Last Myth Standing

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Myth of Myths

Forget Myth of the Year, or, Myth of the Decade, everything recorded (or constructed) in the hands of “enlightened” mankind is now largely and universally un-substantiated at best, irregardless of substantiable “evidence”. First stop at the center of this charade is the intent to treat lawgiving justice entities with kid-glove accountability.

While this breathes both alarm and life into this craft, it also pushes the quest for authenticity to the next level. But God promises us room for remaining authenticity to work,


And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. (2 Timothy 2:2)
 
Last edited:

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I invite any to bring on some form of credible gov't, or civil authority calling out this once great wonder. For, it's day to amaze has past and flown far from its welcoming reception. You know it as well as I and every other rational thinking Christian what must be done. But, many will continue to throw up their hands in surrender till the day come when they will wonder, 'why didn't I resist?' Or is this just another segment of doom deprived of running it's (Mark 13:20) course?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
A Better Way to Trust What You Read
How to trust what you read online and tell if it’s AI or human
BY KIM KOMANDO, KOMANDO.COM • NOVEMBER 12, 2023

"I got this note from Ben in Texas. “Hi there, Kim. I love your podcast. You were talking about AI and I got to thinking. When I read a story online at some website, how can I tell if a human wrote it or some bot?”

Ask USA Today. Last week, a bunch of mysterious bylines (WashPo, paywall link) with stories suddenly appeared on its site. Did these writers have a pulse?

Staff writers at Reviewed spoke out that management published stories written by AI under the names of non-existent humans. They couldn’t find these writers with any other bylines or social media profiles, not even on LinkedIn. Of course, the parent company, Gannett, denies it all.

AI lies
When reading something online, especially at a big site, you want to trust that what you get is the truth. But AI makes things up. Did you hear about the law professor who was accused of sexual harassment? AI made up the whole story.

Humans code AI algorithms, folks, and we’re all full of opinions and biases. When you read an AI-generated article or social media post, remember that you’re actually getting a spoonful of someone else’s viewpoint. It’s like a game of digital telephone, and sometimes, you only hear one side of the story.

I know it’s a lot to think about. Let’s start with identifying what’s AI-generated and what’s not. I’ve got your back with the telltale signs a chatbot made that article or webpage.

It wants to sound important
Remember back in school when you were trying to fill a word or page count? You see the same information repeated over and over … and over, with only slight changes in the phrasing.

Keep an eye out for vocab words that are unnecessary and eye-rolling transitions like “Moreover,” “Consequently” and “Furthermore.” That’s not a kid at his first journalism job — it’s a telltale sign of a bot in the bytes.

Chatbots don’t do analysis
AI can state facts, but it cannot talk about how that impacts real life. A human-written celebrity gossip piece would end with something like, “Kim Kardashian dieting for months to squeeze her butt into the 60-year-old Marilyn Monroe dress proves she’ll do what she must to get attention on social media.”

A human writer will draw a meaningful conclusion. If an article is just spouting statements like “Kim Kardashian wore a dress that Marilyn Monroe owned,” it might be AI.

Quotes and numbers don’t pan out
AI can write quotes and cite numbers like nobody’s business! As CNN pointed out, when chatbots are asked to write an article with quotes, they (hilariously) make up names like John Doe and Jane Smith. Not so hard to spot.

AI is also really bad at quoting real-world figures. If an article gives a percentage, ratio or amount, copy and paste that thing into Google. If a chatbot wrote it, there’s a good chance you won’t find any other evidence.

There’s no personality
Chatbots really struggle with humor. The result is often bland writing without an interesting perspective or take. If you find yourself thinking, “Wait, this website used to have a lot more humor or wit,” AI writers may be taking over.

If you think, “I wish Kim would stop making those bad jokes,” congrats, you’re getting an email written by me, real-life Kim Komando.


Keeping an eye out
Since ChatGPT launched last November, phishing emails are up 1,265%. That’s not a typo! AI chatbots are popping up in new corners of the internet every day. And that’s not a bad thing. Like this handy use: AI assistants can scour long articles, research for us and sum up the main points.

