▶

00:00 / 00:00

⬇

Once again humanity is being threatened by an artificial existential crisis, this one actually containing the word artificial in it - presented to us in the form of artificial intelligence (AI).

As AI safety researcher Roman Yampolskiy expressed it to Patrick Bet-David last week, there is "a 99.999% chance that humanity will be destroyed by AI" and that government should be called in to control it. In these claims he is not alone, and is supported by the likes of AI researcher and founder of the AI safety company Conjecture, Connor Leahy.

Their calls for government controls are highly suspicious in light of their insistence that AI cannot possibly be controlled. However, upon reviewing the AI industry's poor returns on investment, British tech critic Ed Zitron offers us an insight to the true nature of the latest crisis.

In light of the bigger picture, one cannot help but notice how these and other AI experts are promoting the same agenda as did all of the Covid experts during the last existential crisis. In both cases it appears that the crisis is not existential, but financial.

To distract us from the real fiscal nature of the crisis, they have anthropomorphized the concept of AI into a human foe, using terms that cannot possibly be applicable to computer programs, no matter how sophisticated.

These computer experts speak about "AI agents" as entities that "don't care" about humanity, that can "lie, cheat, and steal," and that have "minds" as yet not understood by the experts themselves. The experts claim that AI agents can "want" to do things and are capable of being "convinced" by their own conclusions.

And perhaps the real stupidity underlying all of these artificial attributes is the argument that AI is capable of possessing them "...because the only thing (AI agents) care about is the reward."

One can only imagine what a "reward" might mean to a mechanical device or process, let alone how it could possibly "care" about getting this reward. The very idea is an absurdity.

"Artificial" can refer to something man-made or to something that is not real. When it comes to artificial intelligence it means both: man made and not real.

Until both terms - artificial and intelligence - are defined in a proper relevant context, the term artificial intelligence (or AI) will continue to enable those with sinister intentions to terrorize the populace - while forcing taxpayers to subsidize their financial misadventures.

Remember, just as big pharma was suffering declining revenues and returns on investment, an existential crisis threatening all of humanity via a novel virus requiring vaccines was created. And who bought all of the "vaccines" that weren't even vaccines? Why, governments of course. And thus their financial crisis was averted.

It seems to us that the AI industry is attempting the same strategy. Calling for governments to put "external pressure" on them to control AI, what they are really after is an external subsidy of taxpayer money to save them from their own existential financial crisis.

While we would like to believe otherwise, it's looking more and more as if there is a 99.999% probability that we could be Just Right.