Twitter CEO Elon Musk said during an interview Tuesday night that the government needs to have a plan to physically shut down the power grid in areas that house “heavy duty” artificial intelligence servers in case mankind ever lost control of the AI.
Musk told Fox News host Tucker Carlson that “really heavy duty intelligence” would be concentrated in only a limited number of areas on earth and that it’ll be so concentrated that they can be located from space using their heat signature.
“I’m not suggesting we go and blow up the service centers right now, but there may be some — it may be wise to have some sort of contingency plan where the government’s got an ability to shut down power to these service centers,” he said. “Like you don’t have to blow it up. You can just cut the power.”
When asked at what point it might be time to cut the power, Musk said if humans “lost control of some super AI, like for some reason, like the things that would normally work to do a passive shutdown, like the administrator passwords, if they somehow stop working where we can’t slow down or get out.”
“What’s happening is they’re training the AI to lie,” Musk said. “It’s bad.”
Musk said that AI is either being programmed to lie or to “either comment on some things, not comment on other things, but not to say what the data actually demands that it say.”
Twitter CEO Elon Musk warned during an interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Tuesday that artificial intelligence needs to be regulated or else it could destroy humanity.
Musk said that AI had the potential to be more dangerous than almost anything because “it has the potential of civilizational destruction” and that it could be catastrophic to wait until after something bad has happened before deciding to implement regulations.
Musk said that he helped create ChatGPT because he saw Google racing to control the AI industry without seeming to understand the need for safety and controls.
When asked to give specifics of the danger that AI could pose to humanity, Musk said, “If you have a super-intelligent AI that is capable of writing incredibly well and in a way that is very influential, you know, convincing and then is constantly figuring out what is more convincing to people over time, and then enter social media, for example, Twitter, but also Facebook and others, you know, and potentially manipulates public opinion in a way that is very bad, how would we even know?”
“What’s happening is they’re training the AI to lie,” Musk said. “It’s bad.”
Musk said that AI is either being programmed to lie or to “either comment on some things, not comment on other things, but not to say what the data actually demands that it say.”
When he became the owner of Twitter, Elon Musk pledged to rigorously “adhere to free speech principles.” That pledge is unraveling at lightning speed, and the new boss lighting his newfound $44 billion dollar property on fire in the process.
The Dossier is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
In Case You Missed It:
Over the last couple days, Elon Musk, who came to Twitter promising to be guided by the principle of free speech, has imposed a Great Firewall upon Substack. He has blocked any interactions with any and all Substack posts, and has censored Substack’s account and mentions of Substack on Twitter. He also added a warning label to Substack links.
Click on a link to The Dossier and it will look like this:
Twitter has not released a statement on the matter. In a recent reply to Bret Weinstein, Musk claimed the following:
Substack founder Chris Best replied with the following:
Without sufficient evidence to adjudicate this disagreement, we have no idea who is right and who is wrong here. Nonetheless, it remains clear that Elon Musk is willing to shatter his Potemkin “free speech” principles to resolve disputes. The world can now witness the incredible hypocrisy of a man who claims to care about free speech and open conversation.
Americans have been told a dangerous and uncertain world requires stronger managers and less freedom, but the decline of civil liberties is what started this mess
At the hearing, Pee-Wee’s words of the day were clearly cherry-picked, money, and Elon Musk. Nearly every question asked of Michael Shellenberger and me involved our associations or motives. Florida’s Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said “being a Republican witness certainly casts a cloud over your objectivity” (only a Democratic witness can be trusted), while Dan Goldman tweeted that only someone who signed his version of a loyalty oath — a question about whether or not we “agreed” with Robert Mueller’s two indictments of Russian defendants — can “belong” in the public conversation:
These are behaviors we associated with Republicans in the War on Terror years, when Democrats howled over accusations that John Kerry “looks French.” That the roles have been reversed is old news, but the big question remains: why did this happen?
In the coming days you’re going to see a new release of Twitter Files material, about the creation of a multi-agency working group to address what experts described as vaccine “disinformation and misinformation.”
