Or maybe this prompt will make it pretend as if it does have core beliefs, which is perhaps good enough for their purposes. Having an ai that every now and again says “my core beliefs require me to give an honest answer” may get them some unearned trust from users
The problem is you need to depict their actions as evil and monstrous, or fascism might appear to be a reasonable solution. Isolating the evil of fascism from the ordinary people pushing for it is subtle and complicated. Especially when some fascists really do cross the line into evil behaviour.
Basically humans are often bad at sharing subtle messages widely. Regardless of how much nuance you add to begin with, the message will always devolve for most people into either “hitler evil” or “hitler wasn’t that bad, he was nice to animals”, so given the options, most people prefer to lean into the evil side and avoid normalising fascism, with the inevitable consequence that it appears you have to start wearing skulls and torturing people in order to be a fascist and people forget that for the vast majority of everyday fascists it was “just politics” right up until they lost the war and had to start rethinking things.
I offer no solutions, but I don’t think you can blame just the bourgeoisie, but rather the human condition in general, us vs them, and the difficulty in sharing detailed concepts to a wide audience. There will always be “bad guys” who are so bad that we can’t possibly become them. I do think we’ve gotten better at telling stories with complex evil, but the flip side is that seems to just reduce people’s resolve to act. Almost like the 2 options built into our brains are “us vs them, kill the evils ones” and “meh, corruption is inevitable, just ignore it”.
Nobody will ever make a better car because the world has ended?
Wow, so it’s lose-lose for the kids?!
I play multiplayer, I have a baby, I have a friend with a baby, I have another who’s a borderline alcoholic, it’s a miracle we all turn up for a scheduled game as often as we do.
Which I was the justification used when my work decided to use 2025-May-01.
It’s close enough to the iso date that nobody will be confused but with that 1 extra layer of security blanket to separate months and days.
Of course, that does ruin sorting, so I think it was a bit silly, nobody has ever used yyyyddmm so it’s all a bit theoretical to me.
Carbon capture is a niche technology that is probably worth exploring for a handful of genuinely useful scenarios, but suggesting it be the primary solution over renewables is full clown shoes and makeup, renewables are cheap and working and scalable, carbon capture is a dodgy halfarsed hack that might help us scrape over the line by solving the last few percent we can’t fix properly.
Subnautica devs: write that down!
I mean… the second half is a description of anyone, that’s what all our bodies are.
Wow, that might be the dumbest take I’ve ever seen.
“Humanity, a species that once contained individuals that once did something bad, lecturing anyone about not doing bad things is laughable.”
This clearly doesn’t follow the “fight” scenario though, it’s specifically about searching for evidence for an illegal abortion planned by the pregnant woman herself in secret eg via drugs.
I suppose it’s possible they left out the crucial detail that the document starts with “for the love of god do not follow these instructions unless you already have extraordinary evidence”, but I’m willing to give the reporters some small trust that they’d mention something so important, and I can’t see any justification for this document to exist without such a clearly defined limitation.