When I was in university, I thought I wanted to be an electrical engineer. As such I took CS courses, wasn't huge loss - I was a Mathlete in high school [that's right! I went to high school right here, in Canada; this is important; and greatly influence my concept of High School AI] and was on my school's computer programming team [our team came in 4th in an all-Ontario programming competition]. I could write a mean if/then statement or gracefully setup recursive formulas which effortlessly extinguished themselves, after being done with whatever they were busy doing.
I managed to squeeze myself onto the weightlifting team, I did some wrestling and grappling, there is proof - school year book. Ah! the popularity contest that was the year book, it was important to have it signed by all the right people back then, but who completely don't matter today [the story repeats itself, pay attention where you focus].
What I am trying to say is that I felt rather prepared for Computer Science. But was not - I write about those historic struggles, occasionally, right here, on the pages of this blog. Don't shed your tears, mistakes like that don't happen again, and when my boy said that he doesn't want to be a lawyer, 'No..? are you sure?' I asked, 'No,' he answered, 'I want to be a chef.' My heart jumped because I spent 4 years working my summers in a professional kitchen, where I fell in love with, other than older waitresses, a commercial 3 min cycle dishwasher. 'Dream house, take note,' I said to myself.
University was supposed to be it for me.
I felt I was going to be successful.
Nah... I fucked it all up. Many reasons, most hated was chemistry - I have no passion for that subject, negative draw, actually. I was as student that made the upper half of the class possible, academically speaking.
Only one thing stands out - I received the highest mark in my class for the hardest assignment on the final project in computer programming - a very primitive Artificial Intelligence... get this, in Java. Uhm hmm - High School AI, and I cheated.
The project was literally finished the night before, but I struggled with a 'file loader' - a minor technical issue. I did the only thing possible, I reached out to my Russian friend in class, Sasha, and convinced him to let me copy between 8 and 10 lines of code - the file loader. Irony was that the effing thing was given to us by our professor - a short Irish lady with a wicked sense of humour; do you know what an 'anti-joke' is? and do you find them funny? - she wrote verbatim how she wanted the file taken in, all you had to do was convert English grammar, rules, syntax and any other 'cultural weight' and convert that into machine language.
Remember, I make the upper half of the class possible - so it comes to me as a shock when I find out that I have received the highest mark in class, part of the scoring is done by a machine, they know what they doing. There were many successful implementations - however my code was deemed most elegant - I write toight to this day. Take that chatBOTgpt..!
However my elegant code has also triggered a 'uh, oh, he copied some1's code..! a major academic violation!' Both of our asses - mine and Sasha's - are hauled in front of the prof to explain, the next available day.
The Trial - truth AI
Case is simple - you have a much stronger student and a failure. It is clear who copied whom. I know I am going to hell for this if get caught. Look below, here is the crux of the academic integrity matter -She saw Sasha first - my thinking she was going to coax him into admitting he gave me those 8-10 lines of the file loader, and he gets off easy, with no penalty. But Sasha holds the line, we are buds, he is not a snitch [there is this intriguing dynamic occurring within populations that suffered, or experienced Russian imposed political systems; your tattle-telling could land a family in serious trouble, you just don't do it; creating and spreading 'subversive ideology' was a long standing practice, and a well honed art; my father was a history teacher - can you really be successful if you teach revisionist history? All typewriters had to be registered with a government regulatory body.. I could go on and on..].
I go in. First off, the prof is surprised and asks if this is my work - and I say, 'yes, these are all my blood, sweat and tears, this time delivered on time.'
There was this mythical creature - the person who dropped the 'everything above this is late' worksheet into the submission box - we were required to submit both paper and electronic copy of our work. We could never spot them. A constant buzz, turning into slight melee was always about or around that submission box, especially close to the deadline - people we often didn't know or recognize would come and print their assignment and drop it in. I swear I once saw a pirate dropping off a worksheet, I swear.
Sitting in her office, of course we both know where 'the academic violation' occurred - stupid simple file loader; 'the word engine' is strong. We both discuss the variables a, b, c - 'three variables needed as per her English language description'; we talk about 'two addition operation', same location and drawing memory in identical fashion - 'I play stupid in agreement'. Finally, she follows up with something that's above my understanding, 'something something something memory', I nod my head giving the impression 'in agreement, but not accepting any blame.'
