Speak with an AI with some Actual Intelligence
Cleverbot is a chatterbot web application that uses an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to have conversations with humans. It was created by British AI scientist Rollo Carpenter. It was preceded by Jabberwacky, a chatbot project that began in 1988 and went online in 1997. In its first decade, Cleverbot held several thousand conversations with Carpenter and his associates. Since launching on the web, the number of conversations held has exceeded 200 million. Besides the web application, Cleverbot is also available as an iOS, Android, and Windows Phone app.
Unlike some other chatterbots, Cleverbot’s responses are not pre-programmed. Instead, it learns from human input: Humans type into the box below the Cleverbot logo and the system finds all keywords or an exact phrase matching the input. After searching through its saved conversations, it responds to the input by finding how a human responded to that input when it was asked, in part or in full, by Cleverbot.
(Description courtesy Wikipedia)
I can tell you from experience, chatting with CleverBot can get a bit creepy at times. Some of the responses generated by CleverBot’s computer can seem so human-like.
Also from the CleverBot website:
PLEASE NOTE – Cleverbot learns from real people – things it says may seem inappropriate – use with discretion, and at YOUR OWN RISK
PARENTAL ADVICE – Visitors never talk to a human, however convincing it looks – the AI knows many topics – use ONLY WITH OVERSIGHT
Try conversing with CleverBot: Cleverbot.com – a clever bot – speak to an AI with some Actual Intelligence?.
By Mason I. Bilderberg,
One of the most intriguing mental disorders i’ve ever come across is called “Prosopagnosia,” a disorder that impairs a person from distinguishing one face from another.
Prosopagnosia – also called face blindness, is a disorder of face perception where the ability to recognize faces is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing (e.g., object discrimination) and intellectual functioning (e.g., decision making) remain intact.
This is why some conspiracists believe the people associated with tragedies like Sandy Hook are actually staged events using professional actors. They watch the video footage of a tragedy or a political event and they see what they think are familiar faces from the world of hollywood or the mainstream media playing a role. This mis-perception only reinforces the conspiracists’ belief that nothing is real, that we’re living inside a matrix where everything is being orchestrated by “them” to fool us and control us.
Actor Kevin Bacon has been VERY busy the last several years playing Press Secretary Jay Carney:
As a fan of all things brain related, i find this extremely interesting and i thought maybe you would too. It certainly explains some of the more bizarre assertions made by conspiracists following a national tragedy.
If you want to get a bit creeped out by how the conspiratorial mind interprets our world through the lens of prosopagnosia, i suggest visiting wellaware1.com. That’s one of the two sites i perused in preparation for this post – MetaBunk is the other.
Mason I. Bilderber (MIB)
Note from Mason I. Bilderberg –
How many people must be in a group for the odds of two people in the group having the same birthday reaches a statistical likelihood better than 50%?
The number is so surprisingly few that some people attribute a birthday match in such a small group to something akin to a sign from the heavens. They ask, “What are the odds?”
But did you know, in a group of 50 people, there is a 97% statistical chance of two people having the same birthday? Psychics use these types of statistical illusions to give audiences the impression that such occurrences are “a sign from above!”
I’d love to be in a group of 50 people when it is discovered that two people have the same birthday and the psychic asks in a mysterious tone, “What ARE the odds?” . . . just so i can yell back “97% you freakin’ charlatan!”
Wikipedia explains all the math, as does the video below.
People who believe in the empty force claim … the ‘Empty Force,’ is the highest martial arts skill in China. This technique claims to harness the power of qi, the “body’s vital energy“, enabling masters of the art to defend themselves against opponents without making physical contact.”
- What is the EFO Empty Force? EFO Empty Force Fail Video Proves Self Defense Method is a Scam (americanlivewire.com)
- Ladies And Gentlemen, The Dumbest Shit In The World: The ‘Empty Force’ Effect (sportsgrid.com)
- Surprise! Magic Is Not A Real Self-Defense Method (EFO Fail) (socialnewsdaily.com)
- After Showing Up to His Live Event, Skeptics Debunk Promoter of ‘Touchless’ Karate (patheos.com)
- Watch this “Master” get exposed as a fraud on video (vigilantemma.com)
It’s been almost a year since 12/21/2012, the day that the world was suppose to end… or change (depends on who you asked).
Now there was a lot that didn’t happen that day that was suppose to, and there were certain things that day that did happen, just not what some people were expecting.
I’ve looked back upon what did happen that day, and I’ve come up with the five different things that I’ve noticed about that day and the whole doomsday prediction itself.
So here are five things I’ve noticed about 12/21/2012:
5. Nothing really important happen that day.
Well… not necessarily nothing per say, but in terms of the world shattering event that was suppose to occur (at least according to some people who mistook the ending of the Mayan calendar as being a Mayan prophecy foretelling the end of the world) nothing happened that day that was even worth bothering to remember.
The only thing that I really remember from that day is that me and several fellow skeptics laughed at all of those people who seriously thought the world was going to end that day, and the History Channel showing a bunch of programs about doomsday (because that is what the History Channel does).
Basically that’s all that happened that day. Skeptics had a good laugh, the History Channel showed a bunch of BS (well a little bit more BS than usual) and that’s it… well, that and fact that…
4. Millions of Doomers realized how stupid they were.
The amount of people who thought the world was going to end that day (or atleast something big was going to happen that day) was probably in the millions, most of which I’m pretty sure were relived that nothing happen (although I’m sure a few were disappointed, especially those who thought it would bring about some kind of human “transformation”).
