26 votes

LISTEN: Creepy AI Telemarketer Sounds Human, Denies Being a Robot (Activist Post)


Time Magazine is investigating a healthcare telemarketing firm who has been using an amazingly realistic robot caller which seems to operate on advanced and a bit creepy artificial intelligence.

The Florida firm Premier Health Plans Inc. is responsible for "employee" Samantha West heard in the exchanges below. After cleverly filibustering, she repeatedly insists she's a real person and not a robot.

Hear the other recording:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To Say Real or Not To Say Real

About seven or eight years ago I noticed the word real was used in contexts showing what it was describing was real, thereby generating redundancy. I remember thinking that use, a nascent one in society, in proportion to society's use of it would whittle then end its meaning and, because of the word's nature, degrade what it's a part of -- language, the articulation of thinking, the process that discerns the material plane and immaterial plane.

Since then, that word has been uttered in commercials on television and radio and typed in print. Now many people use that word redundantly. The use isn't ubiquitous, but it is on its way there. As with other things mental that change culturally, this use got its start light heartedly: Get real, man.

Remember that phrase? It was the rage in the 1990s. It was a statement whose utterer directed to someone he determined was behaving fake. It was meant to jolt the person charged with being fake to stop being fake and to be authentic. Although that phrase might be said today as much it was then, its second word, real, has spread throughout communication.

I hope that whoever reads this comment thinks about whether he or she uses this word correctly or incorrectly, to discern reality from fantasy instead of adding to reality which creates fantasy: Don't use real to describe a thing in reality, but do describe what is real and what is fantasy to distinguish them.

Don't say:
1) a real human -- because it invites the thought, So a fake human exists; what is a fake human?
2) a real robot -- because it invites the thought, So a fake robot exists; what is a fake robot?
3) a real fish -- because it invites the thought, So a fake fish exists; what is a fake fish?
4) a real steak -- because it invites the thought, So a fake steak exists; what is a fake steak?

Those two questions produce questions, then before you know it, you're mired in talking about the definitions of real and fake instead of saying what is what and moving on, wasting no effort, time and space.

Rather, say:
1) a human
2) a robot
3) a fish
4) a steak

If a thing is made from something other than nature, describe it, use the words that depict it, then after its description is established, truncate the description, shorten it to one word, a term, then use it (as long as your receiver knows what it derives from so that you and he are comprehending the same thing). Hence the existence of definition and term and their sequence of existence, that the long version (read: definition; explanation; reasoning) exists, then the short version (read: term; a comment or statement; rationale) exists.

1) It resembles a human, say, a humanoid, a four-appendaged being standing on two appendages and using the other two appendages as arms, a fill-in-the-blank.

2) It resembles a robot, say, a machine, a contraption in the form of a human, a fill-in-the-blank.

3) These fish are from stem cells cultured from a fish. They're grown in an incubator to its second month to achieve maturation then raised in a pool at a farm. This fish is the farm fish. Its nutritional value is considerably less than a fish from the ocean, where it swims freely and eats its diet. Unlike ocean fish, farm fish eat what they're given or else they starve.

4) This slab of meat is from the location of a cow that steak is from but whose cow was raised in oppression rather than being raised roaming a pasture in sunshine and away from bad weather.

Rarely is there reason to say the word real. Context displays what is real and what is fake. For the sake of brevity, clarity and comprehension, use the word real only when it's necessary. The use of it that causes redundancy is a risk no one should want or even can afford in the long run and maybe, just maybe, in the short run. Using the right words today allows us to understand each other tomorrow, especially at first attempt.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton Forest Dutton, MD, in his 1916 book whose subject is origin (therefore what all healing methods involve and count on), simple and powerful.

SteveMT's picture

These Borg must have a set of prime directives,unspeakable words

Unspeakable words like: robot, honesty, truth, Constitution, Liberty, Ron Paul.

She did say "real person."

That is pretty creepy.

That is pretty creepy.

Can you say "I am not a robot?"


[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

I know what this is

This isnt AI.. Its basically a sound board being controlled by a person.

This is a human controlled, human pre-recorded system.

The voice you hear is not the same as the person working the controls.

They push a bunch of buttons in response to the questions from the call recipient..

This is a new type of machine that squeezes through the cracks of the FTC/FCC do not call rules/junk fax rules, etc.

I imagine its only a matter of time before legislation gets passed banning these.

This sounds like a more sophisticated version

of what someone did about 10 or more years ago when Arnold was running for governor of California. I remember listening to a radio call in show when someone called in who simply hit play on selected sound bites from Schwarzenegger movies in response to the show host's questions.
In this case, "I am not a robot" was not prerecorded. The sound board operator could not say that because it is not in the list.
People complain about callers with heavy accents in remote boiler rooms and not being able to understand them. This technology allows people without the verbal skills to have a job making these cold sales calls.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

That must be

one complicated sound board.

I'm detective John Kimball!

This is a sound board:


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

Im a cop, you idiot!

so don't give me that crap!

Jury Nullification is a power of the last resort against tyranny.

she sounds hot

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016

Unsolicited Robot Calls are Illegal & You May Request Damages.

"Your honor, I'd like to call Samantha West to the witness stand."

Meet the Robot Telemarketer Who Denies She’s A Robot.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Hey! He broke the president!

Next time he should try to see if he can't get the robot to malfunction:


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

How about the Comments section?

I have wondered whether they have robot posters in Comments sections. There are some I have noticed post in enormous volumes and I believe they also use different aliases. Many people read the Comments section but only skim the article so in one sense the Comments are more influential than the articles.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

influence by peer-perception

has been a problem on the internet for at least 12 years. youtube was infested with them. ive been warning about that happening here for 4 years.

any examples?

I haven't seen any direct marketing here yet

that's because you don't drink enough


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.


I thought about it, but I don't get. What are you referring too?

I wrote that at 4 in the morning.

So I have no idea what I meant either.

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

Hahaha, I was looking for some hidden meaning.

It was probably an epic thought though.

Perhaps it was a comment on how a lot of people on here whine

like women, and progesterone helps men adopt the same sort of female whinyness. Encouraged by all the effeminate advertising.

Probably not though.

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

More creepy that people still believe she's human

Forget the fact that the article actually mentions her inability to answer simple questions such as naming a vegetable in tomato soup.

Or, that her inflections are dead-on consistent.

Or, her somewhat bizarre choice of word groups, pauses and abrupt changes in tonal pitch...

Or, that they consistently get the same person on the phone...

Or, the company phone number has since been rerouted...

Or, The company website was since been taken down...

If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.

Turning Test Fail

But what is truly disturbing . . . it's asserting its humanity. "I am a real person." Sadly, it would probably get more rights as a citizen than we have.

I thought it was creepy before you pointed that out.

Yeah, that is disturbing. No less when the responses are only going to become increasingly sophisticated.:(

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir


a fictitious entity can probably get away with fraud in this country.

that is the disgusting part.

I believe you meant 'Turing Test'...


The Turing test is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human. In the original illustrative example, a human judge engages in natural language conversations with a human and a machine designed to generate performance indistinguishable from that of a human being. All participants are separated from one another. If the judge cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test. The test does not check the ability to give the correct answer to questions; it checks how closely the answer resembles typical human answers.

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.


You're right - my fingers were wonrg.

first i thought it was real person, even with the headline

then I followed the link and listened to their 2nd conversation.

that is just terrible.

Couple this with voice cloning technology

and you've got falsified audio "recordings" to incriminate you with a push of a button.

Thanks for posting!!!

I am not a robot. Just sayin'.

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

I'm not listening to this anymore...


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

Better question: Are You A Turtle?


Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.