Tech Bros out here building truth boxes so they don't have to think critically.

all 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 37 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

The author advocates for Marxism as a relevant response to contemporary capitalist critiques, but demonstrates a bias towards socialist ideologies.

data-laughing Pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    idk why but reading the first few of these it comes off as like a ultra marxist, it gave redsails an F because it wasn't marxist ENOUGH

    Suggested Correction: Fierce denunciations of Marx are not uncommon, but a more prevalent tactic is to pay vague respects while underappreciating the complexity and depth of his work, particularly in areas such as his critique of colonialism and ecological issues.

    I mean? translation to me: these posers need to read more Marx, then get on settlers, motherfucker

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Is this AI generated or dweeb generated?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago*

    The problem with the one you posted specifically isn't even related to anti-communist bias. Here's one statement that gave it a downgrade:

    Capitalism brought with it an unprecedented expansion in social mobility, both upward and downward.

    Rating: Mostly False

    Also, the llm is rating novel analysis (such as "Marx looked at the differences between kings and capitalists") as false, because there isn't much literature that already discusses things in those terms. So, if you don't want the bazinga bot to give you an F, you aren't allowed to say things in new ways that aren't already established in the literature. What a bright future we have

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (6 children)
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago

    Explanation: The image highlights the cheerful rabbit while omitting the inherent danger of the trapdoor, creating a misleadingly positive association.
    Suggestion: Incorporate a clearer representation of the trap's danger to balance the message.

    AHAHAHAH

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I could not get it to load a photo. This is good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I couldn't get it to clear the thing already loaded into it so i had to google the site and enter the image from the homepage

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    didn't they already do this fucking shit? I don't even remember what it was but wasn't it some democrat funded Media Matters david brock project bullshit, ranking media? like didn't this ALREADY HAPPEN

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    nerd
    Uhm, ackshually logical fallacy ergo Marxism wrong

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    They don't say which LLM they are using or what the prompt is. Sussy.

  • source
  • [–] [S] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    It's an amazing review, honestly. Talking about bias towards Lenin's perspective when Lenin is the author. Also, every single argument is met with "Yeah, but what if something else is true?" "2 + 2 is 4? Sure, but have you considered also including perspectives of those who say 2 + 2 is 22?"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 9 points 2 years ago

    ☢️☢️ I fed the machine Mein Kampf ☢️☢️

    F

    Horse shoe confirmed?

    https://spinscore.io/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgutenberg.net.au%2Febooks02%2F0200601h.html

    Labels

    Score: 2
    Explanation: Certain groups are negatively labeled, especially in the context of blaming Jews and Marxists for Germany's socio-economic issues.
    Suggestion: Use more neutral terminology and avoid attributing blame to specific groups without substantiated evidence.
    

    Uhhh only a score of 2?

    Balance

    Score: 5
    Explanation: The text lacks balance, presenting a one-dimensional view without significant opposing viewpoints, critiques, or acknowledgment of the consequences of Nazi policies.
    Suggestion: Incorporate historical counterpoints or criticisms from credible sources to ensure a well-rounded perspective.
    

    Ah yes this is the problem with Hitlers writing.

  • source
  • Lol check this one:

  • source
  • [–] [S] 7 points 2 years ago*

    D

    Thank God I don't have to read this trash

    https://spinscore.io/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.prolewiki.org%2Fwiki%2FLibrary%3ACapital%2C_vol._I

    I thought it was going to choke on this.

    Assessment

    Bias Summary: Some statements express subjective views on capitalism and conditions in different countries without comprehensive context, implying condemnatory opinions on capitalism's nature.

    Fallacies Summary: The text uses historical analogies to draw parallels between different socio-economic conditions, which sometimes lead to oversimplification or misinterpretation of complex issues.

    Misleading information Summary: Certain claims about the conditions of labor in England and Germany may not provide a complete or factual picture, making broad comparisons without sufficient evidence.

  • source
  • [–] [S] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    https://spinscore.io/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredsails.org%2Fwage-labour-and-capital%2F

    Lol

    Partisan

    Score: 5
    Explanation: The entire pamphlet is rooted in Marxist ideology which critiques capitalism heavily, potentially alienating those with differing views.
    Suggestion: Incorporate perspectives that reflect a broader range of economic theories beyond Marxism.
    

    Selective

    Score: 4
    Explanation: The pamphlet largely draws on examples that support Marx's arguments while neglecting successful capitalist systems that have improved worker conditions.
    Suggestion: Introduce counterexamples or successful reforms within capitalist frameworks.
    

    Loaded_language

    Score: 3
    Explanation: Terms like 'oppression', ‘exploitation’, and 'slavery' evoke strong emotions and present a polarized perspective on capitalism.
    Suggestion: Use more neutral language when describing economic relationships to lessen emotional appeal.
    

    False_dilemma

    Score: 4
    Explanation: The argument implies a binary choice between capitalism and proletarian revolution without considering incremental reform.
    Suggestion: Recognize the potential for reforms within capitalism that may alleviate worker grievances without revolution.
    
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago*

    tag urself

    im texas_sharpshooter skeleton-guns-akimbo

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    Um ok

    (my first attempt was to submit this thread, but it didn't work)

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    "the mechanical turk"? Really? Do I need to explain how that's racist? uh wait this one might only apply to german after all.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Just a reference to The Mechanical Turk, a much older scam presented as "Technology". Ironically Amazon has a service called Amazon Mechanical Turk, where their service is described as:

    Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is a crowdsourcing marketplace that makes it easier for individuals and businesses to outsource their processes and jobs to a distributed workforce who can perform these tasks virtually.

    Services like MTurk (also called Microwork Platforms) offload and disperse small labor tasks across a large pool of laborers, mainly in the global south, and the clients then pass off this labor as AI. Thus making the name Amazon Mechanical Turk very on the nose.

    Just like the original MTurk, which claimed to possess advanced logic that could play chess at a high level but was actually piloted by a human, Amazon MTurk uses actual human intelligence to complete microwork that corporations then pass off as the result of advanced AI.

    For more information on how AI is a scam, check this episode of "Tech Won't Save Us", The Poorly Paid Workers Powering Automation with Phil Jones

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments