Jump to content

Most concerning article I have read on AI .. ( from Reuters ) .. "threaten humanity"


aidan o driscoll

Recommended Posts

 " That said, there are already kill switches in them, they are just controlled by private corporations, not the federal fellas. "

As if knowing  - absolutely  - that there is no credible accountability in the private corporate world makes that notion better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RBH said:

 " That said, there are already kill switches in them, they are just controlled by private corporations, not the federal fellas. "

As if knowing  - absolutely  - that there is no credible accountability in the private corporate world makes that notion better.

I cannot speak for every manufacturer, but there are indeed mechanisms in place that allow to remotely disable ignition. Contrarily to the common misconception, it is not possible to stop the car (for obvious reasons). Not that the technology isn't there to do that, I would assume. 

In my experience however, here in the US, there are three absolute imperatives that must be met before a vehicle is disabled: first and foremost, the owner must file a stolen vehicle report with the police. He must then communicate the report information to the manufacturer, and finally, a federal officer must request that the vehicle be immobilized - which very rarely happens in fact.

In most cases, the police only want the car to be tracked - something which also can only be done when requested by a police officer, incidentally. At least in my experience. Likewise, information concerning the vehicle's whereabouts can only be provided to a federal officer.

Each request needs to be thoroughly documented, with the name of everyone involved, from the precinct dispatcher's to the name and badge number of every officer working the case. 

So yes, the technology is there, but, at this time at least, there are vast quantities of legal ramifications.

 

 

Edited by Rain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With OnStar you can remotely start and stop the vehicle, lock the doors, turn on the lights, and sound the alarm. I don't know if you can turn it off while it's in gear though. I'll try it and reply here later.

I bought my truck in Kansas City. It's mandatory that it has a GPS tracking device. Between certain zip codes in KC and St. Louis, Missouri is on the top 10 list of stolen vehicles. I got a discount on my car insurance because of it having unremovable GPS.

MO is odd, well not really if you think about it a little, but crime is very low except in a handful of zip codes. 

Same with the other safety thing that's always on the news. You take out a handful of isolated zip codes where there are a lot of laws 'protecting' people, and the US is one of the safest countries in the world.

But anyhow, AI is gonna take care of all that for us. Yepper. Can't wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting read - BIG BROTHER made real

"Facial recognition firm Clearview AI says it will soon have 100 BILLION photos in its database to ensure 'almost everyone in the world will be identifiable' and wants to expand beyond law enforcement"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10523739/Clearview-AI-seeking-100-billion-photos-facial-recognition-database.html

This is where the problems start:

"Clearview fills its database by scouring sources like Facebook, YouTube, Venmo and millions of other sites, according to the company."

Further down article they go into the privacy issues in all this and many countries / agencies not at all happy with this. BUT my first thought is even if demands are made at Clearview AI to remove these images who knows if they would, the database of 100 billion images is already created it seems, just go under ground.

I know the saying where social media is concerned - "YOU ARE THE PRODUCT" - but i dont think legally that extends to companies scraping data from soc media to use without any form of permission

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aidan o driscoll said:

I know the saying where social media is concerned - "YOU ARE THE PRODUCT" - but i don't think legally that extends to companies scraping data from soc media to use without any form of permission

Unfortunately, once you publish something it enters the public domain, so rights diminish dramatically. If anyone can open something up to look at it, there is little control on what they are actually doing with it. Even just being in public means you can be photographed (paparazzi make a living off this), so the only real legal threshold that can be crossed is when it enters into the realm of "stalking." A lot of what you mention has actually been around for years, well before "AI" entered the picture, AI just made it easier to assemble and correlate data into information. One of the most surveilled locations on Earth went so far as to improve facial recognition to identify people "even wearing masks" during the pandemic. There are complex algorithms already in place that go far beyond just what someone looks like, and much of it centers on what people willing publish to social media. In the digital world, anything and everything published is permanent record and will survive long after we are all dead.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aidan o driscoll said:

Wikipedia is a main part of the deceptive programming and should never be considered a source of truly accurate information.  Similarly, all of the so-called "fact checker" sites are run by the people making up the lies in the first place.  The whole reason for the HUGE push to censor the internet is to make it so there's only one source of information for the bulk of the world and that's the BS narrative being put out by the global governments.

Time for everyone to wake up and start questioning EVERYTHING!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Musk on AGI - artificial general intelligence  - video at link below

https://twitter.com/krassenstein/status/1730001789137633281

Elon Musk has just stated at the DealBook summit that artificial general intelligence (AGI) is only about three years away. He also stated that he thinks that Open AI discovered something possibly dangerous or alarming and that is why Sam Altman was fired.

Edited by aidan o driscoll
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, aidan o driscoll said:

Net result of that is you can never believe in anything going forward, even your own beliefs should be questioned and potentially unbelieved / a lie in that case?

I've heard that craigb isn't his real name.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...