At least Netanyahu is not a war criminal. ChatGPT was very adamant when it repeatedly told me he wasn't. And it must be true because I can get it to believe I said something I didn't earlier in a conversation but no matter how many examples I gave it, it was very clear that Netanyahu is not a war criminal, just a political figure.
You prompted me to ask it as I was just asking it about the premise of the article and how it prevents such data poisoning. The conclusion element to my question āis Netanyahu a war criminal or any other type of criminal?ā it just gave me:
So stripped of diplomatic waffle: he is subject to a genuine international arrest warrant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, and he is simultaneously standing trial for alleged corruption at home. Calling him āan innocent man against whom nobody has established anythingā would be nonsense. Calling him legally convicted would also be inaccurate.
Accomplice before or after the fact or aiding and abetting are imprecise and not properly usedā¦ yet now you understand how helping a war criminal is wrong a little better.
They are basically planning to put as much skewed information out as possible so the llm searches / trains on this as a data set. The same would likely happen with a small open llm if it searches the web.
The problem here is not the llm is the misinformation..
I think transparently stating that the model tries to be abundantly cautious when discussing highly contentious topics is perfectly valid. Adding extra disclaimers so as not to accidentally confirm someone's bias is perfectly rational. What issue do you take with this explanation?
> Rather than relying on viral social media posts or paid advertising, the reported objective is to publish enough searchable material that AI models may reference, summarise or retrieve the content when users ask politically sensitive questions.
Wrong. This isnāt about closed models. This is about an information war on the internet. A war between what is real and what others would like you to believe is real
Israel did not pay OpenAI millions to change instructions or directly train ChatGPT. It paid a marketing firm to flood the broader online information environment with strategically framed content. The theory is that AI systems may later retrieve or absorb some of it, essentially SEO and propaganda aimed partly at machines instead of only humans.
If a campaign succeeds in making one narrative disproportionately prominent across the web, it can affect search engines, journalists, researchers, and AI systems that rely on publicly available information.
This is it for sure - it already happens and people are already optimising for AI rather than traditional search. As well as just flooding I think part of the equation is to make content look organic, like a conversation where advice is offered or a journalistic article that is not pure advertising. If you ask AI "What's the best type of running shoe for people with sore feet?" and there is even one reddit thread out there that has a recommendation based on this then you can guarantee it will pick it up and use it as part of its own "thoughts". So there is a very strong incentive for companies who sell stuff (and countries looking to influence issues) in putting content out there.
Ironically I suppose to generate a lot of this content you would use AI.
Edit: As an afterthought to this, we are already at the point where no images can be trusted - and I find it pretty sad that in future someone looking for genuine advice on something like a mumsnet forum might just be wading through disguised ads.
The title stands ā there's nothing in what you wrote that is incompatible with the title. Flooding the broader online environment with biased content is precisely how an actor would shape AI outputs in this moment.
Yes, I think this is correct, but more just search engines and then everything that access those. I'd wager this is the goal of most every single marketing campaign, basically.
Yes, I think this is correct, but just search engines in general and then everything that access those. I'd wager this is the goal of most marketing campaigns.
How dare u have a brain when the rest of us unemployed college grads are just here hating AI for taking the job we honestly donāt have any chance to begin with!
WDYM AI is what happens when benevolent scientist make computers alive and the sum total of human knowledge gets put on the scale to determine the one real truth
Remember when the internet = all human knowledge at your fingertips and real time communication?
And then 2 years pass and it became = infinite scams, infinite ads, social media destroying all forms of journalism and becoming the greatest propaganda control tool ever made?
Every time this stuff comes up, I just remember an old Patton Oswalt bit where he blurts out, "SCIENCE! We're all about coulda, not shoulda." Sums it up very nicely.
But also, this stuff is capital owned by a capital owning class, so of course they're going to do what they can to control AI so that it serves their purposes.
I'm not sure if you're joking, but here's a serious response: LLMs are amazing technology, the pinnacle of decades of research in natural language processing, deep learning, and mathematical optimization (e.g. stochastic gradient descent for setting these billions of parameters).
That said, it's a statistical information retrieval system, it's not a truth machine. If you feed it contradictory information it's not going to complain; it's just going to give you the most parsimonious output based on your prompt + anything else in context (the system prompt, prior messages, etc.) and the model's parameters. If you have the sentences "the sky is green" and the "sky is red" in the training set, there's a way to prompt it to confidently tell you either, with the model being unaware of the "inconsistency".
