Talk:Artificial intelligence

This looks (and reads) very much like auto generated content. All input welcome, thanks.

-> http://archive.today/2021.04.09-224518/https://medika.life/we-call-out-reiner-fuellmich-as-a-fraud-the-covid-conspirator-investigated/

[Whois Record for Medika.life - Created on 2020-04-15]

"Dr Robert Turner https://cre8tive.media - Robert is a Founder of Medika Life. He is a published author and owner of Cre8tive Digital Media. He lives between the Philippines and the UK. and is an outspoken advocate for a better internet. Global access to basic healthcare and eradicating racial and gender bias in medicine are key motivators behind the Medika website and reflect Robert's passion for accessible medical care."

--Sunvalley (talk) 23:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Medika does claim it is "self-funded" but canvasses for money vaguely "If you feel our goals and ambitions are aligned with those of your business, why not reach out and let's explore how our synergy can contribute to more equitable healthcare...We partner with a diverse range of businesses from various sectors, not only the healthcare industry.", implying they are funded by undeclared business interests.

Cre8tive Media "is a collaborative of digital influencers", a bit strange way of describing a journalistic venture. "We use this data to influence the distribution of content that engages and enriches readers."

One of their "partners", Compumatrice, does "AI-based software solutions, like machine learning models, can help your organization automate the operations of virtually any department"

In short, Medika is definitely suspected of being a paid astroturfing enterprise, but if the article "We Call Out Reiner Fuellmich" is slapped together from skimming documents and general ignorance, combined with loose threats, or if it is machine written, I cannot tell.

And it is number one hit on Google with the search word "Medika", showing that it is prioritized by the corporation.

Terje (talk) 08:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, for pointing that out. It's pretty close. If it is AI, likely someone will still have looked at it before publishing; so it can be a mixture of both too. Since some predictions say that in the future we will get many news items written by a bot, I guess the technology that is now in the open is at a level to produce longer articles like that. If it gets incoherent an operator can even it out, still this can produce much more content written in a language that will resonate with a certain (younger) audience -> Inform and Influence Activity -- (a few links from Rand that deal with the topic)

-- Sunvalley (talk) 21:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Two more things: When Medika highlights how concerned it is with "racism in medical treatments" etc, it is using the sectarian buzz-words that are needed to get funding from well-connected foundations. And the second thing that struck me with the Fuellmich article, is that it was very possibly written under the influence of alcohol :) Terje (talk) 05:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Also note the Gibberish talk about "gender", reflecting the "Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB)" of Davos. Whenever you hear "sustainable", think about population reduction, because: too many people are not "sustainable". Urban (talk) 11:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

And "medika" does also perform well on Bing at present, for just the search term: "Reiner Fuellmich". Also interesting to see how long indexing takes for Wikispooks, both (but especially Google) crawlers were exposed to new links on the site that they did not follow up on. I did this search the last couple of days but only today I get a result with his name and the limitation on just "wikispooks.com". -- Sunvalley (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)