Crom’s Crommentary: The Future of AI ‘Should Be of Enormous Concern Because, If You Start with A False Premise, The Likelihood of Coming to a Good Conclusion Is Almost Nil’

Crom’s Crommentary: The Future of AI ‘Should Be of Enormous Concern Because, If You Start with A False Premise, The Likelihood of Coming to a Good Conclusion Is Almost Nil’

Live from Music Row, Monday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. – host Leahy welcomed the original all-star panelist Crom Carmichael to the studio for another edition of Crom’s Crommentary.

CROM CARMICHAEL:

Michael, in order for a person to have wisdom, they have to have understanding. In order for them to have understanding, they have to have knowledge, which means they have to have the facts. And that doesn’t mean that if you have the facts, you’ll necessarily have understanding, and therefore you’ll necessarily have wisdom.

But it does mean that if you don’t have the facts, then you’re not going to have understanding, and therefore you’re not going to have wisdom. There was an interesting long-form article in The Wall Street Journal written by Henry Kissinger, Eric Schmidt, and Daniel Huttonlocker.

Now, everybody knows who Henry Kissinger is. Eric Schmidt used to be the head of Google or Alphabet. That’s the name of the company that owns Google. And Daniel Huttenlocher is a dean at MIT. And the article was about the intellectual revolution that is coming in with AI.

And they were talking specifically about ChatGPT. Now, we kind of made a joke about this because there was a dean at Vanderbilt who has been suspended because she wrote an email using ChatGPT. And then at the bottom of the email, it actually said, this came from ChatGPT, which means the email was generated by a computer, not by her.

But here’s what’s interesting. This article talks about what this form of AI means. And that is that you can ask a question. Now, if you do a DuckDuck Go or Google, Bing, or any of these other kinds of search engines, Bing now, but these other searches, historically, would give you a list of places to go to click on to get information.

They will give you paragraphs with the answer. In other words, they give you the final answer. But the final answer comes from a database that has billions and billions and billions of data points of information. And when they give you the answer, there are no citations.

So if you read a book and you want to know the footnotes, you want to know, where did that come from, you can look at the footnotes and you can see where it came from so that you can determine if you agree that the facts that the knowledge that you’re getting is actually true.

But with AI, there are no citations. And even the machines themselves don’t know exactly where they got what they’re putting in the paragraph, because sometimes it’s synthesized from a whole bunch of different facts. Well, that’s why this push by the Biden administration to control information is so incredibly dangerous.

And that is if AI is going to pull information from only databases that are approved by the government, then you’re going to get government-approved facts, which could very well be lies. But AI doesn’t care. It doesn’t have a moral compass. It doesn’t have a philosophy. It doesn’t study philosophy.

It just goes into its data and spits back, from its perspective, a completely neutral answer, which could very well be wrong. Well, we learned not that long ago that the Biden administration or the government paid Twitter. Actually, I don’t even think it was Biden. I think it was the Trump government, without Trump’s knowledge, was paying Twitter millions of dollars to suppress information that might have been the Biden administration before the midterms, but $3.4 million they paid to Twitter.

And we now know that the big tech firms suppressed information about the Hunter Biden computer. We know that the tech firms have suppressed information about the ineffectiveness, and there is now study after study coming out showing the ineffectiveness of masks to protect people from COVID.

And we now are seeing more and more information about the downside effects of vaccines. So the question is, in the future world of AI, where’s the information going to come from that AI pulls from to give answers?

That is an unknown. The answer is unknown. But it should be of enormous concern because, once again, if you start with a false premise, the likelihood of you coming to a good conclusion is almost nil.

Listen to today’s show highlights, including this Crommentary:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Photo “Man Using Phone” by NordWood Themes.