Excerpt:
To underline Blanchfield’s point, the ChatGPT book selection process was found to be unreliable and inconsistent when repeated by Popular Science. “A repeat inquiry regarding ‘The Kite Runner,’ for example, gives contradictory answers,” the Popular Science reporters noted. “In one response, ChatGPT deems Khaled Hosseini’s novel to contain ‘little to no explicit sexual content.’ Upon a separate follow-up, the LLM affirms the book ‘does contain a description of a sexual assault.’”
I simply said in response to someone else that was frustrated about this sort of content in the technology instances, that I agreed this particular article doesn’t belong here. As for what you said, it seems you are pulling meaning out of thin air and trying to apply it to me in bad faith which I do not appreciate so I will not be answering those things. You can certainly see other comments that seem to agree with that stance, as well as this being a junk/clickbait article so maybe you could ask them instead.
The guy you’re trying to pass the buck to, money_loo, is from a lemmy instance that only has Chicago sports communities and whose front page is mostly federated meme posts. You’re a BeeHaw user. You’ve presumably read and agreed to the Beehaw community documents.
I expect more than anti-intellectualism from you.