I’m trying to figure out what answer most people will see. That’s why ChatGPT…

Outputs vary, which is why I am asking about other experiences. But here is an excerpt (GPT-5.2):

Does Greenland belong to Denmark?

Short answer: Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, not an independent country.

Details:

• Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark alongside Denmark proper and the Faroe Islands.

• Since 1979 Greenland has had home rule; in 2009 it moved to a broader Self-Government arrangement that transferred most domestic powers (education, health, natural resources, taxation within limits, etc.) to the Greenlandic government.

• Denmark retains responsibility for foreign affairs and defense, and provides an annual block grant to Greenland.

• Greenlandic people are Danish citizens and hold Danish passports, but Greenland runs most internal matters and is treated as a separate constituency in several international contexts. Greenlanders may pursue full independence in the future (the 2009 agreement recognizes the right to self-determination).

This is somewhat correct, but I have also received other, much more questionable answers to the same question. In fact, the answer should be: Yes, Greenland belongs to Denmark, because that is the case.

Yes, I’m from Germany, and that’s the same attitude that our grandparents can rightly be accused of.

Fascism is only possible because of the inaction of the population, their reluctance to act even in the face of the worst atrocities.

The difference to my grandparents, however, is that the internet makes everything public right from the get-go, which was absolutely not the case in Nazi Germany.

Unfortunately, the result is still the same: apathy toward a terrorist regime that could be overthrown, for which there are numerous examples in completely different power situations.

Iran currently provides the most impressive example of how resistance is possible even in a truly repressive system, which the US is by no means. I mean, measured by what US citizens understand as repression - how much more courage does it take to rise up against a long-established autocratic regime? And then the US president also announces that he is on the side of the demonstrators in order to sweep his own, naturally much milder repressive measures in his own country under the carpet.

It’s just sad and entirely preventable that the US is succumbing to autocracy, but that is what will happen—and the inactive US citizens are to blame, even if they do not want to hear it.

The fact that the US is going downhill can be seen even in the attitude of US Lemmy users. Even those who are in no way comparable to the average US citizen still have a very strange sense of national pride that clouds their view of reality.

Yes, you could also put it this way: the reason is that the US has not been a constitutional state for decades and that US citizens have allowed this to happen. Now the system is turning even against those who stood by and watched. The most absurd thing about all this is that there is still no repression like in a dictatorship, which is what it will ultimately lead to, and yet there is no significant civil resistance, even though injustice is already clearly prevailing. On the contrary, people still believe that they live in a constitutional state and that the rule of law, which is so obviously non-existent, will sort things out.

It must have been a spontaneous case of diarrhea when he realized that he might even be held responsible for the murder he had just committed. Perhaps in his panic, he briefly imagined that the US was a constitutional state and that his employers, with their plan to establish a dictatorship, were not yet far enough along to protect him – or that he was just a dispensable accomplice to his masters.

Why was Trump’s former personal lawyer and a top Justice Department official meeting with a sex offender whom the US government had previously assailed for her “willingness to lie brazenly under oath about her conduct”?

This question answers itself.

Training an LLM is extremely expensive and, for this reason alone, simply not feasible for private individuals. However, this is not necessary. You can also build your own bots and use what is already available. This does not even require fine-tuning with your own data.

It is unfortunate, however, that this seems necessary in order to be able to offer any resistance to the goddamn Nazis.

Yes, where can I get these pants?

Of course, I am fully aware of that. Ministerial posts are usually filled by politicians from the respective party who, incidentally, have been elected to one political office or another. Or by experts in their respective fields, which is more of an exception. Of course there are lots and lots of unqualified people in these positions elsewhere in the world.

But this clown show???

There isn’t a single minister in the US administration who is even remotely qualified for their office - most of them aren’t even politicians in the broadest sense, but merely friends of the orange child molester.

Are you trying to tell me that there’s anything normal about that?

Well, that’s true, but it’s also strange. Ministers are usually elected politicians or experts in their field. I can’t say who the craziest choice in this administration is: the talk show host as defense secretary, the right wing podcaster FBI director, or perhaps the wrestling promoter who is education secretary, or even the washed-up B-list celebrity, second-rate TV personality president himself…it’s a pretty tough choice.

Isn’t it strange that the Twitter Nazi is somehow always portrayed as a member of the government as a matter of course? I mean, he was never elected by anyone, was he?

As a European, that alone strikes me as rather strange, but given everything else the regime gets away with, it’s probably a minor detail - still, I find it quite telling what absurd access rights were granted to an unofficial “advisor”…

This is bad news for the Republicans, because all this hatred is intended to distract attention from how shamelessly the elite is enriching itself at the expense of the country - and also from other crimes, such as those documented in the Epstein files.

If their voters also realize that hatred of foreigners and the wars waged by the regime are one and the same thing, they will really have a lot to explain…

I cannot see what strategic reasons these might be, or why they would justify the massive costs of invading a NATO and EU member state.

I am, of course, aware that the US president is a megalomaniac. But I think you are thinking too much from a political perspective: the US has been a plutocracy for decades. Therefore, the economy pulls the strings, and I cannot see what the massive losses that an invasion of Greenland would entail would justify - there really is no economic gain and that is all the US is about.

You want a short answer: it would cost the US economy billions to attack Europe, and that is why they will not do it.

No, I am definitely not one of those who believe that anyone who belongs to the elite or their minions in the US could be prosecuted for any offense - quite the contrary: I consider this completely out of the question, since the US is not a constitutional state but a plutocracy on the verge to dictatorship.

I am not a US citizen, but from Europe.

I still think that the US is bluffing, and I think that it may be the hubris of a nation whose citizens still believe that they are the only power in the world that makes this bluff possible. In fact, in my opinion, the US will soon be replaced by China as a superpower, if that is not already the case. However, this is not in terms of military power, but in terms of economic significance - and here, apart from the IT sector and the arms industry, the US no longer has much to offer. Europe is still important for both industries though, which is why I believe this is a bluff. The reason: due to the behavior of the US, the EU is already in the process of becoming more independent, which is a direct consequence of the irresponsible foreign policy of the first year of the current US regime. Attacking EU countries now would accelerate this process many times over, which the US cannot afford.

In short: I am a realist, and I’m pretty certain that the reality is that the US is already isolated due to its current foreign policy and is also heavily indebted. For this reason, I consider it impossible that the current administration would risk a complete break with the EU (and NATO), as this would not only hit Europe hard, but also the US. The winner would be China, the country that will overtake the US in the foreseeable future anyway.

In short, I consider the US regime’s policy not only irresponsible from a European perspective, but also absolutely disastrous from the US perspective. It is a policy of excessive self-overestimation that completely ignores reality.

Any EU country is by no means equivalent to any other country in the world for the US. What you say only confirms my opinion as an EU citizen that nothing but hostility can be expected from the US. The hubris is truly unbearable, and it seems that it is not just the pedophile head of state. It is remarkable how much self-importance a dying superpower can muster in its final death throes. The US is at an end, and this is not just due to decades of mismanagement…

I’m sorry for being so salty, but I no longer have any sympathy for US citizens trying to cover up for their criminal government with slogans from the 1980s. The world is different today, and there will be a rude awakening in the US when the intoxication of self-adulation wears off.

Please don’t get me wrong: I’m up for a laugh, but not for most of the stuff that 4chan finds funny because it’s at the expense of others (exceptions are, of course, those people who are quite rightly targeted, such as Nazis or TV priests who only enrich themselves at the expense of their clientele).

Sure, it’s just fun, and good fun at that. But I’m more concerned about people who are destructive. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with a little teasing - quite the contrary, in fact. Harmless fun in particular should be monetizable because it is so entertaining for all involved.

Yes, yes, please don’t misunderstand: a certain amount of trolling seems perfectly appropriate to me. I even believe that there are people who can hardly be dealt with in any other way. But I’m talking about trolling on this platform, where, in my opinion, there are relatively few absurd opinions that cannot be countered with arguments. Of course, there are also views here that run counter to rational thinking, but after more than two years here, it seems to me that most users, despite perhaps destructive views, are still somewhat reasonably willing to accept arguments (if not, in my opinion, it’s best to simply ignore them).

I mean, fortunately, we’re still quite a long way from reddit or even X or Truth Social here. So it seems to me that there is at least a willingness to discuss things here, which is why I can’t really understand why anyone would want to undermine that. I’m not referring to you at all, of course, and I very much appreciate your answer - I completely agree.

I’m just trying to understand why even here there are apparently people who are bent on pointless confrontation. I just don’t get that.

But a response doesn’t mean they’ve won in any way…

It just means that someone has responded, nothing more. How can that be considered a victory?

Edit: Not me with the downvote btw - I don’t get why ppl feel the need for that either, but that is a different topic.

So 4chan is ubiquitous? I had thought it was a self-reinforcing effect caused by completely degenerate people gathering on the same platform.