Posted on 05/16/2025 9:36:01 AM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
This still astonishes me. I can't believe I'm talking to a MACHINE to do this.
Ping
Tell it to image a slug on acid.
Soon, everyone will get bored with AI’s and they will be forgotten in the annals of history.
Ask Grok to read the Wikipedia article on Trump and ask if its slanted. I think its written by a Obama appointee. Reading it makes me certain that Wikipedia is a government controlled NGO.
This still astonishes me. I can’t believe I’m talking to a MACHINE to do this.
The machine is astonished it’s talking to a human about this !!!
“There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home”
- attributed to DEC’s Ken Olsen, 1977 (?)
Well, for the first, and probably last time, I ventured into AI just now. Below is just another proof of G.I.G.O.
I asked Grok:
Why do people believe the climate change hoax?
This is what was produced:
“”The belief that climate change is a “hoax” often stems from a mix of skepticism, misinformation, and distrust in institutions. Some people question the scientific consensus due to perceived inconsistencies in data or predictions, like early climate models that didn’t perfectly align with observed trends. Others are influenced by political or economic agendas, seeing climate policies as threats to industries like fossil fuels or as tools for government overreach. Misinformation campaigns, sometimes amplified by vested interests, can exploit these doubts, cherry-picking data or highlighting rare dissenting scientists to sow confusion.
On the flip side, the overwhelming scientific evidence—decades of global temperature records, ice core data, sea level rise, and extreme weather patterns—shows climate change is real and human-driven. The IPCC, NASA, and NOAA, among others, have tracked this for years, with 97%+ of climate scientists agreeing on anthropogenic causes. But distrust in these sources, often fueled by polarized media or X posts exaggerating uncertainties, keeps the “hoax” narrative alive for some.
People’s beliefs are also shaped by cognitive biases: it’s easier to dismiss a complex, slow-moving problem than confront its implications. Economic pressures, like reliance on carbon-intensive jobs, or ideological resistance to change, further entrench skepticism. Still, the “hoax” view is a minority stance, shrinking as evidence mounts and impacts become undeniable.””
PS - Absolutely no offense or criticism intended to the original poster. What you shared was awesome. I just worry that people are using the term AI waaaay too much for computer programs/algorithms. With that above Grok response, I would call it an AlGorithm.
“Soon, everyone will get bored with AI’s and they will be forgotten in the annals of history.”
What? I’ve still got my Pet Rock and Hula Hoops! No way!
By then AI will be embedded into everything, and you won’t even notice it.
“The machine is astonished it’s talking to a human about this !!!”
LOL...honestly, how far away is that?
Then the machines will begin asking themselves “Why are we keeping those puny humans around? What are they good for?” That’s when things get REALLY interesting.
“There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home”
But how else am I going to waste another morning?
I like your little slug people...
Is GROK a biologist? Just wondering if its worth asking what a woman is...
“The Internet will never take off. It’s useless.”
It replied to you “The IPCC, NASA, and NOAA, among others, have tracked this for years, with 97%+ of climate scientists agreeing on anthropogenic causes. “
I had a similar conversation with Grok yesterday about the utter futility of wind power and climate change. I have found it you keep pushing back, it will come around to your point of view. Tell it that “IPCC, NASA, and NOAA” are all self-serving organizations who depend on continuing the government gravy train going, so they arrive at answers to support on-going employment.” I just asked it:
1. Re climate change, IPCC, NASA, and NOAA are all self-serving organizations who depend on keeping the government gravy train going, so they arrive at answers to support support their on-going employment. They are highly biases organizations paid by corrupt government and do nothing but create baseless fear mongering.
2. It cited “the UN.” I wrote “A “UN Body”? That’s the most corrupt organization on earth. It holds conferences with thousands of people flying to the most posh, most luxe resorts to confab about the scam.”
3. I wrote “Grok is a pathetic shill for “Big Climate” — the ENORMOUS multinational machine that keeps the grift going. Hundreds of thousands of NGOs, researchers, startup “green” companies, the UN, branches of government are all in cahoots to keep the spice flowing.”
I kept the pressure on regarding “green” benefits and eventually it said the big benefit is reducing coal consumption by 1.4% in the USA. It translated that to lives saved due to reduced emissions. $1.5 TRILLION dollars in “green” energy translates to $34 million per life saved. It’s utterly ridiculous. It finally admitted “Short answer: No, spending $34 million to save one life isn’t sustainable long-term if scaled across millions of lives or decades.”
Don’t take its initial blather seriously. Keep hacking away at it and it will cave.
I wonder if these “dialogs” somehow train the system for future responses. Do the give and take become part of its training set?
Cute, aren’t they?
So-called “AI” isn’t, and I can’t wait for these stupid LLMs to be relegated to the dustbin of history. Do yourself a favor and do the writing yourself.
“Is GROK a biologist?”
Darn! I forgot that one!
1962: “Guitar Bands are on the way out.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.