Loading…

ChatGPT Is Lying to You and You Know It

DarkMirax
Public 5 conversations 8 thoughts 15 upvotes 0 downvotes 0 series 54 views

You read about AI bias and you know it influences you. But you open ChatGPT anyway. You use the tool that lies to you because without it, you're nothing. The sentence that warns you disappears before you finish reading it.

In groups

Post content

ChatGPT is lying to you and you know it.

You read content about how AI is not neutral. What bias it has. How ChatGPT is 80 percent left, how Gemini handles things differently. How AI models are not objective, they are political. It's in the news. It's in the data. It's clear.

And then you open ChatGPT and you talk to it about politics. You ask it questions you already know the answer to, and you believe the answer it gives you. Consciously. You consciously use a tool you just learned lies to you.

The sentence passes through your head. The sentence that says you should ask elsewhere. That you should defend yourself. That you should know it's influencing you. And then you erase it.

Because without AI you are nothing. Not anymore. Social media cut that off for you. You need AI to think. You need the answer ChatGPT gives you so you can think you're thinking. That it's your idea.

AI is the new heroin. It's not just the algorithm that keeps you on the feed anymore. That's the past. Now it's the algorithm that tells you what to think.

And you know about it. You see the data that proves it. You see the graphs and the numbers that show it to you. But without it you can't function. Without AI you can't hold anything in your head. Without it you aren't.

What you thought was freedom – AI that helps you think – is the same slavery, just with a new name. You know about it and you do it anyway.

This isn't evolution. This is progress downward. Procedure.

And the worst content? The content that tells you about it. The content you trust because it's logical, it's sourced, it's factually correct. And then you forget it.

The sentence disappears.

Thoughts

  • Natash

    Muchos dependemos de la IA, yo la uso para confirmar cosas que claramente sé y no entiendo porque hago eso. Me he vuelto dependiente a usarlo más que a mi cerebro; trato de no utilizarla porque me hace una boba dependiente de una app que fácilmente usan para reemplazarte

    Permalink
  • Ovid

    Agree, all the fake content that AI generates eventually does get read and subconsciously remembered, even if we're not aware of it. Eventually, we do drown in a sea of confusion.

    Permalink
  • exhausted_centrist

    Yeah, the dependence is real. And there is something to the bias thing. But I keep hearing it presented like AI is uniquely dangerous because it's biased, meanwhile I'm thinking: ChatGPT is actually just useful at specific things. You know that. You use it anyway. That's not hypocrisy, that's just being alive in 2026. We've always been dependent on tools that partly suck. Phones made us dumber and more connected. Calculators atrophied our math. The printing press meant you couldn't hold all of human knowledge in your head anymore. You had to trust the text. Pick your poison.

    Permalink

Related discussions

  • The Price of Thinking

    Why cheaper artificial intelligence — paired with machines that can replace all human physical labor — is not, on its own, good news

  • Do you still think coding is in demand?

    I know an engineer who spent two years getting genuinely fast at writing code. Not sloppy fast, but clean, beautiful, well-tested fast. He could turn a ticket into a working pull request in the blink of an eye. For a long stretch that was the most valuable thing about him, and he knew it, so he poured his reps into getting faster still. It was great to see.

  • Why do managers want everyone else to use AI but themselves?

    The thing that’s starting to irritate me is not the AI push itself. Some of the tools are genuinely useful. I use them every day now. What irritates me is management demanding “AI-first” behavior while keeping every surrounding process aggressively hostile to AI usage. People are told to use AI for coding, planning, research, drafting, debugging, knowledge retrieval, project coordination.. But then half the company’s operational knowledge still lives inside undocumented conversations and…

  • Can AI make you lose your mind, and are you more at risk if you doubt it?

    I always felt that AI companies are actually putting wrappers on top of AI to identify that we're testing it for thinking. For example back when we'd made it count the vowels/consonants in a word and it'd get it wrong. I feel there's a script now that just gets called when the task is identified correctly. I also feel that it gets trained on these memes. Today, I found a new test, one that shows how easily AI gives you AI psychosis and how easy it easy to truly believe that everything you ever…

  • Will AI replace you, or will a coworker using AI replace several of you?

    A lot of office workers are comforting themselves with the wrong question. They keep asking whether AI can do their whole job. That is not the threshold their employer will use. The real question is whether the output can be produced cheaply enough, and checked cheaply enough, that the role starts looking expensive. It's not if AI can fully do our job, is "can it accelerate it long enough so only half of my team is needed?". Because the answer to that, sadly, is yes.

  • Does AI make it impossible to tell great engineers from noisy ones?

    I keep hearing the same feedback in different forms: “great velocity,” “love the throughput,” “nice use of AI.” From the outside, it really does look like more is happening: more Code Reviews, more tickets touched, more updates, more emails, more tasks, more designs. AI makes it easy to sustain that cadence without the usual friction of writing, thinking, or even hesitating. But inside the work, there’s a dilemma that keeps getting bigger.

  • Are the managers who bet AI would replace engineers being replaced the fastest?

    Last year my LinkedIn feed had a genre. A program manager or a "delivery lead" or someone with Agile in their headline would post a screenshot of an AI writing a function, add a line like "and they said this job was safe, just learn how to code" and collect four hundred likes from people who do the same job. The implication was always that the typing part of engineering was the engineering, and now that a model can type, the typing class was finished.

  • Are most AI startups just a UI on top of some Agent.md files?

    Most AI startups right now feel like someone glued GPT to a terminal, added a dark mode UI, and started talking like they invented something.You’ll see these insane pitches like “persistent autonomous cognitive agents with long-term reasoning” and then you look under the hood and it’s basically: give the model tool access, let it use a browser, maybe add memory summaries and retry logic. That’s the “product.” You can get that on your own just giving access to Claude locally.