If you are the one inputting/programming the AI algorithm, of what use is it to your mission; at what point would you depend on it for decisions?
So far, Christopher Wray is doing well, testifying before Graham. He’s had to notify of at least 25 agents’ deaths since taking over.
Trust Wray. This is not a game.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?462772-1/fbi-director-wray-testifies-senate-judiciary-committee&live
First, I have to say that anything that I think of, I’m sure the Q team has given 1000 times more thought to.
That said, if *I* were writing AI to help with the plan, whether to “fully be” Q or to just be a tool, here’s what my reasons would be and how I’d use it. (Some are mutually exclusive, depending on what the plan was).
If “full Q AI”, my reason would be to give the entire team complete legal immunity. Because if I wrote a program that is 100% putting out what we see as Q posts, then it couldn’t be “prosecuted” for revealing secrets. People who have security clearances CANNOT talk about the stuff they know from their classified work. Say I’m working on a secret rocket. Even if the details of that rocket are printed in the NYT, I can’t comment on it. (No comment. Neither confirm or deny. You know the drill.) But if an AI program could find the published info, it’s already PUBLISHED, so the AI program would only be posting what is already out there.
So many tools to build/use!
>> at what point would you depend on it for decisions?
I would use data gathered by my AI tools to help me decide when to release new info. If there were only 100 people following Q, a big reveal might be wasted. But if my tools told me that there were 10 million people following Q, that might trigger release of info X. And I’d want tools to tell me the difference between 10 million page views vs. 10 million actual followers. I care about the difference between 1 million people looking at a page 10 times or 10 million people looking at a page 1 time. I’d want to know how engaged people were. 1 visit to 8ch per person is not engagement. I’d want to know how many of those page views were bots. So just based on volume, there is SO MUCH important data to use for decision making. Not enough followers? Maybe it’s time to release some attention-grabbing info. Or even disinformation.
I would use AI to gauge sentiment. Are people interested? Do they think Q is a hoax? How committed are they? Are they spreading the word (red pilling)? Or are they just reading it and wondering? Are people outraged at the evil? Or do they disbelieve? Which parts of the Q message are getting through and which parts are they ignoring? Is Q reaching “influencers”? Or is Q only reaching anti-social recluses? Is some of the information so horrific that people are driven away? Is some of the information too outlandish that people who previously were following are now having doubts? All of those are important questions in order for the Q team to adjust their plans and timing.
ANY leader uses information to make decisions. A CEO of a potato chip company gathers data to decide whether to create/market a new flavor of chip. Trump/Q team would be stupid NOT to use plenty of information to make their decisions. And they are DEFINITELY NOT stupid! Data tells them what is working and what is not working. It tells them when the timing is good. It tells them what the ENEMY is doing.
I’ve probably just scratched the surface here, but that’s the gist of it.
I think it’s more like given this and this and this what are all of the options the enemy might choose. Then you look at the list to see if anything is there you didn’t think of.