General Discussion

highplainsdem

(62,070 posts)

47. It still hallucinates. All genAI models do. It can hallucinate at any time, and for that reason its

Reply to milestogo (Reply #42)

Sun Mar 29, 2026, 01:33 PM

12 hrs ago

results need to be checked just as much as any other AI model's results.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Prairie_Seagull paleotn GrapesOfWrath Wednesdays

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So, I'm gonna stir the pot a bit... don't be too harsh... [View all] Joinfortmill 14 hrs ago OP

Its a loaded gun, given to a child. Swede 14 hrs ago #1

AI is simply a change accelerant to make the wealthy wealthier more quickly Tim S 14 hrs ago #2

Best explanation of it I've heard so far Walleye 14 hrs ago #3

Except this time genxlib 14 hrs ago #10

Elon Musk promises an age of abundance thought crime 13 hrs ago #23

Elitist billionaires... Safe as Milk 12 hrs ago #53

I believe he said that is one possible path genxlib 11 hrs ago #57

Even Elmo doesn't know what he has in mind. paleotn 10 hrs ago #70

Oh dear lord. Not this shit again. paleotn 11 hrs ago #64

I hope you are right genxlib 10 hrs ago #73

We already have near humanoid robots... paleotn 10 hrs ago #75

Thanks for the interesting links - bookmarking. jmbar2 9 hrs ago #88

Well, that describes the market. thought crime 13 hrs ago #37

Yup. orangecrush 13 hrs ago #46

Ha! I think I could do better stirring, but I'll pass. BootinUp 14 hrs ago #4

I'd take one of these leftstreet 14 hrs ago #5

Of course, that video was made with AI thought crime 13 hrs ago #26

How about AI is like fire, and has to be controlled FullySupportDems 14 hrs ago #6

Exactly. anciano 14 hrs ago #7

I agree. But it has to have some (considerable regulatory) constraints hlthe2b 14 hrs ago #8

A LOT of constraints! n/t Safe as Milk 12 hrs ago #56

Seems like a... 2naSalit 14 hrs ago #9

It's much better and safer than Google gulliver 14 hrs ago #11

I have yet to find a single AI summary which is accurate. Ms. Toad 14 hrs ago #15

It's better for the AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google gulliver 13 hrs ago #16

It is absolutely NOT better for AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google Ms. Toad 10 hrs ago #76

The trouble with Wiki isn't that it spouts false information on a regular basis. Igel 13 hrs ago #18

Agreed - but it took me until the last paragraph to get the AI connection. Ms. Toad 10 hrs ago #79

I've found many accurate responses from AI summary thought crime 13 hrs ago #28

Those AI overviews are stealing traffic from the websites they stole the information from, and the highplainsdem 13 hrs ago #35

And you've fact checked every bit of its response? Ms. Toad 10 hrs ago #78

A Substantial Majority Of The Time... ProfessorGAC 8 hrs ago #89

A coworker used AI to get a second opinion from his doctor's. Shermann 13 hrs ago #41

I have a long history of correcting doctors with independent research. Ms. Toad 10 hrs ago #81

Anthropic Claude is very accurate. milestogo 13 hrs ago #42

It still hallucinates. All genAI models do. It can hallucinate at any time, and for that reason its highplainsdem 12 hrs ago #47

Define accurate. paleotn 11 hrs ago #65

I haven't specifically checked it myself - Ms. Toad 10 hrs ago #77

And current LLMs do exactly the same thing as Google search or YouTube algorithms. You just don't realize it. paleotn 11 hrs ago #66

While I agree, in principle as to the possibilities for it's use, Ms. Toad 14 hrs ago #12

"AI relies on the stolen works of humans (art and writing)..." mike_c 9 hrs ago #86

Without planning and guardrails... Happy Hoosier 14 hrs ago #13

AI doesn't concern me as much... biocube 14 hrs ago #14

You aren't wrong ... BUT KentuckyWoman 13 hrs ago #17

Of course it is, Disaffected 13 hrs ago #19

If you mean generative AI, the kind most hyped now, it's badly flawed tech based on stolen intellectual property, highplainsdem 13 hrs ago #20

