Dear James, anonymity may not be important to presenting these ideas in general, but I prefer to stay pseudonymous in this case. On 22.3.2023 at 4:16 PM, "James Foster via Pharo-users" <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
Are you willing to sign your name to this? Is anonymity important to presenting these ideas?
James Foster
On Mar 22, 2023, at 5:34 AM, in_pharo_users--- via Pharo-users <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
Offray, and to all others,
you are missing the issue.
The problem we face is not to measure 'intelligence' of a system, but it's ability to verbally act indistinguishable from a human.
This ability is allready given as chatbots are accepted by millions of users, f.i. as user interfaces. (measurement = 'true', right?)
ChatGPT has the ability to follow a certain intention, f.i. to convince the user to buy a certain product. For this purpose, chat bots are getting now equipped with life like portrait pictures, speech input and output systems with life like voices, phone numbers that they can use to make calls or being called. They are fed with all available data on the user, and we know that ALL information about every single internet user in available and is being consolidared on necessity. The chat bots are able to use this information to guide their conversational strategy, as the useful aspects of the users mindset are extracted from his internet activity.
These chat bots are now operated on social network platforms with life like names, 'pretending' to be human.
These bots act verbally indistinguishable from humans for most social media users, as the most advanced psychotronic technology to manufacture consent.
The first goal of such a propaganda will naturally be to manufacture consent about humans accepting being manipulated by AI chat bots, right?
How can this be achieved?
Like allways in propaganda, the first attempt is to - suppress awareness of the propaganda, then - suppress the awareness of the problematic aspects of the propaganda content, then - reframe the propaganda content as acceptable, then as something to wish for, - achive collaboration of the propaganda victim with the goals of the propaganda content.
Interestingly, this is exactly the schema that your post follows, Offray.
This often takes the form of domain framing, like we see in our conversation: the problem is shifted to the realm of academics - here informatics/computer sciences - and thus delegated to experts exclusively. We saw this in the 9/11 aftermath coverup.
Then, Offray, you established yourself as an expert in color, discussing aspects that have allready been introduced by others and including the groups main focus 'Smalltalk', thus manufacturing consent and establishing yourself as a reliable 'expert', and in reverse trying to hit at me, whom you have identified as an adversary.
Then you offered a solution in color to the problem at hand with 'traceable AI' and thus tried to open the possibility of collaboration with AI proponents for the once critical reader.
I do not state, Offray, that you are knowingly an agent to promote the NWO AI program. I think you just 'learned' / have been programmed to be a successful academic software developer, because to be successful in academics, it is neccessary to learn to argue just like that since the downfall of academic science in the tradition of, let's say, Humboldt. So, I grant that you may be a victim of propaganda yourself, instead of being a secret service sposored agent. You took quite some time to formulate your post, though.
You acted to contain the discussion about AI in this vital and important informatics community to technical detail, when it is neccessary that academics and community members look beyond the narrow borders of their certifications and shift their thinking to the point of view where they can see what technology does in the real world.
On 21.3.2023 at 7:21 PM, "Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas" <offray.luna@mutabit.com> wrote:
I agree with Richard. The Turing test is not a good one to test intelligence and we have now just over glorified Eliza chatbots that appear to think and to understand but do none of them. ...