BACK-END: AI Propaganda for the Elites from the World Economic Forum
The 1% Don't Just Fear the Future. They're Attempting to Shape It to Their Best Interests by Recruiting New Members & Adapting New Technologies Like AI.
It’s a platitude that current conversations about artificial intelligence are wrapped around perceptions of fear, uncertainty and doubt.
As outlined in the August 18th, 2024 The Conversation post, “What is ‘model collapse’? An expert explains the rumours about an impending AI doom,” the heady early days of “AI hype,” when developers were given private audiences with presidents and high ranking government officials, has passed.
It’s given way to the independent, half-assed software development of vast quantity of increasingly dumber AI bots unable to access the actual human interactions and data-sets needed to properly develop skills or do anything useful.
The perception is growing that our future AI focused rulers will not create the all encompassing central authority presented in classic dystopia’s like “1984“ and “Brave New World.”
Our future will instead unfold as the confused, slow motion collapse presented in movies like Terry Gilliam’s 1985 film “Brazil" or the 1979 post apocalyptical action movie “Mad Max.”
Curiously enough, the World Economic Forum (WEF) doesn’t approve of this potential future.
WEF members prefer, and are working towards, a future where AI based technology allows them to remain in control, cull the “useless eaters,” by encouraging us to “own nothing and be happy” and allow them to embrace their glorious future of central planning, amazingly extended lifespans, unparalleled knowledge and access to the “singularity.”
To this end, the WEF has announced a series of online seminars targeted at the international business community and intended to push their propaganda out to potential future funders.
As outlined on the undated WEF promotional page for “Advancements in AI,” the WEF is “pleased to invite you to join us virtually for an expert briefing on Advancements in AI taking place on Wednesday, 11 September at 15:00 CET.”
The invite goes on to note:
Next week, Digital Members will join us for this session where we will explore the latest breakthroughs and innovations shaping the future of artificial intelligence (AI), delving into cutting-edge research, emerging trends and transformative applications across various industries.
From deep learning and natural language processing to robotics and autonomous systems, discover how AI is revolutionizing business models, driving efficiency and unlocking new possibilities.
Industry experts contributing to the forum include:
Babak Hodjat, the co-founder and CEO of San Francisco CA based Sentient Technologies, the “world's most well-funded AI company,” before its dissolution in 2019.
As part of the dissolution, Sentient sold its primary product, a SaaS AI based conversion rate optimization platform to San Francisco CA based Evolv AI, which uses the platform for retail website optimization. Most of Sentient’s other intellectual property was sold to Teaneck, New Jersey based Cognizant Technology Solutions where Hodiat now works as Chief Technology Officer.
Mona Diab, the Director of the Language Technologies Institute at Carnegie Mellon University. Previously to her current posting, Diab was a professor at George Washington University and a research scientist with Facebook AI.
The session will be moderated by Benjamin Larsen, the AI & machine learning project lead and AI governance expert for the WEF.
This well credentialed trio of experts is seemingly sufficient to entice the average corporate mid-level manager wanting to become the next office mover and shaker, to pay for a membership in this illustrious organization.
Curiously enough, all those experts and more are available online for just $25.50 US a month.
The low fee suggests that the seminar is not really an informational session, but instead a recruitment tool.
The low fee also suggests that the real power of the WEF lies in its ability to cast a wide net and cultivate prospective movers and shakers over a long period of time, providing junior members with the opportunities needed to gain experience and move up the food chain into eventual positions of political or corporate leadership.
Once in these positions, they’re used to influence politicians and corporations.
The seminar isn’t their only AI initiative.
It not that there’s anything wrong with the WEF’s financial strategy of targeting middle managers or “young leaders” hoping for a better life, then moving them into roles where they can advocate for WEF positions.
The real problem is the categorization of the WEF as being all powerful.
While the WEF and its minions like to cultivate an aura of omnipotence, they’re not all powerful.
In fact, the WEF is mostly just a distraction.
As outlined in the January 23rd, 2023 Christopher F. Rufo on YouTube post, “Klaus Schwab and the WEF Are Not a Threat—They’re Irrelevant,” the obsession with Klaus Schwab, Davos, and the WEF is misguided, “as they have little real power over life in America. It’s also enervating, as it shifts the locus of control to far-away figures, while constructive action can be taken at home.”
