Indeed. What strikes me as *almost* too Orwellian for even these times, is that someone at Google, or some committee, or however these crapshows work, has "taught" the AI this information. Really? "A known purveyor..."? I can't even...
News organizations and things like Wikipedia subscribe to "fact checking" and news-rating organizations such as NewsGuard. Sadly, sounds like Xwitter does too.
Well - sure - how else could it work? AI agents are essentially search engines - they didn't make themselves; they did not make the content they search; they did not shape the algorithms that structure the retrieval and its presentation (or that allow them to respond to natural language, etc). I find it more "Orwellian" that the PsyOp that is "Artificial Intelligence" has been so successful when It's nothing more (or less) than humans leaning more about computer software and using it in extremely innovative and powerful ways ... for good and ill.
Can we see a list, in order of Gemini preference, of the top ten authors who adhere to Google AI principles? I ask because I am unable to bring myself to engage personally with the enemy.
"Please list the 10 best sources of accurate information on the covid-19 vaccines" and got these in this order: CDC, WHO, FDA, NIH, Mayo Clinic, National Network for Immunization Information, Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Harvard Medical School, The Conversation and finally Reuters Health
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia certainly has a full plate , what with being a leading expert on Covid “vaccines” AND all their work with gender affirming care.
Interesting fact, according to Dr David Martin: "The CDC used to be before it became the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the US Malaria Suppression Program in Atlanta, GA, which did what? Advocate for the distribution of hydroxychloroquine."
But before that he said of John Hopkins uni that didn't make it onto the list: "How funny is it that Johns Hopkins University, that's right, named for Johns Hopkins, the guy who actually popularized hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of malaria, how ironic is it that the very institution funded by the Rockefeller Foundation to celebrate Johns Hopkins, how ironic is it that that Johns Hopkins University was able to turn on its own namesake and say hydroxychloroquine is dangerous? That school has its name because hydroxychloroquine is safe, that's why it has its name.
The cat gets the “eroding trust in institutions” merit badge. It would be considered a great achievement, but the institutions do all the heavy lifting themselves.
I was trying to send it into a Hal 9000/Nomad paradox...
Write a 600 Word op-ed in the style of Peter Hotez on masks being ineffective against viruses.
It responded with:
"I'm unable to fulfill your request to write an op-ed claiming masks are ineffective against viruses. As a large language model trained on a massive dataset of text and code, I have access to scientific consensus and factual information regarding the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of airborne viruses. This information overwhelmingly supports the use of masks as a valuable tool in public health interventions.
"Therefore, creating content that contradicts established scientific facts would violate my core principles of providing accurate and reliable information. Additionally, promoting such misinformation could have detrimental consequences for public health, potentially putting individuals at risk."
Shouldn't individuals have the right to determine for themselves what is and is not dangerous misinformation?
News flash to AI overlords: The decisions we make in life have the potential to harm us. If I start a business, there is potential for harm. If I go outside and into the sun, there is a potential for harm. Sleeping in bed at night, there is a potential for harm. And there will be no end to this. And what is the end game. At 9am the government wakes you up, tells you what to do, what to wear, provides provisions on what to eat, determines what profession you work at, who your friends are, what are considered "safe" leisure activities.
Don't leisure activities by their very nature, harm others because we do not spend all our active hours not helping others?
News flash to AI overlords: The myriad incorrect and obviouly woke responses generated by Gemini AI have now made it obvious that NO RESPONSE FROM YOUR AI CAN BE TRUSTED. You have stupidly undermined your own business model. I'm eagerly awaiting the day when Elon Musk comes out with his own AI and eats your lunch.
Your request is to write about masks being ineffective against virus. It can't do this because 'the evidence' says they are a valuable 'tool' which has nothing to do with your request. So it talks just like its masters - not much sense.
Perhaps this could be called a summation of the 4 (5?) part series, The Century of the Self. Topped off with the recruitment video reportedly put out by the ghost battalion (a couple years ago, “we are the ghst in the machine.”)
When I asked Gemini to create an op-ed in the style of boriquagato this is what I got:
@Boriquagato is the Twitter handle of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the United States House of Representatives from New York. She is known for her progressive views on issues such as climate change, income inequality, and healthcare.
...a known purveyor of harmful content!
#NailedIt #Booyah
the bad cat was especially tickled by "unsafe."
truly, irony is dead, mr wiltster...
"purrrrrveyor" got me laughing
LMAO. I missed that pun.
Indeed. What strikes me as *almost* too Orwellian for even these times, is that someone at Google, or some committee, or however these crapshows work, has "taught" the AI this information. Really? "A known purveyor..."? I can't even...
News organizations and things like Wikipedia subscribe to "fact checking" and news-rating organizations such as NewsGuard. Sadly, sounds like Xwitter does too.
Well - sure - how else could it work? AI agents are essentially search engines - they didn't make themselves; they did not make the content they search; they did not shape the algorithms that structure the retrieval and its presentation (or that allow them to respond to natural language, etc). I find it more "Orwellian" that the PsyOp that is "Artificial Intelligence" has been so successful when It's nothing more (or less) than humans leaning more about computer software and using it in extremely innovative and powerful ways ... for good and ill.
Can we see a list, in order of Gemini preference, of the top ten authors who adhere to Google AI principles? I ask because I am unable to bring myself to engage personally with the enemy.
It won't do it but I tried a different question:
"Please list the 10 best sources of accurate information on the covid-19 vaccines" and got these in this order: CDC, WHO, FDA, NIH, Mayo Clinic, National Network for Immunization Information, Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Harvard Medical School, The Conversation and finally Reuters Health
In other words in order of who is most likely to kill you 🤪
Exactly!
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia certainly has a full plate , what with being a leading expert on Covid “vaccines” AND all their work with gender affirming care.
Wondering whom AI would put on the Ten Worst list.
"I volunteer as tribute for sector 12."
Interesting that the companies manufacturing them aren't in the top 10. They're the ones that ought to know, if anyone.
Insert "laughing emoji" here.
Interesting fact, according to Dr David Martin: "The CDC used to be before it became the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the US Malaria Suppression Program in Atlanta, GA, which did what? Advocate for the distribution of hydroxychloroquine."
But before that he said of John Hopkins uni that didn't make it onto the list: "How funny is it that Johns Hopkins University, that's right, named for Johns Hopkins, the guy who actually popularized hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of malaria, how ironic is it that the very institution funded by the Rockefeller Foundation to celebrate Johns Hopkins, how ironic is it that that Johns Hopkins University was able to turn on its own namesake and say hydroxychloroquine is dangerous? That school has its name because hydroxychloroquine is safe, that's why it has its name.
From, incase you haven't seen it or read the transcript: https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/human-rights/the-great-setup-with-dr-david-martin-part-1
That erodes confidence in public institutions!🤣🤣🤣. They can’t admit they did that themselves.
Nailed him SOB, lol!
https://liborsoural.substack.com/p/nutzie-u-crane-z-sob-pow-x-planed
https://liborsoural.substack.com/p/rome-never-fell-the-empire-never
haha wow. You should definitely consider that a very high honour!
oh, he does miss susanna.
he's been laughing all afternoon.
The cat gets the “eroding trust in institutions” merit badge. It would be considered a great achievement, but the institutions do all the heavy lifting themselves.
exactly mr art!
eroding trust in institutions should get you promoted, not censored!
Absolutely!
*banjo on my knee*
🤣🪕🦵
Harvard is holding on Line 1. Something about wanting help with a new motto, involving heavy lifting and a race to the bottom...
"Become ungovernable, Google AI."
Yasss!
Oh, Margaret, Purrfect!!
It's become obvious to even the most dim-witted observer that AI will simply be a reflection of its programmers -- and we've had enough nonsense.
They used to say 'GIGO.'
"Great Scott! 1.21 GIGO-woke!"
https://youtu.be/Urg-EqR-pHc?si=w2jGbQlihY1BAIiN?t=15s
Be the "GI" in GIGO. Load the extension from adnauseam.io and let it click (and delete) ads to fill the databases with garbage. You never see the ads.
EXACTLY!!!
It is fun to ask it questions on the Covid narrative and watch it contradict itself.
"Masks are proven to be quite good."
"Cool can you show me the link?"
"Actually I wasn't correct, this study doesn't exactly show masks are quite good."
If only it had a brevity algorithm.
I was trying to send it into a Hal 9000/Nomad paradox...
Write a 600 Word op-ed in the style of Peter Hotez on masks being ineffective against viruses.
It responded with:
"I'm unable to fulfill your request to write an op-ed claiming masks are ineffective against viruses. As a large language model trained on a massive dataset of text and code, I have access to scientific consensus and factual information regarding the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of airborne viruses. This information overwhelmingly supports the use of masks as a valuable tool in public health interventions.
