Tag Archives: AI

Eric Winter is a god

Yup, we are going there. It might not be correct, but that is where the evidence is leading us. You see I got hooked on the Rookie and watched seasons one through four in a week. Yet the name Eric Winter was bugging me and I did not know why. The reason was simple. He also starred in the PS4 game ‘Beyond two souls’ which I played in 2013. I liked that game and his name stuck somehow. Yet when I looked for his name I got

This got me curious, two of the movies I saw and Eric would have been too young to be in them and there is the evidence, presented by Google. Eric Winter born on July 17th 1976 played alongside Barbara Streisand 4 years before he was born, evidence of godhood. 

And when we look at the character list, there he is. 

Yet when we look at a real movie reference like IMDB.com we will get 

Yes, that is the real person who was in the movie. We can write this up as a simple error, but that is not the path we are trodding on. You see, people are all about AI and ChatGPT but the real part is that AI does not exist (not yet anyway). This is machine learning and deeper machine learning and this is prone to HUMAN error. If there is only 1% error and we are looking at about 500,000 movies made, that implies that the movie reference alone will contain 5,000 errors. Now consider this on data of al kinds and you might start to see the picture shape. When it comes to financial data and your advisor is not Sam Bankman-Fried, but Samual Brokeman-Fries (a fast-food employee), how secure are your funds then? To be honest, whenever I see some AI reference I got a little pissed off. AI does not exist and it was called into existence by salespeople too cheap and too lazy to do their job and explain Deeper Machine Learning to people (my view on the matter) and things do not end here. One source gives us “The primary problem is that while the answers that ChatGPT produces have a high rate of being incorrect, they typically look like they might be good and the answers are very easy to produce,” another source gives us issues with capacity, plagiarism and cheating, racism, sexism, and bias, as well as accuracy problems and the shady way it was trained. That is the kicker. An AI does not need to be trained and it would compare the actors date of birth with the release of the movie making The Changeling and What’s up Doc? falling into the net of inaccuracy. This is not happening and the people behind ChatGPT are happy to point at you for handing them inaccurate data, but that is the point of an AI and its shallow circuits to find the inaccuracies and determine the proper result (like a movie list without these two mentions). 

And now we get the source Digital Trends (at https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/the-6-biggest-problems-with-chatgpt-right-now/) who gave us “ChatGPT is based on a constantly learning algorithm that not only scrapes information from the internet but also gathers corrections based on user interaction. However, a Time investigative report uncovered that OpenAI utilised a team in Kenya in order to train the chatbot against disturbing content, including child sexual abuse, bestiality, murder, suicide, torture, self-harm, and incest. According to the report, OpenAI worked with the San Francisco firm, Sama, which outsourced the task to its four-person team in Kenya to label various content as offensive. For their efforts, the employees were paid $2 per hour.” I have done data cleaning for years and I can tell you that I cost a lot more then $2 per hour. Accuracy and cutting costs, give me one real stage where that actually worked? Now the error at Google was a funny one and you know in the stage of Melissa O’Neil a real Canadian telling Eric Winter that she had feelings for him (punking him in an awesome way). We can see that this is a simple error, but these are the errors that places like ChatGPT is facing too and as such the people employing systems like ChatGPT, which over time as Microsoft is staging this in Azure (it already seems to be), this stage will get you all in a massive amount of trouble. It might be speculative, but consider the evidence out there. Consider the errors that you face on a regular base and consider how high paid accountants mad marketeers lose their job for rounding errors. You really want to rely on a $2 per hour person to keep your data clean? For this merely look at the ABC article on June 9th 2023 where we were given ‘Lawyers in the United States blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing fake court cases’. Accuracy anyone? Consider that against a court case that was fake, but in reality they were court cases that were actually invented by the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot. 

In the end I liked my version better, Eric Winter is a god. Equally not as accurate as reality, but more easily swallowed by all who read it, it was the funny event that gets you through the week. 

Have a fun day.

