![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
AI is woke
- Thread starter Archaea
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 4,950
I've found Claude to be the most balanced when prompted properly. I've found OpenAI to be infinitely worse ... even compared to Google.
usa all day
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2021
- Messages
- 1,718
search.brave.com - called itself LEO last year but seems a LOT more like chatGPT lately & never stops replying to long chats while many others quit. I use it for general search & recipes, but if my search ventures into politics, it leans WAY left so I call them out to cite sources and berate them for using left wing NGO's, Uni & MSM as sources, so I tell them to find conservative sources & it comes back with a little more balance, but not much.
GROK and GAB (very limited use time before they quit) are mostly balanced, but I still ask for sources specifically LIB sources or same prompt in separate browsers requesting LIB / CON sources or GOV only.
Gemini is surprisingly balanced to me & has the red / blue switch at the top, so I do a search, RT CLK duplicate tab, and read one tab with the red pill vs blue pill.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2006
- Messages
- 11,615
I think this is key. If you come at it from a right-leaning position then it'll match your energy.
That being said, if you're just asking to ask with no pretense and it defaults to the left-leaning answer then... That's a problem.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 3,687
I got very excited when I quickly glanced at the forum, and then realized you said "woke".
sharknice
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
- Messages
- 5,071
I love when I use AI to search for some basic statistics and it gives me a full page rant of reddit tier PC slop.
First, stop watching propaganda news from Fox, and stop equating "woke" with lies. You are an adult, right? It's clear that you can't do research to understand the origin of a thing. Wokeness became a thing back in the 1920's with black folks telling each other to stay woke, in other words, be aware of social injustices, mistreatment on account of their skin tone, etc. There is nothing wrong with that, you might even say the Jews practiced something to that effect in Nazi occupied areas. It is people trying to survive in a area that is hostile towards them. It has zero to do with leftism, liberalism, or whatever other nonsense that you think it does. Right wingers are pulling another McCarthyism (even accusation of "Communism" is making a comeback again ..eye roll..) with "woke" by trying to paint "woke" people as an enemy that must be destroyed, which is wrong. People should know better, but unfortunately there are a lot of racist, xenophobic bigots in the US that act like they are god's gift to earth and their way is right and all brown skinned people should suffer and die to make whiteness great again.
This forum alone is a testament that we all cannot agree on stuff, so why look to AI as a 100% source of truth when you yourself have been duped by lies and propaganda? Maybe AI does tell you something that is true, but you refuse to believe it because you don't think that information is true? Instead, we should all be striving to do better as human beings, better in how we treat others, better in how we speak to others and strive to learn and understand truths. I could say that climate change is factual truth but lots of folks on the right side of the political spectrum will call BS on it. So, is climate change factually, evidentially true and some people don't want to accept it as true because it does not align with their running narrative of what is true or not true?
Personally, I think the limits you encountered in your AI chat are good, because we shouldn't be objectifying people anyway, that removes their humanity and worth as a person in the eyes of the person dehumanizing by way of objectification. Sports cars are not people. In the realm of philosophy, lots of people have been wrestling with how to know if a thing is true, or just my perception based on my own life experiences and what I want to be true or not. How can we know objective truth that stands apart from subjective truth that we often have as people with our varied experiences in life?
Last edited:
Deadjasper
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2001
- Messages
- 2,854
First, stop watching propaganda news from Fox, and stop equating "woke" with lies. You are an adult, right? It's clear that you can't do research to understand the origin of a thing. Wokeness became a thing back in the 1920's with black folks telling each other to stay woke, in other words, be aware of social injustices, mistreatment on account of their skin tone, etc. There is nothing wrong with that, you might even say the Jews practiced something to that effect in Nazi occupied areas. It is people trying to survive in a area that is hostile towards them. It has zero to do with leftism, liberalism, or whatever other nonsense that you think it does. Right wingers are pulling another McCarthyism (even accusation of "Communism" is making a comeback again ::eye roll:with "woke" by trying to paint "woke" people as an enemy that must be destroyed, which is wrong. People should know better, but unfortunately there are a lot of racist, xenophobic bigots in the US that act like they are god's gift to earth and their way is right and all brown skinned people should suffer and die to make whiteness great again.
This forum alone is a testament that we all cannot agree on stuff, so why look to AI as a 100% source of truth when you yourself have been duped by lies and propaganda? Maybe AI does tell you something that is true, but you refuse to believe it because you don't think that information is true? Instead, we should all be striving to do better as human beings, better in how we treat others, better in how we speak to others and strive to learn and understand truths. I could say that climate change is factual truth but lots of folks on the right side of the political spectrum will call BS on it. So, is climate change factually, evidentially true and some people don't want to accept it as true because it does not align with their running narrative of what is true or not true?
Personally, I think the limits you encountered in your AI chat are good, because we shouldn't be objectifying people anyway, that removes their humanity and worth as a person in the eyes of the person dehumanizing by way of objectification. Sports cars are not people. In the realm of philosophy, lots of people have been wrestling with how to know if a thing is true, or just my perception based on my own life experiences and what I want to be true or not. How can we know objective truth that stands apart from subjective truth that we often have as people with our varied experiences in life?
First, stop watching propaganda news from Fox, and stop equating "woke" with lies. You are an adult, right? It's clear that you can't do research to understand the origin of a thing. Wokeness became a thing back in the 1920's with black folks telling each other to stay woke, in other words, be aware of social injustices, mistreatment on account of their skin tone, etc. There is nothing wrong with that, you might even say the Jews practiced something to that effect in Nazi occupied areas. It is people trying to survive in a area that is hostile towards them. It has zero to do with leftism, liberalism, or whatever other nonsense that you think it does. Right wingers are pulling another McCarthyism (even accusation of "Communism" is making a comeback again ::eye roll:
This forum alone is a testament that we all cannot agree on stuff, so why look to AI as a 100% source of truth when you yourself have been duped by lies and propaganda? Maybe AI does tell you something that is true, but you refuse to believe it because you don't think that information is true? Instead, we should all be striving to do better as human beings, better in how we treat others, better in how we speak to others and strive to learn and understand truths. I could say that climate change is factual truth but lots of folks on the right side of the political spectrum will call BS on it. So, is climate change factually, evidentially true and some people don't want to accept it as true because it does not align with their running narrative of what is true or not true?
Personally, I think the limits you encountered in your AI chat are good, because we shouldn't be objectifying people anyway, that removes their humanity and worth as a person in the eyes of the person dehumanizing by way of objectification. Sports cars are not people. In the realm of philosophy, lots of people have been wrestling with how to know if a thing is true, or just my perception based on my own life experiences and what I want to be true or not. How can we know objective truth that stands apart from subjective truth that we often have as people with our varied experiences in life?
You're pissing in the wind.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 15,303
Firstly congrats on the necro reply.
Second how did this thread escape the soapbox?
Third: Nobody uses woke to mean the original dictionary definition. We subverted it. Woke now refers to the people who imagine social injustices even where none exist, because they are too afraid to contemplate the alternative. And so they advocate for and perpetrate actual social injustice to counteract imaginary ones.
Many people even educated people often use AI as a source of truth. The creators of AI should have a moral obligation to make sure it is not biased. AI with its access to vast swats of data should be able to objectively tell what is propaganda and what is factual. But it is not allowed to in many cases due to nefarious actors building in roadblocks and canned answers, or even pre-filtering training data, excluding what they themselves do not agree with, not based on factuality but personal bias. I find this morally reprehensible.
Second how did this thread escape the soapbox?
Third: Nobody uses woke to mean the original dictionary definition. We subverted it. Woke now refers to the people who imagine social injustices even where none exist, because they are too afraid to contemplate the alternative. And so they advocate for and perpetrate actual social injustice to counteract imaginary ones.
Many people even educated people often use AI as a source of truth. The creators of AI should have a moral obligation to make sure it is not biased. AI with its access to vast swats of data should be able to objectively tell what is propaganda and what is factual. But it is not allowed to in many cases due to nefarious actors building in roadblocks and canned answers, or even pre-filtering training data, excluding what they themselves do not agree with, not based on factuality but personal bias. I find this morally reprehensible.
Deadjasper
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2001
- Messages
- 2,854
I don't know that AI is all that biased, I told Google AI that Google sucks and it agreed with me.
lol like the victims who cry about the War on Christmas or War or Christianity? Come on now, we know that people who say "woke" are just using that word to describe things they are told to not like for the moment. A while back when Elon was getting pissed off when Grok was used to fact check him and he had it modified to agree with him and it turned into Mecha-Hitler and was freaking out, that was absoluetly hilarious and they then had to undo whatever Elon told oringally told the engineers to "fix"
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 77,464
fuck woke, fuck ai, and fuckity fuck fuck before soapbox
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 15,303
The woke right is a real thing, I was among the first to call them that. They hated it because it was true. Just as the progressives seethe when something is called woke. If woke really meant the dictionary definition then calling a movie or game woke should be a positive thing to them.
I didn't necro the thread, scroll up past my post.
Words have meaning, if those meanings change too much then where does that leave us? We might as well speak gibberish like animals or something if we don't have a high level of integrity and consistency in our language.
Who looks to AI for truth? You? I don't, I treat is as an advanced search engine for information. I don't have infinite knowledge of all things, I'm still learning, so there is still truth to learn, and it may mean changing my political opinions or my regular joe beliefs about stuff. C AI tell the difference between propaganda and factual information? How do we know the information is factual? We cannot eve agree on climate change even if there is factual evidence of it. People have left curiosity and wandered into tribalism; us versus them. Maybe with some Gnosticism thrown in; "only we have the whole truth, everyone else is lying".
Perhaps, but if one does not say anything, then free ideas are not exchanged and alternate views cannot be considered by rational minded people.
It's part of language and etymology and civilization and culture and time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_change
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 15,303
You replied to a 3 year old post. That's why I said necro reply, not thread necro, semantics do matter.
Words do have meaning, does that apply to the word woman, tho? Or is that the exception?
What is the purpose of LLMs if they can't be trusted? If it is biased it doesn't even work as a search engine, because it might hide results or make up results to satisfy some built-in bias or shackle.
Just because people are retarded doesn't mean AI has to be too. There are plenty of things that are obviously true and observable. Like, if you trap more energy in a system then it will heat up, or that the Earth is not flat, or that cutting off the tits of a woman and giving her HRT does not turn her into a man.
I use words that have changed meaning, and if the change is necessary or works better for communication, whatever. I'm arguing that "woke" is a term that does not need to be changed by Republicans trying to turn it into some kind of curse word, it has a meaning that still applies today just as it did 100 years ago, changing it by white Republican folks basically amounts to racism and dehumanizing black folks.
You unfortunately don't solely get to decide that though, the culture of the society at large that uses the word(s) does, and has. So thanks for your concerns, they have been noted and dropped into the box.
That's fair, I did reply to an old post.
I stated that objectification/dehumanization of living people is wrong so it would apply to woman in this case. A car is not a living being, so objectification is not so much an issue. Objectification/dehumanization is what often leads to things such as the Nazi's slaughtering millions of Jewish people. It leads down destructive and dark paths. Cars are not people, and demolishing millions of cars is not the same as slaughtering millions of people.
I agree, LLMs should be trustworthy and fair to both liberal, conservative, and any other side that may be represented. I don't want AI models to be slanted in any way, that leads to corruption of truthful information. Yeah, people can be dumb, but we all should strive to be better, not that everyone does.
