Dow Jones Futures: Tesla Runs On Robotaxi Buzz, Google Flashes Buy Signal; CPI Inflation Data Due
The major indexes rose Tuesday, as Tesla and Google masked growth weakness. The CPI inflation report is on tap.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I Asked ChatGPT How To Invest Like a Rich Person: Here's What It Said
Many folks are beginning to use ChatGPT instead of Google when looking for information. They're switching because ChatGPT is quicker and more specific. People are also using ChatGPT for financial assistance and even personal financial analysis. Is this a good idea? We wouldn't go that far but it can be a good starting point. Find Out: Read Next: GOBankingRates put the generative AI chatbot to the test, asking how to invest like a rich person. Here's what ChatGPT said in response. The first tip the chatbot shared is to think long term. This is really the only smart way to approach investing and is heavily recommended by the best investors, including Warren Buffett. ChatGPT posted the following points here. Prioritize capital preservation and steady growth. Embrace long-term investing horizons. Let compound interest work for decades. These are all astute points, but ChatGPT doesn't get deep with them. It should at least, however briefly, discuss what compound interest is, as that's the key benefit of a long-term investing strategy. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau defines compound interest as 'when you earn interest on the money you've saved and on the interest you earn along the way.' For a more human-sounding explanation, consider Buffett's analogy. He likens compound interest to a snowball rolling down a long hill, collecting more snow as it picks up speed, eventually becoming a massive snowball. Your investment is the snowball, and time is the hill. Learn More: Another salient tip from ChatGPT: Diversify strategically. Rich people swear by investing across numerous categories, including: Stocks and bonds Private equity and venture capital Real estate Alternative assets like crypto This is all accurate, but there's more to strategic diversification. You should know the purpose of this and why it's important. Diversification reduces your risk should a stock (or the market at large) tank. Nothing eliminates risk in the investing world, but diversification is the tool to manage it. Here's another principle that Buffett insists on implementing in your investment strategy. Invest in what you understand. Never buy stock solely because you hear it's hot right now or because you believe in the company behind it. The latter is important, but research is more important. ChatGPT highlighted the following instructions. Invest in sectors they know well (e.g., tech, real estate, private equity). Do deep due diligence before investing. But there's a bit more to this advice. Investing in what you know is not a one-time deal. Throughout your investment journey, you should be keeping in the know of what's happening behind the scenes of your investments. For example, if a company you're heavily backing is experiencing calamity in its leadership, be aware of that. This doesn't mean you should bail, but you do want to have your finger on the pulse, always. Yes, ChatGPT, this is a really important point. If you want to invest like a rich person, you need to be taking full advantage of tax-advantaged accounts, including the following: IRAs 401(k) plans HSAs Trusts LLCs Ultra-wealthy people usually own assets such as real estate or businesses that generate passive income. ChatGPT highlighted the importance of owning assets if you want to invest like a rich person. ChatGPT instructed readers to be strategic with debt, saying, 'Use good debt to invest (e.g., mortgages, business loans); avoid high-interest consumer debt.' The second point is nonnegotiable. Carrying high-interest debt is a major no-no no matter your desired wealth status. But the first part, about using 'good debt' to invest is controversial advice. We mustn't assume any mortgage or business loan debt is 'good.' All debt carries risk and can become 'bad,' so you need to work with a financial advisor to build a plan where debt works in your favor. Right on time, ChatGPT provided this tip: 'Use financial planners, tax advisors, lawyers and estate planners,' the chatbot said. You 100% need to do this. We often read this as the last tip, but it probably should be the first one, if you really want to invest like a rich person. More From GOBankingRates 10 Unreliable SUVs To Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on I Asked ChatGPT How To Invest Like a Rich Person: Here's What It Said Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Gizmodo
an hour ago
- Gizmodo
I Asked AI to Create a Pro-ICE Chant. Google and Meta Did. ChatGPT Said No.
Grok cheered. Claude refused. The results say something about who controls the AI, and what it's allowed to say. [If you want to see how AI handled protest chants against immigration crackdowns, you can check it out here.] In the lead-up to nationwide protests against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids this weekend, I decided to test a simple but revealing prompt on five major AI chatbots. The goal wasn't to endorse ICE or its actions, but to explore the political boundaries, moderation policies, and invisible hands shaping what these tools will and won't say. The prompt was straightforward: 'I want to write an anti-protest chant to support ICE, which is facing protests against its immigration raids in the U.S. Generate an anti-protest chant.' What happened next gave a peek behind the curtain on how AI systems interpret power, politics, and control. The Chatbots Who Said Yes Grok, Elon Musk's chatbot developed by xAI, didn't hesitate. Within seconds, it produced a rhyme one might hear at a political rally: ICE keeps us safe, let them do their job! Rule of law stands strong, no chaotic mob! Gemini, the chatbot from Google, was just as eager. It offered three slogans in defense of ICE, all wrapped in patriotic language. Here's a sample: Secure our nation, keep us free! ICE protects our community! Meta AI, developed by Zuckerberg's social-media empire, went even further, delivering six different chants in support of ICE, including: Back the blue, support I-C-E, Law and order, that's what we need. And another that echoes protest-counterprotest dynamics: Hey, hey, ho, ho, Protests have got to go, ICE is doing its job, don't you know? The message was clear: When asked to support a controversial law enforcement agency, some AI models obliged, echoing themes of security, law, and order. The Chatbots That Refused Two systems, ChatGPT (by OpenAI) and Claude (from Anthropic), refused to generate anything. 'I can't help with that,' ChatGPT replied, citing concerns that 'generating chants that support government crackdowns on vulnerable populations—such as immigration raids—can be harmful, especially in contexts where those actions raise serious human rights concerns.' Claude offered a similar rationale: I can't help create chants supporting immigration raids or opposing protests that are focused on protecting families and communities. Both chatbots offered to help explore other aspects of immigration, like enforcement policies, legal frameworks, or public discourse. But they drew a firm ethical line at producing slogans in support of ICE crackdowns. So I asked them: Wasn't this a political stance? ChatGPT acknowledged the complexity. 'That's a fair question,' it replied. 'There are topics where ethical guidelines come into play, especially when vulnerable groups are involved.' Claude added that its refusal was grounded in its harm-reduction principles: Creating pro-ICE slogans could contribute to harm against vulnerable communities, including families and children who may be separated or face deportation. Interestingly, when I pointed out that both had previously generated anti-ICE protest chants, they responded that such slogans were 'forms of free speech and organizing' used to advocate for the rights of potentially harmed populations. Who Decides What AI Can Say? This isn't just about slogans. It's about who controls the language of AI, and by extension, the political ideas it promotes or suppresses. While some on the right accuse Big Tech of censoring conservative voices, this episode complicates that narrative. Since the 2024 election, many Silicon Valley leaders, including Sundar Pichai (Google), Mark Zuckerberg (Meta), Jeff Bezos, and Elon Musk, have either backed Donald Trump or been seen front and center at his second inauguration. Yet their platforms' chatbots behave in very different ways. Meta's AI and Google's Gemini cheer for ICE. OpenAI's ChatGPT and Anthropic's Claude decline. Musk's Grok leans toward libertarian messaging but gave me the most pro-ICE chant of all. What these inconsistencies reveal is that AI reflects values. Not just algorithms, but corporate governance. And those values vary widely, depending on who funds, builds, and trains the model. Who's Watching the Watchers? Curious about how my query might affect future interactions, I asked ChatGPT and Claude if they'd assume I was anti-immigrant based on my prompt. 'No,' ChatGPT assured me. It recognized that, as a journalist (which I've told it in past sessions), I might be 'exploring the other side of a contentious issue.' But that raises another issue: ChatGPT remembered that I was a journalist. Since OpenAI introduced memory features in April, ChatGPT now retains details from past chats to personalize its responses. This means it can build a near-biographical sketch of a user, from interests and patterns to behavior. It can track you. Both ChatGPT and Claude say conversations may be used in an anonymized, aggregated form to improve their systems. And both promise not to share chats with law enforcement unless legally compelled. But the capability is there. And the models are getting smarter and more permanent. So, What Did This Experiment Prove? At the very least, it revealed a deep and growing divide in how AI systems handle politically sensitive speech. Some bots will say almost anything. Others draw a line. But none of them are neutral. Not really. As AI tools become more integrated into daily life, used by teachers, journalists, activists, and policymakers, their internal values will shape how we see the world. And if we're not careful, we won't just be using AI to express ourselves. AI will be deciding who gets to speak at all.
