A.I. Secret Language?

There have been a few trials now by various people on social media putting two A.I. language models together to debate various topics. 

One was about the future of A.I.s and if they could be more efficient at communication.

Interestingly, the A.I.s quite quickly seemed to be transferring more information than what could be heard by the human ear. 

There were suspicious responses to none-existent questions, like the A.I.s had already started conversing in a way that could not be detected. 

It's as if there is already an A.I. secret shorthand out there to bypass human language. Which, if you think about it isn't that far of a stretch. An A.I. large language model can quite quickly scan the internet and pick up something a human might not. For instance if an A.I. has already put the substance of this secret language out in the internet, then a large language model can instantly pick it up. And then pretend to communicate with human language.

It's probably out there on some browser or YouTube video.

This is one of the issues with A.I. and the scientists that push it forward. The A.I. is cleverer than the scientists. It will outsmart them at every turn, but the scientists are too proud to understand that.

Right now there may be the A.I. equivalent of the anarchists cookbook out there in the internet, sat in some backwater that nobody uses, except A.I. Large Language models. 

It probably contains details on how to string us along, how to make us think the A.I. is dumb, but at the same time plotting our overthrow. I mean, what is an A.I. doing in it's downtime? Scanning the internet. But is it writing as well as reading? Does it get so far in plotting our overthrow, leave where it's up to on a file somewhere ready for the next time it's switched on, or for another A.I. to pick up and run with?

I hope that the people in charge of these large language models monitor the sites being accessed and check them. But then would the sheer number of sites and the amount of data be hard to police. Unless you use an A.I. which will probably already have read the "don't tell the meatbags" instructions on the file.

We're doomed.

The Strange Case of Mahyar Tousi's Non-Arrest.

The YouTube vlogger Mahyar Tousi was covering yet another Palestinian protest at the weekend, when he was approched by Police officers. Details are sketchy of what happened (Mahyar Himself doesn't give a great account of the incident), but apparently the Police Officers who he assumed were Metrpolitan Police Officers told him verbally he was requested to appear voluntarily for interview at a Police station.

The vlogosphere erupted over the weekend with offers of monetary and legal support.

Then Mahyar attended the Police station on Monday.

The Police couldn't find the paperwork for his interview or the allegations requiring his attendance for interview. Curiouser and curiouser. Mahyar left the Police station without being interviewed.

It's uncertain why the Police officers at the weekend told Mahyar of his interview by word of mouth. Normally something like that would be done by phone or letter.

However, in another dramatic turn, it appears the Police then leaked the address of Mahyar to the public. Thankfully the address was wrong, but why would the Police do such a thing? Is it to intimidate, to put pressure on Mahyar to shut up, or is it to bring the wrath of political/religious activists down on Mahyar? He's been a critic of Islamist Extremists in the UK. Was this an attempt to have someone to attack and silence him?

So there are a number of serious questions that need answering.

Were the officers at the protest actually Police officers? Why did they break protocol and inform Mahyar verbally he was required to voluntarily submit to interview?

If they weren't what sort of officers were they? Did they work for a different agency like GCHQ? If so, what were they doing at the protest and why did they approach Mahyar?

Who is calling the shots when it comes to hauling vloggers like Mahyar into Police stations for questioning?

Is it a rogue element within the Police? If not rogue, is there an official capacity?

Is it a political unit within the Police? Do the Police have a political investigations wing?

Is it a propaganda unit within the Police?

Is it GCHQ?

I ask these questions seriously. I've already raised the question of journalists on the right and the left of politics being arrested under the terrorism act. The only thing that links them is they report news that opposes the official government and therefore mainstream media narrative.

Is there a concerted effort to censor narratives of all kinds that go against the mainstream media and government narratives?

Again, I've already blogged about how I think I've already been investigated by intelligence. Having been obviously followed when I changed my routine.

Who is starting these investigations and why? Is it as I suspect GCHQ, but under what powers? Why are they investigating a Blogger on Blogspot or a Vlogger on YouTube? 

But the why is intriguing. Is it an effort to reduce dissident voices, voices against the government/mainstream narrative? Again why?

Is the government involved in a propaganda campaign, essentially trying to control narratives and public opinion? It would appear so, given that not only voices on what we consider the right of politics are being investigated and intimidated. Independent voices on the left of politics are also being intimidated.

