EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5179
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24773 Posts
I don't think there's anything wrong with interacting with ChatGPT and related tools, but I'd recommend taking whatever it says with a grain of salt. Further, we should treat what ChatGPT (or similar tools) said as a source the same as if I came in here and said, "The deportation of Garcia was technically illegal. I know because I asked my Dad who is an engineer, but he's pretty damn smart." Nobody is going to take that source seriously, even if I record a video of my Dad talking and share it. Use ChatGPT all you want to formulate your opinions (it's a bit dumb but I can't stop anyone). But if you're attempting to actually share a source, use something else. Maybe ChatGPT can help find a good source. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
Here's the timeline of the wrongful deportation. https://abcnews.go.com/US/timeline-wrongful-deportation-kilmar-abrego-garcia-el-salvador/story?id=120803843 The simple reason why his deportation was wrong to begin with (not just the method or the location) is that the charges against him weren't resolved. You can't deport someone based on charges alone, you have to prove guilt. So it's not just the abduction that was wrong, the whole deportation process was wrong. Here you can read about how things are unfolding now. New deportation offers have been made to Garcia which so far he has rejected. He's unwilling to admit guilt or to be deported. He's standing his ground together with his lawyers - as he should if he's in fact not guilty. https://apnews.com/article/abrego-garcia-deportation-uganda-el-savador-1a94ad82d88ddda56d669ce86bc77ff4 There is no argument for his guilt, there is no argument for his deportation. It's all baseless, at least for now. There is a legal process that must be followed. I'm calling America a joke country because it's not following the legal process. Trump's administration is criminal and it's using abduction and threats to keep people such as Garcia in line. He has rights, regardless of his immigrant status. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9299 Posts
On August 24 2025 21:34 Zambrah wrote: ChatGPT is something no one should interact with or support or trust to do anything. That goes for all of these bizarre commercialized glorified chatbot AIs. ChatGPT and its equivalents can save you a lot of time if you're using it as a tool to gather or sort information before you start your own work. I agree that it's frustrating to interact with people who treat their chat outputs as something final, but refusing to use AI tools on principle is like refusing to use elevators because stairs are more trustworthy. I wouldn't mind posts with AI generated content if they didn't take up so much space. I would just ignore them if they were less verbose, but they're so big they're making me scroll way more and that's why I think I would be okay with banning the use of AI chatbot outputs or at least requiring to hide them under spoilers. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
On August 24 2025 21:41 micronesia wrote: This is actually a novel case where the mods need to weigh in. The thread rules specifically require sources, and the rules were written before ChatGPT was a thing. I don't think there's anything wrong with interacting with ChatGPT and related tools, but I'd recommend taking whatever it says with a grain of salt. Further, we should treat what ChatGPT (or similar tools) said as a source the same as if I came in here and said, "The deportation of Garcia was technically illegal. I know because I asked my Dad who is an engineer, but he's pretty damn smart." Nobody is going to take that source seriously, even if I record a video of my Dad talking and share it. Use ChatGPT all you want to formulate your opinions (it's a bit dumb but I can't stop anyone). But if you're attempting to actually share a source, use something else. Maybe ChatGPT can help find a good source. Fine to use as an investigative tool. Highly suspect to worthless as a source of authority. Pretty straightforward I think. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On August 24 2025 22:06 farvacola wrote: Fine to use as an investigative tool. Highly suspect to worthless as a source of authority. Pretty straightforward I think. The same applies to any Google search. You can't figure out which sources are credible unless you go to fact checking sites determining the credibility and bias of your sources. I always use MBFC (media bias fact check) to do that, regardless of whether I get the information from a search engine or from ChatGPT. ChatGPT is faster and better at searching for information than Google. And I've also found that generally speaking the former is less likely to provide me with false/misleading information. But you can - and should - read the source regardless and check it for factuality. For example you can try to confirm the information with credible sources, and if those exist then it's more likely correct and useful - if not then you may want to disregard the information. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43989 Posts
On August 24 2025 21:14 Magic Powers wrote: It's a valid source, it literally uses sources. Argue the actual point about Garcia or I will stop caring to respond. No it doesn’t. It makes up citations etc. It’ll reference materials that never existed. It gives the answer in a format the same shape as one that is true. For example a true answer may reference a court case that can be reviewed by finding the judge’s conclusion in a book of case law. ChatGPT knows that and so it’ll give a case name, number, year, and the book of case law it can be found in. The only problem is that none of it actually happened. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24773 Posts