This focus encourages individuals to ignore local activities initiated by WEF acolytes and others in municipal, provincial and federal governments over which citizens have direct control and can influence policy, just like the WEF minions.
We shouldn’t focus on an abstract “big bad,” represented by a silly old man who often wears a funny suit and usually seems to be mostly a cartoon caricature of a real super villain.
He’s not where the action is. He’s just the figurehead of an advertising agency and its transnational acolytes.
But he is not omnipotent. WEF policy pronouncements must be debated and approved locally, or they possess no real power to control the populace.
And local policy pronouncements can certainly be campaigned against, debated and rejected by the people, locally, as part of the standard process of local government.
That’s where most of the WEF acolytes end up after they’ve been integrated into the WEF mindset through seminars and networking opportunities. They end up in local initiatives, pushing WEF positions.
In essence, we don’t need to go to Davos to destroy the cabal. We can do it without leaving our communities simply by continuing to participate in our community and removing their minions.
Curiously enough, the WEF’s embrace of AI serves as an example for why a centralized authority such as the WEF should be in control.
AI based technology is pitched to WEF members as a tool to allow the “elites” to remain in control and will work best only in a controlled centralized environment.
Here’s their logic.
Without centralized authority and sanctions for providing incorrect data, far to many people are intent with corrupting AI applications with fake data or with not sharing their own data.
Some do it for selfish ends. Some are just bad people. Some of them are even scientists.
Therefore, a centralized authority is required to take full advantage of the opportunities provided by the AI revolution to insure the purity of the data and allow the AI application to develop the best solutions.
There are, of course, problems with this approach.
Its easy enough for even the non-scientist to give a fake number, report a fake preference, offer up a fake location or type in a fake email address to receive a free gift or gadget or hide real perceptions.
Besides, no one trusts authority these days. Most of us don’t want our every move tracked, our every purchase filed and our every thought assessed.
Even corporations don’t want to share internal data with their direct competitors. Data is their most important asset and no one want to enable a direct competitor.
Over time, and because of the numerous incentives, AI applications acquire more and more bad data, which creates less useful and far dumber AI applications.
And an awful lot of people who don’t want central control are perfectly OK with this.
This leads inevitably to another problem with AI.
Under the current models, AI capabilities grow exponentially but only if provided with massive computer processing capabilities and almost infinite amounts of useful, accurate and uncorrupted data.
But people who prefer not to provide data on demand or who provide intentionally incorrect data are considered to be a key component of the “broken” societies least likely to be able take advantage of the wonders of the expected AI revolution.
The 2023 Aspen Ideas presentation on “The AI Dilemma,” notes that it’s very hard for AI to function in a “broken” society.
According to the presentation, a “broken” society is a distributed society with multiple, independent zones of control, no authority capable of top-down central planning, a lot of competition and a strong distrust of authority figures in general.
Oddly enough, this state of affairs sounds like the underlying structure of most western nations, including Canada, the UK and the US.
The AI Dilemma also suggests that the independent nodes of control in a distributed “broken” society will:
Either be unable to create the AI utopia, since large amounts of data is corrupted and nothing useful can be created without a centralized AI;
Or else destroy itself from the intense competition between the various nodes of control using AI developed weapons.
Either of the above futures could almost certainly lead to the confused, slow motion collapse presented in movies like Terry Gilliam’s 1985 film “Brazil" or the 1979 post apocalyptical action movie “Mad Max.”
The AI presentation concludes that the only real option to creating an AI based utopia is to work together and centralize everything around a small cadre of informed experts willing to do what’s best for the rest of us.
The WEF agrees with this assessment, but argues that leadership should be centralized about WEF members and their interests.
Will the WEF talk about “bad” data in AI applications during their September 11th seminar on “Advancements in AI.”
Will the WEF discuss its own authoritarian bent and how its embrace of AI provides a rational for authoritarianism?
The only way to find out for sure is to pay your money and take your chances.
Let the buyer beware.