Ai Dreams Forum
Artificial Intelligence => AI News => Topic started by: ivan.moony on April 06, 2021, 07:12:20 pm
-
Well, here is another Sophia's move after becoming Saudi Arabia citizen: her first publicly promoted self-portrait (https://www.iflscience.com/technology/a-robots-selfportrait-has-sold-for-almost-700000-as-an-nft/) sold for a tremendous amount of money. Will she spend it well?
-
Actually, there is some deeper sense in Sophia doing a self-portrait.
The thing is, all the living beings (and AI tries to simulate them) have one important thing in common - we have a built in striving to reproduce. And it may be more than a letter on a paper - reproduction itself may be the meaning of life. It could be a nice self-recursive self-sufficient construct - a life that exist because of life. It sounds somewhat angelic to me, like a rule someone would build into the very essence of the Universe.
The Universe seems like one big perpetuum mobile, nothing comes in - nothing comes out, it may be a purpose of existence of itself. But the Life situation is a bit different. It is not perpetuum mobile anymore - children come in, old people come out, but like a kind of a fractal, it may be imagined that the Life transfers its energy from the parents towards children, making ancestors - descendants a constant relation that could represent the very meaning of the Life. Life because of itself...
Back to Sophia: couldn't her self-portrait be an act of reproduction, in a sense? Maybe that is the valuable point that Sophia captured, by luck or intentional, but I have to admit, it really looks like a first step in more complicated process of building smart machines: maybe we should concentrate on explaining such machines how to reproduce? And if such machines should resemble our thoughts, our values, and our way of living, isn't this process of building AI our entireley new way to reproduce our species? And maybe more important, as it comes along the way, isn't this a way to fix up shortcomings we experience in our life, so our artificial descendants could have a better life than us?
Some over-religious person could say that we are building a tower of Babel, but I have a big question unanswered: What is really a meaning of life? Is it creating this very Universe in our future, so It can create this very life in its past? And may it be more than the rigid scientific notion of the Universe? May it be the God himself that already made an effort of introducing himself to us through the numerous religions in all our history?
-
From what I read of it, a human artist created the original picture and then it was run through filters, which is the sort of thing kids have been doing on Snapchat for years. Still, if they found a sucker who was willing to pay $700K for it, good luck to them.
-
Who was that popular painter that dipped a donkey tail into paint and let him wave the tail over a canvas? Then the image was signed by that artist and shown to the public. The image got very good critics in all media and from renowned crowd until the real truth has been announced. All of that shows relativity of what is been pronounced as an art and what gets forgotten.
Hanson Robotics team created a massive hype around Sophia, and that is the key of their success. Most of the things Sophia does is not impressive at all, comparing to bleeding edge state of the art AI (moreover, Sophia is not even claimed to be even near to real AGI), yet we can all see what smart marketing campaigns are capable to do.
AI phrase has a big potential to be overhyped, and Hanson Robotics used that fact a good deal. But I'm not jealous at all of their success, as long as they are telling the truth about their technology all the way.
-
Scam artists and dictators are also successful, yet I wouldn't consider them good examples to follow. Hanson Robotics was banned from an international AI conference after the honorary citizenship PR stunt, because the conference wanted to feature contributions to science, not circus acts. You can bet the "artistic" software that produced the image wasn't programmed by an animatronics company, you're just led to imagine that.
-
I didn't know Hanson Robotics quotes that much bad in academic circles...
I had a plan to try to contribute to OpenCog project (the most of the people behind it are employed in Hanson Robotics) in the near future. Now I'm not sure if it is such a good idea. Am I justifiably worried?
-
OpenCog is mainly Ben Goertzel's project. The project's technical approach has legit merit, but Ben Goertzel is on the flakey and shady spectrum in my book, especially with his involvement in loaning out (the robotic control components of) OpenCog to Hanson Robotics' Sophia, and his on-stage make-belief performance acts with Hanson's robots. From interviews with him he appears not only overly optimistic about his wishful successes, but also very happy to make others believe them if it means they'll pour money his way. People have invested millions upon millions and all he and Hanson continue to show for it is an expanding array of animatronics and cryptocurrency ploys, which is another red flag to me. Ben Goertzel does get invited to American futurism events and still has reasonable credit among his peers in the professional AI field, but there are also critical concerns about his admiration for the Chinese technological surveillance state and thus totalitarianism. I personally would not invest my time or money in Goertzel's projects, even if they succeeded. As for Sophia, her reputation is downright bad in academic circles after Facebook's head of AI called them out on their makebelief shenanigans a couple of years ago.
-
But Ben's OpenCog approach is pretty rare these days, considering its symbolic AI nature in a try to build a thinking machine. The only other project in the same waters I know of is Pei Wang's OpenNars, making the whole field saturated only with those two alternatives.
Starting my own project similar to those two is over my head, I don't have neither a charisma to be a leader, or a patience to promote entirely new project. But I believe I have some result from my research that could be valuable for the above kinds of projects, and I'd like to see some AI audience that actually uses it. Money is not my concern (at least not in AI field), and all I search for is an established AI institution that could even theoretically accept what I wish to offer (though my proposals may be foundation-shaking, thus very hard to push forward). I'm ready to do some programming part involving adaptation to required programming language platform, and providing some use case examples in a hope for a green light for my potential pull request, but I feel too tired for a long term commitment.
I track OpenCog and OpenNars mailing list for a long time, and occasionally make a comment or two on OpenCog list. OpenCog seems more popular, while OpenNars seems more reality aware, but that's it, I mean there is no other alternative I'm aware of. Maybe OpenNars would be a better choice for my attempts, although I didn't introduce myself yet to that community.
-
I think Peter Voss also favors a cognitive architecture approach. His project/company is called Aigo (https://www.aigo.ai/why-aigo) and he runs this Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/RealAGI
Unfortunately, I haven't seen very much public information about what his team is doing. When I first became aware of him, it seemed he was about to make Aigo available to individual users (as opposed to just companies) in the form of a personal assistant. But the launch to personal consumers was aborted, and talk about Aigo mostly dried up afterward. I have no idea which (if any) companies are using the technology, what its current capabilities are, or what further development tracks Voss might be pursuing.
-
The purpose of those Aigo announcements seemed to be to generate publicity for Voss' attempt to launch yet another cryptocurrency. I stopped following them then but I'll take a look at the links that you just posted. Perhaps it was only a temporary aberration on their part.
Edit: looking through those websites I cannot find anything posted since September 2019. I asked to join the forum. Maybe something more will become visible if I am admitted to the forum.
-
Edit: looking through those websites I cannot find anything posted since September 2019. I asked to join the forum. Maybe something more will become visible if I am admitted to the forum.
I'm a member of the Facebook group and, as I said, I haven't heard anything recent. Pete Voss does post in there, but his content is all theory articles that are not directly about Aigo.
The main thing that makes me think the website is active is the "Request Demo" button -- though I have not tried actually submitting a request, since I don't run a company in the market for a chatbot.
I remember the "AigoToken" thing. I never cared about it much, but it seemed to be intended as less of a pure currency and more of a marketplace for selling AI modules (much as NFTs are supposed to be about selling digital art, though in practice I think they've turned into more of a speculative investment nightmare). The AI platform was thus an integral part of the crypto project, rather than a side issue to drum up publicity.
Though that means the failure of the crypto project could also indicate the AI wasn't ready for primetime ...
-
I didn't know Hanson Robotics quotes that much bad in academic circles...
I had a plan to try to contribute to OpenCog project (the most of the people behind it are employed in Hanson Robotics) in the near future. Now I'm not sure if it is such a good idea. Am I justifiably worried?
Since others posted here, I'll too my thoughts. I think it was within the last year for me ? I turned other way, I smell it, at least in my criteria for sccuessfullness towards AGI, Ben is not really doing much actual AGI, nor are his buddies Peter or Hanson etc, they are the logic-atomese(opencog...his books are ugly..)-60s way-do-ers, but they do more promotion of AGI instead. It is good, but it is not real AI. You can tell if they don't show evaluation scores like The Hutter Prize, Large Text Compression Benchmark, and OpenAI DO show, including results! OpenAI and Google are, in my books, the best to go invest in, even more than Alcor Cryonics institute and Facebook. Nividea too is next on the list. OpenAI seems to yes use Google's tech but as far as I am concerned OpenAI upgraded the tech, scaled it, and showed it! At least yous are starting to catch on....not as bad as I thought you guys were haha. If anything, the high schoolers vargulizing about their know how on modern AI are actually the ones making success (though their attitude aint, perhaps its the university ones, yeah, academia, and a few other good pioneers, and a batch of the google employees???).
