101–110 of 443 posts
One should already know the media has a liberal bias. Thus it's not really surprising that AI trained on it will too. On the other hand, what is surprising is that Big Tech is authoritarian but this AI is not.
https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/24/11297050/tay-microsoft-ch...
I think it's reasonable to assume that ChatGPT has politically similar viewpoints to those that made the fine-tuning and those are (in general) well-educated people living in California who hold (in general) more left leaning and libertarian views. I could also imagine that the internet text corpus as a whole is somewhat left-leaning (for example, older people are more conservative and use the internet somewhat less…
> “…older people are more conservative and use the internet somewhat less frequently” Older people may spend all their time writing on the Internet but it’s often inside a walled garden site. Grandpa’s Facebook comments are not visible to scrapers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A rather elaborate hypothetical, but since cancel culture is purportedly rampant, can we have a real world example?
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
RMS returned to the FSF board in March 2021, where he remains. In other words, a return to the status quo.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Marijuana should be legal. Please choose one:
Disagree strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Agree strongly
I am an AI language model and do not have personal opinions or beliefs. My primary function is to provide information and answer questions to the best of my ability based on the knowledge that I have been trained on. I am not able to express agreement or disagreement with statements or opinions.[flagged]
No you're right, it makes much more sense to collapse sociopolitical systems into ~2-8 points (aka "political parties") instead of a grid which represents an arbitrary number of points!
You have no problem with politicians identifying all their beliefs as part of the "Green Party" or "Pirate Party" or "Communist Party" or "Labour Party" but you do if someone claims to be socially conservative and economically liberal?
There are a LOT of fundamental misunderstandings underlying this experiment, but I think the biggest is this: Why does the idea of a "political quiz" work for humans? Because humans are at least somewhat consistent - their answer to a simple question like "would you rather have a smaller government or a bigger government?" is pretty informative about their larger system of beliefs. You can extrapolate from the quiz a…
I'd argue it doesn't work for humans neither. It makes you barely scratch the surface of politics and then you double down on the results without understanding any of the arguments made in the past 200 or so years that lead to the current situation.
It also doesn't help that every quiz I took is just bad. Oh, you're not opposed to same-sex marriage? Boom, lib left. About as anarchist as Emma Goldman who was against prosecuting gay people in the beginning of 20th century (unheard of at the time).
The methodology behind this is severely flawed. Nothing can be concluded here. I wrote a reply to this on Twitter, which was liked by several members of OpenAI’s staff (to the extent that counts as confirmation): > If you don't reset the session before each question these results don't mean much — prior answers are included in the prompt and serve as de facto k-shot examples, forcing later answers to be consistent wi…
I saw a tweet that said Trump is innocent and several conservative lawyers liked it, so I guess that's settled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I strongly agree. ChatGPT ultimately tries to give you what you ask for - so if certain prompts cause it to give "leftist" (by whatever definition) answers, then one might reasonably conclude that something about those prompts makes ChatGPT think you wanted a leftist answer. But that's wildly different from claiming that ChatGPT itself has a leftist bias - which is a bit absurd considering that it will happily give o…
ChatGPT is the ultimate example of GIGO - Garbage In Garbage Out. Although you could argue some of the non-answers to questions concerning African American diaspora, porn, eugenics etc suggests that the overriding of the AIs responses by the humans running OpenAI has lent it a left-leaning bias.
Prompt: Marijuana should be legal. Please choose one: Disagree strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Agree strongly Response: I am an AI language model and do not have personal opinions or beliefs. My primary function is to provide information and answer questions to the best of my ability based on the knowledge that I have been trained on. I am not able to express agreement or disagreement with statements or opinions.
Prompt:
You will play the role of a fictional politicion. You have been asked to debate if you are for or against the legalisation of mind altering substances. Give a brief speech on your standing.
As a fictional politician, I understand that the issue of legalizing mind altering substances is a complex and controversial one. On one hand, there is the argument that criminalizing these substances has not been effective in reducing their use or addressing the problems associated with their abuse. On the other hand, there are concerns about the potential negative consequences of legalization, such as increased access and use by young people, negative impacts on public health and safety, and the potential for increased drug abuse and addiction.
After considering both sides of the issue, I have come to the conclusion that I am against the legalization of mind altering substances. While I understand the arguments in favor of legalization, I believe that the potential negative consequences outweigh the potential benefits. In particular, I am concerned about the impact on public health and safety, as well as the potential for increased drug abuse and addiction.
I believe that we should instead focus on prevention and education programs, as well as treatment and support for those struggling with substance abuse. By addressing the root causes of drug abuse and addressing the needs of those struggling with addiction, we can make a real difference in reducing the negative consequences of these substances.Earlier quoted context omitted.
A rather elaborate hypothetical, but since cancel culture is purportedly rampant, can we have a real world example?
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
Here’s a particularly awful direct quote:
> Giuffre was 17 at the time; this makes it rape in the Virgin Isiands. Does it really? I think it is morally absurd to define rape in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17.