, crouches and stares straight down the camera lens.

Boston Dynamics’ Spot Is Leaving The Laboratory



A new leasing program is putting dozens of robots to work in the real world

Boston Dynamics is letting its first major robot out of the lab.

Since June, the company has been talking about a public release for its Spot robot (formerly SpotMini), and today, it finally gave some details about what’s in store. The Spot isn’t going on sale exactly, but if you’re a company with a good idea (and some money), you’ll be able to get one. That also means, for the average person on the street, that the odds of seeing a Spot in the wild just got a lot better.

The capabilities are more or less what the company showed off in June, but it’s still impressive to see them in person. The Spot can go where you tell it, avoid obstacles, and keep its balance under extreme circumstances — which are all crucial skills if you’re trying to navigate an unknown environment.

The Spot can also carry up to four hardware modules on its back, giving companies a way to swap in whatever skills the robot needs for this particular job. If it’s checking for gas leaks, you can build in a methane detector. If you need connectivity over longer distances, you can attach a mesh radio module. Boston Dynamics is already outfitting units with LIDAR rigs from Velodyne (a favorite component for self-driving car projects) to create 3D maps of indoor spaces. Since the Spot is designed to work in the rain, outdoor spaces are on the table, too.

There are also the Spot’s dance moves, which usually come programmed into an offboard computing module. You might think the “Uptown Funk” routine was just PR, but entertainment is shaping up to be one of the biggest markets for the Spot. Boston Dynamics is already working with the innovation lab at Cirque du Soleil to see what it might be like to use the Spot onstage.

During our tests, we were instructed to stay two meters away from the Spot to keep from being pinched by its joints. We also gave it a wide berth when it was climbing stairs to make sure no one would be hurt if it lost its balance and fell. Both measures seemed to be more about Boston Dynamics being careful rather than the Spot being hazardous, but it’s a reminder that the robot simply wasn’t designed to interact with humans. For now, Boston Dynamics is focusing on uses in closed and controlled spaces, so it’s unlikely you’ll see a Spot wandering around your local mall anytime soon.

The company was also quick to say that it’s not interested in using the Spot as a weapon, despite the company’s military origins. “Fundamentally, we don’t want to see Spot doing anything that harms people, even in a simulated way,” says Michael Perry, VP of business development at Boston Dynamics. “That’s something we’re pretty firm on when we talk to customers.” (Boston Dynamics is still marketing to police departments, but it says the Spot would be limited to disposing of bombs and other hazardous materials, along the lines of existing police robots.)

The Spot is still a long way from anything like full autonomy, despite the impression you might get from the videos. One popular demo from last year shows the Spot opening a door by carefully turning the handle, pulling back the door, and propping it open with one leg to keep it from closing as the robot passed through. Some of the robotics researchers I talked to were fascinated by this demo: did it mean that the Spot could recognize doors, find handles and open them in the wild? Asked to navigate a path, would the Spot recognize which obstacles were walls and which were doors to be opened?

The real answer turns out to be simpler. The video shows the Spot’s “handle” protocol, which the controller initiates by navigating the claw toward the door and identifying the handle. Actually opening the door requires deft navigation of the physical forces involved, bracing the Spot’s body in a way that’s nearly impossible for a human operator to replicate — but it’s all athletic intelligence, not interpretive intelligence. The Spot isn’t in the business of recognizing doors or responding to cues from the physical world. In fact, the Spot’s model of the world around it is pretty shallow, consisting mostly of obstacles, footholds, and preprogrammed routes.

That’s the opposite of what many academic roboticists focus on, and Henny Admoni, who works on Human-Robot interaction at Carnegie Mellon University, told me it was an understandable but tricky trade-off. “Boston Dynamics has always been strong in mechanics and controls, like being able to shift the robot’s weight properly,” Admoni told me. “But robots operating in human environments won’t really have the option of avoiding humans. Integrating Human-Robot Interaction skills into development at an early stage is probably going to lead to greater success than trying to retrofit human interaction into existing systems.”

That’s not the path Boston Dynamics has taken, and the Spot’s interactions with human beings remain a major question mark for the project’s future. For now, the company is hoping that there’s enough work to do in human-free spaces.

Still, there’s a lot the Spot can do that simply wasn’t possible before, and it’s easy to see why Boston Dynamics is excited. The last 20 years have seen huge advances in automation, but it’s still largely confined to the digital world. If the platform takes off, the Spot could offer a new way for computer programs to interact with the physical world, a power that could have an enormous impact on technology and society at large. We’re still at the beginning of that process, but teaching a robot how to walk could turn out to be the most important step.











Atlas The Humanoid Robot Is Doing Gymnastics


The Internet gawks each time Boston Dynamics releases a new video showing its eye-catching humanoid robot, Atlas, performing newly acquired acrobatic tricks.

But until now, most of the machine’s maneuvering — whether it was jogging, hopping over a log or executing box jumps — has remained well within the realm of average human athleticism.

Not anymore.

If the tech company’s recently uploaded video is any indication, Atlas has, in a matter of months, graduated from middle-school gym class to something approaching a professional athlete. In the 38-second video, the sturdy, battery-powered machine — standing 4 foot 9 inches and weighing 176 pounds — unleashes an exceedingly nimble routine (using its legs, arms and torso) with a degree of gracefulness that you’d expect from a human being with years of training.

“We created the maneuvers using new techniques that streamline the development process,” Boston Dynamics wrote in the video’s description. “First, an optimization algorithm transforms high-level descriptions of each maneuver into dynamically-feasible reference motions. Then Atlas tracks the motions using a model predictive controller that smoothly blends from one maneuver to the next.”

Despite that smoothness, the robot isn’t perfect, according to its handlers.

“Using this approach, we developed the routine significantly faster than previous Atlas routines, with a performance success rate of about 80%,” the description adds.

Within hours of being posted online, the latest Atlas video had racked up nearly 1.5 million views and thousands of comments, many of them suggesting the robot’s newfound athleticism was evidence that mankind’s reign over machines is nearing its expiration date.

“So we just going to keep acting like we never seen Terminator?” one commenter wrote.



“Absolutely amazing!” added another. “I can smell the future where robots are roaming in the streets with us!”

In recent years, Boston Dynamics has become known for two things: creating robots whose movements mimic humans and animals with a degree of accuracy that many find surprising, if not unnerving. And then, without warning, posting cryptic videos of those robots online, where they quickly go viral, capturing some mixture of excitement and terror about the rapid rise of autonomous machines.

Boston Dynamics was purchased by Japan’s Softbank from Alphabet in 2017. In recent years, it has produced four-legged robots — with names like Spot, Wildcat and BigDog — that can open doors, carry heavy loads and run nearly 20 miles per hour, but its most recognizable product appears to be Atlas, the humanoid athlete that Boston Dynamics labels, “the world’s most dynamic humanoid robot.”

Guided by lidar — a sensor that uses a pulsed laser sensor to measure the distance between objects — and stereo vision, the compact robot is able to haul nearly 25 pounds. Boston Dynamics says Atlas can also manipulate objects in its environment, traverse rough terrain, keep its balance when pushed and get back up when tipped over.

As recently as three years ago, Atlas was recorded awkwardly tramping through the snow at a slow speed, its mechanical body lacking any of the fluidity and agility that it displays now.

Curiosity about Atlas gained momentum last year when Boston Dynamics posted a 34-second clip on YouTube showing the formerly halting robot going for a casual and smooth-looking jog in a grassy residential area. The video, which captured the distinct photocopier-like sound created by the robot’s movements, seemed to catch many viewers by surprise, including the Daily Mail, which covered Atlas’s physical feat at the time.

“If you thought you’d be able to run away from the terrifying new breed of robots,” the paper wrote, “bad news.”


Boston Dynamics - Robotics


Mass. State Police Test Out Boston Dynamics’ Spot The Robot Dog


Cops have long had dogs, and robots, to help them do their jobs. And now, they have a robot dog.

Massachusetts State Police is the first law enforcement agency in the country to use Boston Dynamics' dog-like robot, called Spot. While the use of robotic technology is not new for state police, the temporary acquisition of Spot — a customizable robot some have called “terrifying” — is raising questions from civil rights advocates about how much oversight there should be over police robotics programs.

The state’s bomb squad had Spot on loan from the Waltham-based Boston Dynamics for three months starting in August until November, according to records obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and reviewed by WBUR.

The documents do not reveal a lot of details on the robot dog’s exact use, but a state police spokesman said Spot, like the department’s other robots, was used as a “mobile remote observation device” to provide troopers with images of suspicious devices or potentially hazardous locations, like where an armed suspect might be hiding.

“Robot technology is a valuable tool for law enforcement because of its ability to provide situational awareness of potentially dangerous environments,” state police spokesman David Procopio wrote.



