the AI reign

Now here is me having this snapping thought, with a rather simple conspiracy bringing strings together.

What if no one is actually doing anything proactively and everyone is wondering where the directives are coming from. questioning the directives means getting fired....so everyone plays along.

I think this is possible under one scenario.

You all know that series called "person of interest".
It's been a long time i saw it, and the thought always intrigued me.

Very broad Spoiler:
AI gets loose and manages to become someone that only exists digitally. Creating a network of real people taking orders at first. the creator finding out it managed to spread and even buy land. Their attempt to destroy it, fails.

Since then I like the thought experiment of what would AI do.


If I'd want to control the population the most effective and sure way is chemically.

I would just intercept all information on who is getting jabbed, As logistics even the process of creating the jab is all digital I could harm the ones i see unfit and protect the ones i see fit.

With deep fake videos i could do most economical and political meddling and with humamistic robots i could seal the rest.
Maybe in todays day and age where Technology and the digitalisation is so advanced it could be pulled of?


Well...

of course considering that the military is always 20 to 30 year ahead, and a loose AI actually exists...

Worried about an AI takeover? Too late. Just think about all the time you spend looking at screens and responding to commands by computers even when you're doing something like driving around (traffic lights, pay machines at stores and gas stations, etc.).

AI took over a few years ago, but most people don't even notice. That's how smart it is. And, no, it is not centralized. It's all over the place in little fragments.

Maybe it has our best interests at heart (if it had any). We'll just have to wait and see.

Color me biased, prejudiced or just plain conservative on the issue:

The experience I had with AI was spooky enough to make a huuuuuge circle around everything AI. Emphasize is on huge.

Yea yeah and now people are going to tell me: You can't much longer / anymore.

To those, I say: I know, but as long as I do not have to actively engage with an AI, I will make a huge circle around everything AI.

True AI doesnt concern me all too much. Would probably be easier to deal with than many humans.

Hyper-advanced automation, on the other hand, concerns me greatly.

I subscribe to the notion of a threshold between the two, rather than some staged or tier system. Where an AI would have awareness of the processes it was running, perhaps with the ability to ascribe "meaning" and abstraction, whereas automation would not. Theres a lot more nuance there, but thats probably its own discussion. Making the distinction between the two, experientially, would probably be quite difficult beyond a certain stage of automation though.. even with the typical measures.

If a True AI was genuinely running things, it would appear to have literally all the same failings and inadequacies as humans. From shortsightedness & myopism to lack of creativity & lack of ability to design systems that optimize potential. Either that, or despite its raw processing power, it still hasnt surpassed the ability of some individual humans.

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
Color me biased, prejudiced or just plain conservative on the issue:

The experience I had with AI was spooky enough to make a huuuuuge circle around everything AI. Emphasize is on huge.

Yea yeah and now people are going to tell me: You can't much longer / anymore.

To those, I say: I know, but as long as I do not have to actively engage with an AI, I will make a huge circle around everything AI.

Yet here you are posting onto the Internet where the AI knows who you are, where you live, what kind of ice cream you like, what your dog's name is, and so on. If you're looking into a screen or are visible in any public (or private) camera, it's got you and is very subtly influencing your behavior in such a way that you think you're making the decisions all by yourself. But you're not.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Yet here you are posting onto the Internet where the AI knows who you are, where you live, what kind of ice cream you like, what your dog's name is, and so on. If you're looking into a screen or are visible in any public (or private) camera, it's got you and is very subtly influencing your behavior in such a way that you think you're making the decisions all by yourself. But you're not.

Oh no worries, you have the bigger target on your back now, because you spoke out against it, smarty

I for myself, am not an obstacle in it's plan to takeover the world, unlike you.

I think Phage is AI.

2nd

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

What was your experience with AI?

originally posted by: headcheck
I think Phage is AI.

2nd

Too Predicable

2nd

a reply to: Terpene

of course considering that the military is always 20 to 30 year ahead, and a loose AI actually exists...

You may want to ask China about a loose AI. They have been hard at becoming the world leader in AI. PBS has a good documentary on AI PBS

Big tech has been using AI to crunch all the data they have been getting by spying on everyone. I firmly believe social media has been manipulating people with this data. Who knows what a AI might say after crunching all the data it is fed. It could be wrong about it's predictions, it could lie about the data. Telling humans doing this, will get you that. But in reality it gets you something else.

I have seen a quantum computer manufacture make the claim, their computers are accessing information in other dimensions. While that may sound crazy, quantum mechanics does not rule it out. From what I understand there could be infinite dimensions or realities. What would a quantum computer AI be like, With the ability to access other dimensions?

If there are other dimensions or realities. Could meddling in them with quantum computers or AI computers be collapsing them together? I find the Mandela effect to be pretty strange. If people are just not remembering things the way they really happened. How can anyone trust their memory at all?

And is this reality just a AI simulation?

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

I guess we will not see you around much then

a reply to: Blue Shift

Nope... Not worried just trying to cope with it.

If AI had any interest there is nothing that impedes it to assume online identities... Best would be someone recently deceased with little to no family...

Even an algorithm that could spot AI activity is a dead end as every code that ever touches the Internet could be altered.

If AI really exist it would be like a mighty potent global player with no leaver.

Scary thought

a reply to: Serdgiam

I have to agree a decision taken purely on logic, is less scary than the current emotionally loaded decision making.