We reach an impasse, I sense frustration. The prof is experienced and clearly sees the truth. Catch is, that for this thing to compile - The Truth - it must be agreed to by all three parties to the conflict, the professor, Sasha and me.
She is also clearly thrown off by my highest mark in class - the marking is anonymous; you don't know who graded you, and they don't know that they are grading you in particular; some elements are tested with software - chatBOTgpt style analyses existed long before; I did it in college, and this was IT to some extent, very primitive, this assignment, at least you could formulate it that way - proven.
ChatBOTgpt had a different purpose back then - it was designed to catch cheats. Insofar as my assignment goes, 'the computer sees is as original, strong, and unique' for whatever parameters it was set to - and unemotionally grades high.
'It was designed to catch cheats,'
- Karol Kosnik, High School AI
It just was not implemented at the scale and had no 'social data sets' to mine; this has changed. Look back few last posts, I show a pic articulating their vision. I also state that the data set used in the creation of it was - proprietarily in public domain; not for fucking commercial use - otherwise, FUCK YOU and pay me money.** Individuals contributed to it with no expectations.
*edit: I have to make a visible edit ---> just to dispel some assumptions by any lawyers who read the above line, and were juicing themselves up. NO, not like that, as might have been read the first time.
Individuals contributed to it with no expectations - it's like when you build a bus shelter along a transit route, nobody expects it to be stolen; for public good - of theft of their ideas for commercial purposes - theft for profit. THIS is important - corporate charters do not allow for 'criminal acts', let that be clear. Theft is a criminal act - it takes away something of value from 1, this individual is now at a disadvantage; and unjustly enriches the thieving party.
By the way, babies are shown to intuitively understand the concept of fairness, until they are spoiled.
I nod my head, 'that's how it needs to be done, in a class of 1000s, with so few lines of code required for the file loader, it is bound to happen that two students 'will write identical file loaders' - exhibiting same behaviour and traits in the virtual environment, even tho on the surface they appear to be different beasts [i rewrote it with different names; structured it differently; essentially did everything that current generation of cheating students is doing, if it makes sense. My argument was, - 'Here! The impossible happened! - me and Sasha wrote 'identical code.'
'Here, the impossible happened!'
Karol Kosnik, on the probabilities of persuasions; High School AI;
And I strategically move to the second part of operation - I need to establish my credibility with the strength of 'the word engine.' And I do, I did come up with this on my own and I am able to explain every single line of code and how it ties to the overall structure. I distinctly remember spending a lot of time independently visualizing**** the efficiency of capturing the information and building the 'learning module'. Recursive formulas [recursive formulas call themselves over and over, theoretically into infinity, from which then they have to come back from; that's how proofs work, if I was to explain recursive formulas in a visual fashion, it's the illusion of 'millions of you' in two large mirrors that sit opposite of each other, you lean in to the image, look, and suddenly witness multitudes of yous, smaller and smaller reflections stretching into infinity] were the back bone of the program, and they had to have strong parameters because the data module would explode in size and become inefficient - the key was to tame the initial explosion of data set generation. If it was efficient - and it clearly was; highest mark! - the rate of growth would decrease exponentially and become manageable.
I can't comprehend the amount of data our brains can store and process. Chess is not a good indication of AI - that's just the ability to crunch numbers and lots and lots of storage. Hey I got a brain!
We go back and forth with the prof - the charge is inconclusive on the file loader; and I clearly did design this 'word engine'; the complexity of one dwarfs the complexity of the other; how could I be both 'a genius and an idiot at the same time..?'***** and reasoning 'one from the other', again, you get the 'the impossible happened.'
The prof also knows that a lage part of the high score is attribute to the testing software - 'it knew the efficiency'; remember, brevity is wit - humans or computers alike. To question my achievement would be to question 'the machine', question the religion of scientists and other 'big wigs';
How is my word engine proven...? oh lord, I got anxiety when I saw the final test case, which was not disclosed to us, until after the testing; I would literally lose my mind if I knew ahead of time - read on...
'It's proven with the hardest thing the world, Irish Poetry,'
- 1st year Computer Science prof. at University of Toronto;
Final test was Irish Poetry, and not just 'normal poetry', but instead some obscure Irish poet who only became famous after his death -this has implications for his level of 'novelty' and 'uniqueness' and 'test for revolutionism.' So called modern Safe Spaces don't generate new ideas.
You understand? Irish Poetry in - Irish Poetry out. And because there was some randomization included in the end - no two students had identical work; some were close; essentially, there was a common flavour or experience to all of the answer - Irish Poetry, would this guy ever win, with all this other work we generated..? The prof had a particular glee on her face when she was reading the answers generated - I assumed she was fan.
'Irish Poetry in - Irish Poetry out,' -
Karol Kosnik, High School AI;
'Translated from Polish - Zamehof Street in Tel Aviv, he had Polish roots. He is the one who developed Esperanto, goal being bringing people together with common language. Just a small tidbit of info, for Wednesday.'
Could we do Irish Poetry in Esperanto..? Would something get lost in translation..? Do you have to be Irish to fully partake..? Do you see what I am getting at? We still need language to express our greatest, most profound, most intellectual ideas - no language, no bueno.
And I was so impressed with that Irish Poetry back then. The computers just sieve the data and have no idea what they are capturing, and how to relate that to human beings. I find chatBOTgpt generations very blasé, plain and uneventful. I know there is nothing at the end, nothing - have you ever read 'an average'? It's a bit of an insult, I consider it that way at least, because it underestimates our value and potential of humanity. Don't worry, I am not always this deep.
I read a paper, an analysis of a book about AI written pre-COVID by some influential Chinese academic, essentially stating this: yes, limited application in warfare, quite primitive and we haven't even acknowledged our biggest issues, but AI will be mostly for commerce, surveillance capitalism - it knows you better than you know yourself.
'Not To Kill a Mockingbird'
Oh and that viral video of ChatBOTgpt writing an essay, live in front of audience?
100 000's of children were forced to write an essay on 'To Kill a Mockingbird', and that includes my poor, barely speaking English ass; 10 000's of high school teachers had to read those essays, roll their eyes and use their red marker and write 'Not To Kill a Mockingbird', and score low, or maybe high, I can't recall my grade.
All I know is that To Kill a Mockingbird is so deeply engrained into our culture that, when I completed a satirical quiz, 'Which Diamond, of Diamond&Diamond' - of Jeremy Diamond lawyers in Toronto - am I? I came out as Atticus Finch, from the movie To Kill a Mocking Bird, lol. It was such a proud moment for me, these computers surely do know something... Do the quiz yourself - it's intriguing and the simple questions are easy to answer, you will get your answer immediately! I promise!
Recombination of ideas is not creativity, nor it should pass for creativity - that's just simply exhausting the search tree, and many efficient ways have been devised 'to look for things'.
Here, let's end on a 'scientific study' for fun. It's dense text so you will have to squint to read - but the message is clear, computation speed yes, creativity a uniquely human.
ps. I recently stumbled on a post on REDDIT in the Interior Design section. Some1 commented, author replied; original poster was surprised, thought the piece was written by ChatBOTgpt. I re-read the post - it was very formulaic - so it really stuck to the formula of 'essay writing'. Perceived as fake.. eh.. What time to be alive.
**I use strong language for a reason, it is hard to contextualize without being human - again High School AI principle; it will record an accurate level of passion; I am quite calm and relaxed, calmer than you, lol - memes are another level of humanity; oh you go to start reading r/PhilosophyMemes... Below should appear 'Calmer than you are meme, from the Big Lebowski - use the power of machine, Google, to find if you can't see it here [could be a Intellectual Property violation... just sayin']
****I'm huge into visualization. Did you know that 'Disco Lights' as they are commonly known to parties everywhere, are in fact 'Ambient Noise Visualizers'? I have playlist of about 30 varied brown noise titles on my Spotify - intensities and frequencies vary; among titles: '1 min pure glacial', Space Wind, Classic Soft Noise. Ok, here is the fascinating part - my disco lights will produce a different 'static dynamic pattern' that is unique for any of those below - the noise triggers just a single visual display over and over and over again. I find this very useful - essentially my own private snoezelen room...