AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Which is a manifold part of the problem
Dangers of AI
- Thread starter boji
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
One use of AI that's emerging: as a translator.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-scientists-are-using-ai-to-talk-to-animals/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-scientists-are-using-ai-to-talk-to-animals/
On the topic "dangers of AI".... we have already seen credible studies about Google search results being steered by idealogical bias. If web search results can be used to steer public sentiment, does anybody expect Chat AI to be ignored by political manipulators?
JR
JR
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Of course our own gov/mil may have already deployed this tech internally (like any good black project, they're a decade or more ahead of commercial development).
I wrote about this my post from 2019
The link in the original article is 404 but I found another copy here and some pushback from the left. I don't expect they think Trumps reaction as credible.
I stopped using Google for searches, and advertising back years ago.
JR
I didnt read the entire article posted above ,
One take away point I got from a brief skim through was this ,
Its was shown in the last UK election , where Borris won, that Cambridge analytica was actively using a kind of reverse psychology to get more votes from disenfranchised white people , all they actually had to do was make a fake advertisment on behalf of Corbyn's labour party with a picture of him shaking hands with black voters , that was enough to pull in lots of extra votes for Borris ,from what would have been mostly labour constituencies . In the end Borris was a nightmare , an imbarressment and was utterly unfit as a leader , but that didnt stop him getting in .
Data mining and aggregation turns up a list of undecided voters , a little slight of hand trickery via social media and you have them in the bag .
One take away point I got from a brief skim through was this ,
Its was shown in the last UK election , where Borris won, that Cambridge analytica was actively using a kind of reverse psychology to get more votes from disenfranchised white people , all they actually had to do was make a fake advertisment on behalf of Corbyn's labour party with a picture of him shaking hands with black voters , that was enough to pull in lots of extra votes for Borris ,from what would have been mostly labour constituencies . In the end Borris was a nightmare , an imbarressment and was utterly unfit as a leader , but that didnt stop him getting in .
Data mining and aggregation turns up a list of undecided voters , a little slight of hand trickery via social media and you have them in the bag .
and every year they get more experienced, while technology gives them sharper knives....
JR
boji
Well-known member
'Noticing' is precisely what is supposed to happen. To all of us. No matter who or what's raised our blood pressure. That's big data in action:
Demonstrate to an audience that their defended blind spot is in accord with site 'content'.
Generate ad-revenue from the resulting increase in attention.
Last edited:
Thanks, John.
But that's business as usual. SEO. Search Engine Optimisation. Big business. A little shady, as it doesn't follow documented methods and dirty tricks allover.
If the Republicans don't buy SEO, that's not the Democrats fault. It's what you get for putting very little into the way of big corporations.
I've said it before, your govt is owned by corporations.
I can understand not using Google. But for search, there isn't a real alternative. Bing is MS. Besides being rather lame, compared to Google, it's also even more skewed.
Then there's Quant. Run by the EU, to protect our privacy. But is uses Bing's index and as such is eaqually lame. Then there's a dozen others, but none of them sticks out.
fallout
Well-known member
Somehow people still believe there's a difference between republican and democrat politicians.
I still think companies advertising skewing elections as a product, with whatever means necessary, is far worse than SEO. It includes murdering people if necessary.
FSO has another spyware ready to invade everyone's phone. It doesn't matter if it's a dumb phone, a smartphone, or even a Linux phone.
And these have been proven to sell to anyone. Including drug kartels, dictators and everyone else with enough money.
As the CIA, FBI etc. (including the Russians and Chinese) remain awfully quiet about FSO, but have stopped US companies of acquiring them, don't you think they are already using FSO's malware? Even for free?
The first techies at FSO are ex NSA, transited from the NSA to the secret police in Saudi-Arabia to FSO in Israel. Don't you think they have to ask their former bosses to do so?
And since that means their former bosses allowed it, doesn't it mean NSA and the other agencies no longer think these tools are essential?
If these tools are no longer essential to CIA, NSA... doesn't that mean they already have far better?
Over the years in ITC, I have seem a few too many examples of industrial espionage by US "security" agencies.
Aren't we forgetting the good guys, like Julian Assange. He's literally dropped from the news. Dark forces in the USA still want his skin and what I hear from people in the media it isn't good for your career to draw attention to that fact.
He's up to the last resort, afaict. That's the European Court of Justice. I hope the judges have the balls to keep him out of the claws of US "justice". It's a shame his home country, Australia doesn't do sh*t for one of their citizens. But they are one of the "Five eyes"...
The rules for being in that club seem clear: shut up and dance to the tune of the USA. Maybe now you understand why I'm so critical about the USA, land of the so-called free.
Another point that raises my sympathy for the Canadians, as their universities are still allowed to track all that malfeasance.
On the sideline, a little history of what the CIA did in Cuba, with a lot of help from the maffia:
FSO has another spyware ready to invade everyone's phone. It doesn't matter if it's a dumb phone, a smartphone, or even a Linux phone.
And these have been proven to sell to anyone. Including drug kartels, dictators and everyone else with enough money.
As the CIA, FBI etc. (including the Russians and Chinese) remain awfully quiet about FSO, but have stopped US companies of acquiring them, don't you think they are already using FSO's malware? Even for free?
The first techies at FSO are ex NSA, transited from the NSA to the secret police in Saudi-Arabia to FSO in Israel. Don't you think they have to ask their former bosses to do so?
And since that means their former bosses allowed it, doesn't it mean NSA and the other agencies no longer think these tools are essential?
If these tools are no longer essential to CIA, NSA... doesn't that mean they already have far better?
Over the years in ITC, I have seem a few too many examples of industrial espionage by US "security" agencies.
Aren't we forgetting the good guys, like Julian Assange. He's literally dropped from the news. Dark forces in the USA still want his skin and what I hear from people in the media it isn't good for your career to draw attention to that fact.
He's up to the last resort, afaict. That's the European Court of Justice. I hope the judges have the balls to keep him out of the claws of US "justice". It's a shame his home country, Australia doesn't do sh*t for one of their citizens. But they are one of the "Five eyes"...
The rules for being in that club seem clear: shut up and dance to the tune of the USA. Maybe now you understand why I'm so critical about the USA, land of the so-called free.
Another point that raises my sympathy for the Canadians, as their universities are still allowed to track all that malfeasance.
On the sideline, a little history of what the CIA did in Cuba, with a lot of help from the maffia:
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
I believe there is a difference in fundamental philosophy. But they all have the same human flaws, and most, after spending a few years in office, succumb to these flaws which makes them appear the same.
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
I use DuckDuckGo which, as far as I can tell, is really just an anonymizer layer between the user and the search engine(s). I gladly give up "personalized" search for some increase in privacy.
The divide these days seems to be between "insiders" and "outsiders".
===
I find it pretty amusing that ex-President Trump just published a book of letters from famous celebrities that he received over the years. It's pretty remarkable how many of his most vocal detractors now were once very complimentary and friendly. This reveals how shallow and hypocritical some celebrities can be.
JR
living sounds
Well-known member
Trump himself was once good friends with the Clintons... He actually was a Democrat 15 years ago...
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Everyone knew that until 2016. He's not really "right-wing" or traditional Republican and never was despite the ridiculous mischaracterization (character assassination) done by the media.
living sounds
Well-known member
Right, it was all the media's fault and nothing he said or did...
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Did I say that? No, I did not. He has a big mouth and not enough self-control at times. But it was his calling out the media for their bias and lies that caused their immature response to him as a candidate and as POTUS. I have no problem with criticism of actual faults, mistakes, etc. That isn't what happened.
The Clinton's attended his wedding and have kind words for him in the new book. They are political creatures.
Trump was/is a businessman to his detriment in politics.
JR
