Category Archives: Transhuman News

Americans regard advances in artificial intelligence and human enhancement technologies with a degree of caution and uncertainty.

Anew Pew Research Center reportlooks in depth at three of the growing number of AI applications: the use of facial recognition by police, the use of computer algorithms by social media companies to find false information on their sites and a future with driverless passenger vehicles. It also explores three developments tied to the convergence of AI, biotechnology, nanotechnology and other fields that raise the possibility of dramatic changes to human abilities in the future: computer chip implants in the brain to advance peoples cognitive skills, gene editing to greatly reduce a babys risk of developing serious diseases or health conditions, and robotic exoskeletons with a built-in AI system to greatly increase strength for lifting in manual labor jobs.

Americans wariness about this wide arc of emergent developments runs through many of the surveys findings. This wariness often centers on concerns about whether people would retain control of their lives, possible unanticipated impacts as these technologies become widely available, and uneasiness about how far these advances might go in changing fundamental human traits and social realities. Some remain uncertain of where they stand on these developments, and about half or more see restrictions on their use that would make them more acceptable.

The survey of 10,260 U.S. adults was conducted between Nov. 1 and 7, 2021. Here are five key themes that run through peoples answers on these questions.

Far more Americans anticipate positive than negative effects from the widespread use of facial recognition technology by police to monitor crowds and look for people who may have committed a crime: 46% think this would be a good idea for society, while 27% think this would be a bad idea and another 27% are unsure. By narrower margins, more describe the use of computer algorithms by social media companies to find false information on their sites as a good rather than a bad idea for society (38% to 31%).

One of the factors tied to Americans largely cautious take on these new and emerging developments stems from doubt that these potential human enhancements would make life better than it is now or that reliance on AI would improve on human judgment or performance. On these questions, less than half of the public is convinced improvements would result. For example, 32% of Americans think that robotic exoskeletons with built-in AI systems to increase strength for manual labor would generally lead to improved working conditions, while 36% think their use would not make much difference and 31% say they would make working conditions worse.

Another concern for Americans is tied to the potential impact of these emerging technologies on social equity. For instance, 57% of Americans say the widespread use of brain chips for enhanced cognitive function would increase the gap between higher- and lower-income Americans, while just 10% say it would decrease the gap. There are similar patterns in views about the widespread use of driverless cars and gene editing for babies to greatly reduce the risk of serious disease during their lifetime.

Views are also tied to peoples sense of how these technologies would be used and who might benefit or be harmed by their rollout. About two-thirds (66%) of Americans think the widespread use of facial recognition technology by the police would lead them to monitor surveillance of Black and Hispanic neighborhoods much more often than other neighborhoods.

The public largely agrees when it comes to standards for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of technologies still in development. Across the four of these technologies in the survey, large majorities support the idea that higher standards should be applied, rather than the standards that are currently the norm. About nine-in-ten Americans (87%) say that higher standards for testing driverless cars should be in place, rather than using existing standards for passenger cars. And 83% believe the testing of brain chip implants should meet a higher standard than is currently in use to test medical devices.

There are sharp partisan divisions when people think about possible government regulation of these new and developing technologies. Americans are often closely divided in their views of government regulation of these six scientific and technological developments. For example, when it comes to regulating the use of facial recognition technology by police, 47% of Americans say their greater concern is that government regulation will go too far, while 51% instead say their greater concern is that government will not go far enough.

Across all six technologies the survey explored, a majority of Republicans and independents who lean to the Republican Party say they are more concerned about government overreach, while a majority of Democrats and Democratic leaners worry more that there will be too little oversight.

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say their greater concern is that the government will go too far regulating of the use of facial recognition by police (59% vs. 36%). Conversely, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say their concern is that government regulation will not go far enough.

People are relatively open to the idea that a variety of actors in addition to the federal government should have a role in setting the standards for how these technologies should be regulated. Across all six applications, majorities believe that federal government agencies, the creators of the different AI systems and human enhancement technologies and end users should play at least a minor role in setting standards.

One element of public caution in thinking about these six developments is the desire to retain human control over these new and emerging possibilities. Some of the mitigating steps we explored related to the issue of human autonomy. For instance, seven-in-ten Americans say they would find driverless cars more acceptable if there was a requirement that such cars were labeled as driverless so they could be easily identified on the road, and 57% would find driverless cars more acceptable if a licensed driver was required to be in the vehicle.

