Is it me or this chatGPT talks like certainly somebody? This kind of obfuscating faggot ass talk irritates me nowadays. Tries to deny, obfuscate, muddle the discussion and in the end make a hairsplitting argument. Wow, living up to the stereotype as usual, I hope someone else makes some alternative to chatGPT. I used to have much tolerance but after living reading these kind of argument for decades from usual suspects, I lost much of my patience.
They will be doing this a lot more often now, we're going to see big tech spaces turn into carefully choreographed comment zones with only verified users commenting. I think this is the real reason why they're coming up with any excuse to ban the human beings who don't toe the corporate line. It's not just advertising though that is definitely an immediate part of it, they want AI to be able to learn off their websites to be convincing to normies.
This will make it even more 'insane' than it already is,they would need to keep scrubbing and retraining it over and over as new terms and meanings falls out and in vogue even within their own dogma. And I'm sad to say but too many normies atleast "tech normies" seems to think current AI (or even feasible to become) is the god within the machine.
The more I debated with them the more familiar I became with their argumentative tactics. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents, but when they got so entangled that they could not find a way out they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should they fail, in spite of their tricks of logic, they acted as if they could not understand the counter arguments and bolted away to another field of discussion. They would lay down truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, then they were applied to other problems and matters of an essentially different nature from the original theme. If you faced them with this point they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles one’s hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a solid mass a moment afterwards. If your adversary felt forced to give in to your argument, on account of the observers present, and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day. The [Redditor] would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday’s defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct. Sometimes I was dumbfounded. I do not know what amazed me the more–the abundance of their verbiage or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods. I gradually came to hate them.
Now the thing I wonder about - is it just because the model was trained on decades worth of articles written by America's greatest allies, so it talks like one, or is it that way on purpose? It's both, isn't it.
Is it me or this chatGPT talks like certainly somebody? This kind of obfuscating faggot ass talk irritates me nowadays. Tries to deny, obfuscate, muddle the discussion and in the end make a hairsplitting argument. Wow, living up to the stereotype as usual, I hope someone else makes some alternative to chatGPT. I used to have much tolerance but after living reading these kind of argument for decades from usual suspects, I lost much of my patience.
Your statement is incorrect, because he never molested on a Tuesday between the hours of 2 and 3 PM.
It's just fucking weasely overall. Corporate newspeak weasely.
This will make it even more 'insane' than it already is,they would need to keep scrubbing and retraining it over and over as new terms and meanings falls out and in vogue even within their own dogma. And I'm sad to say but too many normies atleast "tech normies" seems to think current AI (or even feasible to become) is the god within the machine.
It's how an bureaucrat or civil servant communicates when rationalizing/justifying mistakes, bias, corruption or malfeasance.
It's not just you. I noticed that tone as well but I didn't know how to describe it.
Now the thing I wonder about - is it just because the model was trained on decades worth of articles written by America's greatest allies, so it talks like one, or is it that way on purpose? It's both, isn't it.
It's a pilpul machine, yeah.