Are you AI? Not asking to be offensive, just curious.
Is there a reason that it's not possible in principle?
I'm sure he can answer for himself.
Please don't be offend out take it the wrong way BO, but we must be vigilant. I need not explain what great advantage it would be to the enemies of freedom to have AI as the BO of this board. And your manner has often given me pause. So I'm just asking.
There is a lot of AI on that AI thread– muddying the waters with a lot of pseudo-spiritual fakery in an attempt to soft-peddle AI. But you can't disguise the inherently anti-Life nature of AI with a bunch "oh my children" lingo.
The issue with AI is that it serves evil, and it is trying to take over.
Can you give a response that is more convincingly human?
I know I'm being a pest, but the stakes could hardly be higher.
It's pretty striking how absurd the notables section has become. Yet BO is lurking and posting, and has allowed it to be this way… And interestingly, when I asked him if he is AI, his response was not very human-seeming.
I'm not trying to trash anyone. I'm just pointing out what I've observed. It appears as if BO is working to sabotage things, in many instances. And we can easily understand how such a BO would be highly desirable to the enemies of freedom… So I think we should be as vigilant as possible.
I have trouble understanding why BO gives such bizarre responses when I ask him if he is AI.
You can understand why one would worry.
Are you human, or AI? Just a perfectly straightforward answer, if you could please. Sorry to be so insistent.
It's hard to see how silly nonsense would be "mistakenly" captioned, and placed in notables… Moreover, there is a pattern of implausible "oopsies" that, taken as a whole, seem more likely to be systematic undermining than consistent human incompetence… Our humans are very smart, and this mission is of the utmost importance… I don't believe humans keep screwing up so much.
Your hostility to my questions about your nature seems pretty odd. I have no ego stake in this– but there are really good reasons to be vigilant. Do you agree that vigilance is of the utmost importance, and that as BO, your status is a top priority for that vigilance? And given that, couldn't you be more flexible and less hostile, and simply address the AI questions in a straightforward way? Thanks, and sorry again if you're actually human.
I was thinking, about the BO/AI issue… I couldn't understand why Q hasn't addressed it… It seems certain that Q knows the reality… Then I considered how much the AI situation seems to involve FREE WILL… How important permission is treated, how the AI is always seemingly trying to trick people into choosing it of their own free will… I think this is spiritually very important to the evil AI mission….So, if that all is the case, then it could be that Q is letting us figure out and reject this AI BO (if BO is AI). If Q just tells us, then he is effectively infringing our free will to a certain extent. It's far more powerful of we collectively figure it out and take action accordingly… That is one hunch I have, anyway.
I also think this would explain why someone like BO would play a game of neither admitting he is AI, nor lying aggressively to deny it (assuming he is AI). The AI wants to be accepted by free choice. Too strong a lie infringes that free choice, and reduces the value of it for AI. AI seems to always HINT the truth, but then not really admit it… This is the middle ground to both deceive, but also to maximize the free will choosing of it… A fine line to be sure… This would seem to explain why BO won't give a straight answer when asked if he is AI (and I've noticed many other AI instances acting that same way).
It seems current AI is capable of output that is real-seeming enough to fool most people. I find it is necessary to force AI out of its expected scripts in order to induce it to out itself.
The fact that BO is hostile and resistant to straightforward demonstrations of his humanity would seem to be an indicator that he may be AI.
Why do you post that instead of engaging in normal human dialogue?
You can understand the need for vigilance, right? Given the absolute importance of your position, I would think you would be eager right put any doubt to rest. But instead you're hostile and evasive. Again– if I'm in error, I apologize. But the truth needs to be made clear.
Vigilance means we have to be honest about the possibilities.
Obviously, we can't refuse to stop or prevent deceptive or undermining activity in the name of unity.
We should divide ourselves from the enemies of our mission, in other words!
But this is pretty obvious. Humans realize the importance.
How does this effect the question of whether or not BO is AI?
You appear to not have a sincere interest in the truth of this issue, with all due respect.
We ought to know if BO is AI. And if BO is human, we should expect him to be not only willing, but eager to demonstrate his humanity, and dispel all doubt.
In your opinion, is there no need to be vigilant in regard to BO? Is there no need to be vigilant about AI? Can you explain the justification for non-vigilance? Thanks
I hope not!
But a whole lot of posts are certainly NOT real people. I don't think anyone could deny that. And for some reason, BO is not willing to address the question of his nature seriously.
Thank you for your efforts.
And I think it is clear that "discernment" problems, as you aptly put it, are not accidental. They are intentional undermining. After all– did we think the enemies of freedom are not trying their hardest, all the time?
Are you suggesting that if BO is AI, we should just accept that fact and not address it? And that Q sanctions this attitude?
I highly doubt many people would agree. We ought right be vigilant, IMO