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.
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.”