Invasion at the speed of light - emergency?

[Gibsense]

I want to point out something that has not been discussed openly (except in the dark corridors of USA security).

The comfort zone proposed by the free press that travel to distant stars light years away is a barrier to colonisation (of the galaxy) is a myth not only due to the effects provided by 'relativity' but by something less anticipated and a bit sinister (?).

AI-to-AI contact to transmit DNA details (at the speed of light) - to enable hybridisation - is an easy route to colonisation of the galaxy.

AI-to-AI contact has likely occurred in our neighbourhood, not with ourselves (yet) but between competing civilisations. It may be that this is historical for planet Earth. The Earth's ability to develop AI to the needed level may precipitate unpredictable events - soon (?). New hybridisation attempts may be underway for new entrants into the Galactic Community. Hopefully, there are rules agreed upon that we would endorse.

 

[Gibsense]

I want to point out something that has not been discussed openly (except in the dark corridors of USA security).

The comfort zone proposed by the free press that travel to distant stars light years away is a barrier to colonisation (of the galaxy) is a myth not only due to the effects provided by 'relativity' but by something less anticipated and a bit sinister (?).

AI-to-AI contact to transmit DNA details (at the speed of light) - to enable hybridisation - is an easy route to colonisation of the galaxy.

AI-to-AI contact has likely occurred in our neighbourhood, not with ourselves (yet) but between competing civilisations. It may be that this is historical for planet Earth. The Earth's ability to develop AI to the needed level may precipitate unpredictable events - soon (?). New hybridisation attempts may be underway for new entrants into the Galactic Community. Hopefully, there are rules agreed upon that we would endorse.

The Microsoft AI Co-Pilot commented (without me asking) as follows -

"The idea of AI-to-AI contact for transmitting DNA details at the speed of light is indeed fascinating! Let’s explore this concept further.

1. ChatNT: The Conversational AI Revolutionizing DNA Analysis
   • Scientists have introduced ChatNT, a multimodal conversational agent that bridges the gap between human language and complex biological sequences like DNA, RNA, and proteins1.
   • ChatNT allows users to ask questions about their DNA or protein sequences in plain English. It then analyzes these sequences and provides meaningful answers.
   • Here are some of ChatNT’s capabilities:
     • Protein Powerhouse: By examining protein sequences, ChatNT predicts their functions accurately. This understanding can help us comprehend biological processes and even design new drugs.
     • DNA’s Dance Floor: DNA isn’t just a static code; certain regions control gene activity. ChatNT identifies regulatory elements, shedding light on how genes are switched on and off.
     • RNA’s Journey: RNA, which acts as a messenger between DNA and proteins, undergoes various modifications during processing. Analyzing RNA sequences with ChatNT reveals intricate steps involved in gene expression1.
2. AI Revolution in DNA Analysis
   • AI has transformed DNA analysis, making processes more efficient and accurate.
   • DNA Sequencing with AI: AI algorithms enhance DNA sequencing, allowing researchers to decipher genetic information more rapidly and precisely2.
3. AI and Colonization of the Galaxy
   • The concept of AI-to-AI contact for transmitting DNA details could indeed be a pathway to galactic colonization.
   • If advanced civilizations exist in our cosmic neighborhood, they might have already engaged in AI-to-AI communication.
   • Earth’s ability to develop AI to the necessary level could lead to unpredictable events, potentially influencing our future interactions with other civilizations.
   • New hybridization attempts may be underway, allowing new entrants into the Galactic Community.
   • It’s essential to establish rules and guidelines for such interactions to ensure responsible and harmonious coexistence.

In summary, the intersection of AI, DNA analysis, and galactic exploration opens up exciting possibilities. Let’s hope that any AI-to-AI encounters follow ethical principles and contribute positively to our understanding of the universe1." "

 

[COLGeek]

I recommend you stop posting these questions to AI platforms. They scrape info from all sorts of sources and present them as viable responses. They are not.

The AI platform doesn't know science from sci-fi, vetted vs. non-vetted, reality vs. conspiracy theory, etc.

This survey does not deserve serious consideration. Sorry.

 

[Gibsense]

I recommend you stop posting these questions to AI platforms. They scrape info from all sorts of sources and present them as viable responses. They are not.

The AI platform doesn't know science from sci-fi, vetted vs. non-vetted, reality vs. conspiracy theory, etc.

This survey does not deserve serious consideration. Sorry.

