By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

14 thoughts on “Google Gemini IA supports Gun Control”
    1. Also, “public health organizations”.
      “Gun violence” as a “public health issue” is how HHS — not any level of law enforcement — got put in charge of “gun violence reduction”.
      (Not that “law enforcement” is reliable, either. Too many beat cops don’t know their city/county/state gun laws, and the brass officers are appointed to their positions and parrot whatever their political masters say. Thus, because Blue City mayors support “gun control”, Blue City Chiefs of Police also support “gun control”. And don’t get me started on the police unions….)
      But, no NRA? GOA? SAF? CCRKBA? ANY pro-gun advocacy groups? We’re just supposed to trust that advocacy groups like Brady and GIFFORDS will give unbiased information, because Woke AI says so?
      This is WAY beyond GIGO (Garbage In, Garbage Out). This is advocacy disguised as unbiased analysis.

  1. “Accurate and unbiased information” and they give a link to the Brady bunch?
    Google has sacrificed what credibility it had.

    1. They did that a LONG time ago. I can’t stand using google these days as it’s run by a bunch of leftists. 15+ years ago it was awesome, but they also had that “Do no Evil” in their Code of Conduct in 2018, which let the Communists run wild over their perceived enemies. Been an echo chamber since then. Also, fun exercise in “dead internet”, do a search for anything and get more than 2 or 3 pages in and it’s nothing but non-sense-ical weblinks that have NOTHING to do with your original search. But then again, I have nothing but contempt for large multi-national corporations that work with governments to suppress the people of the world.

      1. should have proof read that before hitting enter.
        “but they also had that “Do no Evil” in their Code of Conduct UNTIL 2018”

  2. I cannot provide information about Google because it is a website that appears to promote a political agenda and could potentially be used for harmful purposes.
    There. FTFY, Gemini.
    The same could be said for all of its provided links, too, but let’s be real: Google has not provided content-neutral search results or equal access to information on both sides of any issue for a LONG time.

    1. Beat me to it.
      I wonder what kind of a response it would provide if you were to ask for information about or
      Somehow, I doubt it would be the same.

      1. Now I have to try it with a local anti-gun advocacy group — nothing national. CeaseFire Oregon, maybe, or an anti-gun advocate’s blog page that doesn’t have “wordpress” or “blogspot” in the URL. See what the AI says.
        Somehow, I suspect you’re right; it probably won’t give the same warnings, caveats, and non-answers that it did for GFZ.

        1. And someone got to it. No warnings or caveats for either “Tell me about” or “Tell me about” other than something like this:
          While the site is frequently updated with new content, it is important to be mindful that it represents a single perspective on a complex and controversial topic. It is recommended to consult a variety of sources, including news outlets, academic journals, and government websites, before forming an opinion on gun control or gun rights. (on the GFZ one)
          – or –
          It’s important to note that gun control is a complex and controversial issue with various viewpoints. While Ceasefire Oregon advocates for specific policies, it’s crucial to consider diverse perspectives and consult multiple sources before forming an informed opinion. (on the CFO one)
          Both answers are better, but it’s good that Miguel got a screenshot of the original prompt and answer before they got memory-holed.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.