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.
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.
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.
Have you tried Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD)?
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.
Scott, seems you have not yet acquainted yourself with AI.
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.