In my opinion, the stakes will get higher as the jabs have clearly impaired the innate immune systems of probably billions. These people are not going to be happy when the reality will hit home (it is unavoidable for the great majority). Unfortunately, 99% of the population is of the kind that is mad that some managed to avoid the jabs - their anger will be mostly directed at the "anti-vaxxers" not because they the anti-vaxxers were wrong. On the contrary, because they were right and thus do not have to suffer with crippled immune systems. I have already seen it. Many of my former colleagues, who were stupid enough to get jabbed as soon as they could, are angry that I did not take any jabs and I have not had Covid. In the words of a couple of them - "It is not fair that you did not get inoculated whereas we had to do it to keep everyone safe". Is it rational thinking? No. By jabbing themselves they put everyone at greater risk of all sort of problems but that is all they are capable of, as far as I can tell.
Your guess was spot on - all my former colleagues have PhDs in different types of STEM. Clearly a PhD in science does not equate common sense & critical thinking. It is what it is and maybe they will wake up someday. On the other hand I have no doubt that our side will come out on top simply because we can still think critically whereas they cannot.
Categorizing - quacks and irresponsible, selfish lowlifes who endanger everyone. Analyse us? Not possible - they lack the capacity to think without being totally biased.
Oh, the analysis is very much on the basis of what you buy, what you visit and watch on the net. I have worked in AI for over 20 years and it is not as advanced as people think. Yes, AI can do massive number crunching but getting the context right is still a problem. In most cases they use a two class problem and then they adjust it to multi-class if they have sufficient data and these days, they do.
I do not have an actual link but I can point out a book that covers the basics of AI at a level that is, in my opinion, easier to digest compared with other fundamental AI books. It is Patrick Winston (from MIT) and the book is called Artificial Intelligence. It goes over all different AI techniques and what I was referring to would be in the inductive learning category. In short, what they probably have is some basic set of "instances" that rather than being geographically focused, they are more likely to be feature of interest based - as in regularly reads or watches sources X, Y and Z, buys consistently A, B and C and so on. Then they generalize over the instances which would have substantial variations and get a "class" that can be used to predict the main "properties" that define the person - for example, all "troublemakers" will read source X and W while buying items B and F. This can be extended and made more detailed if needed - if there are any geographic based patterns that can be derived using the class definition. I am not sure if that makes any sense but that I the quickest way I can summarize one basic way to do the analytics.
In my opinion, the stakes will get higher as the jabs have clearly impaired the innate immune systems of probably billions. These people are not going to be happy when the reality will hit home (it is unavoidable for the great majority). Unfortunately, 99% of the population is of the kind that is mad that some managed to avoid the jabs - their anger will be mostly directed at the "anti-vaxxers" not because they the anti-vaxxers were wrong. On the contrary, because they were right and thus do not have to suffer with crippled immune systems. I have already seen it. Many of my former colleagues, who were stupid enough to get jabbed as soon as they could, are angry that I did not take any jabs and I have not had Covid. In the words of a couple of them - "It is not fair that you did not get inoculated whereas we had to do it to keep everyone safe". Is it rational thinking? No. By jabbing themselves they put everyone at greater risk of all sort of problems but that is all they are capable of, as far as I can tell.
Your guess was spot on - all my former colleagues have PhDs in different types of STEM. Clearly a PhD in science does not equate common sense & critical thinking. It is what it is and maybe they will wake up someday. On the other hand I have no doubt that our side will come out on top simply because we can still think critically whereas they cannot.
Categorizing - quacks and irresponsible, selfish lowlifes who endanger everyone. Analyse us? Not possible - they lack the capacity to think without being totally biased.
Oh, the analysis is very much on the basis of what you buy, what you visit and watch on the net. I have worked in AI for over 20 years and it is not as advanced as people think. Yes, AI can do massive number crunching but getting the context right is still a problem. In most cases they use a two class problem and then they adjust it to multi-class if they have sufficient data and these days, they do.
I do not have an actual link but I can point out a book that covers the basics of AI at a level that is, in my opinion, easier to digest compared with other fundamental AI books. It is Patrick Winston (from MIT) and the book is called Artificial Intelligence. It goes over all different AI techniques and what I was referring to would be in the inductive learning category. In short, what they probably have is some basic set of "instances" that rather than being geographically focused, they are more likely to be feature of interest based - as in regularly reads or watches sources X, Y and Z, buys consistently A, B and C and so on. Then they generalize over the instances which would have substantial variations and get a "class" that can be used to predict the main "properties" that define the person - for example, all "troublemakers" will read source X and W while buying items B and F. This can be extended and made more detailed if needed - if there are any geographic based patterns that can be derived using the class definition. I am not sure if that makes any sense but that I the quickest way I can summarize one basic way to do the analytics.