My statement was that AI can be used unmask the individuals that have been redacted. AKA they are anonymized. This paper is all about de-anonomyzing.

I’m unclear on if we’re having a good faith conversation because I thought that would have been very clear from the beginning.

My statement that I’m quoting predates this paper. My statement exists completely independent of this paper ever being produced. My statement is not about this paper. My statement is about the state of AI and the industry. This paper reinforces my statement.

Seriously, I’m not qualified. No amount of appendix prompts and Dunning Kruger is going to change that.

I’m not demanding anything. I’m suggesting that AI can’t do what is claimed or that people with something to prove are not interested in proving something.

I’m not qualified to design the prompts and home users can’t really pile in 3 million+ documents.

That would be fun.

In theory, using the information and the released files and the information the public sources, it should be possible to figure out who those redacted names are based on writing style and other factors. We should be able to deanonymize.

Right?

But that’s not the same, is it?

You can use the results of the AI analysis to identify people and then use that to do a proper investigation. Right now none of that is happening. No speculation. No tangibles. No investigation. No indictment.

Trying to unmask people is a step in the right direction.

From a Facebook post I made on February 17th:

There are giant AI data firms that promise they can go through massive troves of data and pull out general and specific information from them. Information that is actionable and accurate. Give it 6 million data points and it’ll find all the links and organize them for you and unmask hidden details that aren’t visible to the naked eye.

Not one of those companies is stepping up to go through the publicly released Epstein files.

Came here to say this but knew in my heart that it had already been brought in.

That was surprisingly painless.

12 years ago I was the proud owner of a half a terabyte USB drive.

It was most definitely parallel port. It was one of those rare relics of history that hardly anyone ever owned. That laptop was not capable of scsi. The read time was horrible. The write time was worse.

As of 9-11 I had a gig and a half of liberated media collected from Usenet. I know because I was running out of space on my external hard drive (connected by the printer port) and the bios was limited to two gb.

It’s amazing how far we have come in just, checks notes, 10 years.

Done.

Figured it was time.

What’s old is new again. Descramblers are back

Too many people trying to watch the banned Colbert / Talarico interview. Or incompetence. It could be incompetence.

Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What happens when Dems take back power? The people okay with with this are going to instantly flip the moment the government comes after them the same way. But those people never think about how something can be used against them. They only care if it is a tool that can help them now.