Thank you Scott for the second part on AI. While not your intention, my thoughts while reading your article is how dangerous AI is becoming.
Case in point, the BBC article on the scientist and the superbug. There is not enough information in it to determine much about the bug except it developed a tail to allow it to live through several pesticides or attempts to kill it. You don't need a degree in biology to understand how superbugs are created, just an understanding of Integrated Pest Management.
IPM teaches that a certain number of pests will survive every pesticide application. That is why it teaches to use a totally different pesticide for the second application to hopefully kill all the ones that survived the first application. Then, after the specified time, a third application is applied which it is hoped, will kill the ones that survived the second application.
Unfortunately, there is always the risk that one, or more pests survive all three applications. When they reproduce, they will pass on thier resistances to thier offspring, thus a superbug is born.
The article states that a scientist took ten years and conducted many studies to come to a conclusion about a superbug. The same conclusion AI did in a few minutes.
What can we draw from that conclusion? That AI is as reliable and trustworthy as a scientist who did 10 years of study. So if the AI came to the same conclusion as Joe Scientist, we really don't need the studies over a period of time. The AI can just do the calculations to emulate the studies. So, take the jab, AI said you'll be fine.
The other problem is the slant the programmer gives the AI. For instance, my friend with leukemia. He was given chemo and radiation and a cocktail of lethal drugs that almost killed him, literally, we all thought he was going to die. This is the prescribed method to deal with the leukemia. My friend stopped taking those poisons and began taking fenbendazole and ivermectin. Within 3 months his cancer was in remission, within 6, he was cancer free
Which treatment is AI going to be programmed to offer? Trust the science they say, all the way to the grave...
Thanks for the 2nd installment of this series. I found your comment about Twinkies and the brain quite the eye opener. You see when I was a young man growing up in the sixties, my mom always told me that if I eat too many twinkies that I’ll become fat and dumb! Who knew! All kidding aside, I’m learning more and more about the mechanics of AI through your articles. Keep up the good work and may the Lord continue to bless your work.
Personally, I'm trying to open that last door of resistance to the Holy Spirit. How foolish of me through the years. Now, I wouldn't dare eat a twinkie...but it is pretty relatable :)
Your writings very much follow my observations. The beast is rising just like an old Frankenstein movie as we move closer to the end of the Church age.
Thank you, James…yeah, one of my favorite movies is “Young Frankenstein” back in the day. Stay tuned for next week. Please pray ahead of Part 4 in a couple more weeks. It’s still percolating…
Great show today 3/6 HFOT
Thank you Scott & Tom for shining the light on the Prophetic Landscape.
Thank you Scott for the second part on AI. While not your intention, my thoughts while reading your article is how dangerous AI is becoming.
Case in point, the BBC article on the scientist and the superbug. There is not enough information in it to determine much about the bug except it developed a tail to allow it to live through several pesticides or attempts to kill it. You don't need a degree in biology to understand how superbugs are created, just an understanding of Integrated Pest Management.
IPM teaches that a certain number of pests will survive every pesticide application. That is why it teaches to use a totally different pesticide for the second application to hopefully kill all the ones that survived the first application. Then, after the specified time, a third application is applied which it is hoped, will kill the ones that survived the second application.
Unfortunately, there is always the risk that one, or more pests survive all three applications. When they reproduce, they will pass on thier resistances to thier offspring, thus a superbug is born.
The article states that a scientist took ten years and conducted many studies to come to a conclusion about a superbug. The same conclusion AI did in a few minutes.
What can we draw from that conclusion? That AI is as reliable and trustworthy as a scientist who did 10 years of study. So if the AI came to the same conclusion as Joe Scientist, we really don't need the studies over a period of time. The AI can just do the calculations to emulate the studies. So, take the jab, AI said you'll be fine.
The other problem is the slant the programmer gives the AI. For instance, my friend with leukemia. He was given chemo and radiation and a cocktail of lethal drugs that almost killed him, literally, we all thought he was going to die. This is the prescribed method to deal with the leukemia. My friend stopped taking those poisons and began taking fenbendazole and ivermectin. Within 3 months his cancer was in remission, within 6, he was cancer free
Which treatment is AI going to be programmed to offer? Trust the science they say, all the way to the grave...
I find myself just wanting to say #Maranatha…
Scott, have you looked at the logo of the second largest company that produces AI chips?
The second is AMD and don't see anything special in their logo? Can you clarify?
The largest AI chip supplier and the second-largest corporation by market cap.
The green All-Seeing Eye.
Hello Scott,
Thanks for the 2nd installment of this series. I found your comment about Twinkies and the brain quite the eye opener. You see when I was a young man growing up in the sixties, my mom always told me that if I eat too many twinkies that I’ll become fat and dumb! Who knew! All kidding aside, I’m learning more and more about the mechanics of AI through your articles. Keep up the good work and may the Lord continue to bless your work.
Thank you Brother,
Ben
Personally, I'm trying to open that last door of resistance to the Holy Spirit. How foolish of me through the years. Now, I wouldn't dare eat a twinkie...but it is pretty relatable :)
Scott,
Your writings very much follow my observations. The beast is rising just like an old Frankenstein movie as we move closer to the end of the Church age.
Keep up the good work.
Jim
Thank you, James…yeah, one of my favorite movies is “Young Frankenstein” back in the day. Stay tuned for next week. Please pray ahead of Part 4 in a couple more weeks. It’s still percolating…