The system described here works as a five-level chain: ethics, standards, clearing, settlement and outcome. Each level depends on the one above it and none works alone. Together they form a single system running from international treaty down to a transaction in a digital wallet
On Jan. 30th. the following exchange between Escape Key and a commenter was posted in the below-linked comment section. What the commenter was referring to was the fact that in Escape Key’s original post it was stated that “Bono contributed a speech” at an event that was being discussed. The commenter points out that Bono did not, in fact, contribute a speech (and wasn’t mentioned in any respect) and this is an obvious (and particularly goofy) “A.I. hallucination” (i.e. bullshit). It appears to have been generated from the fact that the title of the source article contains the well-known phrase “cui bono?”.
As a writer myself, I can’t imagine allowing such an error to make it through to the final draft (but I also can’t imagine using a chatbot to write my articles for me!). Is “error” even the right word to use when describing a made-up claim created by the chatbot you used to write your post for you? It not only shows that Escape Key didn’t write their own article, it shows Escape Key didn’t check the chatbot’s sources.
'Bono contributed a speech on ‘The Real Economics of Subsidies’14, promoting a vastly exaggerated figure of $400bn; the direct outcome of forward projecting anticipated future cost through ‘black box’ modelling.'
No he didn't. AI glitch there, the speakers were Mandelson and two others…
esc:
The link is right there along with a screenshot
Thumbnail Green:
Yeah I went to the link. No mention of Bono. Not not picking just hopefully assisting the water tight nature of your piece. I actually don't care but I can image a small potential mistake being turned into 'you can't trust esc key sources'
That's all
esc:
oh fair enough, went through a sh-tload of documents the day prior posting this (live posted on telegram); will change, the 'Bono' aspect is just a minor detail anyway the important aspect is the BS $400bn figure…
Thumbnail Green:
Totally of course. Not a criticism at all. Think of it as a random proof read. You produce so much documentation I sometimes dive in there to see it just this time I didn't find that banking schill Bono as I expected. Live Aid as theft”
Note how Escape Key does not admit to and apologize for the obvious A.I. created B.S. but instead prevaricates and calls the error a “minor detail”. A human being simply would not make an “error” like that. Why didn’t Escape Key check their own source after the first comment by the commenter stating that the “A.I.” had created a comical fiction instead of responding by saying “the link is right there”?
After a minute or two of reading that first piece (the first and last that I’ve read here) I knew a chatbot was being used to produce this “content” (seriously, isn’t it obvious to the rest of you?) and the above exchange confirmed it.
Listen people: these chatbots are simply an improved version of Weisenbaum’s Eliza bot that has been trained to scrape The Google and formulate its response in accord with your prompt. Profound truth (or any other value) cannot possibly arise from such a process for the same reason that a fake plastic tree cannot create a forest.
*Filled to the brim with absurdities like ESG, climate 'Junk in Junk out' models, carbon jibberish, false ethics and sustainable development propaganda🗣️💩🙉 ....
*Who or WHAT are the RoomTemperature IQ entities behind this liberty-crushing abomination🤔 !?
Would you mind briefly summarizing for your readership to what extent you utilize chatbots (a.k.a. L.L.M.’s) in your research and/or the composition of your posts?
yeah i have an upcoming essay discussing just that along with covid and the 'climate crisis' - in essence, the 5-step ToL-derived model applied in those three contexts. it's all the same, every time.
Once the model is implemented and running on auto-pilot, and all the downstream consequences applied according to the system's design, no matter how you trumpet that it is wrong and based on BS, the damage is (and will keep on being) done.
A stunningly researched explanation of the long planned journey to an ultimate form of control of the human species via the capture of the global financial system
So much tying this monstrosity together. Excellent analysis!!
Excellent overview of the working parts of this system, we appreciate your research.
Here is why I’m asking:
On Jan. 30th. the following exchange between Escape Key and a commenter was posted in the below-linked comment section. What the commenter was referring to was the fact that in Escape Key’s original post it was stated that “Bono contributed a speech” at an event that was being discussed. The commenter points out that Bono did not, in fact, contribute a speech (and wasn’t mentioned in any respect) and this is an obvious (and particularly goofy) “A.I. hallucination” (i.e. bullshit). It appears to have been generated from the fact that the title of the source article contains the well-known phrase “cui bono?”.
As a writer myself, I can’t imagine allowing such an error to make it through to the final draft (but I also can’t imagine using a chatbot to write my articles for me!). Is “error” even the right word to use when describing a made-up claim created by the chatbot you used to write your post for you? It not only shows that Escape Key didn’t write their own article, it shows Escape Key didn’t check the chatbot’s sources.
Here is the link to the exchange copied and pasted below: https://escapekey.substack.com/p/the-waddesdon-papers/comments
“Thumbnail Green:
'Bono contributed a speech on ‘The Real Economics of Subsidies’14, promoting a vastly exaggerated figure of $400bn; the direct outcome of forward projecting anticipated future cost through ‘black box’ modelling.'
No he didn't. AI glitch there, the speakers were Mandelson and two others…
esc:
The link is right there along with a screenshot
Thumbnail Green:
Yeah I went to the link. No mention of Bono. Not not picking just hopefully assisting the water tight nature of your piece. I actually don't care but I can image a small potential mistake being turned into 'you can't trust esc key sources'
That's all
esc:
oh fair enough, went through a sh-tload of documents the day prior posting this (live posted on telegram); will change, the 'Bono' aspect is just a minor detail anyway the important aspect is the BS $400bn figure…
Thumbnail Green:
Totally of course. Not a criticism at all. Think of it as a random proof read. You produce so much documentation I sometimes dive in there to see it just this time I didn't find that banking schill Bono as I expected. Live Aid as theft”
Note how Escape Key does not admit to and apologize for the obvious A.I. created B.S. but instead prevaricates and calls the error a “minor detail”. A human being simply would not make an “error” like that. Why didn’t Escape Key check their own source after the first comment by the commenter stating that the “A.I.” had created a comical fiction instead of responding by saying “the link is right there”?
After a minute or two of reading that first piece (the first and last that I’ve read here) I knew a chatbot was being used to produce this “content” (seriously, isn’t it obvious to the rest of you?) and the above exchange confirmed it.
Listen people: these chatbots are simply an improved version of Weisenbaum’s Eliza bot that has been trained to scrape The Google and formulate its response in accord with your prompt. Profound truth (or any other value) cannot possibly arise from such a process for the same reason that a fake plastic tree cannot create a forest.
*'Welcome to the MACHINE🤡 🕸️.'
*Filled to the brim with absurdities like ESG, climate 'Junk in Junk out' models, carbon jibberish, false ethics and sustainable development propaganda🗣️💩🙉 ....
*Who or WHAT are the RoomTemperature IQ entities behind this liberty-crushing abomination🤔 !?
CJY
Yet another tidbit that is warning people about what's to come : https://www.globalresearch.ca/digital-
enslavement-nuclear-weapon/5926755
It's not the full-blown picture presented in this substack but is still aligning with the same thesis.
https://youtu.be/7FkXl6FsaGw?si=2UQ-12VogrA0nnQ_
Escape Key,
Would you mind briefly summarizing for your readership to what extent you utilize chatbots (a.k.a. L.L.M.’s) in your research and/or the composition of your posts?
I look forward to your honest reply.
Thanks,
There you go: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/targeting-dairy-farmers-esg-wants-decide-your-milk
yeah i have an upcoming essay discussing just that along with covid and the 'climate crisis' - in essence, the 5-step ToL-derived model applied in those three contexts. it's all the same, every time.
Cool, keep it up!
What about this, is this too little too late ?
https://dailysceptic.org/2026/05/14/shocked-silence-greets-rcp8-5-demise-as-implausibility-ruling-leaves-net-zero-fearmongering-in-tatters/
Once the model is implemented and running on auto-pilot, and all the downstream consequences applied according to the system's design, no matter how you trumpet that it is wrong and based on BS, the damage is (and will keep on being) done.
A stunningly researched explanation of the long planned journey to an ultimate form of control of the human species via the capture of the global financial system