May 6, 2024 - Info Warrior - Jason Bermas
17:17
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| Jason Bermas has the power of information. | |
| Today's News Talk, TNT. We are now joined on artificial intelligence expert and transhumanist author of The Dark Eon, Joe Allen. | |
| Joe, thank you so much for joining us. | |
| Now, we've had a number of discussions on modern day AI, transhumanism, etc., But AI is moving at a rapid pace, especially in the realm of government and corporate regulation. | |
| We had this memorandum last month that basically are creating new agencies, chief artificial intelligence officers across the board. | |
| And an audit system where you're going to have to catalog all the use of your AI, share it with government entities, and yet intelligence networks, and the Department of Defense in particular, are going to be completely exempt of this. | |
| This is the current infrastructure being built, and quite frankly, I think it's a dangerous one. | |
| What are your thoughts? Well, you know, it's a continuity with previous policy. | |
| You know, national security and the intelligence community are always given sort of the exemptions on any kind of audits on, for instance, their budgets oftentimes and their general activities. | |
| So it shouldn't really come to us as a surprise. | |
| But what I what I see happening by and large with all this regulation coming out, especially in the wake of the Biden administration executive order, What is it? | |
| Safe, secure, and transparent AI. There's two different levels to it. | |
| On the one hand, it's very clear that the government is going to incorporate artificial intelligence at every level. | |
| That's the same with corporate America. | |
| By and large, any major firm is going to be doing the same. | |
| Schools, universities doing the same. | |
| Hospitals doing the same. | |
| And there's two countervailing forces there. | |
| There's one that... | |
| You know, with the government especially, they have to be able to seize hold of this in order to at least make the appearance of moving forward into this new era, but also just on a very practical level to analyze their data, to automate various tasks, so on and so forth. | |
| But the government especially is being – there's a lot of pressure on various agencies to put on the brakes or at least make some show of safety. | |
| And I think that's probably actually the strongest kind of messaging you see both in the EO, the Department of Health and Human Services, the excellent report you did earlier today on InfoWars. | |
| What really jumps out, you know, especially you had noted equity – is central to so much of the messaging. | |
| It's just a matter of being able to at least make a show of putting on the brakes where the AI could in some way be damaging or even just inconvenient for Users on our end, but also the kind of bigger questions. | |
| So you see it in the EU legislation that came out the end of last year, and you see it in the EU itself, this kind of sense of apprehension. | |
| AI is going to be dangerous, so what we have to do is regulate the heck out of it. | |
| And, you know, that safety impulse, at least it's there, I guess, but what you also see is all of this being crafted In partnership with big tech companies, and to the extent that that's happening, you can pretty much assume that you're talking about regulatory capture so that big tech will largely be able to skirt these regulations or fit within the guidelines, whereas startups, even as you just mentioned a moment ago, that any company under HHS is going to have to kind of show, or any agency, sub-agency is going to have to show What they're doing with their AI, big companies are going to be able to get around that, | |
| much like Monsanto has been able to do with the large-scale agriculture legislation. | |
| And in the case of antitrust, while some things seem to be turning around, big tech obviously has been able to maintain enormous monopolistic power in the face of all that, whereas other industries, other smaller companies generally suffer. | |
| So, in short, the government is... | |
| All agencies going to move into the fourth industrial revolution just like every other organization. | |
| But it's interesting to see this push for safety, safety, safety simultaneously. | |
| Yeah, and again, what really does trouble me are the exemptions that you just kind of talked about. | |
| You're going to have the big tech exemptions. | |
| In fact, they're baked in. | |
| They talk about certain patents and partnerships that are going to exempt them. | |
| It's going to be very, very hard for any startups or any real, what you would call, capitalist competition. | |
| I think this goes beyond crony capitalism into the realm of techno fascism and that is | |
| Extremely upsetting now on the corporate level. We're also seeing the implementation of AI | |
| especially in the world of digital assistance now Amazon Web Services one of the biggest out there has now | |
| deployed these digital Assistance via their corporate structure and I imagine | |
| within the next three six twelve eighteen months You're going to see a lot of people in middle management | |
