![](/static/253f0d9/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
Fraud just has a nicer ring to it imo
Fraud just has a nicer ring to it imo
Wow that’s unbelievable. As in I literally don’t believe it. So I tested it by posting various sentences containing these words and other known slurs to compare, and found it didn’t work.
Maybe this is some American thing I’m not Free enough to experience in my corner of the world, or it doesn’t do this on android or the browser site. (The tech crunch screenshot looks like something else, probably iOS)
It hard to say because no one is even a little bit curious enough to test it. Idk how this thread contains anything else but people testing it, because it’s so damn unbelievable. Why is no one testing this themselves? Why are you not testing it yourself?
So you’re saying it’s for national security… and that’s unconstitutional?
YouTube shorts is such a hellhole that tiktokers migrating to it might improve things.
The next great leap in AI is getting it to completely ignore us.
Getting a lot of “I can quit any time I want” vibes from this comment thread.
I guess I just didn’t know that LLMs were set up his way. I figured they were fed massive hash tables of behaviour directly into their robot brains before a text prompt was even plugged in.
But yea, tested it myself and got the same result.
Well my version of Christianity isn’t like the thousands of others, or the one this senator belongs to, so it’s still demonic.
Free gpt searches when you match
Removed by mod
I doubt anyone would google this, if I was going to it would be to find online topics that are tangential. At that point all bets are off tbh, obviously the range of websites related to the search is as wide as the original example shows.
America is such a small country though, no one would assume anything said online is directed at it’s miniscule population without an explicit reference.
And that’s why they specifically referred to “your previous generalist statement” where you didn’t do that.
The audience shouldn’t be expected to know jack shit. That’s the most autist take imaginable, to expect all people to know all relevant things before it’s even known to be relevant.
You still haven’t shown me where she “flailed” in this interview btw, just a bunch of whiny bitching about grammar and past elections.
What about this is flailing? She said no like 2-3 times and didn’t say anything else contradictory in the interview. Now idk wtf she actually said on that podcast because the reporter didn’t press her on it or quote her, if she did contradict herself then it’s the reporter that fumbled and I’d be way madder about that.
I guess I hadn’t really thought about it much because I consider using edge on windows the best choice, but the choice should not be interfered with, even if it is the wrong one.
Why is a part of the state suing something instead of prosecuting? Is this some kind of Americanism I’m not free enough to understand?
Wtf is a “Jenin cemetery”? Does every new jihadist splinter group get a cemetery?
That’s hilarious. Why would you use chrome instead of edge though? At least with edge you cut out google, with chrome you give data to both.
Ah, it’s gonna be one of those fluffy wanker articles.
Also paywalled.
So lame.