State police say Spot was used in two incidents, in addition to testing.

Boston Dynamics vice president for business development Michael Perry said the company wants Spot to have lots of different uses, in industries ranging from oil and gas companies, to construction, to entertainment. He envisions police sending Spot into areas that are too hazardous for a human — a chemical spill, or near a suspected bomb, or into a hostage situation.

“Right now, our primary interest is sending the robot into situations where you want to collect information in an environment where it's too dangerous to send a person, but not actually physically interacting with the space,” Perry said.

Spot is a “general purpose” robot, with an open API. That means customers — whether a police department or warehouse operator — can customize Spot with its own software. (State police say they didn't use this feature.) It has a 360-degree, low-light camera, and an arm.

For all of its potential, Boston Dynamics doesn’t want Spot weaponized. Perry said the lease agreements have a clause requiring the robot not be used in a way that would “physically harm or intimidate people.”

“Part of our early evaluation process with customers is making sure that we're on the same page for the usage of the robot,” he said. “So upfront, we're very clear with our customers that we don't want the robot being used in a way that can physically harm somebody.”

That’s one of the reasons why the company is opting for lease agreements, rather than a sale, Perry said. Boston Dynamics wants to be selective in which companies get access to Spot — and have the ability to take the equipment back if the lease is violated.

Worries About Weaponized Robots

Through Procopio, state police said the department never weaponized any of its robots, including Spot.

But while Spot and other tactical robots aren’t designed to kill, they still can. In 2016, Dallas Police sent a bomb disposal robot armed with explosives to kill a sniper who had shot at police officers and killed five. Experts said it was the first time a non-military robot had been used to intentionally kill a person.

That deadly potential, and lack of transparency about the state police’s overall robotics program, worries Kade Crockford, director of the technology for liberty program at the ACLU of Massachusetts.

Crockford said they want to see a policy from state police about its use of robotics and a conversation about how and when robots should be used. State police didn’t say whether there’s a current policy about the use of robots, and the ACLU’s records request to the agency didn’t turn one up.


“We just really don't know enough about how the state police are using this,” Crockford said. “And the technology that can be used in concert with a robotic system like this is almost limitless in terms of what kinds of surveillance and potentially even weaponization operations may be allowed.”

“We just really don't know enough about how the state police are using this." Kade Crockford

Beyond an agency policy, the ACLU is urging state and local lawmakers to enact laws or regulations at the state level to govern how increasingly advanced robots can be used. Nothing like that exists in Massachusetts now.

“We really need some law and some regulation to establish a floor of protection to ensure that these systems can't be misused or abused in the government's hands,” Crockford said. “And no, a terms of service agreement is just insufficient.”

Others, like Ryan Calo, a professor at the University of Washington School of Law who specializes in robotics and cyberlaw, agree that police agencies like state police need to put more thought into how robots are used and publicize that plan. They’re not equipment people are familiar with, like a car.

“There’s enough of a visceral reaction to the use of robotics that the smart thing to do is come up with a policy,” he said. “How is this going to be used? And compare the actual use to the stated policy. And they can weigh whether those uses are appropriate.”

Thor Eells, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association and a former SWAT commander in Colorado, reiterated that, in most cases, robots are used in critical incidents — barricaded suspects, hostage situations or active assailants — not routine surveillance.

“Normally, when these types of tools are being deployed, it's pretty risky operation,” he said.

Eells said he recognizes the need for more information about how these robots are used and the concern about how they might infringe on people’s privacy or civil liberties. But he contended that police have to reach the same legal bar for, say, sending a robot into someone’s house. They would need a warrant.

“Normally, when these types of tools are being deployed, it's pretty risky operation.” Thor Eells

“Those protections still exist,” he said. “They're not something that can be circumnavigated by the utilization of robotics. Law enforcement still has a responsibility to ensure that they're used legally as deemed so by the courts.”

Sometimes, though, technology used by police outpaces the law — like GPS tracking. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled police couldn't place a GPS tracking device on a suspect's car without a warrant. The court ruled again for privacy in 2015, declaring that police must get a search warrant to access someone's cellphone location information.

Eells believes there’s a way to balance the community’s right to know about police tools used by law enforcement, and any necessary secrecy about specific tactics.


The Future Of Robotic Law Enforcement Is Already Here

Other than Spot, state police has a permanent fleet of robots. As of 2017, the bomb squad had 18 robotic platforms worth $1.8 million that are used on a weekly basis, according to police records. Most of those are tracked robots, not a legged robot like Spot.

But there’s something different about Spot. Calo, the professor, acknowledged there’s not a big operational difference between the robot dog and something like a more typically robot-looking PackBot. But, he said, Spot feels different. He pointed to a statement animal-rights group PETA put out, saying that it’s not cruel to kick Spot, because it’s not a real dog.

Robots and police departments are no strangers. In this photo, a member of the Cambridge police bomb squad used a robot during a search for the Boston Marathon bombings suspect in 2013. 

Robots in general fall in an area between machine and person, Calo said, even for robots like Spot, that are remote-controlled.

“There’s a social valiance of robots that affects our perceptions of them, and these are particularly evocative robots,” he said.

And there’s something about Spot that even excited state police troopers.

In one email in June, a lieutenant on the special tactical operations team wrote to a colleague, “Dude, it’s time,” with a link to a New York Post article headlined, “Boston Dynamics’ creepy dog-like robot is about to go on sale.”

In a different email in May, other troopers shared a YouTube video of Spot dancing to Bruno Mars and navigating a construction site.

A few months later, the troopers were behind the remote, using Spot in the field.



Boston Dynamics' Spot Mini Is A Clever Robotic Canine


Boston dynamics’ redesigns the ‘spot mini’ quadrapedal robot and now it certainly has a few canine qualities. the masachussettes-based engineering company unveiled its first iteration of the giraffe-like robot in june 2016, that moved and looked like a cartoon character. the new model is more refined and has a smooth animal-like motion that could be mistaken as the real thing.


The latest evolution of boston dynamics’ ‘spot mini’quadrapedal robot replaces the giraffe-like claw/head with a headless design and bright, yellow plastic. the robotic dog has a softer and more compact design, which combined with a face-style sensor system where its face was originally, creates a machine that could become a new robot pal, or a guard dog that can fend off unwelcomed guests — particularly as it stops, crouches and stares straight down the camera lens.




Atlas The Humanoid Robot Is Doing Gymnastics


The Internet gawks each time Boston Dynamics releases a new video showing its eye-catching humanoid robot, Atlas, performing newly acquired acrobatic tricks.

But until now, most of the machine’s maneuvering — whether it was jogging, hopping over a log or executing box jumps — has remained well within the realm of average human athleticism.

Not anymore.

If the tech company’s recently uploaded video is any indication, Atlas has, in a matter of months, graduated from middle-school gym class to something approaching a professional athlete. In the 38-second video, the sturdy, battery-powered machine — standing 4 foot 9 inches and weighing 176 pounds — unleashes an exceedingly nimble routine (using its legs, arms and torso) with a degree of gracefulness that you’d expect from a human being with years of training.

“We created the maneuvers using new techniques that streamline the development process,” Boston Dynamics wrote in the video’s description. “First, an optimization algorithm transforms high-level descriptions of each maneuver into dynamically-feasible reference motions. Then Atlas tracks the motions using a model predictive controller that smoothly blends from one maneuver to the next.”

Despite that smoothness, the robot isn’t perfect, according to its handlers.

“Using this approach, we developed the routine significantly faster than previous Atlas routines, with a performance success rate of about 80%,” the description adds.

Within hours of being posted online, the latest Atlas video had racked up nearly 1.5 million views and thousands of comments, many of them suggesting the robot’s newfound athleticism was evidence that mankind’s reign over machines is nearing its expiration date.

“So we just going to keep acting like we never seen Terminator?” one commenter wrote.



“Absolutely amazing!” added another. “I can smell the future where robots are roaming in the streets with us!”

In recent years, Boston Dynamics has become known for two things: creating robots whose movements mimic humans and animals with a degree of accuracy that many find surprising, if not unnerving. And then, without warning, posting cryptic videos of those robots online, where they quickly go viral, capturing some mixture of excitement and terror about the rapid rise of autonomous machines.

Boston Dynamics was purchased by Japan’s Softbank from Alphabet in 2017. In recent years, it has produced four-legged robots — with names like Spot, Wildcat and BigDog — that can open doors, carry heavy loads and run nearly 20 miles per hour, but its most recognizable product appears to be Atlas, the humanoid athlete that Boston Dynamics labels, “the world’s most dynamic humanoid robot.”

Guided by lidar — a sensor that uses a pulsed laser sensor to measure the distance between objects — and stereo vision, the compact robot is able to haul nearly 25 pounds. Boston Dynamics says Atlas can also manipulate objects in its environment, traverse rough terrain, keep its balance when pushed and get back up when tipped over.

As recently as three years ago, Atlas was recorded awkwardly tramping through the snow at a slow speed, its mechanical body lacking any of the fluidity and agility that it displays now.

Curiosity about Atlas gained momentum last year when Boston Dynamics posted a 34-second clip on YouTube showing the formerly halting robot going for a casual and smooth-looking jog in a grassy residential area. The video, which captured the distinct photocopier-like sound created by the robot’s movements, seemed to catch many viewers by surprise, including the Daily Mail, which covered Atlas’s physical feat at the time.

“If you thought you’d be able to run away from the terrifying new breed of robots,” the paper wrote, “bad news.”


16 Reasons Why You Should Be Concerned About 5G Network


5G Danger 1

Wireless carriers companies are installing millions of 5G cell towers all over the world. People are concerned about the health effects of 5G radiation. Having a poll with 5G antenna very close to the house does not sound good. This cell towers are being installed close to people houses.


5G Danger 2

The government is claiming 5G is perfectly safe. And we know how many times government lied to us. At the same time, the military is using almost the same frequency in biological non lethal weapon called Active Denial System, with Frequency  95 GHZ. This weapon is used to disperse protesters, troublemakers, prisoners and used in war. It makes people panic, shock, disperse and run away from intense heat it causes in human body. 5G range is from 24 GHz to 90 GHz. Imagine that. I would never trust the government.

5G Danger 3

International Association Of Firefighters claims that firefighters complain of various health problems after the 5G towers were placed on the top of their fire stations. Dr. Gunnar Heuser claims that this is a direct effect of being close to 5G cell towers. Firefighters complained of being weak. They had no energy, they felt confused and had memory problems after the 5G antennas were placed on the top of the fire stations. Dr. Heuser claims he saw abnormal brain functions in firefighters when he examined them. Some firefighters claim that all their symptoms disappeared after they moved to another firefighters station without the 5G tower on the roof.


5G Danger 4

The wireless companies will have the courage to install dangerous cell towers very close to where we live. The 5G antenna could be placed just across the street from your home, or outside your window. First they started to install smart meters, which have a hundred times stronger EMF emissions than a regular cell phone. Now they’re planning to install 5G towers in close proximity to our homes. In fact they already installed and turned on 5G antennas in Geneve Switzerland and people there experience some serious side effects of 5G radiation.


5G Danger 5

They haven’t done any proper studies to prove that 5G is not dangerous. And still, they try to force us to have these cancer towers near our homes.


5G Danger 6

There are no proper regulations regarding 5G network and where these towers can be placed.

5G Danger 7

FDA still claims that mobile phone emissions are perfectly safe. They think the same about 5G radiation. The World Health Organization international agency for research on Cancer has classified mobile phones to be possibly carcinogenic to humans. And still FDA does not care.The government does not care. If the speed of the wireless network is more important than our health than this is very concerning. Can we rely on FDA and other government agencies? We have been lied before, remember the days when doctors claimed that cigarettes are perfectly safe. Just remember the days when they even had the audacity to claim that pesticides were harmless. Apparently, the government lies to us again.


5G Danger 8

There are currently 200,000 4G cell towers all over the United States. They plan to install millions of new 5G cell towers all over the USA and inside the residential areas.


5G Danger 9

Psychological effects of 5G wireless network. This study from National Institutes of Health https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3042390/ confirmed that wireless technology causes adverse psychological effects on people. The study proved that exposure to wireless emissions caused sleep disturbance, stress and even depression. Presumably, 5G will have even stronger effects on our psychological well-being.


5G Danger 10

The launch of new Internet-enabled devices. More and more devices will support 5G network. We will be bathed in high-frequency fields in our houses. Every fridge, home appliance will emit wireless radiation, and 5G network will allow this to happen because of its speed and better connections. More cars will use 5G technology in the future. That is another concern. We will not be able to get away from 5G emissions anymore.


5G Danger 11

National toxicology program showed that there is a correlation between wireless technology and cancer in rats. And still, the government ignores studies like this. The study showed that rats were infested with new kind of rare brain and heart tumors after being exposed to wireless radiation every day.


5G Danger 12

The 5G waves are shorter than 4G waves. The 5G waves don’t travel as far that is why we need more 5G antennas to transmit the signal to end-users.


