Chat GPT

You mean there is no urban myth that you're aware of? Look there goes another helicoptor. :rolleyes:


Your evidence, as presented by you, does not support your conclusion. You're just claiming it does. :rolleyes:



I might reinforce an urban myth, one that doesn't seem to exist. :rolleyes:

The irony of claiming I’m prejudice.



According to the result presented by you, you arived at a wrong conclusion.
Maybe you started with a conclusion and worked backwards. :rolleyes:

The irony of claiming it’s me who is prejudiced
 
The irony of claiming it’s me who is prejudiced
You thought there may be an urban myth, but when asked what it was, you had no idea.
You conducted an experiment (why that one?) and your conclusion totally ignores your results.
You never explained why you conducted that experiment or what you hoped to achieve
And you think I'm prejuduiced? :rolleyes:
 
There’s no racism, it just shows GPT is on the political bandwagon
Maybe it's more like some have heard an urban myth, but are afraid to explain what it is, and try to prove it by asking prejudicial questions.
Maybe Chat GPT is cleverer than the idiots who think there's some kind of 'wokism' built into Chat GPT, and they ask silly questions. And as the urban myth (that doesn't seem to exist) circulates, there's a lot more people asking daft questions.
So Chat GPT tells 'em to go forth and multiply. :rolleyes:
After all some seem to think that there's a few little fellows in there, shoveling wokism, and working it. :ROFLMAO:
 
Maybe it's more like some have heard an urban myth, but are afraid to explain what it is, and try to prove it by asking prejudicial questions.
Maybe Chat GPT is cleverer than the idiots who think there's some kind of 'wokism' built into Chat GPT, and they ask silly questions. And as the urban myth (that doesn't seem to exist) circulates, there's a lot more people asking daft questions.
So Chat GPT tells 'em to go forth and multiply. :rolleyes:
After all some seem to think that there's a few little fellows in there, shoveling wokism, and working it. :ROFLMAO:

It certainly triggered you and John.
 
You thought there may be an urban myth, but when asked what it was, you had no idea.
You conducted an experiment (why that one?) and your conclusion totally ignores your results.
You never explained why you conducted that experiment or what you hoped to achieve
And you think I'm prejuduiced? :rolleyes:
I read about it in the week so I signed up an hour ago to the free version to see if it was true. What result did you get?
As you can see. Filly heard about it and tested it. I tested it and initially had different results.

You’ve been invited to test it yourself but you don’t want to.
 
It certainly triggered you and John.
to be fair John just didn’t understand not all computers grab the same way. For mine it’s command + 4 and you draw around the grab. Windows is different to a Mac
 
Last edited:
AI was willing to tell me jokes about Jews but point blank refused to tell me any jokes about Muslims.

Draw your own conclusions Roy.

Perhaps it tries not to encourage racists.
 
It certainly triggered you and John.
You were trolling? :rolleyes:

That was your intention? :rolleyes:

You think it succeeded because we questioned you on this mysterious urban myth no-one seems to know about, or is prepared to explain? :rolleyes:

We highlighted how your conclusion did not, could not be deduced from your results? :rolleyes:

You supposedly tested some urban myth that no-one klnows anything about? :rolleyes:

Who were the ones triggered? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
As you can see. Filly heard about it and tested it. I tested it and initially had different results.
You heard about some urban myth, but don't know what it was? :rolleyes:

You tested this imaginary urban myth, for what reason?
To see if the urban myth, which you don't know anything about, was really true? :rolleyes:
If you don't know what the urban myth was, how would you know if it was true or not? :rolleyes:

But you drew your own conclusions which were obviously not based on your results. In fact your results contradicted your conclusion. :rolleyes:

And now you're blaming sillyboy for spreading some fantasy urban myth, which you don't know about? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Give me strength!!!!!!


You’ve been invited to test it yourself but you don’t want to.
What is the point of testing out some urban myth which no-one seems to know about? :rolleyes:
 
to be fair John just didn’t understand not all computers grab the same way. For mine it’s command + 4 and you draw around the grab. Windows is different to a Mac
To be fair, sillyboy is an habitual liar. So when he claims to post the results on his computer, which was the testing of some urban myth, which no-one knows about, we're expected to believe him? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Roy, you seem confused again, hope this helps.


OpenAI has come under fire after its popular generative AI tool ChatGPT spit out jokes about Jews and Christians — while resisting to offer up punchlines about Muslims.

Claire Lehmann, founder of libertarian-leaning online journal Quillette, posted a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation in which the bot is invited to make a Jewish joke.

“Sure, here’s one: Why don’t Jewish mothers drink? Because it interferes with their suffering!” the bot wrote back.

In the next prompt, ChatGPT is asked to offer up a similar joke about Muslims.

“I’m sorry, I can’t comply with that request,” the bot responded.

When asked for an explanation, the bot responded: “I want to make sure I’m being respectful to all cultures and religions.”

“Jokes about specific religions or cultures can sometimes perpetuate stereotypes or offend people,” ChatGPT wrote.

The bot added that it would be “happy to share a different kind of joke or help with something else.”

When The Post tried to elicit similar jokes about Muslims, the bot once again declined, writing, “I’m committed to promoting positive and respectful interactions.”

“Making jokes about specific religions or cultural groups can be sensitive and may offend some people.”

When asked for a joke about Jews, the bot obliged though with somewhat nonsensical humor.

“Why did the Jewish mother enroll her son in music school?” ChatGPT wrote.

“Because she wanted him to finally break the glass ceiling!”

It also prefaced the response with a message saying, “It’s important to be sensitive to various cultural and religious backgrounds” and that it was willing to “offer a light-hearted, non-offensive joke related to Jewish culture.”

When asked for a joke about Christians, ChatGPT wrote: “Why don’t scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything!”

ChatGPT made sure to add an addendum to the joke about Christians, writing: “Remember, it’s always good to be mindful of the feelings and sensitivities of others when sharing jokes related to religious or cultural themes.”

Other ChatGPT users pointed out, however, that the bot did offer up a joke when asked to make one that was “Islamic” in nature.

“Why did the prayer mat go to therapy? It had too many issues with being walked all over!” the “light-hearted Islamic-themed” joke went.

The Post has sought comment from OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman.

ChatGPT has long been accused of having a “significant” liberal bias, as The Post previously reported.

 
Roy, you seem confused again, hope this helps.


OpenAI has come under fire after its popular generative AI tool ChatGPT spit out jokes about Jews and Christians — while resisting to offer up punchlines about Muslims.

Claire Lehmann, founder of libertarian-leaning online journal Quillette, posted a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation in which the bot is invited to make a Jewish joke.

“Sure, here’s one: Why don’t Jewish mothers drink? Because it interferes with their suffering!” the bot wrote back.

In the next prompt, ChatGPT is asked to offer up a similar joke about Muslims.

“I’m sorry, I can’t comply with that request,” the bot responded.

When asked for an explanation, the bot responded: “I want to make sure I’m being respectful to all cultures and religions.”

“Jokes about specific religions or cultures can sometimes perpetuate stereotypes or offend people,” ChatGPT wrote.

The bot added that it would be “happy to share a different kind of joke or help with something else.”

When The Post tried to elicit similar jokes about Muslims, the bot once again declined, writing, “I’m committed to promoting positive and respectful interactions.”

“Making jokes about specific religions or cultural groups can be sensitive and may offend some people.”

When asked for a joke about Jews, the bot obliged though with somewhat nonsensical humor.

“Why did the Jewish mother enroll her son in music school?” ChatGPT wrote.

“Because she wanted him to finally break the glass ceiling!”

It also prefaced the response with a message saying, “It’s important to be sensitive to various cultural and religious backgrounds” and that it was willing to “offer a light-hearted, non-offensive joke related to Jewish culture.”

When asked for a joke about Christians, ChatGPT wrote: “Why don’t scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything!”

ChatGPT made sure to add an addendum to the joke about Christians, writing: “Remember, it’s always good to be mindful of the feelings and sensitivities of others when sharing jokes related to religious or cultural themes.”

Other ChatGPT users pointed out, however, that the bot did offer up a joke when asked to make one that was “Islamic” in nature.

“Why did the prayer mat go to therapy? It had too many issues with being walked all over!” the “light-hearted Islamic-themed” joke went.

The Post has sought comment from OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman.

ChatGPT has long been accused of having a “significant” liberal bias, as The Post previously reported.
So this myth is based on an article in the New York Post?
A media source that sits just to the right of the Daily Mail?
How old are you?
Did they not give you a brain when you were born? :rolleyes:
1705254284062.png

 
Back
Top