Ask Lemmy

The other day on Reddit someone was saying they just fact checked something with ChatGPT.

AI is untrustworthy and shouldn’t be used

I have a more nuanced take. AI is simultaneously untrustworthy and useful. For many queries, DuckDuckGo and Google are performing considerably worse than they used to, while Perplexity usually yields good results. Perplexity also handles complex queries traditional search engines just can't.

About a third of the time, Perplexity's text summary of what it found is inaccurate; it may even say the opposite of what a source does. Reading the sources and evaluating their reliability is no less important than with traditional search, but much of the time I think I wouldn't have found the same sources that way.

Of course there are other issues with AI, such as power usage and Perplexity in particular being known for aggressive web scraping.

Nuance and depth isn't as popular as I'd like on or off Lemmy.

I have people telling me how to do my work because "That's what ChatGPT suggested, and they're always accurate".

🤷

I think it is useful with a constrained dataset. Like using it to summarize things about a dataset, or dumping documents into it and asked getting info about it (like Gemini in Google Drive).

It is not useful for general question using the whole-ass internet as a dataset.

Also I wish it was called something other than AI...it's just a word guesser FFS.

The propaganda is so strong with this one. If you talk to someone who owns just about anything, they somehow imagine you're coming after them and their stuff if you even mention anything like taxing the rich, much less getting rid of people who own more than some entire counties.

[Giancarlo Esposito Meme]

I think billionaires shouldn't exist because we should have appropriate levels of taxation and a "maximum wage" law.

Lemmy thinks billionaires shouldn't exist and are setting up guillotines.

We are not the same.

Linux girlies are the goats

And if you install it often enough you might change from bro to sis /s

It's all about how you prepare the meat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie

Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists, especially those who support or defend acts of repression by such regimes, their allies, or deny the occurrence of the events thereof. More specifically, the term has been applied to those who express support for one-party Marxist–Leninist socialist republics, whether contemporary or historical. It is commonly used by anti-authoritarian leftists, anarchists, libertarian socialists, left communists, social democrats, democratic socialists, and reformists to criticise Leninism, although the term has seen increasing use by liberal and right‐wing factions as well.[5][4]

As an example, I recently had someone unironically claim that china has more free speech than france, from a server hosted in france 🤦

If you want to see some non-lemmy tankies, check out https://raddle.me/.

The term came into use for communists who supported the Soviet Union sending in tanks to crush the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, with the commentary being that tankies supported Soviet imperialism over local revolution.

So supporting Palestine over Israel doesn't make someone a tankie, but supporting Russia over Ukraine does.

Lol fascism is not a popular opinion.

Reminder that the actual original nazis never had a majority in any democratic elections, its the loud minority that took control by force.

That seems pretty popular out in the world as well, just usually with slightly different selections of 'sometimes.'

This is popular. Just look at the celebrations when bin laden got killed. Or how people celebrate executions of heionous criminals. Sure, they say they don't like "murder", but they think like: "he should get the death penalty", which is practically the same thought, but worded in a more... "legal" phrasing.

I mean maybe not "majority", but there's a lot of people that are okay with death penalty. Even the liberals opposing death penalty sometimes think that a mass shooter should get executed, like that white supremacist dude that murdered black people in a church (not gonna name the shithead), biden was doing pardons when he was leaving office and that guy was one of the ones that he did not commute the death sentence of. So he basically implied that he approved of the racist murder getting executed. A president of the US implicitly approved of a killing (a good decision, btw), I mean... that's as mainstream as it can get.

Death to the Charleston Church shooter. Lolol (To mods: this is not "violence" since dude is on death row, I'm just wishing for it to be faster LOL)

TLDR: "Murder" bad, "Executions" okay, is basically the sentinment of some people.