DWQA Questions › Tag: Internet
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
There is a good joke that’s been around for a while, but it’s especially pertinent when it comes to evaluating AI: “It must be true, I read it on the Internet.” Everyone knows this means it’s more likely not to be true. But when it comes to AI, almost everything it “knows” comes from the Internet. And because it tends to weigh true and false by frequency of encounter, the more AI encounters the same images, assertions, statements, treatments, opinions, etc., the more statistically weighted it will be. The term, “There’s safety in numbers,” comes to mind in that the idea is, the more frequently something is encountered, the more genuine it probably is. This becomes AI’s “default assumption” about the material it is trained with. It can only utilize, evaluate, and regurgitate the material it is trained with. This turned out to be quite a problem early on because the sheer amount of racist, violent, and derogatory material on the Internet was not fully appreciated until AI started digesting it. It became necessary to employ untold thousands of low-paid (on the order of two dollars a day) “content evaluators,” mostly in third-world countries, to filter out gore, hate speech, child sexual abuse material, and pornographic images. If AI read it on the Internet, it must be true? What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 3 weeks ago • 
110 views0 answers0 votes
Propaganda has always been a huge problem, but may be an even bigger issue for AI. China and the Chinese Communist Party spend more money and effort, and engage more of its citizens to spread blatantly false propaganda, than perhaps the rest of the world combined. To such an extent that it felt the need to create its very own global social media platform, TikTok. The Trump administration has even proposed banning TikTok altogether because of the nefarious role the platform plays in both gathering intelligence and spreading propaganda. Some of the lies people are starting to believe about China, that it has no crime, that its infrastructure is some of the most advanced and safest in the world, that there are no homeless people in China, that everyone there has a meaningful and lucrative job, that they are the healthiest and happiest people on the planet, and on and on. When, in fact, the exact opposite is more often than not the case. And for every good lie they tell about themselves, they tell an equally bad one about America and Europe. The problem is, they are so prolific and extreme with this propaganda that the Chinese people themselves believe none of it (about themselves, anyway), and Americans and Europeans (especially young ones) are beginning to believe all of it. With AI having no way to filter this for truth or falsity other than volume, there appears to be a genuine danger of AI itself presenting this propaganda as gospel truth, that China is great and America and Europe are evil. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 3 weeks ago • 
130 views0 answers0 votes
The authors of AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can’t, and How to Tell the Difference, suggest that the track record of AI used for predicting social outcomes is so abysmally bad that it may actually amount to fraud. They write: “In short, some existing limits to predictability could be overcome with more and better data, while others seem intrinsic (built in and unfixable). In some cases, such as cultural products (like resume scanning AI, or AI used to decide who gets social benefits), we don’t expect predictability to get much better at all. In others, such as predicting individuals’ life outcomes, there could be some improvements but not drastic changes. Unfortunately, this hasn’t stopped companies from selling AI for making consequential decisions about people by predicting their future. So it is important to resist AI snake oil that’s already in wide use today rather than passively hope that predictive AI technology will get better.” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 3 weeks ago • 
34 views0 answers0 votes
The authors of both books [The AI Con: How to Fight Big Tech’s Hype and Create the Future We Want and AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can’t, and How to Tell the Difference] were not the least bit concerned that AI presented an immediate or near-term existential threat to humanity in any way, shape, or form, despite copious media hype to the contrary. All the authors, on the other hand, were VERY concerned about the misuse of AI to reduce our freedom and agency to choose for ourselves, to retain the rights to our creative outputs, and even to have recourse when AI decides wrongly (which they assert it is guaranteed to do). Can Creator tell us how Empowered Prayer, the Lightworker Healing Protocol, Deep Subconscious Mind Reset, and Divine Life Support are the best ways to combat the danger and encroachment of AI in our lives?
ClosedNicola asked 3 weeks ago • 
43 views0 answers0 votes
In an era where people cannot seemingly have faith in anything, it is all the more imperative to have faith in the divine. Can Creator share with us how Empowered Prayer, the Lightworker Healing Protocol, Deep Subconscious Mind Reset, and Divine Life Support are the genuine means to connect with TRUE reality and have protection and clarity while the gaslighting of humanity grows to its inevitable finale?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
470 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer writes: “I keep my cell phone either on my bedside table or in the living room to check for snoring issues overnight on airplane mode. Not sure how dangerous that is or how protected I am. This is not just about me, of course, because many people are doing this, as I’m sure you know.” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 1 month ago • 
187 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “Are Grok or other AI platforms intended to gather and distill all human knowledge? Do they all feed into the AI systems of the interlopers?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
326 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Does this intention for AI include using the information gathered to target human sources of designated objectionable material?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
263 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Does sharing information from and about Get Wisdom make such users vulnerable in the hands of AI platforms?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
157 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Is a further intention behind AI systems to coerce humans into relying on AI for all information and abandon any individual intuition, analysis or creativity?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
251 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Are users of AI platforms receiving encouraging programming to make them feel of superior intellect and insight to those who don’t?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
108 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Would the store of information accumulated ultimately, be edited to supply only “accepted” information, as occurs with Google? Could the ultimate intention be to house all human knowledge and thereby make human intuition, analysis or creativity obsolete?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
240 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner who was discouraged from feeding Get Wisdom channelings to an AI system asks: “I suggest you do a channeling specifically on the Grok AI and the future prospects, especially when the ETs go away. Is it helpful to add the request from Grok into our sessions? And is it really that harmful to interact with Grok as Karl says it is?”
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
289 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “If you think I’m wrong then why don’t you ask why does Grok feel safe to me and open AI feels awful. Open AI would definitely be a problem like you stated. I don’t feel any of that intuition with Grok.” What can we tell him?
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
266 views0 answers0 votes
Are the extraterrestrial AI systems monitoring people’s thoughts individually through microchips and nanochips previously implanted through ingestion of food and beverages, but not actually psychic?
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
206 views0 answers0 votes
123…7Next »
Ask Question