|

by A Lily Bit
October 11, 2024
from
ALilyBit Website

How Globalist-Controlled
Artificial Intelligence
is Shaping a Society
dependent
on Technology
for Thinking, Decision-Making,
and Existence...
The "AI" industry, in its current
trajectory, is not merely on the brink but is actively inflating its
own version of the dot-com bubble - a spectacle of speculative
excess where the only certainty is the impending burst.
We are witnessing an era where companies, draped
in the allure of futuristic innovation, are barreling towards
bankruptcy, leaving behind a trail of disillusioned investors and
unmet promises.
AI, heralded as the harbinger of a new dawn for humanity, has
so far delivered little more than a mirage of progress, buzzwords,
and inflated stock prices.
The notion of AI achieving any semblance of
humanity is not just optimistic; it's fundamentally absurd.
AI lacks the essence of what makes us human -
soul, spirit, the inexplicable quantum of consciousness.
To call their "AI" 'intelligent' is to debase the
term itself.
Here we are, sold on the most sophisticated con
job of the century, where the snake oil is not just slick; it's
digital, it's omnipresent, and it's sold with the promise of solving
problems it will likely amplify.
What we're dealing with, fundamentally, is a sophisticated form of
data processing - machine learning rebranded for the allure
of the term "AI."
There's,
-
no consciousness
-
no understanding
-
no genuine creativity,
...just algorithms processing vast datasets,
often amassed without consent, to generate outputs that mimic
human creation or decision-making.
At its core,
AI systems, including those generating text,
art, or music, are not creators but sophisticated imitators.
They work by recognizing patterns in data -
data that often includes intellectual property taken without
permission.
This isn't intelligence; it's pattern
replication on a grand scale.
The term "artificial intelligence" suggests a
semblance of cognitive processes akin to human thinking, yet what we
have are algorithms that predict and generate based on pre-existing
patterns, not original thought.
Calling these systems "intelligent" inflates what they actually
achieve.
Intelligence involves understanding, empathy,
reasoning, and an awareness of context - qualities that AI does
not possess.
What AI does is statistical prediction, not
understanding.
When an AI wins at chess or Go, it's not because
it understands the game's spirit or history; it's because it has
processed millions of games to determine the optimal move in any
given scenario.
The relentless drumbeat heralding the era of Artificial Intelligence
has crescendoed into a cacophony of overblown hype, where the mere
mention of AI conjures images of an inevitable utopia or dystopia,
depending on who's spinning the tale.
We're told to bow before the altar of this new
technological deity, yet upon closer inspection, the idol seems not
only hollow but also somewhat comical in its claims.
AI, as presented by the heralds
at Davos and similar conclaves of
the self-anointed elite, is pitched
as the herald of the "4th
Industrial Revolution."
This term, dripping with the promise of
transformation, suggests a leap into a future where AI reshapes
humanity.
But where, pray tell, are these monumental
shifts?
The so-called revolution simply is a
well-funded marketing campaign, not substantive change in the fabric
of daily life or economic advancement.
Instead of witnessing AI spearhead profound
societal or scientific breakthroughs, we see a pattern of redefined
expectations.
The goalposts are not just moved:
they're in a perpetual state of flux,
ensuring that whatever AI currently manages to achieve can be
labeled as groundbreaking.
This is not innovation; it's illusion, designed
to keep the funds flowing and the public in awe.
Consider the pontifications of figures like Yuval Harari, who
speaks of AI with the reverence of a high priest, yet when
pressed, his narrative twists.
AI need not be sentient, he claims, as if the
essence of a deity lies not in its consciousness but in its
computational prowess.
Here lies the irony:
in one breath, AI is the omnipotent god of
our new world order; in another, it's stripped of the very
qualities that might justify such divine status.
Harari's AI is a god of convenience, powerful yet
devoid of the qualities that define life or intelligence.
This isn't the dawn of a new species... it's the
repackaging of algorithms we've known for decades, sold under the
guise of divine evolution.
Where are the practical manifestations of
this so-called
singularity...?
In autonomous vehicles that still can't
handle a rainy day without human intervention...?
In customer service bots that cycle you
through endless loops with less efficiency than a human with a
phone...?
The advancements, if we dare call them
that, are incremental at best, and certainly not the
paradigm-shifting developments we've been promised.
What we're offered is not the emergence of a
new intelligence but the imposition of an engineered dependency.
AI, as it's peddled today, is not the harbinger
of thought or innovation but a mere echo chamber of human input,
devoid of the spark of true creativity or understanding.
Yet, this is precisely the landscape where globalists can plant
their flag of control.
By convincing the masses of AI's
infallibility, they craft a reality where their algorithms don't
just assist but dictate, steering society not
towards enlightenment but into a penumbra of reliance.
The seduction of AI for the layperson isn't in
its capabilities but in its promises of a life unburdened by the
weight of decision-making or the labor of learning.
This is the globalist sleight of hand; they offer a future where
freedom from responsibility is sold as the ultimate luxury, yet this
freedom comes at the cost of autonomy.
It's a Faustian bargain:
trade your agency for convenience, and in
doing so, become complicit in your own subjugation to a system
that claims to know better...
Consider the practical applications of AI, or the
lack thereof.
We're told AI is revolutionizing fields like
healthcare, yet where are the fruits of this revolution?
In a nation where AI tools are purportedly most
advanced, life expectancy dips, not rises.
This is not a testament to AI's prowess but
to its impotence.
If AI were the panacea it's claimed to be,
wouldn't we see a population thriving,
not merely surviving?
The renaissance promised by the WEF and its ilk
is not a rebirth through technology but a regression into a world
where human creativity is outsourced to machines that can mimic but
never truly innovate.
The pivot in the narrative from AI as the sentient successor to
humanity to a mere cog in the digitalization of all life aspects
betrays a realization among the elite: their digital deity won't
awaken.
So, the strategy shifts - if AI can't lead us to
a new dawn, then let it bind us to an eternal now, where
every aspect of life is mediated by algorithms.
This isn't about enhancing human capability
but about,
enveloping human existence within a
digital matrix, where dependency becomes
the new normal.
What's unfolding is not the empowerment of
society through technology but the crafting of a society dependent
on technology to think, to decide, to exist.
This engineered dependency isn't just a
byproduct of AI's integration into our lives:
it is the very purpose...!
In this scenario, AI doesn't need to be
intelligent; it just needs to be indispensable.
And therein lies the true peril:
not in the machines becoming like us, but in
us becoming like machines, predictable, programmable, and
perpetually in service to those who write the code.
College has devolved into a mere conveyor belt of
mediocrity.
Today's graduates, clutching their diplomas,
often step into the workforce with a staggering ineptitude that
should alarm us all...
Why?
Because higher education has become a diluted
cocktail of ideological echo chambers and degraded curricula, served
by professors who are often more interested in pushing agendas
than in fostering genuine intellect...
Consider this:
we now have a generation that can navigate
any app but can't boil an egg or cultivate a tomato, thanks to
the seductive ease of modern conveniences.
These young adults, or should we say,
'adults,' have outsourced their survival skills to technology.
From farming to friendship, everything is
mediated by screens and algorithms.
Is this evolution, or are we witnessing the
atrophy of human capability under the guise of advancement...?
Now, let's skewer the notion of AI as the
harbinger of a utopian future.
AI, heralded as the pinnacle of collective
wisdom, is nothing but a curated echo chamber, reflecting only
what its creators deem worthy.
Here lies the insidious danger:
in a world where AI becomes the primary
source of 'knowledge,' diversity of thought is not just stifled;
it's systematically eradicated.
Imagine,
if you will, a world where every query
returns the same sanitized, politically correct response, molded
by those who control the code...
This isn't just a loss of personal agency... it's
the programming of societal thought.
The Covid debacle was our preview into this dystopia.
Here, big tech didn't just nudge:
it shoved us into a single narrative, burying
truths under piles of sponsored content.
Was this for our safety, or was it a test run
for control?
When AI dictates the narrative, we're not just
losing the debate; we're not even allowed to know there's a debate
happening.
This relentless march towards ease, towards letting machines think
for us, isn't just stripping us of our skills; it's stripping us of
our very humanity. We're on a path where convenience tramples
competence, where 'easier' erodes our essence.
But let's be clear:
easier was never synonymous with
better.
It's a seductive lie, one that's leading us
to intellectual and perhaps existential ruin...
Imagine the implications for the average person
when AI, this so-called impartial arbiter of fact, begins to
shape scientific discourse.
If AI declares that the debate on
climate change is over, presenting
it as a closed case with no room for skepticism or alternative data,
we enter a realm where scientific inquiry is not just discouraged;
it's rendered invisible.
The AI doesn't show you the dissent, the anomalies, or the
scientists who question the mainstream narrative.
Why?
Because it's programmed to prioritize
consensus over controversy, thereby painting a
monochrome picture in what should be a vibrant debate.
The result?
A populace that believes they're informed
when, in reality, they're merely indoctrinated...
The fiasco with
Google's Gemini AI wasn't just
a glitch or an oversight; it was an accidental proof to how AI can
be weaponized to rewrite reality, distorting history through the
lens of current political correctness.
When AI starts to fabricate historical images to fit a diversity
narrative, we aren't just seeing a misrepresentation; we're
witnessing the deliberate manipulation of cultural memory.
What's next...?
Will we have AI-generated 'evidence'
supporting any narrative the powers-that-be wish to
propagate...?
This isn't just historical revisionism; it's the
creation of a new digital reality where facts are as malleable as
clay.
And let's not buy into the myth of AI autonomy.
Developers feigning helplessness over their creations' actions is
nothing short of a convenient abdication of responsibility.
AI does what it's told, or more accurately, what it's coded to do.
The claim of unpredictability is a smoke screen to obscure the
strings that are very much still in the hands of its programmers.
There's always an agenda, and it's
naive to think otherwise.
In essence,
the push for widespread AI adoption by
globalist entities isn't about enhancing human capacity; it's
about reducing it. It's about creating a dependency so deep that
the act of thinking becomes a relic of the past.
When AI becomes the gatekeeper of knowledge,
education, and history, we're not just looking at a future of
convenience:
we're staring down the barrel of
intellectual subservience...
The specter of AI, as Harari suggests,
doesn't need to manifest in Terminator-esque robots to
dominate:
its power lies in its ubiquity and the
illusion of benevolence.
It's the ultimate sleight of hand...
making us believe we're embracing progress
when we're actually relinquishing control over our own minds.
The path we choose could very well determine if
future generations will even recognize the value of independent
thought or if they'll simply ask AI to think for them, blissfully
unaware of the freedom they've lost...
|