But remember, AI has been found to hallucinate (that’s the real term for it) statistics, legal cases, names and science. It just makes crap up, well, kinda like humans do."
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Laodicean60
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
While reports continue to come in from AI proponents as sometimes, protective reasoning, "congress isn't giving up". They sense no need of alarm to move forward to lay down limits, but rather trash God and His civilization, saying: "containment is not possible" and draws down on all such alarm as being "a joke". Rubbing sanity's merciful intent in pointless and unreasonable failure: "the only thing worse than superhuman power in our hands, ," is the 'unthinkable' possibility of it falling into destructive hands. The insult to our intelligence is noted, as though technology is incapable to harness its own devices, , the ONLY move forward here is to secure the point of no return.

"Behind the Curtain: Myth of AI Restraint
By Jim VandeHei, Mike Allen – Nov 21, 2023

Nearly every high-level Washington meeting, star-studded conference and story about AI centers on one epic question:
Can this awesome new power be constrained?

•It cannot, experts repeatedly and emphatically told us.

Why it matters: Lots of people want to roll artificial intelligence out slowly, use it ethically, regulate it wisely. But everyone gets the joke: It defies all human logic and experience to think ethics will trump profit, power, prestige. Never has. Never will.

•Practically speaking, there's no way to truly do any of this once a competition of this size and import is unleashed. And unleashed it is — at breathtaking scale.
•AI pioneer Mustafa Suleyman — co-founder and CEO of Inflection AI, and co-founder of AI giant DeepMind, now part of Google — sounds the alarm in his new book "The Coming Wave," with the sobering Chapter 1: "Containment Is Not Possible."

That's why Sam Altman getting sacked — suddenly and shockingly — should grab your attention. OpenAI — creator of the most popular generative AI tool, ChatGPT — became a battlefield between ethical true believers, who control the board, and the profit-and-progress activators like Altman who ran the company.

•Altman was quickly scooped up by Microsoft, OpenAI's main sugar daddy, to move faster with a "new advanced AI research team."
•Open AI's interim CEO is a doom-fearing advocate for slowing the AI race — Twitch co-founder Emmett Shear, who recently warned there's a 5% to 50% chance this new tech ends humanity.

What we're hearing: Few in Silicon Valley think the Shears of the world will win this battle. The dynamics they're battling are too powerful:

1.Competition between technologists and technology companies to create something with superhuman power inevitably leads to speed and high risk. It's why free competition exists and works.
2.Even if individuals and companies magically showed never-before-seen restraint and humility, competitive governments and nations won't. China will force us to throw caution to the wind: The only thing worse than superhuman power in our hands is it being in China's ... or Iran's ... or Russia's.
3.Even if other nations stumbled and America's innovators paused, there are still open-source models that bad actors could exploit.

Top AI architects tell us there'll likely be no serious regulation of generative AI, which one day soon could spawn artificial general intelligence (AGI) — the one that could outthink our species.

•Corporations won't do it: They're pouring trillions of dollars into the race of our lifetime.
•Government can't do it: Congress is too divided to tackle the complexities of AI regulation in an election year.
•Individuals can't do it: A fractured AI safety movement will persist. But the technology will solve so many big problems in the short term that most people won't bother worrying about a future that might never materialize.

Congress isn't giving up. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) — a former tech entrepreneur who has been a leader in the Capitol Hill conversation on AI — told us he sees more need than ever "for Congress to establish some rules of the road when it comes to the risks posed by these technologies."

•But lawmakers have always had trouble regulating tech companies. Axios reporters on the Hill tell us there are so many conflicting AI proposals that it's hard to see any one of them getting traction.

Reality check: Global nuclear agreements did slow proliferation. Global agreements on fluorocarbons did rescue the ozone layer. Aviation has guardrails.

•With AI, though, there's no time to build consensus or constituencies. The reality is now.

