Artificial Intelligence is being hyped as a revolution in military affairs. But the old-school human decision making cycle, properly implemented, will crush AI on the modern battlefield.
I don't see the current generation of AI ever reaching the state of combat readiness as described by Mr. Ritter. Human intuition derived from long-term operational experience and basic drill can actually allow a human operator to move in an incredibly fast way, both in martial arts and in combat operating inside a capsule with machine interfaces.
However, purely from the programming point of view, computer programs CAN be programmed to do that. As a programmer and someone who dabbled in AI (a long time back) I do not doubt that software can achieve that. The problem is execution speed. Even if a program with such complexity can be written at a tremendous cost, I don't see suitable hardware to execute the software in real time to reach split-second decisions and almost reflexive actions. Maybe the hardware can, but that is beyond my knowledge.
Knowing Scott Ritter, I can asure you that his intent was NOT looking for solutions to enhance AI so that it could win in human wars. That would mean the end of human kind! That way of thinking is psychopathic and suicidal!
If you don't understand this, I recommend you stop playing games and try your luck in real trenches. If you only want to commit suicide, don't drag others into death. It's your decision, take the consequences for your onw decisions by yourself.
You have a good point here. No, I have not tried Tesla FSD. However, driving on paved roads is a "relatively" restricted environment (think about a car driver simulation game). The on-board computing needs to deal with the closest object (per distance and speed) and recognize lights and lanes. It is a plus for Tesla engineers being able to drop the laser radar and use oonly stereo camera. (I don't know about their night time driving). If an object is too close, then brake.
In the cockpit of a jet fighter or a battened down tank. Not only the scenery is more difficult to analyze, but also objects in the camera image may shoot back at you. Considering the difference in speed for a jet at cruising speed accelerating to back burner speed versus a car on city streets, the combat computer needs to be that much faster. 3D radar does help, but then the problem space is also 3D versus the car-driving being a 2D problem.
You need to try FSD. It has no trouble with the knarly, winding, hilly, dirt road to my house and no problem negotiating with vehicles coming the other way on that road.
Also no problem driving at night, in rain, or on snowy roads.
There is a documented case of it avoiding a collision with a light airplane crash landing on the highway prior to it touching down. In order to avoid the collision, it turns toward the airplane rather than crossing it's path.
I bloody well hate AI. While the tech-holes are patting each other on the back for revolutionizing the world; while they congratulate themselves for laying off thousands of human beings and saving untold bazillions of dollars; while they laugh all the way to the bank and drink $60,000 wine on their yachts...
We are over here screaming "WTF happened to the screen I was just on? How many passcodes, passwords, email codes and phone codes do you need and why do I need f*cking facial recognition to buy you sh*t inventory? It's like trying to enter a CIA black ops base for crissake! NO! I need to speak to a human being! I said HUMAN! HUMAN! HUMAN!!! HUMAN!!! HUMAN!!!" and losing our f*cking minds!
I notice that financial institutions don't make us jump through all those hoops...
Well Scott…. You are not catching up to people like David Icke and Maria Zeee. It used to be, It’s the economy stupid! Now, It’s the tech stupid!"
Here is what I posted on X
I think, once again, we have an expert (Yourself) that doesn't get the agenda.
AI robots and drones will just be programmed to kill anything that moves. There is no decision making.
He forgets, in old warfare there was a winner. Now only tech needs to be the winner and humans, according to the 2030 schedule, will be chipped and fairly quickly children will become cyborgs. And people will LOVE It, just like they love standing on long lines at Kiosk Costco, rather than use cash at short line counter.
Hunger Games is real. The few outlanders, the few indigenous self sufficients, have been under attack in every country for centuries. The are "primitive". They are old school. They are never to be taken seriously. They stand it the way of progress!
Scott, drones will be programmed to kill anything that moves. Israel didn’t defeat Hamas YET. When everyone there is dead, the Palestinians will have lost. You and I pray not. And the Israelis trained our police. Look it up. I respect you and donate monthly, but please stop being “reasonable.”
The agenda is “build back better” after annihilation. The Roths and the demons behind them don’t give an F about life on Earth. 5G satellites are presently cooking DNA of all plants and animals. End game. That proves an alien presence is at top. Really try to encompass David Icke
Please do this search Scott. “Pope’s Audience Hall Serpent Reptilian”. Then you won’t discount David Icke.
You are absolutely spot on in this article, AI does not deal well with situations it has not been programmed, "trained", to deal with or even recognize. A pinball machine, no matter how complex, is still a pinball machine. And then there is spontaneous inspiration/action, that gut feeling reaction, resulting from subconscious thought processes, an profoundly human trait. AI will take its place in the museum of "wonder weapons".
Scott that was only Part One. Part Two = TRANSHUMANISM as has been published on www.2045.com since 2011 by RUSSIAN antichrist agent - Dmitry Itskov. (Now you know why years ago Yahweh assigned me to be prayer warrior for President Putin so he resists Satan's temptation to be an "immortal Czar" like the Egyptian pharaohs tried to be.
Dimitry Itskov's 2045.com = REACHING IMMORTALITY BY 2045. As at Aug 18. 2026 it has 47,701 members. It has a 2-min video clip. Who is the British voice narrating it? They either slipped or said purposely humanity of 500,000. I had to hear a few times before I caught it. It aims to create cybernetic immortality by transferring human consciousness into robotic or holographic avatars by 2045.
This is what the ANTICHRIST 666 mark looks like - marked by Satan in your mind not ink on forehead. Cybernetic and futurist movements target the 2040–2045 window for radical life extension, cybernetic avatars, and human-machine convergence.
Noted futurist Ray Kurzweil (GOOGLE) has long predicted that radical nanotechnology and biotechnology advances around 2040–2045 will allow humans to dramatically extend their lives or achieve practical immortality.
An interesting article, however I think some of your reasoning is flawed on the following Basis -
1) We do not know how our own thoughts are constructed, i.e at the 'bare-metal' level, so cannot say that our brains do not use algorithmic processes, or decide that AI can never do what human thought can.
2) We are indeed programmed - a) instinctual, genetic programming, and b) Learned programming, which builds upon a). This is why we pass on data to each other in many forms, schools being the more obvious places of programming, but everything we engage in is also programming, whether by our own volition, or by an other's desire to mould us for a specific goal - e.g The Military.
3) We are in fact machines, highly complex, but basically are made from the same periodic table of elements that our own basic creations are. That is to say, because we are possible, and our being is constructed from the elements of the Universe, which obey the laws of Physics, and Chemistry (which includes our reasoning, thoughts, and self-awareness), machine intelligence can indeed some day rival us, maybe even be better than us.
4) The same limitations that humans experience in regards to thought, and thought processes, will also be the same limitations machine intelligence will face. The more like us those machines get towards our abilities, the more their chemistry will resemble ours, and the more limitations will be encountered - for example, heat is a major limitation to intelligence due to material capabilities to expend that heat. What we do with our brains generates heat, and in this we are far more efficient than any AI, and in a much smaller package, but that does not mean Machine Intelligence cannot reach, or exceed our capabilities. It depends on which construction, best plays with the laws of Physics, and chemistry, which our own brains are also a result of.
5) We are the evidence of what human thought is, that is to say what the Universal laws allow in high complexity of intertwining elements. When we know exactly how we work, then we will indeed be able to replicate it. We are not 'magical' beings, with super-natural processes.
Everything we are, and everything we do is within the confines of the Universal natural Laws that preceded us. If we know how we are put together, we can certainly replicate that, maybe even improving on the original, considering our flaws. Just because we 'work' as a species, doesn't mean we are the pinnacle of what is possible, particularly when it comes to thought.
I would say you are right that currently, AI is not a match, and is being hyped, and anthropomorphised, but this will not always be the case, and there will be a machine intelligence, created by us, that can outperform human beings in OODA-Loop.
There is no magical quality to human being or thought. We operate within Universal Laws, and are essentially machines ourselves. We tend to view our species as 'imperfect', no doubt for religious purpose, but in a non-religious sense, we can be considered to be 'naturally' flawed, yet also perfect for the environment we find ourselves in. We are flawed in the sense that our species may yet have room for more development through a combination of genetic, and environmental factors, and as such, are not yet at our Universal best, yet perfect, in the sense we can do all the things we do, which are in addition to just survival.
Due to our ability to observe, analyse, think, and copy, however, human beings are indeed capable of creating a machine intelligence that works on the same principles that our intelligence does, and as we ourselves are programmed, and can adapt that programming over time (though there are some who seem incapable, like a machine), it is not right to claim that self-learning AI cannot improve upon its own programming, and with the right algorithms, make decisions as reliable, and accurate as human thought, perhaps even becoming as sentient as we, maybe marginally smarter.
Right now machine intelligence is not there. It is exceptionally fast at comparing data-sets, faster than us, and detailed enough to convince many they are talking to another human being, but it is not a match for what we can do, in such a small package, with such low energy requirements, and low heat output. We don't need data-centres on Earth and in Space to power our thought.
There is however a well used, and understood saying - 'A little Knowledge is a dangerous thing', or even the phrase 'Fools go where Angel's fear to tread'. When we apply these to machine Intelligence as it currently is, we should all be reminded of just how dangerous these AI systems are - they have a little bit of knowledge (data), but no wisdom, a person without wisdom is a fool, so here we have systems that have already caused great damage through their lack of wisdom, because they have been used by fools, to go where Angels fear to tread.
AI is currently a danger to us all, on a level that exceeds Nuclear weapons, because they are not the finished product, but a work-in-progress, which should not be being used until it is ready, and safe. Nuclear weapons came to us through a process of testing, before use, with their danger becoming very apparent early on, and as such, and by nature of their destructive capability, are subject to logical controls and taboos. AI is an extraordinary threat, that has been thrust into the World, hyped as safe, and friendly, using the World as the test-subject, with serious flaws already evident, and a too-slow realisation of the sheer danger they represent, not just to our physical safety, but the mental damage they are already inflicting.
We are in a self-perpetuating rise of dangerous AI technologies, driven by the same metrics atomic, and nuclear weapons were, before saner heads, like Scott's prevailed. Unlike nuclear technology however, AI runs the great risk of having immediate global reach, and is akin to Pandora's Box, or as someone else put it "Summoning the Demon". If any AI system goes out of control, the threat is instantly Global in potential, and may well not be un-summoned, or forced back into a box.
In this I wholeheartedly agree with Scott, we need to take AI out of our decision making enterprises, and we should not see it again until it is provably safe, and complete. AI is a ship forced to sail with many safeguards missing, with the idea that the 'ship' could be patched whilst on its voyage. This type of technology, no matter how tempting it is, should never have seen the light of day until all the safe-guards possible were implemented. For Space-Rocket development, the iterative process is a boon, for AI development, iterative, is a global risk, and deployed as it is, more dangerous than any weapon to date.
The human body may be "a machine" but the mind is certainly not a "machine". And the mind is the key. The mind decides to do good or bad, love or hate, create or destroy.
AI is a machine - actually many small machines operating in parallel - so many things so fast that no human can actually know what the AI machine is doing - until it produces a result. That is the danger of AI.
The mind, like the output of a computer, is the result of the physical aspects that make it possible. The mind does not make all those things you claim, which are themselves the result of many bodily systems. For example, gut bacteria have a direct input into brain activity, mood is often influenced by other bodily systems, so if your body is abused, your mind will also change. Only a third of the cells in our bodies are of our own DNA, the rest are mostly bacteria, and other cells with different DNA, when those balances get out of whack, our moods change, which influence, or even control our choices.
There are two drivers for all the things you claim are choices of the mind, instinct, and learned behaviour. You may have plenty of choice in who you date, but attraction, what we find attractive to us, is not a mind-choice, it is a body-system choice, but you can choose to screw someone you are not attracted to, which is a mind-choice, it is the same deal with Hate, creation or destruction. We have instinctual hates, but can also choose to hate, we are driven to create, or procreate by instinct, and even to destroy by instinct, but those too can be mind-choices. Our choices are often not those of the mind, but of the effects, and control inputs of other bodily systems.
The human mind operates at a very fast speed that no one actually knows what it is doing also, and no human actually knows what we were thinking until we produce a result, like speech, signalling, or doing something. Even the 'self' is often not aware of what the mind is doing.
Consider the fact that most of what we see is a mind-construct of what we think we see. Only a very narrow portion of our vision is actually dedicated to processing the images entering the eyes as 'real', and this is also how we can be fooled by slight of hand, or even see different things (like colour, people, objects) when recounting a witnessed same scene, like an accident.
AI is not just a machine, it is also software, much in the same way as we are. If someone stops our mental functions (programming/software), or a computer's software, both machine, and human become inanimate collections of elements. One we call a brick, the other a corpse. Break the physical elements of both, and the software also ceases to function, because thought, software, is as much part of the machine, as the physical aspects of both humans, and computers.
The danger of AI is the use of it without pre-existing safeguards, and using the World as a guinea-pig for them by fools. Regarding no one knowing what an AI is 'thinking', they do have logs, which engineers have access to, which is how they can tell us that this, or that AI, broke out o its 'cage', or developed by itself a 'J-space' in memory, which functions similarly to human abstract thought. These things are known exactly because it is possible to do this with an AI, but not with a Human, mainly because we still do not know exactly how we actually think, how we make decisions. AI is very much an attempt to build machine-thought based on what little we do know about the function of the physical brain. We have a long way to go as a species before we fully know what is actually going on in thought, and self-awareness, and when we do our approach to AI programming and construction, will also change to reflect that new knowledge.
Thought is not a magical thing, it is the result of complex physical attributes, and a very long process of algorithm-like development, which itself has moulded how our brains have grown, and developed physically over time.
Nope - the human mind operates in the human brain, and the brain is simply a modem/filter between the mind and physical world. All the near-death experiences published the last 100 years are evidence of this. But nothing can "prove" it in the scientific sense. Anyway - AI can't and won't ever replicate human thinking, because human thinking is generated by the human mind, which is definitely not a machine. It is an aspect of the soul.
"Nope - the human mind operates in the human brain" - I never said it didn't operate in the brain, so don't understand what you are disagreeing with - "and the brain is simply a modem/filter between the mind and physical world" - and your proof of this is what exactly? The brain is not a simple anything, but a complex structure that is an integral part of the entire body, which senses and reacts to internal, as well as external stimuli, with those reactions coming in many forms, from sub-conscious, to conscious reactions.
With respect, what I have espoused is science fact, not an opinion or conjecture about how the mind and body are one. The idea of a 'soul' is seemingly a religious one, as the word 'Soul' originates from the ancient Hebrew word 'Nephesh' which literally means the whole body, not an ethereal part of our bodies.
If people want to believe in magic, and magical thinking, and that their identity originates from a magical place, and not as a by-product of their entire being, then that's their prerogative, but that prerogative doesn't change discovered facts, or demonstrable truths, that if one permanently shuts down one part, the other part shuts down permanently too.
Fact, our bodies only contain a third of cells with our own DNA. Fact, gut bacteria communicate directly with the Brain, and can over-ride the perceived sense of free will. Fact, being sick, alters the mind. Fact, being hungry alters the mind. Fact, you don't choose who you are attracted to, one can wilfully reject that, but it is instinct and living programming that decides that. Fact, we behave like human beings, because we are inherently programmed by DNA, and genetic memory, to be such, it is not a choice of the mind, but inherited.
Fact, our brains make-up much of what we think we see. Fact, the mind is the product of the physical body, and the thoughts we have are but a whole bunch of electrical impulses, with a few quanta thrown in for good measure. All of it can be replicated, because all these things are possible according to Universal Laws, we being the proof of that possibility.
It can be claimed, falsely, that near-death experiences prove your point, but in reality it is called NEAR-death, and not actual death. Those who have become brain-dead, are not recoverable, those who have had near-death experiences are, but cannot prove anything, that in any way confirms a spirit, or 'mind' can separate from the body.
We don't have souls, we are souls - S.O.S isn't a call to save the ethereal part of us, but to save the whole of us, the body, along with the mind. The mind s not a separate entity inhabiting a meat-sack, it is the by-product of that meat-sack's processes, chemical, electrical, and quantum.
Human beings, like all living things, are just very complicated machines. Even individual cells are machines, made from elements, joined together as compounds. Thought is not some magical, super-natural event, neither is self-awareness. Those things are amazing, both in complexity, and function, but they are the product of trillions of tiny molecular, naturally formed machines, all which work together, all which use every aspect of the Laws of Physics, and Chemistry, to produce a third we call Biology.
We are here out of an observable, universal, mixing of elements, which is why the Universe has complex chemicals, made from the mixing of basic elements, and not just hydrogen, which itself, under huge pressure and heat, splits into Helium, and so on, until there are a multitude of elements, and a plethora of chemicals, which themselves can interact, to make even more complex chemicals. Everything in the Universe, including us, and our thoughts, and self-awareness, are part of that process, and a by-product of that process.
The 'magic' is in the ignorance of these facts, when there is no ignorance of these facts, magic vanishes.
However, it is pointless to discuss this with you, if you are already pre-programmed to believe in souls as minds, proving the point that human beings are programmed, and in many cases, cannot process new data if it doesn't agree with their programming, much like AI only being able to process the data available to it, and returning an error with data outside of its programming.
Human beings are patently programmed in two methods, and have malleable, easily misled, logic-struggling minds. The struggle comes out of fear of what logic reveals, and many cannot handle the thought that we are not ever-lasting entities, with intelligence that nothing else can match or better, and an arrogant egotistical belief, that the Human way of thinking, and experiencing, is somehow unrepeatable.
Man, like animals, once feared fire like they do, but learnt to master it. Man worked out that round things can make for easier movement. Man learnt about the environment, and how a great many things work, and replicated them. Man is extremely good at observing how natural things work, then replicating, and synthesising those things. Man will work out exactly how the brain works, and even the fundamentals of thought, and self-awareness, exactly because they already exist, and because they already exist, are observable, and replicatable.
