Caoimhin O’Muraile 🎥 has been watching a BBC Six Part Series.


I was watching a series, six parts, on BBC1 titled The Capture which, among other things, examined the potential of artificial intelligence. The series was clearly based on the British business minister, Kwasi Kwarteng, issuing an order preventing the acquisition under the “National Security and Investment Act” of vision sensing technology from Beijing, Infinite Vision Technology Co, a Chinese company the British Government or perhaps more importantly the US Government do not trust. 

Infinite Vision Technology Co, it was argued successfully, had too many connections with the Chinese Government and could not, therefore, have anything to do with Britain’s security. The BBC series and characters were fiction even science-fiction in many respects, and told the tale of Isaac Turner, the Security-Minister for Great Britain and how he was portrayed on live television using artificial intelligence. 

In the series it is possible to interview a person, live on TV, and insert a totally different script to what they are really saying live, which is what the viewers see and hear. For example, the hapless Minister Turner, a black man, was interviewed live on the BBC and openly supported “racial profiling.” In the real interview, indeed several previous proper interviews, he had said the absolute opposite of the version some time at an earlier date, but it was the artificially modified and corrupted version which went out and went out live on air! In fact, he was not even in the studio at the time, he was in a ministry safe house, supposedly under protection from the Chinese, whose bid for a contract with the British Government he had rejected. All he could do was watch with horror what he was, to all intents and purposes, saying. 

Suddenly this minister from an ethnic minority background became a racist and the interview was all the proof anybody watching would need. Even the sympathetic person viewing this could not deny that the Security-Minister had indeed said this about supporting “racial profiling” in support of Britain’s national security. In reality he opposed this “racial profiling” but audiences are fickle at the best of times when facts are presented, let alone when untruths, which they believe to be truths are presented. All very confusing and had to be carefully followed I thought to get the head around. It became increasingly difficult to tell the genuine Isaac Turner from the synthetic one! The real Turners finger of suspicion pointed towards the Chinese for doctoring his speeches. This turned out not to be the case.

The question is, how far are the worlds technological giants from reaching this make-believe technology becoming fact? How long before elections are decided not on what the electorate hear candidates say on face-to-face debates, or in interviews, but what the electorate think they have heard the candidates say? In reality elections could be decided, theoretically, by the technology companies, or the larger and most advanced of them working on behalf of powerful states! These companies tend to be US, Russian or Chinese firms and, it would appear, are engaged in an ongoing war with each other on behalf of their respective states and governments. 

In recent years we have heard much about one country, either Russia or China usually, but more likely to be the USA, interfering with another country’s elections. We are never told how these alleged interferences occur, just that they do! Russia was supposedly behind the victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 US Presidential elections. Now, I am no lover of Trump, far from it, but judging by the technology now available, even discounting the possible exaggerations in the BBC series, could such a move have been feasible? If it was the case, then bet your last dollar the USA have been at it for years as they are so far ahead in the tech race. China may now be on their heels in this deadly game of cat and mouse but, certainly for the moment the USA are in the lead I believe. The BBC series opened up the possibilities a thousand times, people getting into lifts who were not visible on security screens and shooting an undercover policemen. Could this be possible and we have not been told, and if it is possible, or becomes a realistic proposition, will we ever be informed?

Could it become possible to interview live on RTE Mary Lou McDonald, while she is away somewhere else, miles away from the reported venue where the interview is taking place, telling us why she supports the partition of Ireland and why a border poll must never come about? Could this happen? Now, I know Sinn Fein are a shadow of their former selves but if such an interview were to be aired live on RTE, UTV or the BBC it would take a hell of a lot of disproving. People may, bewildered at first, believe such an artificial interview especially with Sinn Fein dumping so many other principles over recent years. Likewise, a similar interview with DUP leader, Jeffrey Donaldson, who, like his political foe, Mary Lou, could be elsewhere, miles away from the studio where this supposed interview takes place and certainly not in a BBC building, talking about the benefits of Irish unification and how this should come about quickly. Could such interviews become possible? Imagine the turmoil in republican and loyalist areas of the six counties if such technology were ever used in this way! Once again, if an interview like this went out, and even though Donaldson and McDonald are elsewhere, this is what the viewers, loyalist and republican, would hear and view. Perhaps we could have an artificial intelligence interview with new British Prime Minister, Liz Truss, talking about how great the “Northern Ireland” Protocol is, supported by Sammy Wilson of the DUP. Of course neither of these people would have said any such thing, but try telling the viewers that!

