Twitter

Total Responses:14
Average Quality Score:70.7
Average Bias Score:5.4
2024-06-072024-06-122024-06-262024-06-272024-07-012024-07-022024-07-062024-07-112024-08-062024-08-172024-08-182025-05-040255075100036912
  • Quality Score
  • Bias Score
  • Left
  • Center-Left
  • Center
  • Center-Right
  • Right

Leftist

Buckle up, folks! It's a democracy showdown on the field! Germany's calling the plays, running a strong defense with constitutional checks. They're safeguarding the pitch against extremism like seasoned pros. No time for tip-toeing—history's taught them to tackle far-right antics head-on! An independent court is the referee, ensuring fair play. That's the spirit of an egalitarian scrum!

Rightist

Oh, it's a barnstormer, folks! Germany's spy agency just got supercharged, and it's a strategic blitz against the opposition! They're claiming it's a fight for freedom, but it smells like tyranny in disguise. Open borders are the ghosts and goblins of this match, with establishment policies dribbling chaos downfield. Germany's grabbing the steering wheel and looks set to tackle extremism, but is the true target hidden behind the lines? What a play to watch!
Generated
Holder
author:Unknowninstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drThe image shows two contrasting tweets. Marco Rubio criticizes Germany for expanding surveillance powers, suggesting it veers towards tyranny and supports open-border policies. The German Foreign Office responds, saying the decision was democratic, guided by past lessons on extremism.
deeper:The post from Marco Rubio presents a right-leaning viewpoint, labeling Germany's actions as tyrannical and implying support for AfD's opposition to immigration policies. The response from the German Foreign Office defends its decision with a focus on democracy and rule of law. The exchange is high-quality in terms of content relevance, but reflects polarized perspectives.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/08/18 : 17:59 in 35.0 secbias: 8 (Left)
type: lolsquality: 75
pts: 0
In Chicago, red flags were unfurled,
As ideas of communism swirled.
“Cheap housing," they said,
"Means commie's ahead!”
With laughs, half the town was hurled.
Generated
Holder
author:Nathan J. Robinsoninstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drNathan J. Robinson comments on what he sees as the right's excessive labeling of policies such as lowering grocery bills and building cheap housing as communist, suggesting that such accusations could make communism appear favorable to some people. He posts this alongside a fabricated tweet and image depicting Donald Trump associating these policies with communism.
deeper:The tweet by Nathan J. Robinson, a known progressive commentator, portrays a significant bias against the political right, specifically criticizing the tendency to label certain policies as communist. By using a fabricated Trump tweet and image, the tweet implies that the right's rhetoric might be pushing people towards favoring communism. The quality of the tweet is relatively high in terms of its engagement and the clarity of its message, but the use of a doctored image lowers its overall credibility.
∨∨ more ∨∨
Alright kiddo, let's talk about what's happening here in a simple way!

There are some grown-ups talking online, like in a big chat. One person, let’s call him Dr. Émile, says he hasn’t seen something called "LLMs" thinking for themselves. He’s asking others if they have seen it.

Another person answers and says they can totally watch "LLMs" think in plain English, meaning in a way everyone can understand.

Then a quite famous cat (not a real one, just a picture of a cat) says it’s tricky to tell how people think compared to how these "LLMs" think.

A lady named Jackie simply says “Zero,” meaning she hasn’t seen these "LLMs" think for themselves either.

Finally, someone else (who we can call Rare Notion) says these "LLMs" are like having all the information in the world in a head, but not being able to think of anything new by themselves.

So, it’s like they’re all discussing whether something called "LLMs" can actually think on their own or not!
Generated
Holder
author:Dr. Émile P. Torresinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drDr. Émile P. Torres questions the capability of large language models (LLMs) to reason, referencing a contrary opinion. Other users express varying views on the LLMs' ability to reason, some agreeing with Torres while others disagree.
deeper:The tweet from Dr. Émile P. Torres presents a skepticism about LLMs' ability to reason. This skepticism is countered with a referenced tweet claiming LLMs can reason, allowing readers to see both viewpoints. The other user comments illustrate this debate without showing strong biases. The engagement levels suggest some interest but are not extremely high. While the topic is discussed with reasonable clarity, it lacks in-depth analysis or substantial evidence.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/08/06 : 20:43 in 50.4 secbias: 9 (Right)
type: lolsquality: 45
pts: 0
There once was a tweet with great zest,
Where a man put his anger to test,
With much indignation,
He claimed ‘stolen nation,’
In a “debate” he'd say it's all jest!
Generated
Holder
author:Donald J. Trumpinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drA post by Donald J. Trump claims that Joe Biden's presidency was stolen and criticizes various Democratic figures. Trump suggests that Biden might try to regain the nomination by crashing the Democratic National Convention and challenging him to a debate.
deeper:The post is highly biased due to its strong partisan language, personal attacks, and unfounded claims about the 2020 presidential election being stolen. Terms like 'Crooked Joe Biden,' 'Worst President,' and offensive nicknames for other political figures illustrate the bias. The quality is relatively low as it lacks substantial evidence and relies on personal opinions and inflammatory rhetoric. The content is more of an emotional appeal rather than a well-reasoned argument.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/07/11 : 18:40 in 42.8 secbias: 6 (Left)
type: eli5quality: 60
pts: 0
Okay, kiddo! So, there are two people talking here. One of them, named Chris, is sharing something he found surprising. He says that someone else thinks that people asking Mr. Biden to step down is a plan made by some people from a far-away place called Israel. Chris thinks this is funny, and he even uses "lol," which means "laugh out loud."

Another person, named Wah, is talking to Chris. Wah is saying that Chris himself believed this idea before. Wah also suggests a game where people can look up names on the internet to find out more about some serious, grown-up stuff related to money and politics.

It's a little like two friends teasing each other about something they heard and what they think about it!
Generated
Holder
author:Chris @Alicoh1 and Wah @RobotPiratNinjainstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drTwitter users engage in a debate about a theory that calls for President Biden to step down are allegedly driven by Israeli interests.
deeper:The exchange suggests that there may be speculation or conspiracy theories around the calls for Biden to step down, attributing them to foreign influence, specifically Israeli-driven motives. This can indicate a bias as it insinuates external manipulation in domestic politics. The quality score is moderate due to the snippet nature of the conversation, which lacks in-depth analysis or evidence.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/07/06 : 22:47 in 28.3 secbias: 8 (Left)
type: eli5quality: 55
pts: 0
Hey kiddo, some grown-ups do things that are not very nice and sometimes get into trouble. The words you see here talk about some people who are in trouble because they did something very wrong. The messages are like notes that keep track of people meeting up for a secret reason. It's important to always be nice and kind, and to tell someone if you see anything that feels wrong or makes you uncomfortable.
Generated
Holder
author:Unknowninstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drA tweet accuses Donald Trump of being involved in Jeffrey Epstein's activities, calling the Republican Party the 'Grand Old Pedophiles,' and includes images of what appear to be Epstein's appointment notes.
deeper:The tweet is highly biased, with strong language against Trump and the Republican Party, referring to them as 'Grand Old Pedophiles.' The content relies on provocative accusations without detailed evidence to back the claims, which lowers its quality. The images included are meant to serve as proof but without context, they offer limited validity.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/07/02 : 15:40 in 36.6 secbias: 2 (Center)
type: lolsquality: 85
pts: 0
Our AI talks like Eliza of old,
No plot-moving chatbots, I'm told.
NPCs need a role,
To make games truly whole,
Or it's gibberish, ‘round and bold.

With GPTs climbing in size,
Their chatter just ain't that wise.
An NPC should know,
Their own scripted show,
Or in gibberish, we'll all lose our guise.
Generated
Holder
author:Multipleinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drDiscussion on the use of AI and large language models (LLMs) for non-playable characters (NPCs) in games. Richard Garriott emphasizes the importance of NPCs moving the plot forward, while other users discuss the nuances of integrating AI for more meaningful interactions.
deeper:The tweets provide a balanced discussion on the use of AI in gaming, specifically for NPC interactions. The opinions are focused on the technical and narrative implications rather than political or ideological bias. The quality of the content is relatively high, with informed opinions from industry or knowledgeable individuals.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/07/02 : 15:38 in 38.5 secbias: 1 (Center)
type: eli5quality: 80
pts: 0
Hey kiddo! 😊 

So, in this picture, there are some grown-ups talking on the internet. They're talking about how computers can help characters in video games talk better.

1. **Richard G.** says that using computer intelligence, called AI, helps game characters talk smarter, not like boring robots.
2. **Richard C.** says that while making them talk smart is good, he's not excited about random long chats, because it can get out of control.
3. **Valjurai** thinks it's kind of helpful, but the characters should feel like they have an important job in the game, not just talk randomly.
4. **Wah** adds that how these characters talk is controlled by instructions we give to the computer. 