I say again that while I am pretty sure that most people who believed that the world would end that day were relived that it didn’t happen, I’m also pretty sure that a lot of those people felt stupid for trusting some non-prophesy that a few people who were allegedly smarter than them completely mis-interpreted and got it into the public mindset in such a way that it ended up taking off like wildfire…
Ofcourse what probably made a lot of people feel stupid for believing in the 12/21/2012 end of the world prediction is the realization that…
3. It’s not the first time a major doomsday prediction has fail.
The 12/21/2012 was not the first major doomsday prediction to fail, nor was it the first major one to create a kind of mass hysteria that caused people to waste their time and money on to prepare for, as well as possibly ruin relationships with the people in their lives. The 12/21/2012 prediction wasn’t even the first major doomsday prediction of the century that failed. Infact it was the third major doomsday prediction of the 21st century that failed (the first one was the Y2K prediction, and the second one was Harold Camping‘s Rapture prediction of 2011).
Now I went to the Wikipedia page listing doomsday predictions (and these are just some of the more famous ones) and there were huge amount of them, and obviously they’ve all failed to come true. Infact I actually counted the number of doomsday predictions between the time I was born and the 12/21/2012 prediction, and according to the list the world should have ended atleast 47 times since my birth…
Now in my opinion the whole 12/21/2012 should never have been taken seriously in the first place. This is not only due to the sheer fact that doomsday predictions always fail, it’s also due to the fact that…
This program is not to be confused with a later UK documentary Secrets of the Psychics, which was transmitted under this title as well as Secrets of the Super Psychics.
- Psychics and Alternative Medicine Practitioners: Who is worse? (illuminutti.com)
- Whatever Happened to Parapsychology? (illuminutti.com)
- James Randi exposes Uri Geller and Peter Popoff (ritholtz.com)
- Psychic Sally? (paranormalee.wordpress.com)
- Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions read online (iydifusu.wordpress.com)
- Newsweek Features James Randi and The Amazing Meeting in Latest Issue (patheos.com)
- James Randi (renjiveda.wordpress.com)
- What magicians can teach scientists about skepticism – NewsWorks (richarddawkins.net)
- James Randi, The Amazing Meeting, and the Bullshit Police – Newsweek and The Daily Beast (richarddawkins.net)
Pseudoscience is what one might call a two-dollar word. Skeptics often throw it around because of its weightiness and the values it transmits. We need to talk about this word, where it came from, and why we should be cautious about using it.
Pseudoscience is a pejorative term that is bestowed upon a set of ideas, not used by choice by the holder of those ideas. It’s “false” science, fake science, an imitation missing a vital part, the knockoff, the wannabe, the cheap imitation… OK, you get what I mean.
Contrary to what we think we can say constitutes pseudoscience, there are no set criteria to identify it. It’s not a simple thing but a sticky wicket. It’s whatever scientists say doesn’t belong to legitimate science – a problematic definition. We often must use examples to explain what we mean. Wikipedia has a list of topics that have been characterized as pseudoscience by someone, sometime. Common examples include: astrology, cryptozoology, paranormal investigation, ufology, parapsychology, psychoanalysis, alternative medicine, homeopathy, and creationism.
Because science has authority in our society, it is worthy of imitation. Pseudoscience is science’s shadow, which makes it hard to separate from the real thing. It can’t exist without science. This science imitation was evident to me upon researching paranormal investigation and cryptozoology. I concluded it was useful to have a set of reasonable guidelines one could use to determine if the methodology and the resulting body of knowledge was scientific or lacking in a critical way. The more of these characteristics one can attribute to the field in question, the more likely it is fairly categorized as “pseudoscience.” But since those are fuzzy, subjective criteria, some theories we now regard as legitimate might have qualified as “pseudoscience” at one time, such as Einstein’s special theory of relativity, Mendel’s heredity, meteorites, and Wegener’s continental drift.
There is no continuum between science and pseudoscience. Nor is there a clear boundary or litmus test for what qualifies as science and what lies outside the lines. This is called the “demarcation problem”—a term that Austrian philosopher Karl Popper coined in the late 1920s to describe the issues of marking a solid line between what is scientific and what is nonscientific. It turns out Popper’s solution to the problem was not so hot. He thought it lay in the criterion of testability/falsifiability. But that fails since several theories are not practically falsifiable.
Any series of characteristics commonly attributable to pseudoscience, such as my pet list of criteria, also fails for various reasons. After all this searching for a demarcation criterion without success, philosopher Larry Laudan remarked that we might fairly conclude that “the object of the quest is nonexistent.”
Pseudoscience is just what pseudoscientists do, say the scientists. That is not very helpful for someone who wants to make heads or tails out of a controversial area of research.
- Energy Medicine – Noise-Based Pseudoscience (sciencebasedmedicine.org)
- From Belief in Ghosts to the Contradiction of Pseudoscience (audreyking.wordpress.com)
- TED directors take a stand against pseudoscience (doubtfulnews.com)
- Nasty pseudoscience and counterproductive behavior (idoubtit.wordpress.com)
- Lessons from TED on the dangers of pseudoscience (bigthink.com)