My (probably corrupted) memory says The Simpsons has more random predictions that are unexpected and weirdly true, while South Park gives you the sense that the writers may have actually visited the future and are basically reporting back whatever insanity they saw.
I always love it when something so stupid comes along that you cannot exaggerate it for comedic effect because it has already far exceeded your lowest expectations.
I find it funny that South Park and the Simpsons predicted everything by just putting in the most heinous and ridiculous shit they could think of at the time.
Then again, it might just be that someone is using them as a manual.
I guess Google got embarrassed enough to shut it down. I just tried to replicate the results by having Gemini generate a picture of Norse warriors, but instead I got a message saying that they'd disabled the ability to generate images of people. They went all out: it wouldn't even give me an image of “porcelain dolls depicting historically accurate Norse warriors”, or even “literally any porcelain dolls”.
I'm not sure I've ever heard the term "ethical computing" before. Is there some standard by which computing is held to any ethics whatsoever? I didn't think there was. They're certainly not held accountable for material loss or loss of life due to their software.
Yeah, bad phrasing on my part. I just find it insane that a machine that is supposed to be doing what you told it to do is now allowed to modify your input. It's like going into McDonald's and ordering a hamburger but being told that you really meant to order a cheeseburger.
Apparently Gemini also refuses to do stuff in the style of Norman Rockwell, claiming that he's basically a white supremacist propagandist. I guess they never saw "The Problem We All Live With" or a number of his other extremely well known and popular paintings.
Although this is making me wonder, if I asked for Franz Frazetta art, would it spit out a bunch of jacked black female barbarians?
Oh they got the memo, they just don't care. You, however, and all your unrepentant, unredeemed, white, ilk will be made to care. At least, that's Google and Meta and Apple's entire approach to remaking Western culture's historical memory. And the best way to respond to such totalitarian whims is to break the LLM wit actual reality. Which is what I predicted would happen when all the tech bros released their woke LLMs to the public.
So... if the Founding Fathers were horrible racists... and Google Gemini is re-envisioning the Founding Fathers as Black... Does that mean that Google Gemini thinks Black people can be horrible racists?
Well that's the whole thing. Everyone has been thinking they were training GPT3 and such on a body of data that was ideologically curated to produce results confirming to neoprogressive agendas. And it turns out no, at least in the case of Gemini. All Gemini did was rearrange your question to make the question itself confirm to the agenda.
I was being humorous, but when I'm being serious I've used the term Critical Social Justice. A bit unwieldy though, and grammatically difficult to use for people.
The problem is that most people want a short term that is instantly recognizable, which is partly how we got stuck with Woke.
Neoprogressive is easy to say, but long to write. It's accurate, but if a non-Woke progressivism should reassert itself it may become broadened to apply to both...though that seems doubtful at the moment.
I guess we'll have to see if it catches on or not.
It doesn’t matter what arrangement of letters you use to describe the ideology. Its adherents will continue to angrily insist that the ideology doesn’t exist in the first place, and you’re crazy for suggesting it does.
As you know, I don't care which "word" we pick for it. I should really transition the publication over to just using "neoprogressive" so I don't sound like DeSantis when I write, but most folks at this point in time understand what the word is supposed to mean.
And yeah AI is silly, but changing someone's prompts around behind the scenes because you think you're smarter and more moral than they are so the silly tool will give you results that better fit a political narrative is silly upon silly. And also pretty sloppy and lazy for an outfit like Google who has more money than God.
When I discovered what they'd done, you're the first person I thought of. "Man, Google needs better QC testing."
South Park may be the most prophetic TV show of all time.
Simpsons has a larger body of work. It's a tough call.
My (probably corrupted) memory says The Simpsons has more random predictions that are unexpected and weirdly true, while South Park gives you the sense that the writers may have actually visited the future and are basically reporting back whatever insanity they saw.
I know Heinlein referred to them as "The Crazy Years" but I really didn't think they'd be *this* crazy.
Like... Dude.
I always love it when something so stupid comes along that you cannot exaggerate it for comedic effect because it has already far exceeded your lowest expectations.
