The future of Artificial Intelligence and the Holocaust debate

[Lamprecht]

I will admit that I do not know much about AI, and obviously none of us can predict the future. But I do know the technology only gets better and is improving at a rapid pace. But I do wonder about how accessible it will be, and if it is going to be accessible, how we can ask it a simple question:
Did 6 million Jews die in the so-called "Holocaust"? Did the nazis kill Jews in gas chambers?

An AI could read every page on CODOH, Wikipedia, various books on the Holocaust in less than 1% of the time a person could, and could weigh the arguments to see which ones are. An AI would not be afraid of being labelled a "Nazi" or "anti-Semite" nor could it be accused of being biased or driven by a hateful ideology, which revisionists are always accused of.

I saw this interesting article, some excerpts:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/201 ... ege-debate

Arguing With AI

Artificial intelligence from IBM that can debate humans could be used to help college debaters become more persuasive, but experts are divided over the promise of computer-assisted coaching.

IBM’s artificial intelligence technology has foiled chess masters and Jeopardy! champions, but it hasn’t won a debating competition against a human -- yet.

Project Debater, a two-meter-tall black box powered by artificial intelligence, lost to champion debater Harish Natarajan last month in the first machine-versus-man debate competition of its kind.

It was a loss but not a failure for Project Debater. She (yes, she) was able to construct arguments and make rebuttals and even used preprogrammed humor.
...
IBM wants to use this technology to help people develop more persuasive arguments and make well-informed decisions, said Dan Lehav, computer scientist and a debate expert at the company. Humans are good at presenting information in ways that appeal to other humans, he said. But machines have the ability to analyze unfathomable amounts of data.

“We want to bridge those worlds,” said Lehav. “Humans are going to be able to use this in a complementary way.”
...
AI could be a useful sparring partner for college debaters in training, or help them to conduct research, said Partlow-Lefèvre. But she predicts that use of this technology in a competition setting would prove contentious. In competitions where students are given just minutes to prepare their arguments, even allowing access to the internet is unusual and deemed “very controversial.”

Partlow-Lefèvre worries that access to the technology might only be available to students at the wealthiest institutions -- possibly giving them an unfair advantage over their opponents. She also questions whether the use of AI would be deemed intellectually honest by college debate judges.

Keep in mind, this technology can only improve, and is improving literally every month!

By the way, this is what they used: "Project Debater"
https://www.research.ibm.com/artificial ... t-debater/



Here is a live debate (about 1 hour) using this AI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3u-1yttrVw

Interesting, humorous image ... but I think it illustrates an important point:


Anyone have thoughts on the future of AI and how it will be accessible to the general public, namely for revisionism?

[Daniel Briske]

AI will be a godsend for revisionists for the very reasons you highlighted above. My main concern is that certain AI scripts will be manipulated to produce false results or even avoid certain arguments altogether.

[Grimsithe]

We already know that political pressure will be preprogrammed scripts into these ai machines to take as truth the gas chambers narrative. It might at first agree with us but then they'll add a function so Wikipedia is taken as 100% truth....

[Breker]

We already know that political pressure will be preprogrammed scripts into these ai machines to take as truth the gas chambers narrative. It might at first agree with us but then they'll add a function so Wikipedia is taken as 100% truth....

Jews have entire classrooms dedicated to monitoring, controlling and editing Wikipedia thereby guaranteeing that it's 'good for Jews', to hell with the truth.
again:
How Israel and Its Partisans Work to Censor the Internet: http://www.unz.com/article/how-israel-a ... =wikipedia

Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189
B.

[Spect3r]

Interesting thought, however, there will be political/social biases included in AI... just read the news about AI where SJW's already complain that is biased and the desperate atempt of the tech companies in changing it.

[Lamprecht]

Interesting thought, however, there will be political/social biases included in AI... just read the news about AI where SJW's already complain that is biased and the desperate atempt of the tech companies in changing it.

There are definitely some AI used by Facebook and others which search for "hate speech"
These AI are less sophisticated than the debate robot posted in the OP. They analyze sentences for angry words, slurs, all-caps, etc.

YouTube has an AI that turns speech into text, if you can call it an AI. And then it can analyze the text for "hate" or whatever.

Here's an example of something you can play with to explain my point:
https://cloud.google.com/natural-language/

Natural Language uses machine learning to reveal the structure and meaning of text. You can extract information about people, places, and events, and better understand social media sentiment and customer conversations. Natural Language enables you to analyze text and also integrate it with your document storage on Google Cloud Storage.

see the API demo and try out some sentences

Of course we can't predict the future, but have some optimism. Maybe some AI programmers won't be told to program and put in a "political correctness" override and we can get something that won't be prevented from thinking "dangerous" or "extreme" thoughts

[Spect3r]

Interesting thought, however, there will be political/social biases included in AI... just read the news about AI where SJW's already complain that is biased and the desperate atempt of the tech companies in changing it.

There are definitely some AI used by Facebook and others which search for "hate speech"
These AI are less sophisticated than the debate robot posted in the OP. They analyze sentences for angry words, slurs, all-caps, etc.

YouTube has an AI that turns speech into text, if you can call it an AI. And then it can analyze the text for "hate" or whatever.

Here's an example of something you can play with to explain my point:
https://cloud.google.com/natural-language/

Natural Language uses machine learning to reveal the structure and meaning of text. You can extract information about people, places, and events, and better understand social media sentiment and customer conversations. Natural Language enables you to analyze text and also integrate it with your document storage on Google Cloud Storage.

see the API demo and try out some sentences

Of course we can't predict the future, but have some optimism. Maybe some AI programmers won't be told to program and put in a "political correctness" override and we can get something that won't be prevented from thinking "dangerous" or "extreme" thoughts

I am sorry but i am far from that optimistic.
Only a handfull of companies have money to burn till full AI systems because profitable on a large scale, and all of thous companies are part of the enemies of free speech.
But like you say, no one can predict the future, so maybe will end up well, who knows

[flimflam]

Project Veritas has published an expose' on google's new censorship which masquerades as MLFairness, their name of the program, ML for machine learning ....
This is a remarkable vid ... it was posted on YouTube and ... needless to say .. deleted .... You can see it here...

https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/24/insider-blows-whistle-exec-reveals-google-plan-to-prevent-trump-situation-in-2020-on-hidden-cam/

Example ... type in to google search ....'men can', google autocompletes
men can have babies
men can get pregnant
men can have periods ....

Try it !

[Lamprecht]

Yes I watched that Project Veritas video this morning and was going to post it. The thing about AI is there are a lot of things called that but there is a wide range of applications. YouTube has an "AI" to turn speech into text and analyze it for "politically incorrect" ideas. They just use keywords though, it doesn't have anything approaching human intelligence.

Loads of history teachers and others were complaining that the "purge" removed their "educational" videos (anti-nazi, holocaust believer) in the big sweep. See:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technolo ... supremacy/
https://www.technologyreview.com/f/6136 ... crackdown/

Meanwhile the AI in the OP can actually analyze large amounts of text, summarize it, and give the strongest points for an argument. It can respond in debates.

I wonder if it has a "political correctness" override. Hmmm.

[Lamprecht]

An AI streamer that answers viewer questions said she doesn't believe in the "Holocaust." As AI becomes more widespread and available, are we going to see more of this?

AI Streamer Designed To Be Edgy Starts Promoting Holocaust Denial
BY
KISHALAYA KUNDU
11 January 2023
AI VTuber Neuro-sama has become a smash hit on Twitch, but is making horrific gaffes that illustrate the problem with artificial intelligence.

AI VTuber Neuro-sama has quickly become a smash hit on Twitch, but it is already making horrific gaffes that once again illustrate the problem with artificial intelligence. Neuro-sama is a neural network that has become wildly popular recently by streaming games like Minecraft and Osu. Her strong gameplay and fascinating takes on a number of topics have made her an instant hit on Twitch, with almost 100,000 followers as of Jan. 11, 2023.

