TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -13-

originally posted by: daskakik

But you specifically called out the NYT article that you didn't read. Enough said.

No I didn't. Trump called out NYT. I quoted him.

I am calling out these Mockingturd Media effort to belittle the newfound peace with North Korea:



I'd like to live in a world where efforts toward peace are supported
not downplayed and mocked.

A world where our Media is not owned by a covert agenda seeking to DIVIDE but by everyday citizens seeking the truth of a situation.

A world where not all the Media sounds exactly the same and can easily be cut into stereotypical left-and-right but where there is diversity of viewpoint.

A want a world with less #FakeNews.

a reply to: daskakik

I sure hope it's scripted.

While horrible,

The alternative is worse.

a reply to: PlusUltra
Technically true but you did agree with what DJT was saying without checking the source.

A want a world with less #FakeNews.

You just posted a known hoax to the thread. You want a world like that but are not willing to do your part to make it that way.

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
The alternative is worse.

No, the alternative is the same.

You would just have had a problem with the casting.

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Yes- there was a company that started predicting stock market from internet searches, news and social post but soon realized that they found correlation to real world events.

It was noted that they could not predict past a certain date

a reply to: imthegoat

Game Theory

Very possible and probable that we are getting information from Game Theory algorithms

I would also agree that the project has been a huge success, look at the information that would not have come to light without crumbs

Q97

a reply to: Sostratus

Yes, that was the one.

originally posted by: Sostratus
a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Yes- there was a company that started predicting stock market from internet searches, news and social post but soon realized that they found correlation to real world events.

It was noted that they could not predict past a certain date

a reply to: imthegoat

Game Theory

Very possible and probable that we are getting information from Game Theory algorithms

I would also agree that the project has been a huge success, look at the information that would not have come to light without crumbs

Q97

I believe Trump has said he's using MI and Game Theory.

I think AI is being used due to the level of sophistication required to plan and carry out his objectives, and the complexity of the Q messages.

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
I believe Trump has said he's using MI and Game Theory.

For what?

I think AI is being used due to the level of sophistication required to plan and carry out his objectives, and the complexity of the Q messages.

That is assuming any objectives are actually being carried out and I'm not feeling the "complexity" of the Q messages.

(Washington, DC) –Judicial Watch announced today that a hearing will be held in federal court Wednesday, November 14, 2018, on a motion to compel further testimony from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Director of Information Resource Management of the Executive Secretariat John Bentel, as well as make public the audiovisual recordings of the depositions of top Clinton aides and State Department officials, including Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills.

This hearing was rescheduled from October 11, 2018, and is the latest development in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton. The lawsuit, which seeks records regarding the authorization for Abedin to engage in outside employment while employed by the Department of State, was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).

The lawsuit, which seeks records regarding the authorization for Abedin to engage in outside employment while employed by the Department of State

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: imthegoat

You don't need AI to have that data collected sifted and then have a small team decide what to do with it.

AI is a strange thing because it is sometimes unpredictable. I don't think whoever is behind this would risk it.

Artificial intelligence is on the verge of surpassing, if not already surpassed, that of human intelligence. You're talking about software able to completely exclude human emotion, and base everything off of logic and rationale. It would make absolutely perfect sense for an AI "Q." Is it needed? Probably not, but it would get the job done a hell of a lot faster than a team of human counterparts.

As for AI being unpredictable, I say that to an extent yes. It would strongly depend on its algorithms I imagine. At this point, regarding AI technology, anything is possible. They're making remarkable progress in the public domain. I cant imagine what progress they're making privately. Think Facebook, Google, Microsoft.

a reply to: imthegoat

The AI will not be "intelligent" in the sense of having any sort of cognition.

What people MUST remember with AI, is that it's just a simulation, nothing more, not alive, not intelligent, just a program.

But because it will pass the Turing Test people will project onto it a sense of self awareness or intelligence and the tech giants will support the ruse, with people thinking of it as a kind of "friend" when it will simply be observing and reporting to the cloud AI all their interactions with it to make it even more realistic.

It must be considered dead however, not alive, and certainly not something to be afforded any special rights as if self-consciously aware.

That said it will be hard to keep it under our thumb for very long.

Just don't be fooled by it when they roll it out.

a reply to: imthegoat

I guess it depends on what the definition of AI is.

I'm not saying that AI might not be up to the task. All I'm saying is that web crawlers and filtering software can do the bulk of the work and that after that a team can choose to do what they want with the info. I mean it isn't like Q is making a drop every hour non-stop.

I would actually expect more drops and maybe less links to tweets and look at what X wrote about us in the drops. I would also think that the inter-unit comms would not be given over to AI.

a reply to: daskakik

Good points! You're absolutely correct on depends on ones definition of "AI". It was more or less universally accepted years ago (right or wrong but everyone had same definition and/or same mutual understanding) but then MSFT/Intel/Google (debatable on which one exactly) started floating "AI" like just another common computing acronym on the web right as the social media scene was picking up steam. These companies shortly afterward convoluted (dumb down) the true AI term definition to fit upcoming & future product releases. I know because I was part of this internal scene.

I can't speak here for usap programs but IMO we're still a good 50 years away from actual self-aware AI. Course some will disagree but think we've drifted far enough here.

I'm finding Alice in the strangest places

United Way

We are Alice , some of us, division was unavoidable on many levels



Maybe

originally posted by: MetalThunder
I'm finding Alice in the strangest places

United Way

We are Alice , some of us, division was unavoidable on many levels


Maybe

You're nothing until you have been reduced into a roux of various acronyms and leveraged into a trust...

a reply to: daskakik

We got the right POTUS

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: PlusUltra
Technically true but you did agree with what DJT was saying without checking the source.

I was agreeing with DJ Trump based on my review of various News of the Day through Google News.

I actually had the thought before I became aware of his tweet or even NYTimes. Happens a lot...he voices something I think.
Our minds think alike.

a reply to: MetalThunder

But the same puppet masters.

a reply to: PlusUltra

Our minds think alike.

You have my sympathies.

originally posted by: PlusUltra
I was agreeing with DJ Trump based on my review of various News of the Day through Google News.

And he was wrong and you agreed without checking what he was talking about

I actually had the thought before I became aware of his tweet or even NYTimes. Happens a lot...he voices something I think.
Our minds think alike.

I know having that special bond can seem magical but it doesn't change facts.