Similarly, about six-in-ten Americans think the use of computer chip implants in the brain would be more acceptable if people could turn on and off the effects, and 53% would find the brain implants more acceptable if the computer chips could be put in place without surgery.

About half or more also see ways that advances would be more acceptable to them when it comes to the use of robotic exoskeletons, facial recognition technology by police and gene editing in babies to greatly reduce the risk of serious disease during their lifetime.

Note: Here arethe questions usedfor this report, along with responses, andits methodology.

Cary Funk is director of science and society research at Pew Research Center. Find Cary on Twitter @surveyfunk

Lee Rainie is director of internet and technology research at Pew Research Center. Find Lee on Twitter @lrainie

A version of this article was originally posted at Pew Research and is reposted here with permission. Find Pew Research on Twitter @pewresearch

Read more from the original source:
PEW and transhumanism: Public has mixed concerns about arriving era of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and human enhancement - Genetic Literacy Project

Its too bad that the title Bodies Bodies Bodies is already taken (by an upcoming horror film), because it would be a great name for David Cronenbergs new film, Crimes of the Future, which premiered here at the Cannes Film Festival on Monday. Cronenbergs first film in eight years is about body obsession, imagining a time maybe decades (or more?) from now when humanity eagerly melds with the synthetic.

In some ways, Crimes of the Future is an eco-horror, an imagining of where our species might be headed now that there have been microscopic bits of plastic found teeming in nearly all of us. Cronenberg envisions a world in which people have begun mutating, producing new internal organs for as yet unknown purposes. While their use is sussed out, their existence has become a cult-like fascination, creating a new genre of performance art.

Viggo Mortensen plays just such an artist: Saul, a weather-beaten man whose body is working overdrive inventing new parts. These developments may be killing him. Or maybe its the constant surgeries, performed as public shows by his partner, Caprice (La Seydoux). These peculiar acts have caught the attention of culture vultures and of a government organization that tags new organs, as a way to delineate between regular anatomical matter and the ominous other stuff.

Theres a mystery at work in the film, gruesomely involving a murdered child. Saul and Caprice become ensnared in that bit of intrigue while continuing to explore what I suppose you could call their craft. The film is rather opaque in its plotting, forcing a viewer to lean forward, squinting to gain an understanding of just what is going on in these dank operating theaters and junkyard hangouts.

Crimes of the Future is more style piece than narrative story, a jumble of ideas and images that have been swirling in Cronenbergs singular mind for years now and are finally manifest and sallow. It may prove tricky for some to get on the films eerie-weird wavelength, though lifelong Cronenberg fans will no doubt be happy to see him mucking about in the gooey and grotesque after some time spent in the more polished realms of crime (A History of Violence, Eastern Promises) and celebrity satire (Maps to the Stars). Crimes of the Future is undeniably a Cronenberg film, with its mecha-organic contraptions that look like bones (a la eXistenZ) and the faintest of wry smiles curling up at the pictures edges.

As he has done before, Cronenberg makes great use of Mortensen, who plays Saul with a disarming warmth that stands in pleasant contrast to the broader films chilly murk. Mortensen has vital chemistry with Seydoux. Together they create a recognizably human dynamic amid so much otherworldly strangeness and unease. That the people in Crimes of the Futureincluding Kristen Stewart, as a perhaps overly invested government organ trackerare very much people, not unlike those wed meet in our reality, gives the film a crucial grounding. With these sturdy anchors in place, Cronenberg can stretch his film toward the various gonzo directions of his singular interest.

Much early hay has been made about the body-horror aspect of Cronenbergs film, buzzed about as a film that would send Cannes audiences running for the exits to escape its gory onslaught. Take it from a squeamish person that much of that chatter has been overblown. There are some gnarly things in the movieparticularly a bit of mouth play on an open wound (of a sort) that will dreadfully linger in my head for some timebut for the most part, Cronenbergs approach to these surgical oddities is clinical enough to prevent true revulsion.

Really, the most unsettling image in the film is Saul struggling to eat breakfast while he sits in a rattling, yanking kind of chair made of synthetic bone (I think), meant to stabilize or stimulate (Im really not sure I parsed that one) his body for ideal food consumption. Its quite frightening to think of a quotidian task made so strange and difficult by both failing personal health and technological advancement.

Though, is any of this actually advancement? Cronenberg is coy about whether what hes showing us is meant to startle us into action to prevent such a future, or if there is a cold comfort in its inevitability. Maybe the film is saying we should just sit back and await the surreal wonder of our own mechanical breakfast chairs. Or maybe hes making a sort of doomsday prophecy.

More here:
David Cronenberg Gets Back to Basics in Crimes of the Future - Vanity Fair

Trapped in her dreams, in the half-lit purgatory of insomnia, neither awake nor sleeping, an anonymous young woman wanders through the half-world of the in-between, touching mysterious plants, and embracing the astral entities she encounters a swan, long black lines of unraveled thread, a huge wolf. She is dark-haired, beautiful, and naked. We never see her face. This is the landscape of folk tales, where magic and reality meet, where nothing is what it seems and everything is meaningful. These are the supernatural workings of Mandy Cao, a painter of unsettling and seductive psychological power.

Mandy Cao,My Sheer Dream

Cao was born in China and immigrated to Los Angeles, California, to join her mother who had come to America two years before. She was fourteen years old. When I first came here it was really difficult for me, she says, I enjoy how chill L.A. is, and how nice and welcoming people are, but I dont feel like I belong to anywhere. I guess I belong here I have family here, and now I have kids here. I still think Im Chinese, but when I go back to China, they think Im American. I dont hate that feeling, I take it and enjoy it. I think thats what makes me different from other artists. I definitely show it in my paintings Im living in a world as I want it to be, as I like it. After high school she attended the renowned Art Center College of Design in Pasadena, California, and soon learned from her professors that she must develop her own style if she was to succeed in the world of galleries and shows and deals. Feeling lost, she decided to paint her feelings of uncertainty, of wandering unsure of her direction in an unfamiliar world. She liked living in the United States, but felt like a stranger in a strange land. Her uncertainty became her style, her cheerful alienation became her message.

Mandy Cao, Time in Desolation

Although her wandering woman drifts through a strange landscape, she is unthreatened even a monstrous wolf is a protecting entity in her red riding reverie. When detached and spectral hollow hands touch her shoulders, they seem to offer reassurance rather than any haunted threat, and the mysterious fauna she finds is benignly and beautifully mutated. Its all like daydreaming, Cao muses, its the way I look at the world. I look at stuff, the things in the world and I dont think its real. I paint out what I think it should be, from the direction I look at it. I love the world. She gathers a perfect white swan into her arms, in a cold land, confined on a tiny ice-cold island of bleached white. It rests its head against her shoulder, safe and secure. Twiggy coral-orange plants grow through a white and grey ground as soft as ashes and snow. The swan is an elegant symbol for love, Cao maintains.

Visit link:
Painting on Another Plane: Mandy Cao - MutualArt.com

Is it just me, or does it feel like someone out there is using Orwells work, not as a warning, but as an owners manual? GBNews host Neil Oliver asked in a May 7, 2022 monologue. He summarized a scene from George Orwells book, Animal Farm, in which the farm animals discover that the pigs are taking all the apples and milk for themselves.

When their selfish behavior is revealed, the pigs defend it saying it has been scientifically proven that pigs alone require milk and apples for good health. Theres nothing self-serving about their taking all the apples and milk for themselves. Many of us dont even like apples.

This term, science has been repeatedly thrown in our faces and shoved down our throats over the past two years, while unfairly and irrationally separating the superiors from the plebs. Science has been used to strip us of medical rights and personal freedoms.

Now, science is touted as the justification for not eating real beef and getting used to insects, grubs and lab-grown protein alternatives instead. Science is also being weaponized to cajole us into accepting rolling blackouts and energy deprivation.

Energy giant E.On recently sent pairs of polyester socks to customers with the message, Energy down. CO2 down. Those literally in control of the power are telling people to wear more clothes to fend off the cold rather than have heating in their homes, Oliver said.

In Orwells dystopian novel 1984, we find both a Ministry of Plenty and a Ministry of Truth. Both names are the opposite of their true function. The Ministry of Plentys job is to maintain a consistent level of poverty while publishing fabricated production numbers for items that were never actually made, and the task of the Ministry of Truth is to memory-hole inconvenient facts and rewrite history daily to fit the political narrative.

