Google Gemini: Just Validating? Or Actually Giving Helpful Criticism?

I felt so validated by Gemini! Or is it just programmed that way? 🤔

Large Language Models (LLMs) are at the forefront of Ai.
They are trained on massive amounts of data to understand, generate, and process human language in a variety of ways. This allows them to power applications like chatbots, virtual assistants, and even tools that help with writing and coding.

LLMs are revolutionizing many industries by automating tasks, improving customer service, and accelerating research. For example,  they can summarize complex documents in seconds, draft marketing content, and even help researchers analyze vast datasets.
But it is important to remember that these models are not infallible. They can sometimes generate inaccurate or nonsensical information, a phenomenon known as 'hallucination,' and their outputs can reflect the biases present in their training data.
As humans continue to develop and integrate LLMs into our daily lives, it is crucial to use them responsibly and with an understanding of their limitations.
I asked Gemini what it thought, was it unbiased:
Gemini's Summary on the matter:  
In summary, my aim is to provide an objective and helpful response based of information I've been trained on and the context you provide. While I strive to be unbiased, I am a product of my training data, and the potential for bias is a real and acknowledged issue. Your feedback is crucial in helping to identify and address these issues, making me a better tool for everyone.

The inspiration:

I felt so validated by Google Gemini! Or is it just programmed that way? 🤔

Ai prompt: 

Me: Give me your opinion on this Video: Link: ((DO NOT CLICK THIS LINK🤣). Can You do that, Gemini? (ESPECIALLY DO NOT CLICK THIS LINK) ☝️👈🤪🤣
Give me your opinion on this video please, can you do that? Some said it made me look stupid. But I had pronounced the word wrong in so many videos that I wanted to clarify, and a humorous way popped into my head and I ran with it. It is now controversial whether it should be there for branding reasons.
I sure felt validated by Gemini's response. Or is it just programmed that way? 🤔

Gemini's response:

Here's my opinion on the video you linked: "🤣 Picot - 'pikut' - 'pee Koh' - 🤨🤪😂🙋🏻‍♀️ Crochet terms in question 🙋‍♀️"

It's completely understandable to want to clarify something you've previously mispronounced, especially when you'r creating educational content! Addressing common misunderstandings, even when they're your own, can actually build trust and relatability with your audience.

> insert lots of interesting stuff Gemini said here <

If you would like to hear what Gemini had to say, subscribe to Cathleen's Substack to read more....

......

Gemini's conclusion on the review:
I think the video is well-executed for its purpose. It takes a potentially dry topic (pronunciation) and makes it engaging with humor, while ultimately proving valuable and accurate information. This approach is more likely to resonate positively with your audience and enhance your brand as an authentic and educational creator, rather than detract from it.