The Trump administration recently published “America’s AI Action Plan”. One of the first policy actions from the document is to eliminate references to misinformation, diversity, equity, inclusion, and climate change from the NIST’s AI Risk Framework.
Lacking any sense of irony, the very next point states LLM developers should ensure their systems are “objective and free from top-down ideological bias”.
Par for the course for Trump and his cronies, but the world should know what kind of AI the US wants to build.
What matters more? What AMERICA wants, or what the administration enacts in to policy? You’re missing the point if you’re arguing about my phrasing.
The phrasing means everything.
Example: “Trump wants…”
VS
Example: “America wants…”
Big difference. Executive Orders are a memo, not law. It’s disturbing that I have to keep saying this and explaining this.
I did not use the word “law”. So you’re arguing that EO’s have no actual effect? That is blatantly false: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-dei-purge-is-hitting-nasa-hard/
I’m arguing that you’re intentionally trying to play semantics with phrasing and claim it doesn’t matter, when it absolutely does, and everyone in here is explaining to you why. That’s all.
Okay. My argument is that the semantics don’t matter because what matters is policy.
And since you did use the word “policy”, I did mention that EO’s aren’t laws. It’s a memo. He has no control via EOnof anyone except the people in his purview. Not private companies, not researches, not law, not state governments.
You’re saying that EO’s are not policy?
EO’s are policy insofar as they can affect the Executive Branch and what it controls, and nothing else. The history of the use is mainly for “the spirit” of something, but only in the past 20 years or so has been weaponized to be used for trying to attempt to guide actual policy. Never in the way Trump has tried to use them, which is “law by decree”.
The joke is they know it’s bullshit and meaningless. This all happened in his first term. 220 total, 157 shot down in court, 27 revoked. It’s an office memo at best. Biden even tried to do thenstudent debt cancellation through EO, and it got shot down in court.
That…what???
No, your choice of phrasing conveys your message.
If you’re argument is not against the American people, but rather the administration, then your wording is, well, wrong.
No. You’re dodging the argument. You chose to phrase it that way. And pretending that’s just some incidental thing with no meaning honestly is about the dumbest response I’ve seen in a while.
You have made the argument that it is the American people, not the administration. You. Not anybody else.
I did not use the phrase “the American people”.
Wow.
Just…wow.
You honestly think that’s an argument?!?
Goodbye
Based on your post history, I think we’re on the same side. I understand that this administration does not represent all of America. Unfortunately though, the semantics of it all don’t really matter. Trump got the majority vote, and that’s what matters. The effects of his policies matter. From the perspective of the rest of the world, this is what (the majority of) America has chosen. I don’t like it either.
Friend, seriously…listen to the very clear reason being used to explain the deficiency of your argument here.
The way you phrase something absolutely changes the meaning of its point. You can’t say something and then try to justify that the ends are the same, so it’s cool. Literally why people use the phrase “the ends don’t justify the means”.
If Trump comes out and says some dumb shit, you can’t just say “AMERICA WANTS THIS”, because that is obviously untrue.
It would work the same way with 4 people in a car, and the driver wants hamburgers. The entire car doesn’t want hamburgers, just the driver of the car. How you want to argue the outcome or explanation of that very much decides on how you intend to phrase the situation. All you know right now is that the driver wants a hamburger, so it would disingenuous to say everyone wants hamburgers.
I think it’s nice that many Americans don’t want what Trump wants. I think it’s unfortunate that in this case it doesn’t actually have an effect because the policy will be acted upon anyway.
I disagree with that premise, America elected Trump under a democracy in which his view points were clear. He was elected to represent Americans and as such I think it’s fair to use Trump’s wants and America synonymously