this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
220 points (94.7% liked)

Fuck AI

3578 readers
664 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
VerbFlow@lemmy.world
MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
TootSweet@lemmy.world
BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
cynar@lemmy.world
themaninblack@lemmy.world
drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world
WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world
Communist@lemmy.ml
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
NutWrench@lemmy.world
Soup@lemmy.cafe
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
Tinks@lemmy.world
wizblizz@lemmy.world
corus_kt@lemmy.world
Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
TheFriar@lemm.ee
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
HawlSera@lemm.ee
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works
33550336@lemmy.world
Nougat@fedia.io
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
Quill7513@slrpnk.net
ogmios@sh.itjust.works
glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
220
The book does not exist (lemmy.world)
submitted 10 months ago by nikaaa@lemmy.world to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

... and neither does the author (or so I believe - I made them both up).

On the other hand, AI is definitely good at creative writing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] can@sh.itjust.works 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This is why I never raw dog ChatGPT

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Hallucinations are so strong with this one too… like really bad.

If I can’t already or won’t be able/willing to verify an output, I ain’t usin’ it - not a bad rule I think.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I never walk away with an "answer" without having it:

  1. Cite the source
  2. Lookup the source
  3. Permlink you to the source page/line as available
  4. Critique the validity of the source.

After all that, still remain skeptical and take the discussion as a starting point to find your own primary sources.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That’s good. Ooh NotebookLM from Google just added in-line citations (per Hard Fork podcast). I think that’s the way: see what looks interesting (mentally trying not to take anything to heart) and click and read as usual.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can you link to beyond pdf? I'm always interested in good pdf parsers. But I ge t a bunch of dnd stuff just googling it

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That’s funny, checking I see you have to skip the space.

BeyondPDF

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

Ty

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

At least Bing will cite sources, and hell, sometimes they even align with what it said.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

Heh yeah if the titles of webpages from its searches were descriptive enough

Funny that they didn’t have a way to stop at claiming it could browse websites. Last I checked you could paste in something like

https://mainstreamnewswebsite.com/dinosaurs-found-roaming-playground

and it would tell you which species were nibbling the rhododendrons.

…wow still works, gonna make a thread

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Clowning

(I’m not smart enough to leverage a model/make a bot like this but they’ve had too long not to close this obvious misinformation hole)