Posted on 01/18/2024 8:54:14 AM PST by bitt
Lol. I was thinking something similar. I’m just suprised a crazed person who has had enough hasn’t at least disrupted him while dining out or speaking at an event.
Elections are like measuring the temperature of a sample by measuring the energy of each molecule in the sample. However, there are other ways of measuring temperature that don’t require that detailed information, and they are the ones actually used.
Many elections don’t provide any information not already known by the polling organizations. If the gap in the polls is large, 10 or 15 percentage points, it is very rare that they are wrong.
Lots of elections are essentially useless. For example, there is no reason for Wyoming and Vermont to hold presidential elections. Each states 3 electoral college votes will go to the Republican and Democratic candidate respectively. In the rare case where they would not, the winning candidate would have won a huge landslide in all the less partisan states.
The uselessness of elections is also recognized in many local races, where one party or the other simply does not run a candidate.
>>After all, they all graduated from places like Stanford and Harvard
Klaus Schwab graduated from ETH Zurich (German: Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich; English: Federal Institute of Technology Zurich).
Gates dropped out of Harvard.
Brin graduated from the University of Maryland, College Park.
“Many elections don’t provide any information not already known by the polling organizations. If the gap in the polls is large, 10 or 15 percentage points, it is very rare that they are wrong.”
That assumes that the polls are honest and competently carried out.
So many polls today are push polls, not so much to measure the actual “temperature” as much as to make you believe what the temperature is.
FPV drones were made for scum like this.
True, but it is probably easier to create an honest poll than an honest election.
You could sample 10,000 names from taxpayer rolls, driver’s licenses, census rolls, etc.. Then have 3 local law enforcement officers contact each person with an official paper questionnaire, verify the person’s identity, and then ensure that the person has privacy in which to fill out and seal the questionnaire before they return it to polling central.
This would be sufficiently accurate, lots cheaper than elections, less open to fraud, and would suffer from the bias that elections only obtain the opinion of the segment of population that votes.
Why doesn’t someone just shoot this Nazi prick?
Just genuinely curious, not advocating anything.
I could care less that he wasn’t stupid enough to actually call for it; the fact that he spun a scenario describing it is enough to convince me - especially in view of his other statements over the years expressing great contempt for us unwashed masses - that this is EXACTLY what he wants, and is advocating for out of range of cameras and microphones.
Once again, whatever nefarious thing the left accuses the right of doing or plannings is exactly what the left is doing or planning.
So many polls use far fewer than this, but they claim they're okay because they "intelligently" create the sample size, i.e. make sure that the male/female ratio, racial percentages, etc. match the overall demographic.
please Lord, deal with Klaus.
I doubt AI could ever correctly guess if some one changes their mind last second in the voting boot, or has break down on the way to vote or other issues that happen in true and honest elections, not pretending to read people’s minds so no need to hold elections baloney.
His organization is already in place. Eliminate him and his son will take the reins. Eliminate him and another will take his place.
Whether the population is one million or one hundred billion, all you need are 10,000 representative members to get +/-1% accuracy on who they will vote for.
Wishful thinking
AI will never know how each person will vote. What Schwab is saying is that they can surveil and gather intelligence and AI can predict outcomes at a high level. Top down not bottoms up. But good enough to decide races - so they claim.
But if they can predict the voting outcomes of voters then they can likely predict the voting outcomes of representatives. In that world you may as well do away with congressmen too.
What this results in is a country or the world that is administered by machines that would decide how people work, how they receive subsistence, medicines, etc and who lives and dies.
There would still be a central group that oversees the AI self-learning software and programming. Yes, AI learns by itself but there would still be a group that oversees and controls how the AI-based administrative state works.
That core group would retain the real power of the state. Supreme Soviet if you like.
I’m ready. Nothing beats a virtual jackboot in the face as you wake-up for another day of toil for the state.
but AI guessing the outcome in light of those few as you say is still incorrect overall tallying.
seriously depending what 10,000 “representative” members can be swayed by things.
they just want people to believe they are insignificant and God says that isn’t true so AI and those who think it’s so great are wrong.
“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and, accordingly, all experience has shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.”
Declaration of Independence
The technology is on the shelf to resolve the Problem.
What is lacking is the conviction to employ it.
“it appears that Schwab was saying that AI would would be able to correctly guess who would win an election, and so no election needed to occur.”
I’m sorry, Klaus, I’m afraid you can’t do that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.