• stupidcasey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    Except If I disagree with you it’s because I have a different constructed reality.

    so my every argument no matter how irrational proves my point, making your point irrational making my irrational point rational.

    “The titular “catch 22” is a bureaucratic paradox: a pilot can be grounded for being insane, but requesting to be grounded proves he’s sane - because only a sane person would want to avoid danger. Therefore he can never be grounded. Any escape route is blocked by the very rule you’d invoke to use it.”

    • jve@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      25 days ago

      Given that you seem to think this response is at all relevant to my comment, perhaps you have constructed a different reality.

      • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        It is relevant, you are making a statement that ai lies and as such has no value.

        Propaganda against AI wether for good evil or profit doesn’t matter definitionally it is propaganda.

        but this would imply we have an ultimate source of Truth glean from almost religious like a Bible as suggested by the healthful truth bar.

        but the problem is that all humans lie all websites are influenced by ads, all news is politically biased, making your entire post misleading and therefore it’s creating a false reality.

        Entirely relevant.

        • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          25 days ago

          We get it, you took a philosophy class, or read Kant, or something else equally useless. You’re espousing that there is no such thing as an absolute truth as an absolute truth.

          Do you really not see how the entirety of that argument just boils down to you nihilistically staring into the abyss of your own asshole?

          • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            25 days ago

            Incorrect on both accounts.

            My argument is around the general idea that humans are just as bad of a source of information as AI or worse, and the hallucination argument is not a valid argument it will not prevent anyone’s jobs from being replaced by ai and people who go to the slop machine are not making an inherently worse decision, it might make a mistake but so will you.

            Also I’ve never taken a philosophy class.

        • jve@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          you are making a statement that ai lies and as such has no value.

          Am I?

          I thought I was making a statement about how I downvote everybody who says they will get downvoted, on principal.