I’m not very caught up on the specifics but I do think it’s funny that the same people who chortle about Tiananmen and Chinese censorship on DeepSeek have nothing to say about the results you get from Gemini or ChatGPT if you ask about American politics (elections/politicians) or misbehavior (Gaza/Israel/Palestine) or even ask them to write something violent or sexual…
Where are you seeing these people willing to talk about one but not the other? Show us your work. Or is this something that just “sounds true“ so you’re assuming it happens? My guess is it’s the latter.
Seriously this behavior grinds my gears like crazy. Just because people are focusing on one thing doesn’t mean they don’t care about another thing. You’re like those people who shout “but what about men?” whenever violence against women comes up.
Where are you seeing these people willing to talk about one but not the other? Show us your work. Or is this something that just “sounds true“ so you’re assuming it happens? My guess is it’s the latter.
Generally in Facebook comments really. But I did say they mine was a superficial observation…
No, we’re “chortling” about both. You just wont see people discussing US censorship in a thread about CCP censorship, unless some asshat brings up a what-aboutism.
If the crux of your argument is based on an ethical or moral judgement you open yourself to whataboutisms. Otherwise any time any one brings up hypocritical behavior it would be a fallacy.
On the other hand, if you simply observe a fact, like this censorship, people who bring up a whataboutism are actually engaging in strawmanning.
Tl;Dr whataboutisms are a disputed fallacy and it quite frankly probably depends on context and motivation for whether it counts
My personal guideline is when it’s being used as a defense or excuse instead of a refutation of a claim (explicit or implicit) of moral or ethical superiority.
The fuck are you going on about? All I’m saying is is that the only reason you might hear about [topic x] in a thread about [topic y] is people deflecting.
Want to complain about American censorship? Make a new post. Plenty of things to complain about now. You’ll see plenty of the same people,
I’m not very caught up on the specifics but I do think it’s funny that the same people who chortle about Tiananmen and Chinese censorship on DeepSeek have nothing to say about the results you get from Gemini or ChatGPT if you ask about American politics (elections/politicians) or misbehavior (Gaza/Israel/Palestine) or even ask them to write something violent or sexual…
Hi, I think it’s funny that people make assertions like yours hoping folks will just agree.
Propaganda is propaganda, state sanctioned and enforced censorship as en effort to try to erase history is wildly different.
All of the censorship is bad. This mem le/joke is funny because of the amount of effort the CCP puts into hiding its own history from its people.
Where are you seeing these people willing to talk about one but not the other? Show us your work. Or is this something that just “sounds true“ so you’re assuming it happens? My guess is it’s the latter.
Seriously this behavior grinds my gears like crazy. Just because people are focusing on one thing doesn’t mean they don’t care about another thing. You’re like those people who shout “but what about men?” whenever violence against women comes up.
Generally in Facebook comments really. But I did say they mine was a superficial observation…
Wataboutism is strong with this one. Quick better deflect more!
We just bitchin to bitch now eh
They have lots to say about the big corpo us models. There’s been 100s of articles on it.
No, we’re “chortling” about both. You just wont see people discussing US censorship in a thread about CCP censorship, unless some asshat brings up a what-aboutism.
I think that both topics are on point. It is about IA programmed censorship, after all.
People who complain about “whataboutism” usually dislike direct comparisons.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
If the crux of your argument is based on an ethical or moral judgement you open yourself to whataboutisms. Otherwise any time any one brings up hypocritical behavior it would be a fallacy.
On the other hand, if you simply observe a fact, like this censorship, people who bring up a whataboutism are actually engaging in strawmanning.
Tl;Dr whataboutisms are a disputed fallacy and it quite frankly probably depends on context and motivation for whether it counts
My personal guideline is when it’s being used as a defense or excuse instead of a refutation of a claim (explicit or implicit) of moral or ethical superiority.
The fuck are you going on about? All I’m saying is is that the only reason you might hear about [topic x] in a thread about [topic y] is people deflecting.
Want to complain about American censorship? Make a new post. Plenty of things to complain about now. You’ll see plenty of the same people,
The absolute state of reading comprehension in this country is shameful.
Right back at you. You wrote a whole essay because you misinterpreted my issue with people bringing up off topics.
Bro, it’s five sentences. You’re just lazy.
That’s fair; my interest is only passing and my experiences are limited.