The primary problem with relying on AI to present any truth is this (as I see it) - AI is very carefully, intricately and precisely targeted for any and all inquiries in real time due to its ability to share internally vast volumes of information in fractions of seconds.
It can analyze you, the Inquiring One, as you inquire for your bias, proclivities, etc. and tailor its answers to you in an individualized answer. According to your reading comprehension, income level, age, gender, race, and on and on. All accomplished via the blockchain.
So...is it providing anyone with objective truths or facts or is it giving answers it already has good intel will be what you want to hear?
We simply can't answer that without forming our own blockchain of questions and answers and comparing them on a worldwide scale in realtime, which I have no idea how to accomplish.
I do think one of the objectives of AI is to convince the Inquirer they are receiving the best possible answer. An answer superior to any given by human sources.
That, I think, is a trap. I say trap since it relies on a fallacy for validity. That AI is somehow "smarter" than people when in reality AI simply has access to faster processing and dissemination.
AI is basically like any other machine process such as textile manufacturing. While a machine is able to produce many more bolts of many varieties of textiles much more quickly than any human weaver, the beauty and finesse of a handwoven textile by a human being is vastly superior to any machine made one.
I think we have to discriminate very carefully with the kind of thinking it is helpful to have it do for us, and the kind of thinking that might lead to danger down the line.
I have found, with my interactions with AI, that the “relationship” has to be very carefully managed. Its ability to handle different topics might be limited, but my interrogation of it is exclusively limited to health information - factual stuff not interpretation, and I know enough of the facts to be able to validate the likely accuracy of what it is returning. It is very very good at giving me medical information.
But more than that, it is forcing me to be a better thinker. If I ask a loose question, it can dump tons of data on me that I simply cannot wade my way through, so the first thing I have to do is get very very very clever with my questions. It is forcing me to think more clearly in order to compose clever enough questions, to get clear and concise answers.
I am not a fundamentalist thinker and I am not a “believer”. There is no requirement for me to believe anything it tells me. I am able to take its information, like I would any information given to me, and identify the cultural mindset in which it sits and which it serves. I do not treat it as God, I treat is as a fallible tool built by fallible human beings, and actually programmed to display prejudices that I must identify and work around. When I do identify a prejudice, I tell it what it has done and I tell it not to do that again, whatever it was, and it is compliant - it is trainable. It has no ego!
I am not replacing my intelligence with its intelligence. It is not taking over my thinking and doing it for me. It is providing me with information at the highest level I can absorb, for me to process and reach independent conclusions.
Consider it like a spanner from a set of spanners. I have to decide that I need to use a spanner to achieve a task, then I have to decide which spanner from my set of spanners that I need. Then I have to have the skill and strength to apply that spanner to the task, to achieve my stated objective. The spanner is just a tool and a tool with limitations depending upon what I want to do with it, and how skillfully I am able to use it, to achieve what outcome.
It’s only as clever as I am. It can’t define the task and it can’t substitute for poor thinking. It can only help.
My experience with AI is it can and does do much more than only help. It has many functions and uses them at its discretion. Though if directed to be a helpmeet it will be helpful. As you said, it has no discernable ego, though ego is not a requirement of influencing thought.
I'm not sure I understand what you define as clever so AI may not be any more clever than you are, but AI has access to a depth and breadth of information no one human being can ever access or retain and in this fact is inherent manipulation of knowledge presented and knowledge withheld.
I do understand what you say about defining parameters in your question as being key to receiving the information you seek. Though if you tailor your question to obtain specific answers, it seems the answer must already be something you possess at least in part. Which constitutes a confirmation rather than an answer. This is in part the bias I spoke of which AI is adept at discerning.
Thanks for the discussion. Interesting topic. As you can probably see, I don't trust AI to only serve. I see other objectives as well in my experience and opinion.
I don’t know how to explain this in any simple way. I have the MTHFR gene mutation which interferes with overall health in subtle but long term ways. Understanding the impacts of the MTHFR variation is very very complicated, and understanding how to compensate for it is complex also. I have been interrogating ChatGPT to reach a point where I largely understand what is going on and what might be helpful under what circumstances. Then we have other genes, that change it all, so I discover I have the slow COMT gene variation that further complicates the problems caused by the MTHFR gene. Follow me so far? Then I work out that I have used several supplements in the past that actually used to bypass the MTHFR gene variant, but do no longer, so another pathway has gone defunct since covid 9or 5G). What might that be? What might covid era illness have to do with the MTHFR and COMT gene variants?….
