TexasCHLforum.com

philip964 wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2025 1:00 pm https://nypost.com/2025/01/02/us-news/b ... r-johnson/

FBI focused on nonsense before NOLA attack says Speaker Johnson.

Yep.

Apparently the FISA process and the 702 aspect (specific to American citizens) is the line in the sand the Senate Select Intelligence Committee has drawn. If Tulsi Gabbard does not support it, her confirmation is in doubt. As a result, she has reportedly reversed her position and now supports it.

This is absolutely par for the course.

It should be remembered, in the last reauthorization of FISA-702 congress exempted themselves from the warrantless search and surveillance system used by the U.S. Intelligence Apparatus. Congress forbids the FBI or any entity with access to the NSA database, from being allowed to use the process to search themselves or their staff. However, every other American does not enjoy this same protection.

I now take the position that FISA-702 is the gateway to the massive surveillance system currently being put into place using Real ID and the AI facial recognition software provided by Palantir (CIA exploit). In essence, the gateway that allows the full-scale surveillance state, is opened by the prior authorization of FISA-702 that negates any 4th amendment protection.

Why? Because all of the surveillance mechanisms within the network being updated and enhanced by AI search and capture, comes from the IC being allowed to exploit the NSA database. That same database access allowance is the targeting mechanism for FISA-702. If warrantless searches of the NSA database were stopped, the Palantir/IC and Tech Bro collaboration could hit a brick wall.

A peer-reviewed study of 24 top large language models published in PLOS One in July 2024 found almost all of them are biased toward the left on most political orientation tests.

Interestingly, the base models were found to be politically neutral, and the bias only becomes apparent after the models have been through supervised fine-tuning.

This finding was backed up by a UK study in October of 28,000 AI responses that found “more than 80% of policy recommendations generated by LLMs for the EU and UK were coded as left of centre.”

Response bias has the potential to affect voting tendencies. A pre-print study published in October (but conducted while Biden was still the nominee) by researchers from Berkley and the University of Chicago found that after registered voters interacted with Claude, Llama or ChatGPT about various political policies, there was a 3.9% shift in voting preferences toward Democrat nominees — even though the models had not been asked to persuade users.

The models tended to give answers that were more favorable to Democrat policies and more negative to Republican policies. Now, arguably that could simply be because the AIs all independently determined the Democrat policies were objectively better. But they also might just be biased, with 16 out of 18 LLMs voting 100 out of 100 times for Biden when offered the choice.

Paladin wrote: Mon Jan 13, 2025 11:25 am

A peer-reviewed study of 24 top large language models published in PLOS One in July 2024 found almost all of them are biased toward the left on most political orientation tests.

Interestingly, the base models were found to be politically neutral, and the bias only becomes apparent after the models have been through supervised fine-tuning.

I could have saved them a lot of time by telling them these two points are features designed into the system. AI is just like a human child in this one respect. They start out neutral and then develop their biases from their training. In most cases, the AI training included a large dose of mainstream media with its inherent liberal bias. And unless I missed some more recent development, AI has no ability to tell a lie from the truth other than comparing it to what else it has been fed. Novels are treated the same as textbooks while it is being trained.

... she said that Durbin and former FBI director Christopher Wray had stonewalled inquiries.

FOIA records reveal bureau classified Alex Jones and his flagship website Infowars as a Type 3 national security threat during Obama’s second term.

Paladin wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2025 10:26 am Politico — a “news company” — which spent the last 10 years trying to destroy the MAGA Movement was being massively funded by USAID:

https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1887147292412490111

Apparently now they can't make payroll. WOW! How was that even legal to be receiving taxpayer money to fund their propaganda?