Germany

You use AI to articulate your thoughts & post here , someday some wise ass will use AI to generate a response to your post . That's the end of forums as we know it for it'd be AI vs AI. People may find it funny . I think it's alarming. We're outsourcing our thought process .
It’s still my thoughts and opinions. AI is just a tool that fills in the blanks in between

I was asked to justify my thoughts on my initial assertion with examples and justification

I just don’t have the time to break the speech down into word by word, but I can extract a transcript from YouTube and prompt an AI to extrapolate on a couple salient points I’m making

Yes it’s scary that someone can be this efficient with very little effort, all the more reason for India to invest heavily in AI
 
Last edited:
Yes it’s scary that someone can be this efficient with very little effort, all the more reason for India to invest heavily in AI
How many words did you take to "justify" your assertion ? Do you really think that someone will actually read all of that- wall of text ? Doesn't seem efficient or "effective" way to hold a conversation.

World around us can't be understood by integers, but by float. By parameterizing the knowledge in discrete form, which it is not, we are loosing part of information, in this case be context.And last I know computers are still bad with floating system.
 
It was a specific ask to analyze my assertion. I don’t use AI in normal interactions. This was specific
 
European Car manufacturers were struggling with EV Prices. BYD alone is able to trade blows with an Volkswagen to even BMW, Audi with their product lineup.

They are just trying to use Chinese EV Architecture to reduce cost. Missed opportunity for homegrown car makers of TATA and Mahindra. Can easily do good sales in Eastern European countries where your competitor is Dacia, Renault, Skoda. Both of our guys have decent products with Tata and simply better products with Mahindra.
It's not easy to export cars to whitoid countries as they will just ban out cars citing the safety concern.
China is the largest exporter in the world and have lots of power to trade.
 
You know we can't afford to do AI analysis of political videos because of bias inherent in it.
True, all the more reason for domestic variants of the model. Although models have a setting called temperature, where you can reduce it's creativity and make it listen to what you say explicitly.

 
True, all the more reason for domestic variants of the model. Although models have a setting called temperature, where you can reduce it's creativity and make it listen to what you say explicitly.


how will you input this particular piece of information into an AI model?
right now he is in a phase where he is trying to build more think tank partnerships in other continents on behalf of his think tank. his audience was the guy sitting next to him, not the crowd sitting infront of him in that german video.
 
how will you input this particular piece of information into an AI model?
Prompt:

Context of the Indian panelist:

right now he is in a phase where he is trying to build more think tank partnerships in other continents on behalf of his think tank. his audience was the guy sitting next to him, not the crowd sitting infront of him in that german video.

Conversation:

[insert yourtube transcript here]

Analyze the conversation and summarize what you think of the debate



Generated Output:

The debate between Samir Saran, the Indian panelist, and the other speakers revolves around the global geopolitical and economic order, with a particular focus on Europe's engagement with rising powers such as India.

### Key Points:
1. **India's Growth and Europe's Stance:**
- Samir Saran emphasizes India's significant economic growth and potential, highlighting that Europe has yet to fully embrace or recognize India's rise. He criticizes Europe's hesitancy to pivot away from China, accusing it of being too reliant on China for business and growth.
- Saran notes that India is growing rapidly, attributing this to its work ethic and contrasting it with Europe's slower pace, especially its habit of taking long vacations.

2. **Europe’s Identity Crisis:**
- Saran also argues that Europe lacks critical thinking and needs to redefine its global identity, especially given its large economic power. He critiques Europe's unwillingness to diversify and bet on new, emerging economies like India.

3. **Global South and the Rules-Based Order:**
- A major theme is the frustration felt by many countries in the Global South, who believe the existing global order is unfair and benefits a small elite in the West. Both Saran and the other panelists agree that the rules need to be reformed to better accommodate the interests of the Global South.
- Saran points to the failures in Afghanistan and the global order's selective enforcement of rules as examples of why many countries distrust the current system. He calls for new institutions and more representation for countries like India, Brazil, and South Africa in global governance bodies like the UN Security Council.

4. **China's Influence in Europe:**
- Saran is particularly critical of Europe's relationship with China, accusing it of being addicted to Chinese trade and investments. He argues that Europe is doubling down on its economic ties with China, despite the security risks and the need for diversification.

5. **Partnerships for the Future:**
- Both Saran and the other speakers agree that new partnerships are crucial for the future, especially between India and Europe. Saran stresses that an India-EU partnership can offer mutual benefits, particularly in areas like technology, defense, and education.
- There's also a recognition that the world has become more transactional, and future partnerships should be built on long-term, sustainable benefits rather than short-term gains.