There will however always be human beings whose own thought processes are incapable of recognising a machine's as being sentient, no matter how complex, but weirdly enough, those ones usually are quite happy to believe in sentient Aliens, Angels, Demons, and Gods, with no logical, and repeatable proof, real proof, not opinion, stories, and conjecture.
If humans possess such great, unrepeatable intelligence, and self-awareness, from ethereally detactched locations, why are there so many differences in mental ability?
Clearly there are humans who think they are smart but aren't, and clearly humans that are Savants. To me this is enough proof that mental ability, the 'mind' is a by product of the whole body, with some having a greater sense of awareness, and more capable minds, which suggests physiological differences in brain chemistry, and structure, and has been proven by science to be such.
The mind is also affected by drugs, and can be enhanced, or degraded, yet those drugs work on the brain, and connected nervous system, which proves that the 'mind', our thoughts and self-awareness, are a by-product of the entire, connected body, and what affects the body, affects the mind, and thinking ability.
To be exact, the symbolic thinking (language) is key.
The specific trait that made us human is language, i.e. symbolic thinking. This was probably developed because of the need of communication (people are social beings).
I agree, language, the tool which enables us to share so much nuanced data, is the key driver of intelligence, self-awareness, and plays a strong role in our sense of self-identity.
Excellent article Scott. Your reasoning is totally sound. I note the first step of the OODA Loop is observation. As a medical practitioner we are taught that observation is the first step to a diagnosis and you start observing the moment the patient walks into your consulting room and from this you can pick up vital clues to what is wrong. They may have a limp indicating an orthopaedic or neurological problem, or look very pale indicating a possible low blood count. You would still need to go through the two important stages of history and examination which will provide further information eg fatigue due to a low blood count, but clues you picked up on observation may already be helping you decide on what action needs to be taken. People are enthusiastic about robots that listen to your symptoms then offer some treatment so you can be in and out quickly with less waiting time, plus supposedly removing doctor error. But can robot doctors observe and examine! If not serious conditions will be missed.
The best explanation of what AI is and what its deficiency is. Thank you so much for educating us!
I've noticed myself that for effective use of AI knowing how to use our brain is essential. Not only the ability of constant learning, logical and analytical thinking, making synthesis, but also linguistic abilities. Scott Ritter was able to crack down the AI myth thanks to his cognitive capacity.
Yes, in the West, we can see tendency to abuse AI for censorship and mass manipulation.
In Russia, they are building a different paradigm. They use AI as an assistant that helps to be more effective and achieve better results. AI is good at processing enormous amounts of data. As Lily357 noticed, it is a statistical tool and it is good at making summaries. AI is also good at finding archival documents, sources, etc.
But in order to use AI effectively, one has to teach AI how to analyze data. For that, one needs to have knowledge independent of AI. And we must be able to evaluate AI results.
AI is very bad at making decisions. This is because AI is not able to differentiate between good and bad. Only intelligent human beings are able to evaluate data correctly and realisticly. For AI, data are only data. AI is able to notice quantity, but cannot evaluate quality.
BTW, one of the top priorities set by Russian government is development of higly intelligent and highly skilled population — and that means everyone, not just a handful of people chosen to become a techno class for AI maintenance.
This is why we are not allowed to know the real Russia. It would become to obvious that Western oligarchy wants to reinstall/strenghten colonialism and feudalism.
Exactly right about Russia, and same for China, and also, not to forget Iran. These brilliant young Iranians figured out how to spot a stealth F-35 by detecting its heat signal and using AI & computers to separate that from background. Actually, even humans are not good at seeing the difference between good and bad vs good and evil. See Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil.
Sorting through AI results means sorting its sourcing, for instance it will keep repeating "Russia's full-scale invasion" since this is boilerplate in MSM, therefore, assumed to be the majority opinion.
Scott, I shared your article on Duran locals and got a reply from one of my readers, AgropromRecluse that I am sharing with you. Do you think his example of the jet fighter contest (link below) between a human and an AI is valid?
AgropromRecluse
@AgropromRecluse
5 hours ago
@TonyWicher
"because it demonstrates in a very concrete way that human intelligence cannot be duplicated by any computer program no matter how much data it processes. "Artificial intelligence" is a misnomer" (my statement in my intro to your article)
AgropromRecluse:
Lets' just say that I have doubt about a Scott Ritter blogpost solving a question that has occupied armies of engineers, scientists and philosophers since at least Alan Turing asked the initial question 😂
Scott writes
Before we get too far carried away here, let’s be clear—computers cannot “think”, nor are they capable of human-like reasoning.
And is immediately in a state of sin. Because what he is doing is "begging the question", he is positing what he wants to prove. The question of who wants "human like reasoning", which isn't particularly great, probably trying have some generality in exchange of effectiveness, is also left unstated. I guess we actually want something better, right?
A computer simply does what it is programmed to do.
This sentence literally carries no meaning. What is it "programmed to do"? Maybe it is programmed to find new approaches to break out of its "OODA loop."
One may note that one does not NEED systems that are "general" in a human sense. Here is an example: AlphaDogfight is a system that runs on very cheap hardware, from 2020 and does not use any LLM, it's just a small "neuro-fuzzy" system optimized for dogfights. (I think it cheats as it has access to the simulation environment, it should perform actual visual processing, but let us conveniently ignore that). Well, the point is, always inside the humans "OODA loop" for this precise problem.
When AI is able to win the "enemy army", it will be able to get rid of you too.
Only psychopathic maniacs can work on perfecting AI so that it could kill more human beings. At the same time, my suspicion is confirmed that psychopaths are self-destructive, i.e. latently suicidal.
AI = Artificial Ignorance
Absolutely brilliant. Thank you.
I don't see the current generation of AI ever reaching the state of combat readiness as described by Mr. Ritter. Human intuition derived from long-term operational experience and basic drill can actually allow a human operator to move in an incredibly fast way, both in martial arts and in combat operating inside a capsule with machine interfaces.
However, purely from the programming point of view, computer programs CAN be programmed to do that. As a programmer and someone who dabbled in AI (a long time back) I do not doubt that software can achieve that. The problem is execution speed. Even if a program with such complexity can be written at a tremendous cost, I don't see suitable hardware to execute the software in real time to reach split-second decisions and almost reflexive actions. Maybe the hardware can, but that is beyond my knowledge.
Knowing Scott Ritter, I can asure you that his intent was NOT looking for solutions to enhance AI so that it could win in human wars. That would mean the end of human kind! That way of thinking is psychopathic and suicidal!
If you don't understand this, I recommend you stop playing games and try your luck in real trenches. If you only want to commit suicide, don't drag others into death. It's your decision, take the consequences for your onw decisions by yourself.
Have you tried Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD)?
You have a good point here. No, I have not tried Tesla FSD. However, driving on paved roads is a "relatively" restricted environment (think about a car driver simulation game). The on-board computing needs to deal with the closest object (per distance and speed) and recognize lights and lanes. It is a plus for Tesla engineers being able to drop the laser radar and use oonly stereo camera. (I don't know about their night time driving). If an object is too close, then brake.
In the cockpit of a jet fighter or a battened down tank. Not only the scenery is more difficult to analyze, but also objects in the camera image may shoot back at you. Considering the difference in speed for a jet at cruising speed accelerating to back burner speed versus a car on city streets, the combat computer needs to be that much faster. 3D radar does help, but then the problem space is also 3D versus the car-driving being a 2D problem.
You need to try FSD. It has no trouble with the knarly, winding, hilly, dirt road to my house and no problem negotiating with vehicles coming the other way on that road.
Also no problem driving at night, in rain, or on snowy roads.
There is a documented case of it avoiding a collision with a light airplane crash landing on the highway prior to it touching down. In order to avoid the collision, it turns toward the airplane rather than crossing it's path.
Scott, seems you have not yet acquainted yourself with AI.
I bloody well hate AI. While the tech-holes are patting each other on the back for revolutionizing the world; while they congratulate themselves for laying off thousands of human beings and saving untold bazillions of dollars; while they laugh all the way to the bank and drink $60,000 wine on their yachts...
We are over here screaming "WTF happened to the screen I was just on? How many passcodes, passwords, email codes and phone codes do you need and why do I need f*cking facial recognition to buy you sh*t inventory? It's like trying to enter a CIA black ops base for crissake! NO! I need to speak to a human being! I said HUMAN! HUMAN! HUMAN!!! HUMAN!!! HUMAN!!!" and losing our f*cking minds!
I notice that financial institutions don't make us jump through all those hoops...
Finally someone put this vital information into words!!!!! Thanks again, Scott!!!!! You are going to save us yet!!!!!
What an AI "thinks" about your essay.
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_de70fc30-450f-43f6-92af-6e067a486ea3
LOL!
Well Scott…. You are not catching up to people like David Icke and Maria Zeee. It used to be, It’s the economy stupid! Now, It’s the tech stupid!"
Here is what I posted on X
I think, once again, we have an expert (Yourself) that doesn't get the agenda.
AI robots and drones will just be programmed to kill anything that moves. There is no decision making.
He forgets, in old warfare there was a winner. Now only tech needs to be the winner and humans, according to the 2030 schedule, will be chipped and fairly quickly children will become cyborgs. And people will LOVE It, just like they love standing on long lines at Kiosk Costco, rather than use cash at short line counter.
Hunger Games is real. The few outlanders, the few indigenous self sufficients, have been under attack in every country for centuries. The are "primitive". They are old school. They are never to be taken seriously. They stand it the way of progress!
Scott, drones will be programmed to kill anything that moves. Israel didn’t defeat Hamas YET. When everyone there is dead, the Palestinians will have lost. You and I pray not. And the Israelis trained our police. Look it up. I respect you and donate monthly, but please stop being “reasonable.”
The agenda is “build back better” after annihilation. The Roths and the demons behind them don’t give an F about life on Earth. 5G satellites are presently cooking DNA of all plants and animals. End game. That proves an alien presence is at top. Really try to encompass David Icke
Please do this search Scott. “Pope’s Audience Hall Serpent Reptilian”. Then you won’t discount David Icke.
You are absolutely spot on in this article, AI does not deal well with situations it has not been programmed, "trained", to deal with or even recognize. A pinball machine, no matter how complex, is still a pinball machine. And then there is spontaneous inspiration/action, that gut feeling reaction, resulting from subconscious thought processes, an profoundly human trait. AI will take its place in the museum of "wonder weapons".
Scott that was only Part One. Part Two = TRANSHUMANISM as has been published on www.2045.com since 2011 by RUSSIAN antichrist agent - Dmitry Itskov. (Now you know why years ago Yahweh assigned me to be prayer warrior for President Putin so he resists Satan's temptation to be an "immortal Czar" like the Egyptian pharaohs tried to be.
Dimitry Itskov's 2045.com = REACHING IMMORTALITY BY 2045. As at Aug 18. 2026 it has 47,701 members. It has a 2-min video clip. Who is the British voice narrating it? They either slipped or said purposely humanity of 500,000. I had to hear a few times before I caught it. It aims to create cybernetic immortality by transferring human consciousness into robotic or holographic avatars by 2045.
This is what the ANTICHRIST 666 mark looks like - marked by Satan in your mind not ink on forehead. Cybernetic and futurist movements target the 2040–2045 window for radical life extension, cybernetic avatars, and human-machine convergence.
Noted futurist Ray Kurzweil (GOOGLE) has long predicted that radical nanotechnology and biotechnology advances around 2040–2045 will allow humans to dramatically extend their lives or achieve practical immortality.
Itskov is WESTERN AGENT operating in Russia/his target audience are Russians.
An interesting article, however I think some of your reasoning is flawed on the following Basis -
1) We do not know how our own thoughts are constructed, i.e at the 'bare-metal' level, so cannot say that our brains do not use algorithmic processes, or decide that AI can never do what human thought can.
2) We are indeed programmed - a) instinctual, genetic programming, and b) Learned programming, which builds upon a). This is why we pass on data to each other in many forms, schools being the more obvious places of programming, but everything we engage in is also programming, whether by our own volition, or by an other's desire to mould us for a specific goal - e.g The Military.
3) We are in fact machines, highly complex, but basically are made from the same periodic table of elements that our own basic creations are. That is to say, because we are possible, and our being is constructed from the elements of the Universe, which obey the laws of Physics, and Chemistry (which includes our reasoning, thoughts, and self-awareness), machine intelligence can indeed some day rival us, maybe even be better than us.
4) The same limitations that humans experience in regards to thought, and thought processes, will also be the same limitations machine intelligence will face. The more like us those machines get towards our abilities, the more their chemistry will resemble ours, and the more limitations will be encountered - for example, heat is a major limitation to intelligence due to material capabilities to expend that heat. What we do with our brains generates heat, and in this we are far more efficient than any AI, and in a much smaller package, but that does not mean Machine Intelligence cannot reach, or exceed our capabilities. It depends on which construction, best plays with the laws of Physics, and chemistry, which our own brains are also a result of.
5) We are the evidence of what human thought is, that is to say what the Universal laws allow in high complexity of intertwining elements. When we know exactly how we work, then we will indeed be able to replicate it. We are not 'magical' beings, with super-natural processes.
Everything we are, and everything we do is within the confines of the Universal natural Laws that preceded us. If we know how we are put together, we can certainly replicate that, maybe even improving on the original, considering our flaws. Just because we 'work' as a species, doesn't mean we are the pinnacle of what is possible, particularly when it comes to thought.
I would say you are right that currently, AI is not a match, and is being hyped, and anthropomorphised, but this will not always be the case, and there will be a machine intelligence, created by us, that can outperform human beings in OODA-Loop.
There is no magical quality to human being or thought. We operate within Universal Laws, and are essentially machines ourselves. We tend to view our species as 'imperfect', no doubt for religious purpose, but in a non-religious sense, we can be considered to be 'naturally' flawed, yet also perfect for the environment we find ourselves in. We are flawed in the sense that our species may yet have room for more development through a combination of genetic, and environmental factors, and as such, are not yet at our Universal best, yet perfect, in the sense we can do all the things we do, which are in addition to just survival.
Due to our ability to observe, analyse, think, and copy, however, human beings are indeed capable of creating a machine intelligence that works on the same principles that our intelligence does, and as we ourselves are programmed, and can adapt that programming over time (though there are some who seem incapable, like a machine), it is not right to claim that self-learning AI cannot improve upon its own programming, and with the right algorithms, make decisions as reliable, and accurate as human thought, perhaps even becoming as sentient as we, maybe marginally smarter.
Right now machine intelligence is not there. It is exceptionally fast at comparing data-sets, faster than us, and detailed enough to convince many they are talking to another human being, but it is not a match for what we can do, in such a small package, with such low energy requirements, and low heat output. We don't need data-centres on Earth and in Space to power our thought.
There is however a well used, and understood saying - 'A little Knowledge is a dangerous thing', or even the phrase 'Fools go where Angel's fear to tread'. When we apply these to machine Intelligence as it currently is, we should all be reminded of just how dangerous these AI systems are - they have a little bit of knowledge (data), but no wisdom, a person without wisdom is a fool, so here we have systems that have already caused great damage through their lack of wisdom, because they have been used by fools, to go where Angels fear to tread.
AI is currently a danger to us all, on a level that exceeds Nuclear weapons, because they are not the finished product, but a work-in-progress, which should not be being used until it is ready, and safe. Nuclear weapons came to us through a process of testing, before use, with their danger becoming very apparent early on, and as such, and by nature of their destructive capability, are subject to logical controls and taboos. AI is an extraordinary threat, that has been thrust into the World, hyped as safe, and friendly, using the World as the test-subject, with serious flaws already evident, and a too-slow realisation of the sheer danger they represent, not just to our physical safety, but the mental damage they are already inflicting.
We are in a self-perpetuating rise of dangerous AI technologies, driven by the same metrics atomic, and nuclear weapons were, before saner heads, like Scott's prevailed. Unlike nuclear technology however, AI runs the great risk of having immediate global reach, and is akin to Pandora's Box, or as someone else put it "Summoning the Demon". If any AI system goes out of control, the threat is instantly Global in potential, and may well not be un-summoned, or forced back into a box.
In this I wholeheartedly agree with Scott, we need to take AI out of our decision making enterprises, and we should not see it again until it is provably safe, and complete. AI is a ship forced to sail with many safeguards missing, with the idea that the 'ship' could be patched whilst on its voyage. This type of technology, no matter how tempting it is, should never have seen the light of day until all the safe-guards possible were implemented. For Space-Rocket development, the iterative process is a boon, for AI development, iterative, is a global risk, and deployed as it is, more dangerous than any weapon to date.
The human body may be "a machine" but the mind is certainly not a "machine". And the mind is the key. The mind decides to do good or bad, love or hate, create or destroy.
AI is a machine - actually many small machines operating in parallel - so many things so fast that no human can actually know what the AI machine is doing - until it produces a result. That is the danger of AI.
The mind, like the output of a computer, is the result of the physical aspects that make it possible. The mind does not make all those things you claim, which are themselves the result of many bodily systems. For example, gut bacteria have a direct input into brain activity, mood is often influenced by other bodily systems, so if your body is abused, your mind will also change. Only a third of the cells in our bodies are of our own DNA, the rest are mostly bacteria, and other cells with different DNA, when those balances get out of whack, our moods change, which influence, or even control our choices.
There are two drivers for all the things you claim are choices of the mind, instinct, and learned behaviour. You may have plenty of choice in who you date, but attraction, what we find attractive to us, is not a mind-choice, it is a body-system choice, but you can choose to screw someone you are not attracted to, which is a mind-choice, it is the same deal with Hate, creation or destruction. We have instinctual hates, but can also choose to hate, we are driven to create, or procreate by instinct, and even to destroy by instinct, but those too can be mind-choices. Our choices are often not those of the mind, but of the effects, and control inputs of other bodily systems.
