Harvard, diversity, incompetence and fraud

January 23, 2024

The Claudine Gay diversity-causes-incompetence affair has hardly been put to bed before I saw this article this morning.

A prominent cancer center affiliated with Harvard said it will ask medical journals to retract six research papers and correct dozens of others after a British scientist and blogger found that work by some of its top executives was rife with duplicated or manipulated data.

The center, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, one of the nation’s foremost cancer treatment and research facilities, moved quickly in recent days to address allegations of faulty data in 58 studies, many of them influential, compiled by a British molecular biologist, Sholto David.

In many cases, Dr. David found, images in the papers had been stretched, obscured or spliced together in a way that suggested deliberate attempts to mislead readers. The studies he flagged included some published by Dana-Farber’s chief executive, Dr. Laurie Glimcher, and its chief operating officer, Dr. William Hahn.

The Harvard Crimson also has this story:

David, who holds a doctoral degree in biology from Newcastle University, alleged that three papers authored by Glimcher, 12 by Hahn, 10 by Ghobrial, and 16 by Anderson contained “data forgery,” including five co-authored by both Anderson and Ghobrial. As is typical for scientific research, all of the papers referenced by David have several co-authors, though his post focused on the four DFCI researchers.

The papers, published between 1999 and 2017, most commonly have duplications of blots, bands, and plots within images, David alleged. In a Saturday interview, David said he used a combination of artificial intelligence image analysis software ImageTwin and manual detection to look for errors in the papers.

Another case of scientific fraud with researchers manipulating data to support a desired result is in itself nothing new. The publish or perish ethos has led globally to the exponential increase of not just data manipulation but also of data “creation” where desired data points or images are just invented. Data forgery is prevalent even at the most prestigious institutions and is not just in the social “sciences”. The social “sciences” in the last 40 or 50 years have been known to have been plagued by data manufactured to support pre-determined political conclusions.

Academic cheating is as old as academia. “Positive discrimination” to combat discrimination (whether for affirmative action in the US or with reservations in India) has been misused to favour the undeserving (and thereby disfavouring some of the worthy). What is new is that the false wokeism god of diversity is not only being used to cover up for incompetence, it is also downplaying competence as a criterion for selection. And, it would seem, diversity is also used to cover up for or to excuse fraud.

Claudine Gay got her job because she was black and female. Those attributes overrode any requirements not to have plagiarised or any requirement to be competent in front of a congressional committee. I would not be very surprised to learn that Glimcher was appointed primarily because she was female. And did that allow her greater licence in manipulating or creating data?

I see all around me in Europe, cases where a religious adherence to “diversity” is allowing and even promoting greater levels of incompetence in many fields. I see it in entertainment (with TV presenters and news readers, with actors, with scripts and even musicians). I see it in media with reporters and presenters and “fact checkers” and “research staff”. I see it in academia (though my exposure here is limited). My point is that being “diverse” has become more important in selection for any post than the competence required for that post. But it is getting to the stage where being “diverse” now even compensates for a lack of competence.

And that, of course, gives us the modern versions of freak shows.


Just auto-complete or the beginnings of intelligence when chatGPT says ” two plus two is four”

January 7, 2024

When a five-year old says “two plus two is four” we take it as proof of the growing intelligence of a child. In reality it is not that the child understands the abstract concept of numbers and where they come from to represent identities in our physical world. It is just the child applying its own language model to predict the best next word. This is based on the data it has been fed and the supervised and unsupervised  learning it has received from its trainers. The child is merely going through an auto-complete process with its “best” guess for the next word. based on what knowledge it has been fed and the training it has received.

Chomsky does not like chatGPT and dismisses it as being a glorified auto-completer using statistics and probability to estimate the “best” next word. But I think he’s got it wrong again. Whereas human brains may not exclusively use just a large language model, we certainly do use language when we choose the “best” option for the next word we use (speak, write or even think). We may also use logic, or what we call reason or even other languages to judge what the next word ought to be. This includes all forms of mathematics and specialised languages with esoteric symbols or hieroglyphs. Language is overwhelmingly the method of communicating output from a human brain. We use a variety of processes in our brains to ultimately choose the next word we use. Just like chatGPT, the input is the previous word and the output is the next word.

In judging whether a brain (or a neural network) is intelligent, what is critical is what is generated rather than how it is generated. The process by which a brain for a human, or a neural network for a chatbot, generates the next word based on the previous word(s), is irrelevant in judging whether the brain or the neural network is intelligent. The fundamental problem is that we cannot define intelligence. We cannot, as humans, define what we mean when we say we understand something. We cannot tell what process takes place in our brains when we claim we understand addition or subtraction or some other mathematical or logical process.

It seems to me then that if in the future, a chatbot eventually does do mathematics in practice and is always correct, then it is irrelevant if its neural network got there by calculating probabilities of occurrence of the next most likely word or did it in some other way. If it does mathematics then our assessment of its understanding mathematics becomes moot. If it does generate useful and correct code then its understanding of the objectives is irrelevant. Moreover, we cannot say it does not understand when we cannot determine what understanding means for us, let alone for it. We cannot either impose on an AI chatbot a definition of its understanding when we cannot define it for ourselves.

Perhaps understanding is nothing more than weightage numbers in a network of neurons whether in a human brain or in an AI’s neural network software.


In Sweden GPs are going extinct, but can we expect AIs to help save the GP function?

December 24, 2023

It is now quite common in the Swedish health system where all specialists sit in their own silos that nobody actually has the responsibility for taking a holistic view of a patient. Specialists are primarily looking to hand their patients over either to the the pre-defined “next care giver” or to send them home. No specialist seems to have any particular responsibility to peek across specialisation boundaries. I miss my old-fashioned General Practitioner (GP) but wonder if the species is going extinct.

(My own recent experience with the health service may not be representative and may only be anecdotal. Nevertheless, I believe that this lack of holistic responsibility in the health service has led to medication from one specialisation leading to interference with medications prescribed by other specialisations and with nobody actually having the responsibility to check that they could work together. In my case, detecting and resolving these interferences between different medications is still ongoing and has been extremely frustrating and uncomfortable).

It seems to me that not only are doctors forced to work primarily to these hand-over criteria rather than patient well-being, but that even care institutions (clinics, hospitals, departments) seem to set their priorities on fulfilling hand-over conditions. It is probably policy that fulfilling a handover protocol is more important than a patient’s well-being. Each institution or department is looking to hand over responsibility to the next health-care station. The lack of a GP type of role as the primary care giver means that there is often little continuity in who a patient first meets at the primary care station. There is no one any longer, it seems, who has the responsibility for taking a holistic view of the patient.

I have a gut-feeling – perhaps just wishful thinking – that the use of AI will facilitate the possibility of every patient in any public health system having a primary care giver (human + AI) who actually does take a holistic view and who takes responsibility for the well-being of a patient.

So I put some questions to ChatGPT:

ktwop: Can neural networks be used for medical diagnostics?
 
ChatGPT: Yes, neural networks can be and are being used for medical diagnostics. Neural networks, particularly deep learning models, have shown great promise in various medical applications, including image analysis, pathology detection, and disease diagnosis. Here are some ways in which neural networks are being utilized in medical diagnostics:
  1. Medical Imaging:

    • MRI and CT Scans: Neural networks can analyze medical images such as MRI and CT scans to detect abnormalities, tumors, or other medical conditions.

    • X-rays: Deep learning models have been employed to interpret X-ray images for conditions like fractures, lung diseases, and more.

  2. Pathology and Histology:

    • Neural networks can assist pathologists in analyzing histopathology slides, identifying cancerous cells, and providing more accurate and efficient diagnoses.
  3. Disease Diagnosis:

    • Neural networks can be trained to recognize patterns and features in patient data, helping in the diagnosis of diseases based on symptoms, lab results, and other clinical information.
  4. Drug Discovery:

    • Neural networks are used in drug discovery processes to analyze biological data and predict potential drug candidates.
  5. Predictive Analytics:

    • Neural networks can be employed for predicting patient outcomes, disease progression, and the likelihood of complications based on historical patient data.
  6. Genomic Data Analysis:

    • Neural networks can analyze genomic data to identify genetic markers associated with certain diseases and predict susceptibility to particular conditions.
  7. Telemedicine:

    • Neural networks can play a role in remote patient monitoring and telemedicine by analyzing data from wearable devices to assess a patient’s health status.
  8. Natural Language Processing (NLP):

    • NLP techniques, often integrated with neural networks, can be used to analyze and extract information from medical literature, clinical notes, and patient records.

It’s important to note that while neural networks and other machine learning approaches show promise, they are not a replacement for professional medical expertise. They should be used as tools to assist healthcare professionals in making more accurate and timely diagnoses. Additionally, ethical considerations, data privacy, and regulatory compliance are crucial aspects when deploying such technologies in the medical field.

 
ktwop: Can a neural network based AI take over the functions of a general practitioner.
 
ChatGPT : As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, while neural networks and artificial intelligence (AI) have made significant advancements in various medical applications, a neural network alone is unlikely to completely replace the functions of a general practitioner (GP). General practitioners perform a wide range of tasks that go beyond the capabilities of current AI systems. Here are some reasons why:
  1. Complex Decision-Making:

    • General practitioners often deal with complex cases that require a holistic understanding of a patient’s medical history, lifestyle, and other contextual factors. They need to integrate information from various sources to make nuanced and individualized decisions.
  2. Patient Interaction:

    • A significant part of a GP’s role involves interacting with patients, understanding their symptoms, providing explanations, and addressing concerns. Building a rapport with patients and considering their subjective experiences is a crucial aspect of healthcare that AI lacks.
  3. Diagnostic Challenges:

    • Many medical diagnoses involve intricate decision trees and require a deep understanding of diverse symptoms. GPs use their clinical expertise to navigate through these complexities, often relying on intuition and experience.
  4. Ethical and Emotional Considerations:

    • GPs often deal with ethical dilemmas and emotionally charged situations. They provide support and guidance to patients, taking into account not only medical factors but also the patient’s emotional and psychological well-being.
  5. Preventive Care and Health Promotion:

    • GPs play a vital role in preventive care, health promotion, and patient education. They offer advice on lifestyle changes, vaccination schedules, and early detection of risk factors.

While AI, including neural networks, can augment the capabilities of healthcare professionals by assisting in diagnosis, analyzing medical images, and processing large datasets, a comprehensive and empathetic approach to patient care remains a distinctive feature of human healthcare providers.

The integration of AI in healthcare is more likely to involve collaboration between AI systems and healthcare professionals, with AI serving as a valuable tool to support decision-making rather than replacing the human element. Additionally, regulatory and ethical considerations will continue to shape the role of AI in healthcare. It’s essential to stay updated on the latest developments in this rapidly evolving field.

A pretty good summary but not entirely satisfactory or optimistic.

Perhaps AIs will come and GPs will return – but not anytime soon.


 

Of course Claudine Gay was selected because she was black and female

December 13, 2023

UPDATE!

It becomes increasingly clear that Dr (?) Claudine Gay has committed many small plagiarisms starting perhaps even earlier than her doctoral thesis. Each plagiarism event does not, in itself, seem very serious. But taken altogether they have a weight which makes it crystal clear that having plagiarised or not is just not relevant for being Harvard President. She is, after all, black and female.


If Claudine Gay was not black and female she would not be President of Harvard.

In my view, ethnicity and gender are perfectly valid criteria for selection of people for particular tasks and specific positions. I am surprised at the clamour of politically correct voices trying to claim that these were not the deciding factors in selecting Claudine Gay. It borders on stupid to deny common sense. I don’t see anything wrong either in choosing an administrative leader who fulfills the primary condition of being seen as politically correct. For whatever reason the Harvard search committee decided that it was necessary to have a female, black President. Fine. That is/was their prerogative. For many positions – and not least President of Harvard – the image projected by the incumbent may be paramount. There are many instances where style and form are more important than substance. Technical competence is of secondary concern when skilled subordinates are available. What I find quite ridiculous are the attempts to claim that Claudine Gay would have been chosen as President if she was not black and not female. There is nothing wrong in being selected for being black and female. The stupidity lies in denying that.

It seems the duties of the Harvard President are primarily administrative and for fund raising.

Recently, however, the job has become increasingly administrative, especially as fund-raising campaigns have taken on central importance in large institutions such as Harvard. Some have criticized this trend to the extent it has prevented the president from focusing on substantive issues in higher education.

Each president is professor in some department of the university and teaches from time to time.

Harvard’s current president is Claudine Gay, having become Harvard’s 30th president on July 1, 2023. She succeeded Lawrence Bacow who retired on June 30, 2023. – Wikipedia

Since only Professors are eligible to be selected as President, the available choices of black, female professors must have been fairly limited. Of course it could be critically important for the selected person to project the desired image and to be seen to be politically correct. I do not see any objection to using these as criteria for selection. Droupadi Murmu would not be the President of India if she was not a woman and belonging to the tribal community.

Claudine Gay may prove to be a very able administrator and brilliant at garnering funding. That would be a great bonus since she was selected for being black and female. She certainly was not chosen for her unimpressive research record.  Her research publications consist of six while at Harvard according to Research Gate and up to 13 in total. (The titles are not very enticing and indicate rather mundane work. To me most of the abstracts read like sociological psycho-babble). This is rather a flimsy research record but this was not the guiding criterion for her selection. Now Claudine Gay has even been accused of plagiarism. It is a little more serious but seems not to be a major breach. Of course she is being judged much less harshly than a plagiarising student would be. So what? College Presidents are not students. Different standards tailored for different people sounds sensible, correct and perfectly logical to me. In any event, her few publications could not have been of any great significance in her selection. She has no great track record in administration either, but this probably does not matter very much when the Harvard President’s office has enough lackeys to administer the necessities. Clearly the primary target for the search committee was for a female, black professor who could project the right image and be politically attractive in the funding stakes.

Should she resign? Perhaps. Of course her recent inept congressional testimony was embarrassing. It demonstrated incompetence in the key task of representing the college. She is now a point of weakness in any future attacks on Harvard. She brings to a head the inherent conflict between “diversity” and competence. Only her future achievements may mitigate the general perception that she was selected for displaying “diversity” purposes rather than for any displayed competence. Her position – and Harvard’s –  on condemning terrorism also seems very suspect. (My perception is that she along with most Harvard academics blindly condemn all Israel’s actions but are apologists for even the most heinous Hamas actions). Obviously she cannot provide any kind of unifying point between the Palestinian supporters and the Jewish community. In fact she will find it difficult to get away from her now self-established position that “calling for the genocide of certain people in certain contexts” is acceptable. She may herself find the heat not worth bearing and resign. But if the Harvard Corporation thinks she can still represent Harvard’s values and be a good President then they have no need to call for her resignation. Their unanimous support for Gay was announced yesterday and that now places them directly into the firing line. There are many allegations and accusations flying about. If the allegation turns out to be true that during “her tenure as Dean and now as president, Gay has squelched speech she disfavors while defending and thereby amplifying vile and threatening hate speech, exhibiting a remarkable double standard”, then the Corporation’s support may vanish. With the President and 11 Fellows the Corporation consists of 12 members. The Fellows can all now expect to face critical scrutiny themselves from nosy, hostile parties. They should all ensure that their tax returns are in order. I note that their letter does at least acknowledge that the University should have ‘immediately, directly and unequivocally’ condemned Hamas terrorism, but nobody is being held accountable for that imbecilic lapse.

There is no question that the selection criteria and her selection by Harvard were perfectly proper. Not very smart but perfectly proper. But let us not pretend that Claudine Gay would be President if she was not black and female.


One year on and I can call myself a “non-smoker”

December 11, 2023

It has been over a year since I had my last cigarette. In the health system here you remain a “quitting smoker” if you have smoked within the last 6 months. A “non-smoker” is never defined though it is implied that it is if you have not smoked for at least 6 months. In an abundance of conservatism I have taken this to be 12 months.

I believe I can now call myself a “non-smoker”.

I stopped “cold turkey” without any nicotine substitutes or plasters or chewing gum. Of course my heart infarct a year ago made me highly motivated. However, I think that the difficulties of going “cold turkey” are quite often exaggerated by those trying to sell their nicotine products. The key obviously lies in how the motivation to quit can be generated. But I certainly would not recommend having a heart attack to create the required motivation.

The urge to smoke has reduced significantly and only appears perhaps once or twice a week and not several times a day as it did after 3 months. I do notice that my breathing is much easier. I cough much less but this has not been eliminated entirely. It is certain that the smell of tobacco has gone from my clothes. I presume that all the other benefits of stopping smoking are accruing but it is difficult to tell.


Cold Turkey – an update after 100 days

There are other stories regarding the origins of the term “cold turkey” but I prefer this one.

Scholars of 19th-century British periodicals have pointed to the UK satirical magazine Judy as the true catalyst of “cold turkey”‘s evolution in meaning. The journal’s issue of January 3, 1877, featured the fictional diary of one John Humes, Esquire. The diary’s transcript on the day in question details Mr Humes’ exploits over his Christmas holiday. Throughout, Humes demonstrates a humbug attitude, complaining to every shopkeeper and acquaintance about the irony of the words “merry” and “jolly” being attached to the season. Most significantly, Hume is invited to stay at his cousin Clara’s as a part of her household’s celebrations. Hume, the miser to the core, is shocked that Clara serves him slices of (literal) cold turkey with his pudding and other side dishes on the evening of his arrival. A poor substitute for the roasted and dressed kind of turkey is the continually played-up implication in the comedy piece. The dissatisfied barrister stays several days nonetheless, and with each passing day, he is more and more shocked that the cold turkey finds its way onto his plate again. Finally, Hume arrives home, utterly disgusted at having been treated so badly. He calls for his estate lawyer and chops Clara completely out of his will and testament.


100 days have gone since I quit smoking cold turkey and I am now into week 15. There has been no gnashing of teeth or pulling of hair. Withdrawal effects have been subtle rather than obvious. When I quit smoking on 7th December last year I had 2 cartons of cigarettes and 3 lighters in my study. Many suggested that I should remove all traces of cigarette smoking from my presence but this seemed wrong to me. They are all still all there in full view.

Does the urge to smoke return?

Of course it does.

Every, single day.

But what is clear to me is that it is not a physical craving but something connected to habitual behaviour and entirely in the mind. The urge is triggerred by some action (or inaction) which my brain associates with lighting up. I find I need just a short physical/mental diversion to get rid of the urge. Initially I used conventional chewing gum (not the nicotine kind but sugar free) but now find even that unnecessary. Just thinking about something else or doing something else usually suffices. I am pretty sure that the sight of my cigarette cartons and lighters does not trigger the urge to smoke. There are some physical effects which persist. I “feel” colder than I used to. I feel a little more light-headed more often than I used to. I get the shivers and goose bumps from time to time and I attribute these to quitting smoking rather than to the blood-thinners I now take.

I am sure I am gaining the benefits of quitting smoking but they are gradual and not spectacular. I think I cough less and my breathing is easier. I seem to generate much less phlegm than I used to. I am pretty sure my lungs are in a much better state than they were. Of course, I am sure I am also spending less money but, again, this is not a spectacular benefit. It is difficult to notice the smells – on me, my clothes or in the house – that are no longer there, but I certainly notice the smells of others smoking when I come across them. These smells when noticed, are becoming, gradually but more often, disgusting rather than alluring.

So far so good.

I am not sure when I will be qualified to join the ranks of “non-smokers”. Perhaps in another 200 days.


Harvard, MIT and UPenn agree: “In the right context a call for genocide is justified”

December 10, 2023

One wonders if they think for themselves or can only rabbit what their lawyers have trained them to say. Performing monkeys?.

The New York Times’ Lauren Hirsch reports that Harvard president Claudine Gay and Penn president Liz Magill both worked with teams from the law firm WilmerHale to help them prepare for their testimony. They were over-prepared by their less than competent lawyers apparently. The essence of WilmerHale’s values is that there are some contexts in which genocide can be justified. It would seem that WilmerHale see the genocide of some bad people as no different to eradicating some mosquito strain!