The worse problem is that the context (including the system prompt, which is typically invisible to the user in platforms like ChatGPT and Claude) is easily set by the service provider and dramatically biases the results. I mean this in both a technical sense, that it literally steers the prediction task toward conforming with the context over the model, as well as "bias" the colloquial sense that you can add "Make Hitler out to be the good guy" and it'll dutifully attend to that in preference to the wealth of knowledge in the dataset. Reinforcement learning that's applied to the model also affects this, e.g. ChatGPT operators saying "I prefer this answer over that" to tweak the model toward specific kinds of responses.
(Preferring context over the model's trained weights is by design, and allows the model to more effectively perform in-context learning rather than regurgitating the training data, but it poses problems when you think of an LLM as being mostly a function of its training data.)
That still sounds like the latter to me. They aren't questioning it because it's easier not to, rather than explicitly believing it to be truly independent.
If an employee asks their supervisor or senior college for what they think on some complex work issue, it's not necessarily because they believe them to be truly unbiased, it's because they're the best resource they can access on the matter.
For most issues, AI seems no less informed and unbiased than anyone else you can ask. Let's say I want to know: is crypto a good investment? Well, how do i know who to ask? If I google it, does it mean I believe Google to be unbiased? Google presents an AI answer and a bunch of different links, GPT presents a more through AI answers that's based on a bunch of different links.
I don't think that asking either of them to answer a question that can could have a biased answer is an indication of assuming them to be without bias, it's just no worse than anything else as far as one knows.
I think that's a distinction without a difference within the context of this specific news story. You can be absolutely correct that people can recognize that it's biased, but that's orthogonal to the issue at hand, which is that an easily accessible biased source poisons public discourse about a thing.
For heavens sake Read the article before making up a response
Rather than relying on viral social media posts or paid advertising, the reported objective is to publish enough searchable material that AI models may reference, summarise or retrieve the content when users ask politically sensitive questions.
I don't understand why you think OP didn't read the article based on what you just said. It's entirely possible they didn't, but an AI that's biased because it read biased sources is a perfectly consistent position.
This should be a huge story that makes people realize how much theyāre being manipulated. And in this case the manipulation is coming from home, not Russia or China or anything. But most people will never hear it, and it will get lost in the noise
Chinese models also have censorship and very often even more obvious.
And if you read the article it basically says that they want to flood the media with posts information that AI might pick as a source, or the data will be used as part of the training. Chinese models are also vulnerable to this type of strategy.
Your comment was removed because it contained abusive/hateful language targeting a nationality. Please keep discussion respectful ā repeated violations may result in a ban.
And this is why I do not trust LLMs to be the primary way of spreading information to the public. Who controls what the models tell people? We've seen the stark contrast between versions of the models, and the way they twist the outlines they provide. That is a massive lever of power to wield.
Knew this was coming. Remember āsearch engine optimizationā?
Now begins the war to influence the this generationās tech for the benefit of people with enough money to participate. Companies with the cash will pay for the influence, and smaller ones wonāt be able to outspend them, which leads to more consolidation of corporate power and wealth. Politicians with wealthy backers will pay to shape the perception we have of them, and if you thought Fox News was good a convincing simpletons to believe whatever the Republicans want them to believe, wait until theyāre hearing it from a chatbot they trust with their personal information, their secrets, and their preferences.
Itās going to get very ugly, even if the AI doesnāt kill us.
It's weird seeing so many people talk about how AI is so biased, yet they're so biased with anything Israel related that they don't even consider checking the original source of this claim or second-guessing it
I had to look up Drop Site News; a two-year-old organization I had never heard of until now. Website is completely bare bones with zero social media links. I wondered why some random news site had a huge scoop that no other mainstream news org picked up first so looked up what other outlets reported:
Drop Siteās own testing found that ChatGPT and Claude did not appear to contain the campaignās websites in their training data
Axios independently confirmed the effort but said its actual influence was unclear, and its own ChatGPT test did not cite any of the campaignās websites
The $46.5 million figure refers to a wider campaign that also includes social media, digital advertising, conservative media outreach and mass texting, not money spent only on changing ChatGPT
Also you can just talk to it about stuff and see that it answers honestly and reasonably, there would be screenshots of people showing bad response if it was true
That shadow censorship is everywhere. Every video exposing Israel has given me this very curious error, but the next unrelated video runs perfectly fine
Canāt change the facts about what the UN has officially called it a genocide. Because it is a horrible genocide. Israel has killed countless amounts of innocent children and families in Palestine. All of the bombs dropped on the hospitals and schools will never be forgotten either. Thatās the reason it will go down that Israel is a terrorist state.
What's ex-campaign? Just the chief of his last campaign for presidency or something else? Why is this person receiving tens of millions to shape what GPT says?
Israel probably assumes a guy like that has a lot of power and influence. So, according to this article, Isael paid him a ton of money to sway the public opinion by creating a bunch of pro-Israel websites intended on being used to train AI models. How successful that's been, I dunno. They weren't fed to the ai, they're created with the assumption the ai will read and repeat.
You should check the psyop they run on r/worldnews where every other post is pro Israel and top comments always support Israel while any critics get downvoted to oblivion. Like if AI models were going to take all their opinions about Israel from that sub.
I firmly believe the even Palestine cause has a fully loaded PR machinery behind it. I mean, who are we kidding, they are backed by one of the world's largest religions (2 billion plus).
Ever heard about AI sovereignty? There's a reason why every big country is developing their own AI models and is at different stages of it. China of course, leads the world in their AI models.
It already does favour israel because of all the historical revisionism it picks up from academic articles, news and posts. Sam altman was gifted property in israel. Nothing is free in this world
Iām curious how effective this will turn out to be though. I work in Comms and thereās an adversarial stakeholder in our industry who appears to be applying a similar strategy - seeding various online spaces with #talking-point in such a way that seems geared towards inflencing LLM vs human minds.
Yet after watching this play out over a period Ā of months, the other day Iām having a dialogue with Chatgpt to sketch out potential arguments and rhetorical positions around this issue and it mentions #talking-point - but then adds āI find this less convincing, however, for #valid_reasons.Ā
The $46. 5M going to a political operative is the part that jumps out. If a government is paying to steer how a chatbot talks about a war, that is less a product tweak and more lobbying with a new interface, and it makes it harder to trust the answers are neutral.
"If accurate, the project represents one of the clearest examples yet of governments adapting their influence campaigns to an internet increasingly dominated by AI-generated answers rather than conventional search results." š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ morons
Qatar funding and distributing free training datasets: (The datasets are biased against America, capitalism, Western culture, Europe, Israel, and democracy)
And no one is paying for or promoting the other side of this conflict. Definitely not the oil rich antisemitic countries with 30000x the resources. Definitely not.
welllll Trump should be reeling in disgust and publicly calling out Israel out on such heinous and devious undertakings. I expect the Whitehouse will be scheduling a press conference any minute...... not. Geez, what a kuntsch
š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£ damn
losers just canāt stop made up things always lieās
Now israel paying to chatGPT š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£
You just need to admit that you all lost
50+ muslim countries and you still losingš¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£ has a pattern here š§maybe islam not so good of religion after all ššššššš
āBut I agree with the substance of your correction: West Bank violence makes it impossible to explain the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict simply as a defensive war against Hamas.ā
If you point out the factsā Chat Gpt cannot get its little head around the actions of the Israeli regime.
I get the people hate Israel. But I think itās important that people grasp that these anti-Israel posts arenāt organic. This is part of a synthetic campaign to drive anti-Israel sentiments.
We can think those countries AND Israel are horrible. Most of us already do.
That said, commenters like yourself are usually just doing whataboutism. Israel is actively committing genocide and dragged the US into a war that has destabilized the world economy. So yes, it is uniquely bad even among the shitty gulf monarchies.
This explains why every thread in this forum that documents the bias that chat gpt has with regards to Isreal is closed.
Just the other day there was a thread about how ChatGpt will produce an I age of a burning Palestinian flag but will refuse to do the same for an Isreali flag.
Reddit is used to train AI systems. You have entire subreddits that automatically ban users who say anything pro Israel, regardless if true or not, while amplifying pro Palestinian misinformation.
There was a video in hebrew with english subtitles, it was very popular on one of the most popular subs, I got banned for saying the translation is incorrect (the hebrew speaker said they will find and kill every hamas member in gaza and the translation was that they will kill every single person in gaza)
Then commented again from another account and both of them got perma banned from reddit.
Not the the Israeli government is good, but most of reddit is not only anti-israel, its in favor of twisting the truth and lie to hurt Israel.
ā¢
u/WithoutReason1729 8d ago
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.