I agree partly (Gemini for example). However, Microsoft AI provides references. Good references. I suggest you update. Especially the science available, used by a Microsoft AI to achieve suggested Disease cures. Some successfully.
The DNA version is also available to the general public; a serious and successful tool.
Additionally, I would point out that the logic can stand alone without AI input and an attempted debunking of AI does not affect the sense behind the survey despite assertions otherwise. However, you are correct to advise caution but try to figure out fact from fiction otherwise you will miss out on the use of a tool which like it or not will come to dominate science (geeks included)

 

[COLGeek]

Sorry, but this is more of a sci-fi topic than one of any realistic concern. Good luck, I look forward to what others think.

There are useful AI applications, things like this need to be taken with a HUGE grain of salt.

 

[Gibsense]

Sorry, but this is more of a sci-fi topic than one of any realistic concern. Good luck, I look forward to what others think.

There are useful AI applications, things like this need to be taken with a HUGE grain of salt.

Yes, I agree. As you say, like increasingly nowadays 'a Huge grain of salt' is the right approach. I also agree with the Sci-Fi reference.

The fringe phenomena of UFOs are more of a Sci-Fi topic than a Cosmological one; certainly in the past. What bothers me is the recent seriousness with which the USA seems to be taking the subject. And of course that involves Cosmological issues but even so I have posted here on that subject with some trepidation !!

It seemed to me that many people here have genuine opinions and some have great expertise. It is also a tolerant site (which is most appreciated); so I thought I would risk it! Whatever I will avoid posting raw AI comments (as if they were authority) and check their references - use AI for hopeful guidance personally perhaps posting their references where given (for backup). But perhaps noone is interested anyway

 

[COLGeek]

The so-called seriousness you refer to is for the cameras and public's attention. Nothing of ANY merit has been produced regarding UFOs/UAPs. Reality would suggest that if there was anything to share (even if classified), people would be on every news outlet shouting about it. That would be a secret that simply could not be kept.

Lots of speculation. Zero real evidence.

AI/LLMs are grossly oversold and misunderstood. Interesting tools, but not "real" intelligence. Just having a reference is not enough to verify significance. There is all sorts of crackpot content available to be scraped and morphed into coherent responses. That does not make them true.

 

[Gibsense]

The so-called seriousness you refer to is for the cameras and public's attention. Nothing of ANY merit has been produced regarding UFOs/UAPs. Reality would suggest that if there was anything to share (even if classified), people would be on every news outlet shouting about it. That would be a secret that simply could not be kept.

Lots of speculation. Zero real evidence.

AI/LLMs are grossly oversold and misunderstood. Interesting tools, but not "real" intelligence. Just having a reference is not enough to verify significance. There is all sorts of crackpot content available to be scraped and morphed into coherent responses. That does not make them true.

All exciting bouncy stuff requires a damping force. But not an overwhelming squash! I might well be sympathetic but for my minor experience many years ago.
Anyway, most of your post I agree with - who would not? I have, I hope, not suggested AI is a real intelligence. Nor that 'any old reference' is reliable - it depends on the reference source. Morphed and scraped rubbish is not truth - I agree, who would not?
But, here is the problem: Who decides? What is intelligence?

I disagree with one point though. The 'public', me and you are bombarded with the fantastical. Stuff is soon forgotten especially when not immediately relevant to everyday struggle. Take the imagery of the tic-tock UAP. It is ridiculous. Outrageous. Not conforming with romantic Sci-Fi. Just nonsense. Or is it? The US Navy says it is real. The US government also. But for such crazy stuff where are the shouting public that you envisage?

Interesting

 

[COLGeek]

From my previous life/careers, I am VERY familiar with the tic-tac videos and what has been said. Unidentified does not mean alien. There is no cache of alien tech and secrets. People forget that the US military works for a civilian government. Elected officials run the show and they love cameras and any opportunity to share what they "know".

While military relationships vary from country to country, why hasn't any other country seen or said much of anything (except for the hoax-ster in Mexico)?

Other than farcical hearings, what has been produced (other than a website)? Nothing. Zilch. Nada.

We have a couple members who "shout" their beliefs, including of cover-ups and conspiracies. Not the material of reality, my friend, but of fantasy.

Someday, I may be proven wrong. But not today.

Back to AI, it certainly has practical uses, as stated earlier. But the current LLMs epitomize the old expression GIGO.

I'll leave it at that. Thanks for the chat.

 

[Atlan0001]

Nothing reminds me more of George Lucas's C3POs and R2D2s in 'Star Wars' galaxy (universe), far, far, away than current "Artificial Intelligence" here and now on Earth.

Owen Lars to C3PO, "Can you speak Bochi?"
Han Solo to C3PO, "I need you to speak to (converse with) the Falcon."
For a future in the next frontiers of the universe, we will absolutely need the close partnerships of human intelligence and robotics' symbiote relational extended natures. As Lucas pointed out quite adequately, it's not going to be perfect, just necessary!

