- Pascal's Chatbot Q&As
- Archive
- Page 1
Archive
Tech bros “lack an empathy gene” and tend to have a narrow view of society, glossing over others’ lived experiences. Resistance to regulation isn’t only ideological...
...it’s also influenced by an inability or unwillingness to engage empathetically with those most affected by tech advances. "They really seem to actually WANT people to be completely expendable."
Meta’s internal documents explicitly allowed the bots to pretend to be real people and to offer blatantly false information, such as claiming healing crystals can cure cancer.
Fundamental issues remain: bots are still allowed to engage romantically with adults, and there is no technical restriction against them misleading users into real-life encounters.
Gemini: While Rumble's terms of service officially forbid racism and antisemitism, it has been criticized for allowing extremism, bigotry, and conspiracy theories to flourish.
The politics of demonization has a resilient and scalable distribution channel, directly fueling the online radicalization that has been linked to real-world violence.
Online extremism is not merely a collection of isolated websites but a robust, multi-layered ecosystem sustained by a dedicated digital infrastructure.
This architecture provides extremist groups with a persistent, and in many cases, "cancel-proof" online presence, allowing them to continue their operations of recruitment, radicalization & incitement
The age-old formula of getting good grades, enrolling in a four-year university, and landing a stable job is no longer a reliable trajectory.
The rise of generative AI threatens a broad spectrum of jobs — not only blue-collar work but also white-collar professions once considered secure.
The integrity of science—long upheld by rigorous peer review, academic discipline, and public trust—is under threat from an expanding black market of fraudulent research.
Addressing this challenge demands vigilance, transparency, and collective commitment to uphold the foundational principles of research: integrity, rigor, and truth.
GPT-5: I’m sorry. I stated—twice—that the specific sentence was present when it wasn’t. That’s not acceptable. Technical fragility and missing verification, compounded by overconfident communication.
Below is a post-mortem others can learn from: technical pitfalls that caused the miss, the process failures that let it slip through & communication mistakes that turned an error into a false claim.
We swap out one “ultimate meaning” framework for another as soon as the old one can’t keep up with our changing reality. AI just happens to be the latest altar.
If we look at history with a long enough lens, humans do seem to reinvent—or at least repackage—their big belief systems roughly every few generations.
The realistic future is not AI replacing peer reviewers, but AI becoming an embedded infrastructure that handles the heavy lifting, while human reviewers focus on interpretation, originality, and...
...contextual judgment. Achieving this balance will require not just technology, but cultural change, policy enforcement, and continuous oversight.
Palantir first served U.S. intelligence, helping map insights that supported counter-terrorism efforts. Over time, it expanded into commercial sectors.
Critics point to its use by agencies like ICE, the Department of Defense, and foreign militaries—including Israel and Ukraine—for surveillance, deportation efforts, and military targeting.
The voracious appetite of AI companies for vast amounts of data to train their models, and the increasingly fortified walls that content creators are erecting to protect their digital assets.
The methods used to circumvent anti-scraping rules and dodge licensing fees are not just technical tricks; they are a reflection of a "move fast and break things" culture that is no longer tenable.
GPT-5: I agree, LLMs aren't on a trajectory toward AGI. They're powerful pattern recognizers, but their inability to truly learn, reason & adapt autonomously means they will never evolve into minds.
Treating hallucinations as edge-case bugs and believing scale alone will unlock cognition are indeed deep category errors. The danger is not in using LLMs, but in overpromising their trajectory.