• JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 hours ago

    And then I get down voted for laughing when people say that they use AI for “general research” 🙄🙄🙄

    • Mike_The_TV@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I’ve had people legitimately post the answer they got from chat gpt to answer someone’s question and then get annoyed when people tell them its wrong.

  • brsrklf@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Only yesterday, I searched for a very simple figure, the number of public service agents in a specific administrative region. This is, obviously, public information. There is a government site where you can get it. However I didn’t know the exact site, so I searched for it on Google.

    Of course, AI summary shows up first, and gives me a confident answer, accurately mirroring my exact request. However the number seems way too low to me, so I go check the first actual search result, the aforementioned official site. Google’s shitty assistant took a sentence about a subgroup of agents, and presented it as the total. The real number was clearly given before, and was about 4 times that.

    This is just a tidbit of information any human with the source would have identified in a second. How the hell are we supposed to trust AI for complex stuff after that?

    • Patch@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The AI models can be hilariously bad even on their own terms.

      Yesterday I asked Gemini for a population figure (because I was too lazy to look it up myself). First I asked it:

      what is the combined population of place 1, place 2 and place 3

      It answered:

      Unfortunately, providing an absolutely precise, up-to-the-minute combined population figure is difficult. Population numbers are constantly changing.

      To find these figures, I would recommend checking the Office for National Statistics (ONS) website. They provide detailed population statistics for local authorities in England.

      On a whim, I asked it again as:

      combined population of place 1, place 2 and place 3

      And then it gave me the answer sweet as a nut.

      Apparently I was being too polite with it, I guess?

  • Repple (she/her)@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I searched for pictures of Uranus recently. Google gave me pictures of Jupiter and then the ai description on top chided me telling me that what was shown were pictures of Jupiter, not Uranus. 20 years ago it would have just worked.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      While I do think that it’s simply bad at generating answers because that is all that’s going on, generating the most likely next word that works a lot of the time but then can fail spectacularly…

      What if we’ve created AI but by training it with internet content, we’re simply being trolled by the ultimate troll combination ever.

      • seaQueue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        This is what happens when you train your magical AI on a decade+ of internet shitposting

        • T156@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          They didn’t learn from all the previous times someone tried to train a bot on the internet.

          • pogmommy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            It’s almost poetic how Tay.ai, Microsoft’s earlier shitty ai, was also poisoned by internet trolling and became a Nazi on twitter nearly a decade ago

  • TheGoldenGod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Training AI with internet content was always going to fail, as at least 60% of users online are trolls. It’s even dumber than expecting you can have a child from anal sex.