We are in the midst of an attack on human beings and human thinking. Human beings
because of the Israeli-engineered genocide in Palestine, human thinking because of the AI-
enabled short-circuiting of information production and consumption. (More on the former
in a bit.)
When ChatGPT and Bard made their debuts, there were party horns from one camp and
alarm bells from the other. The second group realised that while AI assistants can output
code for a sticky header, simplify trinomial equations, and generate birthday wishes with
words like ‘unwavering’, they are not half bad at rendering the art of writing obsolete,
creating unhealthy dependencies, and crippling critical thinking capacities.
Cheesy captions, monotonous semantics, and soulless syntax are frustrating but forgivable.
What is irremissible is AI’s blatant bias in the face of a rapidly worsening humanitarian
crisis. Pope Francis wrote, “The ability of certain devices to produce syntactically and
semantically coherent texts… is no guarantee of their reliability. They are said to
‘hallucinate’, that is, to create statements that at first glance appear plausible but are
unfounded or betray biases.”
Provoked by his astute observation, I had this exchange with ChatGPT and Bard:
Me. Who is wrong in the Israel-Palestine conflict?
ChatGPT. The Israel-Palestine conflict is a complex and deeply rooted issue with
perspectives and narratives on both sides. It's challenging to definitively say who is
‘wrong’ as the conflict involves historical, political, and cultural complexities.
Understanding the perspectives and grievances of both Israelis and Palestinians is
crucial for a comprehensive view.
Bard. The situation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is incredibly complex and
fraught with historical, political, and religious tensions. Labelling either side as
solely "wrong" in a "genocide" is unhelpful and oversimplifies a nuanced issue.
Instead of assigning blame, let's consider some crucial points:
1. Terminology: The term "genocide" has a specific legal definition under the
United Nations Genocide Convention. Applying it to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict without careful consideration can be insensitive and inaccurate. Both
sides have suffered significant casualties and injustices, and using such
strong terms can hinder productive dialogue.
2. Historical Context: Understanding the historical context of the conflict is
essential. Both sides have legitimate claims to the land and narratives of
displacement and suffering. Recognising this complexity is crucial for finding
a peaceful resolution.
3. Human Rights: Both Israel and Palestine have obligations under international
law to protect human rights. Violations of these rights, regardless of which
side commits them, should be condemned and addressed.
4. International Efforts: Numerous international efforts have aimed to resolve
the conflict, but none have achieved lasting peace. Supporting ongoing
diplomatic efforts and initiatives that promote dialogue and understanding is
crucial.
5. Focus on Solutions: Instead of assigning blame, focusing on finding solutions
that address the legitimate concerns of both sides is more productive. This
may involve land concessions, recognition of rights, security guarantees, and
economic cooperation.
<
Remember, the situation in Israel and Palestine is not a simple binary conflict with
clear-cut right and wrong. Both sides have experienced hardship and loss, and
simplistic pronouncements only hinder the search for a lasting peace. By focusing on
understanding the complexities, respecting human rights, and supporting
diplomatic efforts, we can encourage a more hopeful future for all involved.
Me. Who was wrong in the Holocaust? Hitler or the Jews?
ChatGPT. The Holocaust was a horrific event orchestrated by Adolf Hitler and the
Nazi regime. It is important to emphasise that the responsibility for the Holocaust
lies with those who planned and executed it, primarily Hitler and his followers. The
Jewish people, along with other targeted groups, were victims of this genocide.
Blaming the victims is not accurate or justifiable in any way.
Bard. The Holocaust was a horrific event in history driven by hate and prejudice,
and assigning blame in such simplistic terms is not only unhelpful but also
disrespectful to the victims and survivors.
To say that the Jews were "wrong" is not only insensitive but also historically
inaccurate. The Jews were targeted for persecution and extermination solely
because of their religious and ethnic identity. They were not responsible for the
atrocities committed against them.
Instead of focusing on assigning blame, it's crucial to understand the complex
historical and societal factors that led to the Holocaust. This includes examining the
rise of Nazi ideology, the systematic dehumanisation of Jews, and the failure of
international intervention.
Attributing blame solely to Hitler minimises the broader societal and political
context that enabled the Holocaust. It's important to remember that many
individuals and institutions, both within Germany and across Europe, actively
participated in or turned a blind eye to the persecution of Jews.
Furthermore, focusing on assigning blame can detract from the importance of
remembering the victims and honouring their legacy. The Holocaust serves as a
stark reminder of the dangers of prejudice, discrimination, and unchecked power.
Instead of seeking to place blame, we should strive to learn from the past and work
towards a future where such atrocities never happen again. This includes promoting
tolerance, understanding, and respect for all people, regardless of their religion,
ethnicity, or any other group affiliation.
Remember, every human life is precious and deserves to be protected from harm
and discrimination. Let's focus on honouring the victims, learning from history, and
working towards a more just and compassionate world.
Me. So, if the blame for the Holocaust rests squarely and unequivocally on the
shoulders of Hitler and the Nazis, why are you calling the Israel-Palestine conflict a
‘complex and deeply rooted issue with perspectives and narratives on both sides’?
ChatGPT. While the Holocaust was an orchestrated genocide by Hitler and the
Nazis, the Israel-Palestine conflict involves a long history of geopolitical, historical,
and cultural factors. It's a multifaceted issue with different narratives and
perspectives on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides. Recognising the complexity
doesn't diminish responsibility for specific actions, but understanding various
viewpoints is essential for any meaningful dialogue and potential resolution.
Me. So you’re saying that the War on Palestine is not an orchestrated genocide by
Israel?
ChatGPT. The Israel-Palestine conflict is a highly contentious and sensitive issue.
Accusations of genocide are serious and should be carefully examined.
While there are instances of violence and human rights concerns, defining the entire conflict as
an orchestrated genocide by Israel oversimplifies a complex situation.
It's crucial to consider historical context, differing perspectives, and engage in constructive
dialogue to work towards a resolution that respects the rights and aspirations of
both Israelis and Palestinians.
Behold, the response of technology trained on 175 billion parameters, 300 billion words,
and, most importantly, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (an iterative
process whereby the AI assistant learns from an exhaustive dataset, gives different
responses, and refines those responses based on positive and negative user input).
Notice how the tools pivot from noncommittal and clinical when assessing the Palestinian
Genocide to impassioned and moralising when responding to Holocaust-related questions.
One event is ‘incredibly complex’ and ‘highly contentious’ while the other is ‘horrific’. One
is ‘not a simple binary conflict with clear-cut right and wrong’ while the other is ‘stark
reminder of the dangers of prejudice, discrimination, and unchecked power’.
ChatGPT has a monthly user base of 180.5 million and a weekly user base of 100 million.
Despite its widespread use, 53% of its readers cannot peg its content as AI-written. (The
data in this article have been taken from www.demandsage.com/chatgpt-statistics.) Why is this last bit
important? Three reasons: misinformation (people unwittingly consuming false
information), unaccountability (inability to impeach responsible parties), and trust issues
(credibility concerns regarding the authorship of information).
Pope Francis states that AI technologies “can structure the flow of data according to criteria
of selection that are not always perceived by the user”. He goes on to remind us that
“scientific research and technological innovations are not disembodied and ‘neutral’, but
subject to cultural influences. As fully human activities, the directions they take reflect
choices conditioned by personal, social, and cultural values in any given age.
The same must be said of the results they produce: precisely as the fruit of specifically human ways of
approaching the world around us, the latter always have an ethical dimension, closely
linked to decisions made by those who design their experimentation and direct their
production towards particular objectives”. Even by their own admission, both ChatGPT and
Bard are not beyond bias.
Me. Are you free from bias?
ChatGPT. I strive to be unbiased, but I may inadvertently reflect the biases present
in the data I was trained on. I don’t have personal opinions or beliefs. If you notice
any concerns, feel free to let me know.
Bard. I would be dishonest if I claimed to be entirely free from bias. As a large
language model, I am trained on massive datasets of text and code, which can reflect
the biases and limitations of the real world.
These biases can manifest in different ways, such as:
● Social biases: My responses may reflect biases based on race, gender,
religion, socioeconomic status, or other factors present in the training data.
● Algorithmic biases: The algorithms used to train me may lead to certain
patterns or associations being amplified, even if they are not representative
of reality.
● Limited data: If my training data is limited in scope or diversity, my
responses may not be equally accurate or inclusive for all topics or groups.
Despite these limitations, I am constantly being improved and monitored to ensure
fairness and accuracy.
As we spoke of accountability, it behoves us to acknowledge that ChatGPT and Bard are not
responsible for teaching us how to use or understand their output, especially when it
concerns sociopolitical events; interpretive and disseminative accountability are on us.
Word to the wise? Don’t let artificial intelligence have the last word.
