[albeebe1]

I've been using this prompt on articles that generate debate. Like microservices, or jwt's. It brings up some interesting points for this article...

Look at this article and point out any wording that seems meant to push a certain viewpoint. Note anything important the author leaves out, downplays, or overstates, including numbers that seem cherry-picked or lack context. Clearly separate basic facts from opinions or emotional language. Explain how people with different viewpoints might read the article differently. Also call out any common persuasion tactics like loaded wording, selective quotes, or appeals to authority.

[pjc50]

Who would win, the combined efforts of the best scientists in the field, or innuendo from a fancy markov model?

You could at least paste the points here.

[albeebe1]

For me, it’s a way to break down and analyze articles more critically, not to pick a side.

[CrossVR]

Note that LLMs can easily deduce what your biases are based on your prompt and give you only information that confirms your biases.

[purpleKiwi]

Thank you!