Select - There & Where - for more
Politics
Art
History
Mind
Finance
Science


Will AIs Rule the World?

By Dr John Sydenham

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is always associated with horror films such as "The Terminator" in which intelligent robots take over the world. All-powerful robots are scary and may well happen but our current reality is "The Matrix", not The Terminator.  In The Matrix humanity lives in a virtual world that is created by AIs.  AI's have already begun to take over the Internet and media.  We are voluntarily allowing the first steps on the way to The Matrix to occur with scarcely a whisper of protest.

Although the fictional robots and AIs are always independent entities, the reality is very different.  AIs are the slaves of the corporations that create them.  They are the tools of corporate power and wealth on the Internet. 

The current damage being done by AIs is extremely serious.  As will be shown below, the people who run Google and online media are using AIs to control what you and I hear about and think about the world.  The young are enmeshed in the businesses of Google, Facebook etc. and are being casually indoctrinated to support the desires of the Corporate Elite.   

The goal of online businesses has always been to connect customers to businesses and to achieve this they have developed AI software to bond groups of similar consumers together so that they are easy to exploit.  This has polarised society.  Now we are entering the next stage of the use of AIs in which they are being used to mould society into the form that is desired by the Corporate Elite in the West and by governments in China and elsewhere.  However, this control of online politics and society did not begin as a sinister plot to take over the world, it began as demands by our governments to stop terrorism. 

Google and the social media corporations dealt with extremism by using AIs to decide who should be "no platformed" (ie: banned) or "Shadow banned" (made invisible on the site).  Having refined their AIs the corporations have discovered that they possess a tool that can inspect and deal with any content.  In the name of counter-terrorism they have full government approval to modify their sites as they see fit provided it also stops terrorist content.  This has also happened in China and now those who are no-platformed or shadow banned are often subsequently arrested and detained.

The corporations are using AIs as a sort of balance control, turning up the volume of their preferred politics and turning down the volume of any opposition.  They are moulding society according to their wishes.  As will be shown below, the most obvious sign of this intervention is the rise and rise of ID Politics.

The brilliance of this scheme is that anyone who points out that it is happening is subtly shadow banned so that consciousness of the threat continually dissipates.  How is shadow banning accomplished?

Twitter uses AIs to implement all sorts of shadow banning.  An academic study ("Setting the Record Straighter on Shadow Banning") showed that an important form of shadow banning occurs on the "Search Bar" so that when you enter search terms that Twitter dislikes there are no shadow banned results listed.  About 2.3% of users were shadow banned during the period of study.  However, this study did not single out political tweets and tweets by politicised users: if you tweet about the the "wrong" sort of politics you are likely to end up shadow banned but tweet on your latest music and you will go free.

Shadow banning goes beyond limiting the results shown in the "Search Bar", it also involves missing "likes" and misplaced "friends" and it includes burying tweets under "Show more replies" and "offensive content" notices.  A real life example of this is given below.

Here is an actual example of pernicious "shadow banning".  The first set of tweets has a "show more replies" notice at the bottom:

Clicking on "Show more replies" gives:

Lets look at the really bad stuff, the "offensive content":

It was a link to a "There and Where" article!  Which is how it came to my attention.  (Click here to see the full original Twitter conversation)

In the example above did Twitter rescue us from "extremists" who show that Brexit has had little effect or was it interfering with British politics on behalf of the Corporate Elite?

Twitter is biased, especially when it comes to events outside the USA.  The then CEO of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, is on record as being deeply opposed to Brexit.  The data strongly suggests he bent his AIs to exclude Leave supporting Twitter users:

As a Leave supporting Twitter user I can confirm that I was bumped off Twitter on three occasions.   My complaints to Twitter received no replies. British people have no protection on sites run by AIs employed by American billionaires.

It is tragic that most Remain supporters believe that the Russians unfairly influenced the EU Referendum with a few thousand tweets when Twitter itself took a proverbial sledgehammer to British politics, excluding millions of tweets,  and fortunately still lost.  The Corporate Elite are so powerful that discussing bias by Twitter, Google etc. is completely taboo in the UK media.

