EDITOR'S NOTE: Would it be a “moral” use of AI to censor “immoral” speech online? To state it in a more direct fashion, is a “human censorship AI” program a viable or advisable type of project to implement? Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum’s founder, says “yes.” Censoring online hate speech and misinformation may seem like a sensible, desirable, or perhaps even an imperative order in a society that values truth and ethics in the transmission of information. The problem with this idea is that both unintentional error and intentional misinformation are human traits. Even something as simple as an advertisement is rife with misinformation (whether it misleads in what it’s saying or not saying). The notion of sanitizing human speech isn’t so far from the idea of sanitizing the human race. And by whose standard should the idea of the “proper human” be constructed? Should it comply with Klaus Schwab's and the WEF’s standards? We’re all for the propagation of truth, the accuracy of information, and the discouragement of biased stupidity in the transmission of ideas. But that’s why humans possess the faculty to think critically. Or have we grown so intellectually passive that we need a machine to think for us, and people like the Klaus Schwabs of the world to program that machine?
Maybe they should just stick to the economy.
Despite the fact that no one asked, the World Economic Forum is now advocating for the merger of human and artificial intelligence systems to censor “hate speech” and “misinformation” online before it is even allowed to be posted.
A report published to the official WEF website ominously warns about the peril of “the dark world of online harms.”
But the globalist body, run by comic book Bond villain Klaus Schwab, has a solution.
They want to merge the ‘best’ aspects of human censorship and AI machine learning algorithms to ensure that people’s feelings don’t get hurt and counter-regime opinions are blacklisted.
“By uniquely combining the power of innovative technology, off-platform intelligence collection and the prowess of subject-matter experts who understand how threat actors operate, scaled detection of online abuse can reach near-perfect precision,” states the article.
After engaging in a whole host of mumbo jumbo, the article concludes by proposing “a new framework: rather than relying on AI to detect at scale and humans to review edge cases, an intelligence-based approach is crucial.”
“By bringing human-curated, multi-language, off-platform intelligence into learning sets, AI will then be able to detect nuanced, novel abuses at scale, before they reach mainstream platforms. Supplementing this smarter automated detection with human expertise to review edge cases and identify false positives and negatives and then feeding those findings back into training sets will allow us to create AI with human intelligence baked in,” the article rambles.
NEW - Klaus Schwab's World Economic Forum proposes to automate censorship of "hate speech" and "disinformation" with AI fed by "subject matter experts."https://t.co/A4JDrh7RaK pic.twitter.com/LYqFhik3Wk
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) August 11, 2022
In other words, your free speech will probably get censored before you’re even able to post it on social media sites. Some are calling it “preemptive censorship.”
Or as the WEF puts it, “Trust and safety teams can stop threats rising online before they reach users.”
No doubt that a central part of such “misinformation” will be strident denunciation of the WEF itself, given that the organization is notorious for blocking its critics on Twitter.
Many would ask why the World Economic Forum, amidst a cost of living crisis, upcoming energy rationing and a global recession, is concerning itself with any of this.
Why don’t they just stick to the economy?
“It’s never a sure bet if this Davos-based elite’s mouthpiece comes up with its outlandish “solutions” and “proposals” as a way to reinforce existing, or introduce new narratives; or just to appear busy and earn its keep from those bankrolling it,” writes Didi Rankovic
“No – it’s not the runaway inflation, energy costs, and even food security in many parts of the world. For how dedicated to globalization the organization is, it’s strangely tone-deaf to what is actually happening around the globe.”
Originally published on Summit News.
