Did 6 million Jews die in the so-called "Holocaust"? Did the nazis kill Jews in gas chambers?
An AI could read every page on CODOH, Wikipedia, various books on the Holocaust in less than 1% of the time a person could, and could weigh the arguments to see which ones are. An AI would not be afraid of being labelled a "Nazi" or "anti-Semite" nor could it be accused of being biased or driven by a hateful ideology, which revisionists are always accused of.
I saw this interesting article, some excerpts:
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/201 ... ege-debate
Keep in mind, this technology can only improve, and is improving literally every month!Arguing With AI
Artificial intelligence from IBM that can debate humans could be used to help college debaters become more persuasive, but experts are divided over the promise of computer-assisted coaching.
IBM’s artificial intelligence technology has foiled chess masters and Jeopardy! champions, but it hasn’t won a debating competition against a human -- yet.
Project Debater, a two-meter-tall black box powered by artificial intelligence, lost to champion debater Harish Natarajan last month in the first machine-versus-man debate competition of its kind.
It was a loss but not a failure for Project Debater. She (yes, she) was able to construct arguments and make rebuttals and even used preprogrammed humor.
IBM wants to use this technology to help people develop more persuasive arguments and make well-informed decisions, said Dan Lehav, computer scientist and a debate expert at the company. Humans are good at presenting information in ways that appeal to other humans, he said. But machines have the ability to analyze unfathomable amounts of data.
“We want to bridge those worlds,” said Lehav. “Humans are going to be able to use this in a complementary way.”
AI could be a useful sparring partner for college debaters in training, or help them to conduct research, said Partlow-Lefèvre. But she predicts that use of this technology in a competition setting would prove contentious. In competitions where students are given just minutes to prepare their arguments, even allowing access to the internet is unusual and deemed “very controversial.”
Partlow-Lefèvre worries that access to the technology might only be available to students at the wealthiest institutions -- possibly giving them an unfair advantage over their opponents. She also questions whether the use of AI would be deemed intellectually honest by college debate judges.
By the way, this is what they used: "Project Debater"
https://www.research.ibm.com/artificial ... t-debater/
Here is a live debate (about 1 hour) using this AI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3u-1yttrVw
Interesting, humorous image ... but I think it illustrates an important point:
Anyone have thoughts on the future of AI and how it will be accessible to the general public, namely for revisionism?