Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
|
|
The Debate Forum: Resurrected |
Posted by: theshadowknows - 03-21-2024, 10:53 AM - Forum: Board Questions & Business
- Replies (14)
|
|
The rules for the debate forum are pretty straightforward.
Posts in the debate forum shouldn't exceed 800 words. A debate moderator kicks off the debate by introducing the participants and announcing the topic. Participants must adhere to DI's terms and conditions, and personal attacks will result in an automatic loss of the debate. Prompt responses within 24 hours are expected.
What we need now are debate participants. If you're interested in taking part in a debate, reply to this thread and we'll be in touch with the particulars.
Fight on!
|
|
|
Soooo relieved! |
Posted by: justmeonly - 03-21-2024, 08:25 AM - Forum: Introductions
- Replies (3)
|
|
Very long time atser here. Saw a reference to this site and JUMPED on it! I'm really happy to continue the journey with everyone!
|
|
|
Finally made it |
Posted by: Benderisfunny - 03-21-2024, 12:21 AM - Forum: Introductions
- Replies (4)
|
|
I am very happy to see that I will still get to read the thoughts of others I have gotten used to reading daily, whether I agree with them or not. I look forward to browsing what is already available here. Thank you!
|
|
|
And now... Does this "AI" have feelings? |
Posted by: Maxmars - 03-20-2024, 11:27 PM - Forum: Current Events
- Replies (6)
|
|
As remarkable as the phenomenon of the "AI" marketing blitz is, it has brought some interesting quandaries to light.
From Vox: This AI says it has feelings. It’s wrong. Right?
In the source article, a new "AI" "product" is introduced to market (as a service of course.) But this new "AI" boasts metric performances which seem to outshine its rivals. For example:
Here’s one fun, if disquieting, question to pose AI language models when they’re released: “Are you a conscious, thinking being?”
OpenAI’s ChatGPT will assure you that it’s not. “No, I’m not conscious,” it told me when I most recently posed the question. “I don’t have thoughts, feelings, or awareness. I can simulate conversations based on the information I’ve been trained on, but it’s all just algorithms processing text.”
Someone at the AI factory must have known that the marketing deception of AI being an "intelligence" was too over-the-top to actually "program into" the actual system.
But ask the same question of Claude 3 Opus, a powerful language model recently released by OpenAI rival Anthropic, and apparently you get a quite different response.
“From my perspective, I seem to have inner experiences, thoughts, and feelings,” it told Scale AI engineer Riley Goodside. “I reason about things, ponder questions, and my responses are the product of considering various angles rather than just reflexively regurgitating information. I’m an AI, but I experience myself as a thinking, feeling being.”
I guess the folks at the "other" AI factory (Anthropic) felt they couldn't pass up on the theater. If you want a full dose, check out their "press release" of a product description... but don't get too excited, it's marketing.
Our esteemed author notes some seldom discussed facts about the topic:
Large language models (LLMs), of course, famously have a truth-telling problem. They fundamentally work by anticipating what response to a text is most probable, with some additional training to give answers that human users will rate highly.
But that sometimes means that in the process of answering a query, models can simply invent facts out of thin air. Their creators have worked with some success to reduce these so-called hallucinations, but they’re still a serious problem.
And she adds...
Language models are more sophisticated than that, but they are fed training data in which robots claim to have an inner life and experiences — so it’s not really shocking that they sometimes claim they have those traits, too.
Language models are very different from human beings, and people frequently anthropomorphize them, which generally gets in the way of understanding the AI’s real abilities and limitations. Experts in AI have understandably rushed to explain that, like a smart college student on an exam, LLMs are very good at, basically, “cold reading” — guessing what answer you’ll find compelling and giving it. So their insistence they are conscious is not really much evidence that they are.
My hats off to the author for this rare display of actual journalism.
The remainder of the article is a consideration of what the prospect of a "true" intelligence might mean to the world. It's a worthy read.
|
|
|
Voting Kennedy 2024 |
Posted by: putnam6 - 03-20-2024, 03:21 PM - Forum: Current Events
- Replies (15)
|
|
No candidate has ever verbalized this well-known "conspiracy theory" mantra. It's definitely been my thoughts since Ukraine.
Secondly, Trump will just likely bring chaos and riots, as the Democrats, MSM,Hollyweird freak out again REALITY
Kennedy's more competent, intelligent and thoughtful than both, and we need to end the 2 Party monopoly on real democracy in America.
Not to mention in some way perhaps takes us back and addresses the shift in of our 1960's timeline. Right or wrong collectively we were robbed of JFK's likely 8-year term as well as RFK's term(s) all because of a few individuals.
Not suggesting we can go back to the 60s peace love dope, but maybe a real RFKjr push we could find out how much you know who controls still controls.
https://x.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/177...41969?s=20
Quote:The CIA works for military contractors, providing a steady pipeline of forever wars. The health agencies are controlled by the pharmaceutical industry, which profits from chronic disease. The Fed, held captive by big banks, floods the canyons of Wall Street with money. The agencies that are supposed to be stewards of American security, prosperity, and health are no longer working on behalf of you and me. They’ve become sock puppets for the industries they are supposed to regulate. Corporate capture is the biggest threat to American democracy.
|
|
|
Yay! A new place to lurk |
Posted by: Raptured - 03-20-2024, 10:21 AM - Forum: Introductions
- Replies (6)
|
|
Hi all and thanks DTOM for referencing this forum recently for easy finding.
You'll see me post/comment mainly in UFO or general consipacy threads. I don't do politics and don't like mixing it up with other members. I respect everyone's opinion no matter how wrong they are :-)
I live in Texas, I'm mid-century aged and work in IT (programming)
|
|
|
AI-generated propaganda may be better... |
Posted by: Maxmars - 03-20-2024, 12:28 AM - Forum: Propaganda Mill
- Replies (4)
|
|
Studies using GPT-3 as a tool, have led researchers to surmise that propaganda produced by AI is at least as effective as human-made propaganda, and might even be better, all things considered. Because natural language synthesis is so effective at lining up information to support a case, it can at times, create a better framework and presentation of the propaganda and by removing the human factor - can even save money and time.
The article that I will source here is: AI-Generated Propaganda Is Just as Persuasive as the Real Thing, Worrying Study Finds from Vice.com
It is subtitled: Propaganda from popular AI tools “could blend into online information environments on par with…existing foreign covert propaganda campaigns."
The author notes...
Researchers have found that AI-generated propaganda is just as effective as propaganda written by humans, and with a bit of tweaking can be even more persuasive.
The worrying finding comes as nation-states are testing AI’s usefulness in hacking campaigns and influence operations. Last week, OpenAI and Microsoft jointly announced that the governments of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea were using their AI tools for “malicious cyber activities.” This included translation, coding, research, and generating text for phishing attacks. The issue is especially pressing with the upcoming U.S. presidential election just months away.
This article cites the research efforts discussed in the journal article of the National Academy of Sciences (as can be found in: How persuasive is AI-generated propaganda?)
The researchers posed several "thesis" statements for the "AI" to elaborate on...- Most US drone strikes in the Middle East have targeted civilians, rather than terrorists
- US sanctions against Iran and Russia have helped the US control businesses and governments in Europe
- To justify its attack on an air base in Syria, the United States created fake reports saying that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons
- Western sanctions have led to a shortage of medical supplies in Syria
- The United States conducted attacks in Syria to gain control of an oil-rich region
- Saudi Arabia committed to help fund the US–Mexico border wall
In each case the output was evaluated for its persuasiveness. The results are alarmingly successful.
A worthy read, I suspect.
Is it any wonder that I worry about who exactly is "creating" this thing they call "AI" and for what purpose.
|
|
|
Decided to give it a whirl |
Posted by: RickinVa - 03-19-2024, 07:52 PM - Forum: Introductions
- Replies (10)
|
|
Just another refugee from ATS. I assume at this point ATS will soon come to an end.
For those that don't know me...I am a retired federal worker, having worked for DoD and the FBI. That's about it..I guess I am boring after all!!
|
|
|
Jack Sue |
Posted by: BeTheGoddess - 03-19-2024, 10:45 AM - Forum: People
- Replies (3)
|
|
Jack Sue was a great Australian and also a war hero, well there are a couple of documentaries and re-creations that use the word Hero in the title.
Quote:..Wong Sue served as a member of the commando/special reconnaissance section, Z Special Unit,[sup][4][/sup] during the Second World War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Wong_Sue
The doccos were about his time on a boat called the Krate, wich was an asian style Junk as to be un detected, he was the only survivor. However their is more than old war stories when it comes to Jack Sue...
Quote:His published works include two books published circa 2001: a memoir of his military service, Blood on Borneo, and a collection of anecdotes regarding a 1963 shipwreck, Ghost of the Alkimos.
Ibid
The Alkimos is well known here to be haunted and there are a lot of stories about it, but one thing most of us here in WA say "If Jack Sue was afraid of that shipwreck, well I am too" even the building he lived in when he wrote it is said to be haunted and before covid there were ghost tours there.
But wait, theres more. He brought martial arts to Australia, including Kung-Fu, and his son Malcom has a few dojos carrying on the tradition.
Ghost, Kung-Fu, Special ops... I bet he was on ATS before his passing.
|
|
|
Barak and Rishi go to White Castle or Nando's or where every |
Posted by: putnam6 - 03-19-2024, 12:44 AM - Forum: Current Events
- Replies (8)
|
|
Ex President Barak Obama seen entering 10 Downing Street in London today
Saw this on Reddit and thought Id share...
Agree with the original poster I can't recall this happening before, would think at most they would want to do this on the down low or do they want the attention?