In the BBC series the technology was being used by a foreign power, notably the USA blaming Beijing, to cause a rift between Britain and China. A Chinese company, like Beijing Infinite Vision Technology Co, in real life, was looking for a contract in Britain. The Security Minister, Isaac Turner, obviously based on the real-life event, rejected the bid on national security grounds and as intended, led to tensions between Britain and China. This led to a series of fascinating events and, if were to happen in real life very dangerous incidents involving killings, ministers and police being watched and monitored in their own homes, ministers saying things they never did, the possibilities with such technology are endless. In many respects back in the sixties a basic variant of this Machiavellian intelligence reportedly happened. British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson’s telephones were regularly bugged by British Intelligence, so such carryings on already have allegedly occurred. But the BBC version was something else and frightening!

In the real-world, employers are already using computer technology to smash trade union disputes. When Willie Walsh was head of British Airways, he reportedly gained access to the TGWU (I think at the time before it became UNITE) emails. He therefore knew every move the union was about to make. Was this illegal? No, apparently not! Could the union have done the same thing in reverse? Again, no, apparently not! The moral to this tale is do not conduct sensitive trade union business via email.

How could such deeds as in the BBC serial be done? I am no expert on computer technology, semi-literate at best, but let us take an interview with Jeffrey Donaldson. It is irrelevant what the interview is about, all that is needed is the image of the DUP leader. Put this image on the screens and insert a totally different text, the interviewer, who would be in the loop, possibly a state employee (Sandy Gall, the former newscaster was allegedly in the pay of MI6), would be talking in the studio to nobody yet the image on the screens would be that of Donaldson saying the complete opposite of his real political position! How far-fetched are such technological developments, if indeed developments is the right description? 

Well, in many ways it has been with us in a very, very primitive way for years. Take, for example, an actor playing two different characters in the same film or series, sitcom even. On many occasions this has happened, the same actor playing two different characters in the same show, even the same scene and clip but never actually conversing face to face with each other. This is the massive leap the BBC makes in the series. It is possible to hold a conversation with nobody and it appears the interviewer is talking to somebody!! An example of the actor, and followers of the sitcom Only Fools and Horses may be familiar with the scene, was when actor David Jason played his usual role of “Del Boy Trotter” and also a Mafia boss. He even appeared as both characters in the same scene but not face to face or conversing. So, in a way and a very primitive way, this technological potential has been around for some time. Call it illusionary filming (my term) as the filming is done completely separately yet when put together it gives the impression the scene with the actor playing a dual role is taken in a single shoot.

Leaving the entertainment industry and their use of double acting aside, this technology, if it comes to pass or, even worse, is already here, poses a very dangerous threat to mankind and certainly democracy, even liberal democracy. It would be possible for the very best of the high-tech manufacturers, on behalf of their respective states, to decide what politicians, Prime Ministers, Presidents, and our own Taoiseach say or are believed to have said, thus deciding the Government of another country. The old maxim, “what can’t speak, can’t lie” would come into play and the saying the “camera never lies” would certainly not be the case here. It would be possible for powerful states, the USA, China, Russia, even Britain to a lesser extent, irrespective of what the various electorates think or are programmed to think, to decide future governments around the globe. It is bad enough now with the media telling people how to think and vote, but if this comes to pass and in the wrong hands, which would include almost everybody with access to it, then the candidates themselves will be, or perhaps will not be, telling people how to vote by way of the tech giants. Regime changes in less compliant countries may in the future not need military invasion, just one of these highly developed digital computer programmes.

I do not know or profess to know how this technology may work, just that it appears as a strong possibility that some powerful states, the US, China, Russia and perhaps the British even the Israelis in the Middle East could be in possession of such technology. What impact may that have, should it be the case with the Israelis, on the Arab world?

In the BBC series an American, a CIA operative called Frank, the ones behind this scam called “Correction” is diagnosed with terminal cancer. Suddenly the disease cures itself and that was because the man never had it. A British spook had inserted, by use of this technology, images showing cancer, which was what the doctor, as would any doctor, based his diagnosis. Is this possible? Is such dangerous material already with us? If it is not, and I believe various states may be close but not there yet, to having such advanced technology a terrifying scenario will exist. Doctors will no longer be trusted, politicians already suspect at best, could be presented as frauds but not in the way they are now, but in such a manner benefiting the states these tech companies work on behalf of. It may come to pass, they, the aggressive states, and not governments, who decide the future of countries and, indeed the planet and that is concerning to say the least. Just imagine a scenario where the US set Moscow against Beijing and they mutually destroy each other. Then, they could set Britain against the EU in a similar way, or on the other hand, Moscow could set London against Washington the possibilities are endless and maybe I am getting a little carried away, but these possibilities are real!!

Finally, a word of praise for the BBC who when they do produce a drama series, Line of Duty, Ridley Road, and now, The Capture which needed concentration with no adverts they get it right. This is the only channel such intriguing dramas could be shown because certainly in The Capture much concentration was needed. Commercial breaks would break that concentration and ruin the series. On the commercial channels, including our own Irish channels, every ten to twelve minutes a commercial break comes on, about fourteen to sixteen minuets per hour. These breaks have slowly increased over the years and shortly it could be we have a programme break in between adverts. Perhaps another subject for another day.
 
Caoimhin O’Muraile is an Independent 
Socialist Republican and Marxist

The Capture

Caoimhin O’Muraile 🎥 has been watching a BBC Six Part Series.


I was watching a series, six parts, on BBC1 titled The Capture which, among other things, examined the potential of artificial intelligence. The series was clearly based on the British business minister, Kwasi Kwarteng, issuing an order preventing the acquisition under the “National Security and Investment Act” of vision sensing technology from Beijing, Infinite Vision Technology Co, a Chinese company the British Government or perhaps more importantly the US Government do not trust. 

Infinite Vision Technology Co, it was argued successfully, had too many connections with the Chinese Government and could not, therefore, have anything to do with Britain’s security. The BBC series and characters were fiction even science-fiction in many respects, and told the tale of Isaac Turner, the Security-Minister for Great Britain and how he was portrayed on live television using artificial intelligence. 

In the series it is possible to interview a person, live on TV, and insert a totally different script to what they are really saying live, which is what the viewers see and hear. For example, the hapless Minister Turner, a black man, was interviewed live on the BBC and openly supported “racial profiling.” In the real interview, indeed several previous proper interviews, he had said the absolute opposite of the version some time at an earlier date, but it was the artificially modified and corrupted version which went out and went out live on air! In fact, he was not even in the studio at the time, he was in a ministry safe house, supposedly under protection from the Chinese, whose bid for a contract with the British Government he had rejected. All he could do was watch with horror what he was, to all intents and purposes, saying. 

Suddenly this minister from an ethnic minority background became a racist and the interview was all the proof anybody watching would need. Even the sympathetic person viewing this could not deny that the Security-Minister had indeed said this about supporting “racial profiling” in support of Britain’s national security. In reality he opposed this “racial profiling” but audiences are fickle at the best of times when facts are presented, let alone when untruths, which they believe to be truths are presented. All very confusing and had to be carefully followed I thought to get the head around. It became increasingly difficult to tell the genuine Isaac Turner from the synthetic one! The real Turners finger of suspicion pointed towards the Chinese for doctoring his speeches. This turned out not to be the case.

