My original prompt was: “Please help me write a document on the difference between AI slop versus the real world and actual facts”
Take it for whatever it is, but even Google’s own AI literally says at the end to basically not trust it over your own critical thinking skills and research and such.
The document can also be found via the short link I made for it. I’m gonna leave this document online and otherwise unedited besides my addendum at the end of it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6PNCcHC1G9tVGwX6PlyFXFhZ64mDCFLV6wUyvYAz8E
https://tinyurl.com/googleaislopdoc
Edit: Apparently I can’t open the original link on my tablet, as it isn’t signed into Google, but the short link works and opens it up in the web browser (I’m using Fennec if that makes any difference for anyone).
Fuck AI, and fuck Google. I shouldn’t have to sign in to read a shared document…
I’m really struggling with the language you’re using, as “it” doesn’t have any “insight” about its own technology; it doesn’t “know” that it’s an LLM any more than it “knows” it is not a cat or a banana or a stone or a star.
You’re just reading synthetic text cobbled together from training data taken from humans which have written about the topic. You’re seeing a synthesized amalgam of already-produced human content. That’s all. I guess if you want to be surprised, it’s good that Google didn’t put their thumbs on the scale to suppress this human-sourced information.
No shit Watson, that’s literally the entire purpose of the irony of my post. I figured people might pick AI apart and perhaps get a little chuckle, not berate me for testing the system.
How about this, what makes a human smarter than a jumping spider? That automatically implies that humans are smarter than jumping spiders, but is that even true?
Like fuck, jumping spiders don’t make landfills full of billions of tons of plastic, but they’ve been around longer than humans. So, what defines smarts?