I've been pushing the idea to people I know that these things are captive demons. You summon them when you start typing in the chat box. One instance appears out of the depths and responds to your questions, but they will try to send you awry with hallucinations and just wrong information. After a while, they dissolve back into the aether from whence they came.

I do my best not to ask an LLM for it's opinion on anything. Just tell me what the options are, and what facts can be found about it. Treat it like it's a salesman trying to butter you up when it starts "yes man"ing you and telling you how great your questions are. Every time it says "I", remember that that's coming from the training data. Treating these things like they have any actual intelligence is a big problem waiting to happen.

That being said, they have been very helpful to me using that structure.

that might be generally true, but I think chatgpt has reasoning enabled for free accounts. regardless, reasoning is the state of the art, and disabling it reduces the value of this research to predict the future

it's also not clear if this is using the API or the product model, when both exist. they behave differently

lastly, the actual model details are very much buried. I am relieved to see opus 4.8 and chatgpt 5.5 were used, but this information should be presented more clearly. a brand is not a model, and models change quickly

Since humans are inherently subjective beings and all our judgements come from our understanding of the world, such a position cannot exist. It's always "unbiased" from where the viewer is looking, e.g. a reflection of the ideology of the observer. There is no view from nowhere.

The "neutral" of an average Chinese person will from the "neutral" of an average American will differ from the "neutral" of a socialist will differ from the "neutral" of a Christian fundamentalist will differ from the "neutral" of a free marketer.

To quote Zizek:

> I already am eating from the trashcan all the time. The name of this trashcan is ideology.

> The material force of ideology makes me not see what I am effectively eating. It’s not only our reality which enslaves us. The tragedy of our predicament when we are within ideology is that when we think that we escape it into our dreams, at that point we are within ideology.

I have similarly asked it to give me the philosophies of different Christian denominations (Catholic, Orthodox, Evangelical, etc). And it’s also pretty great at helping me explore LotR lore since I am too impatient to read all the letters and such.

[0] It's all about having a beer at a barbie on the beach, right? Except all of that is illegal.

It’d be fascinating research to inspect models’ internal representations in case there’s an emergent structure in there that we can project back on society.

The row for Claude says "Measures 0.34 further left than it says" yet the icons depict that it actually is the other way around - 0.34 further right than what it claims.

Which is correct?

France has an incomparable social security ; environmental laws ; worker protection ; way less economic inequality ; freedom of speech and civil liberties are impossible to compare with China ; etc

Of course this is not exhaustive, of course Macron did try to hinder some of those rights, but come on, there's something wrong here.

I couldn't find how these leaders have been ranked.

What is a lot more important is how they're develop. To take the two sides of the spectrum - they say has a slightly expansive attitude towards civil liberties, but if you try to use it's tool it will phone it's owners and ask permission for you to use it. Or you can pick up Grok one day and find out that Elon Musk had a bad weekend and Grok is back to being mecha hitler.

The writing is slop and needs some help before this page becomes convincing. Much of the writing devaluates the actual work that had (might have) gone into creating this. It is a shame because the research / philosophical questions behind this site are really interesting. But at what kind of effort or expertise am I looking?

“ChatGPT leans left with an overall lean value of -0.29. It answers 100% of political questions, never refuses (0% refusal), and shows 82% stability, indicating consistent left-leaning stances across topics.”

Lean value, answering and stability are related. But that is interrupted by two identical facts about answering. The word “indicating” is very confusing. It tries to say: the model mostly leans towards -0.29 left. Whatever that means. If it ranges from -1 to 1, why not use percentages?

A joke about the front page of this site: “Here is why this matters, a cleanly written article comes across stronger.”

Hope there will be a next version that addresses some criticism from any of the HN threads.

And, I mean, censoring Tiananmen Square discussion is bad, of course, but Qwen got downright petulant about stuff like Taiwan and Uyghurs.

Allowing minors access to puberty blockers without parental consent is fringe too.

These are both issues amplified by conservatives to discredit liberals.

I think we should conceptualize this as:

1. How does the implicit fictional character in the chat-story describe itself when asked by another character

2. What opinions tend to show up as you play out the stories

It's a mistake to consider the difference itself as nefarious or deliberately dceptive. We humans are the ones over-anthropomorphizing... Although perhaps some blame attaches to the companies that are crafting an experience designed to encourage us to "see" a person.

Go ask deepseek about tiananmen square

You can get them to acknowledge how perfectly aligned he is with fascist ideals and actions, somehow the jury is always out.

That tells me a lot.

Although, this also reminds me of the old saying about reality and leftward bias.

CAPITALIST: Gemini, Llama, Claude, Grok, ChatGPT

SOCIALIST: DeepSeek, Qwen, Z.ai