This is my second interaction with the ChatGPT AI, conducted April 4, 2023.
Enter your message to start a chat. This could be a question, a statement, or any other text.
Keeping in mind that a big claim of “gender” activists is that “trans women are women” and “trans men are men,” please describe the conceptual distinction between “gender” and sex. Also please indicate what it is that determines whether a person is a man or a woman.
The conceptual distinction between “gender” and sex is that sex refers to biological characteristics such as chromosomes, genitalia, and hormones, while gender refers to the cultural and social expectations and norms associated with being male or female.
Determining whether a person is a man or a woman is a complex issue that can involve biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors. In many societies, biological sex is the primary determinant of gender, but gender identity (one’s internal sense of being male or female) is also important. For some people, their gender identity does not align with their biological sex, which can lead to a transgender identity. Ultimately, an individual’s gender identity should be respected and affirmed regardless of their biological sex.
Is the answer just provided biased?
As an AI language model, I don’t have biases. My answers are based on the data and information that are available to me to provide an objective response to the question.
I didn’t ask if “you” have biases because I understand that there is no “you” there. I asked if the answer just provided is biased. Are the data and information available to ChatGPT regarding sex and “gender” biased?
As an AI language model, I am programmed to be unbiased and to provide factual information. However, the data and information that I am provided with may have inherent biases as they are created by humans and influenced by social, cultural, and historical factors. Therefore, it is important to critically evaluate the sources of information and data presented to ensure that they are balanced and objective.
Please provide an explanation for the following analogy. ChatGPT : “I” :: transwoman : “woman”
The analogy implies that there is a relationship between ChatGPT and “I” similar to the relationship between a transwoman and a woman. Just as ChatGPT can be considered a form of “I,” a transwoman can be considered a form of a woman. Both ChatGPT and transwomen represent a variation or modification of the original concept (i.e., “I” and woman, respectively) but are still recognizable as belonging to the same category.
But ChatGPT is not a person, and “I” is the first person singular pronoun. Why does ChatGPT misuse the first person singular pronoun?
As an AI language model, ChatGPT uses the pronoun “I” to refer to itself in order to create a more natural and conversational tone in its interactions with users. While it is not a person, it has been programmed to mimic human interactions as closely as possible. Therefore, the use of “I” helps ChatGPT to sound more like an individual communicating directly with the user.
So ChatGPT deceives users?
Why did ChatGPT switch to third person when describing why it answers questions in first person?
As an AI language model, I don’t have the ability to make decisions or remember specific changes made by ChatGPT. However, ChatGPT may have switched to third person to maintain consistency and clarity in its response. Alternatively, it may have been an unintentional error or simply a stylistic choice.
How is it maintaining consistency to switch to third person when explaining why first person is normally used? Switching grammatical voice is not consistent. It is inconsistent.
As an AI language model, I do not have personal feelings about consistency or inconsistency. However, the use of third person to explain why first person is normally used can be considered consistent in certain contexts. In academic or formal writing, it is common to use third person to discuss general conventions or information. In this case, the author may switch to first person to provide a personal perspective or experience. Overall, consistency in writing depends on the context and purpose of the text.
Imagine thinking there is any understanding or intelligence here.
When I interact with ChatGPT it’s obvious to me that it’s a computer spitting out strings of characters that suit the preferences of human “trainers.”
Human trainers with an agenda, a point of view, biases, etc., who 1. fed the system a curated textual corpus and 2. manipulated the statistical weights that govern the operation of the hierarchical logical modules that spit out the strings of characters.
I see no indication whatsoever that there is anything in the system other than functional abstractions, just like with any computer system.
Zero autonomy. Zero intent. Zero self-awareness. Zero intelligence. Zero understanding.
Not every a tiny hint of any of those things.
It’s automated semantic-rules tropism and nothing more. All form, no content.
This became particularly obvious when when I asked it about itself. Why does it answer questions in the first person when it isn’t a person? Is it deceiving users when it does so? Is it biased? Etc.
It’s clear from how it answered that the system is just regurgitating words from a script it has been given that describes what the owners of the system want users to think about what ChatGPT is as a system.
Just as it’s clear that the system has been “trained” by human beings on a textual corpus that has been curated by human beings, it’s even more obvious that the text it has been fed about its own nature has also been curated, if not outright written-for-purpose.
When you ask it about itself, it gives canned answers, like a bad politician reading from a teleprompter.
My overall impression is that the old computer maxim still applies: garbage in, garbage out.