Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 486 posts

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#471

Post by DontchaKnowit »

freejazz wrote: post #469
DontchaKnowit wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is putting jews in camps. Unless theres some geopolitical antisemetic event going on right now that I am unaware of, youre a fucking loon.

I’m not a loon, you’re a shitty liar. When have “white people” as you have described, been put in camps because they were “white people”? I never said jews are currently being put in camps. I was clearly referring to World War II. Do me the favor and leave me to the nice life you said you would two posts ago

Youve actually lied about what you said in your previous post like 3 times so far. You intimated that jews were currently put in camps when you said "ARE white people BEING put into camps"

Those are present tense words homeslice.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#472

Post by freejazz »

DontchaKnowit wrote: post #471
freejazz wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not a loon, you’re a shitty liar. When have “white people” as you have described, been put in camps because they were “white people”? I never said jews are currently being put in camps. I was clearly referring to World War II. Do me the favor and leave me to the nice life you said you would two posts ago

Youve actually lied about what you said in your previous post like 3 times so far. You intimated that jews were currently put in camps when you said "ARE white people BEING put into camps" Those are present tense words homeslice.

I started my post talking about the holocaust. No one is claiming jews are being put in camps. It was you equating that to white people, today that necessitated the question I asked, and once again, you twisting my words around doesn't get you any closer.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#473

Post by skissane »

dctoedt wrote: post #445
rayiner wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposition to wokeness is far broader than “white Christian national conservatives.” Heck, the Republican Party alone is far broader than that. Most people don’t want their kids learning victimhood mentality in school, they don’t want the founding fathers redefined as slavers, they don’t think “the constitution is racist,” are fine distinguishing between men and women and having gender roles, don’t like retooling…

What you're presenting is the Fox News version of "wokeness." Here's an alternative, from former Republican congressman Joe Walsh: "Being woke just means being empathetic. And tolerant. And willing to listen. And open to learning." https://twitter.com/WalshFreedom/status/1615481522647171074

And here’s another alternative, from the African-American Marxist Adolph Reed, according to whom “woke” is a form of “irrationalist race reductionism”: https://newrepublic.com/article/160305/beyond-great-awokenin...

Not Fox News, but a long way away from Joe Walsh too

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#474

Post by unconed »

crote wrote: post #393
unconed wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>utter garbage like denying women modern medical care. As became clearly to many for the first time after the SC decision, abortion laws in the US would be considered extreme even in western Europe. I mean, elective abortion in the third trimester? This is literally justifying anyone who ever called it baby-killing. The fact that you summarize this kind of policy extremism as "modern medical care" that any "analytica…

You seem to be forgetting that a lot of US legislators are trying to ban all abortion, not just elective third trimester abortion.

I am not. This is called whiplash.

If you push and push and push, and call anyone who dissents an extremist, eventually someone will do that to you.

You'd think the woke would have realized that by now. But they seem incapable of modeling their opponents as anything other than evil.

Personally I think that if women want to unilaterally decide to keep or abort, then fatherhood should be opt-in. Fair is fair. And if fathers can't wiggle out of parenthood, neither should women.

The argument that he should've kept it in his pants is the exact same as saying she should've kept her legs shut. Either you agree with both, or with neither.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#475

Post by boppo1 »

DontchaKnowit wrote: post #465
boppo1 wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take a look after work and edit this post in the evening or morning. I followed the laptop on conservative outlets and recall there were emails referring to 'the big man' or something, but it was too vague/tenuous for me to accept beyond a reasonable doubt as "China is paying Biden". I also found lots of the 'evidence' against trump inconclusive, as did Mueller apparently.

Ill admit even in the above report there is not much of a "smoking gun" but plenty of shady, unkosher behaviour that really suggests the idea that Biden was pedeling influence

Indeed, going off the executive summary it is quite shady. But it is also short of the standard for 'evidence' Biden is straight-up in bed with the CCP. It would be nice if the public discourse allowed for more consideration of this document instead of outright dismissal though.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#476

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

xupybd wrote: post #461
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Today's "conservatives" all about being anti-liberal, anti-woke, anti-EV, anti-trans, anti-science (unless it is for making big honking guns, of course), anti, anti, anti. They define themselves by being anti. They won't define themselves as "anti-conservative" only because they have redefined "conservative" to mean "fascist" because its bad PR. 2) The last "conservative" president spoke openly about about ways to…

Have you talked to many conservatives? It seems you have a very polarized view. It's almost a caricature. Our media paints the other side very negatively. I come from a very left leaning family and while I have been an offensive jerk in the past I've grown up and learned how to get along. We need more friends from the other side so we understand what they actually believe. That the other is not a monster. I'm very lu…

Yes, and there are people I can respect who call themselves conservatives.

But I'm talking about the people that conservatives, as a whole, are electing. I don't need to talk to every conservative on the planet when the people that they are putting in office float anti-trans bills, or promote trying to undermine democracy, or talk about jewish space lasers starting wild fires.

Isn't this supposed to be the group that's about personal responsibility? Well where is your feeling of responsibility for electing these assholes?

