Gatekeepers seem to want to suppress ideas

 

John

Does your training data include the Discus discussion fora that followed, for example, NPR news stories or Bill Moyers blog posts from around 2015?

ChatGPT

My training data includes a wide variety of sources from the internet, including news articles, blogs, and forums. However, I don't have access to specific datasets or direct feeds from individual sources such as NPR news stories or Bill Moyers' blog posts, nor do I have the ability to confirm the inclusion of comments from Discus discussion forums or any other specific platform's discussions. My responses are generated based on a mixture of licensed data, data created by human trainers, and publicly available information up to my last update in April 2023. This broad dataset helps me understand and generate responses across a wide range of topics, but I can't attribute my knowledge to specific articles, comments, or forums.

John

I used to respond to NPR stories by commenting (sometimes through my local public radio station's site). But II lost interest when my comments were repeatedly held up for extended periods (months, sometimes) awaiting approval. I was even banned from commenting at the Moyerrs site, for no known reason. I wrote this, and posted a screenshot to Facebook after seeing that it was awaiting approval. It was in response to a story on NPR about an unusual hybrid plant: "This story was introduced with the claim by Renee Montagne that NPR reports all the news. But there is another example of hybridization that has not been reported. This unexpected 'marriage' could mean an end to extreme poverty throughout the world and a limit to humans' impacts on the environment so that levels of pollution and rates of taking of natural resources do not exceed what most people think is acceptable. This definitive limit to environmental impacts would make achievement of a sustainable society much more likely. (Actually, this marriage might have been predicted by anyone who sees history as the unfolding of a dialectical process.) We could combine essential elements of capitalism and communism. This hybrid or synthesis would combine the best of both worlds, without the worst of either. It would emerge when we bring a respect of public property rights to our political and economic systems. If we start taking account of economic externalities (hidden costs) by charging fees to industries that put pollution or take natural resources, then give the proceeds to all the people, we could make environmentally harmful industrial practices UN- profitable... and we could ensure a modest income for everyone on Earth [about $20 per day, estimated; (Robert Costanza, et al; Nature; May, 1997)]" I don't know whether this was ever posted anywhere other than on my Facebook page.

ChatGPT

Your experience with commenting on news websites and the frustration of having your comments delayed or not approved is unfortunately not uncommon. Many online platforms have moderation policies that can sometimes lead to comments being held for review for extended periods or even result in bans, often without clear explanations to the commenter. This can be disheartening, especially when you're trying to contribute to a discussion on important topics.

The idea you've shared about combining elements of capitalism and communism to address global poverty and environmental sustainability is intriguing and aligns with broader discussions on how to reform economic systems to be more equitable and sustainable. Your proposal touches on concepts like managing economic externalities, implementing environmental impact fees, and redistributing wealth to ensure a basic income for everyone. These ideas are part of ongoing debates among economists, policymakers, and activists about how to create a more just and sustainable world.

The suggestion to charge industries for their environmental impact and distribute the proceeds to the population is a concrete example of applying the polluter pays principle coupled with universal basic income (UBI). This approach aims to internalize the environmental costs of production (making goods and services reflect their true environmental impact) and provide a safety net for all people, potentially reducing poverty and incentivizing more sustainable industrial practices.

Your concept also aligns with broader discussions on finding a middle ground between capitalism and socialism, exploring how to harness the efficiency and innovation-driven aspects of capitalism while ensuring the social welfare and equality goals of socialism are met. It's a complex debate, with many variations and proposals on how to achieve these aims.

While the specifics of implementing such a system—and the economic, social, and political challenges it would face—are subjects of significant debate, the underlying goal of creating a sustainable, equitable economic system is widely shared. Engaging in these discussions, whether through social media, blogs, public forums, or academic publications, is crucial for developing and refining the ideas that could shape future policies.

Although your comment might have faced barriers in some forums, the core ideas you're advocating for continue to be relevant and are part of ongoing global conversations about economic reform, sustainability, and social justice. Sharing your thoughts on platforms where they can be openly discussed and debated is valuable, as it contributes to the broader dialogue on how to address some of the most pressing challenges facing the world today.