The bottom line: There's never been such fast consumer adoption of a new technology. Cars took decades. The internet didn't get critical mass until the smartphone. But ChatGPT was a hit overnight — 100 million users in a matter of weeks.

•No way it'll be rolled back.

"Behind the Curtain" is a column by Axios CEO Jim VandeHei and co-founder Mike Allen, based on regular conversations with White House and congressional leaders, CEOs and top technologists."

Myth of AI Restraint
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
AI has been found to hallucinate (that’s the real term for it) statistics, legal cases, names and science., , AI lies - Kim Komando,"Digital goddess"
From the newsroom of any major (I just heard one this morning) network, "It's one thing to see it in print, , another thing entirely to watch, ,"

We are long past the days of CG tricks incorporated into film, the film itself is now subject to turning the original film into a vastly different outcome. I can only assume AI is now a great advantage to this end. Why hasn't judicial expertise taken note of this while they continue to parade video after video out as evidence? I thought they were among the best and brightest?

But of course, the great fear here is the possibility if a more organic piece of evidence is submitted, might find himself falling into irrelevance and the prevailing opinion through digital evidence overwhelm the final conclusion.

Did I mention, ever, the once window of resistance I myself witnessed one day stemming from the bench? Small window as it was, you can no longer find it. As an amateur photographer experiencing the crossover from film to digital images, I distinctly remember back then a certain Judge stating what certainly would not be admissible:

"I will not permit digital images in this courtroom as evidence".

That is but one lowly citation to what soon became then, to this day, a fleeting resistance. circa; 1995.
 
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
But, many will continue to throw up their hands in surrender till the day come when they will wonder, 'why didn't I resist?' Or is this just another segment of doom deprived of running it's (Mark 13:20) course?
Asking the reader to forgive me for my own form of surrender in my question. Do me a favor child of God, , if the Lord happens to bring it to your attention, don't ever bet on A.I. overwhelming the law of our life in Spirit. The battle is the Lord's in these last days, just be advised to be on guard. I'm seeing my share in the business world of the poor souls who are destitute of God and good composure, some, insane dreamers.
 
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Just as the Pastor said, "AI can't grasp the concept of serving others as described by our Lord". My request went as follows,

"create illustration of King of kings, Jesus Christ washing disciple's feet"
 

Attachments

  • _e2b429f2-0d86-49a9-9f34-5c8ece022374.jpg
    _e2b429f2-0d86-49a9-9f34-5c8ece022374.jpg
    269.9 KB · Views: 9
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Tell me, if at this point AI isn't formatted to retain truths so widespread as the single most influential book in history to compel at least one-third of the earth's population, then a reboot is needed to cleanse the narrative that is occurring. For it's input is not from the volumes of information available if this is the case, but godlessness.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
My guess, folks generally don't want anything to do with AI. Thinking, 'if we just don't promote it, this 'horse & buggy' will just subside to those interested.' But, we and our freedoms are under assault, it isn't brought this far just so it can be corralled by market corrections. Now that so many have invested so much effort to marketing their video for return profit, why would they not avail AI to remove human lag and imperfection. They have almost perfected the false (Psalm17:8) "apple of His eye".
 
Upvote 0

rocknanchor

Continue Well 2 John 9
Site Supporter
Jan 27, 2009
5,900
8,326
Notre Dame, IN
✟988,656.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
A popular inside sting operative just announced the soon release of the “Most Important Story” of His long “Entire Career” – “Evidence that Exposes the CIA, and It’s On Camera”

“PROOF!” Really? How would he rate his job security? I would think, all it takes for the sting artist to fall into irrelevance is when the public drumbeats of refusing powerful AI software becomes undeniable. But is AI’s power sufficient to snuff the standards of public opinion? The AI video promotions have fallen well silent from its time of inception. Quick defense, may not be required as AI-visuals are becoming increasingly indistinguishable.

The upright's only defense is trusted leaks.
 
Upvote 0