Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: False Personalities in Social Media, A Warning

  1. #1
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    10th April 2015
    Location
    Yucca Valley/Joshua Tree Area
    Posts
    81
    Thanks
    493
    Thanked 391 Times in 76 Posts

    False Personalities in Social Media, A Warning

    Jim Stone (former NSA) posted the following timely information that IMO warrants consideration. NO FORUM is immune to this.

    http://82.221.129.208/

    An important warning


    Computer programming has advanced so far that a software program can now perfectly mimic an above average person online. You can now be fooled by totally synthetic relationships online and not even be in contact with a real person AT ALL. I have known that the CIA has had such software available in various forms for about 8 years, and now Drudge Report finally covered the topic by linking to an article that whitewashed it by saying it is being done by computer programmers and computers in China. This software does not need a multiple thousand core supercomputer to run on, something like a run of the mill quad core or I7 can handle this very easily, (and in the context of an online relationship it would not even take that much of a computer because the software would have time to think).

    Therefore, in addition to making the final decisions about who you are, I urge people to strongly focus on relationships with people you know are real, in your everyday life and to start moving away from social media where everything is just bits and pixels. Remember, the people who possess this technology are basically without souls and they would think absolutely nothing about blowing your entire life on a false hope based on a fake love relationship or friendship that is simply running alongside hundreds of others on the same $20.00 CPU. The elite will have no troubles destroying chat rooms, forums and comment sections with this technology as well, as far as I see it the good old days of the web, where you really were connecting and chatting with real people are gone and more and more it will all be software that has been programmed to manipulate you.

    I believe it is a very good time to break the ice and get to know the neighbors . . . . . the "elite" are definitely going to send online reality down the toilet bowl in a great big swirling glurp WITH THIS


    Artificially Intelligent Computer Outperforms Humans on IQ Test

    http://observer.com/2015/06/artifici...ns-on-iq-test/

  2. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to DeeZe For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), GCS1103 (16th June 2015), Gemma (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), Juniper (15th June 2015), just robj (16th June 2015), lookbeyond (16th June 2015), Majik (16th June 2015), mojo (16th June 2015), RealityCreation (16th June 2015), reno (16th June 2015), Woody (16th June 2015)

  3. #2
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    14,610
    Thanks
    70,673
    Thanked 62,025 Times in 14,520 Posts
    Talk about discernment issues! Jeez, Deeze. I'm a little creeped out. I forge relationships face to face. The online friends I have are people I have met personally.

    So, in a place like this there could be virtual posters who aren't flesh and blood. Weird to think about. Human instincts may serve to discern...

    Society isn't particularly honest. Online, less so.

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), Chester (16th June 2015), DeeZe (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), RealityCreation (16th June 2015)

  5. #3
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    10th April 2015
    Location
    Yucca Valley/Joshua Tree Area
    Posts
    81
    Thanks
    493
    Thanked 391 Times in 76 Posts
    There are, no doubt, fake computer posters here on TOT. It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. And one of several reasons I won't go round and round with "people" online I have never met. I do not have an agenda or anything to sell or to prove. I don't do my "personal work" based on forum comments either. I am here, like many, searching for information on this developing story we call life on Earth.

    As an aside, I find it interesting to note "who" thanks "whom" and for "what" on this forum.


  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeeZe For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), Majik (16th June 2015), RealityCreation (16th June 2015), Windancer (18th June 2015)

  7. #4
    Retired Member Australia
    Join Date
    12th April 2015
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    257
    Thanks
    2,992
    Thanked 1,605 Times in 252 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by DeeZe View Post
    There are, no doubt, fake computer posters here on TOT. It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. And one of several reasons I won't go round and round with "people" online I have never met. I do not have an agenda or anything to sell or to prove. I don't do my "personal work" based on forum comments either. I am here, like many, searching for information on this developing story we call life on Earth.

    As an aside, I find it interesting to note "who" thanks "whom" and for "what" on this forum.

    I think everyone is going to have a different view on the idea of using the thanks button. In my case I do it to acknowledge that I've read the post, to thank for the energy invested in taking the time to post, even if it is not my generally held view point. I do NOT thank because I am necessarily agreeing with the content or opinion of the poster, although quite often that is the case. Sometimes I don't thank at all because I'm quickly reading through a thread to catch up & I simply forget to.

    So I think making assumptions about the 'thanks" can sometimes lead to incorrect impressions of a person.

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to RealityCreation For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), DeeZe (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), Joanna (17th June 2015), Majik (16th June 2015)

  9. #5
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    10th April 2015
    Location
    Yucca Valley/Joshua Tree Area
    Posts
    81
    Thanks
    493
    Thanked 391 Times in 76 Posts
    Two Artificial Intelligence (AI) Chatbots talk and argue with each other


  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeZe For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015)

  11. #6
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    10th April 2015
    Location
    Yucca Valley/Joshua Tree Area
    Posts
    81
    Thanks
    493
    Thanked 391 Times in 76 Posts
    AI vs. AI. Two chatbots talking to each other


  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeZe For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015)

  13. #7
    Senior Member Morocco modwiz's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Nestled in Appalachia
    Posts
    6,720
    Thanks
    40,125
    Thanked 41,242 Times in 6,698 Posts
    People are so programmed sometimes even true flesh and blood is like dealing with an AI. Just one that doesn't function too well.
    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize" -- Voltaire

    "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."-- Eleanor Roosevelt

    "Misery loves company. Wisdom has to look for it." -- Anonymous

  14. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to modwiz For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), DeeZe (16th June 2015), Dreamtimer (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), JRS (17th June 2015), Lord Sidious (16th June 2015), RealityCreation (16th June 2015)

  15. #8
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    10th June 2015
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    2,129
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 922 Posts
    I'm a computer programmer. I'd like to classify two type of "bots".

    1. a canned response system that assists a user in making posting. For the user that makes a _lot_ of posts on may different forums.

    2. A more sophisticated program that get's evaluated according to a Turring test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test) Yes, what you write about does in fact exist. An IBM machine with a decision tree so deep that its bound to a fact bank that requires a whole rack in a data center (at least) to function. Google is finalizing research and development with an algorithm known as "word vectoring" that is supposed to expand on their current capabilities in ways that enhance search (their business).

    I'd venture to say the latter is to expensive to spend on non-critical forums that talk about even sensitive topics below a certain "noise threshhold" the prior can create.

    I'll also venture that it's more cost effective to drown out "voices of truth" by putting a guy with option number 1, on the internet and create an element of noise so as to drown out or create confusion around delicate or sensitive issues. Disinformation is cheap enough in this form. You can tell when canned messages are posted because the poster does not address individual question, but rather puts up stuff that is mostly statement based. may include references, links quotes and the like to appear credible. I doubt the canner will address question that are specific because it reduces his capacity to post a "full spread"; the operators behind this system think it's more important/effective to say whatever everywhere than to say something with actual quality. Furthermore, the messages are not really designed to answer questions, but rather to create uncertainty by creating noise for the uninformed to fuss over.

    I'm inclined to say category 2 is likely to be mostly experimental and thus used in "controlled" or observed environments only. That is not to say that can change in the future. But that the exact belief or topic trending in the masses doesn't need such a powerful countermeasure to control. I just can't see this option making sense in context of chem-trails, Fox-News and the likes that also heighten the level of noise in the information streams. Perhaps option 2 makes more sense in brainwashing a politician in context of talking points before a debate or to find the best language for a pole or something.

  16. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to lcam88 For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), DeeZe (16th June 2015), Dreamtimer (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), Joanna (17th June 2015), RealityCreation (16th June 2015)

  17. #9
    Administrator Aragorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2015
    Location
    Middle-Earth
    Posts
    20,240
    Thanks
    88,437
    Thanked 80,968 Times in 20,254 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by DeeZe View Post
    There are, no doubt, fake computer posters here on TOT.
    I seriously doubt that. First of all, as much as I love The One Truth, this is not a sufficiently high-enough-profile forum within the so-called Alternative Community™ for anyone in the alphabet soup agencies to want to come over and mess with our members via sophisticated AI. In addition to that, why would they even bother, when there are so many trolls eager to earn a little extra on the side by offering their services as a professional corporate shill? (I've come across several of those already in the GNU/Linux newsgroups on Usenet, and I'll give you three guesses as to whose bidding they do. )

    Secondly, you are also overestimating the abilities of AI. Yes, a sufficiently powerful AI -- at least, when we're talking of what's available from the mainstream IT engineering laboratories such as MIT -- can mimic a living person to a certain extent, but not quite perfectly yet. There recently was a test where an AI -- which did run on a sufficiently powerful supercomputer -- was supposedly indistinguishable from a 13-year old boy, and it did manage to fool more than half of the participants in the test. I'm not sure on the numbers anymore, but I think it must have been somewhere in the vicinity of 60%. But that's by far not all of the participants yet, and as I said, this was an AI running on a supercomputer.

    As a for most part self-educated computer geek, I do monitor the evolution in information technology somewhat, albeit that I'm less interested in consumer-grade developments, and I particularly couldn't care less about marketing hypes and bubbles.

    Quote Originally posted by DeeZe View Post
    It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out.
    I'd be very curious to learn of the evidence upon which you substantiate that claim. It sounds more like paranoia to me -- and I don't mean this in an insulting or personal way.

    Quote Originally posted by DeeZe View Post
    [...] As an aside, I find it interesting to note "who" thanks "whom" and for "what" on this forum.
    Well, I too pay attention to that, although I don't necessarily ponder upon it for long. Whereas I myself am concerned, I click "thanks" for a whole variety of reasons -- mainly out of respect -- but that does not necessarily mean that I would agree with (all of) what any particular poster says. And I don't always click "thanks" on posts either -- for instance when I'm only skimming a particular thread without paying too much attention to everything that's being said in it.

    On the other hand, it is also no secret that certain members here will never click "thanks" on any of my posts -- or on posts from any of the other moderators -- as an expression of a consistent and persistent passive-aggressive behavior, while one does just as consistently see them clicking "thanks" on posts which were clearly intended as antagonistic. And it's always the same bunch of people too, albeit that a number of them have already unsubscribed themselves from The One Truth in the meantime. Fortunately, as moderators of this wonderful on-line venue, we can feel the tide changing toward a more positive current these days.

    But I digress, so...

    = DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR =

  18. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Aragorn For This Useful Post:

    DeeZe (16th June 2015), Dreamtimer (16th June 2015), grannyfranny (16th June 2015), Joanna (17th June 2015), RealityCreation (16th June 2015), reno (16th June 2015), The One (16th June 2015)

  19. #10
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    14,610
    Thanks
    70,673
    Thanked 62,025 Times in 14,520 Posts
    Ahh statistics. Thank you icam88 and Aragorn for these helpful analyses.

    I don't like the idea that I may be training AI through the use of search engines. I heard that's part of what Google is trying to do. Is that the word vectoring?

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), DeeZe (16th June 2015)

  21. #11
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    10th June 2015
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    2,129
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 922 Posts
    Word vectors is an advancement in pattern matching algorithms that assign a numeric value to words that permits more logical associations to be made between values (words or numbers) essentially permitting more accurate results.

    This is not my area of expertise, but traditionally, language processing involves pattern matching between words and proximity of words to identify search results. Word vectors take that to new level by association of other values which in turn may permit a more precise "feeling" for what is meant by the words by also inferring other words associated with a topic even if such words are not included in the search. Furthermore it does this without significantly increasing the memory footprint of datasets.

    Perhaps initially word vectoring best serves to eliminate false positive results in the most basic of implementations that otherwise would require the more advanced logically explicit search google provides with AND NOT and OR keywords with possible quotation marks.

    The following link goes through a possible utilization of numeric assignments. The actual algorithm is likely to be a proprietary trade secret

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bag-of-words_model

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lcam88 For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2015), Dreamtimer (16th June 2015)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •