Well then they will have to train their Ai with incorrect informations… politically incorrect, scientifically incorrect, etc… which renders the outputs useless.
Scientifically accurate and as close to the truth as possible never equals conservative talking points… because they are scientifically wrong.
It would be the same with liberal talking points and in general any human talking point.
Humans try to change the reality the way they want it, thus things they say are always incorrect. When they want to increase something, they make it appear less than IRL, usually. Also appearances are not universal.
Humans also simplify things acceptably for one subject, but not for another.
Humans also don’t know what “correct information” is.
A lot of philosophy connected to language starts mattering, when your main approach to “AI” is text extrapolation.
Well then they will have to train their Ai with incorrect informations… politically incorrect, scientifically incorrect, etc… which renders the outputs useless.
Scientifically accurate and as close to the truth as possible never equals conservative talking points… because they are scientifically wrong.
It would be the same with liberal talking points and in general any human talking point.
Humans try to change the reality the way they want it, thus things they say are always incorrect. When they want to increase something, they make it appear less than IRL, usually. Also appearances are not universal.
Humans also simplify things acceptably for one subject, but not for another.
Humans also don’t know what “correct information” is.
A lot of philosophy connected to language starts mattering, when your main approach to “AI” is text extrapolation.
I think you hurt peoples feelings lmao.
The truth just isnt very catchy. Thanks for trying though. Im still on lemmy for people like you.