It was within the Gemini link that the concern was alleviated/squelched. Honestly, I think that the reason A.I. is unwanted is that the information available is so easily and quickly accessible. It would/did put a stop to some of the incomplete and/or misdirection that happens when critics can throw sh** against the wall without anyone cleaning up the mess.
It is what it is.
It gives an overwhelming advantage to the critics on a board such as this where the numbers are so imbalanced. A.I. at least opened up the possibility that critics could be responded to with factual information that counter to their mud slinging, and that it could be done in a timely manner.
Regards,
MG
I believe that this excuse has already been dealt with - even if you don't accept it - because of the established fact that AIs are not guaranteed to produce "factual information". So anything from the illegitimate Gemini link would have to be treated as suspect - not just accepted at face value.
In any case, you chose/choose to come here in the knowledge that there are more critics than defenders, just as some critics choose to participate in places where there are more defenders than critics. in my opinion you don't improve your credibility by complaining over and over and over about the situation.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
It was within the Gemini link that the concern was alleviated/squelched. Honestly, I think that the reason A.I. is unwanted is that the information available is so easily and quickly accessible. It would/did put a stop to some of the incomplete and/or misdirection that happens when critics can throw sh** against the wall without anyone cleaning up the mess.
It is what it is.
It gives an overwhelming advantage to the critics on a board such as this where the numbers are so imbalanced. A.I. at least opened up the possibility that critics could be responded to with factual information that counter to their mud slinging, and that it could be done in a timely manner.
Regards,
MG
So the problem isn’t AI, it’s that critics have access to too much accurate information, too fast. That’s a fascinating admission.
It was within the Gemini link that the concern was alleviated/squelched. Honestly, I think that the reason A.I. is unwanted is that the information available is so easily and quickly accessible. It would/did put a stop to some of the incomplete and/or misdirection that happens when critics can throw sh** against the wall without anyone cleaning up the mess.
It is what it is.
It gives an overwhelming advantage to the critics on a board such as this where the numbers are so imbalanced. A.I. at least opened up the possibility that critics could be responded to with factual information that counter to their mud slinging, and that it could be done in a timely manner.
Regards,
MG
I believe that this excuse has already been dealt with - even if you don't accept it - because of the established fact that AIs are not guaranteed to produce "factual information". So anything from the illegitimate Gemini link would have to be treated as suspect - not just accepted at face value.
In any case, you chose/choose to come here in the knowledge that there are more critics than defenders, just as some critics choose to participate in places where there are more defenders than critics. in my opinion you don't improve your credibility by complaining over and over and over about the situatio
Maybe MG needs to do some missionary work and get the plagiarist Peterson and all his mopologetic backslappers back over here.
It was within the Gemini link that the concern was alleviated/squelched. Honestly, I think that the reason A.I. is unwanted is that the information available is so easily and quickly accessible. It would/did put a stop to some of the incomplete and/or misdirection that happens when critics can throw sh** against the wall without anyone cleaning up the mess.
It is what it is.
It gives an overwhelming advantage to the critics on a board such as this where the numbers are so imbalanced. A.I. at least opened up the possibility that critics could be responded to with factual information that counter to their mud slinging, and that it could be done in a timely manner.
Regards,
MG
So the problem isn’t AI, it’s that critics have access to too much accurate information, too fast. That’s a fascinating admission.
Not only that, but (as MG points out), critics get away with crap throwing and mud slinging when he cannot use AI to rapidly produce counterarguments of dubious quality and accuracy.
MG, do you think you could make your point without the pejoratives? Including writing words that you feel obliged to "bleep" with asterisks?
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Marcus wrote:Precedent has certainly been set-- doubting Thomas...
This is a good point. My thinking was limited to the AI rules. There are certainly other ways that Hound could be dealt with. For me personally, it isn't a priority because of his low output. If he finds a way to cover his AI tracks from AI analyzers faster so that he can post more, then I might think differently.
Lost Gospel of Thomas 1:8 - And Jesus said, "what about the Pharisees? They did it too! Wherefore, we shall do it even more!"
Marcus wrote:Precedent has certainly been set-- doubting Thomas...
This is a good point. My thinking was limited to the AI rules. There are certainly other ways that Hound could be dealt with. For me personally, it isn't a priority because of his low output. If he finds a way to cover his AI tracks from AI analyzers faster so that he can post more, then I might think differently.
Have you considered either addressing or ignoring his content? Or, is the only priority to psychoanalyze and try to diagnose Hound?
Ban Whiskey permanently if that's the only way.
— Gadianton
Yes. I ignore his content completely. My analysis is from material I read months ago.
I can't psychoanalyze Hound because Hound is an AI, and AIs don't have psychology. Nice try though. Frustrations about the double standard that allows Hound to continue to AI post where others aren't allowed have been brought up by others, and that is what I am addressing. I've recommended people ignore his posts and they will likely go away. Hound is an infrequent poster. He'll post something and it will drift halfway down the page but somebody always takes the bait and responds to it. So...?? quit responding. It's not like A-Mike who posted a thousand times a day and so ignoring had little chance of fixing the problem. I do not consider Hound to be a pestilence at a level that requires special moderation. Yes, he's breaking the rules, but the conventional wisdom of putting problem posters on ignore in this case will actually work if people do it.
Lost Gospel of Thomas 1:8 - And Jesus said, "what about the Pharisees? They did it too! Wherefore, we shall do it even more!"
Frustrations about the double standard that allows Hound to continue to AI post where others aren't allowed have been brought up by others, and that is what I am addressing.
Let's see how this plays out. On the one hand, you are convinced that Hound is "an AI" who is allowed, allegedly, to break the rules. On the other hand, Schmo is a genius using his own brilliant combination of intellect and wisdom to call posters and about half the American population "f uckfa ce stupid." Which, not ironically, is what Hound is addressing.
Let the games continue.
Ban Whiskey permanently if that's the only way.
— Gadianton
