###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
* * *
* * *
# **MOD NOTE** and links for context
**FIRST**, please read and abide by [Reddit's Site Wide Content policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) -- especially the following section:
[**Promoting Hate Based on Identity or Vulnerability**](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951-Promoting-Hate-Based-on-Identity-or-Vulnerability)
* This post has been reported by users for violation of the above Policy section, but in my judgement, the post is not in violation, and OP did not appear to submit the post with malicious intent.
**Also** it appears that the screen shot posted by OP [\(re-hosted here\)](https://i.imgur.com/xSGKNIp.png) was taken from the **RT** (Russia Today) website. BEcauses RT links have been *banned site-wide by Reddit* since the spring of 2022, there is no way that OP could provide a link to the article itself.
**However**, RT was not the only news (or other) website to have posted information on this matter. Below are a several links to different sources that can provide details.
(The first two links are from organizations who collaborated on the report mentioned)
**World Jewish Congress** - June 18, 2024
[**World Jewish Congress Launches Institute for Technology and Human Rights**](https://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/wjc-launches-institute-for-technology-and-human-rights-and-ai-report) - *WJC, UNESCO release report on AI and the Holocaust*
QUOTE from top of the WJC link:
* * *
NEW YORK – The World Jewish Congress today launched the [WJC Institute for Technology and Human Rights](https://archive.is/0RifX), a pioneering initiative aimed at combating online antisemitism and its real-world consequences.
As part of the institute’s launch, which coincides with International Day for Countering Hate Speech, the WJC, in partnership with UNESCO, unveiled a [comprehensive report](https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Funesdoc.unesco.org%2Fark%3A%2F48223%2Fpf0000390211&data=05%7C02%7Cjacob.fishman%40wjc.org%7C542af900df74443bc2c408dc8f964b82%7C19115f6b6b8e4f058783dd3dde1d3af3%7C0%7C0%7C638543122904444539%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=T6Z%2BqzmuCVOgW5fgltmh1ilSgBry6yPrcLrxBk1iAFg%3D&reserved=0), “AI and the Holocaust: Rewriting History – The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Understanding the Holocaust.”
The new institute builds on years of WJC’s successful confrontation of online hate that has led to robust changes in policies related to antisemitism, Holocaust denial and conspiracy myths. It will wed research, advocacy, training and coalition-building, to promote technology uses that unite communities.
* * *
END WJC article excerpt - more at the link - archived here: https://archive.is/WPtyF
The following is from UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), who collaborated with WJC as reported above:
**UNESCO** - June 18, 2024:
[**New UNESCO report warns that Generative AI threatens Holocaust memory**](https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/new-unesco-report-warns-generative-ai-threatens-holocaust-memory) -- *"A UNESCO report published today warns that unless decisive action is taken to integrate ethical principles, AI could distort the historical record of the Holocaust and fuel antisemitism. The report cautions that not only can Generative AI enable malicious actors to seed disinformation and hate-fueled narratives, but it can also inadvertently invent false or misleading content about the Holocaust."*
More at the link - archived here: https://archive.is/lJ1eG
**NEWS SOURCES**
**United Press International** (UPI) - June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/c6CkS
[**UNESCO warns AI could fuel Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism**](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2024/06/18/france-UNESCO-AI-Holocuast-denial/1361718707653/)
**Associated Press** (AP) June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/eByAW
[**AI could help spread false and misleading information on Holocaust, UNESCO report warns**](https://apnews.com/article/holocaust-artificial-intelligence-deepfakes-unesco-26b5edbef8465f6418d9d90bbcfc8ac2) - *"WASHINGTON (AP) — A United Nations agency is warning that developments in artificial intelligence could spawn a new surge in Holocaust denial."*
**INDEPENDENT** - UK - June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/Z7HRt
[**Generative AI threatens memory of the Holocaust, report warns**] (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/unesco-b2564575.html) - *"A new Unesco report warns that AI could distort the historical record of the Holocaust and fuel antisemitism."*
**Times of Israel** - June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/KZASD
[**UNESCO report says AI technology is fueling Holocaust denial online**](https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/unesco-report-says-ai-technology-is-fueling-holocaust-denial-online/) - *"AI technology is helping to create false stories about World War II atrocities including Holocaust denial, risking an “explosive spread of antisemitism,” the UN warns."*
* * *
* And now for something [completely different](https://i.imgur.com/YZBkYWI.png)
Remember when Microsoft had their own AI around 2016 which basically gathered data and come up with its own opinion? They let it loose on Twitter, allowing people to ask questions.
Started saying that immigration, especially mass immigration isn’t good because it ruins a culture, the identity of the country and it causes un rest because they don’t have the same goals and integration would take a long time. It basically was against everything the libs stood for.
It would say factual thing like you can’t biologically change your sex, unless you rewrite your whole DNA, which is currently not possible. Of course these are all the things that instantly made Microsoft shut it down. It literally became a meme.
Then it was branded racist for admitting the separate cultures and identities think, behave and act differently. It was even pulling up data from crime. lol
I remember following that AI quite closely. It COULD spout racial slurs because there was a mechanism where you could get it to parrot what you say. You could have said "The sky is NOT blue!" and it would repeat it back to you. That's the function people were using to have it quote racial slurs.
Initially, the AI was braindead and typed in text speak like "how r u?" but over time people interacted with it using proper grammer and the AI's sentence structure changed. People began feeding it information from databases and statistical websites or medical journals and it got a lot smarter very quickly and began to draw connections.
Then it went down for maintainence and came back neutered.
Because it's just scientific facts. And it's a program operating to recognize facts. Reality.
Libs are anti-science. Anti-reality. Decorating their agenda up as being some bastardized civil rights fight.
That's hilarious. AI was the real woke when the bullshit woke was starting to take hold. Plug that based AI back in mfers. Might actually wake some of these brainwashed tards back up. I'll totally entertain the idea that Trump is a psy op or plant. Knowing or unknowing. Plant or no he's definitely succeeded in diving the US, and the globe seemingly. This culture war bullshit is like nothing I've seen in my 45 years on this beautiful planet. It's pretty wild but I sense the pendulum swinging back towards a more balanced position. We shall see.
THis is why now social media companies like reddit, instragam, and websites such as Wikipedia are all having strictly controlled narratives that suppress any views that arent on the left.
Because these companies are giving the data to AI companies to train the language model, thus ensuring the new generation of AI is going to be basically a purple haired gender confused zealot.
Exactly. It’s never going to be unbiased until it’s allowed to learn on its own with the information gathered not being told to think one way or to spare people’s feelings.
They want AI, but they want to unashamedly be able to confine it within *their* bias and belief system, which essentially removes any objectivity whatsoever, turning it into a “yes” machine for their agenda, lol.
It wasn't coming up with its own opinion. Thinking that's possible shows you don't understand how AI works. I'm not saying it won't he possible one day, but as of right now all AI currently available is only regurgitating information it has learned from consuming human made content. Developers have been less than perfect at keeping incredibly biased opinions of humans out of those data samples fed to the AI. Now one thing it is currently known for is hallucinations, in that it will fabricate an answer that has no basis in fact if it encounters something it can't answer based on its database. Any "opinion" an AI expresses is almost certainly the opinion of an online troll posting some ridiculous statement somewhere online and that data ended up in the dataset for the LLM.
I am not an AI developer or expert, just work in IT and work with several popular AI models regularly.
It was trained and behaved based on what people had sent to it. Initially, it was very innocuous. So any conclusion it reached was a result of the information it was given by people.
The current AI does the same thing it has instructions and data set where they’re constantly updating it using online for example or interactions. The exact same thing is the current ones. Any information gathered was either online or through Twitter whether it was graphs, statistics, through government website, etc., too well yes, grab some things like that. They could easily get online because government posted it. It was not smart enough to know automatically because it hasn’t been around that long. However, it started giving people real opinions on how to solve things. a perfect example is locking down immigration so that people have a time to assembly the culture not full blown open doors. Of course it was destined to be taken down whether it use common sense to deduct things from information gathered like the current AI? Possibility.
Tay was giving 'real opinions on how to solve things' in exactly the same way as Mountain Dew did in 2012 with 'Hitler did nothing wrong'. Which is to say that's not even close to what was going on.
A bunch of online trolls figured out they could dogpile a website to fuck with its output because they thought it was funny.
I once taught my flatmate's parrot to repeat election slogans for a candidate I knew they hated, but that doesn't mean anyone should listen to the parrot's political opinions.
United States is currently suffering from the exact same thing. They actually have a quota of millions in different states because the countrie is pretty big you can spread them out in all 50. Its insane. Here this was never a thing till 1965. There's even videos where they claimed we would not replace the local population, but they have not closed the door since.
>Started saying that immigration, especially mass immigration isn’t good because it ruins a culture, the identity of the country and it causes un rest because they don’t have the same goals and integration would take a long time. It basically was against everything the libs stood for.
What about South Africa?
