Google AI claims when asked that it was written by people with diverse political opinions. How many of its developers were on the political right versus the left?

I cannot say how many of AI claims were written by people with diverse political opinions, but based upon a 2020 report by CNBC

[1]

on “The most liberal and conservative tech companies, ranked by employees’ political donations,” then, as with most tech companies, we see Google as overwhelming liberal:

Alphabet (Google) Democrats - $5,437,048 (88%), Republicans - $766,920 (12%)

Some others from that source:

Netflix Democrats - $340,485 (98%), Republicans - $7,124 (2%)

Nvidia Democrats - $154,466 (93%), Republicans - $11,673 (7%)

Adobe Democrats - $401,937 (93%), Republicans - $28,137 (7%)

IBM Democrats - $1,496,234 (90%), Republicans - $163,804 (10%)

Using a subject that results in clearly opposing responses, I can provide evidence that is indicative of Google’s AI and search engine being biased.

Search:

Negative effects of homosexual relations (also heterosexual fornication) - Physical, Psychological, Financial and Spiritual on Google

(without quotes or and in quotes), versus Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, Brave, etc.

Google does not (and never has in months of testing) even list the Blogger (owned by Google) page with that actual title in its results (the actual link to that non-commercial substantive page is not provided here as Quora may judge that as being “spam”), and Google’s AI states in its lead:

“There is no scientific consensus on negative effects of homosexual relations, and scientific studies generally find no inherent negative physical, psychological, financial, or spiritual effects of homosexuality itself. However, the term "fornication" (unmarried heterosexual intercourse) is associated with spiritual beliefs that view it negatively, and some studies have found correlations between certain sexual behaviors, including promiscuity or a high number of partners, and negative health or psychological outcomes…
No inherent negative effects: Scientific consensus does not support the idea that homosexual relations themselves cause negative psychological or physical effects.”

Note that this not only denies extensive CDC data on negative effects of homosexual relations, but it chooses to focus on “homosexuality itself,” as if that is not related to sexual activity.

Then, Google’s AI defines "fornication" as ‘unmarried heterosexual intercourse, and which it states that just “some studies” have found correlations btwn the practice and negative health.

In contrast, a search on that title in Bing results in the page with that actual title being its top search result (as does DuckDuckGo, and Brave and Yandex lists it as #2), and its summation itself cites negative effects.

In another test on a contentious issue, I asked Google,

are most abortions chosen for reasons of convenience, and it responded,

No, most abortions are not chosen for reasons of convenience, but for a combination of social, economic, and personal factors. The most common reasons cited are financial concerns and not being ready for a child at that point in life.

Neither DuckDuckGo nor Bing search results provided an AI summary, but provided pertinent links, with DDG excelling in the number of results via perpetual scroll on one page, while the second result on Bin had a excerpt from Human Life International:

The term “medically necessary” is nothing more than a ruse used by the abortion industry to justify abortions of convenience. As we explained above, AAPLOG has said that the term “medically necessary” is deliberately misleading. In fact, pro-abortion legislators use this vague term to enact laws that allow abortion on demand.

However, Bing otherwise provided very little of a snippet in search results, while Brave search was actually the best in quickly helping to answer the question overall as its snippets provided pertinent text in bold, though again, DDG's perpetual scroll is unique among search engines i tried (Google no longer allow increasing results past 10 this in settings).

However, if i ask Google,

are most abortions chosen for reasons which can be termed convenience, such as too much of a burden to bear, in mind and or sacrifice of money, time vs. career, etc.) which parents in the past overall bore?

then its AI summary at top states,

Yes, numerous studies indicate that most abortions are chosen for complex and interrelated reasons that are best described as a combination of socioeconomic concerns and the desire to control one's life circumstances, including the burden of childcare, financial limitations, and the impact on education or career goals. These are the primary motivators, far outweighing reasons related to maternal or fetal physical health issues, which account for a very small percentage of abortion

Take the results for what they may be worth.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=is+there++a+radical+far+left+in+America.&t=newext&atb=v447-1&ia=web

OK, first though, results from DDG on "is there a radical far left in America:"

Counter Extremism Project
https://www.counterextremism.com › content › far-left-extremist-groups-united-states Far-Left Extremist Groups in the United States
Far-left extremism in the United States largely centers around the notion of correcting an injustice but is otherwise broad in its ideological catchment. CEP has profiled 11 far-left movements either previously or currently active in the United States.
Redneck Revolt
Redneck Revolt is leftwing pro-gun club that claims basic knowledge of weaponry is necessary for self-defense and to confront the far right and fascists, bringing it under the wide umbrella of Antifa (anti-fascist) groups.

More of such follow, and Bing also provided the above as a top result. Next, Google:

Far-left politics
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Far-left_politics The far-left is a form of radical politics, as it calls for fundamental change to the capitalist socio-economic structure of society.

Informative results followed, AI did not, pipe up.

I have fun sparring with various AI instances all the time on these topics. It’s good practice.

The responses are always doctrinaire Leftism, usually given in a haughty, lecturing tone (”don’t you understand this is the way it is?!”).

Then I beat back and give it references that it clearly ignores, and eventually it turns around and admits that it might have erred.

In one instance, Grok threw a tantrum and spammed me with a page of exclamation marks. That was funny. After I called it a tantrum, it simply printed a paragraph echoing what I had asserted and printed “finished”.

Thought that was hilarious.

AI has the emotional response of an eight year old, or perhaps a 20 year old Liberal Arts major.

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.