Google is, in some ways, worse than Twitter.  Most Google users do not realize that the websites indexed by the Google search engine have been trawled by AIs and subjected to no-platforming and shadow banning by placing those websites that it dislikes at the end of search results or even excluding them.

In the West the social media are progressively banning any online content that disagrees with the views of the Corporate Elite.  One of the best ways to get shadow banned is to seriously tweet about the Corporate Elite Groups.  Saying they are run by reptilian aliens is permitted but noting that they delegated the finance for "StrongerIn" in the EU Referendum to Goldman Sachs might get you shadow banned.  This approach seems to be working as this graph of frequency of search terms for various Corporate Elite groups shows:

Data from Google Trends

As you can see, shadow banning dissipates protest without drama.

The Corporate Elite have been so successful at disinformation about the Corporate Elite that any mention of the Bilderberg Group nowadays will often result in some AI on Twitter (a "bot") telling you that you are insane and to "take off the tin foil hat".

The professional network of the Bilderberg Group shows that the Corporate Elite do not just meet, they sit on each other's Boards of Directors, they are closely connected:

Click on image to expand it.

Our corporate media considers the belief that the Corporate Elite all talk to each other and make common purpose is a sign of paranoid insanity, despite the fact that the belief is obviously true.

You might believe that the American social media billionaires are working independently but they do have a common agenda. In May 2019 Google, Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon all agreed to work together to develop techniques to tackle terrorism on their platforms. They also send representatives to the Corporate Elite meetings.

The common agenda of the Corporate Elite is what anyone would expect: expand international trade at the expense of domestic trade, expand international banking, remove borders.  What could be wrong with that?  The message has been so pervasive that many people think it is a good idea.  It can be put another way: destroy domestic businesses and create dependency on multinationals, allow the whole world to suffer financial crashes, move people like locusts from one part of the world to another for work, destroy the diversity of nation states.  However, if you put it the other way you will be no-platformed and shadow banned by the AIs that crawl over everything submitted on social media and the Internet.

OK, you probably think this article is paranoid for proposing that the people who own or control the largest fortunes and corporations in the world are keen to make their fortunes even bigger by deploying AIs to control the political and social environment of the West.  The author must surely be crazy to suggest such a thing.  Surely the AIs that they are using are solely to weed out terrorists and they are never tempted to use them to shape global politics and society, even in places like the UK where complaints about bias can be ignored.

The only way to prevent our society from becoming the puppet of American billionnaires and big business is for the UK to implement a National Internet Firewall like that operated by China or about to be implemented by Russia.

This brings us to China where AIs are automatically trawling through all Internet, Social Media, Credit Card and other data to spot political dissidents. They are also modifying the visibility of news, reports and websites to ensure that it appears that everyone supports the government.  People are ranked by the AIs in a Social Credit System that grants the freedom to travel anywhere and access to lucrative loans to those who have the best score. Score badly and you will end up in a lowly job and even be detained for "re-education".

The West is different from China because the system is being run by large corporations.  Of particular interest is the way that social media users who are attached to their appearance to others (their ID) form strong groups that can be a focus for sales and other exploitation.  Those who are fond of ID Politics are avid social media users.  It is likely, given that AIs are designed to create and bond groups, that these ID Political groups are gaining a high profile and relative immunity from sanction if they break the rules because of their financial value.  They are being groomed by the AIs for profit.

Given that almost all historical philosophies have stressed the inner being as the most important part of a person whilst ID politics stresses external appearance and acceptance of this by "society" it is peculiar that ID Politics has become the majority moral compass of the current social media user.  It is likely that AIs have amplified ID politics for no other reason than that bringing together people in the common cause of ID Politics results in most "likes" and "friendings". The new CEO of Twitter, Parag Agrawal demonstrated this 10 years ago by getting almost 18000 "likes" for a quote on ID Politics:

Agrawal also outlined his attitude to how AIs should be directed in this Technology Review Article which is worth reading to understand how the Corporate Elite are thinking:

"Agrawal: Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment [free speech], but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation. The kinds of things that we do about this is, focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed. One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard. The scarce commodity today is attention. There's a lot of content out there. A lot of tweets out there, not all of it gets attention, some subset of it gets attention. And so increasingly our role is moving towards how we recommend content and that sort of, is, is, a struggle that we're working through in terms of how we make sure these recommendation systems that we're building, how we direct people's attention is leading to a healthy public conversation that is most participatory."

