[flagged]

Most LLM's these days tend to be strongly "left-leaning". (Grok being one of the few examples of one that leans "right".) Personally I'd prefer if they were trained without any political bias whatsoever, but of course that's easier said than done given that such lines of thought are present in so many datasets.

▲

idiotsecant 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Imagine going through the effort of making a new account just to post the same boring white supremacy x junk over and over. It's tiresome reading it. I imagine it's positively soul draining doing it.

▲

ai-doomer-42 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I’m shocked that anyone could think this of me given this comment. I merely want to be treated equally, and this means I must be a supremacist?

Can you explain why?

▲

rendx 18 hours ago | parent [-]

I can, but I doubt you're going to like it. I invite you to reflect on it before you reject it outright, and maybe ask your favorite LLM or search engine for more information on this train of thought. Thanks.

Because of systemic racism, treating you and me "equally" as you ask for would continue the discrimination. In order to undo the discrimination, we're asked to take a step back and be truthful to ourselves and others about our existing privileges and about all the systemic racism we're benefitting from. We don't have to agree with every single action of those trying to change it, and it's certainly not our "fault", but unless you have better ideas on how to fix the issues and repair some of the damages, and put those ideas into practice, we can at least show some respect and dignity in the face of centuries of very violent suppression of minorities and natives. Because not doing that would make us 'supremacists' indeed. We have the privilege that we don't have to experience outright racism day by day by day, generation over generation over generation; we're asked to at least educate ourselves about it, instead of crying out for not being treated 'equally' here and there. Some humbleness.

It's not meant to offend you as an individual. It's not your fault. But what we can do is (trying to at least a bit) understand where all the rage and despair is coming from, bottled up for so many generations, and that while we're "innocent", we're still "targets", and rightfully so -- our ancestors profitted and so did we, by association. I agree that it can hurt to experience it in little things, but I am mindful that it is part of my tiny contributions to accept it, and I understand that if I express my frustration it will cause pain in those that don't have my privileges, and will not in their lifetimes. I do not want to be treated equally. I really have sufficient privileges that it's fine to take a step back in some situations. I don't have to take it personally.

There's plenty of good literature about these dynamics. If you're interested, I can recommend some. We can at least try to listen and understand what is being asked of us.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_defensiveness#White_frag...

▲

antihipocrat 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No race is a homogenous group equally benefiting and suffering from historical and societal privilege and disadvantage.

A large proportion of the majority ethnicity in the U.S live in and suffer from generational poverty. As an absolute number it would far exceed the number of people suffering the same from minority ethnicities. If it weren't for other influences strongly promoting awareness of non-economic differences, I'd like to think (perhaps naively?) that these groups of people would find strong commonalities with one another and organize activities as a united front to change their circumstances.

▲

flibbity-spork 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

(Same person you’re replying to, new throwaway)

While I don’t appreciate the assumption that I commented in bad faith, I do greatly appreciate your earnestness in responding. I grew up in a very conservative area and have never been exposed to these ideas.

Nevertheless, I disagree strongly with this line of thinking. Hate speech is wrong, regardless of who says it, and who the target is; not just because it hurts the target, but because it emboldens the attacker and others to continue being hateful. Social media platforms are where people spend hours every day; and while you may be intelligent and mature enough to accept anti-white hatred as a measure to correct past wrongs, you severely underestimate the degree to which less intelligent and less mature people (whom I promise you’ve spent far less time with than I have) are vulnerable to grievance and negative-polarization. You have to consider them as well if your goal is to create true change outside of the institutions controlled by you and people with your beliefs.

I am not closed to the idea of affirmative action and benefit given to disadvantages groups to make right some past wrongs. I just warn you to not take a maximalist stance that causes resentment or assumes that POC should not have their anti-white speech policed because of “the soft bigotry of low expectations.”

	▲	rendx 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nice exchange, thank you! The idea is to not ask either one of the groups to change their behavior, but to show understanding first. I agree that certain actions are 'wrong'. Things people do can be very wrong, and understandable at the same time. People quite often do not act out of rational thinking but out of emotions. And these emotions can be very strong and very 'old'. When I remind myself I am not "meant" by them I can feel less offended, which allows me in turn to both stay in understanding and protect myself. Speech is just words after all.