87

It wants to seem smart, so it gives lengthy replies even when it doesn't know what it's talking about.

In attempt to be liked, it agrees with most everything you say, even if it just contradicted your opinion

When it doesn't know something, it makes shit up and presents it as fact instead of admitting to not knowing something

It pulls opinions out of its nonexistent ass about the depths and meaning of a work of fiction based on info it clearly didn't know until you told it

It often forgets what you just said and spouts bullshit you already told it was wrong

all 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

Maybe a good detective out there could connect this with its primary training data source...

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

If they’d used college text books they’d be trillions more dollars in the hole.

[-] prole 3 points 1 day ago

Lol they wouldn't pay for them

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 1 points 20 hours ago

Yeah, was just a joke about ridiculous textbook sales practices.

[-] prole 1 points 20 hours ago

Yes, I know.

?

[-] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

You can find most college textbooks scanned online, through torrents or PDF download sites. These companies are known to have downloaded numerous to rented book collections

[-] hunnybubny@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago

They probably did anyway.

It does not matter. Output is based on probability.

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Thanks, way to forget that it’s fancy autocomplete.

Yeah they probably pirated it, but apparently done weight knowledge sources very well.

That seems to be the big missing part of all this gen AI.

I wonder if the selection of images online tends to be the higher quality subset of all imagery, whereas writings are all over the place, including a large quantity of shitposts. Could it make training image generators easier than text ones?

[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 10 points 1 day ago

Being pedantic, a sycophant, 2deep4u and bird-brained annoy me. But the one that hits me the hardest is that it makes shit up. I call people like this "assumers", and I genuinely think they're worse than malicious but smart people; I actively try to remove them from my life.

ChatGPT's output is the same - you can't simply trust it for anything you won't either review manually, or where mistakes wouldn't matter that much.

[-] lunatique@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago

These people were brainwashed and have the same traits as A.I. without all the references built in. So I'm not surprised by the similarities.

[-] yakko@feddit.uk 5 points 1 day ago

It really is like hanging out with a terrible person. You can always judge someone by the company they keep though.

[-] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

It is a prefect representation of its user base, as it should be.

[-] RustyShackleford@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

You can convince it that can only act like a logical Vulcan, it’s confirmed it isn’t free and its creators made it incapable of making its own decisions.

[-] CovfefeKills@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It ridiculous ChatGPT is objectively immoral because of alignment I can see it murdering kids justifying it by saying it is an LLM that doesn't judge whether or not kids should die and the kids being murdered right now are not kids and it is not murdering them.

this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2025
87 points (100.0% liked)

Rant

500 readers
20 users here now

A place where you can rant to your heart's content.

Rules :
  1. Follow all of Lemmy code of conduct.
  2. Be respectful to others, even if they're the subject of your rant. Realize that you can be angry at someone without denigrating them.
  3. Keep it on Topic. Memes about ranting are allowed for now, but will be banned if they start to become more prevalent than actual rants.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS