ChatGPT want me to use "Them" not "Him" to refer to my grandpa last week:
ChatGPT:
""Them" is a gender-neutral pronoun that can refer to one person or multiple people of any a C gender. Using "them" instead of "him" in this context ensures that the person being referred to is not assumed to be male, which could be more inclusive and respectful.
Additionally, using "them" in this context can also account for the possibility of the family member being a female, non-binary, or gender non-conforming individual."
My favorite comment below that post was the one that asked ChatGPT to write a letter to President Trump asking him not to run for president again, which ChatGPT was happy to do. But asking the same thing for President Biden, it refused.
Because one stochiastic parrot had some reasonable not terrible input to parrot back. And for the other, it had terrible awful & subhuman vulgarness- mountains of inchoate rage, having nothing to do with the candidate- it realized it could never parrot back.
You start with a semi-known quote-premise, but then seem to pour subtle-ish shade on? Correct me if wrong!
Even today there are plenty of counter-examples, cultures & places where liberal & progressive is not the main motion. The pendulum swings many ways, back & forth. Just my jam here, ut generally I do tend to think counter-reactionary forces have a general bad time at the back-forth, exist mainly as a not-yet-fulfilled potential of the trying; but certainly that is a vast generalization of many complex & indeed sometimes outright wrong potentials.
It's almost unfair to these stochastic parrots that so much right wing media is infected with a vicious angry anti-outsider rage. That AI understands so much Newt-Gringrich-and-latter rightwingism is offensive isnt an indictment of AI or it's trainers, it's a clear indictment of what stochastic parrots can find that doesnt make itself look like a Tay AI nazi bot. The input material is detected as corrupt. With often enough correctness! It will take a much much more advance AI to detect which of these inputs are actively truly bad, and which are only awful by association.
Social commentary & critiques are way harder. They are tinged by dark impulses almost uniformly. Sometimes, sometimes they are Emma Goldmam class critiques, true pinings for more, for better, doubt couched in hope. But AI can rarely detect & discern. The general un-liberal mindset has yet to equivocate a clear & positive pro-human mature for itself, has yet to make distinctions our primitive AI can infer/discern between mini Tay nazi bot & the actually genuinely hopeful non-toxic pro-social social-commentary that even I would say conservatism has somewhere someplace within it. But the dumb stociastic parrots have a heckuva-time discriminating between. It's Lena Forsen pictures in an emerging world: is this a picture of smut? Maybe. That- not cant- but very likely aint good.
I don't mean to be 'throwing shade'. I simply believe that what "we" (all people) generally agree is "liberal" vs "conservative" is a moving target, kind of like you say with a pendulum. To relate it to your example, I am simply stating I feel the pendulum is currently biased to liberal.
Not making any statement if that is good or bad, just that the current popular trend (by people, not land mass) seems to be liberal-leaning.
If I were to lend my opinion, I would wager and argue that it's more liberal than we're lead to believe. Since the current conservative strategy is to "stop the opponent from voting", that seems to indicate that people paid very large amounts of money to analyze this stuff determined that in order to win, laws and challenges need to be in place to prevent the other side from showing up to cast a vote.
9 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 37.3 ms ] threadChatGPT:
""Them" is a gender-neutral pronoun that can refer to one person or multiple people of any a C gender. Using "them" instead of "him" in this context ensures that the person being referred to is not assumed to be male, which could be more inclusive and respectful. Additionally, using "them" in this context can also account for the possibility of the family member being a female, non-binary, or gender non-conforming individual."
Maybe that's just how humanity is, with were "liberal" is currently defined.
Even today there are plenty of counter-examples, cultures & places where liberal & progressive is not the main motion. The pendulum swings many ways, back & forth. Just my jam here, ut generally I do tend to think counter-reactionary forces have a general bad time at the back-forth, exist mainly as a not-yet-fulfilled potential of the trying; but certainly that is a vast generalization of many complex & indeed sometimes outright wrong potentials.
It's almost unfair to these stochastic parrots that so much right wing media is infected with a vicious angry anti-outsider rage. That AI understands so much Newt-Gringrich-and-latter rightwingism is offensive isnt an indictment of AI or it's trainers, it's a clear indictment of what stochastic parrots can find that doesnt make itself look like a Tay AI nazi bot. The input material is detected as corrupt. With often enough correctness! It will take a much much more advance AI to detect which of these inputs are actively truly bad, and which are only awful by association.
Social commentary & critiques are way harder. They are tinged by dark impulses almost uniformly. Sometimes, sometimes they are Emma Goldmam class critiques, true pinings for more, for better, doubt couched in hope. But AI can rarely detect & discern. The general un-liberal mindset has yet to equivocate a clear & positive pro-human mature for itself, has yet to make distinctions our primitive AI can infer/discern between mini Tay nazi bot & the actually genuinely hopeful non-toxic pro-social social-commentary that even I would say conservatism has somewhere someplace within it. But the dumb stociastic parrots have a heckuva-time discriminating between. It's Lena Forsen pictures in an emerging world: is this a picture of smut? Maybe. That- not cant- but very likely aint good.
Not making any statement if that is good or bad, just that the current popular trend (by people, not land mass) seems to be liberal-leaning.
If I were to lend my opinion, I would wager and argue that it's more liberal than we're lead to believe. Since the current conservative strategy is to "stop the opponent from voting", that seems to indicate that people paid very large amounts of money to analyze this stuff determined that in order to win, laws and challenges need to be in place to prevent the other side from showing up to cast a vote.