In the U.S., the Biden administration has been telling us the economy is good, the GDP is strong1 and inflation is transitory,2 even though data clearly tell a different story. The first quarter of 2022 actually had a negative growth rate,3 consumer debt soared $52 billion in March,4 and inflation over the past year has been the fastest in four decades,5 with no end in sight.

Biden has even insisted that borrowing (read: printing) more money will reduce prices while not affecting the value of the dollar. To quote The Hill contributor Chris Talgo,6 That is called, to borrow a Biden-ism, malarkey, because when the government prints or borrows trillions of dollars, the value of the dollar declines, and prices rise. That is called inflation. Its basic economics, but even that is being redefined at whim.

As if that werent Orwellian enough, at the end of April 2022, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security created an actual ministry of truth, the Disinformation Governance Board, in blatant violation of the First Amendment (free speech).

The DHS is basically pretending as though the Constitution doesnt exist anymore, yet no one can recall it being formally abolished. It should still be there the supreme law of the land. But government is acting as though its been memory-holed, and no doubt hope youll just go along with it. Its nothing short of insane-making, and perhaps thats the intention.

Its very reminiscent of gaslighting,7 a form of emotional manipulation and abuse where the abuser creates a false narrative and step by step makes the victim question their sanity. Rewriting history is a key hallmark, as is refuting what is obvious fact. Silly examples might be commenting on your black shirt when the shirt youre wearing is white, or insist you arrived an hour late when clearly, you were right on time, judging by every clock in the house.

While the victim may wonder if theyre losing their mind, its actually the people who do the gaslighting who typically have a mental health disorder. They tend to be pathological liars with strong narcissistic tendencies.

To protect yourself, psychologists recommend you get some distance from the perpetrator, save all evidence (so you can confirm the facts when you get unsure), and set firm boundaries for what you will tolerate and what you wont. Lastly, you need to sever the relationship something to keep in mind.

In his monologue, Oliver laments the poor turnout in the local elections, noting that most people are simply worn out by the abuse. Exhausted by the lies. Fatigued beyond care by the hypocrisy. Let this be a lesson to Americans do not fall into apathy.

The answer is to replace the abusive leadership by voting in record-setting numbers. Get more involved, not less. You could volunteer as a poll worker, for example. Its true, were being hit with phenomenally powerful psychological warfare, but remaining focused on the truth and refusing to get side tracked is your best defense.

Aldous Huxley was a contemporary and mentor of Orwell. In the 1958 interview above, Huxley discussed a series of essays hed written called Enemies of Freedom. The series outlines impersonal forces that are pushing in the direction of progressively less freedom, and technological devices that can be used to accelerate the process by imposing ever greater control of the population.

With the advent of television, Huxley foresaw how an authoritarian leadership could become a source of a one-pointed drumming of a single idea, effectively brainwashing the public. Beyond that, he predicted the technological capability to bypass the rational side of man and manipulate behavior by influencing people on a subconscious level. This is precisely what were faced with today.

Huxley pointed out that as technology becomes more complex, it becomes increasingly necessary to form more elaborate hierarchal organizations to manage it all. Technology also allows for more effective propaganda machines that can be managed through those same control hierarchies.

Huxley cited the success of Hitler, noting that aside from Hitlers effective use of terror and brute force, he also used a very efficient form of propaganda. He had the radio, which he used to the fullest extent, and was able to impose his will on an immense mass of people.

With the advent of television, Huxley foresaw how an authoritarian leadership could become a source of a one-pointed drumming of a single idea, effectively brainwashing the public. Beyond that, he predicted the technological capability to bypass the rational side of man and manipulate behavior by influencing people on a subconscious level. This is precisely what were faced with today.

Google and Facebook have both been collecting data on you for nearly two decades. They have created massive server farms that are capable of analyzing this data with deep learning and artificial intelligence software to mine information and generate incredibly precise details on just what type of propaganda and narrative is required to surreptitiously manipulate your beliefs and behavior.

Huxley argued that to create the dystopian future presented in his books, you would have to centralize wealth, power and control, which is precisely what the technocratic and transhumanist-inspired globalist cabal have been doing. Their control grid is nearly complete.

One of the final nails in our collective coffin will be the rollout of a global digital identity system, as this will give them more or less total control over every human being on the planet. The World Health Organization is working on one. The European Union just announced the rollout of digital ID, and the U.K. government is drawing up legislation to make digital ID services more secure.8

While sold as the ultimate in speed and convenience, digital ID poses one of the gravest risks to human rights of any technology that we have encountered. The Expose warns:9

Ultimately, social credit systems, such as those that are currently being developed in China, will be based on digital ID, thereby enabling or disabling our full and free participation in society.

By developing facial recognition and AI and machine learning technologies in parallel with systems for a Digital ID, we are not simply establishing an identity to access basic social services. Digital IDs will become necessary to function in a connected digital world

Digital ID systems, as they are being developed today, are ripe for exploitation and abuse, to the detriment of our freedoms and democracies. You may be thinking that this would never happen in the West and it is only unique to China. But they already enforced it here without you realizing it, through COVID-19 Vaccine Passports.

Mandatory COVID passports have almost nothing to do with public health and everything to do with social control. Why? Because the COVID-19 injections do not prevent infection or transmission Vaccine Passports make absolutely zero sense from a Public Health perspective. But they make perfect sense for enforcing a Digital ID and Social Credit system

Youll have to use your Digital ID to buy certain things, be granted access to places, and most probably to even access the mainstream internet. But, if you havent done what the Government has decided makes you a good citizen, and kept up a good social credit score, you wont be able to do any of those things.

Once Digital IDs have been normalized, they will be one of the greatest tools that Governments have ever had in their arsenal to both control and manipulate the public and remain in power, thanks to the huge amount of personal data they will generate.

If centralization is the prerequisite for Huxleys dystopia, then decentralization is the way to protect against it. Today, the wisdom of this is on full display. I believe decentralization of the internet will be required to prevent censorship and manipulation in the future.

This means that websites and platforms are not stored in one central place that can easily be controlled and manipulated but, rather, widely distributed to thousands, if not millions, of computers all over the world. Because there is no central storage it cant be removed.

Decentralized platforms allow the majority of power to reside with the individual. Technologies that can be easily misused to control the public narrative must also remain largely decentralized, so that no one person or agency ends up with too much power to manipulate and influence the public. Our modern-day social media monopolies are a perfect example of what Huxley warned us about.

The same goes for our food system and our economic institutions too. Today, we can see how the role of the central bank (in the U.S. known as the Federal Reserve) a privately-owned entity with the power to break entire countries apart for profit is forcing us toward a new global economic system that will impoverish and quite literally enslave everyone, with the exception of the cabal members themselves.

Like the ruling pigs in Animal Farm, they may insist theyre building back better and working toward a fairer and more equitable society, but if they get their way, they will be the only ones dining on apples and milk in the farmhouse, while the rest of us own nothing and subsist on rationed grubs.

Read original article here

See original here:
Have Authoritarians Used 1984 as a Handbook? - Verve Times

This article was previously published July 6, 2019, and has been updated with new information.

Have you ever wanted to grow your own food but didnt know where to start? Access to fresh, healthy food is a human right, and one of the best ways to exercise that right is to grow your own food. You dont have to be a farmer or have a background in agriculture. You dont even have to own your own land.

The industrialization of our chemical-dependent food system has caused problems that are nearly insurmountable, including soil degradation, water pollution, loss of biodiversity, a decline in public health and climate change. But food production doesnt have to be globalized, industrialized or even monetized.

Thats the message environmental activist and humanitarian Rob Greenfield wants to convey in a new project in which he aims to grow and forage 100% of his own food for one year. The challenge is featured in a two-part film produced by Peter Kanaris of GreenDreamsFL titled, Growing & Foraging 100% of His Food WITHOUT LAND OF HIS OWN: 1-Year Challenge w/ Rob Greenfield.

The film, set in Orlando, Florida, shows Greenfield 138 days into his yearlong project of growing and foraging all of his own food, and some of his own medicine, too. The best part? Greenfield doesnt own any land. Hes growing food in six privately owned yards and a handful of other spots that total less than 4,000 square feet of space.

Greenfield did not go to school for horticulture, either. And, he doesnt have any experience in agriculture. He does possess a certificate in permaculture, but says it never taught him how to actually plant anything. For instance, he had to learn how much sun is needed to grow carrots, how much water kale requires and what time of year is best to plant certain plants.

