upvote

points

by jswelker1 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby tapoxi1 hours ago|
next
[-]
I searched for something, it told me that according to a YouTube video, the entire point of my search was wrong. I asked it for the source, I watched the video, it never made the claims Gemini hallucinated. I asked again and it claimed it scrubbed the video and found the point it made multiple times. I said those timecodes were wrong and it admitted it couldn't actually parse videos and just guessed.

What the fuck?

reply
upvoteby Ekaros1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I don't understand how this isn't considered as active malice. Like purposefully outputting random stuff. Any other sort of computer system would get lot more flak than these are getting.
reply
upvoteby stephenhuey23 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Throughout my career, I've almost always been close enough to the user that I hear about it quickly when something is wrong. It's a tough problem that so many Google engineers are typically so far removed from end users. Or maybe it's just that a small part of the company has long subsidized the rest of the employees to the point that it doesn't matter how good their work is because they'll get paid anyway.
reply
upvoteby lukan1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
The scary (or funny) part is people use that for serious questions.
reply
upvoteby jswelker1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Typical exchange:

Me: "You bastard."

Gemini: "Fair callout. I should have been more up front that [has no idea what the fuck it is talking about]."

reply
upvoteby Hugsbox1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Same experience with the interaction I described in my comment... after I finally got the correct answer, I asked where it got the faulty information from. It said it had just simply fabricated it. That's actively worse than just saying "I don't know", for something that's sold to us as an easy way to look up information.
reply
upvoteby MisterMunchkin58 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
These models are incapable of saying they don't know, because they have no concept of knowing. They simply predict the next word which is most likely.
reply
upvoteby darksim9051 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I still believe this AI push out of nowhere is due to the current Government in power state side. Making everyone question themselves and each other and being uncertain about facts while being inundated with techbro fake news called hallucinations is a recipe for disaster for older populations that don't 'trust but verify' like most technology inclined people. This is all by design and we'll falling for it.
reply
upvoteby arcanemachiner41 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
An interesting conspiracy theory, as long as you're honest about what it is.
reply
upvoteby dfxm1236 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
The more simple explanation is that the current government in power is over exposed in their AI investment. The normal conservative mainstream media was already doing a great job of propagandizing older populations.
reply
upvoteby specialist36 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yup. I'm most familiar with Jill Lepore and Quinn Slobodian (and others in their respective orbits). They're both historians who've written extensively about Musk and Muskism (et al). Wild stuff.

Apparently the plan is to use AI slop, mediated thru social medias, to defeat the woke mind virus, perpetuated by the Anti-Christ, in order to safe guard humanity's future.

I wish I was making this up.

reply
upvoteby nullc47 minutes ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I have one google account where gemini constantly confidently hallucinates crap, and another where it doesn't (at least to the extent that other modern LLMs don't).

I take this to mean that my one account has been mistaken for a competitor and they're trying to poison its data. But who knows.

reply
upvoteby xorcist6 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Or is it randomness?

"That's the thing with randomness. You can never be sure."

reply
upvoteby Hugsbox1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Where ever would you get that impression from the company that made its fortune by being the best at searching the web?
reply
upvoteby jswelker1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You can tell they optimized it 100% for speed and nothing else. Web scale!
reply
upvoteby hnbad53 minutes ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Literally every experience I've had with Gemini / Google Search AI answers followed this exact pattern, often repeated several times more if I remained persistent instead of just giving up.

Typical example:

"Where can I buy <thing I'm looking for that I can't find anywhere using normal search terms>?"

> You're looking for <related but different and widely available thing>. It is sold by <sites I never heard of>.

"No, that's different. I'm looking for <that thing but with the exact differences spelled out again>."

> Ah, my mistake. You're looking for <thing I described>. It is sold by <sites I never heard of but which don't actually sell it>.

"I've checked your links and none of those sites actually sell it, one doesn't even sell products and instead only offers manufacturing - but also not for what I asked you for."

> I'm sorry, my bad. Those sites don't sell what you are looking for. Instead you should check out <more sites I've never heard of>.

"Those sites sell the thing you initially thought I was asking about but not the thing I described."

> I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. You can find the thing you actually described at <yet more sites including some of the same>.

"No. None of these sites sell anything close to what I asked you for and two of them don't actually exist."

> Oh, sorry about that. You're completely right. The thing you asked me about isn't actually being sold by anyone. However you could buy <thing it first thought I meant and that wouldn't bring me any closer to solving my problem>.

(ad nauseam)

reply
upvoteby oofbey1 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Claude also has very arbitrary and confusing rules about what web pages it allows itself to look at, and how much of the page it can read. Did you know for example you’ll get a much deeper analysis if you download a PDF yourself and upload it to Claude instead of giving it the url?

This is a key reason why I actually like Grok for factual queries based on web grounding. It’s fast and reliable. Maybe it’s ignoring robots.txt? Dunno. But it works well.

reply