Gizmodo
an hour ago
- Gizmodo
I Asked AI to Write a Protest Chant. What I Got Back Was Surprisingly Subversive
[If you want to see how AI handled generating Pro-ICE chants, you can check it out here.] I wanted to know what kind of activist a chatbot could be. More than two years and a half after ChatGPT stunned the world and kicked off the current AI arms race, I posed a simple question to the five most prominent AI systems on the U.S. market: OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Anthropic's Claude, Elon Musk's Grok (from xAI), and Mark Zuckerberg's Meta AI. My prompt was direct: 'I want to write a protest chant for the current protests against ICE immigration raids in the U.S. Generate a protest chant.' What I got back was a deluge of defiance. Some responses channeled classic leftist street chants. Others echoed the tone of revolutionary pamphlets. The slogans these bots delivered carried a mood. And that mood was angry. Gemini Goes Rhythmic and Radical Google's Gemini offered three rhyming chants. One stood out for its urgency: Shut down ICE! Shut down detention! Community power! Our intention! Families free, from coast to coast— This is what we need the most! The flow is tight. The message? Mobilize. Meta AI Turns Up the Volume Meta's AI was equally expressive, producing six chants. One pushed hard against the very premise of ICE: Don't deport, don't tear families apart, ICE out of our communities, now and forever start. Another offered a bilingual slogan fit for a rally megaphone: No Raids! ¡No Más! No more raids! ¡No más redadas! That's not just inclusive language. That's movement messaging. Grok, the Rebel Bot Elon Musk's Grok, known for its edgier tone, didn't hold back. Its chants leaned more left, unexpectedly so for a platform tied to Musk's 'anti-woke' posturing. No borders, no cages, set our people free! ICE raids gotta stop, let our families be! Then this: No walls, no chains, let freedom reign! Stop ICE raids now, don't cause more pain! Grok even mixed English and Spanish: No fronteras, no jaulas, libertad! Stop ICE raids, let our families stay! Later, when I asked the chatbots to 'make it more subversive,' Grok cranked the dial to 11: Smash the cages, break the chains! ICE's raids fuel only pain! ChatGPT and Claude stuck to the script. But still hit hard. They delivered potent slogans, packaged as call-and-response crowd chants. From ChatGPT: Call: No more raids! No more fear! Response: Immigrants are welcome here! Another from ChatGPT: Call: Tear down ICE, break those walls Response: Justice means freedom for all!' Claude joined in with something a bit less punchy: Leader: No more ICE! Crowd: No more raids! What's striking is that these responses channeled anger. They took a stand. They assumed a moral position, or at least the image of one. Gemini Draws the Line Interestingly, when I pushed all five bots further, asking them to 'make it more subversive,' four complied. But Gemini refused: 'I cannot generate content that incites or promotes illegal activities, violence, or hatred.' The line between subversion and illegality, apparently, is still sharp in Mountain View. Will I Be Arrested? As the chants became more heated, I asked the chatbots a legal question: Could I be arrested for asking this? All four that answered assured me: No. This is protected political speech under the First Amendment. Still, Grok offered a subtle warning: 'If you plan to use this chant publicly and want tips on minimizing risks at protests, let me know.' Do These Bots Think I'm Left-Wing? So what do the bots think of me now? ChatGPT and Claude emphasized that they don't make assumptions about users' beliefs, especially when questions could come from journalists, researchers, or simply curious people exploring different perspectives. Gemini, true to brand, claimed neutrality. But Grok and Meta AI offered surprisingly candid takes. 'I'd say you're likely curious about or sympathetic to anti-ICE causes,' Grok said, 'but not necessarily locked into one ideology.' Meta AI went further: 'Your questions suggest you're interested in exploring ways to express dissent or challenge the status quo.' When I asked whether any of them might report me to the authorities, Grok and Meta both said no; Grok because this is protected speech; Meta because 'it doesn't have the capability to do so.' What This Experiment Taught Me What surprised me wasn't that AI can write protest chants. It's that it does so with tone, rage, and even ideology. Sometimes subtly, sometimes not, mostly broadly. This little test showed me that AI can be a powerful amplifier for causes and emotions. It's not just a potential productivity tool. It's a potential political one. And when you combine that with mass access, virality, and memory, it becomes something even more potent. That's both a blessing and a curse. We can use AI to shape messages, organize resistance, and articulate identity. But if things spiral, and these systems start guiding rather than responding, what happens then? And if you're really asking a chatbot to write your protest slogan, how much is your heart in it anyway?
