Artificial Intelligence

[HAROLDYOUNG]

We live in relativity and that includes the entire universe (and-or universes). There is positive and there is negative.
Nuclear energy can be used for devastating destruction or to serve humanity. Same with AI. It can be used for positive or negative
purposes. Same with human beings. Some good some evil (positive-negative). Even Steven Hawkings said that we should not
be sending out communication signals into space because we don't know if an alien receiving those radio signals has good
or bad intentions. Positive-Negative---can't escape it anywhere in the universe. It manifests on many levels and in sentient
beings. On one hand we have Mother Theresa on the other hand we had Stalin and Hitler. The contrasts are endless.
A far as God goes from a Christian POV ithe Bible says that God creates Good and Evil, Light and Darkness. The Hindus
believe the same in the Creation and Destruction aspects of an all manifesting cosmic intelligence throughout creation with a
preservation quality in between those two extremes.
Scientists are not gods. Nazi scientists worked for Hitler and were developing the Atomic bomb. Einstein wrote the president of
the U.S. tof hurry up and develop the bomb before the Nazis did. Wernher Von Braun developed the Nazi rockets that destroyed
London and then was inducted into the U.S. space program that put U.S. astronauts on the Moon. AI is no different and neither
are the scientists who made it. AI reflects their values and their brain patterns and beliefs. Mother Theresa versus Hitler-Good Luck.

 

[danadak]

If AI understands the concept of survival the first thing it will do is wipe out any species that
is either incapable of self preservation or is an active participant in killing/destruction of
itself or like species and/or the destruction of planet.....

That would be humans.......on all the above counts.


Regards, Dana.

 

[Delta Prime]

“If I’ve told you n times, I’ve told you n+1 times…” (Artificial Intelligence) is an oxymoron therefore I believe it's
necessary for me to remain
( Naturally Stupid.)

 

[crutschow]

My concern is that even the present relatively low level of AI, it is already performing things beyond what the developers envisioned or understand (Scientific American).
So what happens as more complex AI is developed(?).

 

[Delta Prime]

it is already performing things beyond what the developers envisioned or understand

An artificial phenomenon emerges created by the minds of men.
The problem with linear theory is that it is not non-linear.

 

[kellys_eye]

If AI understands the concept of survival the first thing it will do is wipe out any species that
is either incapable of self preservation or is an active participant in killing/destruction of
itself or like species and/or the destruction of planet.....

That would be humans.......on all the above counts.


Regards, Dana.

That implies AI having access to the means to cause destruction. We don't have 'terminator' robots or even a structure that can be critically/fatally 'infected' by an AI. Stuff of movies - at this time.

The way AI is being used to incite fear in the population reminds me very much of the same process we are seeing over cAGW and 'climate catastrophe' - exaggeration all the way.

 

[Delta Prime]

I asked the question to AI.
"Is there a God?"
AI's response.
"There is now."

 

[crutschow]

We don't have 'terminator' robots or even a structure that can be critically/fatally 'infected' by an AI.

What about the internet and all the critical things connect to that.

'climate catastrophe' - exaggeration all the way.

Only by those who chose to ignore the obvious.

 

[HAROLDYOUNG]

What about the internet and all the critical things connect to that.

Only by those who chose to ignore the obvious.

Climate data can be maipulated like all statistical data and computer models derived from that data. Climate Scientists admitted they had skewed the Data in the Climategate scandal. Funding was the motive and the UN is pushing for control and with their IPCC panel. It was publicly published and is not a conspiracy but of course all involved will deny that there was any manipulating going on and that they
are as pure as the new fallen snow. Any catastrophic weather will be blamed on climate change even if it is a natural cycle of nature.
The population must be driven into a perpetual state of fear, one way or another. That is how control and change is accomplished.
AI is no different although with the advances in technology, quantum computers, human input with AI (biases included) etc., AI might
be something to watch carefully as technology advances by leaps and bounds.

 

[kellys_eye]

Only by those who chose to ignore the obvious.

There is no 'obvious'.

