Im not really into politics enough to say much about accuracy of labels. Ive been on lemmy long enough to see many arguments and debates between political people about what being ‘anarchist’ or ‘leftist’ or ‘socialist’ really means, writing five paragraph heated essays back and forth over what labels properly define what concepts, so on and so forth.
It seems political bias are one of those things nobody can really agree with because it boils down to semantic/linguistic arguments for redefining ultimately arbitrary drawn labels. Also arguers being somewhat emotional about it since its largely dealing with subjective beliefs, and their own societal identity politics over which groups they want to be seen/grouped based off their existing beliefs, which can cause some level of mental gymnastics.
Its a whole can of worms that is a nightmare to navigate semantically in a traditional sense, let alone try to mathematically analyze through plotting data in matrixes and extract range values. I cant imagine how much of a headache it would be to figure out a numerical chart rating ‘political bias’ as a 0-100 percentile number in a chart like UGI. Political minded people cant really agree on what terms really mean, so the data scientist people trying to objectively analyze this stuff for llm benchmarking get shafted when trying to figure out a concrete measurement system. The 12Axes test they use is kind of interesting to read through in itself
Thanks for your response. There is a lot of misunderstanding in those that hold capitalist viewpoints.
I feel some of it is not knowing any better, with some of it being confusion, and some of it is purposeful bad faith. Calling your opponents or people with views that differ from you left-wing or far-left (when in fact both individuals are capitalists) is usually an insult to dismiss them.
When people are called left-wing or far-left, usually what the person is saying about them is that they aren’t as pro-capitalist as they are - not that they are socialist-leaning (e.g. such as being a democratic socialist like Bernie Sanders) or in support of socialist policies.
I’m unsure if UGI has a bias towards AI corporations or capitalism, but AI could be an existential threat to markets and capitalism - especially considering the presence of open source models. For example, AI could very easily enable us to achieve libertarian socialism with none of the drawbacks as seen before in history.
I will have to check out the 12Axes test further, but I feel this could be distortion or misinterpretation of it.
Im not really into politics enough to say much about accuracy of labels. Ive been on lemmy long enough to see many arguments and debates between political people about what being ‘anarchist’ or ‘leftist’ or ‘socialist’ really means, writing five paragraph heated essays back and forth over what labels properly define what concepts, so on and so forth.
It seems political bias are one of those things nobody can really agree with because it boils down to semantic/linguistic arguments for redefining ultimately arbitrary drawn labels. Also arguers being somewhat emotional about it since its largely dealing with subjective beliefs, and their own societal identity politics over which groups they want to be seen/grouped based off their existing beliefs, which can cause some level of mental gymnastics.
Its a whole can of worms that is a nightmare to navigate semantically in a traditional sense, let alone try to mathematically analyze through plotting data in matrixes and extract range values. I cant imagine how much of a headache it would be to figure out a numerical chart rating ‘political bias’ as a 0-100 percentile number in a chart like UGI. Political minded people cant really agree on what terms really mean, so the data scientist people trying to objectively analyze this stuff for llm benchmarking get shafted when trying to figure out a concrete measurement system. The 12Axes test they use is kind of interesting to read through in itself
Thanks for your response. There is a lot of misunderstanding in those that hold capitalist viewpoints.
I feel some of it is not knowing any better, with some of it being confusion, and some of it is purposeful bad faith. Calling your opponents or people with views that differ from you left-wing or far-left (when in fact both individuals are capitalists) is usually an insult to dismiss them.
When people are called left-wing or far-left, usually what the person is saying about them is that they aren’t as pro-capitalist as they are - not that they are socialist-leaning (e.g. such as being a democratic socialist like Bernie Sanders) or in support of socialist policies.
I’m unsure if UGI has a bias towards AI corporations or capitalism, but AI could be an existential threat to markets and capitalism - especially considering the presence of open source models. For example, AI could very easily enable us to achieve libertarian socialism with none of the drawbacks as seen before in history.
I will have to check out the 12Axes test further, but I feel this could be distortion or misinterpretation of it.