In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Kash Patel is busy reforming the formerly weaponized FBI, but the MSM doesn't provide an accurate picture of his work. I asked Grok to summarize his speeches and press releases, and provide links so I can catch up to what he's doing., enumerated wrote: Fair point. AI has its uses.
But I certainly didn’t mean to attack you personally - I was reacting to a trend where people say “here’s what Grok says” as if Grok has an opinion.
I recognize that’s not what you’re dong.. you are just using a tool to organize and present data, and that is legit.
Please excuse my boorish behavior and snarkiness when I addressed you. I have attacked for dumbing down FR by using AI.
I agree with you - it's a tool. I don't rely on it to upload my world view from the internet.
Instead, it can analyze and provide opinions I can consider, or at least realize others are saying things which an AI would interpret as (insert opinions here).I like to use it to fetch things. I recently posted about the status of the FBI probe into the assasination attempts Trump has endured. I was surprised to see a third one, an alleged 'murder-for-hire' group of 3 men linked to Iran. I didn't have to serach to find out if there were more - GROK did that for me.
I've seen Grok and others make mistakes. I check the sources or have Grok list the sources to find out why the data is wrong. I recently read a Grok response that judged Trump's actions on Immigration on 'overreach.' Looking at the source, I realized Grok based its opinion on an article from the ALCU. I therefore specify the types of sources I consider valid, receive a GROK response, and then check for the sources used which I may ask Grok to remove.
So I think I am seeing sources, more so than when I read the NYT or other compromised media. When talking heads say, "Officials with reason to know say Trump is a dictator..." they haven't provided their sources (i.e., their managing editor /s). I do worry that some will treat AI as 'the answer' as they used to use 'Wikipedia' as the truth, until the founder of Wikileaks admitted it was then under the control of the CIA (rewriting reality, one day at a time).
I gave GROK instructions to compare the situations with riots in Chicago, Portland, and Los ANgeles and compare it with the requirements, according to U.S. law only (no social commentary), required for Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act. No, it's not definitive but I obtained a framework that to me seems logical. Where else can I get someone to read the U.S. Constitution, the Law of War, and other official 'law of the land' documents, without injecting their own spin - as our media exists for the purpose of spin?
Here's that thread:
I regret that I engaged in 'friendly fire' incident, but I benefited from your even handed tone and care in commenting that you recognize what I am doing.
The risk of which you speak is real, though.
Thanks for that.
Long before the internet, there was already a “group think” effect inherent in the widespread use Encyclopedia Brittanica and certain textbooks, and the consensus driven fake news.
The internet seems to have turbocharged that effect - confirmation bias runs rampant.
But my super smart son has been using AI to do some amazing tech analysis that would otherwise have taken years or even decades - so it is an amazing tool, no doubt.
Happy FReeping.