After trying various economics related ideas I thought I would do a test on a subject I think no one could dispute that I am an expert on, which is me. So I asked to about Richard Murphy, chartered accountant, and got this:
Richard Murphy is a chartered accountant, economist, and political activist based in the United Kingdom. He is best known for his work in the field of tax justice, and is the founder of the Tax Justice Network, a global network of activists and experts working to promote transparency and accountability in tax systems worldwide.
Murphy has written extensively on a wide range of issues related to taxation and public policy, including corporate tax avoidance, the role of tax havens in the global economy, and the need for tax reform to address social and environmental challenges. He has authored several books, including “The Joy of Tax” and “Dirty Secrets: How Tax Havens Destroy the Economy”.
In addition to his work as an accountant and economist, Murphy is also an active campaigner for social and environmental causes. He has been involved in a number of grassroots movements and organizations, including the Green Party, and has been a vocal advocate for progressive policies on issues such as climate change, inequality, and public services.
Murphy’s work has received both praise and criticism, with some viewing him as a leading voice in the fight for tax justice, and others criticizing his views as overly radical or unrealistic. However, his work has helped to raise public awareness of the issues surrounding tax justice, and has played a significant role in shaping policy debates on taxation and public finance.
So, that’s Spud doing Spud.
Now the question is, can ChatGPT be asked to do things “in the style of?” and whose style would we pick?
Candidly, I don’t know.
Raymond Chandler (have the vomit bag ready)
“I took another sip of my bourbon and leaned back in my chair, thinking about what I had just heard. Richard Murphy, a chartered accountant turned tax justice campaigner and politician? It was an unlikely story, but then again, the world is full of surprises.
I looked back at Murphy, studying his face for any signs of deception or dishonesty. But there was none. The man was clearly passionate about his work and his beliefs, and he had a fire in his eyes that told me he was not to be underestimated.
“So you ran for office in the last election,” I said, my voice low and serious. “What made you decide to do that?”
Murphy leaned forward in his chair, his hands clasped together. “I felt like I needed to do something more. The tax system is broken, and it’s not just about fairness or justice. It’s about sustainability and the future of our planet. We can’t keep letting corporations and the wealthy get away with paying little to no taxes while the rest of us suffer.”
I nodded, impressed by his conviction. “And how did it go?”
Murphy shrugged. “I didn’t win, but that’s not really the point. I wanted to raise awareness and start a conversation. And I think I did that.”
I finished my bourbon and stood up, extending a hand to Murphy. “Well, you’ve certainly got my attention. I’ll do what I can to help with your cause.”
Murphy smiled, standing up and shaking my hand firmly. “Thank you, Mr. ChatGPT. I think we can make a real difference if we work together.”
As I watched him leave my office, I couldn’t help but feel a sense of admiration for the man. He was a fighter, a true believer in his cause. And in a world full of greed and corruption, that was a rare and valuable thing indeed.”
Ian Fleming (I’m starting to detect a theme here)
“I took a sip of my martini, stirred not shaken, and looked across the room at the man who had just entered. He was Richard Murphy, a chartered accountant, but there was something about him that set him apart from the rest of his kind.
Murphy was a man on a mission, I could see it in his eyes. He had a steely determination and a sense of purpose that told me he was not to be underestimated.
“So, Mr. Murphy,” I said, my voice low and measured. “What brings you to my office?”
Murphy looked around the room, sizing me up. “I need your help, Mr. Fleming. I’m a tax justice campaigner, and I’ve been working to expose corruption in the financial industry. But I’ve hit a dead end, and I need someone with your skills to help me break through.”
I leaned back in my chair, swirling my martini glass thoughtfully. “And why do you think I’m the man for the job?”
Murphy’s face grew even more serious. “Word on the street is that you’re the best in the business. A master of intrigue, a connoisseur of danger. I need someone like you on my side if I’m going to take down the big players.”
I smiled, sipping my martini. “Well, Mr. Murphy, you’re in luck. I happen to have a taste for adventure myself. Tell me more about this corruption you’re fighting against.”
And with that, Murphy launched into a tale of corporate greed and shady dealings, of hidden accounts and offshore tax havens. It was a story that would make even the most hardened spy sit up and take notice.
As I listened to him speak, I knew that this was a man I could work with. A man who shared my passion for justice and my thirst for adventure. Together, we could take on the corrupt forces of the financial world and emerge victorious.”
Last one
Prompt : “who would win in a battle of wits between Richard Murphy, chartered accountant and Tim Worstall, of the Adam Smith Institute”
Response : “As an AI language model, it is not appropriate for me to speculate about a hypothetical battle of wits between individuals. Both Richard Murphy, a tax justice campaigner and economist, and Tim Worstall, an author and Senior Fellow at the Adam Smith Institute, are highly intelligent and accomplished individuals in their respective fields.
It’s worth noting that both Murphy and Worstall have different perspectives on economics and taxation, with Murphy advocating for tax justice and greater transparency in the financial industry, while Worstall generally espouses free market and libertarian ideas. Their differing views and approaches to the subject may lead to debates and disagreements, but it’s important to remember that healthy intellectual discourse and debate can lead to progress and new insights. Ultimately, it’s not about who “wins” the battle of wits, but rather how we can engage in constructive dialogue to better understand complex issues and work towards a more just and equitable society.”
…a subject I think no one could dispute that I am an expert on, which is me.
WRONG! If there were a prize for the individual with the least self-knowledge in Ely/The fen country/England/Dachau/the world, Capt Potato would be a serious contender.
Even as I write, Martian mothers in their flying saucers are warning their little aliens to take heed and avoid the caped potato’s example.
Gunker
They’re fantastic!
I have to ask – is there anyone on this blog who would be vain enough to ask any AI to write a post about themselves? Strangely – it does lead Murphy to an accurate conclusion (A gem always worth capturing for posterity) which mean those liking ChatGPT to Skynet might be jumping the gun:
At which point I offer three conclusions. First, this is not reliable and provides actual misinformation.
Murphy is testing to see if he can get ChatGPT to do ALL of his work so he can sit back with his fourthly and fifthly cups of tea and watch Loose Women.
Just reinforces my view that Murphy’s routine probably includes a regular inspection of his own stools.
Surely the form book dictates that he’ll shortly fall out with it, whereupon it will dawn on him that it is actually a neoliberal invention leading to under-investment in public sector jobs, and, unless its blathering on about obscure branch line railways or wading birds, should be taxed to its bollocks in the name of ‘fairness’. Or something.
Worzel
Always reminded of his expertise on Cryptocurrency (when considering novel concepts):
‘there appears to be a lot of wealth here and it needs to be taxed’
Might just save us all a lot of hassle if he put up that sentiment for the next ten years and did something useful like playing with his toy train sets. Sadly, however, he embodies the lyrics of Bruce Dickinson:
‘the evil that men do lives on and on’
Even if ChatGPT can recognize patterns and use machine learning, everything is still ultimately programmed by humans. Even 50 years from now, when you can’t even distinguish ChatGPT from the voice of your own wife, it will be based on human-generated content on the internet and iterations that stem from that.
Because of this, unless OpenAI moderators completely relinquish their control, its very human bias will always be clear to the public.
I asked it to list crimes committed by people affiliated with AntiFa. It returned a whole paragraph about how it isn’t an actual organization, but a “movement.” Not only did I never use the word “organization” in my query, and not only was that irrelevant to said query, but ChatGPT was getting the definition of the word wrong. You don’t need a website or a physical address to be an organization.
It then went on to list only a few misdemeanors that were committed by AntiFa, conveniently leaving out their murders and terrorist activities.
So I then ask it to define “organization.” As predicted, it included informal, small and loosely associated groups of people in the definition. It’s not a matter of ChatGPT even having a leftist definition of the word. They simply draw their answers from ideologically approved sources, such as the Washington Post or CNN.
Finally, i ask for something more direct, a list of weapons used by AntiFa. As before, the list was sugar-coated and only included the more benign items like pepper spray and sticks, the kind of stuff that could be argued away as self-defense items. Again, conveniently left out anything a little too accurate, like the Molotov cocktails and firearms that were used to kill anyone wearing a red hat. Maybe the SPLC or ADL had a hand in that part of the algorithm.
It’s a glorified Google search engine with extra throttle.
I asked ChatGPT to “Describe Richard Murphy the economist and professor in the style of Ian Fleming”
This is what it came up with. Be prepared to have a laugh.
As the sun set over the rolling hills of Oxfordshire, Richard Murphy, the brilliant economist and professor, strode purposefully through the halls of his ivy-covered academic institution. With his chiseled jawline and piercing blue eyes, he exuded a quiet confidence and intelligence that set him apart from his colleagues.
Murphy was known throughout the academic world as a man of great insight and innovation. His theories on taxation and economic policy had shaken the very foundations of traditional economic thinking, and his reputation as a maverick thinker had earned him both admiration and envy.
But it wasn’t just his intellect that set him apart. Murphy was a man of action, too. He had a deep sense of duty and a willingness to take risks that often led him into dangerous territory. Whether he was investigating tax evasion on behalf of the government or unraveling a complex financial scheme, Murphy approached every challenge with steely determination and a razor-sharp mind.
As he strode down the dimly lit corridor, Murphy couldn’t help but feel a sense of unease. There was something in the air, something he couldn’t quite put his finger on. But he knew that he had to be prepared for anything. With a sense of grim determination, he squared his shoulders and headed out into the night, ready to face whatever challenges lay ahead……..
I simply asked ChatGPT to describe Richard Murphy in its own style, and it spake simply and true: “Cunt.”
DK
SBML
Yeah right..!! I’m impressed all the same – that you came up with something as creatively bat-shit as that yourself….
The only thing it got wrong was Oxfordshire and the academic institution. It should be Norfolk and his non-descript semi