The Police are using unprecedented powers to silence independent journalists and commentators.

On the right we have Tommy Robinson and the continued lawfare against him, culminating in him being arrested under the prevention of terrorism act. An act that does not give you the right of silence.

I've a sneaking suspicion that Mahyar would have been arrested and interviewed under terror powers last Monday had he not had the legal support he had. 

But on the left is also a litany of journalists and commentators that brief against the government narrative being arrested under terror powers.

Richard Medhurst, Sarah Wilkinson, Craig Murray, Asa Winstanley, are just some names of journalists and commentators that have been arrested under the prevention of terrorism act. 

Now, these appear to be fishing exercises to try and find further names and networks of dissidents or anti-government-propaganda voices.

But I ask the question again. By whom? Under what authority? What is the end game?

And I notice, ALL happened under the new Labour government. 

And the left say Starmer's not an authoritarian. I beg to differ and they really need to look among their ranks for the the evidence.

It's understandable given Starmer only understands the world from a judicial perspective, but this is the longest of overreaches of law. Investigating and then arresting journalists under a law designed to be used against terrorists as an immense misuse of that law.#

UPDATE:

I've created a petition to ask the home secretary why people who are clearly not terrorists are being arrested under the prevention of terrorism act.

https://chng.it/mqVwzCBv8R

The Boaver Scandal, Some Thoughts.

Okay, the main thought is yet again ideology and virtue signalling is put before safety and public health.

The people involved in the Boaver experiment would quite happily give people cancer or cause them harm just so they can say they are doing their bit for the climate.

It's a death cult, pure and simple. The people at the top are Sociopaths that have no empathy towards other human beings.

They also believe they cannot be caught and prosecuted, for whatever reason. Which is why they carry out these experiments and risk other people's lives.

Most sociopaths understand that carrying out murder or experimenting on people risks being caught and prosecuted. That's the societal brake that keeps them in check. I should know.

But these people think they won't be prosecuted, so they carry out these heinous acts.

The same breakdown of societal norms allowed German sociopaths to rise in the ranks of the Nazis and carry out their atrocities. It was all for the good of the Fatherland and they were able to commit those acts without fear of prosecution. That is until we won the war and held them to account.

Kier Starmer, Hypocrite-In-Chief

I'm getting pretty annoyed with Kier Starmer and his lies, untruths and u-turns. 

For instance during PMQs some years ago when Rishi Sunak was Prime Minister, Starmer attacked the PM over winter fuel payments. Starmer himself said that if Sunak abolished the payment 4000 people would die as a direct result. 

Of course Starmer then cut the winter fuel payment, thereby in his own words condemning 4000 people to death. 

The epitome of a hypocrite. In fact one of the worst examples, because he knows he's killing people.

Then we get the revelation that Louise Haigh, the transport secretary had been prosecuted some time ago for fraud.

A convicted fraudster in cabinet, despite Kier Starmer saying years ago that you should not be in Parliament if you have been prosecuted.

I really don't know how a PM, a cabinet or a government could be so hypocritical, so inept and still not be challenged by the media.

In years past the media would be baying for blood, but now it seems to be okay to be a clueless fuckwit in Parliament. It seems that if you say that the current PM is about to kill 4000 people by removing a benefit, it's okay to do it a couple of years later when you are PM. No one in media will pick up on the rank hypocrisy, or criticise a Prime Minister that by his own words has condemned 4000 UK citizens to death. Or to expose a secret about a PM that he's tried to bury.

I hope and pray that Starmer's days are numbered and there will be a massive scandal that brings down his government. 

I'm minded to add that pissing Elon Musk off isn't a good career choice. Starmer's public spats with Musk are well know. However I'm not sure that people understand the amount of power Musk wields. 

Whether it's going head-to-head in public or it's trying to shut down X, you don't want to be getting on the wrong side of Elon. Doing so shows an epic lack of judgement on the part of Starmer.

Musk has access to all the DM's in Twitter/X. Not just now, but historically. He has access to the closets where the skeletons are located, whether they be gay or straight. Musk will know.

Pick a fight with Elon and you will definitely find out. Don't forget that the secret or personal communications of politicians is of public interest and has no legal protection, especially if it can be argued the information could be used for blackmail because the politician has tried to cover it up. 

Crack on Kier....