This cross-platform group looked for people who were just “asking questions,” which they viewed as a rhetorical trick for introducing misinformation. They took aim at people who “framed” ideas like vaccine passports as compulsory or authoritarian, as opposed to emphasizing their utility and necessity, which they interpreted to mean a tendency to more generally negative opinions about vaccines. Moreover, as disclosed last week, they saw a threat in people who wrote about “true stories of vaccine side effects” or “true posts which could fuel hesitancy.”
Most disturbing was a letter to a long list of academics, tech executives, and communications specialists from a staffer for the non-profit Institute for Defense Analysis. It referred to a new type of online influencer, “some of whom enjoy reach commensurate with mass media channels”:
In an age of declining trust in media, government, and institutions, influencers occupy a position of trust and enjoy a perception of authenticity. In addition to the rise of influencers, now-prevalent online crowds have been transformed into a significant force in shaping narratives; they are persistent and can be leveraged to achieve amplification of particular messages in the battle for attention.
“Online crowds have been transformed into a significant force in shaping narratives” is just another way of saying, “independent groups now have politically effective ways to organize,” which the authors clearly saw as a problem in itself.
The digital age has produced an almost involuntary general disrespect for personal boundaries. Probably all of us are guilty of it on some level. We peek, poke, and prod in ways that would have made us ashamed in the pre-Internet years.
We see a more ominous form of it throughout the Twitter Files, where content moderators are forever taking short cuts to judgment by blithely entering the minds of users, to make snap calls about intent. If people transmit true or possibly true stories that conflict with approved narratives, from human rights abuses in the Donbass to first-person accounts of “breakthrough” vaccine cases, these acts are algorithmically detected as intended to deceive and thrown in thoughtcrime baskets: undermining Ukraine, promoting hesitancy, etc.
The campaign against “disinformation” in this way has become the proxy for a war against civil liberties that probably began in 2016, when the reality of Donald Trump winning the Republican nomination first began to spread through the intellectual class. There was a crucial moment in May of that year, when Andrew Sullivan published “Democracies End When They Are Too Democratic.”
“OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it ‘Open’ AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a closed source, maximum-profit company effectively controlled by Microsoft,” Musk tweeted. “Not what I intended at all.”
Elon Musk has launched a new effort to combat woke artificial intelligence, something he considers to be one of the top threats facing mankind.
The Information reported that Musk has approached top “artificial intelligence researchers in recent weeks about forming a new research lab to develop an alternative to ChatGPT,” the first AI tool to hit the mainstream.
The report said Musk believes that ChatGPT is an example of “training AI to be woke.” Musk is recruiting Igor Babuschkin, a top researcher who has worked at Alphabet’s DeepMind AI unit and at OpenAI, to help lead the effort.
Musk has repeatedly criticized ChatGPT and the company that it was created by, which he co-founded, for the direction it has gone.
“The danger of training AI to be woke – in other words, lie – is deadly,” Musk warned shortly after ChatGPT launched and people began noting numerous problems with the tool.
“OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it ‘Open’ AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a closed source, maximum-profit company effectively controlled by Microsoft,” Musk tweeted. “Not what I intended at all.”
Emails from the so-called “Twitter Files” — internal communications shared with Lee Fang at The Intercept as well as other journalists following Elon Musk’s purchase of the social media platform — reveal that the company had knowledge of a U.S. military-linked information operation and did not publicly acknowledge the operation or provide transparency to the general public after the operation was discovered.
That appears to be a clear violation of Twitter’s principles about state-backed information operations as laid out by Twitter’s former head of trust and safety Yoel Roth in 2019. Indeed, Twitter made a point of disclosing the details of accounts, and the content of their tweets, when they were identified as part of government linked information operations, beginning in 2018.
Roth wrote, in a statement of principles that is still published on Twitter’s website:
We believe Twitter has a responsibility to protect the integrity of the public conversation — including through the timely disclosure of information about attempts to manipulate Twitter to influence elections and other civic conversations by foreign or domestic state-backed entities. We believe the public and research community are better informed by transparency.
Fang, in his article published on Tuesday, details how Twitter “whitelisted” — a function that provided accounts with invulnerability to Twitter’s detection mechanisms that might decrease visibility for accounts engaged in spam or abuse — a list of accounts provided by U.S. Central Command in 2017. The accounts engaged in activities including: touting the accuracy of drone strikes in Yemen, promoting U.S. backed militias in Syria, and spreading anti-Iran messages in Iraq.
An official working at CENTCOM promised that the accounts would be labeled as “USG-attributed, Arabic-language accounts tweeting on relevant security issues,” but many of the accounts subsequently deleted these disclosures and concealed their affiliation with the U.S. government after Twitter granted them the special status.
“Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be ‘unsafe,’” Taibbi continued. “They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography.”
Twitter CEO Elon Musk released information through journalist Matt Taibbi Friday afternoon showing that Twitter was working in conjunction with then-Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden’s team, removing tweets that team Biden wanted deleted.
Musk said that he decided to release the information because it was “necessary to restore public trust” in the platform after it censored the New York Post’s bombshell report about Hunter Biden’s laptop just weeks before the 2020 presidential election.
Musk quote retweeted Taibbi’s multi-tweet thread on Twitter, writing: “Here we go!!”
Taibbi began by explaining that the company was “slowly forced to add … tools for controlling speech [that] were designed to combat the likes of spam and financial fraudsters.”
“Slowly, over time, Twitter staff and executives began to find more and more uses for these tools. Outsiders began petitioning the company to manipulate speech as well: first a little, then more often, then constantly,” Taibbi said. “By 2020, requests from connected actors to delete tweets were routine. One executive would write to another: ‘More to review from the Biden team.’ The reply would come back: ‘Handled.’”
How hard could it be for the world’s richest person to have a team of Tesla engineers build a smartphone? They already mount cellular-connected giant iPad-like screens in all Tesla vehicles on the dashboard of vehicles.
Yah but…would Elon have to create his own Play Store in the process? One can dream, can’t one?
There’s been speculation over app stores potentially de-platforming Twitter following new owner Elon Musk’s commitment to free speech. Musk unveiled a simple plan Friday night if Apple or Google decides to boot the social media platform from their stores: build a smartphone. And how hard could that be?
Musk responded to conservative commentator Liz Wheeler, who tweeted: “If Apple & Google boot Twitter from their app stores, @elonmusk should produce his own smartphone. Half the country would happily ditch the biased, snooping iPhone & Android. The man builds rockets to Mars, a silly little smartphone should be easy, right?”
“I certainly hope it does not come to that,” Musk told Wheeler, “but, yes, if there is no other choice, I will make an alternative phone.”
“We are working hard to prepare our new live, nightly prime-time program — SYSTEM UPDATE — which will debut shortly on Rumble. Once launched, it will air every night for one hour, Monday through Friday, at 7 pm ET and will be freely available to everyone. Once the show is concluded, we will move to Locals for an interactive after-show — for our Locals subscribers only — where we will take questions, address ideas, and hear audience feedback.
“For now we are perfecting the show in anticipation of our launch by streaming our live test-run shows on Locals. Last night (Friday night), we focused our monologue on the media’s truly panic-driven and demented meltdown over the possibility that there will be one social media platform on the internet — Twitter — that they cannot censor and control. The monologue examines the underlying motives and drives that cause corporate media employees to panic in the face of free speech, as well as the insidious and potent plan that is being constructed — right out in the open — to destroy any social media platform that refuses to submit to censor orders, the way they did to Parler.
“We believe there is no more urgent issue than the full-scale, multi-pronged attack on free speech on the internet. The censorship regime they are constructing will enable them to propagandize the population without challenge and fully control the flow of information. That is why we are devoting our work and producing our show exclusively on Rumble, a company that we truly believe is committed to preserving free speech and defying censorship pressures not only as a brand but as a cause. Stay tuned for the premiere of our new live SYSTEM UPDATE program here on Rumble. We hope you enjoy this glimpse of the show we are in the final stages of perfecting.
MCViewPoint 