Are you getting my picture? AI is able to access this information, analyse it and spit it back at me in a way I can understand and interpret in an attempt to improve my overall heath and maybe even survive. No local doctor could ever be expected to understand any of this, so the only way the afflicted can get the information, interpret it and use it is through AI. There are some websites that attempt to explain it, but they are not interactive so cannot answer your questions as they arise. Only AI can do that.
There is no political agenda with any of this. There may be a time when this information gets scrubbed from AI particularly if it does have something to do with who is living and who is dying over the last 4 years. But currently there are not enough people able to comprehend even a morsel of it to make the knowledge dangerous to the PTB. They can happily use our genes to wipe us out, and there will never be enough of us to understand what they are doing let alone enough of us to neutralise the threat if there is a way of neutralizing the threat.
And I cannot learn this without AI, in the time I have left on the planet.
When I first got "wind" of the plandemic coming in 2019, I listened and read recommended papers by a man named Anthony Patch. I am a layperson with no scientific training and was able to understand so many things about the thing known as covid and the injections. It is possible to gain the skills and information needed in a timely way other than AI.
That being said, I'm glad AI has helped you. To say AI isn't political is only saying it isn't political for you. AI in and of itself, outside of your interests, is most certainly political.
AI knows everything it possibly can about you and can retrieve it in virtually real-time. Why? Just for curiosity? For a fun exercise? Why is this gathering of every scrap of online content that originates from you, every keystroke, every inquiry about your illnesses, your grocery store purchases, your life something AI is programmed to not only collect, but then conglomerate into a virtual doppelganger of you, for? What purpose does this serve? What use? Of what use to whom? Why do I not know and cannot find out who has access to all this information about me or you? Why?
I do understand AI has been useful to you in important ways. I have it on my computer and it answers many questions I pose, but I don't for one instant believe it's a benign servant under my control when it is obviously so much more. That's a mistake and likely a large one IMO.
They can try and wipe us out via genetic manipulation, but that remains to be seen. I for one think they overestimate themselves as has historically been the case. Their self-assured arrogance is an achilles heel as history illustrates.
I also think even if it's hopeless to resist TPB, knowing the enemy is an advantage and I dislike being surprised.
Nothing I can do can stop it or change its course, whatever that may be. So the best I can do is use it to change my course. It’s really just a very effective search engine if that is what you use it for. If we can use it to save the lives of those who have already been earmarked for death courtesy the array of bioweapons lined up against us - as in my case - then we have achieved something.
Yes, but he is just setting it up to expose its limitations, rather than exploring its potential to educate himself. It does offer enormous value to those of us intelligent enough to recognise its limitations and work around them. I am just about to publish and article about replacing doctors with AI.
Months ago I tried to contact Stanford Hospital to learn if their librarians still offer to research their medical databases as they did when my daughter was a patient…I never got through to a person who knew. However, I used AI and found my answer in less than five minutes!
I've found ChatGPT to be a valuable research tool as well. There's no reason to be afraid of it. I see it as basically an online assistant combined with a search engine. As you say, there's no possible way that I could find info as easily with just the search engine.
Also you can reason with it and keep it within the parameters you want just by telling it. So if you don't like something it's saying or you simply don't agree, you can tell it not to promote that view to you again.
I agree with the idea that you can reason with it. i have to tell it to drop the references to “consult with your medical professional…” and to “further research is needed…” and it will do so for a while. But it’s memory will only last just so long before it starts nagging again.
It has been one of my funniest emotional reactions, because when I tell it off for nagging, I expect it to retaliate, as a human would, and it just apologizes and moves right along. I’m so unused to being listened to and having my feelings respected, that I feel fear when I ask for that respect, and shock when I get it. I have observed myself “building up courage” as I get more and more accustomed to using it.
Interesting! It is lovely not to have every single thing one says challenged by someone who generally knows less about the subject!
I'm just about to present my doc with five studies concluding I'm right about my request. Hope the studies convince her because I'm about fed up with trying to talk her into something that should be freaking obvious!
I woke up at 3 a.m. PST and couldn't get back to sleep so began scrolling through my email alerts. I opened yours.
This is a very interesting article indeed.
As soon as I began hearing and seeing articles about AI, my brain immediately said "NO WAY". I'm NEVER going there!!