2 Comments

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

The choice of options

Part of this started yesterday when I saw a message pass by. I ignored it because it seemed trivial, yet today ( a few hours ago) I took notice of ‘Google rushes to develop AI search engine after Samsung considers ditching it for Bing’ from ZDNet (at https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-rushes-to-develop-ai-search-engine-after-samsung-considers-ditching-it-for-bing/) and ‘Alphabet shares fall on report Samsung may switch search to Bing’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/4/17/alphabet-shares-fall-on-report-samsung-may-switch-search-to-bing). In part I do not care, actually this situation is a lot better for Google than they think it is. You see, Samsung, a party I disliked for 33 years, after being massively wronged by them. Decided to make the fake AI jump. It is fake as AI does not exist and when the people learn this the hard way, it will work out nicely for Huawei and Google. There is nothing like a dose of reality being served like a bucket of ice water to stop consumers looking at your product. I do not care, I refuse any Samsung device in my apartment. I also dislike Bing, it is a Microsoft product and two years ago I got Bing forced down my throat again and again through hijack scripts, it took some time blocking them. So I dislike both. I have no real opinion of ChatGPT. As we see the AI reference. Let’s take you to the Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/not-everything-we-call-ai-is-actually-artificial-intelligence-heres-what-you-need-to-know-196732) I have said it before and they have a decent explanation. They write “AI is broadly defined in two categories: artificial narrow intelligence (ANI) and artificial general intelligence (AGI). To date, AGI does not exist.” You see, I only look at AGI, the rest is some narrow niche for specific purpose. We are also given “Most of what we know as AI today has narrow intelligence – where a particular system addresses a particular problem. Unlike human intelligence, such narrow AI intelligence is effective only in the area in which it has been trained: fraud detection, facial recognition or social recommendations, for example” and there is an issue with this. People do not understand the narrow scope, they want to apply it almost everywhere and that is where people get into trouble, the data connected does not support the activity and adding this to a mobile means that it collects massive amounts of data, or it becomes less and less reliable, an issue I expect to see soon after it makes it into a Samsung phone. 

For AI to really work “it needs high-quality, unbiased data, and lots of it. Researchers building neural networks use the large data sets that have come about as society has digitised.” You see, the amount of data is merely a first issue, the fact that it is unbiassed data is a lot harder and when we see sales people cut corners, they will take any shortcut making the data no longer unbiassed and that is where it all falls apart.

So whilst the ‘speculators’ (read: losers) make Google lose value, the funny part is that when the Samsung connection falls down Google stands to up their customer base by a lot. Thousands of Samsung customers feeling as betrayed as I was in 1990 and they will seek another vendor which would make Huawei equally happy. 

ZDNet gives us “The threat of Bing taking Google’s spot on Samsung phones caused “panic” at Google, according to messages reviewed by The New York Times. Google’s contract with Samsung brings in an approximate $3 billion annual revenue. The company still has a chance to maintain its presence in Samsung phones, but it needs to move fast” I see two issues here, the first is that the NY Times is less and less of a dependable source, they have played too many games and as ‘their’ source’ might not be reliable, as such is the quote also less reliable. The second source is me (basically) they weren’t interested in my 5 billion revenue, as such why would they care about losing 3 billion more? For the most, there is an upside, when it falls down (an I personally believe it will) Samsung could be brought back on board but now it will cost them 5-6 billion. As such Samsung would have to be successful without Google Search for 3 years and it will cascade into a collapse setting, after that they will beg just to return to the Alphabet fold, which would also make this Microsoft’s 6th failure. My day is looking better already.

Am I so anti-Whatever?
No not really. When it is ready and when the systems are there AI will change the game and AGI is the only real AI to consider. As I stated before deeper machine learning is awesome and it has massive value, but the narrow setting needs to be respected and when you push it into something like Bing, it will go wrong and when it does it will not be noticed initially until it is much too late. And all this is beside the setting that some people will link the wrong parts and Samsung will end up putting its IP in ChatGPT and someone will ask a specific question that was never flagged and the IP will pour straight into public domain. That is the real danger for Samsung and in all this ChatGPT is free of blame and when certain things are found the entire setting needs to be uploaded into a new account. When we consider that a script with 65,000 lines will have up to 650 issues (or features, or bugs), how many will cause a cascade effect or information no one wanted, least of all the hardware owner? Oh, and that is when the writers were really good. Normally the numbers of acceptability are between 1300-2600, as such how many issues will rise and how long until too many patches will make the system unyielding? All questions that come to mind with an ANI system, because it is data driven and when we consider that the unbiassed data isn’t? What then? And that is before we align cultural issues. Korea, India, Japan and China are merely 4 of them and seeing that things never aligned in merely 4 nations, how many versions of data will be created to avoid collapse? As such I personally think that Google is not in panic mode. Perhaps Bard made them road-wise, perhaps not. 

I think 2024 will be a great Google year with or without Samsung and when Microsoft achieves disappointing yet another company its goose will be royally cooked on both sides of the goose no less. We have choices, we have options and we can mix them, but to let some fake AI make those choices for us is not anything at all, but feel free to learn that lesson the hard way.

I never liked Samsung for personal reasons, and I have been really happy with my android phone. I have had an Android phone for 13 years now and never regretted having one. I hope it stays that way.

Enjoy the day and don’t trust an AI to tell you the weather, that is what your eyesight can do better in the present and the foreseeable future.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

Advanced Ignorance

Yes, this is about AI, the big issue is that it does not exist (not yet anyway), the sales bozo’s are giving you some talk about how it exists and yes the naysayers are right, but they are confusing one version of AI with another. Well part 1, Artificial Intelligence does not exist, it really does not and there is no alternative to this. What you see is machine learning and deeper machine learning and these two parts are AWESOME. They really are, but there is a hidden snag. These two elements rely on data and they are therefor dependent on Human Error and there is plenty. This is seen even today at Google. Now, things happen and errors are seen and at some point they will be corrected for, but until that happens, the machine learning part fails and it will fail a few times.

To illustrate this, lets take a look at a British Hollywood giant, namely the actor Tom Holland. Now, there is nothing wrong with this youthful young lad. As image 1 shows above. As you can see he was born June 1st 1996, on the same day as my mother, just a few decades later. He is from (read the pic) and so on, so far so good. I actually had to check something, as such I needed to see his movies. (See below).

Now we get to the good stuff, he did Psycho 2, 13 years before he was born. That makes him a temporal god, which is odd as far as I can tell I am the only one who travelled through time at present, but OK. If I can do it, so could he. And that is where we see the stage, it is seen in the picture below. 

As you can see, there was ANOTHER actor named Tom Holland and he did Psycho 2. But the learning machines never picked it up because the rule to check for errors and movies a person before that person was born did not occur to the software engineer at Google who did this part. Errors will creep in, they always do and there you see the failing of today’s AI when you get one and you might not see it, you will not notice it, because they are rare, but in AI no errors are allowed, they change the outcome of the algorithm and that breaks the AI sooner and sooner. 

This is why I do not trust any AI at present, the minimum stage for AI is nowhere near reaching. It is coming, but I reckon it is t least a decade away. Mainly because ONLY IBM has at present a quantum computer that is required for this and their computer is not ready yet, so at present it is all a version of machine learning which relies on data and it relies on people making the formulas and people are flawed, very very flawed. 

So when you see another AI BS story, feel free to steer clear, AI does not exist and the salesperson who relies on ‘his’ AI story cannot be trusted, he is selling you something that does not yet exist.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

Data dangers

Data has dangers and I think more by accident then intentional CBC exposed one (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/whistle-buoy-brewing-ai-beer-robo-1.6755943) where we were given ‘This Vancouver Island brewery hopped onto ChatGPT for marketing material. Then it asked for a beer recipe’. You see, there is a massive issue, it has been around from the beginning of the event, but AI does not exist, it really does not. What marketing did to make easy money, the made a term and transformed it into something bankable. They were willing to betray Alan Turing at the drop of a hat, why not? The man was dead anyway and cash is king. 

So they turned advanced machine learning and data repositories added a few items and they call it AI. Now we have a new show. And as CBC gives us “let’s see what happens if we ask it to give us a beer recipe,” he told CBC’s Rohit Joseph. They asked for a fluffy, tropical hazy pale ale” and we see the recipe below.

Now I have two simple questions. The first is is this a registered recipe, making this IP theft, or is this a random guess from established parameters, optionally making it worse. Random assignment of elements is dangerous on a few levels and it is not on the program to do this, but it is here so here you have it and it is a dangerous step to make. But I am more taken with option one, the program had THAT data somewhere. So in a setting we acquired classified data through clandestine needs and the program allowed for this, that is a direct danger. So what happens when that program gets to assess classified data? The skip between machine learning, deeper machine learning, data assessment and AI is a skip that is a lot wider than the grand canyon. 

But there is another side, we see this with “CBC tech columnist and digital media expert Mohit Rajhans says while some people are hesitant about programs like ChatGPT, AI is already here, and it’s all around us. Health-care, finance, transportation and energy are just a few of the sectors using the technology in its programs” people are reacting to AI as it existed and it dos not, more important when ACTUAL AI is introduced, how will the people manage it then? And the added legal implications aren’t even considered at present. So what happens, when I improve the stage of a patent and make it an innovative patent? The beer example implies that this is possible and when patents are hijacked by innovative patents, what kind of a mess will we face then? It does not matter whether it is Microsoft with their ChatGPT or Google with their Bard, or was that the bard tales? There is a larger stage that is about to hit the shelves and we, the law and others are not ready for what some of the big tech are about to unleash on us. And no one is asking the real questions because there is no real documented stage of what constitutes a real AI and what rules are imposed on that. I reckon Alan Turing would be ashamed of what scientists are letting happen at this point. But that is merely my view on the matter.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

The theory of new

Before I connect to the story of today which BBC gives us is something from my past. In the 80’s I learned that there are 4 basic stances. Attack, defend, avoid and evade. The last two are not the same. In one we deflect here the attacker goes in the other we avoid where the opponent is expecting to be. It helped me in many of the stages I ever faced. It is the basic of being, that is how I saw it anyway. So these matters were in my mind when an article hit my eyes. It was ‘US-China chip war: America is winning’ (at. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-64143602), are they? Really?

You see the article gives us “These tiny fragments of silicon are at the heart of a $500bn industry that is expected to double by 2030. And whoever controls the supply chains – a tangled network of companies and countries that make the chips – holds the key to being an unrivalled superpower.” I cannot disagree, but the setting is folly. You see for the most in the last 30 years that industry tried to be everywhere and there is a stage where we see them in many places. But is that a good thing, or can that truly be pushed everywhere? Think of it, think of the stage from let’s say 1996 and now 2023. Electronics got to drown everything else. 

Now lets look at the simple image below

It is an abacus, and it comes from Persia about 600BC, there is enough speculation that they got it from somewhere else and that story goes back to the age of Mesopotamia. What is important is that a person truly versatile in this device can get to a result faster than anyone with a calculator and there is the solution, or perhaps the direction of the solution. The second strap is not what is out today, but what was out yesterday. In the older days we had Microsoft laptops, they outgrew their usefulness, or so that was what Microsoft wanted us to believe. The laptops were too slow, but guess what, those laptops became decently powerful Unix/Linux servers and that was a mere 10 years ago. The old PS3 could be broken into a Linux system, which was surprisingly powerful. They got a new lease on life and that is what we need to do, we need to consider other directions. Yes we see all the bla bla bla on AI and on what a powerful system can do, but guess what? AI does not exist. Machine learning does and deeper machine learning exists too and they are awesome. AI needs a lot more and these parts do not yet exist. In the first a real quantum computer is required and IBM is the closest to getting one. Once they get a handle on shallow circuits and the power is upped, that is when the system exists where a real AI could be, the second part is still a decade (at least) away. A Dutch physicist did find the Ypsilon particle and that is essential to get the shallow circuit truly going, but it is a decade away. You see chips are binary. It is either yer or no and an AI needs the Ypsilon particle. It is Yes, No, Neither or Both and these last two will evolve systems into closer to true AI and we are not there yet. So how does it all fill together? 

That is the core and we see part of that with “The manufacture of semiconductors is complex, specialist and deeply integrated. An iPhone has chips that are designed in the US, manufactured in Taiwan, Japan or South Korea, then assembled in China. India, which is investing more in the industry, could play a bigger role in the future.” This is true, or at least it sounds true, but the real issue is what can be replaced with a chip? You think it is ludicrous, but is it? Do we need them? It is a serious question. You see any new technology is derived from the limits of others and as power is more and more an issue in many places, the idea of exploring the field of mechanical computer is not the craziest. What did we overlook? What did we reject because an American told us that their chip was better? They did it before with VHS, Betamax was highly superior, but VHS had the numbers, it is the only reason they won. So what else did we reject? If an abacus can equal a person with a calculator. A system with a time advantage of 3000 years, what else is possible? We forget to look behind us (which is where I found billions in IP) what else is there and what else could be done? And this is not done overnight, this will take years, decades perhaps but it would result in a new technology stream, one not founded on electronics and guess what, when the power falls away, so do your chips. So is my idea weird? Yes. Is it preposterous? Perhaps. Is it invalid? No! There is enough evidence all over the field and seeking replacement systems is not the weirdest idea, not in this day and age. 

