Study reveals left-wing bias in ChatGPT's responses (Correction: it doesn't)

[yRaz]

The violence around this was not the right way to deal with the situation, however, the jurors in the Derek Chauvin case did not see that police brutality did not happen.

I would agree that police brutality happened in that I'm against any type of police state. So, yeah, send him to jail, I don't care. That said, they picked the wrong person to be the face of those protests which I argue shows how little the protests were about actually protesting police brutality. I also argue that my point is supported by how unjustified the response of the protests was to what they were protesting.

 

[king cleanass]

It’s pretty simple folks: reality has a left wing bias.

I’ll list some examples: men can be women and vice versa, children can consent to sex changes, only white people can be racist, burning and looting your local Target is a peaceful protest.

Time to get with reality chuds!

 

[opckieran]

Your question is called a strawman argument.

And your answer is called cope.

 

[sdms96825]

to protest police brutality that didn't happen.

??????

We must live in parallel universes.

 

[yRaz]

??????

We must live in parallel universes.

Do you understand the legal differences between homicide and murder?

But, just incase, here is a quote from the case
"During cross-examination, defense attorney Eric Nelson asked Baker whether Floyd's heart disease, history of hypertension and the drugs in his system played a role in his death.

"In my opinion, yes," Baker replied."

"Baker concluded that Floyd's death was a homicide — which as a forensic pathologist he explained means that someone else was involved in the death, not necessarily that it was criminal."

Everyone know that Chauvin was going to be found guilty with all the societal pressure surrounding that case. As the left's precious belief in science goes they seem to enjoy ignoring the scientific expert on the case whenever it supports their own agenda. That is what Bias is.

 

[opckieran]

Do you understand the legal differences between homicide and murder?

But, just incase, here is a quote from the case
"During cross-examination, defense attorney Eric Nelson asked Baker whether Floyd's heart disease, history of hypertension and the drugs in his system played a role in his death.

"In my opinion, yes," Baker replied."

"Baker concluded that Floyd's death was a homicide — which as a forensic pathologist he explained means that someone else was involved in the death, not necessarily that it was criminal."

Everyone know that Chauvin was going to be found guilty with all the societal pressure surrounding that case. As the left's precious belief in science goes they seem to enjoy ignoring the scientific expert on the case whenever it supports their own agenda. That is what Bias is.

Don’t you bring facts into this! It’ll upset their fragile narrative!

 

[MrCherry2000]

The problem here is the study starts from a USA-centric political bias. USA politics are notoriously right-wing on the global stage, even the US Democratic party is so far right, its most "left-wing" politicians are hardly centrists globally.

USA political parties are hardly a gold standard of evenhandedness.

 

[yRaz]

USA political parties are hardly a gold standard of evenhandedness.

agreed

The problem here is the study starts from a USA-centric political bias. USA politics are notoriously right-wing on the global stage, even the US Democratic party is so far right, its most "left-wing" politicians are hardly centrists globally.

Maybe by European standards, But the EU is the most left region in the world. California might have the EU beat...

But if you put the populations of the EU and North America together and compare them to the other 7 billion people of the world, we are VERY liberal. India is very conservative and their population alone beats that of the EU and NA combined.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Well, duh. Everyone saw this coming. Mainstream social media has gone out of its way to censor and ban conservative viewpoints for YEARS now. Sites like reddit (which was used to train chat GPT) have made it nearly impossible to have an opinion that isnt at least left of center. Google's platforms de prioritize non left wing views (not just right leaning, centrist views are also deprioritized), facebook does the same, twitter was the same until the musk takeover, ece.

So when you take all that data, and feed it into an algorithm, its going to reinforce whatever data it is fed. Those of us who have been on the internet long enough to observe this shift called this out the moment these AI started appearing.

 

[Beerfloat]

Well, duh. Everyone saw this coming. Mainstream social media has gone out of its way to censor and ban conservative viewpoints for YEARS now. Sites like reddit (which was used to train chat GPT) have made it nearly impossible to have an opinion that isnt at least left of center. Google's platforms de prioritize non left wing views (not just right leaning, centrist views are also deprioritized), facebook does the same, twitter was the same until the musk takeover, ece.

So when you take all that data, and feed it into an algorithm, its going to reinforce whatever data it is fed. Those of us who have been on the internet long enough to observe this shift called this out the moment these AI started appearing.

Some people see design and intent behind almost all developments. It is a seductive coping mechanism, as it assumes that most things are generally under our control. But it can also cause frustration, when unhappiness with said developments leads to a sense of being part of a misunderstood out group, subject to the outcome desired by others (not seldomly portrayed as a shadowy controling cabal).

I do not believe there is a malicious design behind the rollout of what is called AI these days. As so often, it instead seems driven by a notion that is objective, pure and beyond reproach: What will make us the most money?

If conservative viewpoints are falling by the wayside in the marketplace of ideas, then that is only natural. And just.

 

[opckieran]

If conservative viewpoints are falling by the wayside in the marketplace of ideas, then that is only natural. And just.

Is it such that those ideas are being properly debunked, or are they perhaps being silenced or censored by external forces or biases? That’s important to consider. Because then it is neither “natural” nor “just” as you put it.

 

[pcnthuziast]

Ideoligical polarization is a mental disease and partisanship is mental slavery.

 

[toooooot]

At the end, what matters is that people who will look for truth using AI will have to stay cautious and avoid AI answers regarding political and social problems.
This is good actually because a tool proven to do it once will less likely be counted on again unless somebody keeps arguing it cannot lie and is always right.

 

[kinetix]

Lol, I wonder how many comments until this one is locked.

Of course it's going to have a left-wing bias, a lot of the big news orgs or sites are left leaning (what they would be used to train on). And silicon valley leans left.

If left-leaning people are writing a lot of the stuff it's trained on with bias, it's going to bleed through.

"left leaning" big media? brooo...

 

[kinetix]

The problem here is the study starts from a USA-centric political bias. USA politics are notoriously right-wing on the global stage, even the US Democratic party is so far right, its most "left-wing" politicians are hardly centrists globally.

USA political parties are hardly a gold standard of evenhandedness.

exactly. if the us gob/parties/politics etc has something "leftist", then I am an ultra-radical anarchist leftist

 

[DubiousFishHook]

Left right & center, downleft etc, all leanings are bad & evil. intelligence, logic & cooperation is much better.
currently the most fascist are the left which is kinda ironic.
I used chat-bots 20 years ago, Chat-Gpt is nothing new.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Did this research surprise in anyway - yes may be done by a bean counter - But from my limited time with Chat Gpt - it was easy to see it was based on the moral philosophy - best for the most of the common man + it knows to argue against the slave dilemma ( ie 5% very unhappy with their lives vs 95% well happy ) - so it has these inbuilt constraints
I do not need to ask it - if I do not break the law , but I exploit people to make myself super rich - I already know what kind of answer I will get - yes you can do this .....but

I'm a left winger on here plus an SJW - but I normally vote right here in NZ - strong believer if the individual being empowered and their destiny - with the proviso to have a social net , laws , regs to stop immoral people/companies - to help the weak , sick and innocent etc, to provide everyone with a chance to better themselves

as stated above the extremes on the end don't work - they are views held by egotistic control freaks - I know best for everyone - if we only did it the right way ( only way ) - communist always made me laugh "govt for the people by the people " really means when I'm in charge - as the mass is a bunch of brainless sheep - The extreme right are just weirdos , psychopaths, hypocrites - Their weird love for "the strong" who live lavish lives exploiting and making misery - Most of these extremists are "losers" - angry - so they live their veraciously - admiring people like Putin even - they happily take govt money and subsidies - cry the most about unfairness and enjoy owning people - that black person with no weapons , mistakenly targeted going about their live should of done nothing - and when they did nothing well who cares - I mean how do you reconcile police brutality with extreme right - but that venn diagram of two circles is hard to see

Anyway ChatBots morality is set to be caring and kind ( yes most centre right people are kind - but instudies - they prefer charity closer to home and people more in common with them - again from memory )

Plus folks - regs and laws made be a pain , wrongly thought out , unintended consequences , onerous - but we 100% need them - believing the rich exploiters -is a cult of thanks giving turkeys - we just need to struggle and improve them , make them clearer etc
Most of these improvements were probably proclaimed work of satanic communists going back in time - but now we champion many of them - What American is not proud to have the first National Parks in the world (from memory ) - yet people screaming - not giving a toss about nature, indigenous people - The Corps should be allowed to come in pillage , leave and let the taxpayer clean the mess- heavy metals in water - huge slags of waste - oh but the will need to clean up ( yeah that now shell company has gone bankrupt - what a surprise !)

Hell Kiwis rave first to give women the vote - how ungodly

 

[BuckarooBonzaii]

It's just a program and as I said before I would think that we humans are smarter than AI. But I guess AI is making and keeping us stupid.

 

[Wye43]

The bias is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[J spot]

A few months ago, I copied a negative Joe Biden comment and asked chatGPT do something with it, but it refused. A few seconds later, I changed the mentions of Joe Biden with Donald Trump, and without hesitation it proceeded on. Repeated the process a few times.

Joe Biden is definitely protected within the algorithm. Like Wikipedia, it's definitely captured, but it can be useful for non politics related things.

 

[captaincranky]

Do you understand the legal differences between homicide and murder?

There is some statutory confusion as to what is "murder". and what is considered "homicide". Right out of the gate, police units don't have "murder squads", they have "homicide squads"

Many, (to most?), regional criminal statues consider "murder", of (at least), two degrees:

Murder one summarizes thus: "willfully, with, pre-planning and malice aforethought.

Murder two: A murder committed in a fit of rage, on the spur of the moment, unplanned.

Homicide: is usually a lesser charge. "criminally negligent homicide", is one "popular", chargeable offense. "The babysitter left their Glock in the coffee table, the babysat stuffed the barrel in their mouth and pulled the trigger, while the babysitter was being banged upstairs by her boyfriend". "Criminally negligent homicide" attaches here.

There are still some codified semantics at play, defining the difference between "Murder 2", and simple "homicide".

From the voluminous waste of my own time watching TV process dramas, I have come to the conclusion that in the matter of Chauvin vs. ???, Mr. Chauvin was guilty of 2nd degree murder.

As to the violent protests over George Floyd's murder, most of the looting was done by separate actors, with the sole intent of personal gain. In fact, in my city, many looters and their fences were tracked down and arrested under charges appropriate to the crimes committed..

As for Derick Chauvin, he should have gotten an extra nickel, for killing such an unattractive person as Mr. Floyd, to spare uninterested individuals such as myself, the emotional stress of having to view murals of Mr. Floyd on the sides of buildings.

Mr. Chauvin showed no restraint whatsoever after rendering the defendant helpless. His fellow officers participated in the crime by not simply intervening, and taking the prisoner into custody..

Speaking for myself, I would have simply allowed myself to be taken into custody without resisting., thereby not offering any justification, or opportunity, for the use of force.

Likewise, I believe Kyle Rittenhouse should have convicted for "homicide", or "murder", call it what you will, during the Kenosha riots.

So, it shouldn't be suggested that I'm a "libtard" or, "far right fascist", these are just my humble observations and conclusions drawn from what was provided by news coverage of the events.

I'd like to fancy myself a, "centrist", which seems to be a dying breed nowadays.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Left wing bias: people should be respectful, not get harassed and live safe lives.
Right wing bias: if you're different, I'm against you.

This distinction actually sounds more like the difference between libertarianism and authoritarianism. Typically the former political ideology exists when someone is closer to the center of the spectrum and the latter is on the extreme left or right.