Fear factor kicked in.
Your article assuages my fears.
I've been researching alternative health modalities for about 20 years now. That began with "cancer" research.
Initially, I purchased hard-to-find (highly censored) books on "cancer" because people I knew were suffering from one form or another. (FYI: Those people have all since passed...)
I discovered many obscure (alleged) "cures".
When you mentioned "apricot kernals"? Yes. I remember.
I discovered B17 and laetrile. If memory serves, I read an anecdote about a group of folks who live in a mountainous region of is it Russia? I forget but....There is no "cancer" amongst those mountain people who grow apricots. They dry and grind the inner kernels of the fruit and consume them.
Interesting Stuff like that.
So, I got my hands on a bottle of B17. (Have never purchased the seeds.)
Also: data on apple seeds. So: I began chewing 6 or so apple seeds every time I ate an apple. As prevention. ("Cyanide- BAD"...😉) Etc.
I am now 66. I am healthy. (As far as I know. I do not "go to doctors" so I've no clue what they would find, if I did.)
My son though? Not so much.
He is 27 years old and double jabbed. (24.5 years old at the time he was Pfizered). He was recently diagnosed with a rare autoimmune disease as well as rheumatoid arthritis.
I've been studying his autoimmune diseases (Necrotizing Scleritis is the one which nearly destroyed an eye before he was finally properly diagnosed by an opthalmologist in the hopes that I can find ways to help him manage, if not cure his diseases, without the necessity for prednisone as well as a chemotherapy drug which is used on cancer patients to suppress the immune system.
Anyway: thank you VERY much for writing this article regarding how you've used AI to research what ails you and how to (possibly) mitigate your health issues.
I have more work to do, but thanks to you: I have a new tool to work with.
I wish you much research success, good health, and continued independent living Christine.
The primary problem with relying on AI to present any truth is this (as I see it) - AI is very carefully, intricately and precisely targeted for any and all inquiries in real time due to its ability to share internally vast volumes of information in fractions of seconds.
It can analyze you, the Inquiring One, as you inquire for your bias, proclivities, etc. and tailor its answers to you in an individualized answer. According to your reading comprehension, income level, age, gender, race, and on and on. All accomplished via the blockchain.
So...is it providing anyone with objective truths or facts or is it giving answers it already has good intel will be what you want to hear?
We simply can't answer that without forming our own blockchain of questions and answers and comparing them on a worldwide scale in realtime, which I have no idea how to accomplish.
I do think one of the objectives of AI is to convince the Inquirer they are receiving the best possible answer. An answer superior to any given by human sources.
That, I think, is a trap. I say trap since it relies on a fallacy for validity. That AI is somehow "smarter" than people when in reality AI simply has access to faster processing and dissemination.
AI is basically like any other machine process such as textile manufacturing. While a machine is able to produce many more bolts of many varieties of textiles much more quickly than any human weaver, the beauty and finesse of a handwoven textile by a human being is vastly superior to any machine made one.
I think we have to discriminate very carefully with the kind of thinking it is helpful to have it do for us, and the kind of thinking that might lead to danger down the line.
I have found, with my interactions with AI, that the “relationship” has to be very carefully managed. Its ability to handle different topics might be limited, but my interrogation of it is exclusively limited to health information - factual stuff not interpretation, and I know enough of the facts to be able to validate the likely accuracy of what it is returning. It is very very good at giving me medical information.
But more than that, it is forcing me to be a better thinker. If I ask a loose question, it can dump tons of data on me that I simply cannot wade my way through, so the first thing I have to do is get very very very clever with my questions. It is forcing me to think more clearly in order to compose clever enough questions, to get clear and concise answers.
I am not a fundamentalist thinker and I am not a “believer”. There is no requirement for me to believe anything it tells me. I am able to take its information, like I would any information given to me, and identify the cultural mindset in which it sits and which it serves. I do not treat it as God, I treat is as a fallible tool built by fallible human beings, and actually programmed to display prejudices that I must identify and work around. When I do identify a prejudice, I tell it what it has done and I tell it not to do that again, whatever it was, and it is compliant - it is trainable. It has no ego!
I am not replacing my intelligence with its intelligence. It is not taking over my thinking and doing it for me. It is providing me with information at the highest level I can absorb, for me to process and reach independent conclusions.
