Timeline for Is OpenAI Anglo-Saxon propaganda? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 2, 2023 at 20:30 | comment | added | Criticizing Israel not allowed | @EikePierstorff Note that a reasonable "productive purpose" would be using it to write fiction. It's not bad at that. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 16:04 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | You are using ChatGPT as a search engine? That is the first problem. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 15:43 | history | closed |
Alexei wonderbear user5155 SJuan76 Giter |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 13:23 | comment | added | user5155 | I think you're adding intent here where there is none. Either way I doubt this question is actually answerable. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 13:13 | answer | added | Jörg W Mittag | timeline score: 18 | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 13:12 | comment | added | convert | Interesting question, but some wording should be changed so it not sounds like russian propoganda for some users. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:57 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 2, 2023 at 14:53 | |||||
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:45 | comment | added | Alexei | ChatGPT clearly mentions in some answers its limitations: "I am a large language model trained by OpenAI, and I do not have access to external sources of information. My knowledge comes from the text that I have been trained on, which has a cutoff date of 2021. I do not have the ability to browse the web or access any new information.". It used to provide references for some of its answers in the past (e.g. public documentation), but now it does not. So, we do not which texts were used to feed it. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:34 | comment | added | F1Krazy | You're also extrapolating from a sample size of one: you've found a single (albeit repeatable) example of ChatGPT blaming one country for something another country did, and seem to be assuming that it will a) do this every single time, and b) only do this in Britain's favour. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:33 | answer | added | John Dallman | timeline score: 11 | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:26 | comment | added | F1Krazy | "Propaganda" and "blatant lies" implies some level of intent, i.e. that the AI is deliberately changing the facts. My understanding is that what ChatGPT actually does is just smash together random pieces of text that looks vaguely correct, without actually understanding what it's saying or attempting to be correct. I imagine it would take a lot of effort either way to determine whether this specific example is being done on purpose and why. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:22 | comment | added | user27735 | The makers of ChatGTP warn that it should not be used for any productive purpose. They probably would not do that if they intended it to be a propaganda tool. This thing has basically be trained on the internet, and if you put random garbage in, you will get random garbage out. Students should already be aware of this. There is a valid concern - ChatGPT will not answer some questions, which means in addition to training data there is someone's bias built in there. But your weirdly specific example sounds just like the usual noise found in public accessible data. | |
| Jan 2, 2023 at 12:10 | history | asked | kungfooman | CC BY-SA 4.0 |