The AI of the minister had an AI lawyer, who, in turn, generated a statement justifying the actions of his client. According to him, the actions of the AI minister were a “stress test”, not corruption.
Is this all just a publicity stunt? I genuinely have no idea what the hell is going on here.
"This is not an error in the code, but an excessive accuracy of the training model. Her neural network recognized a statistical pattern according to which 10 to 15 percent of the value of each contract must be transferred to an unknown account in order for the project to be implemented at all.
so the argument is that the AI picked up on the fact that every single government contract was 10 to 15% graft and corruption and started sending money into the void to keep with the tradition, or are they trying to say that someone coded it to send money to the coders private wallet any time there’s a transaction? just sounds like elaborate performance art (also known as liberal politics)
Keep in mind that it’s the AI lawyer saying that. I assume the AI lawyer is presenting its arguments to an AI judge? Is there also an AI jury? Are any of the AI minster’s children on the AI jury?
Is this all just a publicity stunt? I genuinely have no idea what the hell is going on here.
so the argument is that the AI picked up on the fact that every single government contract was 10 to 15% graft and corruption and started sending money into the void to keep with the tradition, or are they trying to say that someone coded it to send money to the coders private wallet any time there’s a transaction? just sounds like elaborate performance art (also known as liberal politics)
Keep in mind that it’s the AI lawyer saying that. I assume the AI lawyer is presenting its arguments to an AI judge? Is there also an AI jury? Are any of the AI minster’s children on the AI jury?