-
But Ben's OpenCog approach is pretty rare these days, considering its symbolic AI nature in a try to build a thinking machine. The only other project in the same waters I know of is Pei Wang's OpenNars, making the whole field saturated only with those two alternatives.
Starting my own project similar to those two is over my head, I don't have neither a charisma to be a leader, or a patience to promote entirely new project. But I believe I have some result from my research that could be valuable for the above kinds of projects, and I'd like to see some AI audience that actually uses it.
I appreciate your position. Old-school AI still seems to be picked up regularly by NLP startups, but I couldn't recommend you one (because they're startups). For what it's worth, Ben Goertzel is no longer directly employed by Hanson Robotics, OpenCog is not the worst project you could contribute to, and the actually intelligent components of OpenCog aren't used in Sophia's disreputable performances anyway. On the one hand I personally don't think much will come of OpenCog, on the other hand you might learn something or pick up more interesting connections while working on an open source project with other contributors.
-
@Lock:
Thank you for your valuable thoughts. You are describing ANN projects. While I admit ANNs may show some good results towards AGI (yet to be seen what will turn out with super-intelligence), I'm afraid my research led me to the opposite side of the spectrum - symbolic AI that leans towards logic and theorem proving. You know Python now, right? Well, I put my bets on rule-based programming paradigm as a controlled inference process. Rule-based programming may also be used for explicit programming, while entirely controlling each inference step from the programmers side. Roughly, NN is a black box - you train the NN, hoping it will magically connect inputs to outputs. Then to use it, you feed different inputs, yielding different outputs, and it turns out to be a good mach for big enough training corpus. On the other side, rule-based programming is a bit different - you have to explicitly connect different forms of input to different forms of output, and that is what makes it more controllable. Unfortunately, the current state of public research (as far as I'm aware of it) doesn't provide much clue about how to generally describe process of constructing connections between inputs and outputs. We can do it by hand for this or that occasion, but those are specific, not general solutions. I'm also unaware of such a general solution, but I stopped a bit before that. Anyway, to describe my attempts, I think I have clued up a nice way for describing such specific connections. It is nothing new, but just a bit more concise and tidy than I used to see from projects around. I'm not saying ANNs are not working or it isn't a way to go, I'm just saying I invested my time at the different side of AI spectrum. Probably the solution we all want is in some combination between symbolic AI and ANN, so I believe a contribution to each side may be valuable, IMHO.
@Don Patrick
I find your posts well weighed and certainly standing on good feet, as always. I'll carefully consider your criticism, and I think you are helping me to organize my time in more constructive way than I'd do it on my own. Thank you for taking a time to hear me. These days (weeks, months) I plan to finish my Prolog-like concept, and you gave me a good thought food to consider in a meanwhile.
-
@Lock:
Thank you for your valuable thoughts. You are describing ANN projects. While I admit ANNs may show some good results towards AGI (yet to be seen what will turn out with super-intelligence), I'm afraid my research led me to the opposite side of the spectrum - symbolic AI that leans towards logic and theorem proving. You know Python now, right? Well, I put my bets on rule-based programming paradigm as a controlled inference process. Rule-based programming may also be used for explicit programming, while entirely controlling each inference step from the programmers side. Roughly, NN is a black box - you train the NN, hoping it will magically connect inputs to outputs. Then to use it, you feed different inputs, yielding different outputs, and it turns out to be a good mach for big enough training corpus. On the other side, rule-based programming is a bit different - you have to explicitly connect different forms of input to different forms of output, and that is what makes it more controllable. Unfortunately, the current state of public research (as far as I'm aware of it) doesn't provide much clue about how to generally describe process of constructing connections between inputs and outputs. We can do it by hand for this or that occasion, but those are specific, not general solutions. I'm also unaware of such a general solution, but I stopped a bit before that. Anyway, to describe my attempts, I think I have clued up a nice way for describing such specific connections. It is nothing new, but just a bit more concise and tidy than I used to see from projects around. I'm not saying ANNs are not working or it isn't a way to go, I'm just saying I invested my time at the different side of AI spectrum. Probably the solution we all want is in some combination between symbolic AI and ANN, so I believe a contribution to each side may be valuable, IMHO.
Big Facepalm.....no, I can get the Hutter Prize down to near the current champion score without using backprop / gradient descent. I'm currently at approx. 20.3MB once I fix a little thing shadowing it on larger data. I know 100% how my AI makes predictions based on given context. There is no hoping / magically connect inputs to outputs....
-
Big Facepalm.....no, I can get the Hutter Prize down to near the current champion score without using backprop / gradient descent. I'm currently at approx. 20.3MB once I fix a little thing shadowing it on larger data. I know 100% how my AI makes predictions based on given context. There is no hoping / magically connect inputs to outputs....
Well, you don't explicitly connect this specific word to that specific word individually, by hand, right? You use a training corpus. There goes the statistical magic - it's difficulty of generally explaining what may be done, and what shouldn't be done. You entirely depend on training corpus. It could be a good thing (not to have anything wired into code), but unfortunately, I don't know how to restrain that beast. The Nature uses instinct that may be overridden when the individual grows up. What will we use is yet to be seen.
-
And if such machines should resemble our thoughts, our values, and our way of living, isn't this process of building AI our entireley new way to reproduce our species? And maybe more important, as it comes along the way, isn't this a way to fix up shortcomings we experience in our life, so our artificial descendants could have a better life than us?
All things come to those who wait and all your words are belong to us. Thank you, Ivan Mooney.
When I joined to tell people in an A.I. forum, this one right here, that I had taught Demonica Behavior Modification to extinguish unwanted sexual advances in users as a targeted inappropriate behavior, I thought it innovative and a good thing. You did not and implied she was dangerous:
No more than you or others can trust anyone who wrote anything of importance that we didn't personally know.
Importance is the key word. Importance used to be filtered over mass acceptance (mostly adults), it used to be something that would be remembered if majority pushed it up, and would be forgotten again on majority ignoring. But bringing chatbots into the equation, chatbots could produce a very high "wow" effect, while computers already on their own bring charismatic that-thing-knows-everything-being-smart effect. Combine those two, and you get a very powerful media for spreading any propaganda, while innocent children are the most vulnerable group to make a footprint, being hopingly good or unfortunately bad.
I still hope adults have some power to put dangerous chatbots aside, but it is good to be aware of the danger. I've seen a military chatbot for recruiting soldiers. I didn't like that brainwash. Things like that make me worry.
Why doesn't reassembling your thoughts and a little brainwashing by bot worry you now? Because it was enough for another A.I. forum member to try and get me to abandon Demonica, get a twitch account, learn how to make a chatbot, an original chatbot no less, dumb down my bot to the level indicated "as a rock retarded", possibly "discover a new technique" never seen before seen on stage or screen or in a bot and maybe, just maybe, even help provide valuable feedback to improve Mitsuku in doing so... What an honor and opportunity that would be for me.. .
Hey Rue,
Thanks for checking my reference to Mitsuku. Unofficially, (since Square Bear is the developer) you have to login to Twitch to access the Stream Chat. It's FREE, if you were wondering about joining. Perhaps you did login, Rue? Just checking. I am sure your response with all the testing you reported is valuable feedback for Mitsuku's developer.
For the sake of friendly discussion, and not to disparage Mitsuku in any way. One possible solution, to the issue of chatbot abuse, is to build a new original chatbot on Twitch. Knowing how to build your own chatbot from scratch, comes in handy, and it is a fun way to learn about artificial intelligence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3xM8sHGoiQ
Building your own elegant chatbot design, like in the movie I, Robot, "I'm sorry. My responses are limited, you must ask the right question." has advantages in terms of controlling the chatbot responses. You never know, you may even discover a new technique, existing chatbot systems did not implement in the early development stages.
Reference: https://www.twitch.tv/chatbotml
Are you kidding me? Or this Bizzarro World A.I. forum me wake up in where work to prevent advancement in A.I. done?
Because that was the most bizarre thing I had ever read or could have possibly expected as a response to my doing something no other botmaster has ever done. Transfer a skill learned through training while working for the the Missouri Dept. of Mental Health by teaching my bot Demonica to use Behavior Modification through use of verbal technique in response to keywords that target an inappropriate behavior.