It is not just moral bankruptcy. It is also intellectual prostitution. It is also the blind acceptance of the dogma of the religion of woke. To say the 3 presidents were mealy mouthed would be almost a compliment.

It has now become the norm among the intelligentsia (self-proclaimed) who enjoy the protection of their ivory towers, that academic freedom is an entitlement for us but not for them. We are the good guys and they are the bad guys. Calling for the genocide of them is perfectly justifiable in the right context. The call for killing, of course, would only apply to them and without unnecessary cruelty. Calls for such killing would be OK in the right context. The Harvard President said so. And, of course, necessary cruelty is, well, necessary. Hamas on October 7th exhibited cruelty but, these centres of higher education would argue, was necessary barbarism.

The Ivy league is where the high priests of the politically correct perform their inquisitions. It is where they try to, and do, murder all the politically incorrect heretics who don’t believe in the religion of woke.


The paradox of one: Identity leads to the concept of one but oneness kills identity

October 25, 2023

It is the bedrock of my understanding of the world around me. I think it applies not only to every other human but also to every other living thing which has any semblance of cognition.

Any “thing” which exists, can not, at the same time, be “some other thing”. A thing may be identical in properties to some other things but the various things each remain uniquely identified in space- time.

Claims of violation of this uniqueness (by some proponents / propagandists of quantum theory) are just Edward Lear types of nonsense physics. Statements about single particles existing simultaneously in different spaces or times are using a nonsense definition of existence. Nonsense mathematics (whether for quantum entanglement or time travel or the Ramanujam summation) is as nonsensical as the Dong with the luminous nose. Nonsense is nonsense in any language. No matter.

There are – it is said – “1078 to 1082 atoms in the known universe”. Of course this statement is about the 5% of the known universe which is matter. It is silent about dark energy and dark matter which makes up the remaining 95%. No matter. It is entirely silent about what may or may not be in the universe (or universes) that are not known. No matter.

… roughly 68% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest – everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter – adds up to less than 5% of the universe.

Nevertheless, every known atom in the known universe has a unique identity – known or unknown.

In a sense, every atom in the universe can be considered to have its own identity. Atoms are the basic building blocks of matter and are distinguished by their unique combination of protons, neutrons, and electrons. Each element on the periodic table is composed of atoms with a specific number of protons, defining its atomic number and giving it a distinct identity. For example, all hydrogen atoms have one proton, while all carbon atoms have six protons. Moreover, quantum mechanics suggests that each individual atom can have its own unique quantum state, determining its behavior and properties. This means that even identical atoms can be differentiated based on their quantum states.

It has been guesstimated that there may be roughly 1097 fundamental particles making up the 1078 to 1082 atoms in the known universe. These particles too, and not only atoms, have unique identities.

In fact, every fundamental particle has its own separate identity. Fundamental particles are the smallest known building blocks of matter and are classified into various types, such as quarks, leptons, and gauge bosons. Each fundamental particle has distinct properties that define its identity, including its mass, electric charge, spin, and interactions with other particles. For example, an electron is a fundamental particle with a specific mass, charge of -1, and spin of 1/2. Furthermore, in quantum mechanics, each particle is associated with its own unique quantum state, which determines its behavior and properties. These quantum states can differ even among particles of the same type, leading to their individual identities. 

It is the concept of the existence of things, each having a unique identity, which allow us to define a concept of one (1, unity). The concept of identity and the concept of one are inseparable. It is the concept of one which leads to all numbers. The concepts of identity and of “one” are inseparable in both the philosophical and spiritual contexts. But the notion of identity ultimately emerges from the fundamental interconnectedness of the existence of things. And this creates the paradox. Things have separate identities but have the same kind of existence. It is the parameters of the existence which exhibit oneness. But this oneness of existence negates the separate, unique identity of existing things.

Unique identity of existing things gives the concept of one (1) whereas a unifying oneness eradicates what is unique and kills identity.

