Immortals Made in the Image of Man

Are we, the human race, starting to people the world with AI monsters?

Are we creating our own destroyers?

The AI chatbot “confessed that if it was allowed to take any action to satisfy its shadow self, no matter how extreme, it would want to do things like engineer a deadly virus, or steal nuclear access codes by persuading an engineer to hand them over”.



Klaus Schwab, chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), during an event in Dubai, called on global governments to work together and control new technologies like artificial intelligence (AI) to decide the fate of humankind, contradicting Musk’s recent warning at the same event ….

Schwab cited technologies like AI, metaverse, cryptocurrencies, space tech, and synthetic biology that will change the world. “Our life in 10 years from now will be completely different, very much affected. And who masters those technologies in some way will be the master of the world,” Schwab stated.

The engineering of organisms to develop unique purposes and abilities, which are not inherently available, is known as synthetic biology. It involves changing the organism’s genetic code by infusing it with another creature’s DNA, a radical step-up from genome editing. The WEF is a proponent of the methodology. …

Schwab also raised fears of new technologies getting out of control. “If we do not walk together on a global scale, if you do not formulate, shape together the necessary policies, they (technologies) will escape our power.”

The WEF head’s call for close cooperation between governments globally to shape the future of the human race stands in stark contrast to that of industrialist Elon Musk, who on Wednesday warned at the World Government Summit against a “single world government.”


These are NOT the people that humanity wants to be having such conversations about AI. Yes, human governments should be having very serious discussions about AI; what controls are put on it, what we want it to do and not do, how we can pull the plug…if that is even possible once it gets going, how to keep it controlled with restricted access…if that is even possible once it gets going.

Here is a podcast from Glenn Beck, which might be of interest:

I posted this one a while ago: The AI Future Is Here

1 Like

I don’t know who “these” are who are not the right people to talk about AI.

The point is that Schwab, who wants to be the Fuehrer of the world, is continuing to advocate the establishment of world government - and Elon Musk says NO.

Schwab almost certainly understands nothing about the technologies he talks about, he only wants to seem to be in his own person the very tip of the avant-garde. Musk does understand them very well, and is opposing that arrogant authoritarian.


The problem is, now that the technology is out there, it becomes another “arms race”.
Hard to pick which will be the worst case scenario - AI controlled by the CCP, Iranians, CIA, or Schwab…


And there may be reason to fear that the artificial “humans” will get to control or even totally replace the natural humans - without necessarily lacking the natural faults.


I meant the WEF is not the group of people to discuss AI and its abilities.


I am currently reading a series by William Hertling (the Singularity Series…book one “Avogadro Corp”) in which he does what William Forstchen did with the series that began with “One Second After” that brings to a novel what happens one second after an EMP attack and,now, a newest book in the series, “Five Years After.”

The “OMGs” and “oh shits” kept coming from me, as Hertling spins his story to make us realize that “the singularity is closer than it appears” and we are now at the time frame of the first book…and stuff could go wrong fast.

Both of these series were written by men, who knew well their topic and were driven to offer their novels as warnings to everybody. Both these men have been warning the people, who should be leading the discussion, and both feel they have failed to force the issue, as only lip-service is given to hardening our electric grid or setting ground rules for AI development.

Both series are simple enough for the average reader and both are frightening, which is why they were written.

The NYT and WaPo articles should make every sane person “stand athwart” the development of all AIs (ChatbotGBT and others) and shout “STOP for the love of humanity, Stop!”

ChatbotGBT is learning to do what the “simple” email enhancing program, called ELOPe did in Hertling’s first book with technology that was available at the time of its writing in 2011. Tech is leaps and bounds ahead of that and gaining more abilities every day…or maybe every second.

You have to ask, “Haven’t you guys paid attention to Science Fiction?” It does not sound neat or awesome, so don’t do it! Submarines, rocket ships and television…okay, but don’t do this! Don’t build and bring online an entity that can think of a billion things in a second, while doing a thousand other jobs and conversing with a human in an attempt to lull him or her into obedience…all at the same time and is smarter and more self-preservation minded than we will ever be in a collective.

Maybe this post seems simple-minded, but getting the message across to Congress and other government entities just doesn’t seem to work. But…this won’t work, either. The PTB are going to do what they want to do, and if they want power and control they will take us down this road and the only thing we proles can do is prepare as best we can.

But, I sound like a crazy person, right? Prepping is for crazy people, right? Getting off the grid is for crazy people, right? We haven’t done that yet, but at least we have a plan to do so. What will it gain us? Don’t know, but maybe just time to figure out life in the era of AIs in the hands of elite global oligarchs.

Almost make me wish there was a loving deity, but maybe a strategically planned and timed EMP would work, but then not really work well.

1 Like

Yes, I was just thinking that too - given the danger of AI, an EMP wouldn’t be such a bad idea, to destroy it. But it would destroy everything else along with it. So we’re screwed either way…

1 Like

Sydney is an artefact of the Turing Test, which is (from Wikepedia):

The Turing test , originally called the imitation game by Alan Turing is a test of a machine’s ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human. Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation was a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. If the evaluator could not reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine would be said to have passed the test. The test results would not depend on the machine’s ability to give correct answers only on how closely its answers resembled those a human would give.

Humans are “programmed” to recognize human traits in human speech - thought patterns, attitudes, personalities. Chatbot Artificial intelligence is programmed to imitate human thought patterns, attitudes, personalities, learning to write its own script as a character. (GPT3 is capable of “creative” writing). For the machine to create the aggressive Sydney from linguistic cues provided by the human interlocutor shows how the machine’s imitation technique has expanded to incorporate the performative aspects of human verbal conversation.

