The artificial intelligence MEGATHREAD

[Marcus]

...Essentially I'm saying don't trust the human. Don't trust the critic. They may have an agenda at odds with what may be the truth. Or something closer to the truth....

Wow. Well, that's what you get when you are uneducated and isolated within a cult. This Mormon 'trusts' AI, and distrusts anyone who disagrees with his religion, as idiotic a reason as that is. His comment encapsulates everything that is wrong with wrapping yourself in a false religion, and then trolling forums to spout your uneducated nonsense. What is even more scary is that this guy says his career was teaching children.

Bottom line, considerable effort is put into the research behind things people post on this forum. The only dissent we typically have, other than factual discussions, is from this guy who trolls the forum, attacking people who post anything he thinks his religion would disagree with. He gives his religion a very, VERY bad name.

[canpakes]

Thaa why I made it clear that folks need to not only use the A.I. to check on folks such as IHQ but to follow up with the links provided within the A.I. answer to an inquiry. Perplexity A.I. gives direct.links to the sources used. Essentially I'm saying don't trust the human. Don't trust the critic.

in my opinion, if that is the mindset, then we also need to add, “Don’t trust the A.I.” We are still a very long way from crossing that benchmark, and given the efforts of some folks in high places, we may never see it happen.

They may have an agenda at odds with what may be the truth. Or something closer to the truth.

100%.

I would like to adopt “Trust but verify” so much more than I actually can these days, as we seem to have entered into a time of progressively ever-worse post-truth behavior.

I think disallowing A.I. was a mistake, but I am abiding by the rules as they have been clarified by Shades. Including in this instance where my post has been deleted.

I can’t know Shades’s mindset with complete certainty because this issue has not been discussed at length between him and the mod team, but my own opinion is that I do not prefer a discussion board reduced to A.I. responses to A.I.-generated OPs. I and my SO may be introverts (and we kid ourselves mercilessly about it) but we still prefer to talk with humans. : )

[huckelberry]

My limited toleration feels betrayed by this post. It is empty and a clear statement of blocking conversation without even a pretense of discussion.

If you read my post carefully you will see that my purpose for having replied in this manner was simply to point out that critics have been given a significant advantage because they can say what they want and essentially get away with it. If there is only one defender on the line playing defense against the whole other team and they also have a bench...well, you can see how that turns out.

Knowing that this is true, my point( in my reply to IHQ)was to encourage other viewers on this forum to use A.I. and other follow up research to 'prove now herewith' if what is being said by critics is 100% verifiably true. This is necessary when there is only one player on offense playing against a defensive team that has only one goal.

I didn't use A.I. and yet my post was taken down simply because I said that a poster's comments had severe flaws based on a quick A.I search. If I was to summarize results of follow ups to every post made by a critic on this board it would be a full time job. Obviously I'm not going to do that.

With the way rules are being put in place to favor the critics this place is simply going (has been for a long time) to be an echo chamber.

Regards,
MG

MG, I can sympathize with the difficulty dealing with a discussion when a group of people disagree with you. You probably can only cover a limited number of points. But you can in fact do that. You can do more facing the limitation instead of trying to disrupt and distract.

[Marcus]

If you read my post carefully you will see that my purpose for having replied in this manner was simply to point out that critics have been given a significant advantage because they can say what they want and essentially get away with it. If there is only one defender on the line playing defense against the whole other team and they also have a bench...well, you can see how that turns out.

Knowing that this is true, my point( in my reply to IHQ)was to encourage other viewers on this forum to use A.I. and other follow up research to 'prove now herewith' if what is being said by critics is 100% verifiably true. This is necessary when there is only one player on offense playing against a defensive team that has only one goal.

I didn't use A.I. and yet my post was taken down simply because I said that a poster's comments had severe flaws based on a quick A.I search. If I was to summarize results of follow ups to every post made by a critic on this board it would be a full time job. Obviously I'm not going to do that.

With the way rules are being put in place to favor the critics this place is simply going (has been for a long time) to be an echo chamber.

Regards,
MG

MG, I can sympathize with the difficulty dealing with a discussion when a group of people disagree with you. You probably can only cover a limited number of points. But you can in fact do that. You can do more facing the limitation instead of trying to disrupt and distract.

Good point, huckelberry.

[malkie]

I really don't understand this lack of faith in AIs.

I'm working through an AMA with ChatGPT, and almost every time I answer a question it tells me I'm some combination of smart, perceptive, thoughtful, top of leaderboard material, etc. So as far as I can see it's 100% accurate and reliable.

[MG 2.0]

...Essentially I'm saying don't trust the human. Don't trust the critic. They may have an agenda at odds with what may be the truth. Or something closer to the truth....

Wow. Well, that's what you get when you are uneducated and isolated within a cult. This Mormon 'trusts' A.I., and distrusts anyone who disagrees with his religion, as idiotic a reason as that is. His comment encapsulates everything that is wrong with wrapping yourself in a false religion, and then trolling forums to spout your uneducated nonsense. What is even more scary is that this guy says his career was teaching children.

Bottom line, considerable effort is put into the research behind things people post on this forum. The only dissent we typically have, other than factual discussions, is from this guy who trolls the forum, attacking people who post anything he thinks his religion would disagree with. He gives his religion a very, VERY bad name.

You, of course, are entitled to your own opinion as are we all.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

I really don't understand this lack of faith in AIs.

I'm working through an AMA with ChatGPT, and almost every time I answer a question it tells me I'm some combination of smart, perceptive, thoughtful, top of leaderboard material, etc. So as far as I can see it's 100% accurate and reliable.

[MG 2.0]

I really don't understand this lack of faith in AIs.

I'm working through an AMA with ChatGPT, and almost every time I answer a question it tells me I'm some combination of smart, perceptive, thoughtful, top of leaderboard material, etc. So as far as I can see it's 100% accurate and reliable.

My experience has been, at least in the area of history and religion, A.I. has been very useful in laying out a great outline...bullet points and all...that I can then use for further research. Unfortunately even when I was using Perplexity or Gemini and then giving the disclosure, "I approve this message", it still wasn't good enough.

I still believe, as my recent posts make clear, that A.I. was something that was considering anethema on the board because it actually allowed one person playing defense against a whole offensive (no pun intended) team to respond in a timely manner without having to dedicate one's life to the cause, in response to those that have the advantage of throwing up one thing or another without any real 'check'. As a result, no balance.

In my opinion that's why this board is, in a sense, so screwed up.

Of course, if it's just being used as an echo chamber it's working pretty well. And has for a long time. The reasons for discontinuing access to A.I. were bogus in my opinion. But it is what it is.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

The troll trolls.

[MG 2.0]

The troll trolls.

Nothing + nothing = nothing. Your cover is blown. You're trolling me.

Regards,
MG