Update app.py
Browse files
app.py
CHANGED
|
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ history = [
|
|
| 160 |
"output: 1. equates criticism of the dear leader with an unforgivable transgression.",
|
| 161 |
"input: n = 1\nthe notion that trump is absolved of responsibility for january 6th after [lying about the election for months] ->\n\nbe concise.",
|
| 162 |
"output: 1. months of election falsehoods",
|
| 163 |
-
"input: n = 1\nelon musk's considerable wealth does not preclude [him wanting even more money] ->\n\nbe very concise.",
|
| 164 |
"output: 1. further greed",
|
| 165 |
"input: n = 1\nas with any action, the rationale behind the iran nuclear deal withdrawal must be examined to assess its wisdom. in his own words, “this disastrous deal gave this regime many billions of dollars, some of it in actual cash — a great embarrassment to me as a citizen and to all citizens of the united states.” one could be forgiven for interpreting this statement to mean that american taxpayer dollars were being funneled directly into the coffers of the iranian government, with little to nothing in return. this, however, is a gross mischaracterization of events. the funds in question were rather tehran's own assets, previously frozen by sanctions. even if one were to grant for the sake of argument that such a financial outlay had indeed occurred, the suggestion that it would be sufficient grounds to justify scuttling the deal is highly suspect, particularly given the consequences of nuclear war. recall, again, the sheer scale of destruction it entails. from the obliteration of major population centers and widespread radiation poisoning to the ever-present risk of a tit-for-tat escalation culminating in humanity's extinction, the list of potential horrors is extensive. in a hypothetical world where the united states could avert this cataclysm by making a one-time payment equal to 0.27% of its 2015 gross domestic product, it would be a small price to pay for such a monumental return. if even this scenario, where the united states must actively transfer its wealth, is a worthwhile trade, [thing put into place ultimately; really good deal; not even have to give that over] ->",
|
| 166 |
"output: 1. then surely the actual deal, which demanded no such concession, must be viewed as an absolute bargain.",
|
|
|
|
| 160 |
"output: 1. equates criticism of the dear leader with an unforgivable transgression.",
|
| 161 |
"input: n = 1\nthe notion that trump is absolved of responsibility for january 6th after [lying about the election for months] ->\n\nbe concise.",
|
| 162 |
"output: 1. months of election falsehoods",
|
| 163 |
+
"input: n = 1\nelon musk's considerable wealth does not preclude [him wanting even more money] ->\n\nbe very concise. come off as negative.",
|
| 164 |
"output: 1. further greed",
|
| 165 |
"input: n = 1\nas with any action, the rationale behind the iran nuclear deal withdrawal must be examined to assess its wisdom. in his own words, “this disastrous deal gave this regime many billions of dollars, some of it in actual cash — a great embarrassment to me as a citizen and to all citizens of the united states.” one could be forgiven for interpreting this statement to mean that american taxpayer dollars were being funneled directly into the coffers of the iranian government, with little to nothing in return. this, however, is a gross mischaracterization of events. the funds in question were rather tehran's own assets, previously frozen by sanctions. even if one were to grant for the sake of argument that such a financial outlay had indeed occurred, the suggestion that it would be sufficient grounds to justify scuttling the deal is highly suspect, particularly given the consequences of nuclear war. recall, again, the sheer scale of destruction it entails. from the obliteration of major population centers and widespread radiation poisoning to the ever-present risk of a tit-for-tat escalation culminating in humanity's extinction, the list of potential horrors is extensive. in a hypothetical world where the united states could avert this cataclysm by making a one-time payment equal to 0.27% of its 2015 gross domestic product, it would be a small price to pay for such a monumental return. if even this scenario, where the united states must actively transfer its wealth, is a worthwhile trade, [thing put into place ultimately; really good deal; not even have to give that over] ->",
|
| 166 |
"output: 1. then surely the actual deal, which demanded no such concession, must be viewed as an absolute bargain.",
|