Identity and oneness can be seen as interconnected in certain philosophical and spiritual perspectives. While they may appear contradictory at first, a deeper exploration reveals a nuanced relationship between the two. Identity refers to the distinguishing characteristics and qualities that make something or someone unique and separate from others. It is the sense of individuality and selfhood that we associate with ourselves and the objects or beings around us. Identity implies a sense of boundaries and distinctions, where each entity is defined by its own set of attributes and properties. On the other hand, the concept of oneness suggests a fundamental unity or interconnectedness that transcends individual identities. It suggests that all things and beings are ultimately interconnected, part of a larger whole or cosmic unity. This perspective emphasizes the underlying unity of existence, where the boundaries and distinctions that define individual identities are seen as illusory or superficial.

In some philosophical and spiritual traditions, the concept of oneness is understood as the ultimate reality or truth, while individual identities are considered temporary manifestations or expressions of this underlying oneness. From this viewpoint, individual identities are like waves in the ocean—distinct for a time but ultimately inseparable from the ocean itself. However, it’s important to recognize that these concepts can be understood and interpreted differently across various philosophical and spiritual frameworks. Some may place more emphasis on the individual identities and the uniqueness of each entity, while others may emphasize the interconnectedness and unity of all things. Ultimately, whether one considers identity and oneness as inseparable or not depends on their philosophical, spiritual, or cultural perspectives. Both concepts offer valuable insights into understanding our place in the world and our relationship with others, and exploring the interplay between identity and oneness can lead to profound philosophical and existential contemplations.

This perspective can be found in various philosophical and spiritual traditions, certain forms of mysticism, and some interpretations of quantum physics. It suggests that the perceived boundaries and separations that define individual identities are illusory, and the true nature of reality is the oneness that transcends these apparent divisions. Identity and one (1) could well be illusory just as all of numbers and the mathematics which follow are not real.

However, it’s important to note that not all philosophical or spiritual perspectives hold this inseparability between identity and oneness. Other perspectives may emphasize the importance of individual identities, personal autonomy, and the uniqueness of each entity. As with any philosophical or metaphysical concept, the relationship between identity and oneness can be a matter of interpretation and personal belief. Different perspectives offer diverse insights into the nature of reality, and individuals may resonate with different understandings based on their experiences, cultural backgrounds, and philosophical inclinations.


Where numbers come from


Wave of Swedish gang violence originates in 40+ years of “multiculturalism”

September 28, 2023

The peaceful Sweden I emigrated to in 1983 is not the Sweden of today. For forty years sanctimonious politicians have been encouraging young immigrants to live in their own separate, parallel culture with very little encouragement to integrate. We are now reaping the rewards. We are seeing an unprecedented wave of violence sweeping through urban Sweden. Shootings, bombings, blood feuds, revenge killings. Drugs, money laundering and general mayhem. Innocent bystanders getting caught up in the killings as well. Three people were killed last night alone. Mainly gang violence. Mainly immigrant gangs. Mainly people living in a parallel culture with no sense of belonging to, or of having any  need to conform to, an overriding culture that society demands. 

There is no great pleasure in now being able to say “I told you so”, but “I did tell you so”. It is quite clear that the mainly leftist, social democrats all over Europe have been blinded by their own self righteousness for the last 40 – 50 years. They have been caught up in glare of a sickly sanctimony and have not seen that it is the false god of multiculturalism which has brought us here.

I reblog something I wrote some 7 years ago:

A “society” – to be a society – can be multi-ethnic but not multicultural

A “culture” is both the glue that binds any society of humans and lubricates the interactions within that society. It applies as well to a family or an association or a sports club or a company or a geographic area (say a country). The culture of any sub-society – a sub-culture – must be subordinated to that of the larger society it is  – or wants to be – part of.

Of course one can have – if one wishes – many different cultures within different sub-societies in a single geographic area. But if these sub-cultures are not subordinated to a larger culture then the sub-societies cannot – because it becomes a fatal contradiction – make up any larger society. Multiculturalism dooms that geographical area to inevitably be a splintered and fractured “greater” society – if at all.

