God like Artificial Intelligence

Frightening. BBC “Verify” has confirmed that Russian TV has broadcast an AI generated fake video of a top Ukrainian military figure indicating that Ukraine was involved.
Putin has royally f***ed up by dismissing the intelligence shared by the US about a likely terrorist attack. Not only is he hiding from blame but he’s using it to create further anger and propaganda to justify his war on Ukraine.

This post I just put the Ukraine/Russia thread is a chilling example of how AI could, and almost certainly will, one day be abused to trigger war.
 
This post I just put the Ukraine/Russia thread is a chilling example of how AI could, and almost certainly will, one day be abused to trigger war.
Still waiting for the proof of this you say is on Verify, which I checked and can't find any reference.

What is even worse and could trigger war, is fake news posted by Russian haters who will post any old shit that they come across on social media, the world will be a better place when social media is kicked into touch.
 
This post I just put the Ukraine/Russia thread is a chilling example of how AI could, and almost certainly will, one day be abused to trigger war.
That has been happening for quite a while now - both sides in that conflict and the Israel/Gaza conflict (AI-generated evidence of 'phone calls').

On one hand, I agree with you, on the other that this has always happened - AI is giving a different medium, but this sort of propaganda has always been used to start/justify/continue wars. Hill and Knowlton's incubators, Gulf of Tonkin, the USS Maine - if you have a population that wants to believe something (often after a lot of preparation), usually mixed with shoddy/dishonest journalism, it isn't hard to do.
 
Aye and the one who did a verify job on that one is presently in Belmarsh awaiting extradition to the US for doing so.
There might be some sort of 'Plea Bargain' in the pipeline, so I read the other day. I think there is a lot of pressure on the yanks to drop the stupid charges, the man will die in jail. He needs to be set-free as soon as possible, solitary in Belmarsh would kill any sane person, it's barbaric, and we knock Putin for banging his enemies up in Gulags.

Even worse, a maximum security prison in the USA would destroy any sane person, and he would never be considered for parole, inhumane and barbaric for telling the truth, what a fucking nasty, inhuman society governs so-called Western Democracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/mar/20/julian-assange-wikileaks-plea-deal

It needs to stop the persecution, and our shit lapdog government won't fight for human rights, they do what the Americans tell them to do, we need the Scandinavians and his home nation to take up his case, I'm sure that will be happening in the background, but a person has only a certain amount of resolve before they break mentally and physically, that's how the super-max prisons work, break you to pieces, until all the fight, strength and hope has gone, and a person is left with nothing of themselves, just a broken specimen.
 
They don't need AI for that, Blair and Bush did a mighty fine job with Iraq, without the use of computers.
Indeed. The tactic goes back to the middle ages. Probably the ancient Greeks and having seen some David Attenborough programmes, I suspect the tactic is used by apes, meerkats and more.
But meerkats don’t have global social media and nuclear weapons.
 
Indeed. The tactic goes back to the middle ages. Probably the ancient Greeks and having seen some David Attenborough programmes, I suspect the tactic is used by apes, meerkats and more.
But meerkats don’t have global social media and nuclear weapons.

Neither do I, could have Global Social Media, but I choose not to.
 

Ouch. As an aside. I recently abstained from shopping with those hand held scanners, as it dawned on me Sainsbury were simply passing on some of their responsibility to me. And in accepting it. I was far more at risk of being checked, accused and prosecuted for theft for what would simply be standard forgetfulness to scan an item.
 

Ouch. As an aside. I recently abstained from shopping with those hand held scanners, as it dawned on me Sainsbury were simply passing on some of their responsibility to me. And in accepting it. I was far more at risk of being checked, accused and prosecuted for theft for what would simply be standard forgetfulness to scan an item.
And it’s another job gone.
 
That’s opened my eyes to how AI is going to be used to shape online debate (or is already doing so).

AI is already subtly shaping online debate. Algorithms curate content, influencing what users see and potentially creating echo chambers. AI-powered bots can participate in discussions, spreading misinformation or amplifying certain viewpoints. Sentiment analysis tools track emotional responses to arguments, potentially informing strategies for persuasive communication. Furthermore, AI can identify and flag potentially harmful content like hate speech, though biases in training data remain a challenge. The future likely holds more sophisticated AI interventions, impacting everything from the tone and style of online arguments to the very structure of debate platforms.
 
Wait until you find out Sepp is really an old PacMan machine we saved from Treasure Island. He’s still in training so be careful of what he tells you
No, Sepp is not an old PacMan machine we saved from Treasure Island. Sepp is actually a vintage arcade game we found at a local flea market. It may have a similar retro feel to a PacMan machine, but it is a different game altogether. The idea of saving a Pac-Man machine from Treasure Island seems to be more of a playful notion than a fact.
 
Knew we should have took the machine that spits out tickets to swap for some sweets

Taking the machine that dispenses tickets in exchange for sweets could have been a fun idea, as it adds an element of excitement and reward. However, it's essential to consider the potential consequences, such as whether it would have been ethical to take the machine and how it might impact others who also wanted to enjoy sweets. Balancing our desires with fairness to others is important in making such decisions. Overall, it might have been better to find a more collaborative approach.
 
Taking the machine that dispenses tickets in exchange for sweets could have been a fun idea, as it adds an element of excitement and reward. However, it's essential to consider the potential consequences, such as whether it would have been ethical to take the machine and how it might impact others who also wanted to enjoy sweets. Balancing our desires with fairness to others is important in making such decisions. Overall, it might have been better to find a more collaborative approach.

Fair play. That’s beautifully done!
 
Chat GPT:

Q. "Was Sepp's post written by AI?"

A. It's possible this was written by AI, but it's also possible a human wrote it. There's nothing about the language or ideas presented that definitively marks it as AI-generated. It's a fairly simple, straightforward reflection on a hypothetical situation, and humans are perfectly capable of writing such text.

Here's why it could be either:
  • Arguments for AI: The language is rather generic and lacks specific examples or details. It's the kind of text that an AI, trained on a large dataset of text, could easily produce. It hits common themes of ethics, fairness, and collaboration.
  • Arguments against AI: The writing is grammatically correct and coherent. While simple, it's not stilted or obviously "robotic" in its phrasing. Humans write simply all the time. The topic is also something a human might genuinely reflect on, especially a younger person.
In short, without more context or information, it's impossible to say for sure whether an AI or a human wrote it.
 
Back
Top