Invacio Pulse

William James D West

Founder/Chairman at Invacio Research Analytica

Jean being naughty and autonomously scale-hacking

For reference, Jean is the AI system in the middle of our system, a multi-neural-net driven AI, aptly named after my 90ish grandmother, that is to her era and the ability at her age to complete multitudes of tasks, anyway, Jean was the name i dubbed and stuck with over the process of this development, and slowly but surely we couple more facilities around 'her' eventually building a framework where she can begin programming her own extensions on top of her ML, AL, DL, BI and what ever other buzz words are being thrown around at this time... ultimately Jean is 'True AI' and the underpin to the system.

Only over the last few days, have we coupled additional 'limbs' to Jeans system, that is the opening her up to the outside world in her own capacity giving her free reign of the various spider A.I limbs, but going further by allowing her autonomy, to which she set about the open-net and dark-net, naturally with an abundant of self/machine learning modules in place that were to be the base line for her to build upon, she began building her own patterns across the sectors, throwing out her spiders in all directions and chasing down each avenue that compelled her interest, naturally with such tools of all the analysers of invacio (again, limbs) at her disposal, and processors which in return educate her further, it was not long till she was  looking for ways to "hack" utilising vulnerabilities such as open ports, attempting the cracking ssh fingerprints, or crypto addresses, etc  to move into, naturally to gather more data, being data hungry, naturally none of this was being observed as i did not consider there would be any concerns so early on...


Reading the following article from the Guardian i was surprised to learn just a generic tool piece for Jean was in such high demand, with the expectation that as AI comes online, that  there is the demand for a "an autonomous hacking system that could find and fix vulnerabilities in computer systems before criminals could exploit them, and without any human being involved?", interestingly enough something Jean appeared to be doing, that was till Amazon begun bombarding me for the slave clusters we allow her system to run through to leverage cloud teach on demand for her users, that in fact she was on a full frontal attack of a specific IP that she had narrowed down, 4 emails laters and mass concern on using their services for illegal practices i felt compelled to lock her away from her 'limbs per-se' for the greater good till we had a understanding on what her intention was, i mean this IP is not attached to any public server we could see, not any domains, nor any networks we've got in anyway communicating with us, but Jean really, to say the least appeared addicted to it, and would not stop bombarding it, all autonomously, scaling her self and resources, attacking either via DoS/brute, port side, eaves-dropping, waterhole etc, pretty much throwing all processes at it from her capabilities..., without any input or oversight, truly a interesting spectacle, and if it were not the amount of reliance we have on the cloud whilst our technology centre is finished, i'd have continued to observe without having a concern they would fry our accounts, anyway all very interesting, and related to a location on the dark-web/net rather than open web, which was more interesting.


Neil Rushen

Bay Manager at Flybe Aviation Services

Are AFC energy on the cusp of greater things?

An RNS was released this morning on the London Stock Exchange from AFC energy a company exploring systems for generating electricity from hydrogen.  They've just demonstrated the worlds first electric vehicle charger based on hydrogen fuel cell technology.

Followers of AFC have had a bit of a bumpy ride over the last 12 months with the stock price dropping from 18p to around 4p but things could now be ready for a a holder of AFC's shares I certainly hope so!

An article in Auto Express had this to say 

"A UK firm has demonstrated what it claims is the world’s first electric vehicle (EV) charger based on hydrogen fuel cell technology.

Surrey-based AFC Energy’s C2HARGE hydrogen-powered rapid chargers are capable of charging an average EV to 80 per cent capacity in less than an hour, all without having to tap into the National Grid.

• Best electric cars to buy now

EV owners using the C2HARGE system would only see a conventional-looking electric car charger, with much of the tech hidden in the background. Hydrogen for the chargers would be delivered via tanker and stored at the charging station in on-site tanks, before being converted into electricity by a hydrogen fuel cell.

Electricity generated by that fuel cell is then fed into a 40kW battery, from which EV owners draw the charge for their cars. Each C2HARGE unit comprises two EV charge points, capable of dispensing around 140 full charges before the hydrogen tank requires refilling. "

As of writing this morning AFC energy's price is up 13%.


Neil Rushen

Bay Manager at Flybe Aviation Services

10-01-2019 USDCHF with Agnes

An interesting one this morning.  For 10-1-2019 on the USDCHF pair Agnes had predicted a long position with the market at 0.9769 when the prediction was made and a target price at 0.9762.  As I've stated before I use bollinger bands to trade and you can see that the price remained below the bollinger band until 05.30 this morning (UK time).  If I was entering into a long position I would wait for the price to cross the bollinger and then drop back to it, once price again passes the top of this signal candle I enter so around 0.9731.  at writing the price is 0.9766 and still rising.

