Donald J. Trump (For everyone else except Victor)
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
Do people think chatgpt pro is a good resource? I'm just curious. This is what it says about the primary reason for a reduction in elderly homelessness:
Why It Worked:
Guaranteed Income: Social Security acts as a form of "retirement insurance," providing income regardless of personal savings or employment history.
Universal Coverage: Most Americans qualify, ensuring broad access.
Inflation Protection: Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) keep benefits in line with inflation.
In summary, Social Security is the single most important factor in reducing elderly poverty in the U.S., supported by healthcare programs like Medicare/Medicaid and additional income supports like SSI.
You should independently verify everything that comes out of AI. Its trained on lies and misinformation just as much as truth
Really? He's been to "all the events"? Any evidence of this or are you just talking out of your *** again?
Trump had his picture taken with almost everyone, that doesn't automatically mean he's "deeply involved" lmfao. Stop spreading false lies and conspiracy theories.
lol
notice the outfits are oddly different in each photo almost as if they hung out multiple times - and these are just the photos - think of all the times you've hung out with people without having your picture taken
![](https://s3.amazonaws.com/twoplustwo-actually-definitely-helping-stud/userimages/Z5uzvH1.png)
![](https://s3.amazonaws.com/twoplustwo-actually-definitely-helping-stud/userimages/Hrywub9.png)
![](https://s3.amazonaws.com/twoplustwo-actually-definitely-helping-stud/userimages/HhtJOZx.png)
![](https://s3.amazonaws.com/twoplustwo-actually-definitely-helping-stud/userimages/Obsn5pq.png)
and of course his infamous line about epstein
“I’ve known Jeff [Epstein] for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Trump told New York magazine in 2002. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
You should independently verify everything that comes out of AI. Its trained on lies and misinformation just as much as truth
Of course... it's sources it sites tend to be very credible though for most information I've looked at so far. You're not finding the same? I've not put a question into it yet that I thought it didn't have a valid and sourced response to. I've heard of "hallucinations" it can have, but I think this is w/ more abstract questions.
Do people think chatgpt pro is a good resource? I'm just curious. This is what it says about the primary reason for a reduction in elderly homelessness:
Why It Worked:
Guaranteed Income: Social Security acts as a form of "retirement insurance," providing income regardless of personal savings or employment history.
Universal Coverage: Most Americans qualify, ensuring broad access.
Inflation Protection: Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) keep benefits in line with inflation.
I don't think that's wrong, but I don't think chatgtp pro is a good resource. I think it's just telling you that some people think what you wrote is true, not analyzing whether it's correct and I don't think it's a very good judge of sources. Maybe not horrible, but not trustworthy.
I don't think that's wrong, but I don't think chatgtp pro is a good resource. I think it's just telling you that some people think what you wrote is true, not analyzing whether it's correct and I don't think it's a very good judge of sources. Maybe not horrible, but not trustworthy.
chatgpt can't even handle things like giving you song lyrics (it'll often skip entire verses)
it'll also regularly do math wrong or just make up data - i tried to lean on it heavily early on as a shortcut to find out the frequency of things like how often a fg attempt hits the uprights and after having to type "did you just make that up?" and getting a "sorry i did" answer about half the time i gave up on it entirely
or getting something simple like data on the all the mlb games that have happened in mexico and it gives you data for 300 "mlb games that were played in mexico city" and you're like wtf that's impossible
it's best treated like we treaded wikipedia 20 years ago, a useful starting point but you'll need to fact check everything you get back because it's largely made up - it sadly treats all "sources" with equal merits and can't tell the difference between lies, trolls, and just people goofing around or talking about baseball in mexico in general or because someone on twitter posted their favorite verse of a song chatgpt will insist the song only has a single verse etc
From that description it's obviously been reading a lot of Luciom's posts.
Ya, I've not found that remotely to be true about chatgpt PRO. I've found it to be incredibly accurate w/ basic facts, and it does a good job of finding balancing opinions and averaging numbers across different viewpoints.
In other words, I've found it to be the most fair-minded resource on the internet to date. That doesn't mean it won't make mistakes.
I don't think that's wrong, but I don't think chatgtp pro is a good resource. I think it's just telling you that some people think what you wrote is true, not analyzing whether it's correct and I don't think it's a very good judge of sources. Maybe not horrible, but not trustworthy.
I don't find that to be true. Maybe it's how you word questions? I word mine extremely open-ended being careful not to enter bias into the question. Sometimes there's starter points, like we know homelessness was reduced since X time period, but why? For example, the answer was the summary to this question:
What was the primary cause of homelessness and poverty being reduced for the elderly in America since the 1920s?
It looked at neutral data sources to come up with its answers. Often it will look at liberal leaning, right leaning, and neutral sources. And often when I'm looking up data I thought I knew, it provides more convincing counterarguments. But every answer I've had it look at, I've always looked at what it's referencing. I've never found it looking at fringe leaning information unless it has to.
Interesting responses so far.
Sounds like a thread... maybe we can just have a chatgpt (AI) question and answer discussion about political topics. I think it would be a better starting place than random opinions being thrown around. Someone comes up with a question about something... we agree on a question to ask chatgpt, post results and discuss.
Of course... it's sources it sites tend to be very credible though for most information I've looked at so far. You're not finding the same? I've not put a question into it yet that I thought it didn't have a valid and sourced response to. I've heard of "hallucinations" it can have, but I think this is w/ more abstract questions.
I asked it to take a list of alcohol bottles, find their MSRP, and then divide the bottles into 3 groups of equal MSRP and it can't do that. Its pretty bad at math in general.
I've asked it to help me do complex excel functions and it couldn't figure that out either.
Its very good at organizing and structuring data though. You should just verify the data is right
I asked it to take a list of alcohol bottles, find their MSRP, and then divide the bottles into 3 groups of equal MSRP and it can't do that. Its pretty bad at math in general.
I've asked it to help me do complex excel functions and it couldn't figure that out either.
Its very good at organizing and structuring data though. You should just verify the data is right
Well... is MSRP readily available?
I could see it struggling with your request. I have heard it CAN struggle w/ certain math. I've run some problems by it in the past and it did fine.
Those are totally different kinds of requests. Try asking it politically based questions and see what you think. And I'm talking about the paid version.. not the free one. The free one is not very good w/ many types of requests imho.
Ya, I've not found that remotely to be true about chatgpt PRO. I've found it to be incredibly accurate w/ basic facts, and it does a good job of finding balancing opinions and averaging numbers across different viewpoints.
In other words, I've found it to be the most fair-minded resource on the internet to date. That doesn't mean it won't make mistakes.
Are you decent at poker? if so, describe a hand to chat gpt with stacks, actions, reads, and see what it suggests you to do exactly.
And rememebr playing a poker hand is exceptionally easier than basically any question about macroeconomics or political science could be, by several orders of magnitude. like the bot should be absolutely perfect at every poker hand well before it's even reasonable at real life questions.
chat gpt is good for easily sourced data, but once it needs to get less obvious things it fails miserably
like if you ask it how many goals or power play assists wayne gretsky had it'll give you accurate numbers
but if you then ask it to give you how many goals he scored against each team or pre all-star and post all-star splits then it literally just makes stuff up and if you fact check everything is wrong
the killer flaw of gpt is it is unable to say "i don't know" or "i'm unsure but i think it's this" - it always approaches things with max confidence
Well... is MSRP readily available?
I could see it struggling with your request. I have heard it CAN struggle w/ certain math. I've run some problems by it in the past and it did fine.
Those are totally different kinds of requests. Try asking it politically based questions and see what you think. And I'm talking about the paid version.. not the free one. The free one is not very good w/ many types of requests imho.
it can't do anything with advanced probabilities - even if you hold its hand along the way and give it all the inputs and methodology it'll still spew out nonsense
and a few times when i shared some excel stuff with it to try to troubleshoot why a sheet had stopped working and it was never of any help whatsoever and had to get the answer the old fashioned way via excel forums
chat gpt is good for easily sourced data, but once it needs to get less obvious things it fails miserably
like if you ask it how many goals or power play assists wayne gretsky had it'll give you accurate numbers
but if you then ask it to give you how many goals he scored against each team or pre all-star and post all-star splits then it literally just makes stuff up and if you fact check everything is wrong
the killer flaw of gpt is it is unable to say "i don't know" or "i'm unsure but i think it
if you ask stuff about any company it will source data from unreputable sources in ways that will wreck everything it says.
If you provide the data, the analysis will be decent or even good, sure. But it has to google like we do and it isn't particularly good at googling properly.
And it still plays poker terribly, JFC, just tell chatgpt 4.0 o3 a live hand situation with stacks and reads and check
I just asked it how many goals Wayne Gretzky had vs the maple leafs and it was correct
Did you think the Klan ever left?
The vax macro is particularly ******ed because operation warp speed was Trumps baby. His single biggest political win of his first term. He literally spearheaded the funding, development, and deployment. Trump should be synonymous with the vaccine yet his pawns are so malleable that they have fully dissociated themselves with reality.
But Faucci made me wear a mask!
Pushing MRNA jabbies was Trump's biggest failure (now he's promoting mnra cancer vaccines).
The jabs, masking, social distancing, and shutdowns were all proven abject failures but I'm sure you got all the boosters.
Are you decent at poker? if so, describe a hand to chat gpt with stacks, actions, reads, and see what it suggests you to do exactly.
And rememebr playing a poker hand is exceptionally easier than basically any question about macroeconomics or political science could be, by several orders of magnitude. like the bot should be absolutely perfect at every poker hand well before it's even reasonable at real life questions.
Well, I was a high stakes reg for many years, and I have tons of content out there that described lots of poker strategy well before the community was discussing it. I partnered with a friend 15 years ago and won the AAAI poker bot competition, and I created a GTO solver well before people were ever talking about GTO as a poker solution. I still have strategy from many years ago that is archived on 2+2 by the community. I've coached 100's of people (don't anymore, no time), everyone from pro athletes to movie stars. And I've been a consultant on the poker movie, Molly's Game.
So, I was ok.
I have asked it hands on poker, and its results are pretty good. And what you're saying is silly. You don't need solutions on macroeconomics, which are near impossible to solve, you just need reasoned probability.
These responses are super curious to me. Honestly, have you guys asked the pro version many political questions? Post one you don't think is good and let's discuss.
Pushing MRNA jabbies was Trump's biggest failure (now he's promoting mnra cancer vaccines).
The jabs, masking, social distancing, and shutdowns were all proven abject failures but I'm sure you got all the boosters.
I was forced to get the vaccine by my employer
If you think it was all "proven abject failures" then you don't understand statistics, in the slightest. This is normal, most people aren't autistic enough to enjoy numbers.
I would recommend not talking about things you don't understand, like you do understand, to people who do understand, though.
Well... is MSRP readily available?
I could see it struggling with your request. I have heard it CAN struggle w/ certain math. I've run some problems by it in the past and it did fine.
Yeah, I would say it's pretty good at everything I've asked it up to advanced undergrad/first couple years of grad school. Galois group of a polynomial, representation theory of U(1), SL(2) etc it can spit out computations and even get conceptual questions mostly right. Ask it something solidly advanced grad or beyond even closely related, like SK representation of SO(5)? It will just start spitting out the definitions of the things you just asked about. It suddenly won't be able to do simple calculations, much more basic than the ones it was just doing. Anything conceptual you'll get "try this paper". Oh that's totally irrelevant? How about this? Until you give up.