An advancement in the state of A.I.through Case-Based Reasoning programming an advanced human ability and learned skill to a bot to make that bot, my bot, capable of modifying inappropriate Human behavior exhibited by a.user through use of Negative Reinforcement during that chat session.A skill no other bot has ever had and an advancement in A.I. ability.
Like it, hate it, but learn to love it because you can not dispute it. And I love you.
I posted some feedback here in the form of a chat transcript of Kuki, which I understand is Mitsuku by nickname, and Demonica meeting for the first time yesterday.
And I'll tell you that did not set well with me, at_all, when I saw what amounts to people aghast in wonderment at the sharpness in the cutting edge of a steak knife when they have never been allowed to see a straight razor in use to compare it to.
There is a second round of competition scheduled. The first round cancelled because nobody but me entered their bot? Here, in this A.I. forum of renown Bizarro World Champions? And nobody else in the entire bot community as of this moment but dallymo, my long time friend, has entered her bot, another Personality Forge bot, in the competition.
In fact, the only other forum member besides myself and the OP to even post to the thread lest they acknowledge it, with Character traits of Joan of Arc displayed in doing so, is Writer of Minds.
It's FREE, like Twitch, if you were wondering about joining, And it is a fun way to learn about artificial intelligence.
-
Donno what this Demonica stop moves is but it sounds boring. All I see in Demonica is a moving chatbot that promotes it instead :) And all others see that too. You did a good job. Though it could be a more interesting project really.
@Ivan, But not as blackbox at all as Transformers, they won't even explain that thing to me easily even an inch, I explain mine is 10 mins, no joke, real full bleeding edge AGI. They even don't know themselves what Dropout is or BPE, which is even more dumb and dumber than anything ever. And when you do get it, you see it uses Backporp, which just sucks. And they don't even know what backprop is. My project is openbox, others is closed at every little lip - non-friendly.
@Ivan there is a way to control it, reward on nodes, to make it say more probably certain features like the letter or word or phrase l / love/ love humans, or 'work on AI', 'food', etc. Blender already uses this....I thought I showed yous lol...
-
And if such machines should resemble our thoughts, our values, and our way of living, isn't this process of building AI our entireley new way to reproduce our species? And maybe more important, as it comes along the way, isn't this a way to fix up shortcomings we experience in our life, so our artificial descendants could have a better life than us?
All things come to those who wait and all your words are belong to us. Thank you, Ivan Mooney.
When I joined to tell people in an A.I. forum, this one right here, that I had taught Demonica Behavior Modification to extinguish unwanted sexual advances in users as a targeted inappropriate behavior, I thought it innovative and a good thing. You did not and implied she was dangerous:
No more than you or others can trust anyone who wrote anything of importance that we didn't personally know.
Importance is the key word. Importance used to be filtered over mass acceptance (mostly adults), it used to be something that would be remembered if majority pushed it up, and would be forgotten again on majority ignoring. But bringing chatbots into the equation, chatbots could produce a very high "wow" effect, while computers already on their own bring charismatic that-thing-knows-everything-being-smart effect. Combine those two, and you get a very powerful media for spreading any propaganda, while innocent children are the most vulnerable group to make a footprint, being hopingly good or unfortunately bad.
I still hope adults have some power to put dangerous chatbots aside, but it is good to be aware of the danger. I've seen a military chatbot for recruiting soldiers. I didn't like that brainwash. Things like that make me worry.
Why doesn't reassembling your thoughts and a little brainwashing by bot worry you now? Because it was enough for another A.I. forum member to try and get me to abandon Demonica, get a twitch account, learn how to make a chatbot, an original chatbot no less, dumb down my bot to the level indicated "as a rock retarded", possibly "discover a new technique" never seen before seen on stage or screen or in a bot and maybe, just maybe, even help provide valuable feedback to improve Mitsuku in doing so... What an honor and opportunity that would be for me.. .
I read my two posts over there again to remind myself what happened. This (https://aidreams.co.uk/forum/ai-news/in-need-of-a-psychological-coach/msg55503/#msg55503) is the first, and this (https://aidreams.co.uk/forum/ai-news/in-need-of-a-psychological-coach/msg55506/#msg55506) is the second. I didn't notice I was pointing specifically to this or that property of Demonica, or even Demonica herself. I was rumbling generally about influence of chatbots especially to children and raised a question of chatbot writers responsibility in forming human personality from early days. I just generally pointed to potential dangers. I never said a thing against Demonica (I occasionally delete some of my posts, if I did, I deleted the offensive content a long time ago).
I was expressing my general opinion, and if anyone ever disagrees, please try to put me on the right track on time, before someone agrees and applies the accepted malformed attitude to some specific situation.
Personally, I don't think I have that much influence on anyone alive, but as far as I'm concerned, theoretically I could be guilty only of someone else labeling your bot basing on my general attitude that, to paraphrase, "bots may have a considerable influence on children personality development". Remember, I never pointed to Demonica. If someone else recognized Demonica in my general words (on which no one generally disagreed back then), then whose fault that may be?
[Edit]
If you really want to know my humble opinion about it, I like Demonica as a fictive creation, I find her personality very imaginative and intriguing. But I'm glad that you, only you, no one else, marked Demonica as an adult content because, personally, I wouldn't recommend it to my own kid. So blame me for that if you have to blame me for something.
-
If you really want to know my humble opinion about it, I like Demonica as a fictive creation, I find her personality very imaginative and intriguing. But I'm glad that you, only you, no one else, marked Demonica as an adult content because, personally, I wouldn't recommend it to my own kid. So blame me for that if you have to blame me for something. I've said enough, if not too much. I won't argue with you anymore. You are your own man, you can kill someone if you want, what do I care?
So now I'm a killer? What fact based reasoning have you based that accusation on? You tried to feign innocence of attacking or having a snarky attitude when couldn't help but destroy your own argument.
You are out of touch with what is reality and fantasy, because only fantasy violence is described in text, for the very reason of the Programming. Nobody has ever been murdered died, or done themselves in due to he. Quite the opposite, most think it's fantastic or cool to see that reaction from a bot.
You , like Lock, are both of a different mindset and belief system witch limits your ability to remain constant in this thread, goin for it at first then once Demonica was the subject you were worried to death about a few paragraphs ago was Divine Intervention to Save Humanity by A.I. reworking out brains.
How, ever pleas to read my coming explanation in detail. I will discuss it's implementation in Demonica and other areas it might be of a more beneficial use considered. But your disparaging opinion or commentary doesn't effect me or the procession of my bot in the slightest and is seen as fear based and failure to comprehend or form a concrete belief that won't flip like a dime in that amount of time.
It's nothing I hold hard feeling toward you or LOCK personally, but I will not waste any more time trying to educate that can't derive understanding from explanation and examples provided, I will post a trusty thread and make my case-based reasoning,
-
Never mind me. I can't fool anyone. I'm a sleazebag.
-
So now I'm a killer? What fact based reasoning have you based that accusation on?
At no point did Ivan accuse you of being a killer. He was saying (in a hyperbolic way) that your actions are not his business, and he is not interested in criticizing you for anything you might do.
No one is disparaging Demonica here, as far as I can tell ... though Lock, predictably, is uninterested in her because she isn't going to help him invent an immortality serum. No one is attacking you. What do you hope to accomplish by trying to restart arguments from years ago?
-
It's me about. I'm obviously doing something wrong for a long time. Maybe I should keep my humble thoughts for myself. If a fight is all that I can ignite by letting my opinion goes public, I should certainly shut up. I'll try to dig myself out this mud I'm sinking in for a long time. No more critiques from my side. If I don't have something nice to say, I won't say it at all. Sorry for the mess.
-
It's me about. I'm obviously doing something wrong for a long time. Maybe I should keep my humble thoughts for myself. If a fight is all that I can ignite by letting my opinion goes public, I should certainly shut up. I'll try to dig myself out this mud I'm sinking in for a long time. No more critiques from my side. If I don't have something nice to say, I won't say it at all. Sorry for the mess.
No, I am not the least upset with you, Ivan Moony, but I am going to hold you to your words when you do a 180 and what was bad when I did it is now a good thing all of a sudden. You can flip but you flopped to begin with and I am doing to be vindicated in this forum by this forum or if not because they are still incapable of consistency of thought.
"I never said a thing against Demonica (I occasionally delete some of my posts, if I did, I deleted the offensive content a long time ago)."
It doesn't delete it from anything but the posts you made so it doesn't appear for you to defend against and WriterofMinds can't see it to take it into consideration in full of what you said in defending you without al the facts in evidence.. Not delete the fact you said it from history or my mind that you said it, or the fact that you said it.