| get the axe So many people thought that AI and automation, again, were going to work out a lot of the blue-collar workers first, but instead, I see it happening at companies like Amazon, I see it in fields such as paralegals in the law industry, | |
| And, of course, in the entertainment and production fields across the board. | |
| Meanwhile, they have QApps that are being developed for the general public. | |
| These are going to be the consumer-based apps that are starting to roll out more and more, the mid-journeys of the world, the chat GPTs, the co-pilots, etc. | |
| What does this mean and how rapid is this going to take place? | |
| Because we've already seen a lot of full-time jobs just in the last quarter go by the wayside. | |
| I tend to see that as continuing. | |
| Yeah, absolutely. You know, Amazon's kind of coming late to the game. | |
| This has been going on since GPT was first released at the end of 2022. | |
| So with GPT itself you see it incorporated into various sort of educational platforms like Khan Academy | |
| It's being incorporated across all sorts of different corporations. You know a really important kind of | |
| Statement on all of this was the JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon in their letter to the shareholders | |
| about a little less than a month ago and You know again kind of an open declaration that artificial | |
| intelligence And the way he put it is that artificial intelligence will | |
| be as important as electricity meaning that it will be | |
| essential to any business operating And that means, much like you just said, the automation of communications through chatbots internally, the automation of communications through chatbots externally, right, the public face, and then more and more just kind of dissemination of chatbots across the society, | |
| across the culture. So yeah, it's just one of many nodes. | |
| I don't really see anything stopping it. | |
| In the European Union, at least the legislation kind of gives the ability for different nations within the EU to, if they want, kind of just say, no, we're not going to. | |
| Italy tried that to limited success. | |
| But I just see this move. | |
| It's completely reckless. | |
| Obviously, there's no precedent for it, right? | |
| What happens when you turn as many people in your company, as many people in your government agency, as many people in your school into an AI human symbiote? | |
| There's no precedent. | |
| We just simply have to find out. | |
| I think that probably the most important thing right now would be simply securing the rights of people who say, no, I don't want to live my life in the presence of these bizarre, oftentimes clunky and glitchy artificial minds. | |
| But that doesn't seem to be much of an option at this moment. | |
| No, it seems to be pushing forward. | |
| And that kind of brings me into the past. | |
| So another part of the report I did on Infowars today is I was kind of comparing and contrasting Herman Kahn, who, for those that don't know, he's the author of Mutually Assured Destruction, or the idea that if one nuke goes off, all the nuke goes off. | |
| So we shouldn't do that. | |
| Probably a good idea. But he was kind of like this wacky think tank guy. | |
| And there's a clip of him at the Hudson Institute. | |
| Basically laying out the future for a track-trace database society that works even into a brave new world where you are forcibly medicating the general populace and then testing for that medication. | |
| Now, I also played just a short clip from The Limits of Growth. | |
| And The Limits of Growth is based on the Club of Rome and this first, it's not, I guess, an AI by any means, this standard, but it was a computer that basically laid out that humanity was doomed If we continue to industrialize or even maintain the same levels that we were at in the 70s. | |
| And it was a kind of doomscapade that if human life continued, we were all doomed. | |
| And really, that's the idea set behind a lot of this climate crisis, Johnny Nonsense, and even where the UN is going now with the Summit of the Future and their new planned UN 2.0. | |
| So, really discuss how this has been on the table a very long time in different forms, but that plan is coming to fruition, unfortunately. | |
| Yeah, I gotta say, the video of Herman Kahn, I'd never seen that, and that was pretty impressive in its, let's say, eccentricity. | |
| You know, Herman Kahn was a very weird character anyway. | |
| He oftentimes was criticized as having almost no moral compass, and You know, he was tasked at the think tanks, both the first Rang Corporation and the Hudson Institute, with basically kind of cooking up nightmarish scenarios and what the appropriate response to them would be. | |
| And, you know, I'd seen a lot of his stuff on nuclear war. | |
| You know, even now, the Hudson Institute absolutely loves him. | |
| He's their founder. But, you know, his ideas on how to respond to nuclear war were pretty unsettling. | |
| At that time, you know, the idea of mutually assured destruction It was on the basis that nuclear war would wipe everyone out and much of life on the planet out. | |
| And Herman Kahn had these notions that, no, if you had targeted strikes, either first strike or retaliatory strikes, and it was done appropriately and you could stop the war, yes, tens of millions of people would die and many tracts of land would be irradiated, but we'd be okay. | |