The question is, how far are the worlds technological giants from reaching this make-believe technology becoming fact? How long before elections are decided not on what the electorate hear candidates say on face-to-face debates, or in interviews, but what the electorate think they have heard the candidates say? In reality elections could be decided, theoretically, by the technology companies, or the larger and most advanced of them working on behalf of powerful states! These companies tend to be US, Russian or Chinese firms and, it would appear, are engaged in an ongoing war with each other on behalf of their respective states and governments. 

In recent years we have heard much about one country, either Russia or China usually, but more likely to be the USA, interfering with another country’s elections. We are never told how these alleged interferences occur, just that they do! Russia was supposedly behind the victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 US Presidential elections. Now, I am no lover of Trump, far from it, but judging by the technology now available, even discounting the possible exaggerations in the BBC series, could such a move have been feasible? If it was the case, then bet your last dollar the USA have been at it for years as they are so far ahead in the tech race. China may now be on their heels in this deadly game of cat and mouse but, certainly for the moment the USA are in the lead I believe. The BBC series opened up the possibilities a thousand times, people getting into lifts who were not visible on security screens and shooting an undercover policemen. Could this be possible and we have not been told, and if it is possible, or becomes a realistic proposition, will we ever be informed?

Could it become possible to interview live on RTE Mary Lou McDonald, while she is away somewhere else, miles away from the reported venue where the interview is taking place, telling us why she supports the partition of Ireland and why a border poll must never come about? Could this happen? Now, I know Sinn Fein are a shadow of their former selves but if such an interview were to be aired live on RTE, UTV or the BBC it would take a hell of a lot of disproving. People may, bewildered at first, believe such an artificial interview especially with Sinn Fein dumping so many other principles over recent years. Likewise, a similar interview with DUP leader, Jeffrey Donaldson, who, like his political foe, Mary Lou, could be elsewhere, miles away from the studio where this supposed interview takes place and certainly not in a BBC building, talking about the benefits of Irish unification and how this should come about quickly. Could such interviews become possible? Imagine the turmoil in republican and loyalist areas of the six counties if such technology were ever used in this way! Once again, if an interview like this went out, and even though Donaldson and McDonald are elsewhere, this is what the viewers, loyalist and republican, would hear and view. Perhaps we could have an artificial intelligence interview with new British Prime Minister, Liz Truss, talking about how great the “Northern Ireland” Protocol is, supported by Sammy Wilson of the DUP. Of course neither of these people would have said any such thing, but try telling the viewers that!

In the BBC series the technology was being used by a foreign power, notably the USA blaming Beijing, to cause a rift between Britain and China. A Chinese company, like Beijing Infinite Vision Technology Co, in real life, was looking for a contract in Britain. The Security Minister, Isaac Turner, obviously based on the real-life event, rejected the bid on national security grounds and as intended, led to tensions between Britain and China. This led to a series of fascinating events and, if were to happen in real life very dangerous incidents involving killings, ministers and police being watched and monitored in their own homes, ministers saying things they never did, the possibilities with such technology are endless. In many respects back in the sixties a basic variant of this Machiavellian intelligence reportedly happened. British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson’s telephones were regularly bugged by British Intelligence, so such carryings on already have allegedly occurred. But the BBC version was something else and frightening!

In the real-world, employers are already using computer technology to smash trade union disputes. When Willie Walsh was head of British Airways, he reportedly gained access to the TGWU (I think at the time before it became UNITE) emails. He therefore knew every move the union was about to make. Was this illegal? No, apparently not! Could the union have done the same thing in reverse? Again, no, apparently not! The moral to this tale is do not conduct sensitive trade union business via email.

How could such deeds as in the BBC serial be done? I am no expert on computer technology, semi-literate at best, but let us take an interview with Jeffrey Donaldson. It is irrelevant what the interview is about, all that is needed is the image of the DUP leader. Put this image on the screens and insert a totally different text, the interviewer, who would be in the loop, possibly a state employee (Sandy Gall, the former newscaster was allegedly in the pay of MI6), would be talking in the studio to nobody yet the image on the screens would be that of Donaldson saying the complete opposite of his real political position! How far-fetched are such technological developments, if indeed developments is the right description? 

Well, in many ways it has been with us in a very, very primitive way for years. Take, for example, an actor playing two different characters in the same film or series, sitcom even. On many occasions this has happened, the same actor playing two different characters in the same show, even the same scene and clip but never actually conversing face to face with each other. This is the massive leap the BBC makes in the series. It is possible to hold a conversation with nobody and it appears the interviewer is talking to somebody!! An example of the actor, and followers of the sitcom Only Fools and Horses may be familiar with the scene, was when actor David Jason played his usual role of “Del Boy Trotter” and also a Mafia boss. He even appeared as both characters in the same scene but not face to face or conversing. So, in a way and a very primitive way, this technological potential has been around for some time. Call it illusionary filming (my term) as the filming is done completely separately yet when put together it gives the impression the scene with the actor playing a dual role is taken in a single shoot.

Leaving the entertainment industry and their use of double acting aside, this technology, if it comes to pass or, even worse, is already here, poses a very dangerous threat to mankind and certainly democracy, even liberal democracy. It would be possible for the very best of the high-tech manufacturers, on behalf of their respective states, to decide what politicians, Prime Ministers, Presidents, and our own Taoiseach say or are believed to have said, thus deciding the Government of another country. The old maxim, “what can’t speak, can’t lie” would come into play and the saying the “camera never lies” would certainly not be the case here. It would be possible for powerful states, the USA, China, Russia, even Britain to a lesser extent, irrespective of what the various electorates think or are programmed to think, to decide future governments around the globe. It is bad enough now with the media telling people how to think and vote, but if this comes to pass and in the wrong hands, which would include almost everybody with access to it, then the candidates themselves will be, or perhaps will not be, telling people how to vote by way of the tech giants. Regime changes in less compliant countries may in the future not need military invasion, just one of these highly developed digital computer programmes.

I do not know or profess to know how this technology may work, just that it appears as a strong possibility that some powerful states, the US, China, Russia and perhaps the British even the Israelis in the Middle East could be in possession of such technology. What impact may that have, should it be the case with the Israelis, on the Arab world?

In the BBC series an American, a CIA operative called Frank, the ones behind this scam called “Correction” is diagnosed with terminal cancer. Suddenly the disease cures itself and that was because the man never had it. A British spook had inserted, by use of this technology, images showing cancer, which was what the doctor, as would any doctor, based his diagnosis. Is this possible? Is such dangerous material already with us? If it is not, and I believe various states may be close but not there yet, to having such advanced technology a terrifying scenario will exist. Doctors will no longer be trusted, politicians already suspect at best, could be presented as frauds but not in the way they are now, but in such a manner benefiting the states these tech companies work on behalf of. It may come to pass, they, the aggressive states, and not governments, who decide the future of countries and, indeed the planet and that is concerning to say the least. Just imagine a scenario where the US set Moscow against Beijing and they mutually destroy each other. Then, they could set Britain against the EU in a similar way, or on the other hand, Moscow could set London against Washington the possibilities are endless and maybe I am getting a little carried away, but these possibilities are real!!

Finally, a word of praise for the BBC who when they do produce a drama series, Line of Duty, Ridley Road, and now, The Capture which needed concentration with no adverts they get it right. This is the only channel such intriguing dramas could be shown because certainly in The Capture much concentration was needed. Commercial breaks would break that concentration and ruin the series. On the commercial channels, including our own Irish channels, every ten to twelve minutes a commercial break comes on, about fourteen to sixteen minuets per hour. These breaks have slowly increased over the years and shortly it could be we have a programme break in between adverts. Perhaps another subject for another day.
 
Caoimhin O’Muraile is an Independent 
Socialist Republican and Marxist

No comments