this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2025
125 points (97.7% liked)
Slop.
331 readers
713 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
the focus on tiananmen square and what the AI will say about it is deeply embarrassing as a westerner. an entire media cycle of 'gotcha' regarding an AI not wanting to talk about political topics.
Every western """"journalist"""" obsessing over Tiannemen Square is the exact reason China censors mentions of Tiannemen Square to outsiders.
Ask chatGPT about specific cases of police violence in the us and it'll tell you it can't answer that, but because deepseek won't talk about a fictional massacre in Tianamen Square (don't they call it the "June 4th incident" in china?) then that obviously means something
Also liberals would not be satisfied unless the AI says outright there was a massacre against unarmed pro-democracy students and that China should face regime change because of it. Any other nuanced read of the situation would be regarded just as questionable as the AI saying nothing at all
an unfalsifiable anti communist orthodoxy, you say?
Oh yeah it's political topics in general it won't talk about
foreign politics is not anywhere close to being as contentious as domestic politics. this is true around the world. what's particularly specific to china is a distaste for political discussion in areas where it's considered improper.
chinese AI behaving exactly like western AI does in terms of contentious topics close to home is the biggest libshit nothing burger i can imagine. we were all making fun of chatgpt for doing this exact same shit over the past year.
I agree it's insignificant, but I understand why westeners are more concerned about DeepSeek than ChatGPT.
ChatGPT applies censorship which westeners are used to; it's the enemy they know.
DeepSeek on the other hand applies censorship in contexts that westeners are not used to see censored. It's a new and unknown type of censorship; and unknown means it's potentially worse.
I assume that, similarly, Chinese people are more comfortable using DeepSeek than ChatGPT.
'Westerners' or twitter users and journalists who care very deeply about Tianamen Square? Because there's a difference there. I think westerners, in general, are aware of the fact that they live in a police/surveillance state of their own and are not happy about it. The censorship is different in kind, and it covers different topics. However, why would that add up to greater concern for 'devil they don't know' when the devil they do know is inside their house and pointing a gun to their heads?
We all saw liberals and reactionaries showing their ass online. Talking as if they understood LGBTQ+ issues in China and how RedNote was supposedly anti gay people. Meanwhile the westerner community got their RedNote feeds full of sapphic and gay relationships. At the end of the day China was not this perfectly evil inhuman society that twitter users and journalists are conditioned to worry about. It's a group of humans, with all the contradictions that humanity affords them.
You mean it’s the enemy they don’t know. By definition you don’t know what is being censored from you, that’s the whole point. They don’t buck against it because the censorship follows the grooves their brains have been formed into, it doesn’t upset their worldview
Amazing to see an LLM that is actually trained not to be harmful, not just not harmful to the state.
That logical line of reasoning...