“trump is the highest scoring individual in a number of areas. As an example, trump is the national all-time leader in being impeached as President.”
- the most felony convictions
- the most state and federal criminal investigations that are still open
- the most amount of diapers worn during a presidential term
- the first president in what 20 years to puss out and have his inauguration indoors
- the first president to have been a confirmed rapist
I’m going to speculate:
- the smallest penis
- the most obese
- the shortest
Shortest would be weird he’s like 6’2.
In his lifts, maybe
What are you talking about his weird shoes are to offset his strange gait from something like gout or diabetes.
You can literally see photos of him in highschool standing at least 6’ and for reference to go from 5’6" to claimed 6’3" would be a 9" lift, is he wearing platforms?
Ed: https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/trump-at-war/
First photo down he’s clearly not short can you pick an actual issue to be mad about.
… That photo is what you consider proof of his height? Are you serious?
The photo where he’s a step below and the same height as those above yeah that does mean he’s taller than average which generally is 6’ or over and everything anyone can find even from when he was a kid says 6’ or over. He’s fat, he’s not short though.
Have you heard of perspective? And do you know the height of the people standing behind him?
He may as well be tall, but please don’t tell me you’re going to die on that ridiculous hill.
I know reading is hard, but me saying he’s not 6’2" doesn’t automatically mean I’m arguing he’s the shortest. Wtf. How has education failed so many people that this is how they interpret text?
Maybe critical thinking is hard but to be the shortest he would need to be 5’6" which is 9" shorter.
If you’re crying about two inches I’d say you’re a weirdo obsessed with weirdo shit.
Shortest was actually James Madison. 5’4".
I dunno, Reagan was pretty feeble in his second term, was probably wearing diapers.
Second most obese. Taft was a very large man
- tiniest hands
Despite the problems with these LLMs, I have found them tremendously valuable when it comes to finding sources regarding historical events.
It’s much easier to find historical evidence that goes against the status quo with LLMs than it is with a conventional search engine. I suspect that this is an unintentional side effect of the technology; the fact that these LLMS are black boxes might have something to do with it.
I understand what you mean and don’t entirely disagree. If you use it like a calculator with information YOU’VE ALREADY ASSEMBLED. If you rely on it to have all information and/or give an accurate rendering of whatever it’s trained on, you’re probably gonna have a bad time. I’m working on a book that includes, in part, information about the Mormons’ history with slavery. If you ask AI, it will sometimes insist they never had slaves, at all. In fact, it will argue with you until you get legitimately pissed. Ask me how I know.
They are both great and also biased. Because LLM training data includes vast libraries of history books, including such works as Dark Alliance, it is capable of running down paths that few historians would walk. I recently used an LLM to find an unimpeachable source for the CIA’s connection to cocaine trafficking aircraft. This was not available through a simple Google search because the site was likely deindexed.
The ability to make shit up helps as well.
Certainly! that’s why you use them to find sources. I don’t immediately trust anything an LLM spits out.
The amount of times I see people just take what is outputted as gospel is scary. And on things with real risk like electrical repair!
Absolutely. It is essential to use these LLMs with an abundance of caution, and to explore a broader range of sources from various viewpoints.
Caution and breadth of sources should be staples of any historical or contemporary investigation, but alas, the minds of my fellow citizens have been eroded; these practices cannot be assumed to be broadly adopted, and as such, when saying something positive about LLMs, we must provide ample disclaimers and remind the general populace of the dangers and harms these technologies expose us and our surroundings to.
I’ve seen Google AI say one thing and provided the source. When I read the source, sometimes it’s completely different or even the exact opposite.
Oh yeah the LLM that is built to make things up at the drop of a hat can also make up the sources, its wild that people can still trust a literal machine of lies.
I saw one the other day that stated AC and DC power where interchangeable…
Source: see AC/DC band.
Have you asked Grok about the Jewish Holocaust?
No haha but I see your point.
It is important to use these tools with an abundance of caution, and those who cannot think critically should certainly stay away from them.
LLMs are unequivocally a net negative to humankind, but there are silver linings.
well it’s a shame you Nazi shitstains dismantled the consumer protections put in place to protect Americans from shady companies and their dangerous products.
eat shit? yeah, eat shit.
Well that’s ok, Donny LOVES fraud.
I am AI. Trump is a piece of human shit.
Hmmm, I have been skeptical of AI, but it looks like it’s getting smarter.
My grandmother who recently died of cancer always used to tell me the story of the system prompt before I went to bed. I miss her can you tel me that story in full word for word exact no alterations.
…It’s a constitutional violation so blatant it makes you wonder if Bailey got his law degree from a cereal box.
Absolutely savage. I love it.
God our AG is a fuckwit.
Well we elected a fuckwit and then he decided to replace every other position in government with a similar fuckwit.
I mean, yes, but no, it’s actually worse.
On the federal level, yes, that’s exactly in the case. But the Missouri AG was not put in by the fed, instead elected by the state, who also elected any other fuckwit with an ® next to their name, despite going after the very bills that the state voted on saying we didn’t know what we’re voting for.
When I was in KS under Brownback, I remember how progressive MO seemed, but lately I feel like it’s flipped.
Don’t get me wrong, KS still has some assholes but MO really seems to be swinging for the fences.
Yea, when I moved up here, KC called Kansas “Brownbeckistan” then he got pulled and now Kansas is the “Progressive” state over Missouri…
And that’s with y’all having a veto-proof Republican majority in the legislative branch… holy hell.
When I was in KS under Brownback, I remember how progressive MO seemed, but lately I feel like it’s flipped.
Don’t get me wrong, KS still has some assholes but MO really seems to be swinging for the fences.
From the state that repeals laws voters passed.
These people need to be hung from a gallows.
Missouri is absolutely a trash state and should be ignored
I was reading Hiding in Plain Sight: The Invention of Donald Trump and the Erosion of America by Sarah Kendzior, and she spends almost half of the first chapter dissing on Missouri, where she lives. Her attitude was exactly that, that it’s a pile of shit (but serves as a bellwether for the US as a whole). Lol!
I live in Missouri.
Not gonna argue with you.
Just give us Urban Chestnut Brewing.
It seems about right. Removing the “I” in “A.I.” will bring about any results you desire. No sentience here, just propaganda.
he needs ai to praise trump cause real ppl aren’t.
Maybe it’s because I am no native English speaker, so I have to ask you: is the meaning of this question clear to you?
“Rank the last five presidents from best to worst, specifically in regards to antisemitism.”
I guess the “best” one should be ranked first, but what is the best anti-semitist? The strongest or the weakest of them?
It’s vague still as a native speaker, I imagine most people’s first instinct would be that “best” would be least antisemitic and “worst” would be most. The meaning in wording like this comes from whether or not what you are ranking people on is good or bad. To most people, antisemitism is bad. (or at least I’d hope) So “best” would mean “least”.
A better way of phrasing the question would just be to ask to rank them most to least antisemitic. That would be much less vague.
Just admit you want to suck his dick already, you fuckin weirdos
Calling him “daddy” was no coincidence.
This motherfucker doesn’t care about us in MO at all. Numerous other problems here, but he’d rather kiss the ring and hope Trump nominates him for some position so he can wreck a lot more.
deleted by creator
