chat

8645 readers

330 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net

Sulvy@hexbear.net

oscardejarjayes@hexbear.net

Wakmrow@hexbear.net

LeninWeave@hexbear.net

abc@hexbear.net

Claude called me a spineless lib. (hexbear.net)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by arymandias@hexbear.net to c/chat@hexbear.net

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I asked Claude for authors similar to Mearsheimer and Carl Schmitt, ones that have the same observations on the vapidness of international law but don’t come to rightwing conclusions.

Then I mentioned the general collapse of credibility in the system, and how power can reestablish (and has in the past reestablished) this credibility. The answer came basically down to that credibility does not need to be established so long as there is no alternative, so long as the disillusioned don’t organize.

Then as a joke I asked if this conversation puts me on a list and got the answer that, no Anthropic doesn’t share anything with governments (ofc), on top of that I don’t even need to be put on a list, the very fact that I ask the question means I’m a spineless lib that is no danger to anyone (fair enough).

I guess my question would be if anyone knows interesting authors that deal with these topics. And if using Claude this way is stupid, I personally find it very useful to discover new authors (or find very specific products or places, and internet search has become completely useless in general), but I don‘t want to share to much of my private thoughts with the company that brought you the targeting for the Iran war, nor do I want to be influenced too much by them in what I read…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@anarchist.nexus 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

And if using Claude this way is stupid, I personally find it very useful to discover new authors (or find very specific products or places, and internet search has become completely useless in general)

Hmmmm

So I've used Claude a couple times to discover math books...in the specific circumstances that I want the mainstream opinion, warts and all. E.g., I would ask "what's the best real analysis book", but I would expect to get the book that everyone else has read, not necessarily the best or most fitting book. This is actually quite useful since I personally have learned real analysis from books, so I don't know the topics the average student typically learns in an undergraduate or graduate course.

To the best of my knowledge, I do not disagree with the capitalists about real analysis. It's not really one of the main battlefields of the capitalist propaganda war, except for a couple cringe prefaces here and there. So it's probably safe to use Claude to recall its extensive real analysis training.

I would never use Claude to ask for political or economic book recommendations for the simple reason that it gives Anthropic the ability to influence my political perspective, and I fundamentally disagree with the capitalists on this issue, specifically their vile politics, and the boo-boo keys they call economics. And as capitalists, they have already rewired all of society to constantly influence and impose their perspective upon my mind, to the point of hiring "harmless" liberals to parade around as socialists (e.g. Chumpsky ). So no, at least for me, they can't have yet another avenue of influence. Hell no.

Unfortunately I can't help with what you wanted to ask, but I'm sure someone here will have a good response.

[–] space_comrade@hexbear.net 3 points 2 days ago

Haven't used it for this purpose for a while not but if you ask it about explicitly non mainstream very marxist stuff it's usually going to comply and won't even do the "but Stalin 1984 North Vuvuzela 100 gorillion dead" bit.

Just bear in mind as with anything you do on the mainstream public web don't type into it anything you don't want the fed assigned to you to read.

[–] arymandias@hexbear.net 3 points 2 days ago

I think at the moment it’s agreeableness is still it’s biggest weakness. Initially it will give the standard owner-class answer: „Gaza genocide is contested.“ But it immediately folds at the slightest pushback: „My wife says it’s a genocide“, „you‘re absolutely right, I was basing my answer on outdated information, here are a bunch of sources that agree with you.“ Both behaviors are not particularly useful.

I think the current hyper competitive market forces LLMs to always be agreeable, nobody likes a cantankerous bot, I have no doubt that switch will be flipped the moment a dominant player emerges.

Even then, I still read mainstream news now and then, talk to libs regularly enough, my politics are still where they are. I think the danger is rather on the aggregate, John Doe asking Claude who to vote for, and them then voting for the candidate with the least restrictive AI platform.

But yeah, maybe I‘m just being one of those commercial-don’t-work-on-me guys.