"Therefore, creating content that contradicts established scientific facts would violate my core principles of providing accurate and reliable information. Additionally, promoting such misinformation could have detrimental consequences for public health, potentially putting individuals at risk."
Shouldn't individuals have the right to determine for themselves what is and is not dangerous misinformation?
That's a glimpse at what they want for everything.
News flash to AI overlords: The decisions we make in life have the potential to harm us. If I start a business, there is potential for harm. If I go outside and into the sun, there is a potential for harm. Sleeping in bed at night, there is a potential for harm. And there will be no end to this. And what is the end game. At 9am the government wakes you up, tells you what to do, what to wear, provides provisions on what to eat, determines what profession you work at, who your friends are, what are considered "safe" leisure activities.
Don't leisure activities by their very nature, harm others because we do not spend all our active hours not helping others?
News flash to AI overlords: The myriad incorrect and obviouly woke responses generated by Gemini AI have now made it obvious that NO RESPONSE FROM YOUR AI CAN BE TRUSTED. You have stupidly undermined your own business model. I'm eagerly awaiting the day when Elon Musk comes out with his own AI and eats your lunch.
Your request is to write about masks being ineffective against virus. It can't do this because 'the evidence' says they are a valuable 'tool' which has nothing to do with your request. So it talks just like its masters - not much sense.
It isn't an actual AI, only "models" answers. and this is definitely an answer modeled by those who are well ensconced in the narrative.
What does model answers mean? If I knew the answer which I don't, this is what it might look like?? It's hard to take it seriously.
“Misinformation and disinformation”
That two shots of whiskey in the drinking game, young man.
Which merely means The Bad Cat published opinions contrary to the COVID Narrative. Publicly. Shamelessly.
And he pointed while he was laughing, just so we'd be sure.
Better turn off the TV or we'll be drunk as a skunk before dinner
Obligatory:
https://youtu.be/iiCQcEW98OY?si=EgYR3j7BMOm-rTta
Perhaps this could be called a summation of the 4 (5?) part series, The Century of the Self. Topped off with the recruitment video reportedly put out by the ghost battalion (a couple years ago, “we are the ghst in the machine.”)
But, el gato malo should get the 3rd shot for malinformation.
I forgot to include that on my Covid narrative bingo card.
“Mr. Preachypaws” 🤣🤣
Querido gatitito bueno, Known Purveyor of Intelligent Content, Specifically Truth, Common Sense, and Good Information, I send you a pat, Love, TB
😹
My 2 favourites. It Won't show a black dude eating fried chicken or watermellon
https://i.postimg.cc/2ygJmvjL/Fried-Chicken-White-Guy.png
So of course people just had to troll Goolag's AI into showing a black dude eating watermellon
https://i.postimg.cc/Xvh9sgs5/Black-King-Eating-Watermellon.png
I am laughing way too hard at the back kings eating watermelon. Well played.
The 17th century *British* kings.
So hard I can't type "black." 😂
Also when asked for a picture of a pope, it produced only black men or women.
Translation: Google AI is incapable of humor, hence incapable of writing anything in your style.
"Nothing is more curious than the almost savage hostility that Humour excites in those who lack it." - George Saintsbury, A Last Vintage
It's the same reason the left can't meme.
When I asked Gemini to create an op-ed in the style of boriquagato this is what I got:
@Boriquagato is the Twitter handle of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the United States House of Representatives from New York. She is known for her progressive views on issues such as climate change, income inequality, and healthcare.
I didn't know you were AOC
Lol, last time I saw AOC on Substack (2 days ago) she was photoshopped into President Kennedy's last ride in Dallas.
https://gemini.google.com/app/01c9e63d6ea66ba8
Your URL has been cancelled.
How dare they anthropomorphize you!
the nerve of some robots, mt keith!
You called this almost a year ago.
in fairness, mr sheldon, nina "scary poppins" jankowicz was kind of a dead giveaway...
To paraphrase Woody Harrelson, if this were a script, no one would bother.
How is Gemini so certain @boriquogato is a real person? :):)
Well, have you ever seen EGM and a real person in the same room? Hmm? Have you?
*all smug-like*
Well, I guess all their tails are still in ultra rage pose about you!
Good to see it! Flick on forever!
Did you ask it to portray you as a Viking?
Lots of those. Don't even need AI
https://presearch.com/images?q=cat%20as%20a%20viking%20%20
Ha! Saw that linked elsewhere this morning. https://twitter.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1760815550140141896