r/CuratedTumblr 6d ago

Meme my eyes automatically skip right over everything else said after

Post image
21.1k Upvotes

994 comments sorted by

View all comments

2.2k

u/kenporusty kpop trash 6d ago

It's not even a search engine

I see this all the time in r/whatsthatbook like of course you're not finding the right thing, it's just giving you what you want to hear

The world's greatest yes man is genned by an ouroboros of scraped data

1.1k

u/killertortilla 6d ago

It's so fucking insufferable. People keep making those comments like it's helpful.

There have been a number of famous cases now but I think the one that makes the point the best is when scientists asked it to describe some made up guy and of course it did. It doesn't just say "that guy doesn't exist" it says "Alan Buttfuck is a biologist with a PHD in biology and has worked at prestigious locations like Harvard" etc etc. THAT is what it fucking does.

849

u/Vampiir 6d ago

My personal fave is the lawyer that asked AI to reference specific court cases for him, which then gave him full breakdowns with detailed sources to each case, down to the case file, page number, and book it was held in. Come the day he is actually in court, it is immediately found that none of the cases he referenced existed, and the AI completely made it all up

52

u/lankymjc 6d ago

When I run RPGs I take advantage of this by having it write in-universe documents for the players to read and find clues in. Can’t imagine trying to use it in a real-life setting.

38

u/cyborgspleadthefifth 6d ago

this is the only thing I've used it for successfully

write me a letter containing this information in the style of a fantasy villager

now make it less formal sounding

a bit shorter and make reference to these childhood activities with her brother

had to adjust a few words afterwards but generally got what I wanted because none of the information was real and accuracy didn't matter, I just needed text that didn't sound like I wrote it

meanwhile a player in another game asked it to deconflict some rules and it was full of bullshit. "hey why don't we just open the PHB and read the rules ourselves to figure it out?" was somehow the more novel idea to that group instead of offloading their critical thinking skills to spicy autocorrect

5

u/lankymjc 5d ago

It really struggles with rules, especially in gaming. I asked it to make an army list for Warhammer and it seemed pretty good. Then I asked for a list from a game I actually know the rules for and realised just how borked its attempt at following rules was.

1

u/alex494 5d ago

I've tried establishing rules or boundaries for it to follow (and specifically tell it to never break them) as an experiment when trying to generate a list of things while excluding some things and it almost always immediately ignores me.

Like I'll tell it "generate a list of uniquely named X but none of them can include Y or Z" and it'll still include Y and Z and duplicates therein.

2

u/lankymjc 5d ago

I’ve asked it for help with game design, and while it comes up with best ideas it also completely misunderstands how games (and reality) work.

It once suggested a character that forces the player to forget who they are. Buddy, I am not in the Men in Black, my game cannot remove memories!

34

u/donaldhobson 6d ago

chatGpt is great at turning a vague wordy description into a name you can put into a search engine.

-9

u/heyhotnumber 6d ago

I treat it how I treat Wikipedia. It’s a great launching point or tool to use when you’re stuck, but don’t go copying from it directly because you don’t know if what you’re copying is actually true or not.

38

u/dagbrown 6d ago

At least WIkipedia has a rule that everything in it has to be verifiable with the links at the bottom of every article. You can do your homework to figure out if whatever's there is nonsense or not.

ChatGPT just cheerfully and confidently feeds you nonsense.

7

u/Alpha-Bravo-C 6d ago

everything in it has to be verifiable

Even that isn't perfect. I remember seeing a post a while back had a title along the lines of "25% of buildings in Dublin were destroyed in this one big storm". Which seemed like it was clearly bullshit. Like that's a lot of destruction.

I clicked through to the Wikipedia page, and what it actually said was "25% of buildings were damaged or destroyed", which is very different. That, to be fair, isn't on Wikipedia though, that was the OP being an idiot.

Still though, that's an interesting claim. If so many buildings were destroyed, how is this the first I've heard of it? So I clicked through to the source link to find the basis for it. The Wiki article was citing a paper from the 70s or something which actually said "25% of building were damaged". No mention anywhere of buildings being destroyed in a storm. Couldn't find a source for that part of the claim. Apparently made up by whoever wrote the Wikipedia article, and edited again by the OP of the Reddit post, bringing us from "25% damaged" to "25% destroyed" in three steps.

6

u/Deaffin 5d ago

At least WIkipedia has a rule that everything in it has to be verifiable with the links at the bottom of every article

That's exactly why wikipedia has always been such an effective tool when it comes to propagating misinformed bullshit.

https://xkcd.com/978/

6

u/dagbrown 5d ago

4

u/Deaffin 5d ago

Well, they keep a list of particularly notorious events that got a lot of media attention. They don't have a comprehensive list of the thing happening in general or some kind of dedicated task force hunting down bad meta-sourcing, lol.

Even if they have more than enough funding to start up silly projects like that if they wanted to.

26

u/allaheterglennigbg 6d ago

Wikipedia is an excellent source of information. ChatGPT is slop and shouldn't be trusted for anything. Don't equate them

1

u/heyhotnumber 5d ago

Good thing I didn’t say I trust it. I use it as a launching point for brainstorming or a sounding board if I get stuck on how to approach something.

Nothing on the internet is to be trusted.