### Conclusion:
The debate reflects a deep divide between how Europe views its role in the world and how emerging powers like India perceive Europe’s hesitancy to adapt to the shifting global landscape. Saran’s arguments push for Europe to embrace new realities, especially as India and other developing nations take on a more prominent role in global growth and governance. The conversation is a call for Europe to rethink its alliances and adopt a more dynamic and forward-thinking approach in a multipolar world.
 
Prompt:

Context of the Indian panelist:

right now he is in a phase where he is trying to build more think tank partnerships in other continents on behalf of his think tank. his audience was the guy sitting next to him, not the crowd sitting infront of him in that german video.

Conversation:

[insert yourtube transcript here]

Analyze the tonality of the conversation and summarize what you think the indian panelist could have done better



The tonality of the conversation involving the Indian panelist (Samir Saran) was assertive, direct, and often confrontational, aiming to provoke thought and challenge the status quo. He presented strong criticisms of Europe’s reliance on China, the global financial system, and the current geopolitical structure, focusing on the imbalance of power and influence between the Global North and South.

Key Aspects of the Tonality:​

  1. Bold and Unapologetic: Samir adopted a bold stance in critiquing Europe’s economic dependency on China, its reluctance to reform, and the need for Europe to engage more with countries like India. His remarks on Europe’s "China addiction" and its stagnant decision-making were delivered with a level of assertiveness designed to challenge the audience.
  2. Provocative: His comments on Europe "sleeping for two months a year" and the need to "retire" the old global governance structures were clearly intended to provoke. This created tension in the room but kept the conversation dynamic and engaging.
  3. Optimistic on India's Role: Despite his critique, Samir conveyed optimism about India's economic growth, positioning it as an emerging global leader that could provide an alternative to China. His promotion of India's potential partnerships with Europe was grounded in India's trajectory from a $4 trillion to a $10 trillion economy.
  4. Global South Advocate: Samir consistently framed his arguments from the perspective of the Global South, emphasizing how the current world order disproportionately benefits the West. His remarks aligned with a growing demand for reformation in global governance and representation for emerging economies.

Areas for Improvement:​

  1. Less Combative, More Collaborative: While his confrontational style grabbed attention, it might have alienated some European participants or potential partners. By softening the tone and offering more collaborative, solution-driven suggestions, he could have better fostered a spirit of partnership rather than division.
  2. More Specific Solutions: While Samir argued for the dismantling of structures like the P5 and reforming global governance, he could have provided more concrete and actionable steps. Offering clearer ideas about what the transition from the old system to a new one could look like—beyond just naming countries—would have added credibility to his argument.
  3. Balanced Criticism: The panelist's strong criticisms of Europe and the West could have been more balanced by acknowledging some of the complexities or benefits of the current system. While the need for reform was well-argued, a more nuanced take on how both regions could learn from each other might have helped bridge gaps in understanding.
  4. Better Engagement with the Panel: At times, his focus seemed to be more on making bold statements rather than engaging fully with the points raised by other panelists. Greater interaction and acknowledgment of their views would have allowed for a more fluid, constructive dialogue.
In summary, while Samir’s direct and challenging approach made for an engaging discussion, a more collaborative, nuanced tone with clearer solutions would have strengthened his message for the audience and the panel.
 
Prompt:

Context of the Indian panelist:

right now he is in a phase where he is trying to build more think tank partnerships in other continents on behalf of his think tank. his audience was the guy sitting next to him, not the crowd sitting infront of him in that german video.

Conversation:

[insert yourtube transcript here]

Find salient points where the Indian panelist sounded like he was whining and identify a counter example or rephrase what he could have said.



The Indian panelist makes a few points in a tone that may come across as complaining or defensive. Below are some key moments where he sounded like he was "whining" and how those statements could have been rephrased more constructively:

### 1. **Criticism of Europe's Work Culture**
- **What he said:** "You don't grow if you take two months off every year... you're not going to grow if you're going to be sleeping for two months."
- **Whining tone:** This could be interpreted as a direct criticism of European work culture, which might alienate the audience.
- **Rephrase:** He could have said, “India’s rapid growth is partly driven by a culture of hard work and long hours, which could provide insights for Europe in exploring more flexible growth strategies that fit its own context.”

### 2. **Frustration with Europe's Ties to China**
- **What he said:** "Europe has firmly resolved itself to China’s future... Europe businesses have firmly anchored themselves to China's future."
- **Whining tone:** This sounds like frustration with Europe's decisions, but offers no solution.
- **Rephrase:** He could have said, “I believe there is an incredible opportunity for Europe to balance its economic relationships by diversifying partnerships, especially with emerging markets like India, which offer high growth potential and shared democratic values.”