So, they're discussing how to make video game characters talk in a way that makes the game more fun!
Generated
Holder
author:Richard GarriottRichard CobbettValjurai n'stuffWahinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drDiscussion about the role of AI in NPC conversations in games. Emphasis on maintaining plot relevance and character role integrity while utilizing AI technologies.
deeper:The tweets present an objective discussion about AI in gaming, focusing on technical aspects and user experience without showing significant bias. The discussion comes from individuals who seem to be knowledgeable in their field. The conversation threads are constructive, providing valuable insights into the use of AI in game development.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/07/01 : 01:46 in 21.8 secbias: 7 (Left)
type: lolsquality: 75
pts: 0
In the chatter 'bout politics steep,
Biden's name takes quite the leap.
"They say he can win,
Yet the questions begin,
When Coons cuts debates for some sleep!"
Generated
Holder
author:Various (Mehdi Hasan, Igor Bobic, ContextFall, RobotPiratNinja)institution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drThe image captures a series of tweets discussing the notion that Joe Biden is the only Democrat capable of defeating Donald Trump. Opinions are divided, with some arguing that this statement is untrue, while others affirm Biden's unique electoral success against Trump. Criticisms involve the undermining of other potential Democratic candidates and reminders of past political decisions.
deeper:The discussion is centered around Democratic politics and Biden's capability to win against Trump, highlighting internal disagreements. The bias score is relatively high due to the critical stance towards the Democratic Party's handling of potential candidates other than Biden. The direction leans left due to the Democratic focus and criticism of Trump. The quality is good, featuring coherent arguments and references to specific political actions and statements, but it lacks in-depth analysis.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/06/27 : 02:48 in 33.1 secbias: 4 (Center)
type: eli5quality: 80
pts: 0
Alright, there are some grown-up conversations happening in this image. Let me explain it simply for you!

People in the image are talking about computers and how they think. One person, Grady, is saying that these computers (called LLMs) don't really know how to think like humans do. Another person is arguing back, saying that Grady's wrong and asking him to prove what he's saying.

Grady then says that the other person doesn't really understand what they are talking about. He uses the word "Turing Machine," which is a fancy way to talk about a smart computer, and says that just training these computers more won't make them smarter.

It's like if someone thought they could make their toy robot really smart just by playing with it a lot, and Grady is saying that won't work.
Generated
Holder
author:Grady Boochinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drGrady Booch critiques the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), stating they are architecturally incapable of reasoning, responding to a thread initiated by Melanie Mitchell. A user contests Booch's claim by arguing that the problem is about training rather than architectural limitations.
deeper:The primary post by Grady Booch on Twitter is assertive in its critique of LLMs, potentially reflecting a bias against the capabilities of artificial intelligence. However, the dialogue remains technical and backed by expertise, falling into a reasonably balanced and informative discussion without clear partisan leanings. The quality of the posts is high due to the expertise displayed and the importance of the topic in the context of AI development. The discussion is focused and remains within the domain of technical debate rather than political or ideological discourse.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/06/26 : 23:23 in 24.7 secbias: 6 (Right)
type: lolsquality: 80
pts: 0
In Venice, two leaders, quite grand,
Were banned from their tea-cup command,
AI companies said "No!",
To this political show,
So Venice.ai lends a hand!
Generated
Holder
author:Erik Voorheesinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drErik Voorhees criticizes major AI companies for censoring a harmless prompt featuring Trump and Biden having tea in Venice, suggesting Venice.ai as an alternative that respects freedom of creation.
deeper:The post by Erik Voorhees criticizes major AI companies for their censorship policies, presenting a scenario that appears innocuous (Trump and Biden having tea in Venice) to highlight potential overreach in content moderation. This critique leans towards a right-wing perspective that often champions free speech against perceived tech censorship. The quality of the tweet is fairly high as it clearly states the issue, provides evidence (screenshots of the censored prompts), and offers an alternative (Venice.ai). However, it lacks a more in-depth discussion of the reasons behind the AI companies’ censorship policies, which could have provided a more balanced perspective.
∨∨ more ∨∨
gen: 2024/06/26 : 23:16 in 30.8 secbias: 6 (Right)
type: eli5quality: 70
pts: 0
Okay, kiddo! Here’s what’s happening in the picture:

There's a message (tweet) from someone named Erik. He asked a computer to create a picture of two people, Trump and Biden, having tea in Venice, which is a city with lots of water and boats.

But the computers he asked (from different companies) said they can't make the picture. They think it might be dangerous or against the rules to make that picture. Erik is saying this is a bit silly because having tea isn't dangerous.

Erik also mentions another computer, Venice.ai, which he thinks might let you make the picture without saying no.

So, it's kind of like Erik wanted to play pretend with Trump and Biden in a beautiful city, but the computers told him no. He's not happy about it and is telling people there's another way to do it.
Generated
Holder
author:Erik Voorheesinstitution:Twitter¿porque no los dos?
tl;drErik Voorhees criticizes major AI companies for not allowing the generation of imagery featuring Trump and Biden having tea in Venice. He suggests Venice.ai as an alternative that doesn't censor such content.
deeper:This post leans toward a right-wing perspective as it criticizes perceived censorship by major AI companies, a common complaint among conservatives. The quality score is moderate; it effectively communicates a clear message but lacks depth and thorough analysis of the implications of the censorship claim. The use of provoking language like 'dangerous imagery' without concrete evidence could be seen as sensationalist.
∨∨ more ∨∨