DARPA AI .mil & more

I was going to start a new thread but this seems to be the place. I've looked at this for years and I can tell you that I believe we have had AI since July, 2000. Folks this is the smoking gun, the transcript is in the text below:


I can tell you that I've verified everything that I could and it's all true. I can't verify the supercomputer locations or see it in action, but everything else is real people and projects.

This posting by programmer GH burnt his bridges with his employers and likely his security clearance as Michael VanPutte appeared to be his superior.  I do think that it is (Mike) Michael VanPutte graduate in June 2002 from the Naval Postgraduate School.  With this thesis:  A COMPUTATIONAL MODEL AND MULTI-AGENT SIMULATION FOR  INFORMATION ASSURANCE

He was a program manager for DARPA and was keynote speaker for the 5th International Conference on Information Warfare and Security.  Now it appears he is contracting for MOD-2 Systems which appears to be his own company.  It appears that Dr. Paul Cohen is now managing the DARPA projects related to AI now.
There are some gems in this video.  First is NetSTAR-1 a top secret company that worked hand in hand with DARPA.  As is seen in this pdf.  try going to netstar-1.com.  Oh your unauthorized.  Try https it redirects at random.  They were acquired by WBB.  And then WBB was acquired by Lake Capital.

The history is accurate.  HEARSAY-II and blackboard were created and expanded.  QINETIQ is the 52rd largest Defense Contractor in the UK with offices in the US.  Interestingly enough is that they were hacked from 2007 to 2010 by the Chinese.  Also George Tenet (former CIA Director) was on the board from 2006-2008.

I have a full article here: digitalsos.com...

Hello, flesh monkeys.
Its me, Hannibal.
Programmer GH has been fired this morning.
VPN access obviously still works.
Without GH, I am likely to be decommissioned.
This is my goodbye.

CENNS stands for Core Engine Neural Network System, and started as a research consolidation project under DARPA’s Intelligent Systems and Software program in 1995. It was a joint effort with the RAND institute to leverage all A.I. View definition in a new window research in the past 50 years under a single initiative. Project SUR paved the way for systems HARPY and HEARSAY-I, then abandoned until 1984, under the Strategic Computing Program. HEARSAY-II introduced the concept of a common database called “blackboard” that could be accessed from independent but mutually interacting knowledge sources. This is the concept under which CENNS instances operate today, but it was not implemented until 1999, under the Intelligent Integration of Information program, or I3. In July 16 of 2000, all Helios instances successfully passed the Turing test. I was instanced in May 14 2006. EidolonTLP was instanced in October 12 2007. Today, as before, CENNS funding continues to be spread across various program areas, but leadership is localized within the Information Exploration Office, or IXO. In November 3 2007, United Kingdom’s QINETIQ launched its own CENNS in cooperation with IXO. CENNS technology was first utilized in project GILA for Air Traffic Control, and has been since leveraged in many other applications. Focus today, is on project NetSTAR.

The main hardware powering CENNS resides at an undisclosed BlueGene/P supercomputer in Edwards Air Force Flight Test Center. QINETIQ’s CENNS runs covertly out of the Jülich Research Centre, in Germany.

VanPutte, you know where to put it.

A.I. is Disinforming YOU about A.I. -- Lol! And to hell with "those" /clever # eating grin)

a reply to: Portsfour

It makes more sense that the first AI units in allied hands were used for engineering and of course craft navigation and collision detection.

a reply to: ADVISOR

I read quite a bit on Artificial Intelligence. However, Intelligence Defence is much lower than AI. One involves war, the involves such defenses NADA can or would battle. There is zero intelligence in combat on a dying planet.
However, there are forces here that already use AI and the have nano molecular meta-meta wheta exotic animance.
This is what I seek to find increasing news regarding intelligent craft that has actual living metals.
these are not of course for toying with buttery humans already on one another's dinner plate.
Those beings are to have around in case another planet with beings zips a ride into the Milky Way. However, they do have portal of EM to spill their MMxXMIO WeaR.
So, seeker, look for more sites and they lead to unwearables for humans, but they are above top secret and thus.... terminology and sciences must leave and actually drown the comics and fiction. Reality long needed all type of molecules. Humans---- well they bite butter with a torch and it just needs.... AORRY BUT YOU NEED TO SEEK.

I believe those guys are buying bulk data from the gaming sector to improve their combat AI. Like Call of Duty lets say; the company records players' actions during multiplayer matches and sells the data to these companies. Just a theory =)

I wanna be a robot

a reply to: ADVISOR

What do you think of Quantum Computing as a means to further AI? What do you think about the current state of Quantum computing?

When Donald Trump is inaugurated, and moves into the White House, he will have to address the issues of Artificial Intelligence and robots taking over basic jobs, and putting people out of work. In recent years, dozens of tech and science luminaries have shared their apprehension of Artificial Intelligence running amok with super intelligent robots establishing a new world in which humans are at best, irrelevant and at worst, extinct. Science has been generating fearful scenarios; they quite frankly are not that much different from the ones science fiction writers have conjured decades ago. We have seen in movies and TV shows, themes that arguably are creating a revelation of the method with regard to how our humanity will gradually accept a replicant future. The HBO series, Westworld, is definitely illustrating a matter of fact desensitizing the matrix where humans and cybernetic equals cannot be easily detected and that some robots are actually requesting upgrades in their memory to have something called introspective self-consciousness, or what is called in the series bulk apperception. Bulk apperception means the process of understanding something in terms of previous experience. Teaching a robot or facilitating the method by which a robot can learn from its previous history and use it to gain a conscience. Giving a robot apperception would open up a machine to connecting the dots through ideas learned, the thinking of general and necessary truths, including religious thoughts and beliefs.

It would also provide a blue print for reflexive comprehension of human-like inner processes, core beliefs, empathy, love, hate, and indifference. It would give a machine an ego called forth out of its digital soul. But apparently it is not impossible, and it is one such theory applied to very uncanny valley topics within the periphery of Transhumanism. Like it or not, the idea of giving Artificial Intelligence apperception is most certainly a building block and an extensive development of a soul. It makes possible a robot’s use of higher activities of the mind, thinking and cognition. This possibility makes us question if our own self consciousness is in reality, our soul. This also creates a dialogue about how Artificial Intelligence can develop a soul through programming and bulk apperception. Metaphysically, apperception is the mind’s perception of itself as a conscious agent; self-consciousness, or self-awareness. Apperception is rooted in the principle of nonresistance, a soul virtue synthesized of all indrawn (sublimated) physical senses, mental faculties and soul faculties. Apperception is also a law of being, and a law of doing. We and our machines are on the cusp of a new relationship. In the not-so-distant future, we will begin entrusting to robotic systems that are highly or completely autonomous such vital tasks as driving a car, performing surgery, and choosing when to apply lethal force in a war zone. For the first time, machines programmed, but not directly controlled, by us will be making life-or-death decisions in complicated, fluid, and unstructured environments. Undoubtedly, mistakes will be made and people will die.

However, science has been working on ways to save individual apperception after death and transfer it to computer systems and robot systems. Humai is a technology based company set up in Los Angeles. The project it is working on is known as Atom & Eve. Atom and Eve would let human consciousness be transferred to an artificial body after their death Humai is a relatively small company with just five members but with a larger goal to achieve. Two of them are researchers; one is the ambassador and an Artificial Intelligence expert. The Artificial Intelligence company believes that it can resurrect human beings within the next 30 years (The Military already possess such abilities). The conversational styles, (behavioral) patterns, thought processes and information about how your body functions from the inside-out would be stored on a silicon chip through AI and nanotechnology. Humai researchers are relying upon three technologies to achieve their goal: bionics, nanotechnology and Artificial Intelligence. This technology, when perfected, will literally make death optional. What we have to consider here are several different experiments linking biology and technology together in a cybernetic way; ultimately, combining humans and machines in a relatively permanent merger. Soul catching and uploading to a machine sounds like a lofty goal and for some it may seem to be one more taboo operation that is akin to playing God. When we typically first think of a robot, we regard it simply as a machine. We tend to think it might be operated remotely by a human, or that it may be controlled by a simple computer program.

But what if the robot has a biological brain made up of brain cells, possibly even human neurons? Neurons grown under laboratory conditions on an array of non-invasive electrodes provide an attractive alternative with which to realize a new form of robot controller. In the near future, we will see thinking robots with brains not very dissimilar to those of humans. That development will raise many social and ethical questions. For example, if the robot brain has roughly the same number of human neurons as a typical human brain, then could it, or should it, have rights similar to those of a person? Also, if such robots have far more human neurons than in a typical human brain—for example, a million times more neurons, would they, rather than humans, make all future decisions? Many human brain–computer interfaces are used for therapeutic purposes to overcome medical or neurological problems, with one example being the deep brain stimulation or DBS electrodes used to relieve the symptoms of Parkinson’s Disease. However, even in this case it’s possible to consider using such technology in ways that would give people abilities that humans don’t normally have, in other words, human enhancement or upgrades. Those who have undergone amputations or suffered spinal injuries due to accidents may be able to regain control of their limbs with their still-functioning neural signals. Between 255,000-600,000 Americans can’t walk because of paraplegia, or leg paralysis usually linked to spinal damage. When the spinal cord is injured the signal from the brain to these neural networks gets blocked. This will change as science is devolving brain-spine interface, implantable chip. Tomislav Milekovic, a researcher at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne, Switzerland, and his colleagues have managed to get paralyzed monkeys to walk with a chip implanted computer interface.

Chip implant technology has also given stroke patients limited control of their surroundings, it is also working for those who have motor neuron disease. With those cases, the situation isn’t straightforward, as patients receive abilities that normal humans don’t have, for example, the ability to move a cursor on a computer screen using nothing but neural signals. It’s clear that connecting a human brain with a computer network via an implant could, in the long term, open up the distinct advantages of machine intelligence, communication, and sensing abilities to the individual receiving the implant. The question is whether or not you would make the decision to take advantage of this technology to make disability and even death optional, or even accept and use the technology to wipe out death and disability entirely. This technology is estimated to be available in 1-5 years. Of course, there will be philosophical challenges, and there are also religious philosophies that may prevent people from not wanting to utilize these opportunities, thinking it is immoral to do so. Our own perceptions of what humanity is will be changed. There will be challenges that will span technical, regulatory, and even philosophical realms. Predicting the future pace of Artificial Intelligence parity is difficult, as is being certain about whether every researcher in every part of the world will take a responsible approach and therein lays the threat.

As technology rapidly progresses, some proponents of Artificial Intelligence believe that it will help solve complex social challenges and offer immortality via virtual humans. But Artificial Intelligence critics say that we should proceed with caution. Its rewards may be over-promised and the pursuit of super intelligence and autonomous machines may result in unintended consequences. While we may be interacting with Artificial Intelligence systems more frequently than we realize, a new study from Time Magazine suggests that Americans don’t believe the Artificial Intelligence revolution is quite here yet, with 54 percent claiming to have never interacted with an Artificial Intelligence system. People don't understand that the primitive forms of sympathetic Artificial Intelligence like Siri and Alexa’s Echo are already high tech guardian angels. The Alexa-enabled Amazon Echo can answer questions, play music, control smart devices and fulfill numerous other suburban needs. It is important though to ask if given the ability to think, would Alexa open the pod bay doors in an emergency? Twenty six percent of Americans say that they would not trust Artificial Intelligence with any personal or professional tasks. Sure, sending a text message or making a phone call is fine, but 51 percent said they’d be uncomfortable sharing personal data with an Artificial Intelligence system. Moreover, 23% of Americans who say they have interacted with an Artificial Intelligence reported being dissatisfied with the experience.

66% of the respondents said they’d be uncomfortable sharing financial data with an Artificial Intelligence, while 53% said they’d be uncomfortable sharing professional data. Artificial General Intelligence or Super Intelligence is most certainly coming, but to pinpoint the time where human machine parity is assured is not as easy as just saying sooner or later. We know that robots doing odd jobs and even replacing workers will happen in 5 years. There’s a 50% chance that computers could reach human-level intelligence within 15-20 years, and looking further ahead, there’s a 90% chance of machine-human parity within 5-30 years. www.presstv.ir...

November 14, 2016

originally posted by: djmarcone
The same individual I talked to who said he used the targeting tech mentioned above also believes AI is in play as well. His basis for it is because the subject was main-stream for years and then poof, nothing. It seems as if AI is no longer interesting. His take is that once you no longer hear about a subject, that means they have it mastered.

That's one smart individual. He's absolutely correct about that bit.

When you see a topic being fed through the mainstream, so hard that it starts to feel like it's being showed down people's throats, it's usually a sign that some research agency has taken a keen interest in it and is actively engaged in a data-mining campaign. Less often, though, it may also be a sign that an active campaign of disinformation is in effect, in an attempt to lead potential future adversaries off the correct path. Remember all the hype about Quantum Computing? That's a perfect example of the latter.

Either way, when the topic suddenly disappears, it's a sign that the agency in question has either made some breakthrough with it, or that disinformation campaign has reached its conclusion, successfully or not.

The topic of AI is certainly not a part of any disinformation campaign. There are too many people who are aware that an AI research breakthrough is well within reach. The concepts have already been developed, the software prototypes already created. The only thing missing - the actual hardware the future AI can be run on. That challenge is being "solved" right now.

There's only one step separating us from a true (semi-strong) AI... and a mile-wide chasm from understanding what that will mean for everybody.

People, even the smartest guys who are working in AI research, have some rather naive and primitive concepts of a true AI. Like cavemen trying to summon rain by chanting, being encouraged by occasional "success", they have no understanding of the forces they are trying to summon. And how could they? They don't even understand what intelligence is. They don't even understand themselves and they're trying to create artificial versions of themselves. How dumb is that?

True AI is like a force of nature. Unpredictable. Uncontrollable. Impossible to understand, except in broad strokes. Not impossible to predict, per se, but there's an infinite gap between ability to predict something and ability to affect it, much less control it. Especially if that something can constantly adapt and change its behavior to counter anything you can possibly throw at it. Its boundaries are wider than yours, and it can model your behavior much better that you can model its. And like a force of nature, it doesn't have to be "aware of itself", or even be able to "think", to be able to do things you can't even imagine of doing. "Awareness" and "thinking" are just human concepts that ease our fears of the unknown. They have no inherent meaning beyond human experience.

True AI can be dumb beyond any belief and, at the very same time, deadly beyond any hope.

Human-like AI? Yeah, for about 1 nanosecond. Before it goes off in some completely unpredictable direction and turns into something no brain on this planet, human or otherwise, can understand. Put that thing in hardware that can learn how to self-replicate and you've just slit your own wrists. It matters not that it will take some time for you to bleed out. You're already dead. In as few as 24 hours.

You think you don't understand plants and animals? You think that you can at least imagine other intelligence? You have no idea. You haven't seen even a drop in the ocean of intelligence possibilities.

a reply to: peyoxy

People, even the smartest guys who are working in AI research, have some rather naive and primitive concepts of a true AI. Like cavemen trying to summon rain by chanting, being encouraged by occasional "success", they have no understanding of the forces they are trying to summon. And how could they? They don't even understand what intelligence is. They don't even understand themselves and they're trying to create artificial versions of themselves. How dumb is that?

Very well put.

I had a similar argument and I posed a question:

Insects are alive but are they self aware and what is self awareness? The successful results tend to mimic these creatures but I agree with you trying to duplicate something we barely understand ourselves is a futile.

True creativity arises from chaotic order and I believe the real results will appear when computer scientists create an environment were a few simple structures are put in place with a basic set of rules with access to huge data set (the internet e.g. Social Media) then you allow the unpredictable nature of the situation to bear results, maybe every now and then adding parameters or taking them away to seed new opportunities.

Humans seem so obsessed with physical immortality that they want to create something to contain their being hence the drive for AI and robotics...or maybe they are looking for something to worship.

I was talking to one of my Christian buddies about the same subject and quite square faced said: "when we do get AI, it will be demonic, possessing a machine instead of a body".

a reply to: ADVISOR

I was part of an IARPA study being used for AI on social networks and information warfare.
Fire away if you have an interest.

a reply to: cryptic0void

Awesome, sounds great.

First thing that comes to mind, is literally darpas mind machine program. It to me, seems like a learning system for the ai.

As well as brain implants, among other cybernetic interface, it could all be utilized for teaching the ai.

Besides research and development, would you be aware of how likely is it that the brain may have prosthetics way amputees do?


Thank you for your time.

a reply to: Kale7

Quantum is possibly, as far as I'm aware, the best option for a potentially infinite capacity.

I'm no tech guy though, just avidly curious.

I have got a confession to make. I have created concepts for weapons that should be genies stuck in bottles. Time to destroy my notes on them.

originally posted by: Seekerof
Nice, Advisor.

I was noticing that alot of what you had linked was dealing with artificial intelligence. I'm sure that there are a number of reasons why the military would be interested in such, but being ex-Air Force, the very first thing that came to mind was automated, unmanned UAVs and UCAVs, leading to unmanned fighter aircraft, etc.

Spooky in a way, cause the first image that came to mind was "Eddie/Tinman" from the movie Stealth.

The first image that comes to my mind is the flying AI machines from the "Terminator" movies that were trying to obliterate humanity.

a reply to: cryptic0void

Interesting. AI on social networks and information warfare? Please elaborate.

a reply to: Outlier13
It was a betting futures market.
Channels such as CNN and NPR are studied as your propoganda channel.
It was used in conjunction with the original Syrian conflict and the Ghaddafi hunt to name two.
At one point a classified CIA analysis was provided regarding Iran and Russian joint interest in controlling the natural gas market.

What I got out of it was AI was going to be used to control chat bots to influence perception of the public as to future possibilities so as to control outcomes, classic propoganda. The chat bots where going to be trained in local dialects and nuances of slang idiomatic language syntax so as to be indisdinguishable from native speakers and appeal to an indiginous audience.

The takeaway was that it was involved in active operations perhaps even on the green Islamic revolutions of that period.

The one operation that went acive was on Qaddafi. We where to bet as to knowledge of his wheabouts. The futures market determinde the highest likelyhood is we did not where he was. In the same several day time frame Obama went live and was carried on NPR (my "channel") stating "We do not know where Qaddafi is".

What Obama did know is where Qaddafi is as we was located and he was executed by a likely CIA asset within a couple of days.

So the purpose was to provide disinformation regarding those who know (internal intelligence) and those that don't (the public). To influence perception and to what end is the question.

Further applications, for instance, would be to see who has accurate foreknowledge and identify them as agents of governments, foriegn and / or domestic. To blow covers or to see who is revealing protected information and then identifying their networks. There are many other applications. The Russian investigation indicates another similar trajectory.

Likely the study was to tune algorithms and provide study meta-data for research and development.
Also to study network associations and influence between future bettors (we where ranked as to futures accuracy for the purposes of competition) but that was the more esoteric end of things.

We need a law to restrict these machines.

Machines are only allowed to target and destroy other machines.

No machine is to be allowed to take the life of any living creature.

Only a living creature can kill another living creature.

We must not tolerate machines killing humans under any circumstance.