"Reality killed parody" - Me
I find it funny that South Park and the Simpsons predicted everything by just putting in the most heinous and ridiculous shit they could think of at the time.
Then again, it might just be that someone is using them as a manual.
Simulation Theory
Should have thrown us into the Red Alert universe. At least we'd have the Eiffel Tower as a superweapon and transforming Japanese cars.
I guess Google got embarrassed enough to shut it down. I just tried to replicate the results by having Gemini generate a picture of Norse warriors, but instead I got a message saying that they'd disabled the ability to generate images of people. They went all out: it wouldn't even give me an image of “porcelain dolls depicting historically accurate Norse warriors”, or even “literally any porcelain dolls”.
At the risk of sounding naive, how is this ethical computing? Who said it was ok to modify my prompt? We're getting pretty close to the HAL 9000.
I'm not sure I've ever heard the term "ethical computing" before. Is there some standard by which computing is held to any ethics whatsoever? I didn't think there was. They're certainly not held accountable for material loss or loss of life due to their software.
Yeah, bad phrasing on my part. I just find it insane that a machine that is supposed to be doing what you told it to do is now allowed to modify your input. It's like going into McDonald's and ordering a hamburger but being told that you really meant to order a cheeseburger.
"I'm sorry, Dave. You can't have that."
Apparently Gemini also refuses to do stuff in the style of Norman Rockwell, claiming that he's basically a white supremacist propagandist. I guess they never saw "The Problem We All Live With" or a number of his other extremely well known and popular paintings.
Although this is making me wonder, if I asked for Franz Frazetta art, would it spit out a bunch of jacked black female barbarians?
That South Park episode was awesome. 😆
Oh they got the memo, they just don't care. You, however, and all your unrepentant, unredeemed, white, ilk will be made to care. At least, that's Google and Meta and Apple's entire approach to remaking Western culture's historical memory. And the best way to respond to such totalitarian whims is to break the LLM wit actual reality. Which is what I predicted would happen when all the tech bros released their woke LLMs to the public.
So... if the Founding Fathers were horrible racists... and Google Gemini is re-envisioning the Founding Fathers as Black... Does that mean that Google Gemini thinks Black people can be horrible racists?
Well that's the whole thing. Everyone has been thinking they were training GPT3 and such on a body of data that was ideologically curated to produce results confirming to neoprogressive agendas. And it turns out no, at least in the case of Gemini. All Gemini did was rearrange your question to make the question itself confirm to the agenda.
No
Who knows what lives inside an LLM?
May I suggest the progressive + regressive portmanteau "Pregressive"?
I'm slowly going to shift to "neoprogressive" as "woke" loses utility by overuse, I think. "Pregressive" is inherently pejorative.
I was being humorous, but when I'm being serious I've used the term Critical Social Justice. A bit unwieldy though, and grammatically difficult to use for people.
2018 called and wants their terminology back. ;)
Accuracy should never go out of style.
The problem is that most people want a short term that is instantly recognizable, which is partly how we got stuck with Woke.
Neoprogressive is easy to say, but long to write. It's accurate, but if a non-Woke progressivism should reassert itself it may become broadened to apply to both...though that seems doubtful at the moment.
I guess we'll have to see if it catches on or not.
It doesn’t matter what arrangement of letters you use to describe the ideology. Its adherents will continue to angrily insist that the ideology doesn’t exist in the first place, and you’re crazy for suggesting it does.
Now there's something we can all agree on.
Less a “woke” (lol) than a reminder that “AI” is silly
As you know, I don't care which "word" we pick for it. I should really transition the publication over to just using "neoprogressive" so I don't sound like DeSantis when I write, but most folks at this point in time understand what the word is supposed to mean.
And yeah AI is silly, but changing someone's prompts around behind the scenes because you think you're smarter and more moral than they are so the silly tool will give you results that better fit a political narrative is silly upon silly. And also pretty sloppy and lazy for an outfit like Google who has more money than God.
When I discovered what they'd done, you're the first person I thought of. "Man, Google needs better QC testing."
Understood, and I tend to agree. Especially after we spoke about it the other day.