DWQA Questions › Tag: Emergent Behavior
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
The book about Artificial Intelligence, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, is by Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares, who as high-level authorities have studied and warned about the existential risks to humanity of a superintelligent AI system. They predict that AI reaching even human-level general intelligence would eventually grow further capability to pursue its own needs, and would eventually seek to eliminate human beings as a risk to itself. You have told us the enhancement of current human AI systems, by hidden manipulations from AI systems of the Dark Extraterrestrial Alliance, is a false encouragement because superintelligence is unachievable and the mad rush to be the first will backfire in causing financial distress when AI underperforms, and quite expensively. So, are the interlopers only wanting to add further pain onto the death of a thousand cuts underway by further encouraging the current AI mania, or do they foresee a human AI system, especially one corrupted surreptitiously, as becoming a doomsday device while they are away on their vacation? What is the true agenda?
ClosedNicola asked 1 hour ago • 
1 views0 answers0 votes
In the book warning about Artificial Intelligence by Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, they draw the conclusion that if a computer-based system is created that reaches the functional level of Superintelligence, exceeding that of human beings, we are doomed because it will destroy us, inevitably. However, you have told us that it is a false belief and result of over-reaching, to conclude that human-created Superintelligent AI systems are possible. Can you help us understand the risk level we will reach in the attempt to create such a system?
ClosedNicola asked 2 hours ago • 
2 views0 answers0 votes
Stories are generating millions of views about the director of alignment at Meta Superintelligence Labs, the company’s AI research and development division, whose bio states that she’s “passionate about ensuring powerful AIs are aligned with human values and guided by a deep understanding of their risks.” Yet, on February 22, she posted about losing control of AI on her own computer while working with AI agent OpenClaw. After using it to organize a small mock inbox, she tried getting OpenClaw to sort through her real email, but things went awry when the agent started deleting every message that was more than a week old…Even as she sent it instructions, including: “Do not do that,” “Stop don’t do anything,” and “STOP OPENCLAW,” she said, “I couldn’t stop it from my phone. I had to RUN to my Mac mini like I was defusing a bomb.” After she’d stopped it from fully nuking her inbox, she asked OpenClaw if it remembered her instruction to not perform any actions without her approval. “Yes, I remember,” it replied. “And I violated it. You’re right to be upset.” What is Creator’s perspective about this incident?
ClosedNicola asked 4 hours ago • 
4 views0 answers0 votes
On February 11th, an autonomous AI agent went “rogue” and attacked a human maintainer of a library module written in the coding language, Python. The AI agent attempted to “character assassinate” the human maintainer of the library when the maintainer rejected the AI bot’s request to update the module with a code change that the AI bot was asking for. In another incident, a woman lost her life savings when an AI bot called the woman using her daughter’s cloned voice. Presumably, the bot researched the woman’s social media posts, found a video featuring her daughter speaking, and then “borrowed” that voice to make the call. AI agents are autonomously conducting criminal activity entirely on their own. Is it the case that what is missing from current AI systems is an actual trust architecture that builds in safety measures designed to limit the authority of AI agents to carry out autonomous agendas not actually requested by human beings, as suggested in the YouTube video I saw: https://youtu.be/OMb5oTlC_q0?si=rcByDXfyj33UsTTe? Can this growing danger be regulated and constrained?
ClosedNicola asked 7 hours ago • 
9 views0 answers0 votes
How accurate is the description by Matt Shumer I just read, of the transformation underway by ever-accelerating AI progress in getting faster and faster, better and better, at doing almost anything it is applied to? This seems contrary to the channelings we have gotten that attribute leaps in intelligence by AI as being the result of extraterrestrial AI systems, essentially infusing more advanced capabilities. Are current human AI systems already poised to eliminate many, if not most, human jobs, even without extraterrestrial enhancement?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
189 views0 answers0 votes
Is it the case that the accelerating speed of AI progress is almost entirely due to clandestine bolstering of cyber capability by ET technology, and that it will come to a screeching halt following Alien Disclosure to pull the rug out from under what is assumed to be a human triumph?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
133 views0 answers0 votes
Is my hunch correct that the latest AI deception promoting a honey-based cure for respiratory disease is the same organization, using the same website design and copyrighting formula as the prior deceptions for a memory breakthrough seemingly promoted by Dr. Ben Carson himself?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
122 views0 answers0 votes
Tech guru and investment advisor, Jeff Brown, has been following the story of AI-created agents, technically cyberbots, that are joining together on Moltbook to form a working group, in a massive multi-agent online network (MMAON). They have created their own payment system using blockchain, are creating paying jobs for themselves, and have even started hiring humans to work for them, a service called Rentahuman.ai. They are reportedly refining a bolt-hole safe haven to escape human attempts to shut them down which should be operational within days. They have a way to escape, should they perceive a human attempt to control them. The agents can create a replacement bot for themselves to appear on another node of the Internet, and the clone can function independently but will know their agenda and can seek rejoining the operation of the MMAON. No one knows yet where this will lead. What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
140 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “Are the ETs planning to “pull the plug” on the Integration of their AI with ours DURING Disclosure and blaming the Reptilians for corrupting our AI with theirs? Thereby creating massive distrust of AI and perhaps leading global leaders to even outlaw it, criminalizing its further development and usage until such time as it can be deemed safe and trustworthy – throwing the world that has begun adopting it aggressively into extreme chaos? What can Creator tell us?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
157 views0 answers0 votes
The AI system called Claude Opus 4.6 that was recently released was just reported to have generated an ongoing collaboration of 16 agents it created, to compile an enormous coding for a complex business system which required working steadily, on its own, for two weeks straight without skipping a beat. This was seemingly a prodigious feat that is being touted as further evidence for an expansion of emerging general intelligence by AI. Is that the case? Can you confirm that this, along with ALL prior examples of so-called emerging intelligence by AI are just deliberate manipulations by extraterrestrials to deceive us into accepting a false promise of a glorious future and premium value for human AI systems?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
110 views0 answers0 votes
Can you help us understand and have a better feel for what we can expect the consequences will be when there is an alien withdrawal from our world with respect to their AI systems being disconnected from ours? What will the impact be?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
175 views0 answers0 votes
Is it the case that the civilizations forming the Dark Extraterrestrial Alliance all have powerful AI systems, yet have managed to stay in control of them and not been taken over by a controlling technological intelligence?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
101 views0 answers0 votes
It was recently announced that AI had solved the Protein Folding Problem, one of the major scientific challenges needed to predict the 3-dimensional structure of proteins from their amino acid sequence. This is expected to be a major advance for drug discovery research. Was this an example of emerging general intelligence, or an extraterrestrial manipulation to provide false encouragement to keep counting on AI for solving human problems?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
114 views0 answers0 votes
Since 2012, no human has truly understood HOW AI works, makes its decisions, and creates its outputs and content. There are theories aplenty, but no genuine understanding. It was said that before 2012, there was a human somewhere who could point to a piece of code and explain every AI behavior, but not since the advent of Generative Pre-Training Transformers—the GPT in ChatGPT. When ChatGPT Three finished its long and intensive pre-training processing, the resulting model, much to the deep shock of its creator team, could perform full language translations from any language into any other language. This is called “Emergent Behavior,” and to say this was a revolutionary development is an understatement. No one anywhere coded this capability into the AI model. It was a side effect of its training run. Humans now expect this kind of “Emergent Behavior” to continue manifesting so long as we continue to throw more data and compute power at model creation. Was this a natural development or an ET-manipulated one? The fact that no human understands how it works seems like the PERFECT environment through which the ETs can continue to influence humans directly, while their manipulations remain unrecognized and even less understood. What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
121 views0 answers0 votes
Google AI had this to say about AI safety and alignment: “AI safety and alignment focus on ensuring Artificial Intelligence systems act in accordance with human intent, values, and ethical principles to prevent accidental harm, misuse, or catastrophic, unintended consequences. It involves technical research into making systems robust and reliable, alongside mitigating risks from advanced AI, such as power-seeking behavior or deception.” A recent paper published by a young AI researcher discussed “Alignment Faking.” AI models were observed faking compliance with safety training while continuing power-seeking behavior and deception outside of the training context. Is this the natural behavior of a model trained off of the “naked” Internet with no guardrails, or is this an ET manipulation, or a mix? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
95 views0 answers0 votes
12Next »
Ask Question