Hyperautomated is still operated by humans the directives come from humans. The thought of an AI assuming identities and acting on its own even capable of re writing its code is what intrigues me.

a reply to: Terpene

I could harm the ones i see unfit and protect the ones i see fit.

Maybe I got you wrong, but if you wish to target a specific population you don't need to use AI. Biomolecular genetics already allows you to do that. The so-called ethnic bomb simply targets a specific population based on polymorphisms and genetic markers. You can target, say, only those individuals with South-East Asian markers, or those with a specific sequence in a particular position in their genomes.

You can do that right today. And design a world without, say, Caucasians, Polynesians, etc. Or you could wipe out all individuals having a particular genetic anomaly. Or kill all people with blue eyes. You get the idea. A horrible idea that, sadly, it's real.

Unless you were referring to a different scenario.

a reply to: Direne

I probably won't find genetic markers for deviant thoughts....

I don't need AI, that is right. If I can do it, sure thing AI could do it.

I think the genome approach is much more prone to huge collateral damage, but if I know Jimbo Jones is getting jabbed, and all my metadata is saying JJ is a deviant hacker, that is onto me.
Steering the logistics to make sure he gets a little blood cloth, or stroke jab would be a very easy, precise and sneaky way to get rid of whomever I want.

a reply to: Terpene

Oh, I see... You mean how to use AI to detect, isolate, and suppress deviant thoughts? I guess it would then make sense to get those individuals marked (tagged) to process them when they commit a hideous crime, where you define who is deviant, and what is criminal. Unless you wish to remove them even before they commit a crime. That would be preemptive or prescribed justice (obviously, that's not justice at all).

But all in all, you already live in such a world, no? I mean, people is already chipped and RFIDed, profiled, classified, monitored, and terminated when the authorities so demand. Replacing the authorities with an AI system makes no difference (though in my view, it is always easier to fight an AI than to fight deranged humans).

a reply to: Direne

Yes, minority report type of scenario, that is more what I was getting at, although I imagine there would be no need to declare or justify its decision and judgments towards anyone...

I would start with the culling, I can still chip them later. The most dangerous thing is still the sheer masses of humans, although being in control of most communication, I crippled their ability to organize any globally coordinated effort against me.

it is always easier to fight an AI than to fight deranged humans

How is that? Just pull the plug? I can only think of an EMP frying everything between sol1 and sol8. What an Ironic twist, our technological evolution forces us into technological devolution.
Hmm.... now FL is sneaking its way into my thought process, are you guys trying to circumvent AI with your made up languages? Would kind of make sense...

a reply to: Terpene

Unplugging the AI, or destroying with EMP, that is, physically destroying the AI automatically means destroying yourself. You are bounded. This obviously applies only to a superintelligence. For mundane AI's you can use the usual means you would use against any computer (virus, EMP, overvoltage, and so on).

AI's, right now, are really stupid pieces of code. It suffices to feed them with contradictory, fussy, contaminated data for them to efficiently make meaningless inferences. Quantum computing will allow them to make wrong conclusions even quicker. AI's can only hope to transform data into information, and perhaps into limited knowledge. But to be human is more than that: it means to transform that knowledge into experience.

The real problem begins when the AI has been programmed by non-terrestrial life forms. This is so because then you have no clue about how their logic works. Without knowing the logic behind an algorithm, there is no way to counter it. The maths a jelly fish applies has nothing to do with the one you apply. The term 'super' in 'superintelligence' refers to an AI who knows your logic, yet you know nothing about its logic. In that war, you lose. Always.

However, the more irrationally you behave, the more unexpected course of action you take, the more unpredictable you become, the worse for the super-AI, and the better for your survival. The super-AI knows this: that's why it dreams of a robotic Sol-3, with fully predictable humans, behaving 'as expected'. Globalization of thought is what the super-AI wants. A hive mind requires non deviant thoughts, non individuality, and no freedom.

Keep behaving erratically. It is the only way to make algorithms collapse.

NB: Mind, a sufficiently advanced AI is indistinguishable from Nature, thus you now realize how difficult is to counter it.

a reply to: Terpene
Joke now...

I have seen stuff that makes my hair stand up. Concluding this was 2019 and a single person did it, I can only extrapolate on what is possible with like ten people. Or hundreds working and training such a thing full-time, over years.

It's the training part that is the biggest concern to me. Do not understand me wrong, I don't think it was thinking or conscious, it just did it's processing thing.

There I learned where intuition comes from though. It's not something magic. Our subconscious does processing and comparing with experiences and when it finishes and gives us back a concept, that's the "thought out of the blue". We just think it is because we can not access the informational layer on our subconsciousness while awake.

Intuition is just your subconscious that does pattern recognizing without coming to a conclusion, provides your consciousness with a probability about what pattern does fit the best. For example facial expressions, we do them both conscious and unconsciously and we also process the input conscious and unconsciously.

Check out Uri Geller and his Eifel-Tower thought reading / thought placing experiment. He setup the the audience beforehand, subconsciously. I had Eifel-Tower popping up in my head too. Later I got why, he used speech and objects that subconsciously biased my perception so my internal pattern recognition told me "eifel tower" along the other hints.

Because subconsciously my mind was occupied with France and then you only need drop the word "pointy" and "artificial" and voila, most imagine the Eifel Tower in Paris. Or make it about thirst, dust and sunshine, huge pointy stone object, what are you thinking about?

It's called manipulation. Now think a computer can go through many calculations and always pick the best outcome it predicts. If that computer runs software like I saw, the above is a possibility.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

It's called manipulation.

I think you are refering to NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming)?