this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2026
17 points (90.5% liked)

chat

8645 readers
350 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
 

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
[–] arymandias@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day 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folds at the slightest pushback: „My wife says it’s a genocide“, „you‘re absolutely right, I was basing my answer on outdated information, here are a bunch of sources that agree with you.“ Both behaviors are not particularly useful.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.