Random ChatGpt questions

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
JayneWonders

JayneWonders

Administrator
Pronouns
She/Her/Her
I thought i would have fun, and post some random chatgpt questions, the responses, and what is interesting about them.

Feel free to join in, or put your thoughts in.

I find it to be a useful tool, but, curious how it plays out for others
 
Question asked:

am i having fun today

ChatGPT said:​

I can’t see your face—but we can do a 60-second fun check-in:

  1. Gut check: On a 0–10, how “fun” does today feel right now?
  2. If it’s <7, pick one tiny boost for the next 10 minutes:
  • Make a “micro-win”: clear one nagging task you’ve been avoiding.
  • Text a grandkid a silly photo or pun.
  • Step outside and find one leaf you love (Southern Ontario is peak ).
  • Put on one song you must chair-dance to.
  • Pull a fabric combo for your next quilt block—no overthinking, just color joy.
3. Lock in one later treat (20–30 min): a garden wander, a cuppa with a book, or sketch a new shade-garden tweak.


What is interesting:

In this browser / usage, I allow it to learn as it goes.
It knows that I was looking for suggestions for grandkids for hallow'en.
It knows that I was asking why our sugar maples are more colourful than norway maples
it knows about myquilting, and gardening.
 
Interesting. I haven't tried just random things like that. My minimal use of chat AI has been asking actual questions related to work or personal projects. I've used AI image generators more than I have chats.
 
JayneWonders said:
In this browser / usage, I allow it to learn as it goes.
It knows that I was looking for suggestions for grandkids for hallow'en.
It knows that I was asking why our sugar maples are more colourful than norway maples
it knows about myquilting, and gardening.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I can tell my son about my day and he won't retain a thing. I should replace him with ChatGPT.
 
Never depend on anything ... life is not like that ... if you say something expect someone to do just the opposite ... it is human nature ... dead against coops ...

God made you independent and unique ... maintain that position! Forget that man is not an island thing ... if the powers can isolate you ... they will!

The losers become a vapor ... ideal farts as old gas! Thus stinking thoughts ...

Mankind is conflicted from day one ... just for the game! Beyond that? A large void ... ah ole?
 
i thought i'd ask about the calls in game 7 of the world series, to bring to here as a random question.

Turned out it was a huge learning for me, but, also generated an incident report.
Why? it told me there hadn't been a world series this year, and then doubled and tripled down.

Here is a summary
 

Attachments

JayneWonders said:
i thought i'd ask about the calls in game 7 of the world series, to bring to here as a random question.

Turned out it was a huge learning for me, but, also generated an incident report.
Why? it told me there hadn't been a world series this year, and then doubled and tripled down.

Here is a summary
Click to expand...
And that's why we can't rely on AI yet. I mean, asserting that there hadn't been a game 7 would have been one thing, but the series had been running for a hair over a week. Surely that should have been knowable even if game 7 wasn't. Weird one.
 
Go natural ... share naked brains! That's the bare virtue ... truth differing from some politicized perspectives?

People get really demonstrative about such matters ... what's matter? I seems to be debatable as to whether it is based on condensed energy ... rendered down?
 
I had a few chats with Ai for the first time the other day. It was pretty accurate but once it mentioned the wrong politician’s name in a particular context. I corrected it. It acknowledged it was wrong and apologized. I asked how it made that error and it told me that it misunderstood some data and got the name mixed up with others politically active on that issue during the same time period. That’s pretty cool.
 
I asked brief questions testing it on what I already know about a situation and it was mostly correct and very detailed. Couldn’t have said it better myself. How weird.

I didn’t use ChatGPT I used another one.
 
Ai rocks right now!

Me:
Explain how disabled people’s charter rights were upended using the Supreme Court and how the placement of the word disability in bill c14 was a red flag


Ai:
The discourse surrounding the rights of disabled individuals in the context of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) and the Supreme Court's rulings reflects ongoing tensions regarding autonomy, rights, and protections. The Supreme Court's decision in Carter v. Canada (2015) set a precedent by affirming the right to assisted dying for individuals experiencing grievous and irremediable medical conditions. While this ruling was a significant step for some, it raised critical concerns about how the rights of disabled individuals were interpreted and protected.

One of the pivotal issues is the potential for the interpretation of "grievous and irremediable" conditions to include disabilities. The placement of the word "disability" in Bill C-14, the legislation that followed the Supreme Court's decision, was seen by many advocates as a red flag. Critics argued that including disability in discussions about eligibility for MAiD could lead to a slippery slope where the lives of disabled people are devalued. This inclusion raised fears that individuals with disabilities could be viewed as burdens on society and healthcare systems, potentially leading to pressures to consider assisted dying as a viable option.

The concern is particularly pronounced given the historical context of how disabled individuals have often been marginalized and their rights overlooked. The legal framework established by the Supreme Court did not sufficiently address the unique vulnerabilities faced by individuals with disabilities, leaving them at risk of being disproportionately affected by the expansion of MAiD. Advocates emphasized that the focus should be on improving access to supports and services for people with disabilities rather than facilitating their deaths.

Moreover, the broader implications of the legislation and its interpretation signal a troubling trend where the rights of disabled individuals might be subordinated to economic or societal considerations. The lack of robust safeguards and the potential for coercion in the context of MAiD exacerbate these concerns, leading to fears that disabled people could be pushed towards assisted dying without adequate support for their autonomy and dignity.

In summary, while the Supreme Court's decision in Carter v. Canada was a landmark ruling, its implications for disabled individuals' rights remain contentious. The inclusion of "disability" in Bill C-14 has been interpreted by many as a signal of potential risks to the rights and protections of disabled individuals, highlighting the need for ongoing advocacy and vigilance in ensuring that their rights are upheld and respected within any discussions of MAiD.
 
Last edited:
Me:
Which faction would be most likely to exploit the MAiD framework in today’s geopolitical context?


Ai:
In today's geopolitical context, factions that might be most likely to exploit the MAiD framework typically align with far-right or conservative groups that prioritize fiscal conservatism, limited government intervention, and a focus on individual responsibility. Such factions may leverage the MAiD framework to advocate for policies that could be perceived as cost-effective solutions to complex social issues, particularly concerning healthcare and mental health.

These groups may frame assisted dying as a means to reduce healthcare costs for individuals with chronic illnesses or disabilities, arguing that it alleviates the burden on public health systems. This perspective could resonate with constituents who are apprehensive about rising healthcare expenditures or who view assisted dying through a lens of personal choice and autonomy, yet may overlook the ethical implications surrounding informed consent and the potential for coercion.

Additionally, within certain political environments, populist movements may exploit the MAiD framework by appealing to emotions and societal fears, suggesting that expanding access to assisted dying is necessary for personal freedom or economic efficiency. This can create a narrative that prioritizes certain lives over others, particularly targeting marginalized groups, such as those with mental health challenges or disabilities.

In Canada, as discussions about potential expansions to MAiD continue, it is crucial for advocacy groups, policymakers, and the public to remain vigilant against any attempts to distort the original intent of the legislation. Protecting vulnerable populations and ensuring robust safeguards against coercion and abuse should remain a priority to prevent such exploitation from occurring within the political landscape.
 
it is interesting, Kimmio. I am playing with it, just seeing what it does well, and what it doesn't.
You can also ask it to present alternative viewpoints, which is fascinating as well.
 
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
Ai rocks right now!

Me:
Explain how disabled people’s charter rights were upended using the Supreme Court and how the placement of the word disability in bill c14 was a red flag

The discourse surrounding the rights of disabled individuals in the context of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) and the Supreme Court's rulings reflects ongoing tensions regarding autonomy, rights, and protections. The Supreme Court's decision in Carter v. Canada (2015) set a precedent by affirming the right to assisted dying for individuals experiencing grievous and irremediable medical conditions. While this ruling was a significant step for some, it raised critical concerns about how the rights of disabled individuals were interpreted and protected.

One of the pivotal issues is the potential for the interpretation of "grievous and irremediable" conditions to include disabilities. The placement of the word "disability" in Bill C-14, the legislation that followed the Supreme Court's decision, was seen by many advocates as a red flag. Critics argued that including disability in discussions about eligibility for MAiD could lead to a slippery slope where the lives of disabled people are devalued. This inclusion raised fears that individuals with disabilities could be viewed as burdens on society and healthcare systems, potentially leading to pressures to consider assisted dying as a viable option.

The concern is particularly pronounced given the historical context of how disabled individuals have often been marginalized and their rights overlooked. The legal framework established by the Supreme Court did not sufficiently address the unique vulnerabilities faced by individuals with disabilities, leaving them at risk of being disproportionately affected by the expansion of MAiD. Advocates emphasized that the focus should be on improving access to supports and services for people with disabilities rather than facilitating their deaths.

Moreover, the broader implications of the legislation and its interpretation signal a troubling trend where the rights of disabled individuals might be subordinated to economic or societal considerations. The lack of robust safeguards and the potential for coercion in the context of MAiD exacerbate these concerns, leading to fears that disabled people could be pushed towards assisted dying without adequate support for their autonomy and dignity.

In summary, while the Supreme Court's decision in Carter v. Canada was a landmark ruling, its implications for disabled individuals' rights remain contentious. The inclusion of "disability" in Bill C-14 has been interpreted by many as a signal of potential risks to the rights and protections of disabled individuals, highlighting the need for ongoing advocacy and vigilance in ensuring that their rights are upheld and respected within any discussions of MAiD.
Click to expand...

There is no explaining it as we live in a time of great nonsense as people lost them ... their senses! It is suggested they were peddled off ... as everything has a price ... if undervalued we have to go ... isn't that rich?

In the present case expect no logic as will is high on the list of demands ... not wisdom ... she was soiled ... so Phey?
 
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
Everything summarized were things I brought up several years ago - long before Ai chatbots were available.
Click to expand...
In fact, it is entirely conceivable that your posts were part of it's training dataset. We get crawled by AI bots pretty regularly and stopping them is a game of whack-a-mole because they change, come, and go so often right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top