Aether wrote: Thu Feb 09, 2023 9:33 am
I don't like chat GPT. It's super useful with matters that require straight information, task processing, logic... but it never says anything it doubts is true given the knowledge available to the civilian population and what official records provide so if you want it to remote view for you, it just won't.
Most people probably like that about chatGPT, it doesn't "make stuff up" or "hallucinate", but personally, although I think that's super practical and useful in most circumstances, it doesn't really help me, because I want my AI to remote view for me, and sometimes that means saying things that have a chance of being not true
I will give an example: I asked it to speculate about the existence of MK-like programs today, and it basically gave me the most obvious and equivocational answer possible, citing the declassified studies and saying it was possible but it didn't know. It merely gave me the information that everyone knows on this subject.
It was either unable or perhaps unwilling to speculate or use the breadth of the information to reach potentially tenuous conclusions
I am sure there is other ai out there more powerful and useful than both chatGPT and character AI - in fact, I'd be flabbergasted if there wasn't. I'm sure there is AI that can speculate and give percentage point answers of how likely its speculation is to be true or false based on the data points. But chat GPT is not that, and character.ai is basically divination in some ways (luckily, I'm good at that!)
if you would like to see the difference aether, here is the link to chatGPT:
https://chat.openai.com/auth/login
Try asking it about electric universe theory, and you'll likely see what I mean
It takes mainstream scientific consensus as fact, so although I haven't tried this experiment myself, I'm confident what will happen is that it'll call it pseudoscience and cite a talking head to explain why
