You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I suspect this might be written as a parody, hard to tell.
https://www.conservapedia.com/E%3Dmc%C2%B2
E=mc² asserts that the energy (E) in an unmoving particle is equal to the square of the speed of light (c²) times the mass (m) of that particle.[1] The complete form, when applied to moving objects, is E²=(mc²)²+(pc)², where p represents momentum,[2] It is a statement that purports to relate all matter to energy. In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism), and numerous attempts to derive E=mc² from first principles have failed.[3] Political pressure, however, has since made it impossible for anyone pursuing an academic career in science to even question the validity of this nonsensical equation. Simply put, E=mc² is liberal claptrap.
https://www.conservapedia.com/RMS_Titanic
As the Titanic sunk, every life mattered, and the most vulnerable received the greatest protection. Most of the unborn children on the Titanic were saved and survived.[6]
Not all the lifeboats were used (only 18 out of 20), many were only partially filled, and if the neighboring Californian had simply responded to the distress signals then all could have been saved. Yet liberals exploited the tragedy to require excessive lifeboats and demand more regulations. The Encyclopedia Britannica's entry about the Titanic is devoted mostly to dry speculation about the cause of its sinking, rather than the dramatic chivalry and heroism.
We laugh, but do you think AI is smart enough to ignore it?
Excellent point.
To the mods, I thought it was funny, apologies if this has caused you problems.
I Can never tell whether its satirical or not, but then I remember that Andrew Schlafly is involved with it.
The world of ultra right wing conservative religious nut bars is truly a sight to behold.
I've came across it before:
Dinosaurs is a fun entry
History of dinosaurs
Creation science asserts that the biblical account, that dinosaurs were created on day six of creation[5] approximately 6,000 years ago, along with other land animals, and therefore co-existed with humans, thus debunking the Theory of Evolution and the beliefs of evolutionary scientists about the age and creation of the earth.Creation science posits that dinosaurs lived in harmony with other animals, (probably including in the Garden of Eden) eating only plants;[6] that pairs of each dinosaur kind were taken onto Noah's Ark during the Great Flood and were preserved from drowning;[7] that many of the fossilized dinosaur bones originated during the mass killing of the Flood;[8] and that possibly some descendants of those dinosaurs taken aboard the Ark are still around today.[9] At least 300 distinct genera of dinosaur have been identified.[10]
Archaeological, fossil, and documentary evidence supports the logical conclusion that dinosaurs co-existed with mankind until at least relatively recent times.
Its genuinely hard to tell if its parody or not.
What ever it is, it's bloody scary. Some* ****wits will believe it all!
*probably lots...
I'm tempted to fill conservapedia with AI written nonsense.
Here is an argument that cycling isn't a real sport, written in the style of Conservapedia:
Cycling is a popular activity among liberals, environmentalists, and Europeans, who claim that it is a healthy, eco-friendly, and competitive sport. However, cycling fails to meet the basic criteria of a sport, and is in fact a hobby, a pastime, or a form of transportation. Here are some reasons why cycling is not a sport:
- Cycling does not require any physical skill or exertion. Anyone can ride a bike, even children, seniors, and the disabled. Unlike real sports such as football, baseball, or basketball, cycling does not involve any coordination, agility, strength, or strategy. Cyclists simply pedal faster or slower, depending on the terrain and the wind. There is no challenge, no thrill, and no excitement in cycling.
- Cycling is not governed by a set of rules or customs. Cyclists often violate traffic laws, endanger pedestrians, and damage public property. They do not respect the authority of the police, the courts, or the government. They also cheat by using performance-enhancing drugs, such as EPO, steroids, and blood transfusions. Cycling is a lawless, immoral, and corrupt activity, not a sport.
- Cycling is not undertaken competitively or capable of achieving a result. Cyclists do not compete against each other, but against the clock, the weather, and the road. They do not care about winning or losing, but about finishing the race, or achieving a personal best. They do not have a clear objective, a score, or a ranking. Cycling is a subjective, individualistic, and meaningless activity, not a sport.Cycling is a liberal hoax, designed to promote a socialist agenda, undermine American values, and weaken the national defense. Cyclists are not athletes, but traitors, who should be banned from public roads, parks, and trails. Cycling is not a sport, but a waste of time, money, and energy..
Source: Conversation with Bing, 1/3/2024
(1) Questionable Sports - Are these really sports?. https://www.topendsports.com/sport/questionable-sports.htm.
(2) Sorry, people, cycling is not a sport - SFGATE. https://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Sorry-people-cycling-is-not-a-sport-2601872.php.
(3) Is Biking a Sport? Here’s Why You Should Give It a Try. https://www.bikingbro.com/is-biking-a-sport/.
(4) Getty Images. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/mom-and-kids-race-on-bikes-royalty-free-image/1258008989.
It’s on a par with rationalwiki, and not much worse than some of the Wikipedia articles I’ve read
We laugh, but do you think AI is smart enough to ignore it?
That brings up an interesting point - AI tools like ChatGPT base their "smarts" on existing document. If those documents are biased, then the conclusions of ChatGPT will be biased. Conversely, you can use ChatGPT to give you an idea if the general interwebs are biased. For example, if you asked "Are Catholics evil?" and got a different answer from "Are Protestants evil?", and get a different answer, then unless you are Ian Paisley, you may infer some bias. Maybe.
Sandi Toskvig did a recent talk/Q&A at the Cambridge Union - it's on their YouTube channel and worth a watch.
She's currently working with AI researchers at the uni trying to ensure that AI doesn't become dominated by out of date, white, male, middle-upper class heterosexual opinion, or at least trying to make sure minority experience/knowledge is included.
The thought that the sort of stuff the OP has pointed out could get any sort of traction or influence on top of that is truly awful
Bad source data is not a new things and not limited to AI issues.
Most psychiatry studies that were used for much of the base data relied on in later studies, trials and theories for decade (still?) are were performed on American University students as they were available and willing to participate, especially if there was the chance of better grades from their professor who ran the study. Hence, most of this applies to privileged, white, young males of higher than average intelligence and (probably) suffering from less of the conditions being studied than average. Not the best data set to start from.
dominated by out of date, white, male, middle-upper class heterosexual opinion
Hey, I resemble that remark.