471
YouTuber Hank Green Is Facing a Fan Revolt Over His AI Use (gizmodo.com)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
434 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 2 months ago (7 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 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months 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
  • [+] -9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months 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