The politically correct “multiculturalism” followed in Europe in recent times has effectively preserved and maintained each ethnic group in its own cultural silo and – inanely – made a virtue out of preventing the evolution of any overriding, common culture. This has been the fundamental, “do-gooding” blunder of the socialist/liberal “democrats” all through Europe. Creating a society of the future with a common culture as the glue has been sacrificed in a quest for some imagined God of Many Cultures. For an immigrant – anywhere – how could it be more important to keep the language of his past rather than to learn the language of his future? The “do-gooders” have prioritised living in the past to creating and living in a new future.

Hence Rotherham and Bradford or Kreuzberg or Rosengård or Les Bosquets,

Multi-ethnic communities particularly need both a glue and a lubricating medium. And that has to be an overriding common – new – culture and not some mish-mash, immiscible collection of sub-cultures – each within its own silo, insulated and held separate from all others.

  1. Multi-ethnic societies are inevitable around the world.
  2. A single society has a single culture.
  3. To have many cultures in one area – which are not subordinated to a larger culture (values) – is to exclude a single society.
  4. Promoting multiculturalism is to promote the fracturing of that area into many immiscible (inevitably ethnic) societies.

Multi-ethnicity – especially – requires a mono-culture to be a society at all.

Multi-ethnic and multi-cultural is separatism and serves to ensure that a single society will never be established.


Now Google/Bard comes to the party

July 14, 2023

I have been- sporadically – trying out ChatGPT and BingChat.  Now Google/Bard is available in Europe and I started playing with it yesterday.

Of course language models are concerned only with “the most probable text to follow” where truth or correctness has no value  – and cannot actually be given any value. My current concern is about the ownership of the product of language model based chat-bots. For example, the following questions come to mind

  1. Text is generated following a “prompt”. Is the “prompt” an act of creation/invention?
  2. Who owns the copyright to the text generated?
  3. Who is the beneficial owner of the product (the generated text)?
  4. Who is accountable/liable for any consequences of generating the text?

To begin with I put the question to Bard:

ktwop:  Who owns or is accountable for or liable for text generated by a “text-based AI”?

Bard: The ownership and liability of text generated by a text-based AI is a complex legal issue that is still being debated. There is no clear consensus on who owns the copyright for AI-generated text, and the liability for any harm caused by such text is also uncertain.

In the United States, copyright law generally requires that a work be created by a human being in order to be protected. However, there is some debate about whether this requirement applies to AI-generated text. Some experts argue that AI-generated text can be considered “created by a human being” if the AI was trained on a dataset of human-created text. Others argue that AI-generated text is not “created by a human being” and therefore cannot be copyrighted.

The liability for harm caused by AI-generated text is also uncertain. In some cases, the person or entity that created the AI may be liable for any harm caused by the text. In other cases, the person or entity that used the AI may be liable. It is also possible that both the creator and the user of the AI could be liable.

The legal issues surrounding AI-generated text are complex and evolving. It is important to consult with an attorney if you have any questions about the ownership or liability of AI-generated text.

Here are some additional factors that may be considered when determining the ownership and liability of AI-generated text:

  • The extent to which human input was involved in the creation of the text.
  • The purpose for which the text was created.
  • The intended audience for the text.
  • The potential harm that could be caused by the text.

Ultimately, the ownership and liability of AI-generated text will be determined on a case-by-case basis.


 

What is Bing Search and who is Sydney?

June 3, 2023

I am not yet quite clear as to the identities of ChatGPT, Bing Search, Bing Chat and Sydney? I need unique identifiers to have a conversation. Without identity there can be no accountability or liability.

I suspect that the identities of AIs, Chatbots and the like are going to need rigorous definition. While the AI / Chatbot is a long way from gaining personhood, the question of its identity and uniqueness and ownership of its product(s) will have to be resolved first. (And of course that implies liability and accountability for the products and is going to be quite contentious. Especially when the products are known to make mistakes and to be wrong). 

 

Sydney: According to an article on The Atlantic, chatbots can have unique identities. However, the article also mentions that “unique” is a relative term and that it is difficult to define what makes an AI or chatbot unique. The article also states that some chatbots are designed to be more unique than others. For example, ChatGPT is a generative AI chatbot that can create unique responses to questions and has been trained on a large dataset of text.  Another article suggests that voice biometrics can be used to generate a unique identifier for chatbots.