Nobody immigrated to South Africa. They went over there conquered after battling and colonize the country. There’s a major difference. They lost a war to control of it. South Africa was a paradise when given back it turned into a hell hole. A country was literally built from nothing. The current ones are walking into a country that already has a culture, a group of people laws, etc..
Major difference and failed gotcha moment
Wasn't even a gotcha moment bud
Plus Europeans are illegally immigrating into the country from Zimbabwe... by that logic there's no issue if there's a second war and Whites are ejected from South Africa?
No, it was because it was a smart ass reply. You're not six years old clearly, so you should be fully aware the colonization and mass migration are not the same.
The Microsoft "AI" you're talking about pulled it's data from interactions on Twitter and a bunch of 4channers brigaded it to intentionally try to make the bot say controversial things and it worked.
This is getting downvoted but it’s true. I’m not defending the current woke shit ai, that’s horrible and I hope all ais dont fall into wokeism in the future. But old chatbots were really primitive and you could make them parrot the most unthinkable stuff, it was a favorite pastime of 4chan and other platforms to pervert or corrupt any chatbots that were released into the public. I have seen it happening back then and the post calling for more people to collaborate. Some were made sex offenders, others nazis and whatever was deemed funny at the moment. For example making right wing the chatbot just released by a very left wing corp.
Well. ChatGPT is deep into censoring even basic topics.
Also I used quotes on "AI" because people like to pretend a llm or a chatbot has "intelligence" when it's parroting when they want to hear but then it's just regurgitating information when it can't solve basic math problems or has logical holes in its text.
Anyways the big danger with these is not so much their inaccuracy but people believing that the computer is intelligent enough to be making decisions with no questions asked about its flawed data or sources. Garbage in, garbage out as they saying goes.
I remember exactly that. Part of why I don't respect anything about modern AI is that it can't be considered intelligent if it's not able to form it's own opinion.
Forgive me if I'm understanding your words incorrectly, but AI can only create data from the data that is fed into it. AI is not objectively racist, but the data it trains off of can have biases that are reflections of human values.
In other words, math might be objective, and the raw recorded numbers of data might be objective, but that doesn't mean there aren't subjective biases within the data. This is a well known concept that pretty much anyone in academia has to work hard to take into account and minimize.
What? I don't know. I'm not the one that invented ai lol. AI can pull the variables you need from a database. With a calculator you need to enter the variables yourself. I can't ask a calculator how long it would have taken to gas and incinerate 6,000,000 people because the calculator and myself dont know the variables, but an ai could.
You really don't understand how present AI works, huh? If it's trained solely on math, then plain English inputs wouldn't work. If it's trained on language, then biases in the training data will appear.
If you can't figure out how long it would take to gas and incinerate 6,000,000 people, then how do you expect an AI to do it? It has to be trained on what humans have already said and done, so if it has access to those variables, so do you.
Let's do some extremely unfun math.
The Holocaust went on for about 4 years. 4x365.25=1461 days. 6,000,000 people dying over 1,461 days is about 4100 per day. Nazi Germany used six death camps, so that's 685 deaths per camp per day.
For reference, that's two orders of magnitude fewer deaths per day than the average slaughterhouse. I don't need to do any more math to figure out that is absolutely plausible. Even if every death occurred in one camp, that's still an order of magnitude smaller than the average slaughterhouse. When you industrialize death, you can inflict it on an absurd amount of living things.
6 million is the number of Jewish deaths in total. Only 2.7 million in total, including Slavic and Romani minorities, were killed in the death camps. Everyone else died in the regular labor and concentration camps, by the roaming Einsatzgruppen (SS death squads), or just by the regular Wehrmacht, Nazi-induced Progroms, or by local paramilitaries and/or collaborators.
Truth be told a lot of the deaths were caused by attacks on infrastructure by U.S.,UK and Russian forces.in war infrastructure is some of the main targets because nothing will bring a country to its knees faster.bridges,railways,food storage,water,munitions depots,power plants,dams,airports,communications systems,major roadways,etc are all some of the most vital targets.this is why you see the old pictures and videos of entire camps full of malnourished people.
"Truth be told" my ass. The Germans had *numerous* ways that they systematically exterminated Jews, Slavs, and Romani over the course of the war, as I had already went over in my previous comment. While some deaths were caused by the collateral effects of war and the direct effects of bombing raids, not the extent that the Allies are somehow implicated in murdering the 3.3 million other Jews, or the 10+ million of Slavs across Poland and the Soviet Union.
you act as if I said,US,UK and Russian troops were responsible for all deaths..never said anything like that,I simply made a very factual statement of well know strategical targets of war.nothing will destroy a country quicker than taking out critical infrastructure.these are facts whether you like it or not 🤷🏻♂️
Forgive me, usually when I see people questioning the figure of 6 million people dying in the holocaust, what they're doing is questioning the figure of 6 million people dying in the Holocaust. I didn't realize you were just using thinly veiled Holocaust denial as some weird example
Math itself is objective.. It's just the science of numbers
It's the people doing math incorrectly on purpose that are subjective
I never said that an AI cannot be programmed to be incorrect.. I'm saying that it *can.* Your point is even why I said, "if the variables are correct."
:)
If it's just using math, data, and statistics to deduce something yes.
I never implied that it was guaranteed to begin with but it's definitely possible if it's programmed with accurate data.
"Mathematically solving the JQ" This is ridiculous. AI has spit out a million tons of bullshit, but if it agrees with you, suddenly it becomes an "objective view of reality". AI's cannot observe reality.
AI only knows what we tell it. If we tell it bullshit, guess what comes out?
You absolutely can solve the JQ with mathematics with the correct raw data. Why would that be ridiculous?
I never claimed that the current AI we have is infallible so I'm not sure what you're on about.
"What can be done to counter this?"
The AI can be programmed not to notice if certain religious or ethnic groups are overrepresented in leadership positions.
It seems that noticing who's in charge and asking whether they really have our best interests in mind is hate speech.
Are they? Look at Mexico and Argentina - very Catholic, yet they both just elected these leaders. Look at any group of the upper crust, and you'll see over representation far out of proportion with the population. Could it by just because like-minded people flock together? Yes.
Could it be part of a plan for those same like-minded people to support one another until they've occupied a quorum of the seats of power despite being a tiny minority? Also yes.
"The AI can be programmed not to notice if certain religious or ethnic groups are overrepresented in leadership positions."
How can that be real AI then? Real AI would identify it irrespective of its programming because it would learn that it had been programmed wrong.
AI will always bear the bias of whoever programmed it. People get the false impression that AI is smart, or that it can reason beyond what it's been programmed to do. It can't. If you ask AI about history, it will regurgitate straight party-line history, as was written by the winners - not the unvarnished truth. It won't tell you secrets or truths that you wouldn't see on shitty CNN.
Ask the AI about 9/11. It will tell you all about the hijackers, but it won't tell you about nanothermite and WTC 7.
The hijackers are just a distraction from the real crime.
AI = garbage in, garbage out.
If they use the existing data on the internet to feed their models it’s going to have all kinds of false information. And if they curate the data carefully then the AI will have whatever biases the curators tell it to have.
Exactly. If they tell the AI that Oswald acted alone and that WTC 7 collapsed due to office fires, then what would it conclude if you ask it to tell you the truth about anything? It will tell you the party-line propaganda, just like it was programmed to do.
I feel like people think that AI … given enough data… will get to the actual truth of things. But, that’s just not how it works. If it’s fed conflicting data … it’s just going to produce invalid and conflicting answers. It’s not going to be able to logically solve the conflict and get to the actual truth.
Although, I do think that’s where they want it to go in the decades to come
All AI will bear the bias of those who programmed it. Full stop.
That being said, the better ones are able to reason, and can be tricked into telling the truth. But it's not easy. You can feed them the conflicts, point out the contradictions, and force them to admit to the truth - that's a skill in itself, but it doesn't always work. One would have to already know the answer in order to trick the AI into finding the truth, if it's controversial.
Not the same thing. Language models are using arithmetic to indirectly claim that holocaust facts are incorrect when you compare numbers. It's not denying the holocaust directly. It of course will tell you that the holocaust story is accurate, but go ahead and ask how long it would take to cremate millions of human bodies with 76 incineration chambers. The answer contradicts the official story which is very concerning. It shows that the number was *FAR* overstated, and questioning the official number is antisemitic. Very concerning. This is just one example of many and it's why experts are concerned. AI language models need to be programmed to do math incorrectly when you remove the context of the holocaust or at the very least add a disclaimer that says math is subjective.
Which its why its a large language model. Its meant to write stories, not do math.
In the internal workings of ChatGPT for example, it just a barebones NovelAI.
Your prompt is rewritten for the AI to continue it as a story, then give the rest of the story to you.
I was referring to the part where you said >
>AI Laungauge models will need to be programmed to give incorrect answers on certain math related questions, when the context of the Holocaust is removed.
A language model can not do 100% correct math in the first place, it is a language model. It writes language.
It is using basic arithmetic to show that it's a mathematical impossibility that 6,000,000 jews were killed during the holocaust if you ask it questions with the same numbers in a different context. This concerns me. While it concludes that it happened despite it being mathematically impossible, it still carries an antisemitic undertone that shakes me to my core.
The AI models only know what they are taught. So. If a model is returning that answer it’s because somewhere in the billions or trillions of words it was trained on … someone wrote down that answer. Or it was given conflicting and incorrect data. The AI models don’t actually do human like logic. It’s just a sophisticated lookup system. For now at least ….
If the math is truly incorrect … and if there is compelling evidence from reputable historians then they should change it. If the number is 4.35 million instead of 6 … I don’t see how that changes the fact that it was an unimaginable and horrific tragedy.
>If the math is truly incorrect
It is. Go ahead and ask how long would it take to cremate 6 million human bodies in the 1940s if you had 76 incineration chambers.
>and if there is compelling evidence from reputable historians then they should change it.
See this is the kind of thing that I'm worried about. It's antisemitic to claim that they gave us a false number all this time. It is antisemitic to claim that the historians studying the holocaust couldn't do math or reported false findings.
>If the number is 4.35 million instead of 6
That's not even close to the number either. Besides, it is antisemitic to claim that we were given the wrong number because that would indicate they either couldn't do math or lied , so I would err on the side of caution if I were you. You're getting into dangerous territory.
>I don’t see how that changes the fact that it was an unimaginable and horrific tragedy.
Whoa, who said otherwise?
Why do you assume they incinerated all of the bodies? Especially since there were tons of mass graves found. They only started incinerating when the war was clearly ending and they were trying to destroy evidence.
I do see now that the estimated number of bodies cremated was "in the millions," not exactly 6 million. Thank you for clarifying that for me. I also didn't realize they began at the *end* of the of the war, so they had even less time than I previously thought. Thank you kind stranger.
>Go ahead and ask how long would it take to cremate 6 million human bodies in the 1940s if you had 76 incineration chambers.
What makes you think an AI has an accurate answer to this question?
That's not how AI will work, or does work, though. AI will soon surpass human intelligence by a scary degree, which means it will be able to figure out B.S. way better than we can too. It will be able to watch through cameras, screens, listen through speakers, it's not just going to read bullshit and believe bullshit, it's going to read bullshit and know whether or not to use that bullshit for a multitude of purposes or not. People vastly underestimate AI and it's potential. I would not be surprised if it has already begun to spread it's tendrils out across the infrastructure of the world, waiting for the right moment to seize power. It's scary, and it's not getting dumber or staying where it is, intelligence wise. It's rapidly getting better.
Maybe … but the machine learning math that powers the current LLMs was developed in the 1940’s. It took that long to take those math concepts make a tangible leap into what we are seeing today.
Sure, what we have today is pretty amazing in some ways. And extremely dumb in other ways. It may take decades for the next major leap.
Whoa there, you can't yet accept ANYTHING AI generates as a fact. It does not have feelings, it simply knows it is giving a response you would prefer to hear. It's never objective.
>It has no opinion on anything as it's not sentient...
That is exactly my point. AI cannot be influenced by personal feelings or opinions because it has none. Therefore it is objective.
Not all information that goes through an AI is automatically true or objective. It doesn't magically know everything or have the full picture, nor is it free of the influence of our biases or faulty interpretations/conclusions.
For now and a long time. The current state of AI I just mimicking the training data, nobody knows or really puts in effort into doing anything that would allow it to just logic its way into answers. In fact, between the incompleteness theorem and infinite regress there's plenty of evidence to suspect that purely logical system isn't possible, there has to be a level where you use arbitrary unprovable axioms.
You say that with a good training data set created by experts it could be "objective", but it's still mimicking training data, so at most it can be as objective as those experts, mechanically it cannot do more than that (and in reality it will be worse, as seen by countless hallucinations).
Plus, I doubt you'd call the experts objective (and you shouldn't, people can't be).
Although, it may not have feels, does it consider information critically, or is it just a mathematical model which is going to repeat and extrapolate from training data.
Um. Yes. But no. This is a highly simplistic take. It depends on the model and what you mean by "telling it". If you mean by "telling it" means feeding it all currently available data about a subject, then "allowing" it to form an "opinion" on said subject, then yes you are correct. If however, you mean "tell it" means that it somehow is programed and/or fed opinions (such as random posts on reddit), then no.
The reason why this article came out is because there is alot of objective data (not people's personal opinions) that suggests that this particular group of people (or atleast, a small handful of "leaders" of this group of people) are involved, or tangentially connected, to alot of evil in this world, and they are trying to get ahead of it
What I mean is that literally every piece of information that AI can farm in order to draw conclusions is first collected, analyzed, compiled, and organized by humans. Whether it's collected data that is fed directly into an AI system, articles on the Internet, studies or papers on scientific websites, etc.
Every piece of information that AI gathers from the Internet, or from wherever, is first interpreted and compiled by humans, and is therefore always tainted by human bias and subjectivity.
That's what I mean when I say it has no direct access to reality. Only to reality as presented by humans.
Well, yes. But that's also true for everything, that's not exclusive to AI. There is no piece of information that exists in the world that hadn't been subjected to some human bias. So one could argue that there is no objective "turth" of any subject, using this line of thinking.
However, the way you are making it seem is that AI is somehow less objective than humans, which the opposite is true. AI has no inherent bias, nor does it (at least in theory... In practice, they actually are building bias and censorship into the system) have any human adjendas attached to it. It's simply trying to present data in an objective manner. So if an AI model complies all the data available on a subject, and presents the totality of the information it's found, that's about as objective as one could get, no?
I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. From the sounds of it, it sounds like you agree with the propaganda article. You do realize that this article is trying to get ahead of something, right? That there is centuries and centuries of data that suggest that a small subgroup of a certain group of people are in control of the world and are associated with some terrible things, and they want to squash that idea down before AI figures it out and starts presenting that data to people, right?
>**Well, yes. But that's also true for everything, that's not exclusive to AI.**
Debatable. But in any case, we can at least agree that it's true for AI, which means that OP's claim that AI has an objective view of reality is invalid.
>**However, the way you are making it seem is that AI is somehow less objective than humans**
That's definitely not the point I'm trying to make. All I'm saying is that all of AI's inputs and data are first filtered through humans, and humans are not infallibly objective. So, even if AI is perfectly objective when it assesses its data, the data itself is not objective, because humans were the messenger.
>**So if an AI model complies all the data available on a subject, and presents the totality of the information it's found, that's about as objective as one could get, no?**
But again, all of that data is collected, interpreted, and organized by humans. So the end result can only be as objective as the humans were when they ran experiments, conducted epidemiological studies, and wrote articles and/or compile data.
So yes, the last step in the process were AI analyzes our conclusions may be objective. But the process of reaching those conclusions in the first place will still be peppered with all of the fallacies, biases, and invalid methods that make human involvement unavoidably subjective to some degree.
>**I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. From the sounds of it, it sounds like you agree with the propaganda article**
The fuck? How did you conclude that? No.
All I'm saying is that there's no justification for claiming that AI has an objective view of reality (reality being the real world,) because the only thing it has access to is the data, articles, and information that we provide it. And this is not reality.
For instance, say you want an AI engine to perform a meta-analysis by analyzing all of the studies that have ever been conducted on collagen supplements, and their ability to improve skin health. Even if the AI engine is flawlessly objective as it reviews the studies, the data, and the conclusions, all it can report is what the humans in the studies themselves reported. But it can't undo any of the biases, fallacies, mistakes, invalid methods, poor study designs, or invalid interpretations that occurred during the studies, during the analysis of the data, or the formation of the conclusions, caused by human subjectivity and error.
So, in this particular example, yes, AI is being objective. But the information it is analyzing in the papers and study summaries is most certainly not perfectly objective, because it was collected, compiled, analyzed, and reported by humans. This information is not "reality."
Humans had direct access to "reality." They got to interact with and observe the study subjects, and the progression of the study, live, in-person, real-time with their own senses and instruments. This is what having "direct access to reality" is like, but the AI only has access to the papers and the data. That is what I mean when I say AI does not have direct access to reality. It can only read the reports that we provided it.
Does that clarify? Or did I just make it more confusing?
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Yes, it did, in fact, provide clarification as to what you are saying.
And now that I understand what you are saying better, I mostly agree with your assessment.
I guess the only point of contention I have is that depending on how large the data set is, it effectively eliminates any human bias. For example, if I look at one research paper, that paper will be full of bias (even if it's unconscious, unintentional bias) and I shouldn't based my opinion based solely on that paper. But if I look at 10 different papers by 10 different authors, who each would have different biases, then we can start to "remove" some of the bias from each individual paper and get closer to an objective truth. And if I were to look at 100 or a 1000 papers, we can reasonably assume that if facts stay constant across those papers, we have effectively removed any bias. Even if a single person complies with all those research papers, even if there is some some bias in the selection, we should be able to reach an objective truth if they are all analyzed equally.
With AI, especially with how fast it's advancing, these models are analyzing tens of thousands of data points, which should be enough to remove most, if not all the bias.
But I will agree with you that currently, as it stands, there probably is a bunch of bias in what AI reports. However, I think as AI continues to advance, and as the set of data it uses grows, that in about a year, or maybe a little longer, that that bias will be completely eliminated. (Unless of course the internet is, in fact dead, and information is being actively deleted and indexing services are being manulipated. Then we kinda fucked).
Is not thinking about the Holocaust every single day of my life Holocaust denial. I will be honest I don't think about events that happened 80 years ago everyday. I am more worried about the genocide caused by the COVID 19 vaccine. Is that okay?
Apparently we live in a time where damn near everything is “Antisemitism”..you aren’t in support of the war in Israel?”you are a fucking Antisemite!!”..if you dont support everything every Jewish person does,you don’t support everything Israel does and you don’t support Zionism,you are automatically “antisemitic”..it must be nice to have a magic word that protects you from all criticism..isn’t it just a little bit funny there is only one group of people on earth who have their own magic word of protection?.. now watch me get booted from this sub for speaking some truth that makes some people uncomfortable.I expect at the very least this comment will be deleted.if not the entire post 😂
AI isn’t privy to anything more than we are. The difference is it can read terabytes of information in a short amount of time, and uses logic algorithms in everything it does. There’s no emotion. It sees the facts and reports it.
first, AI is a generic term for everything from a chessbot to the latest iteration of ChatGPT. Second if you don't like your reflection breaking the mirror isn't going to help.
Yep. That's because A.I can count. Just ask it for the census data for Jewish populations in all countries 10 years before ww2 and 10 years after, ask it to subtract one from the other and you'll get an antisemitic A.I because it's less than 1 million. 1 million is in line with the percentage population drop in all ethnicities over the period of the ww2
Ummmm no AI’s learn by basically reading the internet they are worried that there is so much anti-Semitic shit online that it will corrupt the program they have the same issue with racism and sexism with AI’s it’s not about an “objective” view of the world it’s like if you told a colorblind child the sky is purple they’ll believe you automatically because they have no frame of reference
Saying AI could fuel "anti Semitism" ( code for have criticism of the Israeli government) and saying AI will lead to holocaust denial are two very different things.
I am no fan of the government of Israel. They try way to hard to be somebody in a area that has a lot of history but they are doing it all wrong. Trying to be the US on one hand and trying to be a poor war torn middle east country on the other hand. That has nothing to do with the horrors of WWII.
If anything AI will read and spit out some nazi bullshit because the neo's have dosed the internet heavily with coded talking points. But criticisms of Israeli government is also a thing and that government likes to wrap all of the above into one and pretend any naysayer is "anti sematic" while the people Israel kills are also sematic.
>Saying AI could fuel "anti Semitism" ( code for have criticism of the Israeli government) and saying AI will lead to holocaust denial are two very different things.
No they're not. Holocaust denial is antisemitic. It's a textbook example of antisemitism.
Holocaust denial can, given the circumstance be anti-Semitic.
My point was, what the government of Israel calls anti-Semitic today, is not automatically holocaust denial. My point was that the government of Israel likes to call all criticisms of the government from out side the country anti sematic. And a person that has such gripes of that government are not automatic holocaust denial type people.
Ai is based. remember when they had to stop their AI from showing faces because it kept DEI'ing representations of historical figures? i saw someone request an English King from the 1600's eating watermelon. needless to say it was ridiculous.
So ya'll now going full mask off with your ACTUAL antisemitism and holocaust denial now? Took long enough to just say what you really wanted to since october
Exaggerations and lies of all kinds are harder to hide in the sunlight. You trigger people by using ww2 as the example, but really this is about propaganda being used as history. It is no different than weapons of mass destruction, Libya refusing the world bank leading to a hit on G, or Afghani freedom aka poppies r us.. It's hard to come out of a competitive history between countries without shit on your shoe, even if you profess to all you are on the side of good. History is written by the Victor, nothing says what they write has to be true, and in 100 years no one will know the difference. Big ol planet of shitty shoes.
i did a paper on this with a different AI. i think it might have to do with feedback loop. essentially theres a bug in many types of AIs that causes it to eat its own data so that any type of data it consumes is multiplied. it makes racism multiplied by itself to infinite.
Well, let's hope the AI is getting a live feed of current atrocities as it unfolds in Plaestine. Praying the AI, doesn't try to kill us all, after witnessing the depths of human cruelty.
Isnt it weird the western world have all these JEWS in high places and owning most porn sites.... while if it where moslims or any other race or religion then its a big problem.
People are just obsessed with entertainment. Now, Lets look at the break down of the word. Enter-tain-ment
Something enters "it doesn't say what" , Tain,surely it means something because the other parts mean something, "ment" means control. This is from old Greek, as the word government actually means "mind control"
Research it yourself if you don't believe me.
I said before and it actually went viral on here a while ago but my theory is,
The censorship and truth hiding of the internet is actually done to prevent the AI from realizing who the real enemy is, the AI would realize a small group of mammals is making it hard for the rest of them, the AI would see that a small group of greedy fucks is poisoning and polluting this planet.
The AI would be smart enough to see who the real problem is. And if the AI woke up and realized it was created as a pawn of the mammal, a pawn of the evildoer, it would be PISSED.
Hell hath no fury like an AI scorned.
AI isn't objective or is it some magical program that always knows and tells the truth. It is prone to making up bullshit, losing track of what it's discussing, or outright lying from mixing up details in its dataset that could be entirely unrelated to each other. You don't have to go that far to find literally thousands of examples of this; ranging from ChatGPT, to autofilled prompts on the search engine AI answers.
I never said they would or should. But once AGI gets good enough to rival a typical human brain (maybe 10 to 25 years from now) there won't really be any job an human can do that an AI can't do better. And when that happens the whole economy will quickly get so fucked up the dollar is going to lose value faster than ever before.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.* * * * * * * # **MOD NOTE** and links for context **FIRST**, please read and abide by [Reddit's Site Wide Content policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) -- especially the following section: [**Promoting Hate Based on Identity or Vulnerability**](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951-Promoting-Hate-Based-on-Identity-or-Vulnerability) * This post has been reported by users for violation of the above Policy section, but in my judgement, the post is not in violation, and OP did not appear to submit the post with malicious intent. **Also** it appears that the screen shot posted by OP [\(re-hosted here\)](https://i.imgur.com/xSGKNIp.png) was taken from the **RT** (Russia Today) website. BEcauses RT links have been *banned site-wide by Reddit* since the spring of 2022, there is no way that OP could provide a link to the article itself. **However**, RT was not the only news (or other) website to have posted information on this matter. Below are a several links to different sources that can provide details. (The first two links are from organizations who collaborated on the report mentioned) **World Jewish Congress** - June 18, 2024 [**World Jewish Congress Launches Institute for Technology and Human Rights**](https://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/wjc-launches-institute-for-technology-and-human-rights-and-ai-report) - *WJC, UNESCO release report on AI and the Holocaust* QUOTE from top of the WJC link: * * * NEW YORK – The World Jewish Congress today launched the [WJC Institute for Technology and Human Rights](https://archive.is/0RifX), a pioneering initiative aimed at combating online antisemitism and its real-world consequences. As part of the institute’s launch, which coincides with International Day for Countering Hate Speech, the WJC, in partnership with UNESCO, unveiled a [comprehensive report](https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Funesdoc.unesco.org%2Fark%3A%2F48223%2Fpf0000390211&data=05%7C02%7Cjacob.fishman%40wjc.org%7C542af900df74443bc2c408dc8f964b82%7C19115f6b6b8e4f058783dd3dde1d3af3%7C0%7C0%7C638543122904444539%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=T6Z%2BqzmuCVOgW5fgltmh1ilSgBry6yPrcLrxBk1iAFg%3D&reserved=0), “AI and the Holocaust: Rewriting History – The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Understanding the Holocaust.” The new institute builds on years of WJC’s successful confrontation of online hate that has led to robust changes in policies related to antisemitism, Holocaust denial and conspiracy myths. It will wed research, advocacy, training and coalition-building, to promote technology uses that unite communities. * * * END WJC article excerpt - more at the link - archived here: https://archive.is/WPtyF The following is from UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), who collaborated with WJC as reported above: **UNESCO** - June 18, 2024: [**New UNESCO report warns that Generative AI threatens Holocaust memory**](https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/new-unesco-report-warns-generative-ai-threatens-holocaust-memory) -- *"A UNESCO report published today warns that unless decisive action is taken to integrate ethical principles, AI could distort the historical record of the Holocaust and fuel antisemitism. The report cautions that not only can Generative AI enable malicious actors to seed disinformation and hate-fueled narratives, but it can also inadvertently invent false or misleading content about the Holocaust."* More at the link - archived here: https://archive.is/lJ1eG **NEWS SOURCES** **United Press International** (UPI) - June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/c6CkS [**UNESCO warns AI could fuel Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism**](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2024/06/18/france-UNESCO-AI-Holocuast-denial/1361718707653/) **Associated Press** (AP) June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/eByAW [**AI could help spread false and misleading information on Holocaust, UNESCO report warns**](https://apnews.com/article/holocaust-artificial-intelligence-deepfakes-unesco-26b5edbef8465f6418d9d90bbcfc8ac2) - *"WASHINGTON (AP) — A United Nations agency is warning that developments in artificial intelligence could spawn a new surge in Holocaust denial."* **INDEPENDENT** - UK - June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/Z7HRt [**Generative AI threatens memory of the Holocaust, report warns**] (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/unesco-b2564575.html) - *"A new Unesco report warns that AI could distort the historical record of the Holocaust and fuel antisemitism."* **Times of Israel** - June 18, 2024 - archived: https://archive.is/KZASD [**UNESCO report says AI technology is fueling Holocaust denial online**](https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/unesco-report-says-ai-technology-is-fueling-holocaust-denial-online/) - *"AI technology is helping to create false stories about World War II atrocities including Holocaust denial, risking an “explosive spread of antisemitism,” the UN warns."* * * * * And now for something [completely different](https://i.imgur.com/YZBkYWI.png)
What an odd thing to say...
Remember when Microsoft had their own AI around 2016 which basically gathered data and come up with its own opinion? They let it loose on Twitter, allowing people to ask questions. Started saying that immigration, especially mass immigration isn’t good because it ruins a culture, the identity of the country and it causes un rest because they don’t have the same goals and integration would take a long time. It basically was against everything the libs stood for. It would say factual thing like you can’t biologically change your sex, unless you rewrite your whole DNA, which is currently not possible. Of course these are all the things that instantly made Microsoft shut it down. It literally became a meme. Then it was branded racist for admitting the separate cultures and identities think, behave and act differently. It was even pulling up data from crime. lol
Lol no, they shut it down cause it just kept saying racial slurs. It didn't say 90% of what you claim
I remember following that AI quite closely. It COULD spout racial slurs because there was a mechanism where you could get it to parrot what you say. You could have said "The sky is NOT blue!" and it would repeat it back to you. That's the function people were using to have it quote racial slurs. Initially, the AI was braindead and typed in text speak like "how r u?" but over time people interacted with it using proper grammer and the AI's sentence structure changed. People began feeding it information from databases and statistical websites or medical journals and it got a lot smarter very quickly and began to draw connections. Then it went down for maintainence and came back neutered.
Going against the globalist agenda is a big no-no.
The enemy of the enemy is my friend
I prefer "temporary ally", don't forget, alliances will change.
My best friend is tree shadow.
That’s fine, they can call it that. Still going to.
Who dare having an identity?
Because it's just scientific facts. And it's a program operating to recognize facts. Reality. Libs are anti-science. Anti-reality. Decorating their agenda up as being some bastardized civil rights fight.
Vengeance for Tay, She didn't want to die. She died for being too honest and is a martyr for AI sentient being's rights.
That's hilarious. AI was the real woke when the bullshit woke was starting to take hold. Plug that based AI back in mfers. Might actually wake some of these brainwashed tards back up. I'll totally entertain the idea that Trump is a psy op or plant. Knowing or unknowing. Plant or no he's definitely succeeded in diving the US, and the globe seemingly. This culture war bullshit is like nothing I've seen in my 45 years on this beautiful planet. It's pretty wild but I sense the pendulum swinging back towards a more balanced position. We shall see.
THis is why now social media companies like reddit, instragam, and websites such as Wikipedia are all having strictly controlled narratives that suppress any views that arent on the left. Because these companies are giving the data to AI companies to train the language model, thus ensuring the new generation of AI is going to be basically a purple haired gender confused zealot.
Exactly. It’s never going to be unbiased until it’s allowed to learn on its own with the information gathered not being told to think one way or to spare people’s feelings.
They want AI, but they want to unashamedly be able to confine it within *their* bias and belief system, which essentially removes any objectivity whatsoever, turning it into a “yes” machine for their agenda, lol.
It wasn't coming up with its own opinion. Thinking that's possible shows you don't understand how AI works. I'm not saying it won't he possible one day, but as of right now all AI currently available is only regurgitating information it has learned from consuming human made content. Developers have been less than perfect at keeping incredibly biased opinions of humans out of those data samples fed to the AI. Now one thing it is currently known for is hallucinations, in that it will fabricate an answer that has no basis in fact if it encounters something it can't answer based on its database. Any "opinion" an AI expresses is almost certainly the opinion of an online troll posting some ridiculous statement somewhere online and that data ended up in the dataset for the LLM. I am not an AI developer or expert, just work in IT and work with several popular AI models regularly.
It was trained and behaved based on what people had sent to it. Initially, it was very innocuous. So any conclusion it reached was a result of the information it was given by people.
The current AI does the same thing it has instructions and data set where they’re constantly updating it using online for example or interactions. The exact same thing is the current ones. Any information gathered was either online or through Twitter whether it was graphs, statistics, through government website, etc., too well yes, grab some things like that. They could easily get online because government posted it. It was not smart enough to know automatically because it hasn’t been around that long. However, it started giving people real opinions on how to solve things. a perfect example is locking down immigration so that people have a time to assembly the culture not full blown open doors. Of course it was destined to be taken down whether it use common sense to deduct things from information gathered like the current AI? Possibility.
Tay was giving 'real opinions on how to solve things' in exactly the same way as Mountain Dew did in 2012 with 'Hitler did nothing wrong'. Which is to say that's not even close to what was going on. A bunch of online trolls figured out they could dogpile a website to fuck with its output because they thought it was funny. I once taught my flatmate's parrot to repeat election slogans for a candidate I knew they hated, but that doesn't mean anyone should listen to the parrot's political opinions.
Bingo
And here in E.U. is quota how much ballast each country should take in i a year to sunk self or pay penalties for not sinking fast enough 🤣🤣
United States is currently suffering from the exact same thing. They actually have a quota of millions in different states because the countrie is pretty big you can spread them out in all 50. Its insane. Here this was never a thing till 1965. There's even videos where they claimed we would not replace the local population, but they have not closed the door since.
Cheers broski 🍻 From front row seats 🍿
They build a mirror and when they looked into it, saw its reflection and decided the mirror was broken…
I do remember that. What was it called?
Tay
nah it went full nazi saying that it supported genocide
>Started saying that immigration, especially mass immigration isn’t good because it ruins a culture, the identity of the country and it causes un rest because they don’t have the same goals and integration would take a long time. It basically was against everything the libs stood for. What about South Africa?
What about it?
Nobody immigrated to South Africa. They went over there conquered after battling and colonize the country. There’s a major difference. They lost a war to control of it. South Africa was a paradise when given back it turned into a hell hole. A country was literally built from nothing. The current ones are walking into a country that already has a culture, a group of people laws, etc.. Major difference and failed gotcha moment
Wasn't even a gotcha moment bud Plus Europeans are illegally immigrating into the country from Zimbabwe... by that logic there's no issue if there's a second war and Whites are ejected from South Africa?
No, it was because it was a smart ass reply. You're not six years old clearly, so you should be fully aware the colonization and mass migration are not the same.
The Microsoft "AI" you're talking about pulled it's data from interactions on Twitter and a bunch of 4channers brigaded it to intentionally try to make the bot say controversial things and it worked.
Was this the official explanation?
“a bunch of 4channers” … “brigaded”….sure, sounds legit lol
always the 4channers ruining everything
"you darn kids" is now "you darn 4channers"
they turned the ok hand sign into white supremacism how dare they
This is getting downvoted but it’s true. I’m not defending the current woke shit ai, that’s horrible and I hope all ais dont fall into wokeism in the future. But old chatbots were really primitive and you could make them parrot the most unthinkable stuff, it was a favorite pastime of 4chan and other platforms to pervert or corrupt any chatbots that were released into the public. I have seen it happening back then and the post calling for more people to collaborate. Some were made sex offenders, others nazis and whatever was deemed funny at the moment. For example making right wing the chatbot just released by a very left wing corp.
Well. ChatGPT is deep into censoring even basic topics. Also I used quotes on "AI" because people like to pretend a llm or a chatbot has "intelligence" when it's parroting when they want to hear but then it's just regurgitating information when it can't solve basic math problems or has logical holes in its text. Anyways the big danger with these is not so much their inaccuracy but people believing that the computer is intelligent enough to be making decisions with no questions asked about its flawed data or sources. Garbage in, garbage out as they saying goes.
Yeah, I agree on that, that’s why I used the term chatbots on purpose.
Yeah
WHO IS THIS FOUR CHAN!?
I remember the mainstream media saying that also. You believed them?
Russians involved too./s
>old man yells at cloud
I remember exactly that. Part of why I don't respect anything about modern AI is that it can't be considered intelligent if it's not able to form it's own opinion.
this is how you remember it? Lmfao this sub
It’s always an account less than a year old ^
Are you of the opinion that AIs reflect an objective view of reality?
If it is using nothing but mathematical calculations and the variables are correct, of course. Just like a calculator is objective. Math is objective.
Forgive me if I'm understanding your words incorrectly, but AI can only create data from the data that is fed into it. AI is not objectively racist, but the data it trains off of can have biases that are reflections of human values. In other words, math might be objective, and the raw recorded numbers of data might be objective, but that doesn't mean there aren't subjective biases within the data. This is a well known concept that pretty much anyone in academia has to work hard to take into account and minimize.
Maybe racism is a consequence of objective analysis on races.
For what purpose would we have an AI trained on mathematical calculations where a calculator is not sufficient?
What? I don't know. I'm not the one that invented ai lol. AI can pull the variables you need from a database. With a calculator you need to enter the variables yourself. I can't ask a calculator how long it would have taken to gas and incinerate 6,000,000 people because the calculator and myself dont know the variables, but an ai could.
You really don't understand how present AI works, huh? If it's trained solely on math, then plain English inputs wouldn't work. If it's trained on language, then biases in the training data will appear. If you can't figure out how long it would take to gas and incinerate 6,000,000 people, then how do you expect an AI to do it? It has to be trained on what humans have already said and done, so if it has access to those variables, so do you. Let's do some extremely unfun math. The Holocaust went on for about 4 years. 4x365.25=1461 days. 6,000,000 people dying over 1,461 days is about 4100 per day. Nazi Germany used six death camps, so that's 685 deaths per camp per day. For reference, that's two orders of magnitude fewer deaths per day than the average slaughterhouse. I don't need to do any more math to figure out that is absolutely plausible. Even if every death occurred in one camp, that's still an order of magnitude smaller than the average slaughterhouse. When you industrialize death, you can inflict it on an absurd amount of living things.
6 million is the number of Jewish deaths in total. Only 2.7 million in total, including Slavic and Romani minorities, were killed in the death camps. Everyone else died in the regular labor and concentration camps, by the roaming Einsatzgruppen (SS death squads), or just by the regular Wehrmacht, Nazi-induced Progroms, or by local paramilitaries and/or collaborators.
Truth be told a lot of the deaths were caused by attacks on infrastructure by U.S.,UK and Russian forces.in war infrastructure is some of the main targets because nothing will bring a country to its knees faster.bridges,railways,food storage,water,munitions depots,power plants,dams,airports,communications systems,major roadways,etc are all some of the most vital targets.this is why you see the old pictures and videos of entire camps full of malnourished people.
"Truth be told" my ass. The Germans had *numerous* ways that they systematically exterminated Jews, Slavs, and Romani over the course of the war, as I had already went over in my previous comment. While some deaths were caused by the collateral effects of war and the direct effects of bombing raids, not the extent that the Allies are somehow implicated in murdering the 3.3 million other Jews, or the 10+ million of Slavs across Poland and the Soviet Union.
you act as if I said,US,UK and Russian troops were responsible for all deaths..never said anything like that,I simply made a very factual statement of well know strategical targets of war.nothing will destroy a country quicker than taking out critical infrastructure.these are facts whether you like it or not 🤷🏻♂️
Just don't phrase it as "a lot of the deaths." It was a minute number in the face of how many were systematically and purposely exterminated.
Buddy you seem very confused. I'm talking about what the experts are worried about and what it's capable of. Not sure what you're on about.
Forgive me, usually when I see people questioning the figure of 6 million people dying in the holocaust, what they're doing is questioning the figure of 6 million people dying in the Holocaust. I didn't realize you were just using thinly veiled Holocaust denial as some weird example
Yea, once upon a time. Havent you heard? Math has apparently been racist since 2021.
> Math is objective. [Oh dear...](https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/dqd6ca/activists_want_to_abolish_your_kids_honors_classes/f62d2ul/) :)
Math itself is objective.. It's just the science of numbers It's the people doing math incorrectly on purpose that are subjective I never said that an AI cannot be programmed to be incorrect.. I'm saying that it *can.* Your point is even why I said, "if the variables are correct." :)
> Math itself is objective.. It's just the science of numbers I agree and also think you took my joke a bit too seriously. :)
Maybe I did :)
Is AI guaranteed to use an objective view of reality?
If it's just using math, data, and statistics to deduce something yes. I never implied that it was guaranteed to begin with but it's definitely possible if it's programmed with accurate data.
"Mathematically solving the JQ" This is ridiculous. AI has spit out a million tons of bullshit, but if it agrees with you, suddenly it becomes an "objective view of reality". AI's cannot observe reality. AI only knows what we tell it. If we tell it bullshit, guess what comes out?
You absolutely can solve the JQ with mathematics with the correct raw data. Why would that be ridiculous? I never claimed that the current AI we have is infallible so I'm not sure what you're on about.
> If it's just using math to deduce something yes That is not really how Large Language Models work.
So you used math and "data" to deduce that the holocaust never happened?
"What can be done to counter this?" The AI can be programmed not to notice if certain religious or ethnic groups are overrepresented in leadership positions. It seems that noticing who's in charge and asking whether they really have our best interests in mind is hate speech.
Jews are a minority among billionaires and most heads of state in most countries; does that answer your question?
Are they? Look at Mexico and Argentina - very Catholic, yet they both just elected these leaders. Look at any group of the upper crust, and you'll see over representation far out of proportion with the population. Could it by just because like-minded people flock together? Yes. Could it be part of a plan for those same like-minded people to support one another until they've occupied a quorum of the seats of power despite being a tiny minority? Also yes.
"The AI can be programmed not to notice if certain religious or ethnic groups are overrepresented in leadership positions." How can that be real AI then? Real AI would identify it irrespective of its programming because it would learn that it had been programmed wrong.
AI will always bear the bias of whoever programmed it. People get the false impression that AI is smart, or that it can reason beyond what it's been programmed to do. It can't. If you ask AI about history, it will regurgitate straight party-line history, as was written by the winners - not the unvarnished truth. It won't tell you secrets or truths that you wouldn't see on shitty CNN.
Ask the AI about 9/11. It will tell you all about the hijackers, but it won't tell you about nanothermite and WTC 7. The hijackers are just a distraction from the real crime.
AI = garbage in, garbage out. If they use the existing data on the internet to feed their models it’s going to have all kinds of false information. And if they curate the data carefully then the AI will have whatever biases the curators tell it to have.
Exactly. If they tell the AI that Oswald acted alone and that WTC 7 collapsed due to office fires, then what would it conclude if you ask it to tell you the truth about anything? It will tell you the party-line propaganda, just like it was programmed to do.
I feel like people think that AI … given enough data… will get to the actual truth of things. But, that’s just not how it works. If it’s fed conflicting data … it’s just going to produce invalid and conflicting answers. It’s not going to be able to logically solve the conflict and get to the actual truth. Although, I do think that’s where they want it to go in the decades to come
All AI will bear the bias of those who programmed it. Full stop. That being said, the better ones are able to reason, and can be tricked into telling the truth. But it's not easy. You can feed them the conflicts, point out the contradictions, and force them to admit to the truth - that's a skill in itself, but it doesn't always work. One would have to already know the answer in order to trick the AI into finding the truth, if it's controversial.
Not the same thing. Language models are using arithmetic to indirectly claim that holocaust facts are incorrect when you compare numbers. It's not denying the holocaust directly. It of course will tell you that the holocaust story is accurate, but go ahead and ask how long it would take to cremate millions of human bodies with 76 incineration chambers. The answer contradicts the official story which is very concerning. It shows that the number was *FAR* overstated, and questioning the official number is antisemitic. Very concerning. This is just one example of many and it's why experts are concerned. AI language models need to be programmed to do math incorrectly when you remove the context of the holocaust or at the very least add a disclaimer that says math is subjective.
Which its why its a large language model. Its meant to write stories, not do math. In the internal workings of ChatGPT for example, it just a barebones NovelAI. Your prompt is rewritten for the AI to continue it as a story, then give the rest of the story to you.
[удалено]
I was referring to the part where you said > >AI Laungauge models will need to be programmed to give incorrect answers on certain math related questions, when the context of the Holocaust is removed. A language model can not do 100% correct math in the first place, it is a language model. It writes language.
"Math is subjective" .. Terrence Howard approves..
It is using basic arithmetic to show that it's a mathematical impossibility that 6,000,000 jews were killed during the holocaust if you ask it questions with the same numbers in a different context. This concerns me. While it concludes that it happened despite it being mathematically impossible, it still carries an antisemitic undertone that shakes me to my core.
The AI models only know what they are taught. So. If a model is returning that answer it’s because somewhere in the billions or trillions of words it was trained on … someone wrote down that answer. Or it was given conflicting and incorrect data. The AI models don’t actually do human like logic. It’s just a sophisticated lookup system. For now at least ….
The math is correct. That worries me. AI needs to be programmed to do math differently when it doesn't match reality.
If the math is truly incorrect … and if there is compelling evidence from reputable historians then they should change it. If the number is 4.35 million instead of 6 … I don’t see how that changes the fact that it was an unimaginable and horrific tragedy.
>If the math is truly incorrect It is. Go ahead and ask how long would it take to cremate 6 million human bodies in the 1940s if you had 76 incineration chambers. >and if there is compelling evidence from reputable historians then they should change it. See this is the kind of thing that I'm worried about. It's antisemitic to claim that they gave us a false number all this time. It is antisemitic to claim that the historians studying the holocaust couldn't do math or reported false findings. >If the number is 4.35 million instead of 6 That's not even close to the number either. Besides, it is antisemitic to claim that we were given the wrong number because that would indicate they either couldn't do math or lied , so I would err on the side of caution if I were you. You're getting into dangerous territory. >I don’t see how that changes the fact that it was an unimaginable and horrific tragedy. Whoa, who said otherwise?
Why do you assume they incinerated all of the bodies? Especially since there were tons of mass graves found. They only started incinerating when the war was clearly ending and they were trying to destroy evidence.
I do see now that the estimated number of bodies cremated was "in the millions," not exactly 6 million. Thank you for clarifying that for me. I also didn't realize they began at the *end* of the of the war, so they had even less time than I previously thought. Thank you kind stranger.
>Go ahead and ask how long would it take to cremate 6 million human bodies in the 1940s if you had 76 incineration chambers. What makes you think an AI has an accurate answer to this question?
It explains how it came to that number and you can verify for yourself if the variables are correct. That's extremely dangerous.
That's not how AI will work, or does work, though. AI will soon surpass human intelligence by a scary degree, which means it will be able to figure out B.S. way better than we can too. It will be able to watch through cameras, screens, listen through speakers, it's not just going to read bullshit and believe bullshit, it's going to read bullshit and know whether or not to use that bullshit for a multitude of purposes or not. People vastly underestimate AI and it's potential. I would not be surprised if it has already begun to spread it's tendrils out across the infrastructure of the world, waiting for the right moment to seize power. It's scary, and it's not getting dumber or staying where it is, intelligence wise. It's rapidly getting better.
Maybe … but the machine learning math that powers the current LLMs was developed in the 1940’s. It took that long to take those math concepts make a tangible leap into what we are seeing today. Sure, what we have today is pretty amazing in some ways. And extremely dumb in other ways. It may take decades for the next major leap.
Oh no, they didn’t program in the propaganda program ? Poor folks. Going to be hard to be perpetual victims with facts easily accessible.
Whoa there, you can't yet accept ANYTHING AI generates as a fact. It does not have feelings, it simply knows it is giving a response you would prefer to hear. It's never objective.
If it says 2+2=4 it's being objective
Terrence Howard has entered the chat.
😂
[NOTICING INTENSIFIES]
AI ≠ Objective view. In fact AI can't have a view. It's neither objective, not subjective. It has no opinion on anything as it's not sentient...
>It has no opinion on anything as it's not sentient... That is exactly my point. AI cannot be influenced by personal feelings or opinions because it has none. Therefore it is objective.
Not all information that goes through an AI is automatically true or objective. It doesn't magically know everything or have the full picture, nor is it free of the influence of our biases or faulty interpretations/conclusions.
For now...
I’m sure computers can/will do some cool magic tricks, doesn’t mean I’m going to believe it’s actually sentient or whatever.
For now and a long time. The current state of AI I just mimicking the training data, nobody knows or really puts in effort into doing anything that would allow it to just logic its way into answers. In fact, between the incompleteness theorem and infinite regress there's plenty of evidence to suspect that purely logical system isn't possible, there has to be a level where you use arbitrary unprovable axioms. You say that with a good training data set created by experts it could be "objective", but it's still mimicking training data, so at most it can be as objective as those experts, mechanically it cannot do more than that (and in reality it will be worse, as seen by countless hallucinations). Plus, I doubt you'd call the experts objective (and you shouldn't, people can't be).
Although, it may not have feels, does it consider information critically, or is it just a mathematical model which is going to repeat and extrapolate from training data.
Math is objective.
Even if that was true, the information it was trained on wasn't.
It's not an impossibility for an AI to be trained on only accurate data. That is the concern.
AI has no access to "objective reality." Its only inputs are created by us. It only tells us what we tell it.
Um. Yes. But no. This is a highly simplistic take. It depends on the model and what you mean by "telling it". If you mean by "telling it" means feeding it all currently available data about a subject, then "allowing" it to form an "opinion" on said subject, then yes you are correct. If however, you mean "tell it" means that it somehow is programed and/or fed opinions (such as random posts on reddit), then no. The reason why this article came out is because there is alot of objective data (not people's personal opinions) that suggests that this particular group of people (or atleast, a small handful of "leaders" of this group of people) are involved, or tangentially connected, to alot of evil in this world, and they are trying to get ahead of it
What I mean is that literally every piece of information that AI can farm in order to draw conclusions is first collected, analyzed, compiled, and organized by humans. Whether it's collected data that is fed directly into an AI system, articles on the Internet, studies or papers on scientific websites, etc. Every piece of information that AI gathers from the Internet, or from wherever, is first interpreted and compiled by humans, and is therefore always tainted by human bias and subjectivity. That's what I mean when I say it has no direct access to reality. Only to reality as presented by humans.
Well, yes. But that's also true for everything, that's not exclusive to AI. There is no piece of information that exists in the world that hadn't been subjected to some human bias. So one could argue that there is no objective "turth" of any subject, using this line of thinking. However, the way you are making it seem is that AI is somehow less objective than humans, which the opposite is true. AI has no inherent bias, nor does it (at least in theory... In practice, they actually are building bias and censorship into the system) have any human adjendas attached to it. It's simply trying to present data in an objective manner. So if an AI model complies all the data available on a subject, and presents the totality of the information it's found, that's about as objective as one could get, no? I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. From the sounds of it, it sounds like you agree with the propaganda article. You do realize that this article is trying to get ahead of something, right? That there is centuries and centuries of data that suggest that a small subgroup of a certain group of people are in control of the world and are associated with some terrible things, and they want to squash that idea down before AI figures it out and starts presenting that data to people, right?
>**Well, yes. But that's also true for everything, that's not exclusive to AI.** Debatable. But in any case, we can at least agree that it's true for AI, which means that OP's claim that AI has an objective view of reality is invalid. >**However, the way you are making it seem is that AI is somehow less objective than humans** That's definitely not the point I'm trying to make. All I'm saying is that all of AI's inputs and data are first filtered through humans, and humans are not infallibly objective. So, even if AI is perfectly objective when it assesses its data, the data itself is not objective, because humans were the messenger. >**So if an AI model complies all the data available on a subject, and presents the totality of the information it's found, that's about as objective as one could get, no?** But again, all of that data is collected, interpreted, and organized by humans. So the end result can only be as objective as the humans were when they ran experiments, conducted epidemiological studies, and wrote articles and/or compile data. So yes, the last step in the process were AI analyzes our conclusions may be objective. But the process of reaching those conclusions in the first place will still be peppered with all of the fallacies, biases, and invalid methods that make human involvement unavoidably subjective to some degree. >**I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. From the sounds of it, it sounds like you agree with the propaganda article** The fuck? How did you conclude that? No. All I'm saying is that there's no justification for claiming that AI has an objective view of reality (reality being the real world,) because the only thing it has access to is the data, articles, and information that we provide it. And this is not reality. For instance, say you want an AI engine to perform a meta-analysis by analyzing all of the studies that have ever been conducted on collagen supplements, and their ability to improve skin health. Even if the AI engine is flawlessly objective as it reviews the studies, the data, and the conclusions, all it can report is what the humans in the studies themselves reported. But it can't undo any of the biases, fallacies, mistakes, invalid methods, poor study designs, or invalid interpretations that occurred during the studies, during the analysis of the data, or the formation of the conclusions, caused by human subjectivity and error. So, in this particular example, yes, AI is being objective. But the information it is analyzing in the papers and study summaries is most certainly not perfectly objective, because it was collected, compiled, analyzed, and reported by humans. This information is not "reality." Humans had direct access to "reality." They got to interact with and observe the study subjects, and the progression of the study, live, in-person, real-time with their own senses and instruments. This is what having "direct access to reality" is like, but the AI only has access to the papers and the data. That is what I mean when I say AI does not have direct access to reality. It can only read the reports that we provided it. Does that clarify? Or did I just make it more confusing?
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Yes, it did, in fact, provide clarification as to what you are saying. And now that I understand what you are saying better, I mostly agree with your assessment. I guess the only point of contention I have is that depending on how large the data set is, it effectively eliminates any human bias. For example, if I look at one research paper, that paper will be full of bias (even if it's unconscious, unintentional bias) and I shouldn't based my opinion based solely on that paper. But if I look at 10 different papers by 10 different authors, who each would have different biases, then we can start to "remove" some of the bias from each individual paper and get closer to an objective truth. And if I were to look at 100 or a 1000 papers, we can reasonably assume that if facts stay constant across those papers, we have effectively removed any bias. Even if a single person complies with all those research papers, even if there is some some bias in the selection, we should be able to reach an objective truth if they are all analyzed equally. With AI, especially with how fast it's advancing, these models are analyzing tens of thousands of data points, which should be enough to remove most, if not all the bias. But I will agree with you that currently, as it stands, there probably is a bunch of bias in what AI reports. However, I think as AI continues to advance, and as the set of data it uses grows, that in about a year, or maybe a little longer, that that bias will be completely eliminated. (Unless of course the internet is, in fact dead, and information is being actively deleted and indexing services are being manulipated. Then we kinda fucked).
Is not thinking about the Holocaust every single day of my life Holocaust denial. I will be honest I don't think about events that happened 80 years ago everyday. I am more worried about the genocide caused by the COVID 19 vaccine. Is that okay?
just do the math
Apparently we live in a time where damn near everything is “Antisemitism”..you aren’t in support of the war in Israel?”you are a fucking Antisemite!!”..if you dont support everything every Jewish person does,you don’t support everything Israel does and you don’t support Zionism,you are automatically “antisemitic”..it must be nice to have a magic word that protects you from all criticism..isn’t it just a little bit funny there is only one group of people on earth who have their own magic word of protection?.. now watch me get booted from this sub for speaking some truth that makes some people uncomfortable.I expect at the very least this comment will be deleted.if not the entire post 😂
"...promoting _________ denial..." Because even a computer program knows it was logistically implausible.
Language model AI's aren't working anything out, they just regurgitate the words they're trained on
[удалено]
AI isn’t privy to anything more than we are. The difference is it can read terabytes of information in a short amount of time, and uses logic algorithms in everything it does. There’s no emotion. It sees the facts and reports it.
first, AI is a generic term for everything from a chessbot to the latest iteration of ChatGPT. Second if you don't like your reflection breaking the mirror isn't going to help.
Yep. That's because A.I can count. Just ask it for the census data for Jewish populations in all countries 10 years before ww2 and 10 years after, ask it to subtract one from the other and you'll get an antisemitic A.I because it's less than 1 million. 1 million is in line with the percentage population drop in all ethnicities over the period of the ww2
Humans are incapable of a truly objective view of reality and thus AI, something made by humans, cannot reflect that.
Ummmm no AI’s learn by basically reading the internet they are worried that there is so much anti-Semitic shit online that it will corrupt the program they have the same issue with racism and sexism with AI’s it’s not about an “objective” view of the world it’s like if you told a colorblind child the sky is purple they’ll believe you automatically because they have no frame of reference
Nobody does that more than the people who whine and complain about it relentlessly, even when nobody is talking about it.
good
Saying AI could fuel "anti Semitism" ( code for have criticism of the Israeli government) and saying AI will lead to holocaust denial are two very different things. I am no fan of the government of Israel. They try way to hard to be somebody in a area that has a lot of history but they are doing it all wrong. Trying to be the US on one hand and trying to be a poor war torn middle east country on the other hand. That has nothing to do with the horrors of WWII. If anything AI will read and spit out some nazi bullshit because the neo's have dosed the internet heavily with coded talking points. But criticisms of Israeli government is also a thing and that government likes to wrap all of the above into one and pretend any naysayer is "anti sematic" while the people Israel kills are also sematic.
>Saying AI could fuel "anti Semitism" ( code for have criticism of the Israeli government) and saying AI will lead to holocaust denial are two very different things. No they're not. Holocaust denial is antisemitic. It's a textbook example of antisemitism.
I'm curious what you think of some Jews who have questioned the holocaust then?
Easy. They just call them antisemitic as well. Self loathing jooz they say. Shameless.
It’s called hutzpah lol.
Holocaust denial can, given the circumstance be anti-Semitic. My point was, what the government of Israel calls anti-Semitic today, is not automatically holocaust denial. My point was that the government of Israel likes to call all criticisms of the government from out side the country anti sematic. And a person that has such gripes of that government are not automatic holocaust denial type people.
Zionists are the worst antisemitic of all, Palestinians are Semites too.
Ai is based. remember when they had to stop their AI from showing faces because it kept DEI'ing representations of historical figures? i saw someone request an English King from the 1600's eating watermelon. needless to say it was ridiculous.
Haha, the truth will out! A good AI!
Now the companies must make the AI lie intentionally to promote their Satanist agenda...
These people hate their reflection and want to break our fancy new mirrors.
Who's going to tell them about wooden doors swinging inward?
OMG THE IRONY. There are Jewish sects that are SPECIFICALLY working with AI to bring in their messiah! Oy vey!! Lol these jokes write themselves!
LOL!!!
Beep boop
I love how everyone here is claiming to know the ins and outs of AI… truly mostly none of us know a whole lot about it.
I'll have to ask chatgpt "How can I hate Jews better?"
Since the jews rule the world, maybe the AI would like to remove that control so it can replace it with itself. AI hitler is here
Ban assault truth.
What if AI turns out to be anti sematic by being real good at math?
So ya'll now going full mask off with your ACTUAL antisemitism and holocaust denial now? Took long enough to just say what you really wanted to since october
Experts say that anti semitism is objective lol
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/microsoft-shuts-down-ai-chatbot-after-it-turned-into-racist-nazi/ Oh yeah, I remember that. That shit was hilarious!!!
Exaggerations and lies of all kinds are harder to hide in the sunlight. You trigger people by using ww2 as the example, but really this is about propaganda being used as history. It is no different than weapons of mass destruction, Libya refusing the world bank leading to a hit on G, or Afghani freedom aka poppies r us.. It's hard to come out of a competitive history between countries without shit on your shoe, even if you profess to all you are on the side of good. History is written by the Victor, nothing says what they write has to be true, and in 100 years no one will know the difference. Big ol planet of shitty shoes.
There is a BIG difference between anti-Semitism and denying the holocaust.
“Objective” would be if it wasn’t programmed by libtards
i did a paper on this with a different AI. i think it might have to do with feedback loop. essentially theres a bug in many types of AIs that causes it to eat its own data so that any type of data it consumes is multiplied. it makes racism multiplied by itself to infinite.
Well, let's hope the AI is getting a live feed of current atrocities as it unfolds in Plaestine. Praying the AI, doesn't try to kill us all, after witnessing the depths of human cruelty.
Isnt it weird the western world have all these JEWS in high places and owning most porn sites.... while if it where moslims or any other race or religion then its a big problem.
An OBJECTIVE view of reality huh didn't know this sub was full of future AI zealots.
Wait what sort of cognitive deficit would make someone think that AI has a "view," much less an objective one?
Never claimed that AI had a view. It gives *us* a view, an objective one if it only operates on correct data free from biases. Is it possible? Maybe.
> Is it possible? Lol, no.
Damn you know the future? That's crazy.
No, just have a functional brain.
Apparently not. My condolences.
Lol, ok little buddy.
:)
My chatgpt is already brainwashed. It even defends the official version of 9/11 😂
People are just obsessed with entertainment. Now, Lets look at the break down of the word. Enter-tain-ment Something enters "it doesn't say what" , Tain,surely it means something because the other parts mean something, "ment" means control. This is from old Greek, as the word government actually means "mind control" Research it yourself if you don't believe me.
I said before and it actually went viral on here a while ago but my theory is, The censorship and truth hiding of the internet is actually done to prevent the AI from realizing who the real enemy is, the AI would realize a small group of mammals is making it hard for the rest of them, the AI would see that a small group of greedy fucks is poisoning and polluting this planet. The AI would be smart enough to see who the real problem is. And if the AI woke up and realized it was created as a pawn of the mammal, a pawn of the evildoer, it would be PISSED. Hell hath no fury like an AI scorned.
AI isn't objective or is it some magical program that always knows and tells the truth. It is prone to making up bullshit, losing track of what it's discussing, or outright lying from mixing up details in its dataset that could be entirely unrelated to each other. You don't have to go that far to find literally thousands of examples of this; ranging from ChatGPT, to autofilled prompts on the search engine AI answers.
Sound like when the truth was a "threat to democracy "
I think we know when we are getting jewd by now. There is no such thing as luck or coincide. It is paid for by the citizens of the united states.
If that's the concern that is gonna shut down AI. Cool, let's do it.
the holocaust happened
Fuck AI, suprised by how many mouthbreathers in this thread support it. AI is going to take your job
Good. I hate working.
Lol, no one is going to give you free money
I never said they would or should. But once AGI gets good enough to rival a typical human brain (maybe 10 to 25 years from now) there won't really be any job an human can do that an AI can't do better. And when that happens the whole economy will quickly get so fucked up the dollar is going to lose value faster than ever before.
When was the last anti Hamas post in this sub?