You must log in or # to comment.
That sentence is a self-issued Certificate Of Stupidity.
Eh.
It’s in the same ballpark as “my buddy said this while we were high” or “my uncle posted this on Facebook” or “I saw this YouTube video…”
It turns out people, on average, have horrible information hygiene and little incentive to consider this. ChatGPT just made Facebook Uncle Facts more personalized and accessible, unfortunately.
No, because “my uncle” didn’t post a 6 paragraph essay that no one has ever read, but you are now expected to read.
“I googled”
Anything that isn’t on the first page of google might as well be lost to time.
People on Lemmy also have horrid information hygiene that’s just as bad even though a lot of people like to pretend that they’re better than everyone.
Agreed, 100%.
What’s worse, few seem to care when a made-up post is pointed out.
It generally means the person made no effort and information should be taken with a grain of salt. Like “a quick Google”.
I had an Uber passenger that straight up said,“well I asked grok about restaurants around here…”
Like no infuriation, as much as pity.
strange hyper-focus of anger here, i feel.
i can think of plenty of more upsetting phrases, many to do with ongoing genocides. idk, i guess im just tired of people virtue signalling about their “unmatched” hatred for a new tech.
You’re seriously talking about virtue signalling when you jumped directly to asking why OP wasn’t talking about genocide?
I can barely use the internet anymore. I have to filter by date to get results from before 2024. Otherwise all the results are obvious AI trash.
When I tried to look up information about storing film negatives. Pretty obscure niche topic these days. The top pre-2024 result was from a well respected national archive, good informative page written by experts in the field.
By contrast, the current day results were an endless sea of random websites who all by sheer coincidence decided to start writing about film archival in the year 2025.
This is one of those things where you can be unhappy about it but also you’ve already lost this battle and you’re just going to look like fools in the future
Like when we see old news footage and newspaper articles from people who claimed Nintendo wouldn’t last longer than the early 80s Christmas season and that the Internet is a fad
AI is here and it’s not going away
Yeah, just like Betamax, HD-DVD, The Virtual Boy, Zune, Theranos, Viox, and Google Glass. Every technological innovation is always good, especially when they are force feeding them to you, LLMs are too big to fail spectacularly! It’s not an entirely pointless way for idiots to make computers do the exact same things they can already do but worse when you really look at it.
I’m in the software industry and I’m telling you that AI is not The Virtual Boy
It’s used from the bottom up. It dictates notes, makes cases, tracks meetings, does basic PR reviews, updates code, tests, writes tests, manages the Kanban board, etc…
It’s in your phone, it’s in your search engines, I made a phones call the other day and talked to an AI to navigate the phone system, I ordered by talking to an AI at a fast food place about a month ago, etc…
It’s here and it’s not going away
You can hate it, but in 20 years people are going to look back on “AI is dumb” posts and laugh
Betamax forever!
Edit: “I work for AI, it’s actually super rad!” HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
by now, saying “i did a search” and actually having done a search and found stuff AND shared the link feels like a “good skill to have” again.
my brother (14 y/ooooo sooooooo skibidi) uses mister gpt for all web searching which sucks big time. whenever he does use a real life search engine, hes surprised by the amount of stuff he finds by now.
EDIT: fixed some typos…
It would be a “good skill to have” if they haven’t actively been making search engines worse, so they can make AI look better.
How the fuck could AskJeeves from 20 years ago work better than search engines of today?
It’s not just them, it’s the SEO spam gaming the system.
AskJeeves would be utterly horrendous today because the web of its time is no longer feasible.
And who is the center cog of this ad-driven SEO apocalypse? Who runs basically all web advertising?
Well… Google, of course.
i believe search engines have been degrading prior to the LMs but might be misremembering…
No, I agree. One indicative moment was when Google stopped showing the “X million results found” and the results ended after 10-15 pages even when the keywords should have millions of results. This was noticed back in 2021.
I tried looking up the decline but…
Off topic: If said in french “ChatGPT” translates back to “Cat, I farted” - you’re welcome
“I ask ChatGPT” is the “I consulted the Oracle of Delphi” of our time.
Ugh. I once heard someone say “I did a chat” as slang for “asking ChatGPT”. It was a software vendor on a call regarding compatibility with our existing systems. We had concerns it wasn’t. They insisted it was, because they “did a chat” and ChatGPT said it was.
It wasn’t.
Should have gotten them to verify in writing they guaranteed it was compatible and then sued them for it lol
I vibe questioned, and got vibe answered 🌟
yesss its a weird usecase. its easy to think ur getting so much out of it while theres actually rather little to gain.
(okay fine yes im just commenting on this post cuz its got more likes than mine… and its a screenshot! >o< grrrrr- )
if u ask mister gpt or daddy claudius for a web search thing, you lose out on the actual sources. Which sucks cuz they are right there in the LMs context, but u dont get to see it. u dont get to see the sources.
this requires a mockup. imma be back in a few hours or so and post a mockup on Qwen community and then link it here. So here u go: have this pointless indicator showing that im working on something, maybe:
👩🍳 Cooked for 1 hour and 20 minutes
okay i cooked. 🍳
the post is here and if u dont care to open a link but do care to click a dropdown, here is the mockup:
mockup i made
the idea is that the LM highlights the actual sources by writing special syntax which shows up in the UI as the sources themselves. Here an example.
The LM writes:Here is that part of the script:
<show>
<path=“res://script.gd”>
<from_line=7>
<to_line=7>
</show>This gets parsed and shows up as this:
Here is that part of the script:
var whatever: String = "the content of this file is"
soooo… it doesn’t regurgitate, but highlights the actual sources. The example is about code but this is easily extended to regular web search. its just text so… its the same thing.
sigh i spend too much time on lemmy.
EDIT: i moved the post from qwen community (which is on blahaj zone) to FOSAI which is not on blahaj zone cuz i feel this stuf doesnt belong here.
Love the mockup and effort :D
if u ask mister gpt … for a web search thing … u dont get to see the sources.
Just tried the free ChatGPT (.com) and it linked me to Carfax on a Toyota pricing question. Have also seen Claude’s web UI cite sources (as of a couple weeks ago). Maybe the latest slopmachines are citing more than when you tried?
yea it puts some little “source” buttons but then u gotta find the exact text the LM mentioned.
soooo it would be Nixe to show the exact parts of the text that matter.
the LMs do cite, but they just link to the entire site instead of… only the exact content u care about, if that makes sense.
What you’re looking for, that’s one of the best uses of LLMs. No need to regurgitate anything, just be an amazing search that highlights relevant segments of original documents. Something that’s hard to even hate (“I only want to be able to find exact query match results!” is a request we don’t hear).
Instead we’re headed for Google Zero I hear
fair, but I would like to see the actual source instead of getting the entire page link as a source.
its like saying “its in this chapter” instead of pointing on the page i think. the first one is helpful but may be false, the second one is immediately verifiable and… very helpful.
I think we’re on the same page.
When the tool says “it’s in this chapter”, I furthermore want it to essentially embed a screenshot of that exact reference. Then I can scroll through search results on a single page, and whatever grabs me I can open the full link.
Don’t ask chatgpt, I can tell you bullshit too and I’m beautiful
Dig this energy. Shine on.
A couple days ago I heard the horrifying sentence “I asked chatgpt to generate a secure password for the laptops” from someone returning a cart full of laptops they borrowed. Does your browser not have a built in password generator? Does your password manager not have a built in password generator? Could you not find a single password generator online?
And of course not only is that unnecessary, but insecure since your password is immediately in the chatgpt logs
And very likely to be the same “strong password” that someone else would get if they asked for one.
In plain text
And it’s not even a random or strong password! LLMs can’t randomly generate 'em
I asked ChatGPT (I use a third-party frontend, so I don’t have a paid subscription. API prices mean they probably got paid like one cent for this, if that.) “Generate a list of 10 secure passwords.” like 5 times and it regularly re-used the words Saffron, Comet, Marigold, Harbor, Lynx, and Cobalt multiple times across all of them, sometimes even inside the same list.
There was also a theme of using names for animals and natural geographic/geological features.
Oh, and for one of the passwords it genuinely just said “raven” and nothing else 😭
😭🙏
Lol, yes. It’s probably the same example of a secure password it gave to a hundred other people.
this… is an unexpected level of absurdity