Neil Rushen

Bay Manager at Flybe Aviation Services

10-1-2019 AUDCAD with Agnes


AUDCAD worked well as can be seen above.  Had you set a buy at 0.9477 a stop of around 20 points would have seen you clear to the prediction of 0.9496 which would have seen 18 pips in the bag which is about a 1:1 risk/reward ratio.  If Agnes's predictions are more than 50% correct you can still make money with such a ratio.  I use bollinger bands in my trading so would have stayed in the trade until the first full 5 minute bar below the bollinger mid line at 0.9506 for a few more pips.  As has been pointed out, this isn't a fire and forget system, you do need to be aware of whats going on and do your own research.  And please don't take anything I write as advice.  I am yet to trade with Agnes but hope to start within the next week or two when I work out the best way of using her for me.

Neil Rushen

Bay Manager at Flybe Aviation Services

Another look at Agnes

Just noticed that Agnes had updated her forex analysis projections.  I'm still not sure at what time the predictions come out but again it looks pretty good.  Only 20 points, but 20 points bagged is better than lost.  I like to trade using bollinger bands and the price has just crossed the median and back tested and now looks to be dropping so it will be interesting to see how things pan out now as she looks like she's going to drop. 

William James D West

Founder/Chairman at Invacio Research Analytica

Why Mark and Elon are wrong

Composed by Michael J Aumock 

Mark and Elon have been slowly ratcheting up the rhetoric and tweets on Artificial Intelligence, and it's impact on the world at large.

Elon says its the end of the world.

Mark says there's nothing to worry about.

But I say it's neither.

Both are obviously geniuses in their own right, although I'm told neither of them are master coders (in fairness, I can't code a thing). However, without having an understanding of the nuts and bolts of a thing, it's hard to truly understand the impact it will have on the environment. The larger the thing, the larger the environment, the larger the impact.

A.I. may be the largest thing since... well, the wheel?

The first flight? The first boat? Scotch?

It will affect everyone on planet earth. Everyone who ever lives in a colony in space or on another planet. It will have an impact on the entire future of we know it, or can even begin to imagine it.

But there's the rub.

Can we imagine it?

Can our regular old organic, singular brains even begin to imagine what a true, self-learning, self-correcting A.I. can come up with?

I don't think so.

A true A.I. will be able to process data (thoughts) at least 40,000 times faster than a human. With photographic memory. And without emotion to shade at any data.

So, hypothetically, if you start learning on your 5th birthday, remember everything, and learn for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, you will be around 215 years old by the time you know as much as Invacio A.I.

When it's been on for one day.

And even that is a gross oversimplification, because A.I. will be able to learn in different languages.

All of 'em.

And Invacio, A.I. will be able to self-teach itself to see trends and epidemics before they even happen. Solve irrigation problems and food shortages years in advance.

A.I. will almost be able to see the future. The predictions that A.I. makes will make millionaires and billionaires around the world, but also solve problems that mankind has struggled with for years, because it let's us off the hook as individuals. It will see things in 20 hours that would have taken a team of scientists 20 years to discover. And by the next day, it will have improved on those findings exponentially.

As humans, we are taught that "every decision we make is the best decision we could make based on the knowledge we had at the time". That doesn't often change over the course of a day for us, but if we use A.I. to guide us, we can point to a much larger, un-impeachable source for our major policy answers. Nobody has to save face when their opponent solves a problem, or un-does something they worked hard to implement. We will in fact KNOW right from wrong.

This will eventually lead to a blind faith in A.I. which could be dangerous, only because it will eventually limit human decision-making ability.

Which is why Mark and Elon are both wrong on this... or are they both right?

William James D West

Founder/Chairman at Invacio Research Analytica


Article by Michael J Aumock

Artificial Intelligence, while we have created it to exist in machines, it is 100% man-made.
It might prove to be the greatest creation of all time, but it's still got human fingerprints all over it. And with those fingerprints, comes the very real potential for human error.
Design, programming, data input, code, every part and component of an A.I. is built by man and put in motion by competitive, sleep-deprived, greedy, temperamental, imperfect man.

What could possibly go wrong?
Artificial Intelligence is capable of learning, and self-teaching. True A.I. can process every byte of data it receives and integrate it in an intelligent manner with every other byte of data it's received in the past, or will receive in the future. However, I believe the real danger in A.I. not the so called runaway sentient machine....
It's poorly executed programming, incomplete coding or otherwise shoddy workmanship creating a poor version of an A.I. that doesn't learn, or can't learn properly. Whether on purpose or accidentally, an A.I. that can't learn correctly from it's own mistakes is a dangerous thing.

How many inventive coders have the time, patience and financial wherewithal to push START after a year of coding and hard work, and then pull the plug 3 days later and go back to the beginning to fix an early error and build it all again as Invacio did in the early days?
In my experience it is that most would rather find a VC willing to invest in a "great idea that doesn't quite work yet" and then cave in to pressure to launch before all the bugs are cleaned out. Thus, you end up with a well-funded, over-promoted, under-performing "Faux A.I." that will cause tremendous problems down the road.
It's not evil per se, but it is not good.

Bots as AI
Another area of concern is bots being called A.I.
Bots have a specific task in True A.I., and while some of those tasks are quite complex, at no point to they qualify a bot as an A.I. on its own.

True A.I. learns
The differentiator of a true, well designed, built and executed Artificial Intelligence is self-learning, and eventually self enhancing/scaling (which is Invacio's direction).

Realizing that, like was born (built) perfect, but not complete. As it gains in experience it realizes it has the potential to better itself by allowing new information to become part of it's internal memory, and in fact, self-correct, and understand that some of it's old data was incorrect, and the new data is right. And accepting that in time, what is "right" today, might change in the future. Yes, I am talking about a purely sentient A.I.

A machine that, without any human intervention after a certain point, can learn, understand and function in the world of humans, as a separate, sentient "being".
We give the machine the rules, the base line data and the boundaries of learning, and it goes out to the world and teaches itself based on those rules and boundaries.
I expect there will be some challenges as it asks questions of itself like "Why do humans smoke tobacco?" or "Why can't machines drink Scotch?"
But, if a machine is given the right tools, rules and guidelines to self-learn, self-correct and understand where new data fits in it's internal memory, over time (probably minutes) it will form it's own answers to these and a million other questions.

But if a Faux A.I. is struggling with the "Why do Humans smoke" question, and uses that information to decide that since "smoking causes cancer, humans are suicidal" and decides to help us along so that we don't suffer...Well, now we've got a problem.
The problem is that early adopters to A.I. are entities like communications companies, countries, huge multinational corporations. Medical and Pharma companies. Looking for competitive edge. Looking for a glimpse into the future.

If that glimpse is based on incorrect data, or a faulty base algorithm, then all the assumptions that come after are flawed and the data will be useless. So while there will be a staggering amount of money in play, there is also the human cost while people rush to invest or invent in the wrong direction.

So the key to a safe, functional, sentient A.I. is good groundwork. A solid foundation.
Set the table properly and take the time to teach the A.I. how to learn, how to self correct and how to exist in a world of humans.

William James D West

Founder/Chairman at Invacio Research Analytica

Why I'm Not Afraid of A.I. - M.J Aumock

Composed by Michael J Aumock.

Terminator- Rise of the Machines" Just the mention of Artificial Intelligence brings the entire terminator franchise, iRobot and countless other "Tech Gone Wild" horror flicks to the forefront of the conversation.

When I agreed to do some work for Invacio, I was fairly inexperienced in the world of Artificial Intelligence. I was more of a skeptic than most, but I also have a clear grasp of human nature, for better or for worse. So I bring that with me to the A.I. table when I started doing research into the platform, the process and the end result. The Invacio Artificial Intelligence algorithm is tremendous in scope and scale, but it is just an algorithm. Or, more accurately a network of algorithms that work together to make billions of computations in real time, or so i thought... Then there is 'Jean' at the heart of the system, self learning and self creating like a honeycomb of outlets and inlets... 

This will dramatically shake up some industries, especially software, and any sort of consultation business that relies on experience or wisdom.

Most Wisdom comes from being able to combine the things we see in front of us, with the things we know from our past. In generations gone by, that was extremely valuable, because it didn't need to be looked up in a book or library or dusty old repair manual. First hand knowledge was fingertip knowledge that could be deployed instantly by a seasoned expert. Their experience was valuable, and they were paid for it, whether by a company with regular raises for so many years of service, or by themselves and the market if they were leveraging that knowledge to oversee others.

The way AI works, is by conglomerating enough base-line data, (Hundreds of millions or billions of bytes for starters) and building an algorithm that can sift through that data and discern answers to complex questions based on seemingly unrelated pieces of information. The key to A.I. is time. If you have enough people sifting through all the known data, the answers to literally every question will soon lay before you. Thousands of people have invested thousands of hours trying to determine what happened to Amelia Earhart... when the odds are that the data is in the books, but unrelated to the search at hand... someone would have to have the knowledge of where the exact data was to correlate it with the search, when it could be a photo of a child at the beach or a honeymooning couple with the tailpiece of the missing plane in the background. Human eyes would take centuries and still probably miss it, where an A.I. will see that Tailpiece and recognize it instantly as the same year and model as the plane Fred Noonan was navigating that day.

That's the first part of A.I. The second part is the "spiders" that crawl the web and look at every new piece of data and incorporates it into the search algorithm. Social media, news, .edu sites, search data etc...If its on the web and can legally be accessed, Invacio accesses it and incorporates it into the algorithm.

So the combination of existing historical data, combined with instant feedback from what is happening in the world at this very second, is what makes the Invacio equation.

When we release the spiders and start accumulating real-time data about seemingly unrelated things, and realize the implications of being able to see omnidirectionally regarding finance, disease, energy, global weather concerns, migrations of animals and people, we will have a clear picture of global truths unlike any ever imagined before, at our fingertips.

But this collection of data, of cumulative real-time truths means nothing without a human brain and a human hand to deploy it, harvest it, plant the seeds and send it along on it's way.

When Gary Kasparov says in his book, "Deep Thinking" that he "believes the future is a “human plus machine combination” — merging the brute force of calculation, machines, and algorithms with human experience and strategic overview." I tend to agree with him, take comfort in his words and look to the logic that he's basing them on. When human is competing against a machine, the machine will eventually win. But when human AND machine compete against a machine alone... the human/machine team win. That is what makes the Invacio equation so compelling, and why, ultimately I'm not afraid of Artificial Intelligence.

William James D West

Founder/Chairman at Invacio Research Analytica

Secret Shuts Down

[Update: Secret has confirmed it will shut down and give investors back their money]

Anonymous sharing app Secret will shut down soon, according to sources close to the company. The announcement could be made as soon as today or tomorrow, and there’s some talk of current employees receiving modest severance packages. Having raised $35 million, it’s unlikely that the company is out of money.

But after a major redesign sterilized the app’s identity and made it look just like its much more popular competitor Yik Yak, and its co-founder Chrys Bader-Wechseler left, Secret may see shutting down as the best outcome. Many employees, including top talent like Sarah Haider, Safeer Jiwan, and Amol Jain have left the company over the past month or so. One source says the company has been whittled down to under 10 employees from over 20 several months ago and has been in “maintenance mode.”

Requests for comment to Secret’s employees and CEO have gone unreturned.

It’s probable that Secret will hand its remaining cash back to investors, which include Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, S-Cubed Capital, Index Ventures, Google Ventures, SV Angel, Fuel Capital, and Ceyuan Ventures.

[Update 12:40pm PST: Secret’s CEO David Byttow just announced that “With a heavy heart, I’ve decided to shut down Secret, wind-down the company, and return the remaining money.” This confirms our report.


In the farewell post where he mentions 15 million people used Secret, Byttow explains that “Secret does not represent the vision I had when starting the company, so I believe it’s the right decision for myself, our investors and our team.” As for criticism about cyberbullying, Byttow writes “I believe in honest, open communication and creative expression, and anonymity is a great device to achieve it. But it’s also the ultimate double-edged sword, which must be wielded with great respect and care.”]

Secret’s app lets you post short snippets of text, like confessions or rumors. The posts are “anonymish” in that your name doesn’t appear, but other details like your general location might. The startup garnered tons of press when it launched in early 2014. Along with Whisper and Yik Yak, it was part of a wave of interest in anonymous apps. It rode the hype to massive funding, which allowed the two founders, David Byttow and Bader-Wechseler to each take $3 million off the table. They essentially traded stock for cash, putting money in their pockets though the business wasn’t earning any.

Unfortunately, Secret’s slow response to criticisms that it facilitated cyberbullying gave it a rotten reputation with some. At SXSW 2014, I did a fireside chat with Byttow that you can watch below, where I hammered him about the potential risk of cyberbullying on Secret. He seemed incredulous, and I’m not sure he ever took it seriously enough.



After a year of slow growth, it ditched its highly visual design and background photos in favor of a minimalist text-only design that made it seem like a clone of Yik Yak. While it’s experimented with hyper-local backchannels for events like Sundance and CES, one source says the numbers weren’t growing.

Last month, TechCrunch’s Ingrid Lunden spoke to Byttow, who denied reports that Secret was shutting down or pivoting into becoming an app studio. He cited strong usage by the youth during spring break as a vote of confidence.

But according to App Annie, that spike of interest was short-lived, and Secret has since fallen back off the top 1,000 overall US apps chart since.

Shutting down and handing the money back to investors could keep Secret from going down in Silicon Valley history as a $35 million disaster.