Obama is Soros-controlled. Soros put him into the presidency. Obama's thinking was totally influenced by Soros. i read Obama's Dreams from My Father...he admitted that he was not too bright. The first time I saw Obama speak...I got a gut feeling 'con artist.' I saw videos, where he didn't have a teleprompter...and he was tongue-tied. Soros is still in the picture...and Soros should have been imprisoned long ago. He couldn't go back to his country Hungary, because he would have been put in prison...and our inept government let him have 'dual' citizenship here in America in the early 1960s. His Open Society funds problems to cripple America. George "Schwartz" Soros has caused economic chaos worldwide...The word Soros means trouble in Hebrew.
well, at least George is really old and will soon meet his reward with his demons in hell. His son Alex runs the organization now along with wife Huma Abedin (former Hillary Clinton's chief of staff)
Fantastic post! I so wish our country would ban dual citizenship. You pick one and only one country, and you pledge allegiance to that nation. The word Soros means demonic in my language.
I scanned through the whole essay but to me the most important portion was at the top which could easily be summed up in just few words: humans are lazy. We keep electing the same poor performing people because people are lazy; our inner city kids can’t read read because they’re stoopid but because parents are too lazy to demand better of their teachers, Kenny kan’t kount in the same school districts for the same reason; Google knew this long ago when it saw that people are too lazy to read past the first few search results, much less past the first page; now lazy humans have found a new way to cheat effort, save time (to play online/watch Netflix/catch the latest episode of the real househusbands of _______) by letting the algorithms do their research.
You’d think 60 years after Star Trek introduced us to the perils of AI overlords, we’d be a little more wary; personally, I think too many people watch those episodes and looked forward to the day when they could offload much of the minutia of life to someone or something else.
We elect the same people because those elected have manipulated the districts and rules so it’s nearly impossible to oust them. People give up trying, and so long as politics is a means to wealth and power it won’t change. Term limits is the best solution, and perhaps changing districts to county lines or lines of latitude and longitude rather than obvious political boundaries.
85% of political districts are no contest for a particular party. It’s why we never see real change
Well, I’m not sure I buy the whole of your opening but I’ve advocated for both of your solutions - even on here. Political districts SHOULD be distinct and contiguous communities, not a serpentine path 1km wide stretching across the state. And while term limits may be a bad idea, the founders of America did not envision a life in politics as a career. To you’re two solutions you should add a third: repeal the 17th and return selection and appointment of senators to the state legislatures .
Recall Winston Smith’s job in 1984. Orwell foresaw the problem. In a totalitarian state, the control of information is Job One. Winston Smith’s job in the Ministry of Truth was, along with thousands of colleagues, to erase yesterday’s news and history. Completely gone, never existed. The world of Oceania’s simulacrum was only 24 hours long. Everything written or said publicly yesterday was erased today. The only version of reality there was is today’s version, approved by the government. But even that proved inadequate. Enter the Thought Police and thoughtcrime. Here Orwell was “forced” to bring in a bit of technology, at last - the telescreen, the anchor of the Surveillance State. Telescreens were everywhere, and they contained facial recognition software(although Orwell never mentions this, it must be assumed, and he likely wouldn’t have imagined its reality with clarity). Orwell was racking his brain to envision totalitarian technocracy with the required technology not yet invented, most especially AI. Had he written “2024” instead of 1984, who knows, his imagination may have landed right above the target. But a 40 year miss ain’t bad by historical measure.
Orwell was a prophet. Unfortunately, I think ours is the last generation to comprehend what he foretold. Everyone today is up to their ears in Group Think.
AI at a cross roads. For Good or Evil? I found Alter AI to be great time saver in researching historical events. It recognized false data versus true data. It also expressed the fact it some times hallucinates. I caught it doing just that and called "it" on it. It apologized and rethought what was original reported. If they reprogram history and the facts and re-write history, then we are in trouble. My major concern is having AI develop new drugs that have a hidden time bomb buried in the formulation. Especially mRNA. or GOF Chimeric molecules. By the way. AI helped bring focus to my book that is now on Amazon. Seven Innocents Tylenol Trail of Death.
I like Alter.systems too. If you tell it to give a heterodox, academic answer, give it instructions on how you like it to approach a query, it's quite good.
What strikes me is that AI may be a new and more powerful gatekeeper, but the shaping of perception did not begin with AI.
Film and television have been doing something similar, more subtly, for decades through repetition and visual shorthand.
A character wakes up and reaches for coffee: morning has begun. Someone comes home after a hard day and pours a whiskey: time to decompress. Friends meet over drinks: social connection.
Wine accompanies dinner: sophistication. None of this needs explanation because we have seen it so often that it simply feels normal.
Now imagine a character waking up, washing spinach and berries, cutting ginger, adding seeds or protein, blending a healthy shake, and sitting down to drink it. Unless that person is being portrayed as especially health-conscious, athletic, eccentric, or obsessive, we rarely see that scene. That difference matters.
Coffee does not need an explanation. Whiskey does not need an explanation. Wine does not need an explanation. Healthy behavior often does.
This is how cultural framing works: not necessarily by explicitly telling us what to think or do, but by repeatedly showing us what ordinary life supposedly looks like.
AI raises the stakes because it can move that process upstream. Instead of merely showing us what is normal, it can help determine what information is presented, what is omitted, which sources are considered credible, and which questions receive a warning or refusal.
The deeper issue, then, may not simply be censorship. It is the power to shape the frame before we even realize a frame is there.
And once something has been repeated often enough, we stop seeing it as a message.
Ms. D---you are absolutely correct. I have mentioned to my kids and grandkids the fact that one TV shows or in the movies whenever someone has a problem that cannot be ignored or when they get bad news or something terrible has happened to them the first thing they all do is reach for the alcohol like this is something that is guaranteed to help. No question that millions of children worldwide see this hundreds of millions of times while they are growing up and it is easy to think that everybody knows this is the proper response.
There is a famous painting of George Washington knelling and praying during the time he is going thru the travails of Valley Forge and most everyone has a great deal of respect for what Washington did during those time but......can you ever recall a time when something happens to someone on a TV show or movie where it shows that person kneeling and praying ?
Look up mendacious in a dictionary...there you will see a picture of Barack Obama. The old adage "follow the money" is ALWAYS top of line when Obama is involved. H&R Block and Intuit spent 100 million in lobbying when Obama enacted his ACA and Justice Roberts decided it was a tax. The ROI for that 100 mil was well worth it for those firms.
Re monopolies...I loved the browser Netscape which was buried into oblivion by Google et al.
And Dr Malone...so he's a right wing lunatic as portrayed by the corporate industrial media complex because he simply states scientific facts regarding the Covid shots but in reality I saw at least one interview where he stated he had voted Democrat his entire life and was somewhat politically agnostic prior to the pandemic.
The control of what information is dessiminated is really disturbing...
Still praying for Cara and Filly. I hope they are okay. 🤞🙏🙏🙏
Belloc-----Obama's picture is in the dictionary at least in one other place----in the definition of ---HUBRIS.
However, under the word LIAR, you will see Bill and Hillary Clinton's picture first and then comes Obama and......there are 435 pics of our current House and Senate shown as well. The dictionary apologized for the total number of pics but.....said it could not leave anyone out.
One of my email addresses is @netscape.com (buried under AOL). Of late AOL and Netscape have said they were ending operations, but have continued to provide free operations sans clear need or path to a paid operation.
What do people trust for information? It used to be the media, which is corrupt as hell. Some people found a way around it and we have a divide; people who trust the news and people who know they are lying.
The AI gatekeeper controls all information to most users (people who trust its answers - I don't).
To ask for government control is to assure that the corrupt government will never be called out for corruption. The media used to be where politics was tried. Now it is corrupt and helping corrupt politicians and the arbiter of truth is a machine that people trust more than media and no one can see under the hood (like an electronic voting machine).
It's what you make of it. I've had profound "conversations" with Alter.systems on cosmology, various religions, Penrose's microtubules and consciousness, steady state universe and supermassive black holes, geopolitics and cui bono, health topics, book recommendations and how to clean the efflorescence off my deck. I find it an excellent tool that makes me think more, not less.
Ms C---- I can clearly see the utility of being able to ask a source for all the info about X but...I think one of the rules should be that the AI source should have to tell you which sources it used so you could know where the info is coming from. If it lists organizations that you know are leftist or are people you know are liars, you could have sort of insight as to the validity of them.