Despite his lack of experience, he learned how to successfully grow a variety of food and herbs including green onions, carrots, beets, celery, spinach, kale, cabbage, tomatoes, garlic, cilantro and dill. Remarkably, in less than one year (about 10 months), Greenfield was able to grow 100% of his own food.

But it gets better. Hes growing so much food that his project doubles as a community garden, where locals can sample fresh, locally grown produce, and leave feeling inspired to try and grow some of their own.

At least thats my hope, says Greenfield in the film. I took on the challenge to not just feed myself, but to inspire others to try and do the same. That could mean planting your first tomato plant, starting an herb garden on your apartment balcony or turning your front or backyard into a full-on garden. Growing your own food is something we all can do.

In an effort to conserve water, Greenfield uses a drip irrigation system that delivers water directly to the roots of plants. Drip irrigation is one of the most efficient watering systems, as it can reduce water usage by 30% to 70%. Greenfield says he could grow the food without a drip irrigation system, but with all of the different gardens hes growing, it would add up to 10 hours more per week of labor on top of the 40 to 60 hours he already spends tending to his gardens.

In addition to his gardens, Greenfield also helped plant more than 200 community fruit trees in Orlando, including cherry, peach, mulberry, avocado and loquat trees. The trees are marked with a sign that says: I am a community fruit tree. Please enjoy my fruit. The community trees act as a reminder that food can be available outside of the grocery store.

The film shows Greenfield munching on fresh mulberries from one of the community fruit trees he helped plant. Food is a gateway to getting people to rethink everything, says Greenfield, adding:

The idea is to try and get food grown freely all around us. A lot of people when they see food thats growing free, thats nutritious and delicious, for the first time, and they realize that it doesnt have to come from the grocery store, that can be a pretty revolutionary moment.

Im super passionate about growing food. But the passion is equally as much about inspiring people not just to grow their own food, but to look at the world in a different way, to start to see the world as something to work with, rather than against, in all facets of life: our food, our water, our energy, our waste and our transportation.

Just every way we deal with the Earth. I think food is one of the greatest gateways because we eat food three times a day, and some of us, more like 10 times a day. Its our connection to our community. Its our fun. Its our social life. For a lot of us, we eat to live and we live to eat. So, if you can get people really thinking about their food, I think you can get people thinking about their entire lives.

Theres no doubt that Greenfield is an inspiration to us all. Hes a force to be reckoned with when it comes to raising awareness about some of the most pressing social and environmental issues of our time, including food waste, plastic pollution, climate change, corporatism and homelessness, just to name a few.1

With more than half a million likes on Facebook and nearly 100,000 YouTube subscribers (some of his videos have views numbering in the millions), Greenfield has captured the attention of audiences worldwide.

His motto Live simple and you will live free summarizes his belief that happiness is not derived from money and possessions, but rather comes from the meaningful connections we make with others, and having a profound appreciation and respect for our planets natural resources and the life that exists within it.

Greenfield isnt just passionate about growing his own food and showing others they can do the same. Hes also dedicated to creating awareness about food waste and food insecurity.

Americans discard an estimated 34 million tons of food every year thats like tossing a quarter of your groceries into the trash. The food waste problem is not limited to Americas home kitchens, but also occurs in restaurants, grocery stores and on farms.

Through his campaign The Food Waste Fiasco,2 Greenfield created awareness around food waste by diving into thousands of dumpsters to show how nearly half of all food in the U.S. is wasted.3

In one of his videos, Dumpster Diving for Food with Rob Greenfield, he showed how he was able to fill an empty pantry and fridge with more than $1,000 worth of perfectly good food after just five hours of dumpster diving.4 Thats collecting $200 an hour worth of food, he says.

Greenfield is also a big advocate of showing that people are good. In an effort to illustrate this, he bravely traveled to Rio, Brazil, with zero dollars to his name. He was able to travel 7,000 miles to Panama, relying on nothing except for the goodness of others, who kindly offered him food, shelter and transportation.

He even used other peoples cell phones to capture the footage, some of which was used in a six-episode series called Free Ride that aired on the Discovery Channel. To learn more about Greenfield and his adventures, check out his website, RobGreenfield.TV.5

Read original article here

Read more here:
How to Grow and Forage Without Owning Land - Verve Times