ChatGPT

I do not favor legislating morality such as a mandatory abortion ban(which I oppose)I do not believe in the legislation of rights for an unborn child if they override the guardianship of the Mother.Whats wrong with having the Mother (and Father, if applicable) take full responsibility for the child until as far along as age 5? Only if they cannot handle the responsibility and give the state reasonable written notice can and should the state then take over. (or in the event of abandonment.)The parents should have primary legal and moral responsibility unless found incompetent.

A hands-off approach would seem to favor government allowing teachers to choose freely among pronouns and not have to ignore that Abby has two daddies. Is that your position?Here's what ChatGPT said when I asked, "Should teachers answer questions about children who have two mommies or daddies?"

ChatGPT:

---

As an AI language model, I can provide you with an opinion on this matter. Whether teachers should answer questions about children who have two mommies or daddies depends on the context and the age appropriateness of the question. However, promoting inclusivity, diversity, and respect for different family structures is generally considered beneficial for creating an inclusive learning environment.

​

If a student asks a question related to same-sex parents or diverse family structures, it is important for teachers to provide age-appropriate and factual information in a respectful and inclusive manner. This can help foster understanding, empathy, and respect among students.

​

Teachers can approach such questions by emphasizing that families come in different shapes and sizes, and that what matters most is the love and care provided by parents or caregivers, rather than their gender or number. Encouraging open dialogue, respect for differences, and teaching about diversity and inclusivity can help create a positive and supportive classroom environment for all students.

​

It's also important for teachers to be aware of and sensitive to the cultural and religious backgrounds of their students and their families. While promoting inclusivity, teachers should also respect the values and beliefs of different communities, ensuring a balanced approach that considers the diverse perspectives within the classroom.

​

Ultimately, it is up to individual schools and educators to determine how they address these topics within their specific educational frameworks and guidelines.

---

--Percy

As a Christian, I believe in separation of church and state in legal matters, I do not believe that legal means secular only. Just as parents have the primary responsibility of raising, training, and educating their kids until ages of accountability, the State has the responsibility to allow a family to develop within the parameters of their own faith. The State should never have as its goal any sort of moral,spiritual, or ethical agenda that supersedes a families chosen beliefs.According to what you wrote, ChatGPT seems to agree.

Phat posits: While this sounds good, it's not. Most parents will bring up their children to believe in the same shit they do,
perpetuating the horror of religion and it's harmful side shows, such as Racism, Misogyny, Sexism and the like.But it is also scary to imagine a committee of some chosen people deciding what is best for children, so here we are.Imagine the Branch Davidians...or other weirder cults....Who decides who is incompetent? "Me! Me! Us!" and here we are.

And here we are in a world where U.S. Christians kill their children with exorcisms and medical neglect, and poison the survivors' minds with religious and racial hate, all in the name of parental rights -- oh, and in Jesus' name, too, amen. I wonder if those would fall under Phat's umbrella of "unless they are ruled incompetent."Philip Larkin, that most dyspeptic of 20th century poets, had deep thoughts about parents and kids:This Be The VerseThey fuck you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
And add some extra, just for you.But they were fucked up in their turn
By fools in old-style hats and coats,
Who half the time were soppy-stern
And half at one another’s throats.Man hands on misery to man.
It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can,
And don’t have any kids yourself.- Philip Larkin (1922-1985)

As a Christian, how do you feel about the plight of those on our southern border trying desperately to enter our county after fleeing poverty or threats to life? Here's ChatGPT's answer:

ChatGPT:

---

The issue of migrants at the southern border is complex and multifaceted, and there are differing opinions on the appropriate stance the United States should take. It is important to approach the topic with empathy, respect for human rights, and a consideration of both domestic and international obligations.

​

One perspective is that the United States should prioritize compassion and provide support to migrants fleeing poverty and threats to their lives. This viewpoint emphasizes the principles of humanitarianism and the obligation to protect vulnerable individuals. Advocates argue that the United States, as a prosperous nation with a history of immigration, should provide opportunities for those seeking safety and a better life. This may involve offering asylum to those who qualify under international and domestic laws, ensuring humane treatment, and working toward comprehensive immigration reforms that address the root causes of migration.

​

On the other hand, some argue for stricter immigration enforcement and border security measures. They believe that maintaining the integrity of immigration laws and securing the border is essential for national security, economic stability, and the rule of law. Advocates of this perspective may argue for more stringent immigration policies, including increased border enforcement, streamlined asylum processes, and discouraging irregular migration to protect domestic resources and prioritize legal immigration channels.

​

Finding a balanced approach is often challenging. It is important to consider addressing the root causes of migration, such as poverty, violence, and lack of opportunities in the migrants' home countries. Collaborative efforts with neighboring countries and international organizations can help create regional solutions and alleviate the conditions that drive migration.

​

Public policy discussions and decisions on this issue involve considerations of national interests, human rights, economic impacts, and social factors. It is crucial to engage in informed and constructive dialogue to work towards comprehensive immigration policies that uphold both the values of the United States and the well-being of migrants.

---

--Percy

that's kind of the namby-pamby kind of a one-size-fits-all answer you would expect from a collection of articles amassed over the internet.don't offend anyone!. oh well. thanks, Percy.

I've seen a few of these now. The response has been described as a trained undergraduate answer; keen to provide both sides of the conventional arguments without forming a view or providing new thoughts.I remember discussing my first essay with my tutor at Cambridge about my mark of 73%. 75% was the mark required for a distinction. I asked her what I had to do to get the extra 2%. She said the most cruel thing a woman has ever said to me:"You have to say something original."

And I suppose that the progressive alternative answer is that the village has more of a mandate and responsibility to raise the child than do the parents. Scary.Getting back to AI, Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin talked about AI in a transcript, found here. The AI DilemmaWhat do we propose the "Village" (Progressives) do to restrain AI from messing with the 2024 elections? You old codgers are viewing AI from an ancient lens. As Tristan Harris says, GPT4 is already at the level of a healthy adult, one year after being at the level of a 4-year-old child. Unplug it indeed! Our world is changing at the speed of light. None of you appear versed enough to understand the implications! (Not that I am either)Another powerful episode was Synthetic Humanity: AI & What’s At StakeSome excerpts from this transcript.

quote:

---

It may seem like the rise of artificial intelligence, and increasingly powerful large language models you may have heard of, is moving really fast… and it IS.

​

But what’s coming next is when we enter synthetic relationships with AI that could come to feel just as real and important as our human relationships… And perhaps even more so.(...)This is a structural revolution that affects way more than text, art, or even Google search. There are huge benefits to humanity, and we’ll discuss some of those. But we also see that as companies race to develop the best synthetic relationships, we are setting ourselves up for a new generation of harms made exponentially worse by AI’s power to predict, mimic and persuade.

​

It’s obvious we need ways to steward these tools ethically. (...)We'll get into all that, but first, here's an example of how it works. This is from a technology called VALL-E, that's
V-A-L-L dash E, which can take the first few words of someone's normal speaking
voice and synthesize it into a completely different phrase that you never spoke...

---

The episode goes on to show how anyone's voice can be synthesized and mimicked, literally putting words in the mouth of that voice.

quote:

---

The thing that I want all listeners to have in their mind is first just to note the
difference between what happens in your mind when you call an AI a chatbot
versus calling it a synthetic relationship. Just that change starts to right size how
powerful this technology is. For as long as we call it chatbot, we're going to think
of it in our minds as a 1990s AOL chatbot thing that's not really that persuasive
and doesn't have transformative power over me. It can't change my mind,
change my views, change my political orientation, change how I feel about
myself. And that if everyone listening to this episode were to do one thing, it
would be to cross out every time you see the press use the word chatbot,
replace that in your mind with synthetic relationship.(...)

​

You and I spend so much time on a relatively simple
technology, which is social media. It's the ability to post some texts, post some
images, and have it go to some set of people with some ranking of how that
information gets shown, not that hard comparatively. And that has broken
society and caused democratic backsliding the whole thing. That was just when
technology sat between our relationships. That says nothing about how
powerful it's going to be when technology starts becoming some of our
relationships.

​

And grappling with that shift, that paradigmatic shift to technology
becoming relationships is, I think, the most important thing for us to be focusing
our attention on.

---

The transcript and/or the episode can be found here: Synthetic Humanity: AI And Whats At StakeI know that some of you scoffed at the technology, but its here to stay and in my mind can and will fall into the wrong hands eventually. Am I being too pessimistic?

I had a pointed question for AI:

Phat:

---

Will Individual beliefs get recognized as a viable source of information in regards to data and truth claims?

---

Open AI:

---

The recognition of individual beliefs as a viable source of information in regards to data and truth claims depends on the context and the specific criteria used for determining the validity of information. In general, individual beliefs are subjective and may not be considered reliable sources of information when it comes to objective facts or scientific claims.

​

In fields such as science, where empirical evidence, rigorous testing, and peer review are essential, individual beliefs alone may not be sufficient to establish the truth or validity of a claim. Scientific knowledge is built on the foundation of systematic observation, experimentation, and consensus among experts in the field.

​

However, in certain areas where subjective experiences or personal perspectives are relevant, such as matters of personal opinion, values, or subjective interpretations of art and literature, individual beliefs can play a more significant role. For example, in fields like philosophy, ethics, or cultural studies, individual perspectives and beliefs are often considered valuable and can contribute to broader discussions.

​

It is important to note that the recognition of individual beliefs as a viable source of information should be balanced with critical thinking, scrutiny, and openness to alternative viewpoints. It is through rigorous examination and analysis of various sources of information, including empirical evidence, expert consensus, and diverse perspectives, that we can strive towards a more accurate understanding of the world.

---

Im not impressed!If my belief is such that there is one source of truth and one truth, alternative viewpoints do nothing but obfuscate the issue.

This happens when your beliefs are not based on any evidence and the evidence does not support your beliefs.

Cult leaders in particular are especially intolerant of viewpoints other than their own.--Percy