8 Comments
Feb 17, 2023Liked by Christopher Dake

Best post in a while. Funny but at the same time the fact that this AI has enough revisionist history to cite for these answers is only marginally horrifying as it illustrates how these tools could further accelerate and worsen revisionist history.

Expand full comment
Feb 17, 2023Liked by Christopher Dake

Yes. In my first History lecture at Xavier, the brand-new professor (who left after only a few years) asserted that the study of History is best justified to make one an interesting conversationalist at cocktail parties. And, he asserted, that History is the story of the past, as told by the victors. With this assertion, I agree, up to the point that the victors acknowledge and are constrained by objective reality. That these AI units are programmed this way suggests that someone believes that he or she is winning over reality.

Expand full comment
author

That last sentence is a bit disconcerting. Fortunately for all of us, OKH is here to help!

Expand full comment
Feb 17, 2023Liked by Christopher Dake

This puts me in mind of a comment attributed to Stalin. "It doesn't matter who votes; it matters who counts the votes."

If deniers of objective reality are programming these things, they are effectively counting the votes.

Expand full comment
Feb 17, 2023Liked by Christopher Dake

A fun read. Now do Jefferson Davis or John Calhoun. Or Woodrow Wilson. That one should be a blast.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. There are few things I'd like to ask Calhoun, but doubt the app would let me get those through. Wilson would be pretty interesting.

Expand full comment
Feb 17, 2023Liked by Christopher Dake

Then you must do Thaddeus Stevens. You could moderate a debate between them.

Expand full comment
author

Unfortunately, Thaddeus is unnavigable at this time.

Expand full comment