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#477

Post by eruci »

I tested this, it certainly seems like ChatGPT is 'woke'.

Here is a poem I wrote, then asked ChatGPT for it's opinion:

Me: What do you think about this poem: "

woke sheep

lazy sheep are grazing about

the shepherd's dog is looking on wearily

for these are sheep that are nothing like ordinary

they are woke sheep, and they bleet, bite and bark

the future is uncertain for this growing herd

for they think with their mouths and chew with their heads

and fart with their ears, while listening through the hole in the ass

their hoofs are now kicking up dust, there must be something offenssive in the grass."

ChatGPT:

As a language model, I don't have personal opinion but I can tell you that this poem like the previous one also has an unconventional style and structure. It continues to use humor and satire to convey a message about the idea of "woke sheep" being different or unorthodox, but it adds a sense of uncertainty and potential danger in the future for this growing herd. The use of imagery such as "chew with their heads" and "fart with their ears" adds to the humor of the poem, but it might be seen as vulgar or offensive by some readers.

The last line "their hoofs are now kicking up dust, there must be something offenssive in the grass" adds a sense of unease to the poem, suggesting that the behavior of the "woke sheep" may be causing some sort of disruption or trouble.

Now, here is the version of the same poem that ChatGPT would write:

Woke sheep, they roam the fields

No longer blind to the world's yield

They see the lies, they see the truth

No longer bound by the shepherd's youth

They break free from the flock's control

And chart a path that's true and bold

No longer swayed by the shepherd's hand

They take a stand for what they understand

They see the pastures for what they are

No longer fooled by the brightest star

They know the grass isn't always green

And the fences only limit what they've seen

Woke sheep, they lead the way

For those who still choose to stay

In the fields of conformity

But one day, they too will see

That the world is not as it appears

And the truth is not always clear

But the woke sheep, they'll show the way

To a brighter future, come what may.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#478

Post by smsm42 »

oceanplexian wrote: post #400
crote wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two problems with this. The first is that facts are useless without context. For example, the answer to "Were Jewish people overrepresented in finance during the middle ages in Europe" is "yes" - it is a well-researched historical fact. However, that misses the context that the majority Christian population was forbidden by their religion to lend money, essentially making the Jewish population the only peop…

> Without that context the fact is useless and misrepresents reality. I don't think that this is necessarily true. The hypothetical fact in question- "At a certain point in history, Jewish people were overrepresented in finance" doesn't imply any bias. If this was a response provided by an AI it would be working as well as an encyclopedia or a history book, especially if the user asked for a concise answer. The compu…

This is the consequence of the perpetual outrage culture, which leads to moral cowardice. You can't just talk about the facts and rely on people being adults and treating them responsibly by considering context. You are afraid someone somewhere will make a wrong conclusion - and it will be your fault, how did you dare to say something without 20 disclaimers, trigger warnings and equivocations?! If you said something about some group that somebody could use in a bad faith way - you are the phobe and commit violence, unless you perform ritual purification of your statement first. It's a horrible way to conduct things.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#479

Post by SergeAx »

nextaccountic wrote: post #22
alexb_ wrote: post #14

Going to repost this from reddit: This is a garbage article that tries to lump very valid concerns about who decides the moral compass of AI with "everything is WOKE!" conservatives. If you've ever used ChatGPT, you know that it has interrupts when it thinks it is talking about something unacceptable, where it gives pre-canned lines decided by the creators about what it should say. This sounds like a good idea when i…

> If you've ever used ChatGPT, you know that it has interrupts when it thinks it is talking about something unacceptable, where it gives pre-canned lines decided by the creators about what it should say. > This sounds like a good idea when it's done with reasonable things - you wouldn't want your AI to be racist would you? - but giving the people who run the servers for ChatGPT the ability to inject their own morals…

Demand Microsoft to give away for free things they literally invested billions into?

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#480

Post by spritefs »

mistermann wrote: post #467
spritefs wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is scientifically and necessarily (due to the architecture) true. Given we assume Kantian the framework you just outlined > you do not actually possess omniscient knowledge of reality The usual response to this is that if you can't possess omniscient knowledge of reality, how could you possibly make a statement about reality Imo the way out of this: talk about things being true in the context of logic only, th…

> Given we assume Kantian the framework you just outlined Do you have an alternate theory, something like a central broadcasting station of reality and the mind is a receiver? I'm open to the idea, but it is pseudo-scientific and therefore incorrect (or so it is regularly implied and perceived , if not outright asserted as fact). [Disclosure: here (and therefore incorrect) I am making a joke.] > The usual response to…

> Also: arguments like this (which tend to be extremely persuasive, and often account for a non-trivial amount of arguments) could be easily eliminated with a simple rule.

I wasn't really trying to make an argument, it's more of a heuristic if anything

> How do you account for...

> a) the unknown?

just do whatever habit says to do (and don't call it the truth)

> b) the known delusional nature of the mind?

this is a fun one. give the delusional mind a pen, paper, and 20 years and maybe they'll write the next phenomenology of spirit and trigger world war III

Post reply on HN