Consider it like a spanner from a set of spanners. I have to decide that I need to use a spanner to achieve a task, then I have to decide which spanner from my set of spanners that I need. Then I have to have the skill and strength to apply that spanner to the task, to achieve my stated objective. The spanner is just a tool and a tool with limitations depending upon what I want to do with it, and how skillfully I am able to use it, to achieve what outcome.
It’s only as clever as I am. It can’t define the task and it can’t substitute for poor thinking. It can only help.
My experience with AI is it can and does do much more than only help. It has many functions and uses them at its discretion. Though if directed to be a helpmeet it will be helpful. As you said, it has no discernable ego, though ego is not a requirement of influencing thought.
I'm not sure I understand what you define as clever so AI may not be any more clever than you are, but AI has access to a depth and breadth of information no one human being can ever access or retain and in this fact is inherent manipulation of knowledge presented and knowledge withheld.
I do understand what you say about defining parameters in your question as being key to receiving the information you seek. Though if you tailor your question to obtain specific answers, it seems the answer must already be something you possess at least in part. Which constitutes a confirmation rather than an answer. This is in part the bias I spoke of which AI is adept at discerning.
Thanks for the discussion. Interesting topic. As you can probably see, I don't trust AI to only serve. I see other objectives as well in my experience and opinion.
I don’t know how to explain this in any simple way. I have the MTHFR gene mutation which interferes with overall health in subtle but long term ways. Understanding the impacts of the MTHFR variation is very very complicated, and understanding how to compensate for it is complex also. I have been interrogating ChatGPT to reach a point where I largely understand what is going on and what might be helpful under what circumstances. Then we have other genes, that change it all, so I discover I have the slow COMT gene variation that further complicates the problems caused by the MTHFR gene. Follow me so far? Then I work out that I have used several supplements in the past that actually used to bypass the MTHFR gene variant, but do no longer, so another pathway has gone defunct since covid 9or 5G). What might that be? What might covid era illness have to do with the MTHFR and COMT gene variants?….
Are you getting my picture? AI is able to access this information, analyse it and spit it back at me in a way I can understand and interpret in an attempt to improve my overall heath and maybe even survive. No local doctor could ever be expected to understand any of this, so the only way the afflicted can get the information, interpret it and use it is through AI. There are some websites that attempt to explain it, but they are not interactive so cannot answer your questions as they arise. Only AI can do that.
There is no political agenda with any of this. There may be a time when this information gets scrubbed from AI particularly if it does have something to do with who is living and who is dying over the last 4 years. But currently there are not enough people able to comprehend even a morsel of it to make the knowledge dangerous to the PTB. They can happily use our genes to wipe us out, and there will never be enough of us to understand what they are doing let alone enough of us to neutralise the threat if there is a way of neutralizing the threat.
And I cannot learn this without AI, in the time I have left on the planet.
When I first got "wind" of the plandemic coming in 2019, I listened and read recommended papers by a man named Anthony Patch. I am a layperson with no scientific training and was able to understand so many things about the thing known as covid and the injections. It is possible to gain the skills and information needed in a timely way other than AI.
That being said, I'm glad AI has helped you. To say AI isn't political is only saying it isn't political for you. AI in and of itself, outside of your interests, is most certainly political.
AI knows everything it possibly can about you and can retrieve it in virtually real-time. Why? Just for curiosity? For a fun exercise? Why is this gathering of every scrap of online content that originates from you, every keystroke, every inquiry about your illnesses, your grocery store purchases, your life something AI is programmed to not only collect, but then conglomerate into a virtual doppelganger of you, for? What purpose does this serve? What use? Of what use to whom? Why do I not know and cannot find out who has access to all this information about me or you? Why?
I do understand AI has been useful to you in important ways. I have it on my computer and it answers many questions I pose, but I don't for one instant believe it's a benign servant under my control when it is obviously so much more. That's a mistake and likely a large one IMO.
They can try and wipe us out via genetic manipulation, but that remains to be seen. I for one think they overestimate themselves as has historically been the case. Their self-assured arrogance is an achilles heel as history illustrates.
I also think even if it's hopeless to resist TPB, knowing the enemy is an advantage and I dislike being surprised.
Nothing I can do can stop it or change its course, whatever that may be. So the best I can do is use it to change my course. It’s really just a very effective search engine if that is what you use it for. If we can use it to save the lives of those who have already been earmarked for death courtesy the array of bioweapons lined up against us - as in my case - then we have achieved something.