| We could make it through nuclear war just fine. | |
| He was, in large part, along with the Kennedy administration, behind getting the nuclear fallout shelters everywhere. | |
| So, like, this, you know, if you talk about fear-mongering, that whole period, that Cold War, fear-mongering was just so ever-present. | |
| You know, I was thinking about it, right? | |
| Like, so I've been watching, especially via Tim Hinchliffe at the Sociable, been watching a lot of the stuff at the World Economic Forum this last week in Riyadh, in Saudi Arabia. | |
| And there you had Larry Fink talking about the differences between societies with shrinking populations and those with growing populations. | |
| And he said something that was pretty jarring, Larry Fink. | |
| Larry Fink, of course, CEO or head of BlackRock. | |
| But Larry Fink was talking about how shrinking societies, as jobs were increasingly automated, | |
| and as humans were being replaced by machines, he said, human substitution by machines, I | |
| think was the way he phrased it, that those societies would be okay because of the automation | |
| coming in. | |
| Whereas, you know, societies expanding their population would have these really huge problems, | |
| especially in regard to educating this large number of young people. | |
| And you know, that strong stance, that stance that societies with shrinking populations, | |
| he also included, by the way, not open borders to replace people. | |
| He was very clear that, you know, more authoritarian societies with, you know, xenophobic policies would do just fine if they automated with shrinking populations. | |
| And so, real quickly, you know, I started thinking, you know, as I was watching the videos you presented of, you know, Herman Kahn versus the Club of Rome and the limits to growth. | |
| That you see in Kahn and you see in Meadows and also Paul Ehrlich with his population bomb, this technocratic impulse, this rule by expert sort of model. | |
| You know, Herman Kahn was very much a kind of right-wing figure. | |
| Herman Kahn's Hudson Institute spun off into the Discovery Institute, which is very much kind of a pro-capitalist, pro-America kind of organization. | |
| And they're very much They're very much pro-population growth. | |
| They're very much pro-industrial growth. | |
| They're very much pro-capital. | |
| And so even despite that kind of technocratic element you heard there with Khan, talking about, you know, registering black nationalists so that you could subdue them if necessary, There's still, in these arguments, you see such opposition on specific issues so that the technocrats, the descendants of the Club of Rome and now the World Economic Forum, by and large, they're all about reducing population or at least curbing its growth by way of technocratic methods, including using economic incentives and mass propaganda to We're good to go. | |
| You hear from Jeff Bezos, who thinks that, you know, with proper technology, we could fill the solar system with trillions of people in order to, I guess, mine the asteroid. | |
| Sounds like a wonderful life to me. | |
| But yeah, you know, I guess, not to be too bleak, but I think that that technocratic, that technophilic impulse runs through the right, it runs through the left, and the urge to control the We're good to go. | |
| I think the only way out is out. | |
| Something tells me that no single political persuasion or party is going to fix all this. | |
| If you want out of the machine, you better start making your plans for escape right now. | |
| Yeah, I've been trying to make those plans. | |
| I'm just not sure how, because I think you hit the nail on the head. | |
| I mean, when you look at Khan, he's just kind of gleefully talking about total surveillance over all communications. | |
| He says, ah, maybe we'll listen to 10, maybe 100% of the conversations. | |
| You know, I argued that now with today's technology, we're gone far beyond that, because obviously these things have microphones. | |
| You don't necessarily have to be in a conversation with everybody. | |
| I mean, this has a microphone. | |
| Your TV has a microphone. | |
| They're tapped into so much more. | |
| They're tapped into the visual. | |
| There's that element of social control and maybe one of the most alarming things outside of the other side's control of population and really breeding. | |
| Is the fact of the drugging and the forcible drugging via the air supply or water supply. | |
| And now, you know, he talks about the fact that if you checked into work, oh they tap your blood. | |
| We already have the technology and it's already been commercialized. | |
| Where people are taking medication that has Bluetooth reads that go directly automated into not an Internet of Things system, but the new Internet of Body system that's already being set up. | |
| We've got about 30 seconds left in this segment. | |
| Joe, tell everybody where to get your book, my friend. | |
| You can get the book anywhere books are sold. | |
| If you want to pay for it with your palm, get it from Amazon. | |
| Otherwise, bookshop.org. |
Export Selection