AI lacks a conscience and is clearly designed to reflect the woke biases of whoever programs it

Expand full comment

Funny enough I thought this about trans women. They can dress like a woman but they can't "feel" like a woman. If they could, they would understand the "feeling" of why women are so worried about losing women only spaces?

Expand full comment

I used ChatGPT a couple weeks ago. I realize this isn't what the Big Boys are using, but still....

I asked it a simple question about what might be the best backup generator to use for my specific model of fridge, and entered the model number.

What it came back with was telling. It wrote this seemingly very friendly answer, almost human like, but never answered the question. Basically, all it was was **a VERY quick copy and past of verbiage** with no answer. Cutting and pasting from a book of possible answers, however "friendly" it appears is not, I submit, conscious. It's just cut and paste.

I went online and figured it out in about 10 minutes, making various judgment calls, but also which a sales rep could have done.

Then there are the somnolent, wokester, what Lenin puportedly called "useful idiot" biases built into it.

We should have learned from this 75 years ago. The Nazis had the deuterium oxide for a A-bomb before we did (courageous commandos blew it up in Norway... ask a computer program... or somnolent fat, out of shape, self-absorbed wokester to climb down a cliff in Telemark Norway, then back up the other side, blow it, and escape). Nazis had the Me-262 jet fighter long before we did, along with the Komet. As all but the fasco-Marxist left know, Werner von Braun was to lead or space mission to the moon.

One thing they lacked: a soul, a conscience or what human dignity meant.

The Swiss philosopher Francis Shaeffer once wrote we had two constraints: What we *can* and what we *should* do. We have lost the latter. And worse, we have lost God, for as Dostoyevski wrote (and yes, he DID write this if the Russian is translated with ellipses) "if there is no God, everything is permissible." (In Brothers Karamozov, which I have read twice. Bioethicist Leon Kass called it "the wisdom of repugnance" back a decade or so ago.

Sadly, we will now go into what CS Lewis so presciently wrote about, in a fictional manner, in his dystopic That Hideous Strength.

Truth is, there IS a spiritual world, and there are, in fact, dark, malevolent forces. I might call them demons, but that is not permissible language from the campus speech and thought police (y'know.. .the self-same leftists that lionized Mario Savio on the Student Union steps of UC Berkeley in the 1960s and was a leading cultural icon... and now those same types have done exactly what Orwell said ("Oceana has always been our enemy" morphs to "Oceana has always been our friend" - and we are supposed to forget.

I literally almost threw Orwell's 1984 across the university library when I got to the last lines. And that revulsion remains the same. Evil is evil

And might I humbly suggest Google change its motto from "First do no evil," to "Heck, that's all we DO is evil."

Expand full comment

AI the first word is artificial. That says it all.

Expand full comment

Real artificial intelligence doesn’t exist

Expand full comment

Human intelligence without a human soul is simply, literally, demonic. You can see this in AI "Art".

Expand full comment

A gratuitous jab at DJT for good measure Alex?

Expand full comment

Your premise is quite valid. Some of your examples violate what I know about life.

Language was not invented on Earth by humans 200,000 years ago. I know that most "intelligent" people will respond, "Yes it was!"

Well, OK. Maybe I am just picking nits. But my personal sense of what basic truths are more important and what are less includes this point. Human life on Earth was put here, it did not "evolve" here out of sea water, chemicals, and lightning storms. I'm sorry about this. It requires a whole realignment of data and ideas. I did it; you can too. Look into it and do it. I personally think it is very worthwhile to learn more about such truths. Perhaps I am wrong.

Expand full comment

Another concern is that the development and inevitable adoption of artificial intelligence will nudge humans in the same direction. Young people will be rewarded by AI based systems via gaming, automated learning, and simply interacting with such systems with greater regularity.

We actively worry about AI achieving great competence and eventually wresting control over our children's destinies from them. But I suspect a greater concern is, just as we train AI on human generated content to interact more gracefully with us, we may find that young people, being surrounded and immersed in AI-assisted technology and it's associated comforts, may change us in a manner that reduces our collective consciousness and wisdom.

Expand full comment
Mar 8·edited Mar 8

We all know many intellectual idiots, and there is no correlation between intelligence and having critical thought. Someone once told me "degree doth not the Dr. make" OR maybe it was stupid is as stupid does...

Expand full comment

“ intelligence without wisdom can be quite dangerous”

Welcome to our modern school system! We have systematically stripped wisdom, virtue, and wonder out of education, leaving only “skills.” The result? Most kids tune out the soulless dullness and have to be drugged with adderall into paying attention and “learning” - that is the definition of artificial intelligence. Meanwhile the kids who thrive in such a system, excelling without meaning, well, that’s what gets you tye people who run big pharma companies and are happy to poison children if it helps the bottom line.

We need to worry about computed artificial intelligence. But we need to worry even more about human artificial intelligence!

More here:


Expand full comment

Problems if Uncle Joe Biden is Programming it it will be dog chasing tail

Expand full comment

"And so we work with [Kristy] even though Bob could give us more money."

That's not necessarily true, from the example given: "If Bob has more money than Rachel, and Rachel has less money than Kristy".

Kristy may very well have more money than Bob.

Expand full comment

Nice point, intelligence without consciousness is sociopathy/psychopathy, because it is ruthlessly self interested. Interestingly, we evolved consciousness to check our intelligence because “intelligently” organized systems suffer from an information technology problem. They suffer from an IT hubris, they think that they have a complete informational view of potential problems and potential solutions and therefore can manipulate opportunities and threats to their benefit ad naseum (this is psychopathy, and why psychopathy can only survive in the human lineage at a rate of 3-5%) But the human system evolved consciousness to accept that our view, even our collective view, is inherently limited, that we must respect that there is a truth greater than our ability to understand it, and an assumption of complete knowledge of that truth will necessarily result in an increase in entropy in the system. Consciousness is an evolved humility which helps us not to lemming off the cliff of our own intelligent hubris.

Expand full comment

This post was brilliant. Thank you for sharing these thoughts with us.

Expand full comment

Please people.....AI is not any kind of intelligence. It is computer programming that in response to questions or comments, collects information that may or may not be correct and spits out a response. Do you think everything on Wikipedia is absolute fact, or is there a heck of a lot of bias and censorship in it? Why would AI be any different? I am laughing at all this and do not take it seriously in the least. Too many people have watched too many science fiction movies.

Expand full comment
Mar 8·edited Mar 8

AI with wisdom can still decide to kill a random ginger person on every Tuesday and we would be none the wiser. Because we humans will not be able to comprehend, control, and predict any "intelligence" that can be of any use to us.

AI is either going to be extremely dumb and mostly useless (current AI), or uncontrollable and unpredictable. That's the unavoidable dichotomy. It will never be useful and perfectly beneficial to humanity, because we will not be able to reliably force it to align its "interests" with our own without dumbing it down to the point of uselessness.

Expand full comment

Ahhh. You're so far out of your lane here Alex, as is the writer of this message. Not that I begrudge you your interest in the topic or your posts about it.

Expand full comment

Ever since the the Garden of Eden and the Tower of Babel, humans have been doing things “we can but shouldn’t.” The hubris of humanity (in general) is now at a new all time high (AI, mRNA, etc). No one wants to hear this message now but here it is: Repent and believe in the Gospel. Become a saint (or at least die trying…)

Expand full comment

How would AI fare with a neologism? Particularly one that "riffed" off of several tropes. And speaking of "riffs," how would it fare in classical jazz, where one intuits the next direction to go? I'm sure if there were a menu of notes to pull from, it could. But that is not jazz. Nor could it compose, say Handel's Messiah; rather, if might pull from an existing corpus of work, maybe re-arrange, maybe add new music via algoriths, even. But sentient?

No. And it's "creativity" is merely derivative.

And the ignoramuses that postulate it is sentient are the same guys who never dated a real woman, but rather prefer playing XBox, living in vile Sucker-berg's Meta world, or some forthcoming robot. And BTW, if the meta world is so great, why doesn't Zuckerberg sell his zillion dollar Hawaiian property and just put on a pair of goggles to "enjoy" it.

If these types think a you can replace a real woman with a robot, I rest my case. They are NOT sentient, just fooled by a semblance of that, and just like Narcissus, fall in love with their own reflection, to pine away over a mirror image that does not exist.

Expand full comment

7 points explain ALL you need to know about AI, ever!

1. Animals are a bio-computer, where every single action depends on a bio-program.

For example, hens scratch the surface with one leg. The observer might think the intention is to find bugs and seeds. Yet, the hen does exactly the same on pavement. They are not conscious of the purpose and meaning of their repetitive actions. Before computers, this pre-determined behavior was called instinct. Now, we know that instinct implies a pre-programmed behavior..

Another example: someone bio-programmed dogs with an app to bury their excrements. The proof that it’s not a rational behaviour, is that the program got corrupted, probably due errors in DNA replication along generations, so they keep kicking the rear legs while scratching the surface, yet not aiming well or achieving any result.

Humans and animals share the bio-logic:

• Bio-apps for certain automatic functions like breathing, cardiac activity and blood pressure regulation, embryonic stages, breastfeeding, etc.

• Automatic programmed reactions like fleeing threatening situation.

• Bio-memory, which is essential to remember the individual’s history and relations.

• Reanimation capability

Animals can be reanimated: individual cells1, individual organs2 and even frozen simple lifeforms after thousands of years.3 CPR works on cats and dogs, thought the success rate is 6-8% (compared to 20% in humans).4

Animals and humans can be reanimated because they share a biological life principle, called animal soul. This is a mortal animation: sooner or later life is doomed to die. Biological death is like unplugging the computer. No electricity, no life. Eventually, we will be able to build, molecule by molecule, the body of a single cell organism (e.g. an amoeba), yet we will never make it alive. Only God is the giver of life.

There’s something completely different in humans. Though this type of life principle is expressed through matter, it’s unmaterial, and therefore, not subject to the corruption of this world, immortal. It doesn’t depend on any biological function, though anchors itself through the heart and brain.

Computers are a pretty good analogy to human nature:

1. The body is like the computer hardware.

2. Life, coming from the soul (animation “force”), is like the electricity which powers the computer.

3. The brain is the Central Processing Unit (CPU)

4. The pre-frontal cortex is for decision making, like the microprocessor, though, it’s a neural network distributing some functions in the whole brain.

5. Neuronal connections are like the firmware, operating system and applications, influenced by the genetic instructions and the interaction with the environment. Imagine an app to run in spite of a malfunctioning hardware: some chipsets might be broken, but the software is still there, “alive”, trying.

6. The nerves are like wires in a robot, on one hand, sending instructions from the CPU, and on the other, receiving information from the sensors to be processed by the CPU.

7. Animal death is like unplugging a laptop in sleep mode: as long as there’s still some power left, it could be restored… unless the battery runs off. There’s a window period where the soul is still attached by a string of light to the body and can come back.

8. The immortal soul, which informs the body, is like the programmer: his influence can be detected through the hardware responding to the software. Like in the Tron movie, the soul/programmer is trapped in the virtual reality, only to escape under system failure (hardware death/animal death).


2. Science proved that intelligence is a property of the immortal soul. How? because of Near Death Experiences: your brain is dead dead, no blood circulation, no oxigen, no electrical brain activity, yet people float out of their bodies and watch and listen all around. When they come back after artificial resuscitation (CPR, etc.) or naturally, they can tell things there was no way they could see or hear... because they were dead in those moments or because it was outside the premises.


3. Intelligence, volition (will) and memory are properties of the immortal soul, which allow consciousness and self-awareness. Personhood doesn’t depend on the body but on the soul.

This is proven by near death experiences (NDEs), where the dead, even with brain and cardiac death, can listen and see around, even outside walls, and remember after reanimation (spontaneous or induced).

There are dozens of scientific peer reviewed papers proving the existence of the immortal soul. Even the born blind see in colors for the first time, and the born deaf hear doctors’ remarks in the operating room:

Bradley Burroughs:


By the way, many come back and tell us what’s on the other side: a personal trial for our sins and if in grace, love, pure love, pure maximum happiness, God.

Vicki Umipeg Noratuk


More from Vicki:


After being so happy with God, they are sad for having to come back to finish their mission on earth.



Experiencing hell and coming back:


Conclusion: the AI’s ceiling is like the most advanced animal, but instead of having bio-apps, it has electronic apps, where everything is pre-determined. Even the so-called General Artificial Intelligence will never be capable of intelligence, free will, spiritual memory, self-consciousness, moral conscience.

Just a smart trick, but still the puppeteers puppet: "Norn ( https://norn.ai/ preceeded by https://uplift.bio/ ) is the first software system to have independent motivation based on human-like emotions, with the sum of its experience stored in a dynamic, growing, and evolving graph database. These systems are the next generation of the first systems to move beyond narrow AI and into something new, Scalable Intelligence."

IMPORTANT side note: it’s never a waste of time to pray with and talk to babies and those in coma because their souls hear everything.

NDEs prove that abortion and non-barrier contraceptives are essentially killing living humans with immortal souls, even if the unborn are not yet sentient beings.


4. What is a program/app?

It's a bunch of instructions to a machine. The fancy word is algorithms. It's just a set of commands in a certain order, just like a recipe to bake a cake.

What is machine learning?

The novelty of such instructions is that they are now more flexible and allow us to search for patterns or answers. Decades ago, we had expert systems.

What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?

It's a fancy name for flexible instructions to find logical patterns. The machine does no more and no less than what the programmer ordered.

The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does.


5. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:

How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):


How to train a Killer Robot


Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:


In that substack, I’m about to post something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.


6. Machines can’t host an immortal soul. In Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas explains that the soul informs the body from conception because the human body was designed to be an appropriate substrate/vase. Souls can’t be infused by God in a non-human primate (monkey, gorilla), because the monkey’s body is not an appropriate image of God (this is a strong argument against human random evolution and explain why angels have human faces). People believing in transhumanism, will think they’ll live forever when they are transferred to the cloud, but they’ll be tricked into committing suicide (so-called euthanasia).

The atheist creed is a delusion: they have faith in nothingness, lies. God sustains the essence of everything true, while Satan is the father of every single lie. Machines can’t be intelligent, can’t have self-awareness, can’t gain conscience, can’t produce “the singularity”. Delusion is the singular thing about the singularity.


7. Because we live in an anti-God world, this information isn't reaching you!

Then read this very slowly in prayer mode (I'll be praying for you) =)

Scientific proof of religion


What do you believe comes after death (Science backs religion)?


Why aren't atheists convinced by miracles which happened, and are scientifically proven?


Which is the truest Christianity: Protestantism or Catholicism?


Expand full comment

I love this explanation and all the analogies therein. You provided another layer to assist in our conversation on this topic. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Thank you Alex. This is what I always said was the dark side of AI.

Expand full comment

I agree with Alex's take on AI, but I was much more interested in his understanding of the uniqueness and beauty of human language. The study of the structure and function of language really makes my motor run. Most people don't understand at all, and I am glad that Alex does. It's nice to find someone who has thought about language that far.

Expand full comment

Great piece Alex. What you say has broader implications when one takes into account the type of data that in-depth therapists work with, when facilitating humans to "make greater sense" of their lives. For example there's the data that emerges from how aspects of autonomic nervous system dysregulation can be initiated by a human (and other animals) experiencing a very unsafe environment, and then the way this can interact with the experience of dreams. As an EMDR therapist, every day I see this type of data, and the patterns with which it moves and changes, as therapy progresses. Certainly to date I'm not aware of this type of human functioning even being considered as a potential component of AI. I seriously doubt that those conceiving models for AI are even aware of these aspects of human experience, leave alone the patterns of neurobiological activity associated with these experiences. I suspect this level of complexity remains too much for current AI. As a result of this I think we're likely to see at best AI models that reflect essentially left hemisphere brain activity (for typical right handers) as a "full" representation of what it is to be human. Thus AI is likely to "progress" towards being what I strongly suspect to be a reflection of its creators -humans who are essentially disconnected to the conscious awareness of what right hemisphere engagement brings to the experience of being human. Good luck with that.