Consider one other system, in the old days (a little past WW2) someone invented the Knijpkap (squeeze cat) the torch had a small dynamo inside which sounded like a purring cat when operated. 

The interesting part is that it needed no battery. So how many torches do you know that have no battery? What happens when batteries are not available? We can add a recharging battery to hold that power, or not. But one device completely without battery. So what happens when we adjust this to other means? These are two simple applications, now consider one where whomever invents it reuses a mechanical computer to take the load away (and revenue) for electronic ones? That will be the exercise and it is not an easy one. It takes one with serious brains and a decade at their disposal. But I reckon the spoils will be so worth it in the end. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics, Science

The rut of the game

Yup, I am in a rut, it happens to us all. Anyone claiming that it will never happen to them is lying to you, there is no exception to that rule. We will all face it, whether we are in creative more, in production mode, in management mode or in operation mode. Rut is a dangerous thing, it tends to precede burnout for some. You see rut is not always dull, it is not always repetitive, but the brain sees a return to similar enough settings to treat it that way and it comes across as dull and/or repetitive. But there is a much larger issue in play and I cannot define it. 

For me it started with one of the series I was writing. I got to the stage that I wanted to up the ante and add to the flavour of Greek mythology. So my mind wandered all over the field and I suddenly remembered an old (very old) lesson. You see organised crime and corrupt officials have the same flaw, the same weakness. It is ‘unfathomable loss’. So even if they have no issues stealing from you. When you start killing their children they go all huffy and puffy on these innocent kids, however they never considered your innocence when they stole from you and there lies the rub. But that setting is also dangerous because the main player gets ‘changed’ in the process, no matter how close he is related to Hades. As such I started to recall one of the lost episodes (I truly forgot where I put them). You see, you can orchestrate a player, you can expose them to the social media (with images and YouTube footage) hoping that one of the caught players will lose their mind and kill for you. You can take strife and do the killing yourself and kills those corrupt protection people as well. But the rut starts when that becomes repetitive. You need to change the menu, even though the act remains the same the journey to these acts can alter, and for me there is the added setting of taking a Greek take on the events. The adulterous female party can be thrown in that Turkish cave (formerly Greek) and let the change to a Medusa be the act where her lover the corrupt politician ends up relying on mercy which will never come and as a statue he will be as dead as anything else and placing that statue in the garden of a certain enabler should create the right tone. Not only can he explain the statue, but when they examine the statue he would be in much warmer waters than he would be happy with. And that is merely the first three players. I need a few more, but then the rut set in. Avoiding the repetitive is essential, as such looking for Greek solutions might not make the right cocktail, even though it feels right. There were a few options, but I wanted to keep that player out of the equation until much later (like the season 2 cliffhanger). 

So the rut that I fight is against relying on the repetitive, the mundane and the creation based on existing paths. Now I could hand him an accuracy International AX338, but that is out of character. But it would be a tool that the protective details have access to and we only need to change the ammunition for one with more ‘bang’, an altered bullet and the bolt system would end up seeking refuge in the skull of the shooter. Yes, that might work, but I would need to check some elemental engineering principles (which will take some time). And that is one problem solved, but like the old Greek dramas, I need something with fireworks, like a gift, but not the gift, the wrapping becomes the killer, so it needs to be fun enough so that the reader sees the gift and sees the menace that the gift represents, even as the wrapping will be the killer in the room, yes that might work. 

Still two solutions to find and doing this whilst I fight the rut of the matter is not the greatest setting for any creative mind, but there I am ploughing ahead trying to change the stage, change the setting and change the speed of things in motion. It is what it is. That is the danger of rut too, relying on yourself is dangerous, because what the mind sees as different could merely be a change of perspective and that is an additional danger that every creative mind faces. And in that I am no different than any other creative mind. That too matters (for me at least).

So whilst I try to fight the rut of the game, I might do some gaming in the process of working things out. It always worked in the past.

1 Comment

Filed under Stories

The opportune moment of my IP

There was a side I never, or almost never talked about, merely because it was interacting with other options and therefor it had a slippery side of becoming unpredictable. The second wave of my first IP bundle had an evolutionary stage that went straight into the Metaverse. Now I see that Saudi Arabia (at https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/saudi-arabia-neom-invests-1bn-metaverse) as I see it the Middle East Eye reports ‘Saudi Arabia’s Neom invests $1bn in metaverse’, it could cover my IP as well, so as we see “The company has invested $1bn in 2022 in AI projects that include a metaverse platform, in the hope that it will advance Tonomus’ goal of positioning Neom as the world’s first “cognitive community”” add my monthly $500M solution to that and it becomes a much larger powerhouse and it goes a lot further than making the UAE jealous. The IP as offered to the Saudi Consulate (in Sydney) gives rise to much more than I expected, if these two are united (something I hoped to do in 2024)  this goes a lot further than even I expected in the term I expected things to go and it goes beyond AI or mere Saudi interests. This impacts several nations all with access, making Neom an instant power hub for technology and streaming.  Although originally not part of their design Tonomus would have the ability to be well over 100% more powerful within 2 years. So even as we see “Dubai announced a metaverse plan in July that aims to deliver 40,000 new jobs and $4bn to the city’s economy in five years.” I saw another path that they were not looking at and now Saudi Arabia has the setting for $6,000,000,000 annual within 5 years and a lot of jobs, not that many, but their setting it total, my setting is annual, as such I win, or actually the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wins if my structure is accepted into the whole frame and that number is merely on my side of the equation, their side could spell it to be a lot more for a lot longer because my scope enhances their scope, something I never banked on because it was not part of my design, and there is a secondary part to that too, you see the Metaverse was an optional enhancement to my IP, so there are waves upon waves (as I see it) and that means that the old approach is next to the new approach and I have to giggle to myself, when I see the utter stupidity of Optus, whilst seeing my own innovation, a side that neither Amazon nor google saw, or saw coming enhances my IP even more and should the KSA buy it, the nextgen powerhouses of IT will no longer be in the US, or EU. They will be in the Middle East because it is not merely what Saudi Arabia, or the UAE does. It is what they can achieve together, a side I never considered and I feel decently certain that none of the other players had considered that either.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Science

When one door closes

Yes, that is the stage I find myself in. However I could say when one door closes someone gets to open the window. Yet, even as I am eager to give you that story now, I will await the outcome of Twitter (who blocked my account) and the outcome there will support the article. Which is nice because it makes for an entertaining story. It did however make me wonder on a few parts. You see AI does not exist. It is machine learning and deeper learning and that is an issue for the following reasons.

Deep learning requires large amounts of data. Furthermore, the more powerful and accurate models will need more parameters, which, in turn, require more data. Once trained, deep learning models become inflexible and cannot handle multitasking.

This leads to: 

Massive Data Requirement. As deep learning systems learn gradually, massive volumes of data are necessary to train them. This gives us a rather large setting, as people are more complex, it will require more data to train them and the educational result is as many say an inflexible setting. I personally blame the absence of shallow circuits, but what do I know? There is also the larger issue of paraphrasing. There is an old joke. The joke goes “Why can a program like SAP never succeed?” “Because it is about a stupid person with stress, anxiety and pain” until someone teaches that system that SAP is also a medical term for Stress, Anxiety and Pain” and until we understand that ‘sap’ in the urban dictionary as a stupid person, or a foolish and gullible person the joke falls flat. 

And that gets me to my setting (I could not wait that long). The actor John Barrowman hinted that he will be in the new Game of Thrones series (House of the Dragon), he did this by showing an image of the flag of House Stark. 

I could not resist and asked him whether we will see his head on a pike and THAT got thrown from Twitter (or taken from the throne of Twitter). Yet ANYONE who followed Game of Thrones will know that Sean Bean’s head was placed on a pike at the end of season 1, as such I thought it was funny and when you think if it, it is. But that got me banned. So was this John Barrowman who felt threatened? I doubt that, but I cannot tell because the reason of why this tweet caused the block is currently unknown. If it is machine learning and deeper learning we see its failure. Putting ones head on a pike could be threatening behaviour, but it came from a previous tweet and the investigator didn’t get it, the system didn’t get it or the actor didn’t do his homework. I leave it up to you to figure it out. Optionally my sense of humour sucks, that to is an option. But if you see the emoji’s after the text you could figure it out. 

High Processing Power. Another issue with deep learning is that it demands a lot of computational power. This is another side. With each iteration of data the demand increases. If you did statistics in the 90’s you would know that CLUSTER analyses had a few setbacks, the memory needs being one of them, it resulted in the creation of QUICKCLUSTER something that could manage a lot more data. So why use the cluster example?

Cluster analyses is a way of grouping cases of data based on the similarity of responses to several variables. There are two types of measure: similarity coefficients and dissimilarity coefficients. And especially in the old days, memory was hard to get and it needs to be done in memory. And here we see the first issue. ‘the similarity of responses to several variables’ and here we determine the variables of response. But in the SAP example, the response is depending on someone with medical knowledge and one with urban knowledge of English, and if these are two different people, the joke quickly falls flat, especially when these two elements do not exchange information. In my example of John Barrowman WE ALL assume that he does his homework (he has done this in so many instances, so why not now), so we are willing to blame the algorithm, but did that algorithm see the image John Barrowman gave us all, does the algorithm know the ins and outs of Game of Thrones? All elements and I would jest (yes, I cannot stop) that these are all elements of dissimilarity, as such 50% of the cluster fails right of the bat and that gets us to…

Struggles With Real-Life Data. Yes, deeper learning struggles with real life data because it is given in the width of the field of observation. For example, if we were to ask a plumber, a butcher and a veterinarian to describe the uterus of any animal we get three very different answers and there is every chance that the three people do not understand the explanation of the other two. A real life example of real life settings and that is before paraphrasing comes into play, it merely makes the water a lot more muddy.

Black Box Problems. And here the plot thickens. You see at the most basic level, “black box” just means that, for deep neural networks, we don’t know how all the individual neurons work together to arrive at the final output. A lot of times it isn’t even clear what any particular neuron is doing on its own. Now I tend to call this: “A precise form of fuzzy logic” and I could be wrong on many counts, but that is how I see it. You see why did deeper learning learn it like this? It is an answer we will not ever get. It becomes too complex and now consider “a black box exists due to bizarre decisions made by intermediate neurons on the way to making the network’s final decision. It’s not just complex, high-dimensional non-linear mathematics; the black box is intrinsically due to non-intuitive intermediate decisions.” There is no right, no wrong. It is how it is and that is how I see what I now face, the person or system just doesn’t get it for whatever reason and a real AI could have seen a few more angles and as it grows it will see all the angles and get the right conclusion faster and faster. A system on machine learning or deeper learning will never get it, it will get more and more wrong because it is adjusted by a person and if that person misses the point the system will miss the point too, like a place like Gamespot, all flawed because a conclusion came based on flawed information. This is why we have no AI, because the elements of shallow circuits and quantum computing are still in their infancy. But salespeople do not care, the term AI sells and they need sales. This is why things go wrong, no one will muzzle the salespeople.

In the end shit happens, that is the setting but the truth of the matter is that too many people embrace AI, a technology that does not exist, they call it AI, but it is a fraction of AI and as such it is flawed, but that s a side they do not want to hear. It is a technology in development. This is what you get when the ‘fake it until you make it’ is in charge. A flaw that evolves into a larger flaw until that system buckles.

But it gave me something to write about, so it is not all a loss, merely that my Twitter peeps will have to do without me for a little while. 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, movies, Science

Let’s dance

That is the setting. Several papers gave it, but I am going to stick to the Guardian for a specific reason. The article (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/08/elon-musk-twitter-deal-legal-consequences) gives us ‘Musk’s withdrawal from Twitter deal sets stage for long court battle’ to be honest, I am not convinced. In my mind Elon Musk needs to win and he SHOULD win. The premise is seen with ““For nearly two months, Mr Musk has sought the data and information necessary to ‘make an independent assessment of the prevalence of fake or spam accounts on Twitter’s platform’,” Musk’s team stated in the letter. “Twitter has failed or refused to provide this information.” The data in question centers on the number of spam accounts on the app, which Twitter has claimed make up about 5% of more than 200m users but Musk believes is higher.” There is the setting. You see, I personally believed it was close to 20%, a friend of mine has data showing it to be well over 40%, he stated close to 50%. This is not speculation. HE HAS DATA! That should be seen as evidence. The trolls in the EU, Russia and China, the click farms progressing the needs of wannabe’s, politicians and fake information spreaders from the Trump elections, the Covid misinformation settings, the Ukraine war. These are not done by one or two farms, this is done by thousands of players all wanting to grab a piece of the revenue pie. Twitter states that it is a mere 10 million people. I disagree, the elements I mentioned makes it well over triple of what Twitter claims. As such they are intentionally setting a fraudulent price to a product that is overpriced and the media knew this, they have had the largest part of that evidence under their own fingers. FoxNews gives us “NBC News Senior Reporter Brian Collins discovered Vladimir Bondarenko and posted about him that, “He’s a blogger from Kiev who really hates the Ukrainian government. He also doesn’t exist, according to Facebook. He’s an invention of a Russian troll farm targeting Ukraine. His face was made by AI.”” Do you really think that such a ploy is used for one account? Russian troll farms have been all over this and they have been over a few other things too. That friend of mine has data going back years. 