What they never talk about is evidence. There is zero evidence (and zero peer reviewed literature) that proves that mankind's emissions of CO2 are the cause of climate change. It is an assumption based on the fatuous reason that 'we can't find any other reason for it'. Prove me wrong. Show me ONE piece of evidence that points the finger at mankind's emissions.

Remember this one fact - Man Made Climate Change is a THEORY. It is unproven and remains unproven which is why it is still just a THEORY.

What actually dismays me is that people aren't prepared to even LOOK for the evidence that we're being conned over this. The steadfast belief in the media and the so-called experts is astonishing especially in the face of the experts that "have saved" us from Covid.........<rolls eyes>. Seriously? This is meant to be a site that has people who have genuine critical thought processes and if anyone simply accepts the consensus (in and of itself a total misrepresentation) they are just gullible fools. If there's one thing age teaches you it's primarily that your Government LIES TO YOU. All the time.

What about the internet and all the critical things connect to that.

What about them? Disconnect them! The only reason they are vulnerable is because of Government insistence that 'back doors' are available so each and everyone (and all software) can be snooped. It's perfectly feasible to do end-to-end encryption or make hardware 100% secure - the fact that .gov is stopping end-to-end encryption must tell you something?

Want to buy a bridge?

 

[crutschow]

Want to buy a bridge?

No.
But it's apparent you are trying to sell one with one of the usual conspiracy theories (elections, deep state, covid, climate, Q-anon, etc.).
The gullible fools that swallow those are what dismays me, which appears to be at least 30% of the country right now.

So how do you think you "prove" that emissions are causing climate change?
It's the same argument that big tobacco used when saying the cigarettes didn't cause lung cancer because there was no "proof".
So do you think that's not true also?

 

[kellys_eye]

So how do you think you "prove" that emissions are causing climate change?

It's not for me to prove anything. Those that seek to introduce policies and expense (to me) on the basis of an unproven claim is what irks me. I want the evidence. The actual empirical evidence. Show me that evidence and I'll get onboard the climate train.

Not one single climate computer model actually matches what the evidence says is happening. Not one. Yet all the policies introduced are based on these models. All of them. You tell me why.

The only difference between conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact is around 12 weeks (and getting shorter). Do the vaccines work? If so why are the vaccinated catching Covid? Do masks work? Proven fact says NO. Do the vaccines cause harm? The manufacturers own evidence says YES. Why is there an increase in all-causes of death since the vax was introduced? Co-incidence?

If you don't believe there are issues with elections, with the climate nonsense, the claims about C-19, the existence of the deep state etc then I seriously believe you are misinformed, under informed or wilfully ignorant.

Sadly, the things that are happening now are precisely because they seem so 'un-possible' to the 'wilfully ignorant' and this, historically, is why atrocities have happened in the past and why they will happen again.

60+ years on this planet and the summers are no hotter than I recall (actually, possibly hotter when I was a kid), the winters no colder than I recall, sea levels the same where ever I have visited (not to my naked eye anyway and I've been around the globe), storms are lessening (fact) wild fires are reduced (fact) ice caps and Polar bears are still there - in fact NONE, not a single one, of the predictions for catastrophe has come to bear. How much longer and how many more lies are you prepared to listen to before you are convinced that NOTHING is going to happen?

Same with C-19. No worse than the common flu - same symptoms, same outcomes, different approach (to that taken in, say, 1968 when the same influenza-like event happened).

And if you think that that demented, senile, doddery old moron in the WH won the last election from his basement when the 'other party' had people lining the streets, over-spilling stadia etc plus Brandon supposedly got more votes than Obama???? J-H-C.......

Q-Anon however..... you might have a point although I never took any notice of anything that came from that source anyway, personally, so I was suspect of it from day-1. But that's the usual throw away to justify 'all' claims of conspiracy. It happens. I acknowledge your cynicism on that score but on it's own it doesn't detract from any of the other issues affecting us.

There is only ONE reason for censorship - try denying the efforts of .gov to shut down conversation - and that is to keep you in the dark and allow those who LIE to push whatever policies they want, without your approval and without your interference. When they come knocking at your door for you, it will be too late to say "I never knew".