The human mind operates at a very fast speed that no one actually knows what it is doing also, and no human actually knows what we were thinking until we produce a result, like speech, signalling, or doing something. Even the 'self' is often not aware of what the mind is doing.
Consider the fact that most of what we see is a mind-construct of what we think we see. Only a very narrow portion of our vision is actually dedicated to processing the images entering the eyes as 'real', and this is also how we can be fooled by slight of hand, or even see different things (like colour, people, objects) when recounting a witnessed same scene, like an accident.
AI is not just a machine, it is also software, much in the same way as we are. If someone stops our mental functions (programming/software), or a computer's software, both machine, and human become inanimate collections of elements. One we call a brick, the other a corpse. Break the physical elements of both, and the software also ceases to function, because thought, software, is as much part of the machine, as the physical aspects of both humans, and computers.
The danger of AI is the use of it without pre-existing safeguards, and using the World as a guinea-pig for them by fools. Regarding no one knowing what an AI is 'thinking', they do have logs, which engineers have access to, which is how they can tell us that this, or that AI, broke out o its 'cage', or developed by itself a 'J-space' in memory, which functions similarly to human abstract thought. These things are known exactly because it is possible to do this with an AI, but not with a Human, mainly because we still do not know exactly how we actually think, how we make decisions. AI is very much an attempt to build machine-thought based on what little we do know about the function of the physical brain. We have a long way to go as a species before we fully know what is actually going on in thought, and self-awareness, and when we do our approach to AI programming and construction, will also change to reflect that new knowledge.
Thought is not a magical thing, it is the result of complex physical attributes, and a very long process of algorithm-like development, which itself has moulded how our brains have grown, and developed physically over time.
Nope - the human mind operates in the human brain, and the brain is simply a modem/filter between the mind and physical world. All the near-death experiences published the last 100 years are evidence of this. But nothing can "prove" it in the scientific sense. Anyway - AI can't and won't ever replicate human thinking, because human thinking is generated by the human mind, which is definitely not a machine. It is an aspect of the soul.
"Nope - the human mind operates in the human brain" - I never said it didn't operate in the brain, so don't understand what you are disagreeing with - "and the brain is simply a modem/filter between the mind and physical world" - and your proof of this is what exactly? The brain is not a simple anything, but a complex structure that is an integral part of the entire body, which senses and reacts to internal, as well as external stimuli, with those reactions coming in many forms, from sub-conscious, to conscious reactions.
With respect, what I have espoused is science fact, not an opinion or conjecture about how the mind and body are one. The idea of a 'soul' is seemingly a religious one, as the word 'Soul' originates from the ancient Hebrew word 'Nephesh' which literally means the whole body, not an ethereal part of our bodies.
If people want to believe in magic, and magical thinking, and that their identity originates from a magical place, and not as a by-product of their entire being, then that's their prerogative, but that prerogative doesn't change discovered facts, or demonstrable truths, that if one permanently shuts down one part, the other part shuts down permanently too.
Fact, our bodies only contain a third of cells with our own DNA. Fact, gut bacteria communicate directly with the Brain, and can over-ride the perceived sense of free will. Fact, being sick, alters the mind. Fact, being hungry alters the mind. Fact, you don't choose who you are attracted to, one can wilfully reject that, but it is instinct and living programming that decides that. Fact, we behave like human beings, because we are inherently programmed by DNA, and genetic memory, to be such, it is not a choice of the mind, but inherited.
Fact, our brains make-up much of what we think we see. Fact, the mind is the product of the physical body, and the thoughts we have are but a whole bunch of electrical impulses, with a few quanta thrown in for good measure. All of it can be replicated, because all these things are possible according to Universal Laws, we being the proof of that possibility.
It can be claimed, falsely, that near-death experiences prove your point, but in reality it is called NEAR-death, and not actual death. Those who have become brain-dead, are not recoverable, those who have had near-death experiences are, but cannot prove anything, that in any way confirms a spirit, or 'mind' can separate from the body.
We don't have souls, we are souls - S.O.S isn't a call to save the ethereal part of us, but to save the whole of us, the body, along with the mind. The mind s not a separate entity inhabiting a meat-sack, it is the by-product of that meat-sack's processes, chemical, electrical, and quantum.
Human beings, like all living things, are just very complicated machines. Even individual cells are machines, made from elements, joined together as compounds. Thought is not some magical, super-natural event, neither is self-awareness. Those things are amazing, both in complexity, and function, but they are the product of trillions of tiny molecular, naturally formed machines, all which work together, all which use every aspect of the Laws of Physics, and Chemistry, to produce a third we call Biology.
We are here out of an observable, universal, mixing of elements, which is why the Universe has complex chemicals, made from the mixing of basic elements, and not just hydrogen, which itself, under huge pressure and heat, splits into Helium, and so on, until there are a multitude of elements, and a plethora of chemicals, which themselves can interact, to make even more complex chemicals. Everything in the Universe, including us, and our thoughts, and self-awareness, are part of that process, and a by-product of that process.
The 'magic' is in the ignorance of these facts, when there is no ignorance of these facts, magic vanishes.
However, it is pointless to discuss this with you, if you are already pre-programmed to believe in souls as minds, proving the point that human beings are programmed, and in many cases, cannot process new data if it doesn't agree with their programming, much like AI only being able to process the data available to it, and returning an error with data outside of its programming.
Human beings are patently programmed in two methods, and have malleable, easily misled, logic-struggling minds. The struggle comes out of fear of what logic reveals, and many cannot handle the thought that we are not ever-lasting entities, with intelligence that nothing else can match or better, and an arrogant egotistical belief, that the Human way of thinking, and experiencing, is somehow unrepeatable.
Man, like animals, once feared fire like they do, but learnt to master it. Man worked out that round things can make for easier movement. Man learnt about the environment, and how a great many things work, and replicated them. Man is extremely good at observing how natural things work, then replicating, and synthesising those things. Man will work out exactly how the brain works, and even the fundamentals of thought, and self-awareness, exactly because they already exist, and because they already exist, are observable, and replicatable.
There will however always be human beings whose own thought processes are incapable of recognising a machine's as being sentient, no matter how complex, but weirdly enough, those ones usually are quite happy to believe in sentient Aliens, Angels, Demons, and Gods, with no logical, and repeatable proof, real proof, not opinion, stories, and conjecture.
If humans possess such great, unrepeatable intelligence, and self-awareness, from ethereally detactched locations, why are there so many differences in mental ability?
Clearly there are humans who think they are smart but aren't, and clearly humans that are Savants. To me this is enough proof that mental ability, the 'mind' is a by product of the whole body, with some having a greater sense of awareness, and more capable minds, which suggests physiological differences in brain chemistry, and structure, and has been proven by science to be such.
The mind is also affected by drugs, and can be enhanced, or degraded, yet those drugs work on the brain, and connected nervous system, which proves that the 'mind', our thoughts and self-awareness, are a by-product of the entire, connected body, and what affects the body, affects the mind, and thinking ability.
To be exact, the symbolic thinking (language) is key.
The specific trait that made us human is language, i.e. symbolic thinking. This was probably developed because of the need of communication (people are social beings).
I agree, language, the tool which enables us to share so much nuanced data, is the key driver of intelligence, self-awareness, and plays a strong role in our sense of self-identity.
Language is not only a tool, it is the the OPERATING SYSTEM on which our mind runs.
Indeed :-D , though I do wonder sometimes if some are running 'Windows 95', while others are running 'Linux' :-D
Language is also naturally encrypted.
Excellent article Scott. Your reasoning is totally sound. I note the first step of the OODA Loop is observation. As a medical practitioner we are taught that observation is the first step to a diagnosis and you start observing the moment the patient walks into your consulting room and from this you can pick up vital clues to what is wrong. They may have a limp indicating an orthopaedic or neurological problem, or look very pale indicating a possible low blood count. You would still need to go through the two important stages of history and examination which will provide further information eg fatigue due to a low blood count, but clues you picked up on observation may already be helping you decide on what action needs to be taken. People are enthusiastic about robots that listen to your symptoms then offer some treatment so you can be in and out quickly with less waiting time, plus supposedly removing doctor error. But can robot doctors observe and examine! If not serious conditions will be missed.
The best explanation of what AI is and what its deficiency is. Thank you so much for educating us!
I've noticed myself that for effective use of AI knowing how to use our brain is essential. Not only the ability of constant learning, logical and analytical thinking, making synthesis, but also linguistic abilities. Scott Ritter was able to crack down the AI myth thanks to his cognitive capacity.
AI is a window into a curated past. Emphasis on "curated" - and by whom?
Yes, in the West, we can see tendency to abuse AI for censorship and mass manipulation.
In Russia, they are building a different paradigm. They use AI as an assistant that helps to be more effective and achieve better results. AI is good at processing enormous amounts of data. As Lily357 noticed, it is a statistical tool and it is good at making summaries. AI is also good at finding archival documents, sources, etc.
But in order to use AI effectively, one has to teach AI how to analyze data. For that, one needs to have knowledge independent of AI. And we must be able to evaluate AI results.
AI is very bad at making decisions. This is because AI is not able to differentiate between good and bad. Only intelligent human beings are able to evaluate data correctly and realisticly. For AI, data are only data. AI is able to notice quantity, but cannot evaluate quality.
BTW, one of the top priorities set by Russian government is development of higly intelligent and highly skilled population — and that means everyone, not just a handful of people chosen to become a techno class for AI maintenance.
This is why we are not allowed to know the real Russia. It would become to obvious that Western oligarchy wants to reinstall/strenghten colonialism and feudalism.
Exactly right about Russia, and same for China, and also, not to forget Iran. These brilliant young Iranians figured out how to spot a stealth F-35 by detecting its heat signal and using AI & computers to separate that from background. Actually, even humans are not good at seeing the difference between good and bad vs good and evil. See Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil.
Sorting through AI results means sorting its sourcing, for instance it will keep repeating "Russia's full-scale invasion" since this is boilerplate in MSM, therefore, assumed to be the majority opinion.
Scott, I shared your article on Duran locals and got a reply from one of my readers, AgropromRecluse that I am sharing with you. Do you think his example of the jet fighter contest (link below) between a human and an AI is valid?
AgropromRecluse
@AgropromRecluse
5 hours ago
@TonyWicher
"because it demonstrates in a very concrete way that human intelligence cannot be duplicated by any computer program no matter how much data it processes. "Artificial intelligence" is a misnomer" (my statement in my intro to your article)
AgropromRecluse:
Lets' just say that I have doubt about a Scott Ritter blogpost solving a question that has occupied armies of engineers, scientists and philosophers since at least Alan Turing asked the initial question 😂
Scott writes
Before we get too far carried away here, let’s be clear—computers cannot “think”, nor are they capable of human-like reasoning.
And is immediately in a state of sin. Because what he is doing is "begging the question", he is positing what he wants to prove. The question of who wants "human like reasoning", which isn't particularly great, probably trying have some generality in exchange of effectiveness, is also left unstated. I guess we actually want something better, right?
A computer simply does what it is programmed to do.
This sentence literally carries no meaning. What is it "programmed to do"? Maybe it is programmed to find new approaches to break out of its "OODA loop."
One may note that one does not NEED systems that are "general" in a human sense. Here is an example: AlphaDogfight is a system that runs on very cheap hardware, from 2020 and does not use any LLM, it's just a small "neuro-fuzzy" system optimized for dogfights. (I think it cheats as it has access to the simulation environment, it should perform actual visual processing, but let us conveniently ignore that). Well, the point is, always inside the humans "OODA loop" for this precise problem.
Link to AlphaDogfight:
https://youtu.be/NzdhIA2S35w?t=16795
When AI is able to win the "enemy army", it will be able to get rid of you too.
Only psychopathic maniacs can work on perfecting AI so that it could kill more human beings. At the same time, my suspicion is confirmed that psychopaths are self-destructive, i.e. latently suicidal.