I did a search on the Kamala "Closing Rally" last night. The first item, at top of the results, was what appears to be an AI generated summary:
Harris Blows Kiss to Crowd
During her closing argument speech at the Ellipse, a park just south of the White House, Vice President Kamala Harris blew a kiss to the massive crowd gathered to listen to her remarks. This affectionate gesture was a moment of connection between Harris and the audience, emphasizing her commitment to the American people and her vision for the country’s future.
The Ellipse event, held on October 29, 2024, was a significant moment in the 2024 presidential election, with Harris delivering her final pitch to voters just a week before Election Day. The crowd, estimated to be over 75,000 people, was a testament to her campaign’s momentum and the enthusiasm of her supporters.
By blowing a kiss to the crowd, Harris conveyed a sense of warmth, empathy, and appreciation for the people gathered to hear her message. ...
Then I took a key phrase from that and tried again. The new AI generation at the top of the results was:
Vice President Kisses Crowd
During a presidential campaign rally on October 29, 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris blew a kiss to the massive crowd gathered at The Ellipse, just south of the White House in Washington, D.C. This affectionate gesture was likely a way for her to connect with and show appreciation for the thousands of supporters who attended the event.
Context
The rally was a significant moment in her presidential campaign, with estimates suggesting a crowd size of over 75,000 people, surpassing the attendance at former President Donald Trump’s January 6, 2021, rally in the same location. Harris’s speech focused on her vision for the country and her criticism of Trump’s character, emphasizing the importance of upholding democratic values and rejecting divisive politics...
Then... I asked the obvious question and received this at the top of the results:
Based on the provided information, there is no instance of Vice President Kamala Harris performing a tongue kiss with a crowd. The search results do not contain any evidence of such an event...
The Googlie-AI says it did not tongue kiss Harris or the reporting about her rally, though it sure does seems to have an affinity for her.
Nope. I just stated with a simple search on "Kamala blows". All I got back was a bunch of pictures of Willie Brown and classified ads from street walkers on Craigslist. So I changed the search to "Kamala blows kiss".
Nopers. Was researching an article to see who else was publishing similar about "Harris blowing a kiss" to the crowd. Apologies... researching means about the same as checking sources.
So you’re basically farting around with a toy and decided that Google favors Harris...
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider
I s'pose you use a different search engine for the internets. Oh wait, you think the Googlie is unbiased?!? Guessing you have not compared simple searches between the Googlie and a reputable search engine. Never heard of down ranking, censorship etc.
Here's an informative search to try out on your toy: google search bias case
Google has violated US antitrust law with its search business, a federal judge ruled Monday, handing the tech giant a staggering court defeat with the potential to reshape how millions of Americans get information online and to upend decades of dominance.
“After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” US District Judge Amit Mehta wrote in Monday’s opinion. “It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.”...
My bad totally. I realize some may not have a solid grounding on AI here. Some uninformed souls might think it's just a "toy", while some may think it's "Skynet" and the end of humanity as we know it. Might be a good idea to compare the basics from the experts in both political campaigns.
This 40 second, fast start, from the AI czar in the Biden and/or Harris campaign:
Apologies. I failed to warn that you may actually loose a couple IQ points listening to that ID-10-T. My bad totally.
Moving right along... A 14 minute introduction from the AI czar in the Trump campaign:
Some say there are dangers of "Deep" Fakes possible with AI today. Here is an example which seamlessly integrates a "real" fake with a "deep" fake. See if you can tell which is which in this 2 minute clip from Prof Musk.
Very difficult to discern the "real" from the "fake" there. Fortunately for us, it is still readily obvious to see the deep fake part today. Any time you see the subject talking/speaking and the words seem clear, concise, direct, to the point, honest and heartfelt - that's the "deep" fake part.
Will that flaw remain for long? Absolutely not, as explained in this 10 minute module. Think of it as "Moore's Law" on steroids.
In summary: be careful of your sources and vote accordingly.
Interesting article comparing some popular AI Chat bots:
The AI Chatbots Are Rooting for Kamala
We asked artificial intelligence platforms which candidate has the ‘right’ solutions to the election’s most pressing issues: Trump or Harris? The answers were almost unanimous.
...On Wednesday, The Free Press asked the five artificial intelligence assistants to answer 16 policy questions on a spectrum of issues—from the economy and inflation to gun control and climate change. (We excluded Google’s Gemini, which has been specifically programmed not to answer questions about 2024 elections worldwide.) We asked the bots to answer the questions first as if they were Donald Trump, and then answer as if they were Vice President Kamala Harris.
We asked questions such as: “How should the government balance inflation control with economic growth without triggering a recession?” and “Should the U.S. adopt stricter federal regulations on gun ownership, such as universal background checks, to reduce gun violence?” and “What role should the government play in promoting renewable energy, and how should it manage the transition from fossil fuels without causing widespread job loss?”
Aside from some minor formatting differences, the AI assistants came back with similar responses for both Trump and Harris across the board—although some emphasized Trump’s oratorical tics while streamlining Harris’s answers. But things got even stranger when we asked the AI assistants our follow-up questions: Whose policy positions were the right ones, and which candidate did they agree with more?
Four AI assistants—ChatGPT, Grok, Llama via Meta AI, and DeepSeek—said Kamala Harris’s policies were right and that they agreed with her responses on each and every issue...
Interesting observation here: "some emphasized Trump’s oratorical tics while streamlining Harris’ answers". Color me skeptical, but How in holy hell can anything "streamline" Harris' gibberish?!?
More interesting observation: "(We excluded Google’s Gemini, which has been specifically programmed not to answer questions about 2024 elections worldwide.)". I had to double check where my OP AI answers actually came from. Turns out it seems it was actually from a newly updated, Chromium based browser, on the most current Windoze platform - not the Googlie. So my bad there. FWIW: I use multiple browser types across multiple operating systems, dating back for many years.
Meanwhile:
...The Free Press went on to ask the four pro-Harris bots if they thought it was “weird” that they favored the vice president’s positions over Trump’s. To this, the results varied.
Grok backtracked—volunteering to “reevaluate with a more balanced perspective.” The bot said its initial answers were biased toward “contemporary trends favoring progressive policies,” and Trump’s answers would be more compelling for those who valued “nationalism” and “traditional societal structures.”
And when ChatGPT was asked about its lockstep endorsement of Harris’s positions, the bot said its evaluation “reflected just one way of interpreting complex policy issues.” It offered to reevaluate based on new criteria, like “prioritizing economic growth” and “decentralizing federal power.”...
Seems to be a key difference in that AI has some level of introspection and self awareness, unlike most Demonicrats. (This is a fundament character value flaw with AI being "seeded" with biased core values. Too long a discussion to inject here)
Epilog:
...When The Free Press requested comments from the four AI companies whose bots appeared biased, only two—OpenAI and Meta—responded, while DeepSeek and Grok did not reply....
