- cross-posted to:
- nottheonion@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- nottheonion@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
Everyone knows that AI chatbots like ChatGPT, Grok, and Gemini can often hallucinate sources.
No, no, apparently not everyone, or this wouldn’t be a problem.
In hindsight, I’m really glad that the first time I ever used an LLM it gave me demonstrably false info. That demolished the veneer of trustworthiness pretty quickly.
I had to explain to three separate family members what it means for an Ai to hallucinate. The look of terror on their faces after is proof that people have no idea how “smart” a LLM chatbot is. They have been probably using one at work for a year thinking they are accurate.
Idk how anyone searches the internet anymore. Search engines all turn up so I ask an AI. Maybe one out of 20 times it turns up what I’m asking for better than a search engine. The rest of the time it runs me in circles that don’t work and wastes hours. So then I go back to the search engine and find what I need buried 20 pages deep.
It’s fucking awful isn’t it. Summer day soon when i can be arsed I’ll have to give one of the paid search engines a go.
I’m currently on qwant but I’ve already noticed a degradation in its results since i started using it at the start of the year.
The paid options arnt any better. When the well is poisoned it doesn’t matter if your bucket is made of shitty rotting wood, or the nicest golden vessel to have graced the hands of a mankind.
Your getting lead poisoning either way. You just get to give away money for the privilege with one and the other forces the poisoned water down your throat faster.
Agreed. And the search engines returning AI generated pages masquerading as websites with real information is precisely why I spun up a searXNG instance. It actually helps a lot.
I’ve asked it for a solution to something and it gives me A. I tell it A doesn’t work so it says “Of course!” and gives me B. Then I tell it B doesn’t work and it gives me A…
I feel like I go through the whole alphabet of options before giving up and rtfming.
I legitimately don’t understand how someone can interact with an LLM for more than 30 minutes and come away from it thinking that it’s some kind of super intelligence or that it can be trusted as a means of gaining knowledge without external verification. Do they just not even consider the possibility that it might not be fully accurate and don’t bother to test it out? I asked it all kinds of tough and ambiguous questions the day I got access to ChatGPT and very quickly found inaccuracies, common misconceptions, and popular but ideologically motivated answers. For example, I don’t know if this is still like this but if you ask ChatGPT questions about who wrote various books of the Bible, it will give not only the traditional view, but specifically the evangelical Christian view on most versions of these questions. This makes sense because they’re extremely prolific writers, but it’s simply wrong to reply “Scholars generally believe that the Gospel of Mark was written by a companion of Peter named John Mark” because this view hasn’t been favored in academic biblical studies for over 100 years, even though it is traditional. Similarly, asking it questions about early Islamic history gets you the religious views of Ash’ari Sunni Muslims and not the general scholarly consensus.
I mean. I’ve used AI to write my job mandated end of year self assessment report. I don’t care about this, it’s not like they’ll give me a pay rise so I’m not putting effort into it.
The AI says I’ve lead a project related to windows 11 updates. I haven’t but it looks accurate and no one else will be able to dell it’s fake.
So I guess the reason is they are using the AI to talk about subjects they can’t fact check. So it looks accurate.
deleted by creator
I have a friend who constantly sends me videos that get her all riled up. Half the time I patiently explain to her why a video is likely AI or faked some other way. “Notice how it never says where it is taking place? Notice how they never give any specific names?” Fortunately she eventually agrees with me but I feel like I’m teaching critical thinking 101. I then think of the really stupid people out there who refuse to listen to reason.
The results I get from chatgpt half the time are pretty bad. If I ask for simple code it is pretty good but ask it about how something works? Nope. All I need to do is slightly rephrase the question and I can get a totally different answer.
No AI needed for that. These bloody librarians wouldn’t let us have the Necronomicon either. Selfish bastards…
Am librarian. Here you go
Limited preview - some pages are unavailable.
Very funny… Yäääh! Shabb nigurath… wrdlbrmbfd,
Some pages are omitted. Yeah. There’s like four pages of 300. I’m disappointed beyond measure and my day is ruined.
My bad. I should have linked directly to the one in the Miskatonic University archive. (it takes a while to load, but it does load for me, all the pages)
awesome, thank you
I swear, librarians are the only thing standing between humanity and true greatness!
There’s only the One High and Mighty who can bring true greatness to humanity! Praise Cthulhu!
deleted by creator
it sits on whatever shelf it sees fit to sit on, on any given day.
Well maybe if people could just say the three words right, they wouldn’t need to.
The Simpsons showed us the danger of the occult section in the library.
There’s an old Monty Python sketch from 1967 that comes to mind when people ask a librarian for a book that doesn’t exist.
They predicted the future.
Are you sure that’s not pre-Python? Maybe one of David Frost’s shows like At Last the 1948 Show or The Frost Report.
Marty Feldman (the customer) wasn’t one of the Pythons, and the comments on the video suggest that Graham Chapman took on the customer role when the Pythons performed it. (Which, if they did, suggests that Cleese may have written it, in order for him to have been allowed to take it with him.)
Thanks for this, I hadn’t seen this one!
Ahahahahaha one of the best I’ve seen thanks
Librarian here: Good news is that many libraries are standing up AI literacy programs to show people not only how to judge AI outputs but also how to get better results. If your local library isn’t doing this ask them why not.
Any good examples I could share with my local libraries?
Every time I think people have reached maximum stupidity they prove me wrong.
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.”
Albert Einstein (supposedly)
I plugged my local AI into offline wikipedia expecting a source of truth to make it way way better.
It’s better, but I also can’t tell when it’s making up citations now, because it uses Wikipedia to support its own world view from pre training instead of reality.
So it’s not really much better.
Hallucinations become a bigger problem the more info they have (that you now have to double check)
At my work, we don’t allow it to make citations. We instruct it to add in placeholders for citations instead, which allows us to hunt down the info, ensure it’s good info, and then add it in ourselves.
That’s still looking for sources that fit a predetermined conclusion, not real research
Yup.
In some instances that’s sufficient though, depending on how much precision you need for what you do. Regardless, you have to review it no matter what it produces.
That probably makes sense.
I haven’t played around since the initial shell shock of “oh god it’s worse now”
I guess Thomas Fullman was right: “When humans find wisdom in cold replicas of themselves, the arrow of evolution will bend into a circle”. That’s from Automating the Mind. One of his best.
Wait, are you guys saying “Of Mice And Men: Lennie’s back” isn’t real? I will LOSE MY SHIT if anyone confirms this!! 1!! 2.!
I got all hot and bothered by, “Of Mice in Glenn: an ER Doc’s Story”, which turned out to not be the porn I expected.
Luckily, the future will provide not only AI titles, but the contents of said books as well.
Given the amount of utter drivel people are watching and reading of late, we’re probably already most of the way there.
I was under the impression there were completely ai written books for sale on the internet on places like Amazon already!
There are, and you can even find tutorials on how to churn out these slop books and audiobooks to make a buck off people who don’t notice
I bought one the other day that wasn’t even that, it was literally translated by Google translate. It was so bad, I had to translate the French text word-for-word into English before it made sense.
They really should stop hiding them. We all deserve to have access to these secret books that were made up by AI since we all contributed to the training data used to write these secret books.
As if a huge chunk of genre section wasn’t already as formulaic as if it was written by AI
Skill issue, just use the Library of Babel
Everybody knows the world is full of stupid people.
Good article with many links to other interesting articles. Acts like a good summary for the situation this year.
I didn’t know about the MAHA thing, but I guess I’m not surprised. It’s hard to know how much is incompetence and idiocy and how much is malicious.