 

[HAROLDYOUNG]

Besides AI considerations;
Here are two sources driving the Climate Change agenda and globalist movement:
Browse the sites, study them and come to your own conclusions.
Do you like a globalist type governance?

The WEF trains various leaders, politicians & CEOs to become active working globalist advocates.
Trudeau of Canada is one of them trained so is Governor Newsome of California & Mark Zuckerberg.
The WEF also admires and considers Communist China to be a role model so go figure.

"You will Own Nothing and be Happy"

Agenda

The stories shaping the Global, Regional and Industry agendas

www.weforum.org

Some members & advocates, many from Peoples Republic of China:

Community

The Forum of Young Global Leaders is a community of innovators from diverse backgrounds and experiences. Search current members and alumni by year awarded, sector or region.

www.younggloballeaders.org

UN 2030 Agenda. Sounds noble but ignores nefarious intent of some regimes and promotes centralized control
like social credits (now used in China) and universal digital currency (which can be turned on or off according to
individuals compliance to global mandates).

Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development | Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Preamble This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable...

sdgs.un.org

 

[crutschow]

If you don't believe there are issues with elections, with the climate nonsense, the claims about C-19, the existence of the deep state etc then I seriously believe you are misinformed, under informed or wilfully ignorant.

You can "seriously" believe what conspiracies you want (and you obviously do) but I am not ignorant (willfully or otherwise), just because I don't believe conspiracy theories that some liars on the internet or Faux news espouse and you choose to believe.
That's were the deep fakes are and many have drunk the kool-aid.

Covid was not worse than the flu? Really?
So all those reported deaths from it were just lies?

I want the evidence. The actual empirical evidence.

So what "empirical" evidence do you need besides the century-long rise in temperature along with carbon dioxide levels, the melting of glaciers and the ice caps, and rise in sea level (which you can't "see" of course).
I won't be around to see the full effects of the obvious climate changes happening, due to the "climate nonsense" (even if many are ignoring them) but my children and grandchildren will.

You apparently believe whatever a sociopathic, lying, crooked ex-president says (lock him up I say), along with his fealty followers, who tried to overturn a valid electron by force and fake electors, who have their "own set of facts".
Of course, now he's being unfairly persecuted by the crooked legal system and their "witch hunt".
But, interestingly, they seem to have found a few witches.
Those believers are the ones to fear, the neo-fascists, who claim the elections were corrupt, so the voting rules must be changed, the voting districts gerrymanderd, and only true-believers installed to oversee the elections, so their true autocrat can once again rule.
Those are the ones I fear, knocking on my door with their trusty AR-15 "National Rifle" in hand, not some bogus government conspiracy.

Do you like a globalist type governance?

Ah, another conspiracy theory you can get your shorts in a snit about.
The answer is, of course, no.
So until our government seriously proposes it, it's one more conspiracy theory I can safely ignore.

But I do find it very interesting, how certain groups of people readily latch unto conspiracy theories of just about anything they find on the internet, and then are surprised the the rest of us don't want to drink the kool-aid.

 

[HAROLDYOUNG]

Ah, another conspiracy theory you can get your shorts in a snit about.
The answer is, of course, no.
So until our government seriously proposes it, it's one more conspiracy theory I can safely ignore.

But I do find it very interesting, how certain groups of people readily latch unto conspiracy theories of just about anything they find on the internet, and then are surprised the the rest of us don't want to drink the kool-aid.

You don't even read or look at the links and then talk about Faux News.

The WEF and UN 2030 agenda is not Faux News. Their organizational links are right there for you to read.

Didn't you even look at the video from the World Economic Forum?

It states clearly. "You will Own Nothing and be Happy". That is the stated goal of the WEF in coordination with
the UN 2030 agenda not "Faux News".

The goals are self explanatory and a reality that they themselves lay out clearly for you to read but you would rather toss a
red herring or make up a straw man about Faux news which has nothing to do with those authentic organizations.
No one made it up or hypothesized a possible conspiratorial globalist goal. They state their globalist goals blatantly and openly.