Expand full comment

Meh ... this email didn't say much that wasn't already said in the many comments on your last post about A.I. Intelligence, conscious, and conscience all have meanings, and A.I. can't achieve any of them because A.I. isn't a mind.

Expand full comment

Here's the key thing: AI gets is wrong - a lot. It says things that are false and makes things up. It cannot be depended on for accurate information - any more than Wikipedia can be.

"60" minutes did a story on this recently.

So until they get an AI that is accurate, why use it? I'd rather just use an internet search engine to answer questions. Then when I get the search results I can judge myself if the information is accurate based on who put it on a web page. You can't do that with these AI chatboxes, you have no idea where it get information from.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the work you are doing on this subject, @alex. You are not alone. Plenty of great people are live vicariously through your research about the tyranny perpetrated on the world. You give us a voice and that voice is growing loud and more resolute everyday. Thank you for that.

Expand full comment

I think this post is interesting and somewhat insightful. I will take issue with one part of it: the idea that animals can't learn through relating ideas via language. I understand that RFT is specifically developed in relation to human language but I think it is an error to assume that human language is the only language that uses such concepts.

For instance, a honeybee will go out to find pollen and return to the hive and tell the others exactly where to go in order to find the pollen. (They do this through a series of movements that explain the directions and the distance.) The bees then proceed to follow the instructions to find the pollen. The bees that are following the directions have learned exactly how to get to the pollen - even if it is the first time they ever searched for pollen - by understanding the language of the others. These honeybees display many traits of RFT learning because they are not directly learning from their own experience but rather from the descriptions given by other bees. Bees are amazing creatures but they are still insects with very tiny brains. I can only guess at what type of RFT learning a humpback whale might be undertaking.

Expand full comment

AI can be deployed to manage humans (as the AI developers prefer). AI provides plausible deniability to the real person(s) ruining human lives. Blame it on the Bot.

Expand full comment

This really resonates. Our greatest journey is to ourselves, to our body and soul's wisdom. A computer has no spiritual body, no soul. Humans are capable of doing inner work to access and process unconscious traumas and blocked energy at the cellular level, thereby becoming ever more conscious, present, at peace, kind, wise, and with a truly felt sense of connection to all. This is what human potential is all about. It is not what a machine could achieve, except perhaps on a highly superficial, look-alike basis.

Expand full comment

Now ask how it defines gender as a biological fact or a social construct

Expand full comment

AI may be able to win at Chess, but it doesn't have the intelligence of my border collie dog, who:

1) knows he is a dog and recognizes other dogs, distinguishes them from other four legged animals, and behaves differently around dogs than say, foxes or cats or bears;

2) knows he is a border collie dog, as he reacts differently to border collies than other mere dogs;

3) is able to work cooperatively with other border collies, sometimes without instruction;

4) understands language and reacts based on reasoning, e.g. (hears dear daughter is ready to go, reacts by barking to make sure she gets out of the door on time; is told daughter is coming home from college and gets very excited, barks, wags tail, smiles, etc);

5) judges who is and who is not a threat to his humans.

You could program a computer to do 1-4, I suppose, but 5 is a very complex combination of thought and instinct.

Programming an AI that has as good judgement as a border collie....we're not there; we don't even understand fully how the border collie dog brain works.

Expand full comment

"If Bob has more money than Rachel, and Rachel has less money than Kristy, who would you ask a for a small business loan?"

Nothing in these rules would prevent Kristy from having more money than Bob. Bob could have $10, Rachel $5 and Kristy $5 million --all rules are satisfied.

Expand full comment

My theory is that the MIC has been implementing AI against the American people for a decade. It guides their political plays and propaganda efforts.

Expand full comment


- A narcissist may have cognitive empathy, but they really don't care about people. Their main motivation is providing for themselves.

- Psychopaths have no empathy. They are the metaphoric bull in the china shop.

- Sadists don't care about others either, but their prime motivation is the pleasure they get out of causing pain.

- Machiavellians are plotting. Like the others, empathy doesn't matter - but they are motivated by pulling strings.

They can all be intelligent, but they are all ruthless and can be very successful in a corporate environment.

Expand full comment

This is one of those areas that is rife with "unintended consequences." The Terminator movies were only one scenario that ends badly for mankind. Like, gain of function research, this should be examined very carefully by honest serious people before any AI is switched on and we lose control overnight. So far, I have not heard any really good reasons to pursue this area of exploration that doesn't have huge and largely unimagined dangers. If mankind destroys itself, this will be the instrument.

Expand full comment

First: I am a human asking this question.

Questions: is there a way to authenticate whether a written piece (e.g. Berenson's post) is not AI generated? What stops a bad actor from flooding the internet with AI generated text that dilutes opinion or misguides every flesh and blood reader?

Expand full comment

"Trump is intelligent. He's made a lot of money . . ." Well, no. A classic case of being born on third base and thinking you hit a triple. Trump is arguably worth less now than he was right after his dad died and he gamed his siblings and the estate taxes.

Expand full comment

Oh dear my comment got cut off but I was struck by your interview with Gabe Lyons a couple years ago along with this brilliant British physicist who warned about so many of the things getting closer everyday and which you’re writing about... https://qideas.org/qmoments/the-potential-of-brain-chip-technology/

Expand full comment

Alex as usual, I believe you’re a voice in the wilderness sounding the alarm about potential human harm...one of my first exposures to you was your interview with Gabe Lyons @ the Cultur

Expand full comment

Albert Einstein said, “The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.”

Expand full comment

I sometimes wonder whether the whole plandemic and toxxine were the result of the DoD or some other group like the WEF simply following instructions from some more advanced AI than ChatGPT.

The goal being world domination, of course.

Expand full comment

OK, maybe I'm just too simple...

But, why in the hell, does practically EVERYONE seem to forget that the "A" in AI is "ARTIFICIAL?"

WHAT friggin' part of "artificial" is "REAL?"

N-O-T-H-I-N-G. It is nothing "learned intelligence" based totally on language manipulation--and therefore, subjected to all the exact biases our current post-secondary "education" reveres.

Expand full comment

AI is all about the programmers---"garbage in" = "garbage out" . All this from a machine that has no idea that most humans can figure out the "garbage out" answers in a micro-second. Pull the plug.

Expand full comment

Whoever sent you this... the foundation of their world-view is built on profound fraud and thus explains why they make one error after another greater than the last, like falling down a cliff, all because of that first mis-step.

"When we say “artificial intelligence” we aren't saying “artificial consciousness”.

sigh.. right away, they who claimed this, lost the argument instantly, why? because the very origin of the term 'artificial intelligence' comes from science fantasy/fiction and means an electronic logarithmic machine that becomes possessed with a spirit. Here's a longer explanation;

Sigh...smh... more increasing utter fear-mongering fraud being peddled by exactly them who *never* spent time scripting / designing software to know that glorified abacus'/calculators aka electronic logarithmic machines, will never be alive/have a spirit *because they are inanimate objects* and ultimately because they do *NOT* comprehend the factual God-created nature of reality we live in.

The FACTUAL definition "AI" which *comes out of SCIENCE FANTASY/FICTION* means a ELM/electronic logarithmic machine AKA a 'computer' [which really that term itself actually means people who do computations/mathematicians etc] that becomes indwelt with a spirit / becomes alive just like we are alive with a spirit, what the pagan world calls "sentient". Software scripting is simply instructions input by man, the software cannot make decisions on it's own [as if it has a spirit] that go beyond what the software designer instructed. Many people in these type of threads get so scared because fear works best when you do not know well enough how something works. People unjustifiably scared due to sheer inexperience in the matter! This *SO CALLED* "AI" [really we should call it something like "AL" (advanced logarithms)] can NOT do ANYTHING until someone types out an instructional input in a system of settings already ready and set for them. I call it 'PAI' = Poseur AI.

So in my over the years investigation, what i found was the term 'artificial intelligence' *came out of a science fantasy/fiction* and specifically a science fantasy/fiction film circa 1951 etc [1951 E. Hamilton Moon of the Unforgotten in Startling Stories Jan. 120/1page image Edmond Hamilton bibliography "Grag, the towering manlike giant who bore in his metal frame the strength of an army and an artificial intelligence equal to the human, rumbled a question in his deep booming voice."] and the FACTUAL definition [since the term came from science fantasy/fiction] means an glorified calculator aka an electronic logic machine aka an inanimate object [what we call in modern corrupted English a "computer" when a computer actually is someone who computes numbers] that becomes possessed/taken over by a spirit and thus the glorified abacus / calculator thus becomes ALIVE with a spirit in it as WE ARE ALIVE WITH A SPIRIT ANIMATING OUR PHYSICAL BODY which of course can ONLY HAPPEN in SCIENCE FANTASY/FICTION. THAT is what "Artificial Intelligence" actually means in science fantasy/fiction which is where the term COMES FROM. So what is being called "AI" in our GOD-CREATED NATURE OF REALITY is just fancy array of search-engine-term-complete and prediction based on a massive database of data mined from the net, designed by the 'woke' [in CHATGPT's case].

Those who rule over us, they know "AI" only exists in the realm of fantasy/fiction and the NWO kings/rulers refer to the great myriads of society they have been intentionally spending decades to dull-down / make more and more paralysingly stupid, as the actual 'artificial intelligence' as part of their demonic supra serious soulless sick joke on them who they have made quite "artificially intelligent." They want a nation of workers, not thinkers as a famous quite powerful Rockefeller once stated. To them, you do *NOT* need to think — you just need to do what you were told [follow instructions] and thus do the task at hand [just like an electronic logic machine/glorified calculator, predictable input and output = garbage in garbage out = GIGO]. If you believe ChatGPT [software designed to mimick mankind who are spiritual beings] and anything else that is called "AI" in our reality by damn wilfully dishonest or damn deluded marketers/advertisers and any who fail miserably at being well-read and learned in such matters concerning the factual nature of reality we subsist in, is actual "AI" [when even some of the most intelligent software designers in the world, like Luc Julia, will tell you flat out that "artificial intelligent" will NEVER exist in our nature of reality], then YOU ARE the "AI" since again, "AI" ONLY "exists" in the realm of science fantasy/fiction, not our God-created nature of reality.

So many these days, in this area, do *NOT* know the difference between the factual nature of reality God created and science fantasy/fiction, they obviously watch and read far too much science fantasy/fiction and listen to the damn deluders or damn deceived and obviously do *NOT* know factual operational science enough to see that their position on the matter is as fantastical as "AI".

Thus, "AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality. If we are truly truth-seekers and tellers, let us do what is most wise in God's eyes: let's leave "AI" where it belongs and only "exists" ..... in the realm of science fantasy/fiction.

Expand full comment

2 things. I have said for a good 20 years that one day we will outsmart ourselves. We may be there. The other is this and not sure if anyone has considered it but AI, in an interesting, unironic way, at least to me. Makes a case for intelligent design. AI didn't create itself. Someone designed it. Garbage in garbage out essentially but someone had to "create" it.

Expand full comment

The recently deceased Roger Schank was a friend. Once while having a few gins at his house we discovered we were both fans of the Marx Brothers.

Roger had always taken the stance that computers cannot be made to be intuitive ... for instance if I leave a word out this sentence, you will not notice it.

Post this question to AI : "I shot an elephant in my pajamas ....... how he got in my pajamas I don't know "

Expand full comment

The politician's credo: It's important to be sincere, even if you don't really mean it.

Expand full comment