469
YouTuber Hank Green Is Facing a Fan Revolt Over His AI Use (gizmodo.com)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
436 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Only they're not "answers". AI does not provide information, it tells you what you want to hear. It even makes up fake scientific papers as "references". So you think your info is backed up by peer reviewed sources. Nope!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    The better models absolutely will cite real scientific papers that are relevant to your discussion. It doesn't hallucinate as a matter of course, it can hallucinate some of the time. You can't trust what it gives you 100%, you have to verify it. But it very often gives useful answers and information.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    It even makes up fake scientific papers as "references"

    Broski, it's not early 2023 anymore. Thinking models with internet access have been able to provide public sources just for over a year now. Technology evolves; shocking, I know...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    They do far better today than they did three years ago, but they still get stuff wrong constantly. I've had it give me the source for claims, and the source says the exact opposite of what it claimed. This isn't a quantized to hell model running on my own hardware, but Opus from Claude.

    My go to is to get people to ask it something they know a lot about, and see how bad inaccurate it is. If it gets something you know about so wrong, how wrong is it for everything else?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent