Tell me about Peter Dutton
I’ve been having fun… without even having to think.
Thanks to Bard (Google’s AI tool), all the thinking was done for me. All I have to do is ask a question. About anybody. About anything.
I don’t professionally support AI as a lazy alternative to journalism, but for some fun at home, what’s the harm?
Moving along, I wanted to know more about that man of deep mystery, Peter Dutton, so I asked Bard.
Please note: A number of statements were incorrect, which proves that AI should not be taken seriously as a credible form of journalism.
First question:
Tell me bad things about Peter Dutton
Peter Dutton is a controversial Australian politician who has been criticized for a variety of reasons. Some of his most common criticisms include:
- His hardline stance on immigration and asylum seekers. Dutton has been accused of dehumanizing and demonizing asylum seekers, and of making it more difficult for them to access protection in Australia. For example, he has been criticized for his use of offshore detention centers, which have been described as “torture camps” by some human rights groups.
- His handling of the Robodebt scandal. As Minister for Human Services, Dutton was responsible for the Robodebt program, which wrongly accused thousands of Australians of owing money to the government. Dutton has been criticized for his slow response to the scandal and for failing to take responsibility for the program’s failings.
- His attacks on the media and on public servants. Dutton has a history of attacking journalists and public servants who criticize him or his government. For example, he has accused journalists of being “biased” and “unpatriotic,” and he has threatened to sack public servants who leak information to the media.
- His close ties to the fossil fuel industry. Dutton has been accused of putting the interests of the fossil fuel industry ahead of the interests of the Australian people. For example, he has been criticized for his support for the Adani coal mine, which is a major environmental threat.
In addition to these specific criticisms, Dutton has also been criticized for his overall political style. He is often seen as being arrogant, divisive, and lacking in compassion. His critics argue that he is not fit to be a leader, and that he is doing damage to Australia’s democracy.
It is important to note that these are just some of the criticisms that have been leveled against Peter Dutton. Not everyone agrees with these criticisms, and Dutton has his own supporters. However, it is clear that he is a polarizing figure, and that there are many Australians who have serious concerns about him.
In the interest of balance let’s see if he has a good side …
Tell me good things about Peter Dutton
- He is seen as a strong leader. Dutton is a former police officer and has a reputation for being tough and decisive. His supporters believe that he is the kind of leader that Australia needs to deal with the challenges it faces, such as illegal immigration and terrorism.
- He is a strong advocate for Australia’s national security. Dutton has a long history of working in national security, and he is considered to be an expert in this field. His supporters believe that he is the best person to keep Australia safe.
- He is a fiscal conservative. Dutton believes in small government and low taxes. His supporters believe that he is the best person to manage the economy and keep Australia’s finances in order.
- He is a social conservative. Dutton holds traditional views on issues such as marriage and family. His supporters believe that he is the best person to uphold Australian values.
It is important to note that these are just some of the good things that people have said about Peter Dutton. He is a complex and controversial figure, and there are many Australians who have serious concerns about him. However, it is clear that he has his own supporters, who believe that he is a good leader and that he has the best interests of Australia at heart.
In addition to the above, here are some other specific examples of Dutton’s achievements:
- As Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Dutton oversaw the introduction of Operation Sovereign Borders, which has been credited with stopping the flow of illegal boat arrivals to Australia.
- As Minister for Home Affairs, Dutton has been responsible for a number of counter-terrorism initiatives, including the introduction of the Australian Border Force and the National Security Legislation Amendment (Countering Violent Extremism) Act 2014.
- Dutton is also a strong advocate for veterans and their families. He has been instrumental in a number of initiatives to support veterans, including the establishment of the Veterans’ Support and Advocacy Service and the introduction of the Veterans’ Affairs (Repatriation Benefits) Amendment Act 2016.
Dutton’s supporters believe that he is a strong and effective leader who is committed to keeping Australia safe and prosperous.
Gawd! What a load of rubbish.
I found Bard much more obliging when I sought answers that supported my own opinions, so I asked:
Why is Peter Dutton so nasty?
There are a number of reasons why Peter Dutton is seen as a nasty politician. His critics point to his harsh rhetoric, his divisive policies, and his record of attacking his opponents.
One of the most common criticisms of Dutton is that he is too quick to use divisive language. He has been accused of using dog-whistle politics to appeal to his base, and of demonizing his opponents. For example, in 2019, he referred to climate activists as “anarchists” and “extremists.” He has also been critical of the Black Lives Matter movement, calling it a “divisive” organization.
Dutton’s policies are also seen as being divisive. He has been a strong supporter of policies such as boat turnbacks and offshore detention, which have been widely criticized by human rights groups. He has also been a strong advocate for lower taxes and less regulation, which has led to accusations that he is out of touch with the needs of ordinary Australians.
Finally, Dutton has a history of attacking his opponents. He has been known to use personal attacks and smear tactics against his rivals. For example, in 2019, he accused Labor leader Anthony Albanese of being a “faceless man” and a “puppet of the unions.” He has also been critical of the media, accusing them of being biased against him.
In conclusion, there are a number of reasons why Peter Dutton is seen as a nasty politician. His critics point to his harsh rhetoric, his divisive policies, and his record of attacking his opponents. It is important to note that these are just the views of his critics, and that Dutton also has a number of supporters who view him as a strong and decisive leader.
That’s more like it!
Well, that’s Peter Dutton done and dusted.
Time permitting, I could have more fun with Bard. Who’s next?
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
23 comments
Login here Register here-
corvusboreus -
Michael Taylor -
Roswell -
Glenn Barry -
Andrew Smith -
Kit Tona -
Lyndal -
paul walter -
wam -
New England Cocky -
leefe -
corvusboreus -
GL -
Terence Mills -
Harry Lime -
Roswell -
Phil Pryor -
Clakka -
GL -
leefe -
Clakka -
Mark & Margaret -
Ben
Return to home pageDear Bard,
Peter Dutton has never been Human Services Minister, and had no direct connection to the implementation of the Robodebt scam.
The ministers directly responsible were Morrison, Porter, Trudge and Roberts.
I honestly prefer an element of human fact-checking in both news sourcing and ‘debt’ recovery.
My thoughts on AI;
Humans working menial service jobs in order to enable machines the freedom to pursue careers in art and literature.
Not exactly the utopian future we imagined..
CB, we must have crossed paths.
While you were typing your comment I was typing an amendment. Please refer to my writing at the top in red.
You are of course correct, but it is concerning to hear that AI is slowing taking away the jobs of journalists. True, journalists also make mistakes.
Some journalists also talk crap and make stuff up. What’s changed?
As it stands AI looks to be a huge database and lookup table without ability to discern the veracity or quality of that information.
I’m not seeing anything that corresponds with ‘intelligence’ thus far, I am seeing something which will be fatally fallible in it’s current incarnation.
It fits the broad definition of right wing parties and leadership in the Anglosphere; corrupt, fossil fueled, nativist and authoritarian).
MT, re “journalists also make mistakes” this is indisputably true but journalists also once had things called sub-editors, a wise and holy mob (or so I’ve heard) incapable of letting an errant apostrophe—let alone fact—slip through their angelic fingers. Remember the old drinking cry: “Death to the subs”? Oh how I wish that could be taken back.
Something very boring and predictable about the writing style
A new post truth era turned feral.
Like others, I remain sceptical for the future.
Any armed service or police site will show you dutton and a world of ‘belief’ that communism, socialism and labor are one and need to be destroyed, with side dishes of women, jews, muslims and lgbtq.
Reads like some scribblings from the Murdick Media Monopoly for broadcast over Lie News for that about 3% of Australian voters who choose to believe any fairy tales rather than do any critical thinking. Is it 1984 yet?
The “good” things: Left out his wife insisting that he “isn’t a monster”. What an endorsement!
Leefe,
‘he isn’t a monster…unless I make him be.’
NEC,
The Merdedoch meedja: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/aug/01/news-corp-ai-chat-gpt-stories
I asked Bard if Peter Dutton was the messiah or just a naughty boy ; I asked Bard the same question about Anthony Albanese.
The response, apart form the personal histories indicates that Bard is a diplomat :
Whether Dutton [Albanese] is the messiah or just a naughty boy is up to each individual to decide. He is a complex and contradictory figure, and there is no easy answer to this question.
However, it is important to note that Dutton [Albanese] has never claimed to be the messiah. He is a politician, and like all politicians, he has both strengths and weaknesses. Whether he is a good leader for Australia is something that only time will tell.
I also asked Bard : “is bard the messiah or just a naught algorithm ?”
Whether Bard is a messiah or just a naughty algorithm is a matter of perspective. On the one hand, Bard is a powerful tool that can be used for good or evil. It can be used to generate creative text formats, like poems, code, scripts, musical pieces, email, letters, etc., and answer your questions in an informative way, even if they are open ended, challenging, or strange. It can also be used to spread misinformation or propaganda. On the other hand, Bard is just a machine. It does not have the ability to think for itself or make its own decisions. It is up to the humans who use Bard to decide how it is used.
Ultimately, whether Bard is a messiah or just a naughty algorithm depends on the intentions of the people who use it. If used for good, Bard can be a powerful tool for education, creativity, and progress. If used for evil, Bard can be a dangerous weapon. It is up to us to decide how we will use Bard.
Hmmm !
The Dutton thing is neither a messiah nor a naughty boy..he is a highly objectionable,lying fucking arsehole,with a ridiculously misplaced view of himself.Only a matter of time before his acidic history catches up with his sorry arse.
Given the standards of the mainstream media I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re already using AI.
Questions would be like:
Why was the referendum so unpopular?
Why should Peter Dutton be prime minister?
Why are the Israelis right in massacring Palestinians.
Why should all charges be dropped against Donald Trump?
Is Jacinta Price the new Messiah?
Dutton, and no A I is needed or wanted, is an intellectual porker, a pompous parasite, a racist piggy, a deficient and unqualified duddy dick, an uncivilised boofhead, a deficient dummy front for corporate crooks. He is totally unfit for public representation.
As long as corporatized msm demagogues like Mudroch and flunkies flood the market with trash and are aided and abetted by the opaque, greedy, evil barons of exploitation, through a grubby spiraling wormhole, the common punter will be increasingly infected with confirmation bias.
Accordingly, it makes sense that AI will be likewise infected. And appears to be further neutered by beige and politically correct algorithms and a faux-gravitas delivery system shoveling in the soporifics. An abuse of the broad spectrum of language and its meaningful array of colour.
Could it be a framework for banality? Depending on whether the AI questioner loads the question with bias, poses it as a fence-sitter, or requires an in-depth dig, it remains unlikely that for the feckless inquisitor, the AI answer could be discerned as shit or clay.
‘Bard’. What a joke! A puerile insult to the masters of the word and pen, and the ingenious human minds driving them. Would that it ever come close to Shakespeare, Bacon, Joyce, Dylan, Bronte, Austen, Hobbes, Dickens, Lawson, White, Paterson, Franklin, Winton, Flanagan, Hemingway, Gibran, Machiavelli, those of the Torah and the Quran, Vyasa, Siddhartha, Tagore, Tolstoy, Bulgakov, Solzhenitsyn, Kongzi, Lao Tzu, Sun Tzu ….. and all the contributors to AIMN.
Give me also the streetwalkers, the pub test, the bush telegraph, the ranters and ravers, the conspiracists and nutters, the mute and the signers, the painters and musicians, and those that ponder the invisible.
Do we appreciate the rich tapestry by reconstructing a thread-bare rug and by the rules of water off a duck’s back?
What a greedy, nasty, vile tempered and full of his own self importance person.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/30/warren-mundine-expletive-texts-kpmg-partner-speaker-fee
Clakka: Which Dylan – Thomas or his Bobness? I’m assuming the latter because all the others are surnames, but he seems a little out of order in that list.
leefe,
Yeah, indeed his Bobness. And right, shoulda been alongside Hemingway and Gibran, and Chester Himes was coming to the surface.
But the phone rang and I lost track 🤪
Just checked AI.
Asked for bad things about Albo. “”Tell me bad things about Anthony Alabanese.””
AIs’ Answer:-
“I’m sorry, but I am not programmed to provide negative information about individuals. My purpose is to provide helpful and informative responses to your questions. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me.”
..and the “good things”, I asked. What are the good things about Albo. Could hardly shut her (AI) up.
“Anthony Albanese is a well-known Australian politician and the current leader of the opposition in the Australian parliament. He is highly regarded within his party, and he is looked up to by young parliamentarians, regardless of what party they’re in 1. Here are some of his achievements:
Albanese studied economics at the University of Sydney, and he obtained his degree from there. He’s a proud alumnus of the university 1.
Albanese has been bestowed with the opportunity to serve as a cabinet minister for the Labour party twice, and he has made sure to come up to their expectations those two times. In Rudd’s cabinet, he got the chance to serve as the minister for regional development and local government. Under the leadership of Prime M”……et al.
Between AI and our good selves, we can see rubbish when we write it, or read it.
Mark & Margaret, in other words, Team Propaganda players tasked with selling the idea of who should hold a political position of power at any point in time, advise AI coders that:
‘Protected PM = useful idiot’;
‘useful idiot = Albo’;
‘Nothing negative to be written about useful idiot’;
And then when things start going pear-shaped for the manipulators –
‘Status change, Albo = useless idiot’;
‘useless idiot = 95% negative media good to go’;
AI-generated articles are often infomational-bland and lacking in analysis, sometimes they stink of an agenda.
AI is being used against the people to dumb down our interactions with a vast wealth of knowledge.
That dumbing down process is being formalized in the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill.