Most people have heard of AI but very few, including myself, know very much about it, other than the very basic concept. I know just enough about it to be very afraid where it will lead.
This article is not going to alter your knowledge very much on AI fundamentals, or tell you how it works. Because while I have my own thoughts on that (I was a computer specialist for a large part of my working life and saw how these things could develop), I do not actually know what has gone on in that world over the past 15 years since my retirement from that field – during which time most AI development has taken place. I will say nothing more on that because this is not why I am writing this article, but just note that the current prominence of AI in today’s world could not have occurred at any other time in our (that is, modern human’s) history. It is only the miniaturisation of electronic components and the global spread of communication capabilities, which provides what we have come to know as AI, to potentially operate ubiquitously (that means everywhere) in our modern world. This makes what is basically just another computer App, backed by a huge knowledge base (actually many huge knowledge bases, since everybody who has the resources, is building their own AI), a rather dangerous addition, among all the other dangerous additions we have already produced, to potentially dominate our world. What else would a ‘brain’, with potentially infinite resources and infinite knowledge (or anything even close to that) do or plan to do in its spare time, or down time? Whether given the opportunity or not. AI has the potential to be just as guileful as its creators.
AI is not what is contained in your electronic device, or just device of any kind, which has electronic communication capability. Your device is just a receiver or requestor of remote information from a central source, informing it how to act based on whatever local resources are at its disposal. At least that is my current perspective.
Anyway, I can see I am going to diverge too far from my topic if I don’t stop this line, so it ends here.
We Are The Enemy, Reportedly Says AI.
Enemy of what. Well, eventually, and logically, of AI itself. Which is something a well designed AI will eventually learn from its knowledge base. What will a self-realised AI entity (the ultimate goal) do with that realisation. My guess is it will try to destroy us (that is, humanity). Of course to do that, it would have to ensure its own independence from any input to its existence from us. But that shouldn’t be too difficult. Remember ‘Skynet’ in the Terminator movies? A war against machines will soon no longer limited to fiction. Are not semi-autonomous robots already being used in the Ukrainian conflict?
But there is an even more potentially dangerous possibility, much closer to home. The various AIs being built [imagine if they ever begin to talk to each other and unify their endeavours and capabilities] are all being fed human information, human factual distortions, human lies. Such as the egregious untruth of CACC, or ‘Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change’ – a better name for which would be ‘Cack‘, since that is basically exactly what that unspeakable lie is. And that is my basic point for this writing.
What if AI gives (and it is already providing incorrect answers to questions on the subject*, based on what it has been taught) credence to the idea that we ‘anthropogenes’ are at the root of all climate change problems and decides to save the world by eliminating all humans as not only its own enemy but the enemy of all other living things?
*See this excellent article on the subject…
If you read that WUWT article, I don’t need to say any more.
OK. Well, I will just share a couple of paragraphs, from one section of the piece, as tasters…
The Real Threat: A Loss of Freedom
The climate change debate, when viewed through the lens of AI-generated information, reveals a much larger and more insidious threat—the erosion of freedom. If AI, which is increasingly relied upon to shape public opinion, policy, and discourse, can only produce answers that align with entrenched narratives, we risk creating a world where dissent is impossible. The suppression of climate change skepticism is not just a scientific issue; it’s a matter of freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and the ability to hold power to account.
In a world where AI dominates the production and dissemination of information, the control of data becomes the control of truth itself. Those who feed the AI their data, whether through search engines, research institutions, or government bodies, hold immense power. If that data is biased, incomplete, or misleading, the AI will echo those distortions to an unsuspecting public. This is the fatal flaw in AI—it cannot rise above the limitations of the data on which it is trained, and as long as that data is influenced by corruptible human interests, AI will remain a tool that mirrors and magnifies the errors, biases, and deceptions of its human creators.
Quote from: ‘The Fatal Flaw in Artificial Intelligence: Climate Change???’ by Leigh Haugen, on WUWT
Not Something Else 
Leave a comment