Публикация

I think it was AR4 (2007) in which the IPCC made a very judicious & nuanced projection (with several caveats) of the future potential for tropical storm frequencies & intensities in terms of decade averages. The breathless MSM headline was, "Scientists predict lots more hurricanes!!"

Great catch — you’re absolutely correct to point that out.

Woah woah, the media would never lie to me

This is why I keep telling my dad to ignore Google's AI search engine feature and look at an actual link instead. I want an app that disables AI functions so badly.

Ahem. The only post you need to make: bsky.app/profile/sonn...

Take out the middleman! [Potential client] So it'll be cheaper then! Oh no, it'll be incredibly expensive, ruin our air and water, and destroy students' ability to think. [Pc] interesting... *strokes chin*

Imagine - LLMs with a functional conscience Developed from a culture which seems to breed so many sociopaths along with its inordinate number of “convenient truths”

Yep. "If I don't know it, I'll just St make stuff up"

Welcome to Chat ai

And they're spending billions on it when I could do it for free and be much, much more entertaining!

I don't have to imagine it. AI is here now.

Global warming is exponential Denial is deep amongst the jet set on destruction

That's what Google AI overview does whenever I search something literature related, lol.

You know that the US administration obviously uses LLMs to write „reports“, and prompting them with conclusions up front?

Always verify the underlying data before you blindly follow anything. Too many people just take it for a fact if it "sounds plausible" to their viewpoint lol.

Now imagine some grifting asshole like Andreesen convincing doctors it can help make medical decisions.

please miss one time

It makes up for these minor shortcomings by inventing fun new quotes from people who don’t even exist

That's r/askscience for ya

Computers are incapable of experimentation and the abstract thought required to form a cohesive hypothesis. They can't tell what's real because they lack senses in order to distinguish reality from fantasy. We would do well to remember that.

How is AI going to survive in America if it has no books to quote from?

Omg a Tech Connections video about how when you ask ChatGPT why it messed up and it says "I panicked" it didn't actually panic, it's just that the algorithm decided that the most likely reply a human would make given the context is to say they panicked?

day number (I don't remember) of waiting for LLMs (and whatever else people choose to call "AI") to just die

Plus it has _no_ cognition nor accountability. Spicy autocorrect.

The worst part is that we humans have a bias of trusting a source of information because "it looks legit" because we can't be skeptical of every claim we read or hear. So, if the LLM tell you a few facts that are true, they prime you to believe the future lies it hallucinates.

That's the wild card in all of this, our corporate overlords have their machine learning black boxes and they have a lot of power and resources, but this is very much a GIGO situation, Garbage In Garbage Out. If your premises are wrong you can only be right by accident.

In a lecture about using AI in my business, I was told not to ask it facts. Use it for creative. Example, I asked it, "You're William Goldman. Why should a person buy travel from me?" The results were gold.

Please take away RFKjr's password.... please

So AI is a simulated politician, then? :D

Machine learning, LLMs, "AI" or whatever you call it, can be an incredibly useful tool if you understand how it works, and what its weaknesses are. But it seems many are promoting it for uses that are particularly harmful due to those weaknesses. Another dangerous tech trend powered by hucksters.

Ultimately, science is a question of belief. There is no ultimate reality.

You forgot "...and it does so with the utmost confidence in its answer. At least, that is, until you point out that it's completely wrong, at which point it'll apologize then make something new and freshly incorrect up, confidently."

Yikes!

I've found a new thong I had about how they're implemented: Not only will it confidently argue with me for no reason; Now it will confidently tell me there's no results after not searching.

We used science to build a thing that prevents us from doing science.

That's because it's modelling language. It's the hollow shell of surface communication. It has nothing below it - such as thought, intellect, emotion, learning, cognition, etc. An LLM is an examination of language structure in order to model results. It's just a probability engine.

maybe thats why the media drools over AI. because they want it to make their job easier 🤣

Give it a bajillion dollars

it's like the old wikipedia adage but real now

What could possibly go wrong.

Hah, a computer program would never!

And big corporations love it.🤬

Must be AI. Twice I got wrong info. Simple questions.

A good start would be forcing them to preface their every response with: “This response is from an AI that can easily get things wrong: …”

This is actually a REALLY good way to put it. Ima use this example.

no put glue on the pizza its FINE

I have spent my life looking up facts. First in dictionaries and atlases. Then Google when it became available.i love learning new things. In the age of AI, nothing I read on the Internet now can be trusted. I find this terribly depressing. Guess I'm back to paper dictionaries. I'll need a new atlas

I also find the bitterest part of this whole LLM debacle to be its impact on coding. It should be a great tool for autocomplete, debugging, and natural language programming! The holy grail! And yet, thats all been poisoned. Copilot code is dogshit!

I had a job writing scripts for online ads and the bosses were actively telling us to try out AI to get our assignments done....then telling us you have to fact check because AI will just make stuff up sometimes. Oh, and also, we had to stop using the em dash because clients were convinced it was AI

I can explicitly ask for sources And yes, you have to check the outputs And also, Chinese AI is quite good

That's why I don't trust AI at all. Too much hallucinating and BS from what it spews. I've been a software engineer for 40+ years and as such I treat everything any computer tells me as suspect until I have independent verification.

First thing I did when I got my hands on an LLM was to ask it very specific questions about things I knew very well. They still continue to get the details wrong

That remainds me of the phrase "vegetative electron microscopy", that started as either text recognition error or a translation mistake, and was spread into many scientific papers and articles by LLMs used by journalists, students and scientists. Disturbing stuff.

It’s fucking insane my college professors are out here this year having to accommodate it in the rules while trying to not give students a free pass and I’m just like WHY ARE YOU ALLOWING THIS WHAT

those who have made this connection and understand its implications are who are most opposed to LLMs invading everything. setting aside what could be done to improve the tech, we're always back to it being a shortcut for thinking.

“Vegetative electron microscopy”

A Strange Phrase Keeps Turning Up in Scientific Papers, But Why?Earlier this year, scientists discovered a peculiar term appearing in published papers: "vegetative electron microscopy".www.sciencealert.com

Well that sounds like the sort of no-miss basket we should cram as many of our economic eggs into as possible!

And that is now making medical decisions that override what actual medical doctors advise.

It's so annoying. People should talk to chatGPT about something they're an expert in. Quiz it thoroughly and it's easy to see that it makes stuff up constantly. I don't even trust it to tell me what armor I should use in RuneScape because it just says anything.

Snap!

Honestly, ChatGPT is just the modern day Wikipedia problem, except it has its own internal editors with no accountability. I'd be fine with AI if people used it in the same vein. It is a starting point to research, but you still need to do your own damned work from there.

I try to explain to people it's a text prediction model meaning it's very good at generating an output that sounds like a real human response. Note being accurate is not required for that goal

Even the idea that it "makes stuff up" is giving it too much credit. It literally can't think. Calling it "intelligence" of any kind is ceding ground to its misleading marketing. It's all just fancy autocomplete. Nobody in their right mind would ask their phone's autocomplete for advice.

Humanity is cooked!

I have noticed that Googles AI answer to searches has become extremely error prone in recent weeks. Just keeps learning more false information

It's kind of scary how Grok is being treated like a supreme authority on Twitter

Preach!

IFLS and DailyScience are hot garbage.

This is the base level concern. The real paranoia comes in when we realize these are all corporate controlled and subject to manipulation. We were lucky for a few years there when Google gave us non-manipulated answers to searches, and we assume that will continue in an LLM world? Nope.

A.I. is THE MOST DANGEROUS INVENTION TO DATE.In my world A.I.would be the savior of humanity because I would utilize this powerful tool to attenuate the financial economic model of America to where this system serves 90% instead of the greedy 30% of the present system.I can do this in one generation

incredibly unfair comparison. the news media doesn't get to light investor money on fire and pour a gallon of water down the storm drain every time they publish a story

I've said it before, will say it again. My thoughts on listening to AI:

a man in a suit and tie says everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it ..ALT: a man in a suit and tie says everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it ..media.tenor.com

That describes AI exactly, because it can only spit out what is fed into it.

imagine, also, that the scientists are so deprived of funding that they are increasingly amenable to clickbaiting headlines what could go wrong

You don't get it. It's not being wrong and making stuff up. It's DisCovErINg neW pHysICs!!