Very true statement mgardener 13 hrs ago #21

Absolutely. It's a key tool of production. David__77 13 hrs ago #22

It works - to the extent it works when it's mindless and will always hallucinate - only because of IP theft. highplainsdem 13 hrs ago #29

I guess that depends on one's view of "intellectual property". David__77 13 hrs ago #32

The AI companies who felt they had a right to take everyone else's IP have been quick to scream if highplainsdem 13 hrs ago #40

That's absolutely true and on a certain level funny to see. David__77 10 hrs ago #82

I'm in favor of creatives owning their intellectual property, and that right being protected. It's as highplainsdem 9 hrs ago #84

That can certainly be adjudicated as with any other property issue. David__77 9 hrs ago #85

Legal judgments aren't always ethical, as everyone here is aware. Creatives and those who support highplainsdem 9 hrs ago #87

A.I. got us Donald Trump in 2024. Nuff said. Botany 13 hrs ago #24

Wish AI meant actual (human) intelligence. BattleRow 12 hrs ago #49

AI is the devil. We think we can control it, but we can't. Scrivener7 13 hrs ago #25

Devil with the Blue Dress? She's the Devil in disguise? thought crime 13 hrs ago #31

The problem is not a fork or a knife, the problem is who has it in their hand...An assassin with a knife is very Escurumbele 13 hrs ago #27

"Guns aren't the problem..." ? thought crime 13 hrs ago #33

An accurate analogy, however dlk 13 hrs ago #30

I agree. I've been saying this about computers for decades. However, I think most of us agree that IA should be Martin68 13 hrs ago #34

I think it sound like a scream.AAAAA.IIIIII... MiHale 13 hrs ago #36

The problem is not how we use it, Mblaze 13 hrs ago #38

The most critical word is "you" -- meaning WHO? Martin Eden 13 hrs ago #39

If it were only looked as a fork Javaman 13 hrs ago #43

We are about to FAFO on AI. LudwigPastorius 13 hrs ago #44

True, AI by itself is benign. The companies controlling it, however, are not. tinrobot 13 hrs ago #45

hmmm...almost 50 replies and no interaction... ret5hd 12 hrs ago #48

I sometimes stir a pot in the kitchen and then walk away until dinner is served Soul_of_Wit 11 hrs ago #60

Don't see how that's "stirring the pot" ABC123Easy 12 hrs ago #50

I do agree with you there. One of my smartest friends, a tech professional, thinks like Joinformill. Scrivener7 12 hrs ago #55

It's a tool for the billionaire overlords, not for us FakeNoose 12 hrs ago #51

Where was our blue ribbon commission prior to its release. Prairie_Seagull 12 hrs ago #52

AI can be rejected - and should be, by ethical, smart people who have any choice in the matter. highplainsdem 11 hrs ago #59

Granted that using genAI is optional and can be rejected..... anciano 11 hrs ago #62

It's genAI being hyped and used most widely. Which is why people need to know about how harmful highplainsdem 11 hrs ago #63

The sole cat I ever had agreed with you. Prairie_Seagull 9 hrs ago #83

Not like a fork: like a cruise missle with a spork instead of a warhead. JustABozoOnThisBus 12 hrs ago #54

Two huge negatives, both related to human nature Soul_of_Wit 11 hrs ago #58

In addition, we need... cornball 24 11 hrs ago #61

And using AI harms human intelligence. See this thread on yet another article about that: highplainsdem 11 hrs ago #67

That's very simple Renew Deal 11 hrs ago #68

Sadly, few people are fully able to tell when AI provides facts or fallacies. MineralMan 11 hrs ago #69

This is absolutely true! Oneironaut 10 hrs ago #71

AI differs from a fork in that a fork does not PufPuf23 10 hrs ago #72

americans can't be trusted with sharp objects bigtree 10 hrs ago #74

AI cannot replace humans Progressive dog 10 hrs ago #80