While I have some sympathy for this perspective, what I have learned after decades in computer technology that the output of a computer model is generally little more than a reflection of the modeler — human behavior over the short term is wildly unpredictable. For me, someone trying to sell me on some proposition by claiming “the comput…
While I have some sympathy for this perspective, what I have learned after decades in computer technology that the output of a computer model is generally little more than a reflection of the modeler — human behavior over the short term is wildly unpredictable. For me, someone trying to sell me on some proposition by claiming “the computer said it” is reason for suspicion, similar to claiming to have read the entrails of a chicken. Sometimes the best human intuition is led astray by some flaky computer model.
Generally would agree with your sentiments. However, I invite you to dig into Armstrong's model and it's shocking levels of accuracy forecasting geopolitical and especially economic events. It has been so accurate that the CIA demanded he surrender the model to the USG, and he was in prison for declining to give up his ownership. That said, as a former military intel officer I consider his model as a "source" ( although I persona;;y rate it A-1 in my estimation) BUT it is only 1 source for considering what may be happening in our increasingly unstable and unpredictable world! Good luck to us all as events in 2024 are visibly spinning out of control and seem to be dragging us into global war.
I've followed Armstrong for years (long before I even knew that he was imprisoned for refusing to give up his IT) and I concur with what you say. I take his forecasts quite seriously.
"AI has no concept of human emotions & their timing, and effects of time on them. AI is looking at the situation in a 'flat' perspective that misses SO much it always will fail. "
I do think Armstrong's computer has some valuable insight, and I generally like him. But I do agree that computers don't necessarily take emotions into account.
It is dificult to wrap one's head around the fact that all the bad things that have happened since 3/11/2020 is due to the SARS Cov 2 virus which has only been isolated "in silica". I.e. the whole planet has been in a state of panic for years due to a computer generated image.
Exactly! Their original problem is us, so they have Event 201 at Johns Hopkins to figure out how to solve their problem. Then they present us with the computer generated image, and call it a global "problem". Then, after eight months of 24/7 fear porn they get their desired reaction, and roll out the solution to their problem in the form of billions of doses of clot shot death vaxx (which had been produced years in advance).
It’s interesting, just a trip to the grocery store is revealing. I notice that although there are very very few masks in evidence, every once in awhile I see something that astounds me. Last week in a very crowded store the only ones I saw were a young mother with 3 kids, all masked. The youngest kid was maybe 18 months, and was obviously used to wearing a mask because he wasn’t even trying to remove it. All I could do was shake my head.
While I have some sympathy for this perspective, what I have learned after decades in computer technology that the output of a computer model is generally little more than a reflection of the modeler — human behavior over the short term is wildly unpredictable. For me, someone trying to sell me on some proposition by claiming “the computer said it” is reason for suspicion, similar to claiming to have read the entrails of a chicken. Sometimes the best human intuition is led astray by some flaky computer model.
Generally would agree with your sentiments. However, I invite you to dig into Armstrong's model and it's shocking levels of accuracy forecasting geopolitical and especially economic events. It has been so accurate that the CIA demanded he surrender the model to the USG, and he was in prison for declining to give up his ownership. That said, as a former military intel officer I consider his model as a "source" ( although I persona;;y rate it A-1 in my estimation) BUT it is only 1 source for considering what may be happening in our increasingly unstable and unpredictable world! Good luck to us all as events in 2024 are visibly spinning out of control and seem to be dragging us into global war.
I've followed Armstrong for years (long before I even knew that he was imprisoned for refusing to give up his IT) and I concur with what you say. I take his forecasts quite seriously.
I read this today on Twitter:
"AI has no concept of human emotions & their timing, and effects of time on them. AI is looking at the situation in a 'flat' perspective that misses SO much it always will fail. "
I do think Armstrong's computer has some valuable insight, and I generally like him. But I do agree that computers don't necessarily take emotions into account.
Case in point, the false model used to dictate Covid policy.
It is dificult to wrap one's head around the fact that all the bad things that have happened since 3/11/2020 is due to the SARS Cov 2 virus which has only been isolated "in silica". I.e. the whole planet has been in a state of panic for years due to a computer generated image.
No kidding! But then again, their tactic has been never let a good crisis go to waste, after first creating the crisis!
Exactly! Their original problem is us, so they have Event 201 at Johns Hopkins to figure out how to solve their problem. Then they present us with the computer generated image, and call it a global "problem". Then, after eight months of 24/7 fear porn they get their desired reaction, and roll out the solution to their problem in the form of billions of doses of clot shot death vaxx (which had been produced years in advance).
And there are still dimwits out there still buying in to it!
As late as yesterday I saw a guy in his twenties wearing a light blue face diaper. Good grief.
It’s interesting, just a trip to the grocery store is revealing. I notice that although there are very very few masks in evidence, every once in awhile I see something that astounds me. Last week in a very crowded store the only ones I saw were a young mother with 3 kids, all masked. The youngest kid was maybe 18 months, and was obviously used to wearing a mask because he wasn’t even trying to remove it. All I could do was shake my head.
An 18 month old kid? That's parental terrorism.
It’s abuse, in my book.