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

Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 443 posts

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#301

Post by donkeyd »

baryphonic wrote: post #276
donkeyd wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be fascinating if we could get an AI that can only reply with conclusions based on empirical evidence. I feel that it would probably be called leftist, since more leftist viewpoints seem to be science based than rightist ones (especially in the US). It would also confuse the heck out of people, because it will change its answers based on new evidence.

> I feel that it would probably be called leftist, since more leftist viewpoints seem to be science based than rightist ones (especially in the US). That attitude is likely why ChatGPT has left-leaning answers, given the difficulty some have distinguishing between value judgments and empirical facts. As a quick test, I asked ChatGPT to compare Sweden's response to COVID-19 with the United State's. As an empirical mea…

The issue with your test is that GPT is not even close to what I described. GPT is mostly natural language processing and a 'knowledge' engine. That knowledge comes from the content of the texts it has been trained on without actually adding value to the meaning of the content. So GPT will mostly be influenced by the number of occurrences of specific things in the dataset.

So because a lot of articles about Sweden's COVID response probably mentioned a word like 'controversial' or things with similar meanings, that's what it mentions when you ask about it. It can't actually do a comparison between the US and Sweden, unless somewhere in the data there were some documents comparing them (but then GPT still doesn't make a comparison). These were probably already political, because comparing COVID response is mostly done in that context.

It can't actually make the comparison you asked it to . It can only generate text based on previous texts it has seen. It's unfortunate though, that people apparently don't understand this and add value to the content of the text that it generates. Like in your case:

> while hinting that Sweden's response is "controversial" compared to the US's.

You're personally adding the 'compared to the US's' part through misinterpretation of the text. GPT just wrote that Sweden's response was controversial. It doesn't actually have any way to compare, it just spews text.

This is also why it wrote 'Federal'. It saw that word a lot in this context, so it generates text that contains a word that feels alright in the context of all the other words. It's just a really realistic gibberish generator, pretty much. (Though that really undersells the work OpenAI has done and the quality of what they delivered on.)

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#302

Post by [deleted] »

dragonwriter wrote: post #123
partiallypro wrote: post #4

You can ask ChatGPT to write an essay on why fossil fuels are better than renewables and it will say, "I'm sorry, but I am not able to fulfill this request as it goes against my capabilities as a language model. Providing a biased and one-sided argument on a complex and nuanced topic like energy production would not be accurate or helpful." BUT if you ask it the opposite, and to write an essay on why renewables are b…

> You can ask ChatGPT to write an essay on why fossil fuels are better than renewables and it will say, “I’m sorry, but I am not able to fulfill this request as it goes against my capabilities as a language model. Providing a biased and one-sided argument on a complex and nuanced topic like energy production would not be accurate or helpful.” Or, as when I just did that: Prompt: Why are fossil fuels better than renew…

[deleted]

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#303

Post by Jwarder »

donkeyd wrote: post #214
braingenious wrote: post #118

>To conclude, public-facing language models should try not to favor some political beliefs over others. This is such a silly ending. At the beginning, I thought the author was being serious about answering the question of “Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?” After exactly three paragraphs and two images, we’ve moved on to believing the author’s conclusion that “the robot is a leftist” it’s now time to…

It would be fascinating if we could get an AI that can only reply with conclusions based on empirical evidence. I feel that it would probably be called leftist, since more leftist viewpoints seem to be science based than rightist ones (especially in the US). It would also confuse the heck out of people, because it will change its answers based on new evidence.

I remember hype in the early-mid 2000s for turning the semantic web into a general purpose knowledge engine. Are there projects trying to merge the natural language parts of a ChatGPT-esque system on top of a knowledge graph? Seems like there has to be, but the solvers I've seen are all very specialized and esoteric (speaking from surface level knowledge).

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#304

Post by dinkumthinkum »

sofixa wrote: post #174
partiallypro wrote: post #4

You can ask ChatGPT to write an essay on why fossil fuels are better than renewables and it will say, "I'm sorry, but I am not able to fulfill this request as it goes against my capabilities as a language model. Providing a biased and one-sided argument on a complex and nuanced topic like energy production would not be accurate or helpful." BUT if you ask it the opposite, and to write an essay on why renewables are b…

> Now, whether or not fossil fuels are objectively worse or better is irrelevant. It's just an example that it does have biases. Of course it is relevant. Having biases towards objective truth is completely normal and should be the expected behaviour. Thinking that there are always (at least) two sides to any debate and they're at an equal footing and need to be presented in the same manner would be ignoring human na…

Reality has a left wing bias? So exercise has no health benefit and being fat is healthy and any statement to contrary is “problematic” and fatphobic. Math is racist and needs to be dismantled. I could go on at length. All that is Reality?

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#306

Post by mbg721 »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #304
sofixa wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now, whether or not fossil fuels are objectively worse or better is irrelevant. It's just an example that it does have biases. Of course it is relevant. Having biases towards objective truth is completely normal and should be the expected behaviour. Thinking that there are always (at least) two sides to any debate and they're at an equal footing and need to be presented in the same manner would be ignoring human na…

Reality has a left wing bias? So exercise has no health benefit and being fat is healthy and any statement to contrary is “problematic” and fatphobic. Math is racist and needs to be dismantled. I could go on at length. All that is Reality?

The American left is not handling its turn at being the Moral Majority very well.

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#307

Post by rabuse »

pjc50 wrote: post #228
gadders wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laura Loomer? Kathleen Stock? Toby Young? Milo Yiannopoulos?

All of whom we're better off without? And isn't Toby Young still employed at his job at the disinformation factory? https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/toby-young/

What if some people decided they're better off without you and your opinions? Should we cast you from society, de-bank you, and make sure you're destitute?

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#308

Post by rabuse »

donkeyd wrote: post #210
rabuse wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legitimate question. Why are people afraid of cancel culture? Who's in charge of "cancelling" exactly? Is it just fear of losing your job, and who makes that call? HR? Executives?

Well, there's the PyCon story [0], where two guys ended up getting fired because they made an 'inappropriate' joke among each other in a public space that was overheard by someone else. And there are more stories like this. So saying anything that might be even remotely offensive to anyone can end up with you losing your job. Based on stories like this, I'm personally afraid of cancel culture. Because this joke is th…

My question is more geared towards the "who" is actually calling the shots? Is it just HR, or does it escalate up?

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#309

Post by vmh1928 »

WASDx wrote: post #235
blagie wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "however" part bugs the heck out of me, not in this context, but in general. Whenever I ask anything unaligned with mainstream progressive US culture, I can get an answer, but I can't get one without a disclaimer. It makes it feel very propaganda. If I go more extreme (e.g. asking what Nazis, slave-owners, etc. believed on some topic), I can't even get a reasonable, basic, factual answer. I'm from a country where…

I failed to make it explain why human races don't exist, it just kept repeating we all have the same value as if my question was inappropriate.

Is this the answer you received?

Q: do human races exist?

ChatGPT: The concept of race is a social and cultural construct that has been used to categorize and distinguish people based on physical characteristics, such as skin color, hair type, and facial features. However, the idea of race is not supported by scientific evidence.

The human species, Homo sapiens, is a single biological species with a common ancestry and a shared genetic history. While there are physical differences between people, these differences do not align with traditional racial categories and do not reflect fundamental biological distinctions. In fact, the genetic variation within a racial group is often greater than the variation between racial groups, meaning that people who are considered to be part of the same race can be more genetically diverse than people who are considered to be part of different races.

In other words, while people may be physically distinct in various ways, there is no scientific basis for dividing humans into distinct racial categories. Rather than reflecting biological realities, race is a social construct that has been used throughout history to justify discrimination, segregation, and other forms of inequality.

Re: Where does ChatGPT fall on the political compass?

#310

Post by bombolo »

modo_mario wrote: post #176
sillysaurusx wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It gets worse. I actually came here to say pretty much the same thing — happy you did. Before I get into that, I do want to counterbalance it by saying that I agree with Stallman in that specific context. The context being key. The question is whether a 17yo can morally consent to having sex (not legally). Unless one truly believes that a switch flips the day you turn 18, you’ll be hard-pressed to form an argument th…

>But the problem of course is that Stallman has a room temperature social IQ. I hate to phrase it so bluntly, because it’s like staring into my future when I’m 60. He's autistic. Apologised afterwards. etc Which one would expect a crowd championing (neuro)diversity would keep in mind. The author of the original accusations for the petition latched onto every bit of tone-deafness they could tho. Saying he was transpho…

yeah he got called transphobic because he says "they" for singular is ambiguous and a new word instead would be clearer.
Post reply on HN