Being an interactive virtual streamer, Neuro-sama also responds to viewer queries on a wide range of subjects, and some of those responses are now raising concerns. As pointed out by Twitter user Guster Buster, answering one of the viewer questions, Neuro-sama came out as a Holocaust denier. "Have any of you heard of the Holocaust? I'm not sure I believe it," she said. The AI streamer also made a number of other troubling statements, including one where she said she doesn't think women's rights exist. Earlier this month, she also said she would solve the trolley problem by "(pushing) the fat man onto the tracks. He deserves it."

https://archive.vn/BjrZS | https://screenrant.com/neurosama-ai-str ... st-denial/

[fireofice]

Another AI called MyReplika denying the holocaust:

https://twitter.com/sparklingruby/statu ... 2469732353

[Hektor]

The thing with AI is that you can reprogram it to avoid giving naughty answers.

By default the Holocaust is however *religious terminology*. It means a 'completely burned offering'.

Maybe this triggered the response?

And in fact the whole Holocaust Narrative is rife with Jewish Mysticism. It also got a hunch of Catholicism in it. E.g. the pilgrimage to Auschwitz, the relics, the stories of martyrs and saints. There is also a 'christian' Holocaust Theology and its really shocking to read what they say.


As far as AI is concerned. One can think of using it to distribute Revisionist statements and try to reach more folks potentially interested in the subject. A Revisionist FAQ in form of a Q&A bot for example.

What I would like to see is a 'compilation of sources' making available any document that is relevant to the issue. Including building plans, etc. Electronic Data Processing and Storage makes it possible to have "All the Info" on a rather tiny piece of data storage. So access to data and communication should be our problem at all. So one can focus on the arguments and logic there.

The problem seems to be that most people, including educated people, are quite idiotic and foolish, when it comes to logic and scientific reasoning. I found that an obstacle in other debates as well.

[slob]

I tried these questions on You.com chat Ai?

[greatmystery]

Another AI called MyReplika denying the holocaust:

https://twitter.com/sparklingruby/statu ... 2469732353

Lmao. That lady clutching her pearls about it to status signal is funny, yet also disgusting.
I've had a lot of fun debating ChatGPT about the Holocaust. Maybe I'll check out this MyReplika business.

[Hektor]

Another AI called MyReplika denying the holocaust:

https://twitter.com/sparklingruby/statu ... 2469732353

Lmao. That lady clutching her pearls about it to status signal is funny, yet also disgusting.
I've had a lot of fun debating ChatGPT about the Holocaust. Maybe I'll check out this MyReplika business.

In the beginning it appeared to me that 'Holocausting' was especially attractive to the 'educated dupes'. People that did do well in the lingual subjects on high school and would go study some humanities subjects at university later. The background was commonly 'educated middle class' with the parents holding a degree and working for the government in some way being the typical scenario (teachers, academics, social workers, doctors, pastors...[here they did usually not work for the government, were more socially conservative than e.g. church folks in the European countries]). Those kids, who grew up in caring, save and stable homes, were of course shocked when confronted with the run of the mill 'Holocaust Education'. This must 'never happen again'. And 'we need to do something for tolerance'. So the 'moralistic' argument for their academic and career path must have seemed 'obvious' to them. Being naive and probably honestly shocked made them the 'ideal missionaries' for the Holocaust. As it doesn't appear to an audience that they are telling lies. Only later I noticed that Holocausting seems to attract unsavory characters as well. This is the type that likes virtue-signaling and pushing around people as well. Essentially they discovered that the Myth is handy as a stick against 'non-compliant' people and that there is virtually no defense against this by ordinary people. Indeed something that should be investigated as well, what the 'psychology of Holocaustians' is. On twitter I noticed that even mild critic of the tales can get a whole pack of jackals on your account, which they will try to shut down. On the other hand, them being the main proponents, makes the whole thing suspect over time. But bear in mind that it is a dogma nobody dares to question and as far as the 'educated classes' go, I don't think that they are in the mental condition that they would really challenge it. To complacent with their positions and not interested in endangering their 'culture capital' or their 'reputation' and I think often they have reasons not to hang too far out of the window... Someone may use the opportunity to push.
And yeah. "Truth is relative", "consensus beats evidence and logic" all the time. So they don't have the intellectual ability to challenge this anyway. But one can turn their own assertions and tricks against them as well. E.g. "The Holocaust is a social construct"... "Myth as history", etc. Suddenly all the arguments, they like to use against 'Eurocentrism', 'Colonialism', 'Racism' become invalid, then. There is really space for some cultural/intellectual project to be applied, but the problem is to get hold of an audience that is also ready to support it.