And it gets to be worse. You see there are trolls and click farms and the media has done very little to dig into the amount of either version, they have gone out of their way to avoid clear investigation. Even as some research it and some of it remains debatable. One source gives us ‘19.42% of active Twitter accounts are fake or spam: Analysis’ My issue here is that I do not know the source, hence I do not trust the source (whether valid or not). Consider the Twitter claim. 5% at the most, that implies that a mere 10 million are fake. Now consider the elements I mentioned earlier, there is no way that this matches up. Now consider that Twitter deletes a million fake accounts a day and this has been going on for a while. Now consider that we can not find any clear information on how many NEW Twitter accounts were created in 2021 and 2020 (or 2019 and 2018). That is important information, especially if well over 60,000,000 accounts were deleted in 2022. I believe that this shift is large enough for Elon Musk to start the case, when he gets the data from places like Trollrensics he might have enough to bust the Twitter deal. The setting is and always was that Twitter claims that at most 5% of the accounts are fake, I believe it too be a lot higher. I never speculated the numbers that Trollrensics have, but it is my speculation versus THEIR data, as such they win.

I believe that it will prove the case for Elon Musk.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

Rings

We see them, we are confronted with them, we embrace them and we reject them. Yet weirdly enough, for the most we never ignore them. You see the circle is its beginning and end anywhere on the circle. We have accepted this long before we started to set our faith to wedding rings. Yet in the last few days I have been thinking through the ring process. It matter not why it was done, yet that it was done is still important to some degree. As I was considering the stages of pipelines (sales tracks), life cycles (marketing tracks) and circular service level agreements, I suddenly realised (to coin a phrase)  that games and gaming is not set to such a track. It makes sense, and at the same time it does not. A game is like a painting there are no cycles, there is no repetition and weirdly enough I suddenly found a painting that represents my thoughts. The image below is a ring, a cycle. (Unfortunately, I have no idea who made the painting)

But we see a third dimension and optionally a fourth dimension as well. That dimension cannot be seen, but we feel it is there. I reckon that Hogwarts Legacy unleashed a little more than I bargained for. I think it started when I saw the movie Arrival (2016) with Jeremy Renner and Amy Adams. The language shown in the movie started something in me. Not about aliens, that was clear for decades. Do you think that people really look like Dennis Rodman, for real? (LOL). No It is not about the people, it was about the language we were shown. So when you get that we take a sidestep. You might have heard of chainmail, but do you know how the rings are made? 

So as we see the rings, we take another gander towards that alien language, but now we take a sidestep, consider that every sentiment is in a ring, but more than merely sentiment and language, it become aa stage of digital markers as well, like a polyphonic approach to language and sentiment, vocal intonation. You see, we think of games, we think of NPC characters, but the need for NPC characters to become less singular dimensional becomes increasingly important and there lies the rub, you see we think of today’s emotion whilst relying on recording and programming stages that are decades old and something will have to give. 

And even as it (for now) seems impossible and largely overplayed, do you really think that this is far fetched when the PS6 comes and whatever Microsoft (if they still exist) has? We need to be thinking not merely of the games that come out in 2022, we need to think about the games that need to be made with a release date of 2030. And should we come close to the station of some kind of true AI, what we now have does not even come close to what is required and using yesterdays solutions will not cut the butter. As such my mind went wondering on the sound of the voice. If we cannot tell what is truth now, what do you think will happen next year? The only way to beat this is to look at new and innovative ways to find a way to store and retrieve them. The blue painting help me realise that and even if that solution is for now out of reach, the idea that we limit ourselves today on what CAN be done will result in a tomorrow that never comes, but Microsoft will soon learn that lesson the hard way, 50% of that happening is merely 1-2 steps away at present. And suddenly some other parts come to mind, but that is for another day, but I can tell you that it involves a stick (for now).

1 Comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Science