※ 引述《plamc (普兰可)》之铭言
: ※ 引述《plamc (普兰可)》之铭言：
: : 根本的问题就是要站在学生、国民的立场，好好想想怎样的地理知识才是有用的
: : 然后讲了n百遍的，要有历史感
: : → hips: 准确来讲是AI时代了，遇事不决问chatgpt。 09/21 00:
39
: 后搜寻引擎不一定就是大型语言模型，我认为这是死胡同
: 就是再怎么砸钱下去只能达到娱乐用水准没办法到产业用水准
: 不过不管，反正就算这是死胡同也会发展出别的技术，总之就是会有AI帮你找答案
: 但是问问题的还是你
: 搜寻引擎也一样，要知道关键字，也等于是你要知道你要问什么问题
: 所以知道要问什么问题的训练才是最重要的
: 未来的教育不管是地理还是其他科目，或是已经不分科目了所以也没有地理课
: 总之，重点是要问什么问题的训练
: 另一个重点就是，史地应该是要一起的，没有历史感的地理超级智障
: 尤其是气候变迁时代，你要讲的是变迁，不是讲现在是什么气候
: 反之，没有地理知识根本上就会无法理解历史
: 真的不晓得当初哪个白痴把基本教育的地理历史分开成两个学科的
大模型不见得能达到产业水准
但是也有所谓的小模型
就是针对某个task特化，专注用那个领域的资料训练
比方FSD自动驾驶
历史学科，他需要读过所有相关史料，论文（可能需要去数位化尚未数位化的东西），当代
的discourse，有能力比较不同来源的资料之间的逻辑矛盾，能cross reference，判断资料
可靠度等等，我觉得还是有潜力。
而且关键是不管你个人觉得品质好不好，只要大众觉得ok，他们就会去用，他们对这个世界
的认知就会高度依赖AI给他们的。
至于知道关键字，AI已经能够反馈引导用户进一步发问，copilot就会建议follow-up quest
ions。所以你一开始很模糊的问也能继续讨论下去。
刚刚问了copilot
does UN resolution 2758 includes Taiwan?
答：UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, adopted on October 25, 1971, recognized
the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as “the only legitimate representative o
f China to the United Nations” and removed the representatives of Chiang Kai-sh
ek (the Republic of China, ROC) from the UN.
（这段连结到维基）
This effectively meant that Taiwan, which was governed by the ROC, was no longer
represented in the United Nations under the name "China".
（这段连结到一个华府智库今年的报告）
然后它建议了几个追加问题 包括
What is one China policy
How has this resolution affected Taiwan's international status?
Is there any ongoing dialogue between Taiwan and UN?
我个人是感觉，在宣传战方面
如何让自己的言论易于被AI找到并引用，会是接下来的兵家必争之地。
总之我再追问
but I've heard some say 2758 includes Taiwan, at least at the time when the reso
lution was drafted that's what people thought.
它答：UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 does not explicitly mention Taiwan or
the Republic of China (ROC).
However, there has been ongoing debate and differing interpretations about the r
esolution’s implications for Taiwan. Some argue that the resolution implicitly
includes Taiwan under the PRC’s representation, while others, including recent
statements from the U.S. Senate, assert that the resolution does not address Tai
wan’s final political status.
This ambiguity has led to various interpretations and diplomatic stances over th
e years. If you have more questions or need further details, feel free to ask!
我再追问
Are you saying that the inclusion or not of Taiwan was ambiguous even when 2758
was drafted? It's not that originally people acknowledge it includes Taiwan and
now due to circumstances change people want to take back what they thought?
它答
Yes, the ambiguity regarding Taiwan’s inclusion in UN General Assembly Resoluti
on 2758 existed even when the resolution was drafted.
Over the years, the PRC has interpreted the resolution to support its “One Chin
a” principle, which asserts that Taiwan is part of China. However, this interpr
etation has been contested by various countries and international bodies, includ
ing recent statements from the U.S. Senate, which emphasize that the resolution
does not address Taiwan’s final political status
所以它是说就连当时应该都是模糊的，而不是当时认为有包括，现在被翻盘。
所以你说当时认为包括，感觉也是在误导我。差点被你骗了。