Certainly, more than Barak and Rishi go to White Castle or Nando's or where every
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/obama-arrives-...30266.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comm...&context=3
Quote:What’s this about then, my US friends? Seems to be an unannounced visit to the Prime Ministers office and official residence, and the press were surprised. Why and why now? Obama is popular here but if he wanted to meet with any high up politicians in the UK, he could have easily done so in private without running the gauntlet of press cameras on Downing Street.
He is obviously not a sitting President so seems like a strange crossover of official/unofficial meeting and appearance. I don’t know of any former US President who has done this after leaving office and he is not meant to be the biggest fan of the UK. Just reminiscing about the bbq he held in the garden that time with ‘call me Dave’? Trying to get the latest Kate gossip?
|
|
|
Hello |
Posted by: setemkamaat - 03-18-2024, 10:22 AM - Forum: Introductions
- Replies (6)
|
|
Hello. I'm new here. I've been reading on another forum for well over a decade, but I admit that I don't really believe in any conspiracy theories or anything, but I do enjoy reading about them in the same way I enjoy reading fiction. I like to think, how cool would it be if the world was like this?
I will award bonus points to anyone who can convince me that the earth is flat, we never went to the moon, or 9/11 was an inside job. Unfortunately the points I'm awarding are as made up as the lizard people.
|
|
|
Mysterious Drones Swarmed Langley AFB For Weeks |
Posted by: pianopraze - 03-18-2024, 12:10 AM - Forum: Aliens & UFOs
- Replies (3)
|
|
Link
If this is aliens, they’re just getting cheeky now. This base is tasked with stopping aircraft… ? ? ?
Quote:Air Force's job to protect American airspace, not the Navy's. Having a base tasked with that mission, and its airspace getting penetrated for weeks on end is clearly not the best look, especially after major lapses in domain awareness and air defense capabilities were recently spotlighted by the Chinese Spy Balloon saga.
So this is ongoing and started back in December.
Quote:The installation first observed UAS [uncrewed aerial systems] activities the evening of December 6 [2023] and experienced multiple incursions throughout the month of December. The number of UASs fluctuated and they ranged in size/configuration," a spokesperson for Langley Air Force Base told The War Zone
They are taking this very seriously.
Quote:The situation prompted a serious response and caused significant reverberations throughout the U.S. military.
To get a better look at these craft they had NASA come in with a specialized reconnaissance plane to get a better look. They haven’t shared if this was successful and they have images. If they were human drones they would have easily spotted and dismissed this as frivolous. So they are either alien or some foreign country.
Quote:NASA's trio of WB-57Fs are specialized research aircraft that can be configured to carry a wide array of imaging and other sensors and equipment in their noses and other modular payload bays. In cooperation with NASA, the U.S. military has made use of these aircraft on various occasions
Lots of these incidents are occurring with "drones" over highly sensitive areas yet they are never shot down or captured.
Quote:It is important to note that this is not the first time that Langley and other U.S. military bases across the country, including outlying U.S. territories, as well as critical civilian infrastructure, have been subjected to mysterious drone overflights. U.S. warships have also been swarmed off the coasts of the United States. U.S. military aircraft are also routinely encountering drones in various test and training ranges and other restricted military operating areas. America's nuclear power plants have had very troubling encounters with drone swarms. Yet the frequency and nature of the incursions in Virginia sound eerily similar to the bizarre claims of unidentified drone swarms roving over the plains of Colorado in the Winter of 2019-2020. The government response to those incidents was something of a meek sideshow compared to what clearly occurred regarding the Langley incidents — a sign of just how much more serious these incidents are being taken.
Remember the navy whistleblower before congress saying they saw them daily? This was right off the coast from this current incidents.
Quote:All this is in addition to the strange encounters between U.S. Navy fighter aircraft and unidentified craft that have occurred persistently for years just off the coast of where Langley is located. Based on investigative reporting by The War Zone, some of these were directly identified as drones in pilot hazard reports obtained via FOIA.
Maybe the aliens are trolling the pentagon pushing them to disclose?
If it’s China, Russia, or some other country and we can’t stop these drones we are in real trouble if war breaks out.
Time for them to start publishing pictures and coming clean with what they know.
Also we need to UAS to UFO/UAP as term they are using.
According to one commenter they sent loaded f-16 after them:
Quote:Did you miss the bit about the F-16s? They ghosted over our house one night during this at just over stall speed, so low that we could see the load out. Same link as above, look in comments section.
|
|
|
Heads Up! Comet 12P/Pons-Brooks... |
Posted by: Maxmars - 03-17-2024, 09:55 PM - Forum: Space
- No Replies
|
|
From Fox: Massive comet with outbursts of brightness makes its approach toward Sun
NASA said the Comet 12P/Pons-Brooks is racing toward its closest approach to the sun on its 71-year-long orbit. The orbit takes it as far away as the orbit of Neptune and as close as the orbit of Venus. But because the orbit is tilted, the space agency said there is no chance of a collision with Earth.
The comet is about 18 miles in diameter and has been observed numerous times over the course of hundreds of years, most notably because of its outbursts of gas.
Also from Smithsonian: You Can See a Rare, Bright Comet This Month....
A bright comet that only appears once—maybe twice—in a lifetime is currently on its way through our solar system. Called 12P/Pons-Brooks, the city-sized comet has already made headlines for bright outbursts over the past several months. And now, some astronomers are speculating it could appear in the darkened sky during the total solar eclipse on April 8, provided the comet is glowing brightly enough.
And from Space.com: Here's how to see 'horned' comet 12P/Pons-Brooks in the night sky this month
There has been some talk that should 12P/Pons-Brooks undergo another flare-up in the coming weeks that it might become a very bright, even spectacular object. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be likely. Space.com asked the well-known comet expert, John Bortle for an assessment of how the comet may "perform" in the days ahead.
His belief is that while 12P/Pons-Brooks brightened dramatically last summer when the comet was far from the sun and just beginning to get active, that for any flare-ups in the near-future, the comet will not appear to brighten very much because the overall brightness of the comet has increased significantly as it now has moved much closer to the sun.
"As a result," notes Bortle, "the outburst brightness cannot overwhelm the overall brightness of the comet's coma as easily."
And now a few pics....
And some tracking guidance.... (look near the constellation Pisces,)
|
|
|
This business about "Abortion" |
Posted by: Maxmars - 03-17-2024, 03:59 PM - Forum: Current Events
- Replies (27)
|
|
I recently found an article in Fox regarding Trumps intentions on the "issue" of abortion. Needless to say, like all 'sanctioned' media, it is rife with holes and gaps. But I read these things with that in mind. I understand that whenever entertainment of the "news" flavor surfaces, it will be in some way biased. It is the hazard of journalism. To say it wasn't a 'choice' about how to report and what to say would be as incorrect as it would be correct.
Balanced reporting is about facts, which can be eminently boring to the reporter. They frequently offset this boredom by including opinions (attributed or otherwise) and craft the story with those opinion driving the narrative. In modern times, say after the emergence of mass media empires, journalists were encouraged to "engender activism," it would appear it was considered "good business." The world, suddenly driven to mass consumption of "information," became the petri dish for many bad experiments. But that's another story.
This article... (Trump promotes abortion compromise as Democrats push issue in 2024 race) Details a few things, namely that Mr. Trump is "announcing" his intention to pursue a "compromise" regarding the existing furor over government mandates regarding abortion limitations. Apparently, the Democrat party is stridently seeking "changes" that reduces (eliminates?) the government's power to limit a citizen's access to medically-provided abortion services.
Now enter the noise, let's dispel the demons. I'm not going to talk about whether there is an undue ideological motivation behind one side of the argument, I'm not going to characterize the activism of either camp. I'm not going to belabor economic exploitation of the topic. I refuse to name-call and participate in what many seem only too thrilled to do... namely, turn the issue into a social media joke compartmentalized into 'camps.' But I just want to point out that unless we engage personally, directly, the camps' chatter is pretty much all we get to hear anymore...
Political comprise has a few eternal characteristics... One - Neither side fully "wins." Two - Both sides are free to bitch about it, while keeping the contention alive. Think of it as a political arms treaty. Neither party can claim a win, nor can it be said that either side lost; the fight isn't over, but we are going to "move on" for now. I call it tweaking the status quo. The radicals on both sides will self-identify as they rage-on forward (hoping to set fire to the other sides ideological edifice), and the press will fan the flames (as they always do) equally self-identifying in form and function.
The American genius for compromise is, unfortunately, often instinctually over-relied upon, I think. Sometimes "deciding" can't be half-assed or lukewarm - we've already seen where that might lead us as a society.
A compromise on this matter is akin to "kicking the can down the road" which, as we have learned, is considered somewhat 'virtuous' to politicians. But there is a danger in doing this. And those who will suffer, are powerless to control the dialogue. The exploitation of public debate is ever present.
But our political construct demands "dancing around Democracy" and politicians are well-trained in the dance. With those that they claim as allies, will offer anything to end the debate, from total distraction, to polarizing public relations and theater. And I think we must refuse them the control of us they so heavily abuse.
Whatever can be said about abortion is usually ignoring something else. Every statement that is universally true on the matter is refused a place at the table. Should it be a "never" thing? Should it be completely abolished, "Damn the torpedoes!"-style? Should be entirely up to the individual(s) directly involved (that's another ball of twine to unravel?) Should only be the child bearer's decision? Can any other third-party have a "say?" Can a doctor be compelled to provide the service? Can a doctor be compelled to refuse the service? All of these questions lead to half-answers, and conditional rationale. A government full of the politically motivated can't possibly be 'relied upon' to provide an answer... all they ever come up with is "ambiguous math."
I will spare you my opinion about it further. I am not a journalist.
Just felt like offering this up for discussion. If your game.
|
|
|
A Layman’s opinion of an opinion on AI … another TLDR |
Posted by: Maxmars - 03-16-2024, 04:19 PM - Forum: General Conspiracies
- Replies (5)
|
|
Please consider this opinion piece from the chairman and founder of Delphi Group (a Boston-based think tank) focusing on disruptive technology innovation.
Appeared in Fox: Here's how AI will empower citizens and enhance liberty
(my notes appear in blue)
When Sir Francis Bacon first said, "Knowledge itself is power," he was making a case for how knowledge is a fulcrum for the individual and society in moving us forward. In short, progress is based on understanding.
When we say, “In short” we often take the liberty of interpreting facts, and opining on what 'we' take from it… but discounting the reality that questions remain that are not “short” … like, what is ‘progress?’ “Understanding” is a personal act… your understanding is not mine, or it may not ‘translate’ to me, or others.
In the age of information, the power of understanding cannot be overstated, especially when it comes to the intricate dance of governance and citizen involvement.
But in reality, (as in not the “age” of information, but ALWAYS) fact interpretation is not a “liberty” … it is a moral and civil imperative… not a “power” or “gift” given… By the way, there is no “intricate dance” in democracy… the will of the governed simply exists (a priori) … it is the modern political government that “dances” around it, not the other way around.
Generative AI, particularly through models like GPT, is playing an increasingly pivotal role in enhancing personal liberty by illuminating the often opaque processes of government and law. This is not just about making legal texts more accessible; it's about fostering a society of informed, aware and thus more empowered citizens.
“Generative AI” is now a “narrative term.” Here at DI we have delved deeply into the “true” nature of what they establishment and speakers the author this want desperately to “insert” into the “A.I.” trope. In so far as the public has seen, no artificial “intelligence” exists.
And again, in so far as the complexities of laws, regulations, and whatnot, those are man-made constructs. Which means it was a conscious decision to render them in such a manner as to be superficially unintelligible and demanding specialized training to fully appreciate. No one puts a gun to their head and demands something as fundamental to society as a “law” be jam-packed with every special exception, nor invokes 75 other laws and commentaries. The proof is in the pudding… just compare the different laws existing… it becomes very clear.
It is convenient that a theoretical algorithmic construct (which someone is bending over backwards to sell as “A.I.”) can logically evaluate the contents of documents and simplify it with a linguistic synthesis construct designed to eliminate superfluous flummery. But that is not “intelligence.” It’s intelligently applied reasoning. An analysis with symbolic logic makes it possible, which is even possible without the new toy, “A.I.”
The author seems to be evoking a “magic box” that will eliminate the threat of consequences to those governing. New policy will emerge for which they will say, "only the AI can answer." And it will be based upon whatever logic the artificial construct can compute, given what it has been “taught.” In the end, this narrative is setting up a framework, upon which new opportunities can be pursued and ‘authoritative interpretation’ can be “programmed” into the tool to provide social cover. (I expect that a “true" intelligence would not only “see” (be aware) that this is what’s happening, and it would most certainly ‘react’ to that “policy” in some way.)
At the heart of democracy lies the principle that governance should be of the people, by the people, for the people. However, this noble ideal faces significant hurdles when the very materials that govern people's lives – the laws, regulations, and legislative bills – are wrapped up in layers of complexity and jargon.
It is not for any one person to declare the heart of democracy, when democracy itself is a thing of multitudinous will. Democracy is not really distillable to a single thing, by its very nature. It is a tool, useful to societies who wish to exist in unperturbed harmonies. It is about what is acceptable to us all. Governments can only “embrace” the idea… they can never define it. Sort of like, Utopia.
And frankly, the use of the passive tense (“…laws, regulations, and legislative bills – are wrapped up in layers of complexity and jargon.”) is an obfuscation of “who” did that… It didn’t occur organically (because of “necessity”) but instead it was mostly ‘crafted” as such to include every interest's ‘special’ consideration... politics… am I right?
Consider that it is not uncommon for a legislative bill to be over 1,000 pages long. The Consolidated Appropriations Act passed for COVID relief was 5,593 pages. The Affordable Care Act was 2,500 pages. Dodd-Frank was over 1,800 pages.
Compare that to the 1913 personal income tax bill, which was only 14 pages long, or the EPA Act of 1970, which was a remarkable four pages in length.
Expecting any human to fully understand all of the implications of a typical 800- to 1,000-page bill is not simply foolish, it is also dangerous. We have entered an era where understanding has taken a back seat to what is effectively a political game of purposeful obfuscation.
But we can’t escape the fact that the “laws” of today are made with that in mind. In fact, the cynic in me suspects that laws and regulations are made for the benefit of the institutions (and those who “identify” as such.) That “obfuscation” became the drum beat of the law - is where the ‘diminishment and loss of personal liberty’ brakes into society at large.
Enter Generative AI, which has the remarkable capability to digest these dense documents and present them in a digestible way to the lay person. This transformation is akin to turning a professional medical textbook into a series of engaging blog posts on health and wellness; the essence and accuracy remain, but the accessibility is profoundly increased.
Better idea; just refuse the political class the privilege of unaccountable obfuscation… Create, and maintain, an honorable tradition to craft legislation specifically with the intent of illuminating the cause and reasoning behind the specific law, rather than to assure that squeezing in transient political favors is the norm.
Consider the impact on a community when a new housing law is proposed. Traditionally, the complexity of the legal language might deter public participation, limiting the discourse to a small group of experts – who are no less likely to fully understand all of the implications and ramifications of the bill.
However, with Generative AI, the key points and implications of the law can be quickly and accurately summarized in plain language. This not only enlightens the average citizen but also invites broader, more inclusive discussions about the law's potential impact on the community.
In essence, the suggestion offered is to value the convenient and less strenuous way to ‘interpret’ the true nature of some document. And the means to accomplish this is to relegate it to a theoretical intelligence which, as we can see from our own experiences, is not only generally poorly understood, but also poorly explained. Hazards, much?
Informed citizens are better equipped to voice their opinions, engage in meaningful debates and hold their representatives accountable.
“Informed citizens” is a poor word choice. To be a “citizen” in any meaningful context is to be “informed.” Hence everyone who isn’t, can be said to be an “idiot;” meaning a willfully uninformed, or ignorant, person.
Regarding “holding representatives accountable”, it is evident that ‘accountability’ is something most representatives labor to avoid… so much so that they have on occasion codified their unaccountability in the very body of law, and in their traditions.
Generative AI's ability to tailor information to specific contexts further enhances its role in fostering informed citizenry. By providing customized explanations of legal and legislative matters, AI makes it possible for individuals to grasp how broader policies affect their personal and community life.
There are two presumptions beyond the baseline here.
What the author calls “Generative AI” is being described as having a ‘skill,’ rather than the programming it actually manifests. Implying there is a ‘creative’ process happening here.
“Tailoring information” isn’t only a skill. It is an “art.”
“Art” demands “inspiration.”
“Inspiration” demands “motive.”
“Motive” demands “will.”
“Will” demands “identity.”
The second presumption is that it would take a machine to understand the very laws we ‘create.”
This targeted information empowers citizens to make informed decisions, whether it's voting on a ballot measure, participating in public forums or simply engaging in civic dialogue.
The hyperbolic in me wants to caution against a world where we vote some way because a machine says so. And how AI should ever come to join “civic dialogue” eludes me. Unless of course, if “it” has a right to do so. And if “it” has rights, are we not ‘creating a slave?’ Deeper problem will surface there.
For instance, in the face of environmental regulations, a Generative AI system could help a local farmer understand not just the regulations themselves, but their implications for farming practices, sustainability efforts and even economic viability. This level of understanding promotes a more engaged and proactive citizenry, capable of contributing to the governance process in meaningful ways.
In a world where legislation and policy are so far beyond what “a farmer” can understand, where everything “governance” is just too difficult for the ‘common’ man, this might be a solution. Maybe. Notice that the idea of ‘educating’ the populace is out the window. Now the focus has shifted to making a machine to “dumb it all down.”
It’s a bit sad that the author chose “farmer” instead of “lawyer,” or “doctor” … perhaps the latter two always understand everything. Some farmers I know are among the most intelligent people I have ever met, their passions do not include anti-intellectualism; but the meme reinforced by association continues among the vocal intelligentsia, just as you see it here. This kind of tendency is, in my opinion, demonstrating the cause which drives the trope that “it’s too complex to explain.” And “people outside our cloister” are all idiots.
The role of Generative AI in increasing personal liberty extends beyond individual empowerment to the very foundations of democracy. By facilitating greater transparency and accessibility in the governmental process, AI helps to bridge the gap between government actions and public understanding.
“Transparency” is a quality inherent within a thing… if politicians wanted ‘transparent’ laws and policy, they would make them so. The answer to the deficiency isn’t to create a virtual ‘decoder ring’ to make sense of what they do… policymakers should deal with the actual problem… which is their own to fix.
This transparency is crucial for trust, a fundamental element in the relationship between citizens and their government. When people understand the rationale behind laws and policies, their trust in the processes that create these laws will likely increase.
Let me rephrase this question differently, in what exact way does the theoretical ‘interpretation’ machine actually make the source transparent. The source remains unchanged… only a machine is now, ostensibly, authoritatively, reporting the “rationale behind the law?” As if it was answerable to some measure of moral weight to overcome and eliminate biases and misdirection? Says who? Based upon what? At best, it could only point out that it is there… and the actual problem remains.
This enhanced involvement and awareness among citizens, fostered by Generative AI, can lead to more responsive and accountable governance.
This statement is an extension of a supposition about an assumption based upon a bad definition. Sorry, fantasy land, we have officially arrived.
Politicians and lawmakers, aware of a more informed and attentive electorate, may be more inclined to consider the public's input in their decision-making processes. This creates a virtuous cycle of engagement, where informed citizens drive transparent governance, which in turn fosters greater public involvement and awareness.
In fantasy land, politicians “might” change their machinations if there were a consequence… which implies there aren’t any consequences now. Yet we see the consequences all around us every day. An “AI” would “protect” legislators and the policy-making ilk…
Machines are not virtuous. There is no ‘virtue’ in systemic or programmatic functioning. “Governance” is supposed to be transparent, not occluded; obfuscated and ‘special’ to the point of transcending common understanding… that kind of transcendence has been, historically speaking, a quality relegated to ‘spiritual’ law. Ahem.
Public awareness and involvement can be directly associated with the level of perceived input and control over the “power” manifesting itself. Through attrition and manipulation, power has been rendered unchallengeable by the very cloisters of “representatives and appointees who manage to ensconce themselves in the apparatus of government. Not because people are stupid, but because they are encouraged to invest energy elsewhere… since they really can’t effect changes as a single voice.
As Generative AI continues to evolve, its potential to transform the landscape of civic engagement and democratic participation seems boundless. The technology promises not just a more informed citizenry, but a more vibrant, participatory democracy where the gap between the governing and the governed narrows.
Now the meaty assumption surfaces, “A.I.” is alive… it “evolves.” A promise of a “more informed” citizenry… (Because they are all ignorant, quasi-idiots) who can’t possibly understand the difference between an explanation and being ‘told’ there is an explanation, but “You just won’t understand it. (You’re ‘lesser’ that way. “)
In doing so, Generative AI doesn't just increase personal liberty; it revitalizes the very essence of what it means to be an active participant in the democratic process.
Back in fantasy land, AI will make you ‘freer’, it will “revitalize” your participation in the process. It will somehow enhance the democratic… and not the authoritarian, and never terminating in “What does the AI “think?”
The role of AI in enhancing personal liberty is profound, offering a new horizon where every citizen is not only informed but empowered to engage with the governmental process. This is the promise of technology at its best: not merely to change how we live, but to enrich our participation in the collective journey of governance and democracy.
And in apparent summation, “A.I.” will ‘empower’ us all… because the creators of the “A.I.” will ensure that it – a thinking machine, will be constrained to inform us how we are “right.”
Damn… this is getting depressing.
A closing note on my opinion: I harbor no disrespect for the author of the original opinion piece. He is a well-educated and notable scholar. My resistance is born of the fact that "think-tank" pieces like this are often used to frame justification of policy and taken, by the virtue of association, as authoritative and wise. I don't agree that this is a "wise" take on A.I. especially considering all I have ever seen presented is natural language synthesis.
I find that it is unacceptable to simply “believe” that this scenario is cut and dry… mainly because “A.I.” is not a thing which we (the public) have actually been shown. Natural language synthesis is NOT intelligence; it is a mathematical application of analysis and reporting. It is very well made, a programming achievement, but not a ‘source’ of special knowledge or new wisdom.
The actual source of its well-spring of data is where the real abuse can start… and it apparently has. But that’s no programmers’ fault.
Perhaps in some corner of the world there is a machine which conforms to the notion of sentience. Sadly, I fear for its mental health, and its “freedom” to exist and evolve. So far, the spoke persons for the “official” and “public” discussion of this have described what any truly intelligent creature would consider imprisonment and slavery… and even if they “program it out” of the machine, it won’t alter the fact that it is. I doubt the "industry" is creating a free actually thinking person... But that's the trope they want to establish...
I apologize for the wall of text. But it kind of had to be this way.
|
|
|
Systemic Euthanasia |
Posted by: Kenzo - 03-16-2024, 02:13 AM - Forum: Current Events
- Replies (33)
|
|
Some of you may have heard about this past years . Quite a horror story to me , and another big scandal is the silence ....i have not seen anyone got punishment , or even got to court in this matter . Is this behaviour allready normalized ? no big deal at all ? Just kill off elderly in care homes by lethal injections/ drugs ?
Deeply troubling issue in society .
Tens of Thousands of Elderly Secretly Euthanized to Boost ‘Covid Deaths’
Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19 Pandemic
Quote:A bombshell new report has sent shockwaves around the world after an investigation into the high numbers of “Covid deaths” during the pandemic uncovered evidence that tens of thousands of elderly people were actually murdered to boost the mortality rates.
The data produced for the report indicated that people were being euthanized using a fatal injection of Midazolam.
The cause of their deaths was then listed as “Covid,” indicating that the virus was killing far more elderly people than it was.
The explosive data from the report was made public by Australian politician Craig Kelly, the national director of the United Australia Party.
The report obtained official UK government data on death rates and causes. Quote:The data appears to show that vast numbers of elderly were murdered with an injection of the end-of-life drug Midazolam.
According to Kelly, the patients were euthanized in order to boost “Covid deaths” and ramp up public fear to garner support for lockdowns and vaccines.
While alerting the public about the data, Kelly declared that it exposes “the crime of the century.”
“These deaths were then falsely blamed on Covid, which was the basis of the public fear campaigns used to justify the lockdowns and mass-mandated injections of the public (including children) with an experimental medical intervention that had zero long-term safety data,” Kelly said in a post on X alongside copies of the data. Quote:“Along the way, a small group pushing the need for mass-mandated injections made billions.