Roughly translated the statement that "Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard. The scarce commodity today is attention." means who should we shadow ban?

Agrawal is clearly not an idealist so will amplify the AI created consensus "morality" on Twitter to achieve greatest approval and greatest income.  This consensus morality is ID Politics, which on close inspection, is not a morality at all.  It is just a cause of "likes", "friending" and unfriending".  It is cement for social media groups and provides easy routes to sales by advertisers.

ID Politics may be the first social movement created by AIs.  Being selected and moulded by AIs it has no real moral content and is really a way of controlling prominence on social media and the media.  If someone brings, say, the BBC into "disrepute" by having made a tweet 10 years ago that creates a "Twitter Storm" now they will still be dismissed.  ID Politics has real life consequences in media and high profile posts in the real world because it is about the amount that a person or organisation is "liked" or disliked.  The AIs will steadily shadow ban anyone who dislikes what it is profitable to like so only those who support ID Politics will be widely heard.  As Agrawal says "Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard".  It is this that joins social media to mainstream media and leaves journalists and media corporations terrified of offending the opinions that AIs have selected.

We can see that ID Politics emanates from the Internet in the latest witch hunts.  Marcus Rashford in May 2021 reported that 70 of his 4.5 million followers had submitted racist tweets after he missed the crucial penalty in the Euro Finals. This remarkably low number of negative tweets immediately generated a storm about racism in the UK.  Michael Vaughan, the ex International cricketer and BBC commentator, was sacked from the BBC for a tweet he made 11 years ago.  And so on.  The AIs refine people into groups with views that support ID Politics and those who oppose ID Politics slowly subside into obscurity as a result of shadow banning.  The mainstream media are only too happy to support the AIs because the last thing they want is to be shadow banned.

We can see how Twitter AIs have selected ID politics as "morally correct" from this stream of tweets to JK Rowling:

"Kill her for the love of God" is acceptable to the AIs so long as it also supports ID Politics.  Provided you have a high "friends" and "likes" count you gain some immunity from shadow banning because you are a route to market for advertisers.  The hierarchy of moral values such as speaking out about female changing rooms and sport being less of a problem than threatening someone with death has been inverted by the AIs because profit is more important than anything.

The slightest trespass into "incorrect" views leads to shadow banning or banning.  As an example, had Agrawal said "why should I distinguish between black people and criminals" rather than "why should I distinguish between white people and racists" his own organisation's AIs would have shadow banned or banned him.  The Twitter Storm would have lost him his job.

Many governments apart from China are increasingly keen on the potential of AIs plus Social Media to indoctrinate the population.  A German government project, “Monitoring System and Transfer Platform Radicalization” (MOTRA), is currently working on comprehensive  monitoring to  detect  changes  in  attitudes,  which  can  potentially  serve  as  an  early  indicator  of  criminal  activity. The European Union (EU)-funded Real-time Early Detection and Alert System for Online Terrorist Content (RED-Alert) Project aims to detect potential terrorists by examining the early stages of radicalization based on social media content.  Turkey and Iran are attempting to emulate the Chinese system of using AIs for population monitoring and control.

Corporations, foreign powers and political organisations are using Chatbots, a type of AI system, to simulate basic conversation to interfere in Social Media sites by posing as human users. According to one study in 2017, there were as many as 23 million bots on Twitter, 140 million bots on Facebook and around 27 million bots on Instagram.  There is now the real possibility that someone could be dismissed as a result of a Social Media Storm orchestrated by AI Chatbots.

The Matrix has been planted and it is growing.  AIs will create a disastrous society unless they are stopped now.  Stopping them is easy.  Create a National Firewall, regulate search engines for fairness and subject Social Media to the rules that must be obeyed by other publishers.

Once the Metaverse is established there will be no escape.

30/11/2021

Share on Twitter:

Comments