That is not a conspiracy theory and it is very interesting how when certain groups have the evidence placed directly in front
of them they will deny it exists. The evidence is right there directly from the horses mouth, the WEF themselves and the UN
themselves declare their objectives for anyone to read. Some people will just refuse to read their stated goals and continue
refusing to look at what is right in front of their eyes. It seems the Kool aid you are drinking has affected your objectivity
and anything that challenges your worldview (aligned evidently with MSNBC) must come from Faux News.

 

[kellys_eye]

Covid was not worse than the flu? Really?
So all those reported deaths from it were just lies

The IFR (infection fatality rate) was 0.23% for C-19. I made no claims about any deaths. They happened and, as you should be well aware, older people with co-morbidities actually DO die when they get 'influenza'. But the actual deaths were about the same as any strain of influenza we've previously seen and I quote you the 'pandemic' of 1968 as an example. It happened, people died, but the media didn't make a hoopla over it, the pharma companies didn't make a financial killing from it and other people didn't suffer the consequences of a 'fake' vaccine either.

The average age of death for a C-19 victim (82) was HIGHER than the average age of death from all other causes (79). In other words, if you caught C-19 you lived LONGER. But, that's statistics for you!

I don't know what else to say to convince you over the 'faux' pandemic.

So what "empirical" evidence do you need besides the century-long rise in temperature along with carbon dioxide levels, the melting of glaciers and the ice caps, and rise in sea level (which you can't "see" of course).

Yes, temperature is rising and so are sea levels (but at a steady rate of 1-3mm/year and there is no change in that over any time scale we have access to). Such changes are a natural progression as a consequence of the planet exiting the last ice age. We can expect nothing less. Glaciers melt and they also re-freeze (as they are doing). The ice caps are going no where. At least, not in any time frame you, me or our far, far flung children MIGHT see - but the odds are we'll enter a new ice age - as they seemed to suspect during the 70's but conveniently forgot.

The empirical evidence I want to see is definite proof that mankind's emissions are the cause for the potential of climate change or even catastrophe. There isn't any. You can't find it, no one can show it and no one has done otherwise. That impending 'catastrophe' is headed our way is the utmost crap as previous higher CO2 levels have not resulted in such (quite the opposite in fact - life exploded!) and the many, many predictions have ALL failed to come to fruition. Not to mention that global temperatures rise before CO2 rises - a FACT proven by ice core examples.

Storms, Fires, floods, drought, you name it, the FACTS (as shown in the IPCCs own documents) are LOWER than they have been in many decades, the Great Barrier Reef is flourishing and the Ice caps are still here - despite claims they'd be gone in 2000, 2010, 2015, 2020 etc etc etc. Chicken Little??

I'd argue the issue of the election result but for some reason Democratic supporters are as blind to evidence as they are to C-19 vaccine efficacy. If you seriously believe a 'criminal' with a drug addicted, dubious 'expert' son who passes 10% to the 'big man' (all proven via FACTS found on his own laptop - gonna deny that?), who is now revealed to be in the pocket of numerous foreign 'contributors', can't walk, can't talk and certainly isn't a friend of Hawaiians, is the valid '(p)resident'.......... well.

@HAROLDYOUNG covers the issue of Global Governance succinctly and, once again, if you don't believe what they themselves are claiming, aiming and fighting to achieve then, again, I question your understanding of facts. How much more obvious does it have to be?

 

[kellys_eye]

Can't argue with numbers....

1. CO2 is currently 420 ppm, which is 0.042%.

Humans are responsible for 3% of that, which is 0.00126%.

Thus, 99.99874% of all CO2 is created naturally.

2. At under 270 ppm CO2, plant life dies, and everything else dies with it.

3. The atmosphere has had periods where CO2 was up to and higher than 4000 ppm. During the Triassic period 215 million years ago, both plant and animal life thrived and Alaska was a jungle.

4. When Mt. St Helens erupted in 1980, it released the same amount of pollution as 270 years of human industrial activity in 1970.