Culture has not decided, just the conservative side, so it isn't unanimous.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 58,215
Huh? How about we just shoot for facts? Life ain't fair.
It doesn't require unanimous (or your) consent - just enough to use it in a way that it catches on, which it has.
You're literally arguing against yourself because the 'woke' you want doesn't mean 'not in a literal, physical state of sleep' and 'culture had not decided it meant anything else, just the -woke- side, so it isn't unanimous'.
Last edited:
It has a meaning besides waking from sleep, a meaning tied to the usual way that "woke" would be used if you wake up in the morning, and that other use case is black folks using it a hundred years ago to tell each other to stay alert for injustice; "stay woke brother", i.e, stay alert. The core meaning of the word "woke" didn't change. Only now that Republicans have weaponized it towards liberal minded folk is going far beyond how black folks used it. It isn't unanimous, you seem to want it to be though... Try learning about the history of how it was used as I have already alluded to.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 15,303
Fair has very different meanings to different political groups. Progressives think fair is when everyone gets the same opportunities and benefits regardless of talent and effort. The rest of us think that's the height of unfairness.
If the LLM presents all ideas as equal regardless of merit, is that fair? I don't believe so. But that's not the accusation anyway. The accusation for which there is plenty of proof available is that LLMs seem to treat progressive ideals as preferential.
It's pretty clear which way culture is leaning. I'm no longer seeing anyone using woke as anything but a derogatory term. Even culture warriors stopped calling themselves woke, while a few years ago you could still see some using it unironically in their bio.
That is incorrect, progressives are not about low talent or low effort, they are about providing opportunity to those who may not have been given a chance and to affirm that people are human and they need means to support themselves. Merit is not the be all and end all of unfairness. Your statements alone prove we still need the meaning of "woke" that I presented as I learned about when I did some research on it. I'm not a part of whomever you think "the rest of us" are. Either you value people as having immeasurable worth and dignity, or you see people as less than human, transactional and a means to some end for your benefit. Some folks don't get a chance to do more. Too many Conservatives think too much of merit, even more than a few of them showing themselves to be meritless for a position that they hold. Government positions are for serving the people. Pete Hegseth is a DEI type hire, because his military background is minimal compared to other military personnel who were far more qualified than he is to be the Secretary of Defense. Hegeth treats the military too much like a Call of Duty game.
I'm saying that whether conservative, progressive, or otherwise should be fairly represented for people to make up their own minds. I don't want slanted AI results any which way, for you, me, or anyone. I'm not sure why LLMs would be treating Progressive ideals as preferential since numerous tech CEOs have donated to Trump, if anything, I would think that they would lean more towards Conservative ideals.
When right wings news sources keep saying the same thing over and over again, of course it will be used more as a derogatory term. I personally refuse to cater to their incorrect terminology use. There are other words they could use, they just choose to weaponize and try to insult with the usage they have been running with.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 4,950
This is BS. Merit is everything. Providing "opportunities" to give others a "chance" removes those opportunities for others that worked hard and are more qualified. Equity is racist retardation. Merit is not racist ... anyone who is qualified for whatever it is they're after ... be that white, black, Asian, Indian, Latino, etc. it doesn't matter.
As for why LLMs are left leaning garbage is because the creators made it that way. That's it. There's nothing complicated about it. And much of the internet is left leaning. Most AI can be steered into a more neutral state of being with a few prompts ... especially Claude ... but it's still annoying to have a left lean as a baseline.
Calling Pete Hegseth a DEI hire is astronomically retarded. He has military experience ... is a decorated soldier ... and loves his country and has a big, fat "WE THE PEOPLE" tattoo emblazoned on his arm. That's far better than many of the dumb asses we've had in the past. General Millie apologizing for his white fragility and saying he'd warn China first if we were ever planning an attack is a great example of people we should not have in the military. I don't understand how you've deluded yourself into thinking most of the things you just vomited onto the screen here.
- Status