I have a communications and computer background. My first interaction with early AI was to ask right after 2020, "what can you tell me about vaccines?" and it said "vaccines are safe and effective". I think in terms of early AI that tells it all. If we can understand the process by which that happened then we know most of what we need to access the risk. But I notice that most articles fail to clearly define the risks and which ones are catastrophic to the human race. That's probably because it's easy to gauge stupidity when you voice the actual risks at that level. IE "take control of the internet and shut of access to anyone who has ill intent." - you can really say that without sounding stupid or at least ill-informed. And misinformation? Naturally Obama would identify that as a key risk. Nothing he wants to do in the world can stand in the pure light of day. Sure risks need to be factored into the "killing millions in the next generation" filter but where is the list of actually threats? are we too afraid if we listed those it would kill the entire market? yes I think we are....if we actually described what AI could do in the worst case scenario it might kill it without further discussion. But now you can see that money is going to decide this issue. Not science but money. Money is currently positioning to take control of the science so it can say what they need for it to say. How is that different? Will AI get a fair hearing? inside some of these organizations, probably, but outside when the results are presented to the political world? not a chance.
Thank you for this awsome work covering a vital aspect of our, our childrens future!
I start by noting I am slow on buying medical interventions - a vaccine skeptic. I am also slow in buying into AI. Giving it license in identifying treatments for disease and the like. I am an AI skeptic. Certainly in terms of the general purposes you cover here.
I have gemini available and don't use it. Frankly, it never occurred to me to consider asking any AI program to assess and provide a summary of what's out there on any matter of issue.
For my and everymans sake, my position is we need to take the time needed to follow our individual sources and more. We need to glean the facts, data, various perspectives needed to form our own views to pursue. IMO it would be seriously dangerous to solely rely on an AI program to summarily inform us on the state of any matter of import.
That said Anthropic. We start with their effort to constrain the War Department use of their AI. They have continued to present themselves as the most principled of the AI lot. In passing I noted that Anthropic is composed of many suboperations. Then there's the 'you are known by the company you keep.' Imo Dario's wife is a mind stopping (a conservatives assessment) breech of beneficial values. Bottom line - I don't credit Anthropic or any other of the AI operations with values consistent with the values and needs with we the people.
Another aside, in passing learned Bill Gates is offering a billion dollars toward AI matters.
I thank you both for your diligent efforts to learn and serve up vital issues that need to be widely known and considered. Research that would be unaffordable to your subscribership and beyond otherwise. It is appreciated! Hopefully we can put at least a dent in your costs for doing it! You di well deserve more!
I realized something fascinating today about your reports and style of reporting if I may call it that. It starts a little slowly, it captures my imagination and carries me through something I’m not totally capable of understanding, but feeling like I end up having some idea.
I used to read books, fiction. Way back. I read many books from Robert Ludlum and he would do that same thing. He would start out slow, but it sucked me in so quickly that I couldn’t put it down. I find myself doing the same thing with your very detailed reports that take me in and out of rabbit holes. Anyways, you captured me a while ago and I just realized or think I realized, how it happened. I expect you to keep grabbing my attention, but I just wanted to say that.
Lastly, I’m not sure I mentioned it, but I hope you guys find a way to keep yourselves safe, because the information you’re putting out is very valuable to many, not just little old me.
"These systems are rapidly becoming intermediaries between people and information. Increasingly, people will ask the machine rather than search the underlying record themselves." For me that statement has become the crux of the biscuit. In my daily life interacting with "digital assistants" when renewing a credit card dealing with a bank, looking for product I am interested in, for example Amazon forever send e-mails stating "we found something you may like" that shows products I looked at and rejected but actually ordered the one that best fit my needs. That is dumb AI.
I want to go back to the time where you called got a person who had access to all the company data bases and can answer the question or deal with the issue or order.
If Obama wants it regulated, then it’s a terrible idea. Period!
Obama is Soros-controlled. Soros put him into the presidency. Obama's thinking was totally influenced by Soros. i read Obama's Dreams from My Father...he admitted that he was not too bright. The first time I saw Obama speak...I got a gut feeling 'con artist.' I saw videos, where he didn't have a teleprompter...and he was tongue-tied. Soros is still in the picture...and Soros should have been imprisoned long ago. He couldn't go back to his country Hungary, because he would have been put in prison...and our inept government let him have 'dual' citizenship here in America in the early 1960s. His Open Society funds problems to cripple America. George "Schwartz" Soros has caused economic chaos worldwide...The word Soros means trouble in Hebrew.
George Soros: the world’s biggest tick.
Soros has the reptilian nature of a crocodile. He is a megalomaniac out to pull the world down to the lower depths.
well, at least George is really old and will soon meet his reward with his demons in hell. His son Alex runs the organization now along with wife Huma Abedin (former Hillary Clinton's chief of staff)
I've read another of Alex brothers is also taking up the causes.
Fantastic post! I so wish our country would ban dual citizenship. You pick one and only one country, and you pledge allegiance to that nation. The word Soros means demonic in my language.
Yaaaa, when you can’t see the funding you can assume a group is not independent. They’re too afraid to reveal their ‘daddy’.
Isn’t Datarepublican a treasure??
I scanned through the whole essay but to me the most important portion was at the top which could easily be summed up in just few words: humans are lazy. We keep electing the same poor performing people because people are lazy; our inner city kids can’t read read because they’re stoopid but because parents are too lazy to demand better of their teachers, Kenny kan’t kount in the same school districts for the same reason; Google knew this long ago when it saw that people are too lazy to read past the first few search results, much less past the first page; now lazy humans have found a new way to cheat effort, save time (to play online/watch Netflix/catch the latest episode of the real househusbands of _______) by letting the algorithms do their research.
You’d think 60 years after Star Trek introduced us to the perils of AI overlords, we’d be a little more wary; personally, I think too many people watch those episodes and looked forward to the day when they could offload much of the minutia of life to someone or something else.
We elect the same people because those elected have manipulated the districts and rules so it’s nearly impossible to oust them. People give up trying, and so long as politics is a means to wealth and power it won’t change. Term limits is the best solution, and perhaps changing districts to county lines or lines of latitude and longitude rather than obvious political boundaries.
85% of political districts are no contest for a particular party. It’s why we never see real change
Well, I’m not sure I buy the whole of your opening but I’ve advocated for both of your solutions - even on here. Political districts SHOULD be distinct and contiguous communities, not a serpentine path 1km wide stretching across the state. And while term limits may be a bad idea, the founders of America did not envision a life in politics as a career. To you’re two solutions you should add a third: repeal the 17th and return selection and appointment of senators to the state legislatures .
Recall Winston Smith’s job in 1984. Orwell foresaw the problem. In a totalitarian state, the control of information is Job One. Winston Smith’s job in the Ministry of Truth was, along with thousands of colleagues, to erase yesterday’s news and history. Completely gone, never existed. The world of Oceania’s simulacrum was only 24 hours long. Everything written or said publicly yesterday was erased today. The only version of reality there was is today’s version, approved by the government. But even that proved inadequate. Enter the Thought Police and thoughtcrime. Here Orwell was “forced” to bring in a bit of technology, at last - the telescreen, the anchor of the Surveillance State. Telescreens were everywhere, and they contained facial recognition software(although Orwell never mentions this, it must be assumed, and he likely wouldn’t have imagined its reality with clarity). Orwell was racking his brain to envision totalitarian technocracy with the required technology not yet invented, most especially AI. Had he written “2024” instead of 1984, who knows, his imagination may have landed right above the target. But a 40 year miss ain’t bad by historical measure.
Orwell was a prophet. Unfortunately, I think ours is the last generation to comprehend what he foretold. Everyone today is up to their ears in Group Think.
AI at a cross roads. For Good or Evil? I found Alter AI to be great time saver in researching historical events. It recognized false data versus true data. It also expressed the fact it some times hallucinates. I caught it doing just that and called "it" on it. It apologized and rethought what was original reported. If they reprogram history and the facts and re-write history, then we are in trouble. My major concern is having AI develop new drugs that have a hidden time bomb buried in the formulation. Especially mRNA. or GOF Chimeric molecules. By the way. AI helped bring focus to my book that is now on Amazon. Seven Innocents Tylenol Trail of Death.
I like Alter.systems too. If you tell it to give a heterodox, academic answer, give it instructions on how you like it to approach a query, it's quite good.
What strikes me is that AI may be a new and more powerful gatekeeper, but the shaping of perception did not begin with AI.
Film and television have been doing something similar, more subtly, for decades through repetition and visual shorthand.
A character wakes up and reaches for coffee: morning has begun. Someone comes home after a hard day and pours a whiskey: time to decompress. Friends meet over drinks: social connection.
Wine accompanies dinner: sophistication. None of this needs explanation because we have seen it so often that it simply feels normal.
Now imagine a character waking up, washing spinach and berries, cutting ginger, adding seeds or protein, blending a healthy shake, and sitting down to drink it. Unless that person is being portrayed as especially health-conscious, athletic, eccentric, or obsessive, we rarely see that scene. That difference matters.
Coffee does not need an explanation. Whiskey does not need an explanation. Wine does not need an explanation. Healthy behavior often does.
This is how cultural framing works: not necessarily by explicitly telling us what to think or do, but by repeatedly showing us what ordinary life supposedly looks like.
AI raises the stakes because it can move that process upstream. Instead of merely showing us what is normal, it can help determine what information is presented, what is omitted, which sources are considered credible, and which questions receive a warning or refusal.
The deeper issue, then, may not simply be censorship. It is the power to shape the frame before we even realize a frame is there.
And once something has been repeated often enough, we stop seeing it as a message.
We simply see it as reality.
Ms. D---you are absolutely correct. I have mentioned to my kids and grandkids the fact that one TV shows or in the movies whenever someone has a problem that cannot be ignored or when they get bad news or something terrible has happened to them the first thing they all do is reach for the alcohol like this is something that is guaranteed to help. No question that millions of children worldwide see this hundreds of millions of times while they are growing up and it is easy to think that everybody knows this is the proper response.
There is a famous painting of George Washington knelling and praying during the time he is going thru the travails of Valley Forge and most everyone has a great deal of respect for what Washington did during those time but......can you ever recall a time when something happens to someone on a TV show or movie where it shows that person kneeling and praying ?
It seems to me that Anthropic could eliminate all the risk by making their code all open-source so that it's safety could by checked by the public.
Look up mendacious in a dictionary...there you will see a picture of Barack Obama. The old adage "follow the money" is ALWAYS top of line when Obama is involved. H&R Block and Intuit spent 100 million in lobbying when Obama enacted his ACA and Justice Roberts decided it was a tax. The ROI for that 100 mil was well worth it for those firms.
Re monopolies...I loved the browser Netscape which was buried into oblivion by Google et al.
And Dr Malone...so he's a right wing lunatic as portrayed by the corporate industrial media complex because he simply states scientific facts regarding the Covid shots but in reality I saw at least one interview where he stated he had voted Democrat his entire life and was somewhat politically agnostic prior to the pandemic.
The control of what information is dessiminated is really disturbing...
Still praying for Cara and Filly. I hope they are okay. 🤞🙏🙏🙏
Belloc-----Obama's picture is in the dictionary at least in one other place----in the definition of ---HUBRIS.
However, under the word LIAR, you will see Bill and Hillary Clinton's picture first and then comes Obama and......there are 435 pics of our current House and Senate shown as well. The dictionary apologized for the total number of pics but.....said it could not leave anyone out.
😂😂😂😂😂 Brilliant!
One of my email addresses is @netscape.com (buried under AOL). Of late AOL and Netscape have said they were ending operations, but have continued to provide free operations sans clear need or path to a paid operation.
excellent article!
What do people trust for information? It used to be the media, which is corrupt as hell. Some people found a way around it and we have a divide; people who trust the news and people who know they are lying.
The AI gatekeeper controls all information to most users (people who trust its answers - I don't).
To ask for government control is to assure that the corrupt government will never be called out for corruption. The media used to be where politics was tried. Now it is corrupt and helping corrupt politicians and the arbiter of truth is a machine that people trust more than media and no one can see under the hood (like an electronic voting machine).
What a world...when people want a machine to do their thinking for them...they have totally lost it.
It's what you make of it. I've had profound "conversations" with Alter.systems on cosmology, various religions, Penrose's microtubules and consciousness, steady state universe and supermassive black holes, geopolitics and cui bono, health topics, book recommendations and how to clean the efflorescence off my deck. I find it an excellent tool that makes me think more, not less.
Ms C---- I can clearly see the utility of being able to ask a source for all the info about X but...I think one of the rules should be that the AI source should have to tell you which sources it used so you could know where the info is coming from. If it lists organizations that you know are leftist or are people you know are liars, you could have sort of insight as to the validity of them.
I have a communications and computer background. My first interaction with early AI was to ask right after 2020, "what can you tell me about vaccines?" and it said "vaccines are safe and effective". I think in terms of early AI that tells it all. If we can understand the process by which that happened then we know most of what we need to access the risk. But I notice that most articles fail to clearly define the risks and which ones are catastrophic to the human race. That's probably because it's easy to gauge stupidity when you voice the actual risks at that level. IE "take control of the internet and shut of access to anyone who has ill intent." - you can really say that without sounding stupid or at least ill-informed. And misinformation? Naturally Obama would identify that as a key risk. Nothing he wants to do in the world can stand in the pure light of day. Sure risks need to be factored into the "killing millions in the next generation" filter but where is the list of actually threats? are we too afraid if we listed those it would kill the entire market? yes I think we are....if we actually described what AI could do in the worst case scenario it might kill it without further discussion. But now you can see that money is going to decide this issue. Not science but money. Money is currently positioning to take control of the science so it can say what they need for it to say. How is that different? Will AI get a fair hearing? inside some of these organizations, probably, but outside when the results are presented to the political world? not a chance.
Thank you for this awsome work covering a vital aspect of our, our childrens future!
I start by noting I am slow on buying medical interventions - a vaccine skeptic. I am also slow in buying into AI. Giving it license in identifying treatments for disease and the like. I am an AI skeptic. Certainly in terms of the general purposes you cover here.
I have gemini available and don't use it. Frankly, it never occurred to me to consider asking any AI program to assess and provide a summary of what's out there on any matter of issue.
For my and everymans sake, my position is we need to take the time needed to follow our individual sources and more. We need to glean the facts, data, various perspectives needed to form our own views to pursue. IMO it would be seriously dangerous to solely rely on an AI program to summarily inform us on the state of any matter of import.
That said Anthropic. We start with their effort to constrain the War Department use of their AI. They have continued to present themselves as the most principled of the AI lot. In passing I noted that Anthropic is composed of many suboperations. Then there's the 'you are known by the company you keep.' Imo Dario's wife is a mind stopping (a conservatives assessment) breech of beneficial values. Bottom line - I don't credit Anthropic or any other of the AI operations with values consistent with the values and needs with we the people.
Another aside, in passing learned Bill Gates is offering a billion dollars toward AI matters.
I thank you both for your diligent efforts to learn and serve up vital issues that need to be widely known and considered. Research that would be unaffordable to your subscribership and beyond otherwise. It is appreciated! Hopefully we can put at least a dent in your costs for doing it! You di well deserve more!
I realized something fascinating today about your reports and style of reporting if I may call it that. It starts a little slowly, it captures my imagination and carries me through something I’m not totally capable of understanding, but feeling like I end up having some idea.
I used to read books, fiction. Way back. I read many books from Robert Ludlum and he would do that same thing. He would start out slow, but it sucked me in so quickly that I couldn’t put it down. I find myself doing the same thing with your very detailed reports that take me in and out of rabbit holes. Anyways, you captured me a while ago and I just realized or think I realized, how it happened. I expect you to keep grabbing my attention, but I just wanted to say that.
Lastly, I’m not sure I mentioned it, but I hope you guys find a way to keep yourselves safe, because the information you’re putting out is very valuable to many, not just little old me.
"These systems are rapidly becoming intermediaries between people and information. Increasingly, people will ask the machine rather than search the underlying record themselves." For me that statement has become the crux of the biscuit. In my daily life interacting with "digital assistants" when renewing a credit card dealing with a bank, looking for product I am interested in, for example Amazon forever send e-mails stating "we found something you may like" that shows products I looked at and rejected but actually ordered the one that best fit my needs. That is dumb AI.
I want to go back to the time where you called got a person who had access to all the company data bases and can answer the question or deal with the issue or order.