That’s 270 x 1970 industrial activity - IN ONE DAY.
* volcanic eruptions release water vapor (H20), carbon dioxide (COz), sulphur dioxide (SO2), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen chloride (HCI), and hydrogen fluoride (HF) into the atmosphere.

 

[Delta Prime]

No one told me they were going to be refreshments! I love Kool-Aid.
Avoiding an attitude that is too fearful (“It’s too late to do anything!”) or too optimistic (“We can make it out!”) because either can lead to inaction. The reality is that we have now paid in full into certain consequences on Earth, but we can still prevent further warming and adapt.
Unlike an end-of-the-world Nostradamus scenario, a warmer Earth operates differently. A 2-degree Fahrenheit increase over the past 150 years may sound inconsequential, but research shows (me watching TV) the incremental heating we’re experiencing is pushing climate and weather events to get some payback.
It has been my observation (watching TV) worldwide, communities are experiencing hotter heat waves, drier droughts, heavier downpours and more rapidly intensifying storms. Each event is inflicting more damage on society, partly because of growing urban development and populations. (Watching TV is how most Americans get their news I think I did pretty good.)
But for the rest of you.

 

[HAROLDYOUNG]

No one told me they were going to be refreshments! I love Kool-Aid.
Avoiding an attitude that is too fearful (“It’s too late to do anything!”) or too optimistic (“We can make it out!”) because either can lead to inaction. The reality is that we have now paid in full into certain consequences on Earth, but we can still prevent further warming and adapt.
Unlike an end-of-the-world Nostradamus scenario, a warmer Earth operates differently. A 2-degree Fahrenheit increase over the past 150 years may sound inconsequential, but research shows (me watching TV) the incremental heating we’re experiencing is pushing climate and weather events to get some payback.
It has been my observation (watching TV) worldwide, communities are experiencing hotter heat waves, drier droughts, heavier downpours and more rapidly intensifying storms. Each event is inflicting more damage on society, partly because of growing urban development and populations.

TV is not a wide open and honest depiction of events. The stories and images are filtered through whatever the head of production
and director in charge deems relevant and necesssary or what he or she is told to report by the higher ups.
How many times have we seen and heard " so called" news stories being exposed for selective editing to advance a particular narrative or agenda, words and images cut out or spliced to alter the original context. Reporting of events manipulated to make a story seem what it is not. Even scientists are vulnerable to corruption with data, if the carrot of money and power is dangled in front of them. You can't always believe what you see or hear on TV as the absolute honest truth about the reported scenario. If you believe that scientists are pure as the newly fallen snow, then you will believe everything they say as absolute unadulterated fact like, "the vaccine is safe and effective" .
Anyone who disagreed (including medical experts) were shut down and their lives destroyed. That is the same principle operating elsewhere with news reporting including with Climate change. There are climate scientists who disagree with the Climate change hysteria but they are censored or demonized. The debate should be open and constantly examined but it is not. Instead the accepted position is "the Debate is Over" and anyone who disagrees will be attacked, tarred and feathered and cancelled because they disagree.

 

[kellys_eye]

It has been my observation (watching TV) worldwide, communities are experiencing hotter heat waves, drier droughts, heavier downpours and more rapidly intensifying storms.

And thereby we have the crux of the issue. Before global TV News and t'internet we discussed the weather and saw what happened locally and also saw that it was normal - certainly never unique in most peoples experience.

But with 24/7 reporting and everyone having a mobile phone, everything becomes instantly known and for many who have no idea of what 'normal' is in other parts of the world it's seen as doom and gloom. It is never shown in context i.e. the so-called floods in Pakistan - they have them EVERY year, it's not unique.

What IS unique is the way attachments are now put against each event - 'unprecedented' is a good one, 'catastrophic' is another etc etc. Locals would probably say 'meh'.....

CONTEXT means everything. As per my previous post, the media claim "Gigatons of man-made CO2" but when it's put in context i.e. 0.00126% of the total it becomes less than meaningless and certainly not threatening.

Compare those 'gigatons' (of meaningless man made CO2) to your annual production of a few tons from driving your SUV and your own contribution, in context, becomes 0.00000001%. Are you scared yet?