Ouch.

  • @Nurse_Robot
    link
    English
    325 hours ago

    Calling a 29 year old a girl instead of a woman is the cherry on top of this AI fear mongering article

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      104 hours ago

      They omitted the conversation too. Really makes you wonder how the bot ended up saying that…

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          154 hours ago

          Holy smokes I stand corrected. The chatbot actually misunderstood the context to the point it told the human to die, out of the blue.

          It’s not every day you get shown a source that proves you wrong. Thanks kind stranger

          • megane-kun
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            No problem. I understand the skepticism here, especially since the article in the OP is a bit light on the details.


            EDIT:

            Details on the OP article is fine enough, but it didn’t link sources.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Even if they included it, it changes fuck all imo. We’ve known for a long time now these things hallucinate or presumably throw a Hail Mary as to what comes next conversationally/prediction wise. Also, as the other poster pointed out, with the author referring to a 29 year old woman as “girl” probably tells you all you need to know about journalistic integrity on that site.

        • sunzu2
          link
          fedilink
          13 hours ago

          Low quality journalism strikes again.

          Love seeing commenters spot it and call it.

          That’s what the comment section is for!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 hours ago

        Ive seen it elsewhere and it was just normal questions related to some sociology homework about different types of concentration.