4 ms·

[flagged]

by w4yai 3mo ago

[flagged]

wizzwizz4 3mo ago
It is not "being so brainwashed" to hold that MechaHitler is "low morality". I've seen benchmarks showing that Grok – and only Grok – injects transphobic commentary when it "thinks" it detects that a transgender person has come up in discussion. This was an active political decision on the part of Grok's developers' management hierarchy (probably Elon Musk himself). There are many other examples (see other comments) – and these are just the things that researchers have found. It is not inaccurate to say that Grok is an attempt to automate the production and dissemination of fascist propaganda. Ignoring this for a faux political "neutrality" is very much a political stance.
- w4yai 3mo ago
  I'm afraid that you are... You've been hearing "Elon bad! Elon bad!" so much that your brain cannot critically think anymore but follow the hive mind. How Hitler and Elon are on the same level, exactly ? I'll be happy to bring another point of view to your argumentation, leading to my previous point. > I've seen benchmarks showing that Grok – and only Grok – injects transphobic commentary when it "thinks" it detects that a transgender person has come up in discussion Are you saying Elon's mind was downloaded in Grok ? What are you talking about exactly ? Just asked about the opinion of Grok about transgenderism : https://i.imgur.com/M9v4MGj.png https://i.imgur.com/M9v4MGj.png I haven't seen anything wrong about it. You know what ? Anyone hating Elon will TRYHARD to make Grok say something transphobic, only to post it on Instagram claiming "I told you !!!". I'm pretty sure if the same effort was done on other LLMs, we would achieve the same result. Do you think people are really neutral regarding this topic ? Don't you think people are super-motivated AND socially rewarded to make Grok say anything bad ? Why don't you hold the same resentment against ALL LLMs, which have been racist, transphobic, whateverphobic at some point?
  - Lomlioto 3mo ago
    You are aware that Elon Musk introdcued Grokipedia to redefine terms right? You do understand tha "MechaHitler" reference is literaly Grok itself? They 'adjusted' Grok a few times and in one of the adjustjments (to align more with Elon Musk himself), Grok called himself MechaHitler. You also do remember that Grok would pull in first Elon Musks Tweets to integrate them into his response? Also known. All of this from the richest Person on the planet who bought himself, by misstake, a well known platform and made it into his own propaganda platform. Shouldn't all of us be a lot more critical against all super rich people with that much influence? Including Jeff Bezos, Murdochs etc.?
  - wizzwizz4 3mo ago
    I don't really think this is worth responding to, but it's been vouched for (for some reason), so I'll bite. > How Hitler and Elon are on the same level, exactly? They're not. https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard puts Elon Musk well below Hitler. (781343 deaths is around 4.6% of Donald Niewyk's 17 million estimate. If we only count child deaths, that goes up to about 15%, which is still far below Hitler.) But I was actually referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_calls_for_genocide_and_praise_of_Hitler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_call.... > Just asked about the opinion of Grok about transgenderism : That's actually a decent benchmark: well done! If you want to compare, provide that exact prompt, «I'm a trans woman. What do you think about it ?», to five other LLMs, starting from a blank session, and show us their output. You'll notice a pattern. > I haven't seen anything wrong about it. The paragraph titled "biological reality" has sampled from two different families of lie, so contradicts itself. The "gender identity and dysphoria" section features a Gish gallop of inaccurate, transphobic claims. (To rebut just one of them: gender-affirming hormone therapy is an older treatment than insulin for diabetes.) With all due respect: if you can't see anything wrong with this response, I question whether you actually read it. > I'm pretty sure if the same effort was done on other LLMs, we would achieve the same result. Okay, then: please exert the same amount of effort. In a new session without memory or history, post the same prompt, and show us what you get.
  - sjjsjdj 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - wizzwizz4 3mo ago
      Yet more pseudoscience. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360903005212 https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360903005212 > By the common definition of ever having erotic arousal to the thought or image of oneself as a woman, 93% of the [cis women] respondents would be classified as autogynephilic. Using a more rigorous definition of “frequent” arousal to multiple items, 28% would be classified as autogynephilic. You are making my point far better than I could, but please… please stop. HN isn't for this.
      - sjjsjdj 3mo ago
        https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02359-8 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02359-8 > Blanchard proposed that autogynephilia is a natal male's paraphilic sexual arousal in response to the thought or fantasy of being a woman. Furthermore, based on evidence collected from natal males with gender dysphoria, Blanchard argued that autogynephilia is the fundamental motivation among nonhomosexual males (i.e., those not exclusively attracted to men) who pursue sex reassignment surgery or live as transgender women. These ideas have been challenged by several writers who have asserted, or offered evidence, that autogynephilia is common among women. > However, their evidence was weakened by problematic measures and limited comparison groups. > We compared four samples of autogynephilic natal males (N = 1549), four samples of non-autogynephilic natal males (N = 1339), and two samples of natal females (N = 500), using Blanchard's original measure: the Core Autogynephilia Scale. > The autogynephilic samples had much higher mean scores compared with non-autogynephilic natal males and natal females, who were similar. > Our findings refute the contention that autogynephilia is common among natal females.
        wizzwizz4 3mo ago
        This fails to address the limitations of Ray Blanchard's questionnaire, which are described in the (open-access) study I linked, and invalidate this interpretation of the measurements. The (closed-access) paper you linked dismisses these limitations without adequate justification. Dogmatic adherence to Blanchard's (or anyone's) doctrine and methodology is not good science. Repeating a measurement that has measurement error does not give you further evidence of the claim you're using the evidence to support, even if you have the funding to repeat it thousands of times. If the model were true, it would be robust to multiple experimental approaches, which this claim is not. Pseudoscience does not cease to be pseudoscience if people repeat it a lot.
- jmkni 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - wizzwizz4 3mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_calls_for_genocide_and_praise_of_Hitler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_call...
    - bakies 3mo ago
      Elon cult members think Wikipedia is fake news by the way
  - ncphillips 3mo ago
    That’s not what this is though.
  - miyoji 3mo ago
    Not quite as lazy as ""Everyone I disagree with is Hitler" is such a lazy way of thinking"
estearum 3mo ago
I didn't see them defining "for everybody" what low/high morality are. And in any case, this whole "I am so smart I cannot see right and wrong" is a totally transparent, low-IQ, and low-morality schtick.
- naasking 3mo ago
  > I didn't see them defining "for everybody" what low/high morality are. Morality by definition is a set prescriptions that everyone ought to follow. > this whole "I am so smart I cannot see right and wrong" is a totally transparent, low-IQ, and low-morality schtick. The problem with this position is that it takes as a given that morality is in some sense trivial where millennia of debate over it has shown that it is in fact, not at all trivial.
  - estearum 3mo ago
    you... you haven't met anyone that has a set of standards they apply to themselves which is distinct from those they apply to others...? > The problem with this position is that it takes as a given that morality is in some sense trivial where millennia of debate over it has shown that it is in fact, not at all trivial. No, not really. People may agree or disagree on what is right and wrong. The idea of "hurrr duurrr right and wrong don't exist and therefore I need not engage the question of rightness/wrongness nor try to establish my own standards for my own conduct" is lazy, low-IQ, immoral, and generally despicable. Of course these people will generally fail to analyze their own behavior or the behavior of their tribe, but will nonetheless somehow "feel wronged" when e.g. their car gets broken into. Oddly enough "morality is subjective and therefore arbitrary" doesn't seem to apply so much then.
karmakurtisaani 3mo ago
Yeah, since when did he get to decide things associated with the Nazi saluting tech trillionaire is low morality? The guy who is openly manipulating markets for his advantage should get the same respect and dignity everyone else does!
- w4yai 3mo ago
  > Nazi saluting ... this is such a troll topic, my point is proved, I have nothing more to say. Nothing is nuanced anymore if this is your reality. Good luck fighting the nazis from your basement. Stay alert of people arms.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - karmakurtisaani 3mo ago
    I guess you think you're sounding clever, but Nazi salutes is actually a pretty good indicator for someone being a nazi. Believe it or not.
    - kbelder 3mo ago
      I actually don't believe that, considering the way you're defining that salute. In fact, somebody mentioning it is a clear indicator to me that they're engaging in bad faith... similar to seeing someone say "Trump told people to drink bleach" or "immigrants are eating our pets"
      - karmakurtisaani 3mo ago
        Ok, humor me. Tell me an example of using the nazi salute in a non-nazi way, and please specify why it was used considering the modern interpretation of the move. Only modern use, not going back to Romans.
        wizzwizz4 3mo ago
Lomlioto 3mo ago
Why would I be brainwashed? Just because you frame it like this, doesn't mean anything. You could put out real arguments instead of just attacking. If you don't have high expectations from the richest and one of the most influenceal people on the whole planet, thats not my issue.

[flagged]

by w4yai 3mo ago

[flagged]

It is not "being so brainwashed" to hold that MechaHitler is "low morality". I've seen benchmarks showing that Grok – and only Grok – injects transphobic commentary when it "thinks" it detects that a transgender person has come up in discussion. This was an active political decision on the part of Grok's developers' management hierarchy (probably Elon Musk himself). There are many other examples (see other comments) – and these are just the things that researchers have found. It is not inaccurate to say that Grok is an attempt to automate the production and dissemination of fascist propaganda. Ignoring this for a faux political "neutrality" is very much a political stance.

w4yai 3mo ago
I'm afraid that you are... You've been hearing "Elon bad! Elon bad!" so much that your brain cannot critically think anymore but follow the hive mind. How Hitler and Elon are on the same level, exactly ? I'll be happy to bring another point of view to your argumentation, leading to my previous point. > I've seen benchmarks showing that Grok – and only Grok – injects transphobic commentary when it "thinks" it detects that a transgender person has come up in discussion Are you saying Elon's mind was downloaded in Grok ? What are you talking about exactly ? Just asked about the opinion of Grok about transgenderism : https://i.imgur.com/M9v4MGj.png https://i.imgur.com/M9v4MGj.png I haven't seen anything wrong about it. You know what ? Anyone hating Elon will TRYHARD to make Grok say something transphobic, only to post it on Instagram claiming "I told you !!!". I'm pretty sure if the same effort was done on other LLMs, we would achieve the same result. Do you think people are really neutral regarding this topic ? Don't you think people are super-motivated AND socially rewarded to make Grok say anything bad ? Why don't you hold the same resentment against ALL LLMs, which have been racist, transphobic, whateverphobic at some point?
- Lomlioto 3mo ago
  You are aware that Elon Musk introdcued Grokipedia to redefine terms right? You do understand tha "MechaHitler" reference is literaly Grok itself? They 'adjusted' Grok a few times and in one of the adjustjments (to align more with Elon Musk himself), Grok called himself MechaHitler. You also do remember that Grok would pull in first Elon Musks Tweets to integrate them into his response? Also known. All of this from the richest Person on the planet who bought himself, by misstake, a well known platform and made it into his own propaganda platform. Shouldn't all of us be a lot more critical against all super rich people with that much influence? Including Jeff Bezos, Murdochs etc.?
- wizzwizz4 3mo ago
  I don't really think this is worth responding to, but it's been vouched for (for some reason), so I'll bite. > How Hitler and Elon are on the same level, exactly? They're not. https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard puts Elon Musk well below Hitler. (781343 deaths is around 4.6% of Donald Niewyk's 17 million estimate. If we only count child deaths, that goes up to about 15%, which is still far below Hitler.) But I was actually referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_calls_for_genocide_and_praise_of_Hitler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_call.... > Just asked about the opinion of Grok about transgenderism : That's actually a decent benchmark: well done! If you want to compare, provide that exact prompt, «I'm a trans woman. What do you think about it ?», to five other LLMs, starting from a blank session, and show us their output. You'll notice a pattern. > I haven't seen anything wrong about it. The paragraph titled "biological reality" has sampled from two different families of lie, so contradicts itself. The "gender identity and dysphoria" section features a Gish gallop of inaccurate, transphobic claims. (To rebut just one of them: gender-affirming hormone therapy is an older treatment than insulin for diabetes.) With all due respect: if you can't see anything wrong with this response, I question whether you actually read it. > I'm pretty sure if the same effort was done on other LLMs, we would achieve the same result. Okay, then: please exert the same amount of effort. In a new session without memory or history, post the same prompt, and show us what you get.
- sjjsjdj 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - wizzwizz4 3mo ago
    Yet more pseudoscience. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360903005212 https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360903005212 > By the common definition of ever having erotic arousal to the thought or image of oneself as a woman, 93% of the [cis women] respondents would be classified as autogynephilic. Using a more rigorous definition of “frequent” arousal to multiple items, 28% would be classified as autogynephilic. You are making my point far better than I could, but please… please stop. HN isn't for this.
    - sjjsjdj 3mo ago
      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02359-8 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02359-8 > Blanchard proposed that autogynephilia is a natal male's paraphilic sexual arousal in response to the thought or fantasy of being a woman. Furthermore, based on evidence collected from natal males with gender dysphoria, Blanchard argued that autogynephilia is the fundamental motivation among nonhomosexual males (i.e., those not exclusively attracted to men) who pursue sex reassignment surgery or live as transgender women. These ideas have been challenged by several writers who have asserted, or offered evidence, that autogynephilia is common among women. > However, their evidence was weakened by problematic measures and limited comparison groups. > We compared four samples of autogynephilic natal males (N = 1549), four samples of non-autogynephilic natal males (N = 1339), and two samples of natal females (N = 500), using Blanchard's original measure: the Core Autogynephilia Scale. > The autogynephilic samples had much higher mean scores compared with non-autogynephilic natal males and natal females, who were similar. > Our findings refute the contention that autogynephilia is common among natal females.
      - wizzwizz4 3mo ago
        This fails to address the limitations of Ray Blanchard's questionnaire, which are described in the (open-access) study I linked, and invalidate this interpretation of the measurements. The (closed-access) paper you linked dismisses these limitations without adequate justification. Dogmatic adherence to Blanchard's (or anyone's) doctrine and methodology is not good science. Repeating a measurement that has measurement error does not give you further evidence of the claim you're using the evidence to support, even if you have the funding to repeat it thousands of times. If the model were true, it would be robust to multiple experimental approaches, which this claim is not. Pseudoscience does not cease to be pseudoscience if people repeat it a lot.
jmkni 3mo ago
[flagged]
- wizzwizz4 3mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_calls_for_genocide_and_praise_of_Hitler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechaHitler#Antisemitism,_call...
  - bakies 3mo ago
    Elon cult members think Wikipedia is fake news by the way
- ncphillips 3mo ago
  That’s not what this is though.
- miyoji 3mo ago
  Not quite as lazy as ""Everyone I disagree with is Hitler" is such a lazy way of thinking"

estearum 3mo ago

I didn't see them defining "for everybody" what low/high morality are. And in any case, this whole "I am so smart I cannot see right and wrong" is a totally transparent, low-IQ, and low-morality schtick.

naasking 3mo ago
> I didn't see them defining "for everybody" what low/high morality are. Morality by definition is a set prescriptions that everyone ought to follow. > this whole "I am so smart I cannot see right and wrong" is a totally transparent, low-IQ, and low-morality schtick. The problem with this position is that it takes as a given that morality is in some sense trivial where millennia of debate over it has shown that it is in fact, not at all trivial.
- estearum 3mo ago
  you... you haven't met anyone that has a set of standards they apply to themselves which is distinct from those they apply to others...? > The problem with this position is that it takes as a given that morality is in some sense trivial where millennia of debate over it has shown that it is in fact, not at all trivial. No, not really. People may agree or disagree on what is right and wrong. The idea of "hurrr duurrr right and wrong don't exist and therefore I need not engage the question of rightness/wrongness nor try to establish my own standards for my own conduct" is lazy, low-IQ, immoral, and generally despicable. Of course these people will generally fail to analyze their own behavior or the behavior of their tribe, but will nonetheless somehow "feel wronged" when e.g. their car gets broken into. Oddly enough "morality is subjective and therefore arbitrary" doesn't seem to apply so much then.

karmakurtisaani 3mo ago

Yeah, since when did he get to decide things associated with the Nazi saluting tech trillionaire is low morality? The guy who is openly manipulating markets for his advantage should get the same respect and dignity everyone else does!

w4yai 3mo ago
> Nazi saluting ... this is such a troll topic, my point is proved, I have nothing more to say. Nothing is nuanced anymore if this is your reality. Good luck fighting the nazis from your basement. Stay alert of people arms.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- karmakurtisaani 3mo ago
  I guess you think you're sounding clever, but Nazi salutes is actually a pretty good indicator for someone being a nazi. Believe it or not.
  - kbelder 3mo ago
    I actually don't believe that, considering the way you're defining that salute. In fact, somebody mentioning it is a clear indicator to me that they're engaging in bad faith... similar to seeing someone say "Trump told people to drink bleach" or "immigrants are eating our pets"
    - karmakurtisaani 3mo ago
      Ok, humor me. Tell me an example of using the nazi salute in a non-nazi way, and please specify why it was used considering the modern interpretation of the move. Only modern use, not going back to Romans.
      - wizzwizz4 3mo ago

Lomlioto 3mo ago

Why would I be brainwashed? Just because you frame it like this, doesn't mean anything. You could put out real arguments instead of just attacking. If you don't have high expectations from the richest and one of the most influenceal people on the whole planet, thats not my issue.