AI
Monday, April 24, 2023 2:42:45 PM
Excellent, as always.
I read about ChatGPT AI recently. I went to the site and signed up for the free service; they also have a $20/mo plan. Below is the question I formulated followed by the almost immediate response.
It's ALMOST as good as my own posts on the subject, but soooo much faster.
https://chat.openai.com/
What's wrong with bothsidesism?
Bothsidesism, also known as false equivalence, is the practice of presenting two opposing viewpoints as equally valid, even when one side has more evidence or a stronger argument. This can be problematic because it implies that both sides of an issue are equally valid or credible, even when one side has overwhelming evidence to support its position.
In some cases, bothsidesism can be used to justify inaction or avoid taking a clear position on a controversial issue. It can also be used to create a false sense of balance or neutrality, which can be misleading or even dangerous in situations where one side is clearly in the wrong or where the stakes are high.
For example, if a news report on climate change presents a scientist who argues that the earth is warming due to human activity and a climate change denier who argues that the earth is not warming, giving equal weight to both sides can give viewers the impression that the issue is still up for debate, when in fact the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that climate change is real and caused by human activity.
In short, bothsidesism can be problematic because it can obscure the truth, perpetuate false narratives, and prevent meaningful progress on important issues.
I read about ChatGPT AI recently. I went to the site and signed up for the free service; they also have a $20/mo plan. Below is the question I formulated followed by the almost immediate response.
It's ALMOST as good as my own posts on the subject, but soooo much faster.
https://chat.openai.com/
What's wrong with bothsidesism?
Bothsidesism, also known as false equivalence, is the practice of presenting two opposing viewpoints as equally valid, even when one side has more evidence or a stronger argument. This can be problematic because it implies that both sides of an issue are equally valid or credible, even when one side has overwhelming evidence to support its position.
In some cases, bothsidesism can be used to justify inaction or avoid taking a clear position on a controversial issue. It can also be used to create a false sense of balance or neutrality, which can be misleading or even dangerous in situations where one side is clearly in the wrong or where the stakes are high.
For example, if a news report on climate change presents a scientist who argues that the earth is warming due to human activity and a climate change denier who argues that the earth is not warming, giving equal weight to both sides can give viewers the impression that the issue is still up for debate, when in fact the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that climate change is real and caused by human activity.
In short, bothsidesism can be problematic because it can obscure the truth, perpetuate false narratives, and prevent meaningful progress on important issues.
Discover What Traders Are Watching
Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.