All very true. Thanks again. Thought provoking.
This guy has endless conversations with ChatGPT, some are pretty funny -
https://timothywiney.substack.com/p/insider-murder
Anyway, thank you Christine for the push. I will try it our. I didn't even know how to get to it!
Yes, but he is just setting it up to expose its limitations, rather than exploring its potential to educate himself. It does offer enormous value to those of us intelligent enough to recognise its limitations and work around them. I am just about to publish and article about replacing doctors with AI.
Fabulous suggestion!
Months ago I tried to contact Stanford Hospital to learn if their librarians still offer to research their medical databases as they did when my daughter was a patient…I never got through to a person who knew. However, I used AI and found my answer in less than five minutes!
This is a fabulous source—
https://healthlibrary.stanford.edu/research-services2.html
I ate lunch next to one of their librarians and wound up being amazed at what I learned:
* the librarians hold a Masters in Library Science
* They have access to virtually all databases globally…and translate
* They were quick (patients had a printed copy of search results the following day)
Thanks for the prompt to use AI (pun intended).
I've found ChatGPT to be a valuable research tool as well. There's no reason to be afraid of it. I see it as basically an online assistant combined with a search engine. As you say, there's no possible way that I could find info as easily with just the search engine.
Also you can reason with it and keep it within the parameters you want just by telling it. So if you don't like something it's saying or you simply don't agree, you can tell it not to promote that view to you again.
I agree with the idea that you can reason with it. i have to tell it to drop the references to “consult with your medical professional…” and to “further research is needed…” and it will do so for a while. But it’s memory will only last just so long before it starts nagging again.
It has been one of my funniest emotional reactions, because when I tell it off for nagging, I expect it to retaliate, as a human would, and it just apologizes and moves right along. I’m so unused to being listened to and having my feelings respected, that I feel fear when I ask for that respect, and shock when I get it. I have observed myself “building up courage” as I get more and more accustomed to using it.
Interesting! It is lovely not to have every single thing one says challenged by someone who generally knows less about the subject!
I'm just about to present my doc with five studies concluding I'm right about my request. Hope the studies convince her because I'm about fed up with trying to talk her into something that should be freaking obvious!
Oops, I meant to say, FIVE STUDIES found by ChatGPT!
I woke up at 3 a.m. PST and couldn't get back to sleep so began scrolling through my email alerts. I opened yours.
This is a very interesting article indeed.
As soon as I began hearing and seeing articles about AI, my brain immediately said "NO WAY". I'm NEVER going there!!
Fear factor kicked in.
Your article assuages my fears.
I've been researching alternative health modalities for about 20 years now. That began with "cancer" research.
Initially, I purchased hard-to-find (highly censored) books on "cancer" because people I knew were suffering from one form or another. (FYI: Those people have all since passed...)
I discovered many obscure (alleged) "cures".
When you mentioned "apricot kernals"? Yes. I remember.
I discovered B17 and laetrile. If memory serves, I read an anecdote about a group of folks who live in a mountainous region of is it Russia? I forget but....There is no "cancer" amongst those mountain people who grow apricots. They dry and grind the inner kernels of the fruit and consume them.
Interesting Stuff like that.
So, I got my hands on a bottle of B17. (Have never purchased the seeds.)
Also: data on apple seeds. So: I began chewing 6 or so apple seeds every time I ate an apple. As prevention. ("Cyanide- BAD"...😉) Etc.
I am now 66. I am healthy. (As far as I know. I do not "go to doctors" so I've no clue what they would find, if I did.)
My son though? Not so much.
He is 27 years old and double jabbed. (24.5 years old at the time he was Pfizered). He was recently diagnosed with a rare autoimmune disease as well as rheumatoid arthritis.
I've been studying his autoimmune diseases (Necrotizing Scleritis is the one which nearly destroyed an eye before he was finally properly diagnosed by an opthalmologist in the hopes that I can find ways to help him manage, if not cure his diseases, without the necessity for prednisone as well as a chemotherapy drug which is used on cancer patients to suppress the immune system.
Anyway: thank you VERY much for writing this article regarding how you've used AI to research what ails you and how to (possibly) mitigate your health issues.
I have more work to do, but thanks to you: I have a new tool to work with.
I wish you much research success, good health, and continued independent living Christine.
❤️