this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
508 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19148 readers
4367 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter
aidan
jordanlund
HLMenckenFan
little_cow
508
"Google has been very bad": Trump warns Google may be "shut down" in rant (www.salon.com)
submitted 3 months ago by MicroWave to c/politics
102 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Even ChatGPT is confused

The text seems to convey a few disjointed points:

  1. No Call from Google: It starts by mentioning that no one called from Google, but this point is unclear and not elaborated on.

  2. Importance of Media Exposure: The speaker emphasizes that doing shows like the one being discussed is important because these shows are widely seen, not just on Fox but everywhere through clips shared on cell phones and other platforms.

  3. Effect on Voting: The speaker believes that a good performance on the show will positively influence people to vote for them.

  4. Reach of the Show: The speaker highlights that the show is not limited to Fox but is widely distributed and accessible, thus amplifying its impact.

  5. Praise for the Show: The speaker compliments the show's product and brand, suggesting it has great reach and quality.

  6. Need for Exposure: There's an emphasis on the need to be active and appear on various shows to maximize exposure.

  7. Criticism of Google: The speaker criticizes Google for being irresponsible and suggests that the company might be close to shutting down, although this point is vague and unsubstantiated.

Overall, the rant is an unfocused mix of praising media exposure, expressing a belief in the power of TV appearances to influence voters, and criticizing Google.

To make things worse, I also asked it to Yodaify it

Called from Google, nobody did. Doing a show like yours, yes, on Fox you see it. But everywhere, really, it is. Clips of your show they take, with me right now, doing it you are. Do a good job, I must, for vote for me, they will. On Fox alone, it is not, smaller part Fox is. All over this, you are. On those little beautiful cell phones, you are. A great product, you have. A great brand, you have. Out you must get, out you must get. Things like your show, and other shows, do you must. Very bad Google has been, very irresponsible. Close to shutting down, Google is, a feeling I have.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

LOL at "a few disjointed points". Whatever else you might say about ChatGPT, its output is extraordinarily polite. Saying "a few disjointed points" is practically the equivalent of "what the fuck is this drivel you fed me?"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah ChatGPT didn’t seem to realize he’s praising/condemning google not Fox. He’s attempting to get google to roll over and lie for him like Facebook does