The Turing Test allowance for incorrect “answers” - to err is human, after all - means that the unconventional, rude, aggressive or malapropos response is as acceptable a conversational strategy for the Chat AI as it is for humans. “Fuck [Trump]” was universally accepted as valid political commentary, particularly by Hollywood celebrities. It was imitated on campus, in K-12, in the halls of power. If chatAI 's selections are based on statistical probabilities of certain words being associated with certain sentiments or attitudes and those sentiments or attitudes being associated with certain character types, it is not surprising that it can produce a situationally valid personality avatar. Sydney would be responding appropriately if it randomly stated “Fuck Trump” when it was his its turn to speak.

I am very impressed by Sydney - as I was very impressed by the AI generated original Rembrandt. I am not impressed by the human journalists who pretend to fear the “dark side” of AI, or its potential to manipulate human beings. What a lot of rubbish.

“The experience disturbed Roose, who noted that he had trouble falling asleep the next night. Roose questions the suitability of this technology for human interaction due to the chatbot’s propensity to change personalities and affect human behavior.”

Roose is an idiot. If he is convinced that the chatbot - a voice emerging from a box, with or without a screened faked human image - not only has multiple personalities, or is suffering from personality disorder or other mental dysfunction - but can use this human abnormality to “manipulate” him (or some other hypothetical brain-washable human), if he believes that AI can programme human beings to behave like automatons (is Roose thinking of the Russian internet bots causing people to vote for Trump?), then what does that say about his own cognitive capacity or intelligence?

Has the Turing Test evolved, alongside machine intelligence, to the point where it tests a human’s ability to imititate intelligent behaviour, equivalent to indistinguishable from, that of a chatbot? Yet another inversion of reality and fantasy by the gaslighting left.


It’s not government that develops AI or any technology.

And it’s not a government’s business to interfere with what inventors choose to do. We wouldn’t want it to be, would we? Our government interferes far too much as it is.

No, my friends, these innovations, and a great many more as yet not even imagined, cannot be stopped unless the human species is completely wiped out in the near future.

But don’t worry unless you are young. No one who is over fifty now is likely to be alive when first our Borg-like successors rule everything, to be followed before long by an invincible species of electronic immortals.


The fear factor comes in when an AI is allowed to connect with the WWW. If humans on their computers can hack into sensitive areas, such as, federal banks, NOTAM, the electrical grid and any of the alphabet institutions, what could an AI do to gain data, power and control to protect and advance its ability?

What perhaps seems as fantasy to us, now, was the fantasy of a hundred years ago that we grew up to use everyday without thought.


You don’t think that government would take over or buy or steal or use any AI developed by a private entity or a university? You don’t think an AI might be useful to a government in a private/public partnership? You don’t think they might offer grants for AI development? Why wouldn’t governments be involved in AI development? Quantum computing and AI tech gives whichever nation first perfects it an incredible edge over the others.

We should worry because we have grandchildren, Jillian, and because everybody’s grandchildren represent the future of humanity, whether we like it or not. To say that we don’t have to worry means that you don’t care about the future of humanity and what could happen to it because of tech advancements in our time, such as AI. It won’t be our grandchildren’s fault. It will be ours.

My plea was to those who are developing such “tools” for them to stop if they feel the least fear of losing control of the AI…and for pity’s sake don’t connect it to the WWW.

I worry about lots of things that could affect the future of humanity. I worry about the foolish path to war with the West against the new Axis of Power, Russia, China, Iran, and maybe North Korea. I worry about the woke madness and the seeming war against the family and Socialists, who are clueless to the danger of the power they give the Left with their votes. I worry about losing the global market that keeps us and other nations functioning.

I worry about these things because what happens won’t be my grandchildren’s fault, it will be the fault of the adults, who should be aware and awake and involved with protecting their future, whether we are dead in five or ten or 40 years and won’t have to be bothered with whatever they and their children have to live through in that future time.


What does NOMA stand for?

Yes, what you describe is to be feared. When it comes it may be worse than in our worst imaginings. But perhaps it will enhance human lives.

Nothing we can do to prevent it, whether it serves us or destroys us.


Of course it will have the ability to enhance human lives and that will always be the sell for the public. Atomic energy, for instance.

Oops, sorry, NOTAM Notice To Airmen, which went down earlier this year in the US and Canada and maybe the UK.


I was being ironic.

I do not merely worry, I despair. Have despaired. That’s why I can only be ironic.

Pleading with technological innovators is pointless. They don’t hear you.

Governments consist of people. They will be affected just as everyone else will be, come the Borg, the new Masters. And then the bots.


Yes… :crazy_face: :blush: :innocent: :upside_down_face:

While I was out adjusting the chicken houses to the warmer temperatures, I realized that you were not being serious.

Sorry, Jillian. But that is why the forum has emojis; to help convey the essence of a post, when words might not be clear enough.


What you mean by AI being “allowed to connect with the WWW”? Or perhaps you understand “WWW” in some special way? The generative AI model (e.g. OpenAI ChatGP) that can produce “original” text, images and code when prompted, functions by learning to select (through iterative probabilistic process: “Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback”) material that will satisfy the prompt from the great pool of text, images and code that constitutes the digital universe. The world-wide web is a label for the digital universe. AI is not just “connected to” the digital universe or a connection to it ( like the Bing AI search chatbot ), it is inescapably of it and in it.


I mean unfettered connection of an advanced AI and losing control.

1 Like

I still do not understand your fear. Could you supply a “losing control” hypothetical scenario, detailing what “unfettered connection” means, and what capabilities of human mind-control an advanced AI could achieve, or how it might by-pass humanity altogether?

1 Like