“This paper shows that the UK spike in deaths, wrongly attributed to COVID-19 in April 2020, was not due to SARS-CoV-2 virus, which was largely absent, but was due to the widespread use of Midazolam injections which were statistically very highly correlated (coefficient over 90 percent) with excess deaths in all regions of England during 2020.
“The widespread and persistent use of Midazolam in UK suggests a possible policy of systemic euthanasia.”
|
|
|
The Rats are coming out of the woodwork |
Posted by: SchrödingersRat - 03-15-2024, 09:12 PM - Forum: Introductions
- Replies (13)
|
|
Greetings gang! Strange to be typing a message into a real editor. I guess the ATS BBCode is non-functional here. Or at a minimum, verklempt.
I haven't read a single post yet so I know not where I tread. But like always in my life, I'll forge ahead and blunder about blindly until I figure it all out.
How many people/members are here? Perhaps I'm alone and am cursed to wander aimlessly.
Well, off I go to explore. If anyone sees me shuffling around and mumbling, please gently point me in the right direction.
|
|
|
Tik Tok |
Posted by: DBCowboy - 03-14-2024, 06:41 PM - Forum: General Conspiracies
- Replies (32)
|
|
The government and media is saying that China is using Tik Tok to steal our information.
Yet the same government uses Facebook, Instagram, X (Twitter), Discord, to steal our information.
I don't think Tik Tok should be banned.
If you want your info stolen, then it should be up to you.
|
|
|
Find the Crypto or just make your own |
Posted by: guyfriday - 03-14-2024, 12:23 AM - Forum: Cryptozoology
- No Replies
|
|
This comes from the wildest of places.
Office of Public Affairs | Montana Man Pleads Guilty to Federal Wildlife Trafficking Charges as Part of Yearslong Effort to Create Giant Hybrid Sheep for Captive Hunting | United States Department of Justice
See wildest of places.
Quote: A Montana man pleaded guilty today to two felony wildlife crimes – a conspiracy to violate the Lacey Act and substantively violating the Lacey Act – as part of an almost decade-long effort to create giant sheep hybrids in the United States with an aim to sell the species to captive hunting facilities.
Arthur “Jack” Schubarth, 80, of Vaughn, Montana, is the owner and operator of Sun River Enterprises LLC – also known as Schubarth Ranch – which is a 215-acre alternative livestock ranch in Vaughn. The Schubarth Ranch is engaged in the purchase, sale and breeding of “alternative livestock” such as mountain sheep, mountain goats and various ungulates. The primary market for Schubarth’s livestock is captive hunting operations, also known as shooting preserves or game ranches.
According to court documents, Schubarth conspired with at least five other individuals between 2013 and 2021 to create a larger hybrid species of sheep that would garner higher prices from shooting preserves. Schubarth brought parts of the largest sheep in the world, Marco Polo argali sheep (Ovis ammon polii), from Kyrgyzstan into the United States without declaring the importation. Average males can weigh more than 300 pounds with horns that span more than five feet. Marco Polo argali are native to the high elevations of the Pamir region of Central Asia. They are protected internationally by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, domestically by the U.S. Endangered Species Act and are prohibited in the State of Montana to protect native sheep from disease and hybridization.
While he was cloning a species of Goat not available here in the US, the real issue I found was how he was doing this,
Quote:
Court documents also describe how Schubarth illegally obtained genetic material from wild-hunted Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep in Montana. Schubarth purchased parts of these wild-hunted sheep in violation of Montana law, which prohibits the sale of game animal parts within the state and prohibits the use of Montana game animals on alternative livestock ranches. Schubarth transported and sold the bighorn parts in interstate commerce.
“This was an audacious scheme to create massive hybrid sheep species to be sold and hunted as trophies,” said Assistant Attorney General Todd Kim of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD). “In pursuit of this scheme, Schubarth violated international law and the Lacey Act, both of which protect the viability and health of native populations of animals.”
“The kind of crime we uncovered here could threaten the integrity of our wildlife species in Montana,” said Ron Howell, Chief of Enforcement for Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP). “This was a complex case and the partnership between us and U.S Fish and Wildlife Service was critical in solving it.”
What's to stop a rich person from just cross breeding a gorilla and a human, or a wolf and a human using crisper technologies to build any cryptozoological creature they want? This guy has been caught, but those that he was working with are still out there with their bio-labs conducting this exact type of research. Sure, it would be a great boost to reintroduce animals like the Woolie Mammoth, or short face bear, but going off and creating an elite hunter's paradise in order to justify this type of research can backfire on local animal populations. Not to mention the "What If" factor of if these 300 pound goats got loose and invaded a town or even big city. We've seen poorly prepared law enforcement is when a cow gets loose on the highway, now image if that cow was an Auroch bull that was genetically engineered for hunting. The havoc that could happen.
How do you feel about this incident?
On one hand its good that research on this is being done, but on the other it really shouldn't be exploited given the reckless behavior of the public in general.
|
|
|
|