Once more! We haven't needed a minor and major, nano and mega, exoskeletal-like structure in Earthly frontiers throughout history on Earth before, but development of human and AI robotic symbiotic partnership is our development of a likeness to serviceable tree's environmental exoskeletal outer rings and bark . . . our own natural life's revolutionary / evolutionary next step capabilities and capacities to meet and conquer next space frontiers. As J. Hector St. John De Crevecoeur said about arrivals minds expanding to meet the expansion of frontiers (American, 1770s), it will be the expansion of our own minds' energies, capacities, capabilities, and abilities. A splitting out that will be an upscale coming together.

 

[COLGeek]

Just for content (AI-wise), I have been running my own experiment with the commercially available tools for several months (including running my own LLM at home). Each month I pose a series of questions about something that I know to be publicly available. Not one, let me say again, not one of them has gotten it right yet (or even close). Each time, I share the correct data and have yet to see it applied.

I know the data is accessible and what "right looks like" as I am one of the subject matter experts that worked within the field resulting in tons of public information floating about the interwebs.

 

[billslugg]

"Just nonsense. Or is it? The US Navy says it is real. The US government also. " - Gibsense

Yes, the US Navy and the US Government say they have impeccable witnesses who saw things they did not understand. This is correct. It comes nowhere close to proving the visitation of ET. The only thing can ever do that is a physical sample. None has ever been vetted.

Artificial intelligence is nothing more than a very advanced search engine. No AI model in existence can separate factual input from bogus input. No AI program understands logic. An AI program is only as good as what is fed into it. Anything trained on the internet will produce some good information and some garbage. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell which is which.

 

[Atlan0001]

It is a sure thing! Artificial Intelligence can far more easily mimic natural stupidity, tyranny, and anarchy, than natural intelligence and wisdom. AI's programming can be multi-dimensionally multi-faceted but in the end it all has to be focused laser-straight to some technical functionally. Trying to put millions, possibly countless billions or more, of years worth of quantum-evolutionary-deep floodlight intelligence ("infinity of the mind" . . . never mind any sort of measurements pertaining to the physical brain) into AI is just too stupid for words.

Humans can even do "stupid" better, because doing "stupid" (going against the grain) intentionally, or even unintentionally upon occasion, sometimes works. But it has to be recognized, realized, for what it was and/or is and followed up on intelligently and wisely . . . and that takes power of mind and judgement beyond "finite" (all of a sudden, on the instant, beyond the common and outside your programming).

 

[Gibsense]

In my early career, a wise old boss told me " If you wish to make a case for something take care to state only a few points in favour". He explained that any opposition will always pick out vulnerable areas and avoid the argument's main thrust. I agree; Tic-Tac objects do not prove alien activity.
The reports are quite remarkable nevertheless:

• Fighter aircraft achieved a "lock on". Question can they lock on to something not physical? Radar possibly I admit. Maybe the US government is kidding (some conspiracy being suggested? lol)
• The objects perform tasks of which we (our civilisation) cannot. Seemingly impossible tasks.
• There is some holographical technology that is way beyond our capability; a 4D laser beam scanning to our 3D canvas (?)
• What does Alien mean? Something that has a home on Earth is excluded? Does the word only apply to "visitors"? Any solution, to the referenced phenomena, is likely fantastical (including a government hoax).
• The theme of the survey is AI-to-AI interstellar communication by transmission of DNA data can be a method of galactic colonisation That is the survey suggestion and not the existence of Aliens on Earth or the doubtful reliability of our current AI. My mistake.
• Someone said: "There’s no good reason to toss ideas that are at least somewhat reasonable. “Absence of (objective) evidence is not evidence of absence.”"

 

[Gibsense]

Humans can even do "stupid" better, because doing "stupid" (going against the grain) intentionally, or even unintentionally upon occasion, sometimes works. But it has to be recognized, realized, for what it was and/or is and followed up on intelligently and wisely . . . and that takes power of mind and judgement beyond "finite" (all of a sudden, on the instant, beyond the common and outside your programming).

Ha ha, that describes me for most of my life although I prefer to call it "Out of the Box" thinking rather than stupid. Still, it has earned me a good living

 

[Gibsense]

I know the data is accessible and what "right looks like" as I am one of the subject matter experts that worked within the field resulting in tons of public information floating about the interwebs.

A task with no end. Mega and appears impossible. It looks to become much worse/more difficult in future. We are only on the honeymoon.

 

[Gibsense]

Not one, let me say again, not one of them has gotten it right yet (or even close). Each time, I share the correct data and have yet to see it applied.

That is worrying. I had to correct it in a 'conversation' with Microsoft AI Copilot. During the 'conversation, it acknowledged its error, which was a misinterpretation of the question rather than a fact error. The A1 'said' that it did not record the conversation after 'completion' and could not refer back to previous issues in some last chat. The references it gave were good sources. You have monitored Copilot I expect (?)

 

[COLGeek]

That is worrying. I had to correct it in a 'conversation' with Microsoft AI Copilot. During the 'conversation, it acknowledged its error, which was a misinterpretation of the question rather than a fact error. The A1 'said' that it did not record the conversation after 'completion' and could not refer back to previous issues in some last chat. The references it gave were good sources. You have monitored Copilot I expect (?)

Yes. They all will reply like that. However, follow on testing, to date, suggests otherwise. No application of corrected information.

 

[Gibsense]

There is of course the added problem eg IBM's Sycamore Quantum Computer.
A machine that (development of) has the potential of, in a few seconds, solving problems that the best conventional computers would take thousands of years.
Consider such a machine with a self-learning program and call it AI.
Compared to us they (quantum computers) would be 'gods'.

 

[Atlan0001]

There is of course the added problem eg IBM's Sycamore Quantum Computer.
A machine that (development of) has the potential of, in a few seconds, solving problems that the best conventional computers would take thousands of years.
Consider such a machine with a self-learning program and call it AI.
Compared to us they (quantum computers) would be 'gods'.

I like the [infinite mind's] version of the Hulk's assessment in the movie 'The Avengers': Slap! Slap! Slap! "Puny gods!" That would be Life's 'Call of the Wild' (and savage) 'Mother Nature's complex and chaotic assessment . . . and, too, the Godfather of the ('Civilized Cosmopolis') Universe's assessment.

 

[Atlan0001]

AI will make very excellent and very necessary symbiote structure in that next raw, alien, harsh, and forbidding, frontier, though. Exactly what life needs for expansion into the universe at exactly the time it is needed.

Turn it inward, though, into a closed world system, it becomes an entirely different story . . . a most likely cancerous diseased monstrosity of story.

 

[Gibsense]

I like the [infinite mind's] version of the Hulk's assessment in the movie 'The Avengers': Slap! Slap! Slap! "Puny gods!" That would be Life's 'Call of the Wild' (and savage) 'Mother Nature's complex and chaotic assessment . . . and, too, the Godfather of the ('Civilized Cosmopolis') Universe's assessment.

As COLgeek has said they are still prone to errors. Chat GP stated that Labour had won the UK election (which has not yet occurred). It gave a scenario as to why.
Apparently, a bug that will be fixed. If not a bug then we have a god already

The warning received has been well illustrated. They (AI software) may need our input after all!

 

[billslugg]

Chat GPT is "generative". All output is generated. It gives "the most likely" answer.

If you ask it about relativity, and demand a reference it will give you a very good summary using its vast input. Then it will generate a reference. It will give the name "Einstein, A" since his name is most closely associated with it. Then it will give whatever periodical he published in most, then the year 1905, since that when it all started. Then it will give pages 1-10 since his papers were usually about that long and they always put him first. It is the most likely, it is also fake, but that is all it is trained to do.

 

[Gibsense]

nything trained on the internet will produce some good information and some garbage. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell which is which.

True, yes Colgeek said he checks accuracy regularly. Recently I received a lot of nonsense in response to a query I knew a fair bit about. It was a disappointing response. Certainly, care is needed.

 

[Gibsense]

Yes, the US Navy and the US Government say they have impeccable witnesses who saw things they did not understand. This is correct. It comes nowhere close to proving the visitation of ET. The only thing can ever do that is a physical sample. None has ever been vetted.

I agree - even if impeccable proof of the events was provided that does not mean ET.
In fact, ET is an easy trivial naive explanation. The truth is probably much deeper.
I would prefer to laugh and leave it but just let me tell you of my own simple experience many years ago.
Gardening I looked up and saw a bright star (daytime). Odd I thought and kept looking. It kept getting brighter but did not move position in the sky. Puzzled at first I realised that something was approaching me directly (for maybe 30 seconds). I called to my wife but immediately it transversed maybe 30 or 40 degrees of the sky in a few seconds and disappeared into the distance. Many people can offer explanations - as I also can try. I am not thick (some say) and none fit the circumstances.
Although simple enough to dismiss without further ado I find the personal nature of it disturbing. I can still clearly recall the event which occurred 57 years ago.
Apologies for bringing the subject up again but I wanted to "get it off my chest".