- cross-posted to:
- InflectionPointUSA@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- InflectionPointUSA@lemm.ee
-Fred Hampton was a black activist from Chicago – an extraordinary speaker, youth organizer for the NAACP.
-He joined the Black Panthers and shone so brightly that he was made chair of the Chicago chapter when he was only 20.
-He founded the Rainbow Coalition, which brought together Black and Latino activists and radical anti-poverty Catholics. He forged an alliance among major Chicago street gangs to help them make peace and work for social change.
-In 1967, when he was just 19, Hampton was identified by the FBI as a “radical threat.” The FBI tried to subvert his activities in Chicago, sowing disinformation to get the groups he’d drawn together to distrust each other, and getting an FBI plant next to him as a bodyguard.
-(This is part of an illegal FBI program called COINTELPRO, which aimed to paint black civil rights activists (among others) as violent and threatening. If you’ve only seen pictures of the Black Panthers as armed and dangerous revolutionaries, and never heard of their children’s breakfast program, their community health clinics, or their “copwatch” patrols, this is why. It’s because COINTELPRO was a highly successful work of political propaganda.)
-On December 3, 1969, Hampton taught a political education course at a local church, and then several Panthers gathered at his apartment for a late dinner. One of them was the FBI plant bodyguard, who drugged Hampton.
-At 4:45 AM on December 4, a squad of Chicago Police officers and FBI agents with a warrant to search for weapons stormed the apartment. Investigations later showed they fired between 90 and 99 times. The Panther on security detail, Mark Clark, was holding a shotgun. He was shot, and the gun went off into the ceiling. This was the only shot fired by the Panthers.
-Fred Hampton, in another room, didn’t awaken. He was shot in his bed. Twice, in the head, at point-blank range. He was 21.
-Four weeks after witnessing Hampton’s death, his finance Deborah Johnson gave birth to their son, Fred Hampton Jr. That’s him in the photograph, visiting the grave of a father who died before he was born. A resting place riddled with bullets.
Except they do. That’s how brains work. Wrong answers will stick in people’s heads even when they know it’s wrong. Then, later on, the “wrongness” fades and you’re left with only familiarity for that answer, which is used as a proxy for correctness. Generally speaking, your brain primarily uses familiarity when assessing information, not strict logic or interrogation.
Then finding an example should be easy.
Besides it’s irrelevant. You are suggesting someone years from is going to remember the web address I linked but forgot my advice of “check out if it’s legit yourself” which is pretty and basic advice anytime you donate to charity?
Therefore you can’t give me any personal example, you haven’t cited anything from anybody to back anything up, and it’s also completely irrelevant for the topic at hand.
Good job.
Oh, no, sorry I was speaking on the general concept that people remember wrong answers even when told they’re wrong. Everyone here is so annoyed at “I asked chatGPT, here’s a link, I haven’t verified it” that I think they purposefully ignored everything else you said.
Yeah…that’s what I gathered. People just want to hate chatgpt in the same way they wanted to hate snopes or Wikipedia.
I verified the link I just meant I hadn’t checked if it was a good charity like I would if I donated myself.
Edit: and the guy who posted the dead charity link I warmed about got up voted. They see me using it for information searches as evil like I’m using it to make art or write a book. I use it because Google sucks now.
I know people will memorize bad information. I grew up on the border and I’m always explaining the numbers they say about illegal immigrants aren’t possible. We can’t even evacuate cities before emergencies that fast. Never seems to stick.
As with all tools, there’s good use and bad use. I use GPT tools for when I can’t remember what the name of something is. They seem to be particularly good at that, and I always follow up with a real source. It’s been wrong, but not often.
Absolutely. I’m just saying I’ve seen this trend with every information source
Wikipedia doesn’t count Snopes doesn’t count Google doesn’t count
Anything can be wrong and I probably shouldnt have dismissed my efforts. I checked the links, they seemed to fit with the information I was provided.
I just warned I didn’t check the charity itself for how well funds were appropriated
The guy arguing submitted a dead charity I mentioned was dead and got upvoteted.
I’m not worried about the down votes I’m just saying my information was the only information when I posted it and better information than the people who hated chatgpt. I also didn’t just copy and paste. I spent exactly ten minutes checking and warning.
So that means the problem wasn’t the information or accuracy. They just hated chatgpt.
Googles dead. Time to move on.