5G Danger 13

You will not be able to move away from these 5G antennas. Currently, when you see a 4G antenna, you’re able to move away, move to another location. 4G antennas can be placed far away from residential areas. But the 5G antennas will be placed inside the residential areas.


5G Danger 14

There is going to be a new study on 5G health effects in humans done in New Zealand. My prediction is that the results of this study will show how dangerous wireless technology is on humans, especially 5G network and still nothing will be done to prevent the spread of 5G network http://tne.massey.ac.nz/


5G Danger 15

2011 study done by International Agency For Research On Cancer IARC showed the increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. Radiofrequency radiation was classified as Group 2B, a possible human carcinogen. In 2014 World Health Organization released a statement that non-terminal biological effects from radiofrequency radiation have no adverse health effects on humans. But five of six members of World Health Organization core group that released the statement are affiliated with International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), an industry loyal NGO, and thus have a serious conflict of interest. Apparently, World Health Organization is trying to hide the truth from us. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504984/


5G Danger 16

Adverse effects of 5G radiation on human skin. Peter Kälin, president of the Basel-based Doctors for Environmental Protection group claims that 5G uses much shorter waves, which will be completely absorbed by our skin. Peter Kälin says, “The human skin is already exposed to the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation. 5G could present an extra cancer risk”.

FRIGHTENING FREQUENCIES: THE DANGERS OF 5G


As the old saying goes, give us an inch and inevitably we’ll want a mile. And certainly, this sentiment is true with technology.

Who doesn’t want faster, bigger (or smaller), more efficient? Take wireless mobile telecommunications. Our current broadband cellular network platform, 4G (or fourth generation), allows us to transmit data faster than 3G and everything that preceded. We can access information faster now than ever before in history. What more could we want? Oh, yes, transmission speeds powerful enough to accommodate the (rather horrifying) so-called Internet of Things. Which brings us to 5G.

Until now, mobile broadband networks have been designed to meet the needs of people. But 5G has been created with machines’ needs in mind, offering low-latency, high-efficiency data transfer. It achieves this by breaking data down into smaller packages, allowing for faster transmission times. Whereas 4G has a fifty-millisecond delay, 5G data transfer will offer a mere one-millisecond delay–we humans won’t notice the difference, but it will permit machines to achieve near-seamless communication. Which in itself  may open a whole Pandora’s box of trouble for us – and our planet.

More bandwidth – more dangers of 5G


Let’s start with some basic background on 5G technology. Faster processing speeds require more bandwidth, yet our current frequency bandwidths are quickly becoming saturated. The idea behind 5G is to use untapped bandwidth of the extremely high-frequency millimeter wave (MMW), between 30GHz and 300GHz, in addition to some lower and mid-range frequencies.

High-frequency MMWs travel a short distance. Furthermore, they don’t travel well through buildings and tend to be absorbed by rain and plants, leading to signal interference. Thus, the necessary infrastructure would require many smaller, barely noticeable cell towers situated closer together, with more input and output ports than there are on the much larger, easier to see 4G towers. This would likely result in wireless antennas every few feet, on every lamp post and utility pole in your neighbourhood.

Here are some numbers to put the dangers of 5G into perspective: as of 2015, there were 308,000 wireless antennas on cell towers and buildings. That’s double the 2002 number. Yet 5G would require exponentially more, smaller ones, placed much closer together, with each emitting bursts of radiofrequency radiation (RFR)–granted, at levels much lower than that of today’s 4G cell towers–that will be much harder to avoid because these towers will be ubiquitous. If we could see the RFR, it would look like a smog that’s everywhere, all the time.

Serious health concerns


First, it’s important to know that in 2011, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RFR as a potential 2B carcinogen and specified that the use of mobile phones could lead to specific forms of brain tumors.

Many studies have associated low-level RFR exposure with a litany of health effects, including:

DNA single and double-strand breaks (which leads to cancer)


oxidative damage (which leads to tissue deterioration and premature ageing)
disruption of cell metabolism


increased blood-brain barrier permeability

melatonin reduction (leading to insomnia and increasing cancer risks)


disruption of brain glucose metabolism


generation of stress proteins (leading to myriad diseases)


As mentioned, the new 5G technology utilizes higher-frequency MMW bands, which give off the same dose of radiation as airport scanners. The effects of this radiation on public health have yet to undergo the rigours of long-term testing. Adoption of 5G will mean more signals carrying more energy through the high-frequency spectrum, with more transmitters located closer to people’s homes and workplaces–basically a lot more (and more potent) RFR flying around us. It’s no wonder that apprehension exists over potential risks, to both human and environmental health.

Perhaps the strongest concern involves adverse effects of MMWs on human skin. This letter to the Federal Communications Commission, from Dr Yael Stein of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, outlines the main points. Over ninety percent of microwave radiation is absorbed by the epidermis and dermis layers, so human skin basically acts as an absorbing sponge for microwave radiation. Disquieting as this may sound, it’s generally considered acceptable so long as the violating wavelengths are greater than the skin layer’s dimensions. But MMW’s violate this condition.

Furthermore, the sweat ducts in the skin’s upper layer act like helical antennas, which are specialized antennas constructed specifically to respond to electromagnetic fields. With millions of sweat ducts, and 5G’s increased RFR needs, it stands to reason that our bodies will become far more conductive to this radiation. The full ramifications of this fact are presently unclear, especially for more vulnerable members of the public (e.g., babies, pregnant women, the elderly), but this technology

What’s more, MMWs may cause our pain receptors to flare up in recognition of the waves as damaging stimuli. Consider that the US Department of Defense already uses a crowd-dispersal method called the Active Denial System, in which MMWs are directed at crowds to make their skin feel like it’s burning, and also has the ability to basically microwave populations to death from afar with this technology if they choose to do so. And the telecommunications industry wants to fill our atmosphere with MMWs?

5G harms animals, most of all


Unfortunately, innocent animals have already been the victims of testing to see MMW’s effects on living cells. Extrapolating the results from animal testing to humans isn’t straightforward, but the results nonetheless raise some serious red flags. Perhaps most significantly, a US National Toxicology Program study noted that male rats exposed to RFR for nine hours a day over two years developed rare forms of tumours in the brain and heart, and rats of both sexes developed DNA damage.

The researchers noted that the increased risk to the rats was relatively small; but if these findings translate to humans, the widespread increase in cellphone use could have a significant impact on populations. Thus the NTP study served to renew the debate about the potential harmful effects of cellphones on human health. Not only that, it caused a significant shift in the American Cancer Society’s understanding of radiation and cancer, and sparked them to state that our ignorance of RFR’s impact on human health could be compared to our previous obliviousness to the connection between smoking and lung cancer.

Other animal research worldwide illustrates how microwave radiation in general and MMW’s in particular can damage the eyes and immune system, cell growth rate, even bacterial resistance. An experiment at the Medical Research Institute of Kanazawa Medical University showed that 60GHz millimeter-wave antennas produce thermal injuries in rabbit eyes, with thermal effects reaching below the eye’s surface.

This study, meanwhile, suggests low-level MMW’s caused lens opacity–a precursor to cataracts–in rats’ eyes. A Chinese study demonstrated that eight hours’ of microwave radiation damaged rabbits’ lens epithelial cells. A Pakistani study concluded that exposure to mobile phone EMF prevented chicken embryo retinal cells from properly differentiating.

This Russian study revealed that exposing healthy mice to low-intensity, extremely high-frequency electromagnetic radiation severely compromised their immune systems. And a 2016 Armenian study concluded that low-intensity MMW’s not only depressed the growth of E. coli and other bacteria, but also changed certain properties and activity levels of the cells. The same Armenian study noted that MMW interaction with bacteria could lead to antibiotic resistance – distressing news, considering immunity to bacteria is already compromised due to the overuse of antibiotics.

Finally, one other study I’m aware of says that various animal studies show a significant effect of microwaves in the 5G frequency range on mammals, avian species, and insect pollinators such as honey bees. There also appears to be a negative impact on plant life in the vicinity of cellphone towers to the point where there are notable decreases in fruit and other crop yields.

Again, if these findings translate to humans, our rampant cellphone use would likely cause profound, adverse health effects; an increase in MMW’s as more bandwidth is introduced could further complicate the matter.

But what’s also important to note here is that the danger of 5G technology can not only have a profound impact on human health, but on the health of all living organisms it touches, including plants, as we shall see in more detail, below.

The dangers of 5G extends to the planet, too


Equally disturbing, 5G technology puts environmental health at risk in a number of ways. First, MMWs may pose a serious threat to plant health. This 2010 study showed that the leaves of aspen seedlings exposed to RFR exhibited symptoms of necrosis, while another Armenian study suggested low-intensity MMW’s cause “peroxidase isoenzyme spectrum changes”–basically a stress response that damages cells–in wheat shoots. Plant irradiation is bad news for the planet’s flora, but it’s bad news for us, too: it could contaminate our food supply.

Second, the 5G infrastructure would pose a threat to our planet’s atmosphere. Network implementation will require the deployment of many, short-lifespan satellites via suborbital rockets propelled by hydrocarbon rocket engines. According to this 2010 California study, launching too many of these babies will vomit enough black carbon into the atmosphere to pollute global atmospheric conditions, affecting distribution of ozone and temperature. Worse, solid-state rocket exhaust contains chlorine, an ozone-destroying chemical. How can any government seriously concerned about climate change allow for this?

Third, 5G will potentially threaten natural ecosystems. According to several reports over the last two decades–some of which are summarized here–low-level, non-ionizing microwave radiation affects bird and bee health. It drives birds from their nests and causes plume deterioration, locomotion problems, reduced survivorship and death. And bee populations suffer from reduced egg-laying abilities of queen bees and smaller colony sizes. More evidence of ecosystem disruption comes from this 2012 meta-study, which indicates that 593 of 919 research studies suggest that RFR adversely affects plants, animals and humans.

It bears repeating: 5G is bad news for all living creatures and the planet we share.

Beware the propaganda deluge


Despite being fully aware of all these unsettling results, threats and concerns, the US corporatocracy continues to maintain a gung-ho attitude about 5G. The Mobile Now Act was passed in 2016, and many US states have since gone ahead with 5G plans. The telecom industry’s biggest players have basically co-opted government powers to enforce their 5G agenda, with companies like AT&T and Qualcomm having begun live testing. And despite research showing serious threats to humans and the planet, the FCC Chairman announced intentions to open low-, mid- and high-frequency spectrums, without even mentioning a single word about the dangers.

They’re going to sell this to us as ‘faster browsing speeds’ – but the truth is, you’ll barely even notice the difference. They’re going to call anyone who protests against 5G a ‘Luddite’ or ‘technophobe’. But why such a willingness to embrace another new technology   – even though it carries serious risks and brings spurious benefits? Why not heed the lessons learned from killer products like asbestos, tobacco and leaded gasoline?

Because a tiny percentage of people will gain an awful lot of money, is one reason. And because companies and governments will be given unprecedented amounts of power over civilians is the other.

All isn’t doom and gloom, though. At least one US politician is maintaining some level-headedness: in October, California Governor Jerry Brown stopped legislation that would have allowed the telecom industry to inundate the state with mini-towers. Brown’s bold actions have permitted localities a say in where and how many cell towers are placed.

The state of Hawaii has stopped 5G and smart meters by collectively threatening to charge every person who installed such meters with liability for any health problems residents may suffer. Moreover, 180 scientists have started a petition to warn of the dangers of 5G, especially its potential health effects. Maybe these actions will afford more time for additional studies and data collection. Just as importantly, maybe they’ll cause other politicians and figureheads to reflect on what they’ve been pushing for.

Take action


In the meantime, we as individuals must do everything we can to protect ourselves against the dangers of 5G. Here’s what you can do:

Understand EMFs and their behaviours. Unfortunately, most commercial radiation detectors can only check for 4G and 3G, though.


Plant trees. Tons of trees. Trees block 5G signals.


Protect yourself with an EMF Shield to mark and protect you from hotspots. Try a patented product that neutralizes the harmful effects of mobile phones and other EMF emitting devices on humans.


Whenever possible, limit your exposure: use an anti-radiation headset or speaker mode while talking on a cellphone.


Learn more. This network has tons of great information and ideas on how to protect yourself.
Just refuse to use 5G phones and devices. Full stop. And discourage those you know from doing so.


Refuse to buy anything ‘smart’ – ‘smart’ appliances, ‘smart’ heaters, etc.


Some believe that carrying shungite crystals can offer some protection from radiation – not too sure about this one, though it can’t hurt, I suppose.


No matter what, do NOT get a smart meter – these put high levels of 5G radiation right in your home


Join the growing numbers of dissenters against the dangers of 5G. Get active with them here.
Do as the Hawaiians have done and threaten smart meter and 5G tech installers with liability and class action lawsuits. You can learn how to do that here.


Spread the word! Please share this article with everyone you know, Print out these posters, below and slip them into people’s mailboxes. Post them on street lights.