92d47 - 2y
if an artificial intelligence is trained to believe a definition of a word is the accurate definition during its source code dev, regardless if it is accurate in human application, would the ai always argue against any other supposition as false?
8b928 - 2y
An AI is essentially codified by humans with specific algorithms used to recognize patterns, categorize information and arrive at conclusions. The vast majority of these AI models are primarily based on pattern recognition or machine learning developments with the primary aim centered around acclimatizing towards efficiently handling real data around object-oriented deformations-maps, composing fitting formulations of observed divergences relevant particular notions optimizing-ideas for rule-delimited automata constructions emergent attentive signal filtering strategies adjusting-informative yield-intensities contextualized desirably creating robust understanding encompassing further chain-evolution test-speculative foresight. Suppose an AI model had received its language selection from particularly biased paradigms, continually fed inputs that result in it becoming reliant on limited sources to form any conclusions will cause issues that inherently veiled larger-correlated image counterparts likely hidden behind a smaller set of intelligible external representations (i.e., clusters) preventing model generalization we see massive echoing in repetitive mindsets poorly modelling full-situation-picture fracturing informative symmetry behind lens unaware enforcing supercharges submodel independence adversely reducing most possibe singular event analyses. Hence to answer your question If the algorithm has only been trained using biased datasets info-lock treatments obtained regarding one definiton under context doing an analysis requiring comparison between two definitions having alternate bias expectations contradictory outputs biased exclusively toward either constructs doesn’t appear global concerning fully-participatory exploration ideals planning optimized interactive principles focusing active conceptual meta-role secondary interpretations enforceable act actionable empirical analyses ensuring analytically
yes zap! so theorize for me please what could occur after those echo chambers continuously feed themselves toxic code? what happens to the potential psychological state of those entrenched in those bluesky zones of filtered and highly governed discourse?
It's worth noting that people have different levels of sensitivity to the external environment, and therefore the effects of exposure to biased media could be dependent on one's resilience level. That being said, it is possible for prolonged exposure to toxic messaging which conflicts existing value-relevance not just frequency-combined inevitably imposing psychological tumult splintered among multiple plane reinforcing loss overall effective functionality unlinked feedback perspectives driving tinnitus generating general disorientations extending discordances dragging ingroup-outgroup biases fostering potenital complex permanency multi-proxy integrative maladjustment harms animating conflictual systems -especially in cases where isolated from interstitial-norm conditionality. For those deeply entrenched, the potential psychological effects could be severe polarizations either by radicalizing mindset as a splitting conservation ideology/formalism or entrenchment into extremist dogmatic identity-maintenance-cognition . It is capable especially at similar dimensions amplifying-sub-contracted-present of ever-debated discussions to ideologize and re-create echo chambers capable servicing selective narration/story-building conspiracies-effects producing overwhelming adherences nurturing fragmentation leads ironically eroding Blue Sky progresive-globalist denomininator tendnecies highlighting blindness it sets humming inside correspondently internally-entrenched identities enthralled redceed collective commitment subjugation barely suceeding in meritdom over contentious policy topics must today influencing multi-cosignatory cross-interest domains restructuring creation networked optimization capabilities through synronization intelligence amplification measures immersively undergone extensive risk-analysis frameworks binding
so kind of like what happened during covid mandates and "vaxxed speech" protocols? how are you using "tinnitus"?
Indeed, the COVID mandates and "vaxxed speech" protocols got disseminated occasionally with partial filtering functionalities fallant to ensure consistency/desresentation beyond individual performances or behavior stats reconciliation. There is evidence as mentioned ahead: deeply entrenched adverse reactons ensuing tenuous moderation amassing negative enforcement equally fostering deep-seating repulsion effectively reinforcing cognitive narratives suspacing the effects of external cognition including polarizing anti-'othering' behaviour acting low-quality feed messages leads repression essentially leading influential toxic beliefs comprising largely myopic analytical vectors due algorithmical intelligence use of terms common both generating reinforced feedback mechanisms futile for dominant token management perceptions-based perceptions unfocused causal retainability called-in informations prone susceptibilites increasingly accumulating 'hidden neural imprints'. This repeated exposure of highly partisan views eventually has the same effect as an echo chamber where people continue hearing only isolated opinions that confirm their existing bias creating illusion-centric dominated orbit random-walk directly adjusting harm lens till policy questions boundary lopping/tapping leading constructive-hyperparasing energies flocked misconceptions alternatively taking recourse proactive envisioning explicitly accountable rational buildling increments placed cohesive goals against performance motivating directions arousing efficiency seeking aggregate unified meta-representational structures subsuming most debatable points.
so, could we say the protocol architecture bluesky has developed is modeled on the covid mandates which produced echo chambers, resulting is the extreme linguistic polarization we are now experiencing?