ChatGPT might give you the wrong answer, you may not catch that, and there's no way for us to validate that without doing entirely independent research. | ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2879 Posts
On August 24 2025 22:30 Magic Powers wrote: The same applies to any Google search. You can't figure out which sources are credible unless you go to fact checking sites determining the credibility and bias of your sources. I always use MBFC (media bias fact check) to do that, regardless of whether I get the information from a search engine or from ChatGPT. ChatGPT is faster and better at searching for information than Google. And I've also found that generally speaking the former is less likely to provide me with false/misleading information. But you can - and should - read the source regardless and check it for factuality. For example you can try to confirm the information with credible sources, and if those exist then it's more likely correct and useful - if not then you may want to disregard the information. MP, as a rule of thumb, primary sources tend to be the most accurate. A primary source is for example a study that collected some statistics about some topic. A secondary source can be accurate but it's more hit and miss, for example a journalist writing about the statistics from the study and drawing their own conclusions from it -- you'd normally have to go and check the primary source to check if they're not making stuff up. A tertiary source is a journalist referencing the second journalist and writing about how this person's conclusions are completely wrong without referencing the original material. As another rule of thumb, tertiary sources are dogshit. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26793 Posts
Granted, niche questions I failed to find answers for, and respectively my theory on one, and cigarette packet maths for another weren’t presented authoritatively, but I still recognised em. Quite an odd circle, failed to find an answer, try again years later with this new tech wizardry and have your own speculative answers pumped back out :p I’m not a Luddite, it can also be a useful tool. Equally I’m on a forum to well, forum. Just as a good video can augment a post, but ‘I’m not going to explain my point but watch this 24 minute Asmongold video’ or whatever isn’t really the kind of interaction I’m here for, neither are LLM dumps. I think ‘hey I asked whatever AI, here’s my summary, here’s the sources it dug up that I think agree’ and have them linked or quoted is totally fine. I think one of the strengths of such tools if one is sitting working on whatever with them is sheer volume of info and how it scaffolds it pretty neatly and quickly. But that’s me sitting with it, and generally in different applications. And for pretty specific things. The problem comes for third persons trying to check the working after the fact. It can be either super laborious (the strength of grabbing tons of info, is a weakness here), or outright a ballache. As someone who’s tried to debug programs non-programmers have ‘written’ without access to the prompts and whole output, not a fun task haha | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States2583 Posts
Third economic meltdown during the third Republican presidency of my lifetime. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24773 Posts
On August 24 2025 23:24 LightSpectra wrote: 38% of small businesses won’t last a year without tariff changes Third economic meltdown during the third Republican presidency of my lifetime. Well, TBD. I found a source that an unlikely relationship between a political figure and a forum regular is brewing... + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://i.ibb.co/mPbkx3n/Trump-MP-Dialogue.jpg) edit: Never mind, ChatGPT can't tell the difference between "Magic Power" and "Magic Powers" so I don't trust it anymore. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43989 Posts
On August 24 2025 23:24 LightSpectra wrote: 38% of small businesses won’t last a year without tariff changes Third economic meltdown during the third Republican presidency of my lifetime. For many behind the administration the chaos is the point. Don’t need an enemy behind the chaos and a strongman to save you from it without chaos. The problem is that Trump is also legitimately really bad at his job and so we can’t tell what is on purpose. Like his war on renewable energy production which is one of America’s fastest growing and most important industries may actually just be because he thinks that turbines are making too much wind. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany1151 Posts
On August 24 2025 23:24 LightSpectra wrote: 38% of small businesses won’t last a year without tariff changes Third economic meltdown during the third Republican presidency of my lifetime. Austerity is needed to save capitalism. If the engine of wealth is running too smoothly, even through a pandemic, and a european war "little people" get funny ideas and you simply have throw a bag of bolts down the engine's intake and see the panic in people's eyes. The other idea is starting a war. WW1 was basicly the attempt of creating necessity of keeping Elitists monarchs AND capitalist industrialists in power - with fear and destruction. If people now ask why you couldn't progress society and keep the Covid WFH, Online bureaucracy, remote Schools, low energy costs, less driving... eliminate uncessecary profits in healthcare, up the minimum wage and create jobs fixing problems we identified as a society (Racism, inequality, health issues and global warming) ... the next big question would be: Why can Link only collect 99 Rupees and Gelon Bezosberg can be worth seven hundred thousand million dollars. Why do we need a few thousand people, that are at least a thousand, if not several hundred thousand times more wealthy, than people considered to be wealthy and "care free" Austerity de-organizes society, creates distrust and survival mode. That's why you need an economic slump. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9299 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On August 24 2025 21:59 Sent. wrote: ChatGPT and its equivalents can save you a lot of time if you're using it as a tool to gather or sort information before you start your own work. I agree that it's frustrating to interact with people who treat their chat outputs as something final, but refusing to use AI tools on principle is like refusing to use elevators because stairs are more trustworthy. I wouldn't mind posts with AI generated content if they didn't take up so much space. I would just ignore them if they were less verbose, but they're so big they're making me scroll way more and that's why I think I would be okay with banning the use of AI chatbot outputs or at least requiring to hide them under spoilers. LLM AI shit is primarily insidious and evil to me because it screams another social media. Social media may have been able to be a net good, but it’s abusive and harmful and caused some serious issues when in contact with human psychology. AI didn’t even get a phase where it was mostly helpful, it’s hopping right into the negative impacts on human psychology and society. People use it, trust it, rely on it despite it not being trustworthy and being under the explicit control of people like Elon Musk who will actively and obviously insert bias into it. The world has a hard enough time with truth and AI bullshit is another bullet being fired into the dying body of our capability to discern objective reality without literally witnessing it on site. It should be wiped from existence in every instance where it’s not used by some scientist to crunch through numbers or something several layers detached from the public. | ||
|
Shinokuki
United States923 Posts
On August 23 2025 07:52 Introvert wrote: No? Immigration trials are before immigration judges which are article 2 judges (executive branch) not article 3 (judicial branch). At no point in American history had it been required to have a criminal jury trial to deport someone in the country illegally unless there was some other factor. A joke is thinking that sneaking across the border entitles you to the delays, due process, and legal protections of the criminal system. It'd be overwhelmed instantly. Just imagine if eveyone who Biden, being derelict at the border, let in, had to have a full jury trial to be deported. It's rediculous and easy to see why. Yes the US has kept incentivizing people from other 3rd world countries to keep immigrating. They could've went for E-verify for all and crack down on employers but nope the US massively benefits from this illegal immigration (aka slavery). Then these "illegals" work all their lives, working hard and you get a psychopath retard telling them to GTFO. I wouldn't argue with you if the US kept blatantly allowing for this to happen. If Trump really wants to get rid of illegal immigration crack down on employers and implement E-verify for all but nope he and his rich buddies know they need the labor for cheap. Don't even go down the route of comparing the US (land of immigrants) to other countries. | ||
|
Shinokuki
United States923 Posts
On August 25 2025 00:47 Zambrah wrote: LLM AI shit is primarily insidious and evil to me because it screams another social media. Social media may have been able to be a net good, but it’s abusive and harmful and caused some serious issues when in contact with human psychology. AI didn’t even get a phase where it was mostly helpful, it’s hopping right into the negative impacts on human psychology and society. People use it, trust it, rely on it despite it not being trustworthy and being under the explicit control of people like Elon Musk who will actively and obviously insert bias into it. The world has a hard enough time with truth and AI bullshit is another bullet being fired into the dying body of our capability to discern objective reality without literally witnessing it on site. It should be wiped from existence in every instance where it’s not used by some scientist to crunch through numbers or something several layers detached from the public. Bro 100% There's about $500 billion dollar invested in AI realm right now and only netted like 4% of that in revenue and that's not even consumer based demand. The AI bubble is so scary that it may completely overshadow dot com bubble at this point. i think big portion of S&P 500 is basically tech companies who have invested in this and they have yet to demonstrate actual value out of AI. To even demonstrate this, these companies, combined, would need to also show $500 billion in revenue. You can argue about how this is an investment but where's the actual result now. There's so much energy strain in running these data centers for AI. Where we actually heading with this? lmao | ||
|
Yurie
12087 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
| ||
| ||
