51–60 of 94 posts
Either you're getting a different result due to whatever config you're getting served or they fixed it already because I'm getting 0.
People were talking about how pre-AI internet content might one day be valued like low-background steel, as something that's no longer being produced in a pure enough form Guess we're there already
The "dead internet" is here, and unfortunately there's no going back
I am growing more and more bitter everyday by how many of us are rushing to build a deader Internet.
Every "Show HN: I have made ChatGPT even easier to use" is a stark reminder that either I am growing old and pessimistic, or for the first time in my career I am disgusted at the direction software engineering is going. Appalled by the lack of ethics and long term philosophical concern of what we are doing with AI.
I just see reckless software engineers happily playing with something they do not understand. Where is the AI equivalent of Oppenheimer's "I have become Death, destroyer of worlds," uttered because of his research on world-changing and world-destroying technology?
I am afraid I will have to separate computers from the idea of the Internet at large to keep enjoying this career: I love programming and computers, but the internet and social media are on the way to become a net negative to humanity in my eyes.
So I just asked Bing how many people live on the sun, and apparently 50 trillion people live there.
well its definitely big enough to fit that many people, but you would only be able to go out at night when the sun is cooler which would be a bummer
It gave me two cases. The first case was exactly the opposite of what it had claimed. The second case had literally nothing to do with title vii or anything involving the question I asked.
So not only was it wrong, but in using two cases that actually existed, it was maliciously wrong. Not just misinformation but disinformation.
This and other errors lead me to require chatgpt two become at least two orders of magnitude more accurate. And a huge announcement on how it will no longer make up false citations.
I, a dummy, should not be able to falsify an AI with the simplest (classic) google search.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the number is >0!
Major Tom was recorded in a studio, it's all fake
Bing has 2.5B people on it. Change my mind.
People were talking about how pre-AI internet content might one day be valued like low-background steel, as something that's no longer being produced in a pure enough form Guess we're there already
I might be wrong, but LLM is capable of filtering out noise. (unless we get content farm SEO spam to avert the model)
They poisoned the well once; from whence doth you think that with money at stake they have suddenly developed enough of a soul to grant them the grace to abstain from doing so again?