### 3. **Demand for a Global Reset**
- **What he said:** "For me, the UN Security Council represents the continuation of a colonial project... it needs to be demolished."
- **Whining tone:** The tone is overly confrontational and dismissive of the existing structure without proposing a clear constructive alternative.
- **Rephrase:** He could have framed it more diplomatically: “The global governance structure, including the UN Security Council, needs reform to reflect the realities of today's multipolar world. We must ensure that emerging powers, such as India and other countries in the global South, have a stronger voice.”

### 4. **Europe's Reluctance on China**
- **What he said:** "Europe’s China addiction is a problem... you are not willing to change."
- **Whining tone:** This comes across as accusatory and confrontational.
- **Rephrase:** A more constructive approach could have been, “While Europe's economic ties with China are deeply rooted, there’s an opportunity to diversify trade relations with countries like India, which offers a stable and rapidly growing market, along with shared democratic principles.”

### 5. **Blaming the West for Financial Flows**
- **What he said:** "If I was sitting on the Taps of money... it’s your fault if there’s an unequal financial architecture."
- **Whining tone:** Directly blaming the West for unequal financial systems can sound accusatory without being constructive.
- **Rephrase:** He could have emphasized collaboration: “There’s a great opportunity for developed economies to work with emerging markets to create a more inclusive financial architecture that allows for shared prosperity and global stability.”

In all these cases, the tone could have been shifted from frustration to one of opportunity and collaboration, which would help build rapport with the audience and suggest solutions instead of highlighting grievances.
 
As you can see the model behaves completely differently based on the prompt it is receiving from the user.
 
As you can see the model behaves completely differently based on the prompt it is receiving from the user.

precisely, this is a version of the discussion we were having at DFI as well when chatgpt and gemini was released for public, models when they get trained there is an element of bias that creeps in to the output they are generating.

in this case, as someone one who has been tracking evolution of MSC's view (represented by german guy on the panel, female journo is irrelevant here) on India and "global south" for atleast 4-5 years, i would agree with the first one and disagree with the other two. over the years, MSC's approach has moved towards india's point of view with the same tonality which you are referring to as "whining".

since there is a man in loop, the man's bias is influencing the outcome.

India is a peculiar case in this world at the moment. any topic we take it, can be true and false at the same time. with so much nuance that a "man in loop" needs to be aware of, that chances are confirmation bias gets solidified as the "truth" if the reader is not aware of the prompt. for example : this is not hard to imagine, what the output of algorithm would be if same setup is used by nupur sharma of opindia and LKFC.

readers will not apply the mind so much, if they see the an opinion 100 times in a week artificially placed infront of them, they will end up assuming it as the truth.

in effect, algorithms end up reflecting and amplifying the real world biases.
 
Guys, this thread is derailed. I hope Mods clean up this thread. Stop using ChatGPT on this platform. If you have a hardon for dementia and for alzheimers later in life, then by all means stop using your brain all together. Otherwise, use it on daily basis. That's what makes us human. There is also another group which follows a book written by some moron in 7th century. Don't be one of them. There is no substitute for human intelligence yet.
 
they will just ban out cars citing the safety concern.
Or start building cars based on modern safety and emission standards? Unlike that shitbox Swift that is probably one of the most sold cars in India and crumples like a can of coke.
 
Or start building cars based on modern safety and emission standards? Unlike that shitbox Swift that is probably one of the most sold cars in India and crumples like a can of coke.

Indian vehicle manufacturers have been exporting cars as per specs of the consuming country for decades now, they have the capacity to re-configure their production line as per the standards of the consumer market. in effect, same swift which we get here will not go there if manufacturer does not want to.

during globalisation, because domestic standards didn't sync with global standards all the time, domestic industries like pharma, auto motive, engine manufactuers etc, were forced to build capabilities to cater to multiple standards, if they see value in it.

around 2005, we used to see maruti-suzuki export models at JNPT, models that were not available in Indian market at that point in time.
 
Or start building cars based on modern safety and emission standards? Unlike that shitbox Swift that is probably one of the most sold cars in India and crumples like a can of coke.
Problem is with RHD vs LHD. Indian manufacturers will have to invest into converting LHD cars into RHD. Tata and Mahindra have plenty of cars with good ratings, but huge chunk of our cheapskate population prefers paying 2Lakh less for MarutiSuzuki.
Also Indian govt is very aggressively pushing BS6 standards, most probably they know that China will take EV market, but India has chance of capturing the ICE market.
Screenshot_7-9-2024_141658_www.acko.com.jpeg
 

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Donate via Bitcoin - bc1qpc3h2l430vlfflc8w02t7qlkvltagt2y4k9dc2

qrcode
Back
Top