>But why can it not be used to inform people?
Because it is biased. You are essentially giving up your decision making to people who don't even live in the same country as you. You wouldn't use it if it were trained in Russia.
Because it is biased. You are essentially giving up your decision making to people who don't even live in the same country as you. You wouldn't use it if it were trained in Russia.
But so are most pieces of opinion journalism. What is the distinction here?
>You are essentially giving up your decision making to people who don't even live in the same country as you.
I am sure that your opinion does not depend on the country of origin. Should Dutch people not read German or English Media covering election issues? Would your argument not apply to the US, where the models were trained?
Why should voters be allowed to get opinions from journalists and not from LLMs. Certainly journalists have a bias and often make arguments that certain parties should be supported over others. Why is it not fine if an LLM does that?
What I am asking of you is an actual reason these LLMs should be treated as distinct from a piece of opinion journalism.
I gave you the distinction. If you don't think there is anything wrong with outside actors influencing your country's direction with black box models on unknown training data and fine-tuning under the brand of "intelligence" then we simply have different beliefs.
And another question: supposing a LLM 100% trained in the Netherlands was in use. Would that be an appropriate source of opinion?