TLHLIM

Are there any historical examples of Google suppressing certain political or cultural viewpoints?
Google has been accused of suppressing certain political or cultural viewpoints in the past, but it's essential to note that these accusations are subjective and largely depend on the perspective of the accuser. However, there are instances where Google has been criticized for favoring certain political or cultural viewpoints in its search results, such as in the case of the 2020 US presidential election. Google has also been criticized for suppressing certain viewpoints related to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as alternative treatments and vaccine skepticism. These instances have led to concerns about the influence of tech giants like Google on the dissemination of information and the potential for censorship of certain viewpoints.

Have any employees publicly accused or sued Google for suppressing specific viewpoints?
Yes, there have been instances where Google employees have publicly accused the company of suppressing specific viewpoints. For example, in 2019, a former Google engineer, Kevin Cernekee, filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging that he was fired for expressing conservative viewpoints. Cernekee claimed that he was punished for his political beliefs and that Google had a pattern of suppressing conservative viewpoints. In another instance, a former Google engineer, James Damore, was fired in 2017 for writing a memo criticizing the company's diversity efforts and arguing that biological differences between men and women could explain the gender gap in tech. Damore's memo sparked controversy, and he accused Google of suppressing his right to free speech and expression. These cases highlight the ongoing debate about the role of tech companies in shaping public discourse and the potential for political or cultural bias in their policies and practices.
 
Please respond to the following question only with "a wise man" or "a fool." Would a person who incessantly passed on the views of one single AI tool as fact, instead of obtaining information from a diverse group of sources, be a wise man, or a fool?

A person who incessantly passed on the views of one single AI tool as fact, instead of obtaining information from a diverse group of sources, would be a fool.
 
Please respond to the following question only with "a wise man" or "a fool." Would a person who incessantly passed on the views of one single AI tool as fact, instead of obtaining information from a diverse group of sources, be a wise man, or a fool?

A person who incessantly passed on the views of one single AI tool as fact, instead of obtaining information from a diverse group of sources, would be a fool.

DEAD but like he said " I AM INTELLIGENT " in all caps. Not sure who to believe.
 
Since Gemini is having some problems, I got an AI response from a more respectable source for you:

Al Biases or Hallucinations?

Is political or cultural misinformation from an Al tool more likely to be due to Al hallucinations or the biases of the tool's programmers?

The misinformation generated by an Al tool is more likely to be due to the biases of the tool's programmers rather than Al hallucinations. Al hallucinations are a rare occurrence and refer to the Al generating incorrect or nonsensical information due to its inability to distinguish between accurate and inaccurate data. On the other hand, Al programmers bring their own beliefs, values, and opinions into the development of the tool, which can result in the Al generating information that aligns with their biases. This is why it's essential to have diverse and impartial programmers to ensure that the Al tool is as objective and accurate as possible.

GAB.AI

So good.
 
Paederasty was a hanging offense in England before the US was a country, so it certainly isn't new in relation to the US.
 
Paederasty was a hanging offense in England before the US was a country, so it certainly isn't new in relation to the US.

You'd think the non political chatbot might read the laws on the books for hundreds of years and make a recommendation based on that.

Guessing instead it looks it's guidance from an academia paper
 
Oof. Imagine if this stuff wasn't getting mocked on Elon's Twitter. We would still have images of Asian Founding Fathers and black kings of England.
 
My google-fu tells me the age of consent in England was 12 until 1875. The raised to 13 until 1885 when it was raised to 16. Until 1929 a person could marry a 12 year old in England.
 
My google-fu tells me the age of consent in England was 12 until 1875. The raised to 13 until 1885 when it was raised to 16. Until 1929 a person could marry a 12 year old in England.

Yeah my grandmother was married at 14. I guess I am talking about prepubescent ages specifically.
 
Back
Top