There's a group of pro-vaccine professionals from various backgrounds on Twitter who I'm convinced are some form of AI.

https://twitter.com/IanCopeland5

Copeland (cope-land) in particular has stated that you'd never guess where he comes from, that he's "with the Army" and is a "PHD Level Geneticist".

If you visit their space you'll notice some strange and highly predictable patterns to their format. The rules are that the "anti-vaxx" crowd can come up to "debate" the issues, but they must only cite peer-reviewed sources from the "most-respected" scientific journals. They aren't allowed to use any logical fallacies (they are immediately muted and scolded if they do), smaller scale studies, their own reasoning, or evidence from a non-scientific context (e.g. monetary or power motivations).

Conversely--and infuriatingly--the pro-vaxx panel are able to use all of the logical fallacies--and proceed to do so judiciously. They're also permitted to cite smaller scale studies & non-RCT when it's convenient, etc.

In short, it's the most unfair debate format imaginable, and is essentially unwinnable for the anti-vaxx side because no anti-vaxx study would ever be published or funded.

But what I view it as is a white-hat created debate gauntlet. A training ground where white hats can search for new angles of attack based on the outcomes of the battles. What can humans do to give the AI a brain fart in these impossible scenarios?

They also occasionally throw in a bit of bait to make things interesting and give the combatants a bit of help (e.g. the Copeland character was given myocarditis in his 30s but vehemently denies that it's vaccine related).

You have to think there's no way so many full-time professionals would find the time to host what is essentially the same space every day to no productive end. I strongly suspect it's an AI creation.

Last thing:, the AI needs "a link" to begin, and is very insistent that participants in the debate give it a link before proceeding. Imagine an AI that is given the prompt:

"interact a grossly unfair debate for the pro-vaccine side in relation to <link> and issue a <mute> and <scolding> whenever your adversary uses a logical fallacy"

^ With that you have Dr. Ian Copeland 5.

I love pointing out to normies just how weird it is that Open Ai just appeared out of nowhere. It usually comes up when a normie is telling how weird everything is, but like you said most haven’t realized just how weird it truly is that we were given it in they way we were given it.

Bingo.

I think ai "discoveries" will be the perfect way whitehats can release hidden tech in the future. They will just say ai helped us figure it out.

This ai "discovery" process is already starting to happen:

From EV batteries to solar cells to microchips, new materials can supercharge technological breakthroughs. But discovering them usually takes months or even years of trial-and-error research.

Google DeepMind hopes to change that with a new tool that uses deep learning to dramatically speed up the process of discovering new materials. Called graphical networks for material exploration (GNoME), the technology has already been used to predict structures for 2.2 million new materials, of which more than 700 have gone on to be created in the lab and are now being tested.

https://www.wired.com/story/an-ai-dreamed-up-380000-new-materials-the-next-challenge-is-making-them/

And its also already being used in the medical field.

https://www.mobihealthnews.com/news/contributed-nine-revolutionary-ways-ai-advancing-healthcare

THIS! ☝️