Utopia Talk / Politics / Chatgpt

obaminated rank	Sat Sep 13 00:32:58 We need to institute a ban on copy and pasting chatgpt in political discussions. It is abused and spammed by, primarily, wtb. The purpose of chatgpt is to provide you with information so you can better understand an issue so you can better articulate your position and beliefs. The purpose of chatgpt is not to argue for you based off prompts you feed it. And philosophically this is a forum of people arguing and debating with each other. If we all resorted to using chatgpt to argue for us then we are not at all engaging with each other on any individual level. So please, lets take a vote on banning the use of copy and pasting chatgpt responses.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 00:37:26 ^hates free speech but loves hate speech. A more interesting issue is the fact that Jergul is actually in violation of Norwegian law under which jurisdiction he is a subject by not banning CC's posts.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 00:40:28 All prompts I use are perfectly honest and included in my posts, thus providing information. However, when AI is manipulated by people like - cant remember his name, but the guy who I destroyed earlier todsy when he did that - is an abuse of AI, however.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 00:51:51 This is an example of using AI for information without abusing it: how many politically motivated homicides have been committed by the left vs. the right in the last 50 years in the USA? [wall of text] Political Violence in the U.S. (1975–2025) Research indicates that right-wing extremists have been responsible for a significant majority of ideologically motivated homicides in the United States during this period. A study utilizing data from the U.S. Extremist Crime Database (ECDB) found that far-right extremists were responsible for a substantial proportion of such fatalities, while far-left extremists were involved in a markedly lower number of incidents. CCJLS Another analysis of extremist-related murders between 1990 and 2020 revealed that right-wing extremists committed the vast majority of these killings, with left-wing extremists being responsible for a much smaller share. [wall of text] Over the past 50 years, ideologically motivated homicides in the United States have predominantly been committed by individuals with right-wing affiliations. While left-wing extremism has been a subject of concern, especially with groups like Antifa, the scale and lethality of violence associated with left-wing extremists is decidedly lower.
obaminated rank	Sat Sep 13 01:48:17 Chatgpt isn't free speech you imbecile. I know youll be hardest hit by this because you need chatgpt but you abuse it and spam threads with multiple posts in a row. Its obnoxious at best, intellectually cowardly at worst.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 01:49:30 You literally want to ban truthful acts, you dirty fucking fascist
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 01:52:48 I normally wouldnt care to point out to people who are extremely inferior to me intellectually how severely inferior they are, but apart from being so comparatively stupid, youre also a cruel, lying little fascist thug, which is a whole different story.
obaminated rank	Sat Sep 13 05:44:18 You call anyone who disagrees with you either stupid, evil or a nazi. So yes, do it im normally when you have no credible trsponse ... which is all the time unless you c&p chatgpt. The above post proves it.
Pillz rank	Sat Sep 13 07:01:45 Wtb needs to be delete all'd frequently.
Cherub Cow rank	Sat Sep 13 10:11:52 Given that williamthebastard is even demonstrating here that he has no concern for the right and wrong of his spamming ChatGPT, I think it's pretty clear that the *spamming* of it should be a deleted item. So there's a difference between a potential non-spam use: 1) providing an on-topic prompt that the user used, then examining the ChatGPT output, then writing about what the prompt or output means (i.e., one's own conclusions about the A.I. model and whether or not the information is true) vs. a clear spam use: 2) not providing prompts, using off-topic prompts, not examining the output, omitting sections of the output selectively, taking the output as "true" based on nothing, then posting this same format multiple times in a row and even posting the same prompt in different threads with the obvious purpose of disrupting all topics. williamthebastard is clearly doing the latter ("2)"). And this doesn't mean that all criteria of each "1)" and "2)" category has to be met (e.g.; if a malicious user spams ChatGPT and someone responds with their own counter-use of ChatGPT which doesn't meet "1)" conditions, there is clearly still a satirical bend to that — fire with fire), but those criteria add-up to show what the user is doing. Pre-A.I., forum trolls were effectively doing the same thing by spamming entire Wikipedia articles or entire book chapters with no reason, context, or user-written preamble, and those were rightly deleted as just spam since they were stretching the threads and breaking website formatting. That's what williamthebastard has been doing a lot with ChatGPT. We're having to scroll past a lot of it because it's just worthless. The grey area is that sometimes he'll restrain himself by doing one off-topic prompt and then waiting until someone else comments before doing another off-topic prompt, or he'll wait until he's called out for spamming in one particular thread before repeating the process in another thread, or he'll start spamming things slightly more on-topic but equally worthless. Possible solutions: 1) thread creator can ask for no-A.I. in a thread; all uses of A.I. can then be deleted without worrying about grey areas 2) multi-posts of prompts (i.e., multiple posts in a row which are all just A.I. output) can be deleted on-sight without worrying about other criteria
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 16:32:45 Why is the right far more violent, according to the statistics youve reviewed? Ideological Motivation and Grievances Apocalyptic or zero-sum worldview: Many far-right extremist ideologies—white nationalism, anti-government militias, the “Great Replacement” conspiracy, or Christian Identity—frame social or demographic changes as existential threats. This worldview can justify violence as a necessary means of “self-defense” or “preservation.” Us vs. Them mentality: Right-wing extremists often target perceived enemies like racial minorities, immigrants, government officials, journalists, or left-wing activists. This broad target pool increases the potential for lethal attacks. Access to Weapons Right-wing extremists often have easier access to firearms, especially in the U.S., where gun ownership is culturally embedded and legally protected. Many mass shootings and lethal attacks by right-wing extremists involve semi-automatic weapons or high-capacity firearms. Left-wing extremists tend to rely more on non-lethal direct action (protests, sabotage, property damage). Radicalization via Media and Online Ecosystems Online forums, social media platforms, and conspiracy-theory communities have amplified far-right radicalization. Algorithms promoting extreme content can reinforce a sense of threat and urgency, encouraging preemptive violence. While left-wing activists also use online spaces, the scale and ideological framing rarely promote lethal attacks against individuals. Summary Right-wing extremists are far more violent in the U.S. primarily because: Their ideologies frame violence as justified against a wide array of perceived enemies. They have easier access to firearms. They benefit from structured networks and radicalizing communities. Historical grievances and conspiratorial beliefs amplify their sense of urgency and threat. Their movements have evolved in ways that facilitate lethal violence, unlike left-wing movements which often focus on protest or symbolic action.
Rugian rank	Sat Sep 13 18:40:04 I'm not going to opine on whether this sort of activity should be deletable or not...I will just say though: 1) WTB spams way too much AI content here. 2) I automatically skip over any such posts as soon as I realize what they are.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 18:59:53 All AI does when used correctly, as I do, is to save the user the time of googling and compiling all available statistics on e.g. left wing vs right wing murders; instead, a bot does that for the user. Naturally, Otardinated would have a very different opinion if the facts didnt blow his lies away with statistical evidence. But since all the available, compiled stats are not to his liking and prove that the right commit "far more" murders, he would like to ban them. Because he's a fascist that hates statistical evidence. The fact that he hates getting slapped in the face with evidence this badly does make a smile play cheekily on my lips, though ;)
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 19:02:13 Otardinated, why do you think your right wing commits "far more" murders, as has been proven with extremely comprehensive summaries of all the stats?
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 19:04:35 Personally, I think one of the reasons that AI is too PC to mention is that in addition to the other problems it mentions, your cruel, selfish, anti-intellectual right wing ideology automatically attracts an inferior and more violent class of more criminally minded people
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 19:07:24 Trump told you, hell, we all know trying to be a good person is harder work than being a selfish little cunt who lies, steals and cons to get through life. Vote for me, and you can all just be nasty cunts that hurt other people to get by, that lie, cheat and steal. Its so much easier. When youre selling that kind of ideology, youre going to attract all the worst people in the country.
Sam Adams rank	Sat Sep 13 19:13:03 Agreed, no more insane chatgpt rants. It's just insane spam at this point.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 19:25:43 Hehe boy they really hate the invention of an automated compiler of statistics that gathers evidence showing how violent they are lol
Cherub Cow rank	Sat Sep 13 21:25:23 [Rugian]: "1) WTB spams way too much AI content here. "2) I automatically skip over any such posts as soon as I realize what they are." Yeah, 100%. I know people have said that they skip over my long posts too sometimes, but at least they're written by me on the current topic. Whereas, ChatGPT offers nothing of value and sounds like it was written in a wind tunnel 1,000 miles away from anything relevant to the discussion. billythecoward claimed here that ChatGPT "save[s] the user the time of googling and compiling all available statistics", but this is just false. All this does is create a Gish Gallop of claims which then need to be sourced since the output does not provide the sources unless prompted (which billy does not do). When you Google something (now) and an A.I. response is generated, this at *least* provides links to the sources of the individual output bullet-points so the claims can be evaluated by the user, but a lot of time this output is actually completely wrong — even on things that should be easily verifiable, like how to use a software program. So when billythecoward spams these outputs, he is just doing an asymmetric troll. All he has to do is give his retarded prompt, and ChatGPT spits out a Gish Gallop of claims which would have to be individually checked and manually contextualized to the actual UP conversation. And since he spams them repeatedly and does not even read responses to the prompts, there is zero source evaluation happening by him or ChatGPT. It's just pure spam. So this sounds like a delete-on-sight situation. If he posts a short prompt followed by off-topic ChatGPT output — gone on sight.
williamthebastard rank	Sat Sep 13 21:40:20 Nazi Whore ignored of course. I just hope she isnt incriminating Jergul in hate crimes again "so to summarize: A moderator based in Norway who moderates a site on a US server but allows texts such as the original text could face criminal charges? ChatGPT said: Yes — in Norway, a moderator who is based in Norway and allows the original text to appear on a publicly accessible forum, even if the server is hosted in the U.S., could potentially face criminal charges under Penal Code §185 for public dissemination of hate speech." You said: "or in severe/repeat cases," This case definitely includes many severe/repeat cases, so what is the likelihood of prosecution? ChatGPT said: Given the circumstances you describe—a Norwegian moderator allowing highly extreme, racist, dehumanizing content to appear repeatedly or across multiple posts—the likelihood of prosecution in Norway would be high."
Paramount rank	Tue Sep 16 12:47:39 ” We need to institute a ban on copy and pasting chatgpt in political discussions. ” You have a point. If everyone do this, then this forum will basically just be a forum where chatgpt is arguing with itself.
murder rank	Tue Sep 16 12:54:54 Every time wtb post some chatgpt crap a tree dies.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: