Plot twist: "Dad" isn't even his real name.
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2025
770 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
67987 readers
3454 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What?? That changes everything! Does that mean my name could be false too?
Best regards,
- Hungry
Well played
When do we start suing makers of fortune cookies for lucky coincidences?
"Claim".
I mean, the guy is right, because it's advertised as "artificial intelligence".
Were it advertised as word salad generator, a Markovian chain grown big and scary, something in principle similar to programs for generation of fantasy language texts and spells and names (if someone remembers 00s good old web) for roleplaying, - then there would be no problem.
But if to sell something better you lie what it is, and that lie has social consequences, you should get sued to freezing hot inferno with mustard-greased giant-cockroach-dildo-covered walls. You should also probably face criminal charges.
Yeah, similar to Tesla "full self driving".
No, you see where he grew up it was a common expression that meant you drive it yourself!
It couldn't possibly be expected to mean what any sane person would think.
The fuckin' Pedo Guy.
People thinking a glorified autocorrect is a source of factual information is horrifying.
that's what was advertised. To most people, computers are actual arcane magic, impossible to understand except by the wizards in IT who can do anything.
Of course people believed it.
Sorry, I've spent months telling chatgpt that Arve Hjalmar Holmen killed his kids for a school project.
Are we sure that someone else with that name hasn't committed those crimes? After all if I search my name it says I'm an astronaut, because there is an actual NASA astronaut with my name. It's not saying I'm that person, it's just saying that that name is the same as that person's.
Mine just gives a bunch of accurate information about me.
Bummer (and/or 'F')
when I've searched my name with Google over the years, it has said I'm a high school football star, corporate lawyer, Ironman competitor, hotel chef, tech support specialist, janitorial manager, and horse trainer. LIES! ALL LIES!!!
Are you a male adult performer?
Not as far as you know.
When asking ChatGPT about my name, it provided the following:
"...it seems like you may be referring to a private person rather than a widely known public figure. If that's the case, I wouldn't have any specific public information on him unless he has gained some public recognition for a particular achievement."
It shouldn't be used for looking up people that aren't celebrities or at least known for something.
The problem with that is that a guy who murdered his three kids is known for something.
At the most generous, maybe the professor in the article shares a name with the killer. Articles will include enough information to clear the professor (like maybe the killer has been in jail for a decade ). A LLM will weave together real information about the professor with the "fact" that he killed his kids.
ChatGPT shouldn't be used to find any real information, period.
“…it seems like you may be referring to a private person rather than a widely known public figure. If that’s the case, I wouldn’t have any specific public information on him unless he has gained some public recognition for a particular achievement.”
If you didn't specifically search for "Mr. ", that would be quite the sexist attitude to assume that person is a "him" ;)
PS: please don't use LLMs, they produce nothing of value and contribute to idiots being deceived.
It's AI. There's nothing to delete but the erroneous response. There is no database of facts to edit. It doesn't know fact from fiction, and the response is also very much skewed by the context of the query. I could easily get it to say the same about nearly any random name just by asking it about a bunch of family murders and then asking about a name it doesn't recognize. It is more likely to assume that person is in the same category as the others and if the one or more of the names have any association (real or fictional) with murder.
you can tweak the weights though
Tweaking weights is no guarantee and can easily affect complete unrelated things.
I don't care why. That is still libel and it is illegal for good reason. if you can't stop this for all cases then you ai is and should be illegal.
None of the moneybags will listen, unfortunately. But I'm with you. The rollout of AI was extremely irresponsible. Just to make it profitable as quickly as possible.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
I have this gun machine that shoots in all directions randomly. I can't predict it, so I can't stop it from shooting you. So sorry. It's uncontrollable.
load more comments
(39 replies)
load more comments
(25 replies)
Well, here we are. We skipped using this tech for only search Automation and leapfrogged to directly making shit up (once again).
To me it's clear that these tools are primarily useful as bullshit generators, and I expect them to hallucinate and be inaccurate. But the companies trying to capitalize on the "AI" bubble are saying that these tools can be useful and accurate. I imagine OpenAI is going to have to invoke the Fox News defense in this case, and claim that "no reasonable person would take this seriously".
I feel like the primary use of these tools is only grammar and writing assistance. Everything else is just plugging in extra tools to make it more useful... although the way Perplexity does it is considerably more useful than the rest.
Don’t use hallucinate to describe what it is doing, that is humanizing it and making the tech seem more advanced than it is. It is randomly mashing words together without understanding the meaning of any of them
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
It’s all hallucinations.
Some (many) just happen to be very close to factual.
It’s sad to see that the marketing of these tools has been so effective that few realize how they work and what they do.
It really is sad. I often hear, "I even asked ChatGPT and it said..." as if that means their response is valid. I've heard people say it who I thought would know better, too.
😎👉👉 zoop!
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(17 replies)
Is it really him that it's saying did this? I mean, I could look up my dad's name and all I get are articles about a serial killer who just happened to have the same name; and that's not generated by AI. Names aren't usually unique identifiers.
ChatGPT's "made-up horror story" not only hallucinated events that never happened, but it also mixed "clearly identifiable personal data"—such as the actual number and gender of Holmen's children and the name of his hometown—with the "fake information," Noyb's press release said.
Humans hallucinate. These things extrapolate tokens statistically. In average his tone of requests would be likely to lead to some murder story.
Nothing is wrong with the tech (except it doesn't seem very useful when you firmly know what it can't do), but everything is wrong with that tech being called artificial intelligence.
It's almost like calling polygraph "lies detector".
I replied to the following statement:
I could look up my dad's name and all I get are articles about a serial killer who just happened to have the same name
I countered this dismissal by quoting the article, which explains that it was more than just a coincidental name mix up.
You response is not really relevant to my response, unless you are assuming I'm arguing for one side or the other. I'm just informing someone who dismissed the article's headline using an explanation that demonstrated that they didn't bother to read the article.
Nothing is wrong with the tech (except it doesn't seem very useful when you firmly know what it can't do), but everything is wrong with that tech being called artificial intelligence.
If the owners of the technology call it artificial intelligence and hype or sell it as a potential replacement for intelligent human decision making then it should be absolutely be judged on those grounds.
I know I've hate the fact that we've settled on the word Hallucinate It anthropomorphizes something that absolutely isn't intelligent.
It's not capable of thinking a particular piece of information is true when it isn't, because it isn't capable of thinking about information in general.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Or ChatGPT has become a precog and is reporting a precrime. Lock him up!
view more: next ›