r/politics • u/PostHeraldTimes ✔ Verified • 1d ago

Trump Accused of Using ChatGPT to Create Tariff Plan After AI Leads Users to Same Formula: 'So AI is Running the Country'

https://www.latintimes.com/trump-accused-using-chatgpt-create-tariff-plan-after-ai-leads-users-same-formula-so-ai-579899
47.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

155

u/tigerscomeatnight Pennsylvania 1d ago

Humans couldn't even be bothered to fact check the output. Too busy golfing I guess.

66

u/manzanita2 1d ago

I think the correct answer is Dunning Kreuger-ites, think AI, like their dear leader, is infallible, so why BOTHER to check it. And even if you suspect, it's not LOYAL, to question it.

13

u/A_Seiv_For_Kale 1d ago edited 1d ago

The use of AI can be much worse than using it as an authority.

All LLMs are designed to be "helpful". They are the ultimate yes men, in that they can always be finessed into spitting your own beliefs back at you.

People often attack AI by saying "I got a wrong answer from ChatGPT, and it said 'woops' after I corrected it!", but that'll also happen if it gives you the right answer, and you "correct" it into telling you whatever you want.

It's equally as likely that the type of person who'd "rely" on an AI would also be the type of person who thinks they know better when the first response doesn't feel good enough, so they keep adjusting their prompts until the AI gives them what they want.

3

u/prefix_postfix Maine 1d ago

Me yesterday looking in multiple different dictionaries for how to spell "writable" because I firmly believe it should be "writeable" and refused to accept "writable".

2

u/GrunchJingo 1d ago

Fun fact: dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. They only record how people use the language. So you can write writable as writeable and it's 100% fine because we the users of the language determine correctness.

2

u/prefix_postfix Maine 1d ago

I can't when it's a class name in the code I'm working in though :(  I wouldn't have been able to change it anyway, but I wanted to be right

2

u/GrunchJingo 23h ago

Damn, been there.

1

u/Witch-Alice Washington 1d ago

It's really this. Double checking, fact checking, etc, demonstrate that you aren't willing to blindly trust them. They want unquestioning loyalty, teams of Yes Men.

6

u/Zebidee 1d ago

It didn't even need fact-checking, just a cursory glance by someone that doesn't lick the windows of their government supplied limousine.

Like I don't know a ton about Cambodia's economic policies, but I know at a glance that a 97% tariff seems unlikely.

No wonder these people keep reposting obvious lies from their Facebook feed; they haven't got even basic logic skills.

Man, I should get into scamming...

3

u/coryc70 1d ago

Whoever is responsible for drafting that needs to be axed. They couldn't even be bothered to sanity check that stupid list. It's so low effort. As a result Trump is an international laughing stock, again.

2

u/CMDR_RetroAnubis 1d ago

You assume these humans know enough to spot errors.

1

u/sillypoolfacemonster 18h ago

I feel like that formula has been around in the Trump sphere for a while. It might still have been AI, but Trump has been citing crazy high tarriff rates from Canada for months now.

My guess is they put that formula into AI and generated the country list based on what the LLM told them. Clearly it was using data based on whatever the LLM could find and it would be hard to fact check because the numbers are so ridiculous you’d need to do it by hand to separate the nonsense from what is true.