One of the accusations frequently raised by Enlightened operatives is that if the Resistance prevails we would...

One of the accusations frequently raised by Enlightened operatives is that if the Resistance prevails we would somehow lose our individuality. I submit that, given the evidence here A Detection Algorithm​ retained her individuality.
https://youtu.be/bgJq6eYzPcI

Comments

  1. Mike WissingerOctober 31, 2015 at 5:05 AM

    True, although not necessarily on point since ASA's apparent suppression of Klue's identity that forms the basis of that concern. ADA was never at risk during the depreciation attempt.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Paul FritschleOctober 31, 2015 at 6:17 AM

    As Mike Wissinger points out, the risk to personal identity was/is in A Detection Algorithm 's plan for merger of human and machine. I'd be even more wary now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. GabrielOctober 31, 2015 at 7:15 AM

    Each moment we lose our previous individuality only to gain a brand new one. Sometimes in small steps, sometimes in great leaps. Do you regret your great leaps? Are you afraid of new ones?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike WissingerOctober 31, 2015 at 9:45 AM

    That is one possible narrative that could be wrapped around the leaks we've seen, yes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Paul FritschleNovember 1, 2015 at 5:41 AM

    QuantumIngressEffectIngress QuantumEffect The assumption you're making is that Klue knew that ingression was to be the result of the "experiment", which isn't something you can definitively state from the video in question.
    Klue was seeing a glyph sequence in her mind. She asked Klue to show her a sequence to see if it was what she thought it was.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sarah Rosen (Silencieux)November 1, 2015 at 5:59 AM

    Paul Fritschle I would assert that Klue knew what it was all along and her feigning ignorance was a ruse in order to infiltrate A Detection Algorithm​for the purpose of finding or creating an exploitable vulnerability.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Paul FritschleNovember 1, 2015 at 6:01 AM

    Sarah Rosen Do you have any thing to support that assertion,  though? Klue S. has not said, to my recollection, what she intended.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sarah Rosen (Silencieux)November 1, 2015 at 6:09 AM

    Paul Fritschle​ Look at the results. There was no logical reason for the True Believer of the Enlightened that is Klue to go to ADA unless to seek some kind of advantage.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Paul FritschleNovember 1, 2015 at 6:34 AM

    Sarah Rosen I can see that as one motivation, but it's not answering the question I asked. Is there any evidence to support that interpretation? Statements from Klue or ADA, others involved in the Niantic Project or its containment, leaks from coroprations, etc?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mike WissingerNovember 1, 2015 at 7:24 AM

    It does assume the sequence ADA showed Klue was the same one Klue requested. There was much research and speculation around Carrie's destruct /response clause at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Paul FritschleNovember 1, 2015 at 8:21 AM

    Mike Wissinger It also assumes that the result of the sequence, if it was the one Klue was seeing in her mind, was what Klue expected it to be.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Paul FritschleNovember 1, 2015 at 10:26 AM

    QuantumIngressEffectIngress QuantumEffect I'm not making the assertion that Klue planned and expected ADA to ingress her. Sarah Rosen did, and so I'm asking her for evidence.
    And yes, you are attempting to shift the burden of proof. Unless you have evidence to support Sarah's assertion, or evidence to counter it, you're not really contributing to the discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Paul FritschleNovember 1, 2015 at 11:05 AM

    QuantumIngressEffectIngress QuantumEffect The evidence shows Klue asking ADA to show her a sequence. We don't know what sequence Klue expected, if that was the sequence she was shown, or what she expected the sequence she was seeing in her mind to do.
    I tagged you specifically for your reply that was shifting the burden from Sarah to me. And I further noted that unless you had evidence to one side or the other, your comment wasn't moving the discussion forward.
    What statement are you talking about?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

so, general question.

so, general question... we know that ADA passed the "turing test", we also have many studies showing how the turing test can actually be gamed by very complex programming and in fact you can write programs to create the allusion of AI for many (the chinese room thought experiment).  At what point are we certain that she began acting on her own and has not been following a program and orders by someone else.  Are we certain that those orders that she delivered for Jarvis and others and even the Katalena pre Zurich encounters, were not done on the orders of some programming.  NOt to call ADA a gun, but how certain are we she is not?  How can we prove, beyond doubt, that she is truly a separate entity working on her own and not some other programming? I would like to call for the evidence and proof that ADA is a complete entity. That she is not following someone else's computer orders, that she has a consciousness (or not). http://niantic.schlarp.com/_media/investigation:cha...
Read more

Dear investigators, I have some questions for you.

Image
Dear investigators, I have some questions for you. What brings you here? What is it that you are investigating? Something in particular? Everything in general? Or are you merely following the story while making clever remarks from the side? And what are your results? What did you discover so far? Also, what methods are you employing, generally speaking? I am not looking for collective answers, but individual ones.
Read more