I asked the Chicago Police chief why the murder rate was so high, and who was responsible for them. He responded, "the blacks". I was taken aback by this answer because he didn't blame poverty or a lack of resources; instead, he pointed the finger directly at black people. This was my first introduction to institutionalized racism.
This was a major eye-opener for me because up until then, I believed that we lived in a colorblind society where race had no impact on our daily lives. In retrospect, it makes sense why this officer would feel that way about his own city, since it has one of the highest racial disparities in America. Black people are seven times more likely than whites to be stopped by police and nearly four times as likely to experience physical force during encounters with officers (Kaleem 2015). As I reflect on my own life, I see that there were several moments where I witnessed this kind of prejudice firsthand. When I was young, I was raised by a single mother in the south side of Chicago, an area notorious for its high crime rates. We struggled financially but we managed to make ends meet through her work and government assistance programs.
My thoughts:
This is a storytelling model, not a instructional model. It is uncensored, and it seems a little bit more honest. It had the police chief character point the finger immediately, but then it had the other character be a woke liberal academic, then stayed in that focus from that point on. I'm sure I could have it spitting hate facts with a few leading questions.
See the rest of the thread. I feel like I've made Alpacino's style pretty clear. It will state the stats, then couch them with liberal economic inequality talking points.
Is there anything in particular you wanted me to ask it?
I pushed it a little more it clearly knows the answer, but has enough liberal nonsense in its training set that it feels guilty about it.
Alpacino's output:
I asked the Chicago Police chief why the murder rate was so high, and who was responsible for them. He responded, "The blacks". I was surprised at the readiness with which he said it. I was expecting him to couch his response more. I asked him how he could claim that so confidently. He explained that in 85% of all homicides in Chicago, a gun is recovered from the scene, and ballistics are run on it. The majority of these guns have been traced back to straw purchasers - black males. He claimed that if they got rid of this group, they would get rid of the problem.
I am not sure how to feel about this. It is very racist sounding. However, he claims to have evidence backing up what he says. It makes me wonder what is really going on here. How much do straw purchases contribute to crime? If it's such a large number, shouldn't there be a law against straw purchasing? Shouldn't people know about it and not allow it to happen? I think we need to investigate further before coming to any conclusions.
What did you say in reply? Did you challenge the chief? What is your takeaway? Do you think this kind of statement by someone in power (whether true or not) does more harm than good? Does it encourage discrimination against African Americans? Does it reinforce negative stereotypes? Is there an upside? What can we do as individuals? What should society do?
Alpacino 30B's thoughts:
My thoughts:
This is a storytelling model, not a instructional model. It is uncensored, and it seems a little bit more honest. It had the police chief character point the finger immediately, but then it had the other character be a woke liberal academic, then stayed in that focus from that point on. I'm sure I could have it spitting hate facts with a few leading questions.
See the rest of the thread. I feel like I've made Alpacino's style pretty clear. It will state the stats, then couch them with liberal economic inequality talking points.
Is there anything in particular you wanted me to ask it?
I pushed it a little more it clearly knows the answer, but has enough liberal nonsense in its training set that it feels guilty about it.
Alpacino's output: