As I sent you yesterday, I googled “are our astronauts still stuck in space?” and their AI answered “no, the astronauts returned to earth in February. So, not even close to being accurate.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
And so you used your critical thinking skills—exactly how it’s supposed to work. Nothing is 100% reliable, not AI, not Google, not even you or me. That’s why thinking for yourself will always matter.
Cars are the same every day unless something needs a repair or maintenance. You can count on a car to be consistent. You cannot count on AI to be consistent or correct.
Maybe using too much AI has affected your ability to recognize an apples and oranges comparison.
I once smoked a cigarette and didn't get lung cancer; therefore they clearly have a use and the health warnings are blown out of proportion. Your own spaghetti logic is a dish that can be served right back at ya.
That's EVERYONE's experience when interacting with it for fact-based inquiries. If you claim not to notice it, you're either asking about subjects you don't know well enough to detect it, or you're ignoring it because you hope to profit off of the new big thing.
Are you aware that "fact based inquiries" are a *fraction* of what people are using AI for? It's unfortunate you are having some trouble with your AI-based search inquiries, but extrapolating your bad experience out to everyone else using AI technology is foolish.
Googles responded: As of recent reports, two NASA astronauts, ... are not truly stranded and are expected to return to Earth soon via a SpaceX Dragon capsule; NASA maintains they are not "stuck" and are simply waiting for the next crew to arrive so they can return on a different spacecraft.
Fr. I’m sure there are good uses but seems like AI needs more work. Peeps are saying that’s one of the reasons Musk is raiding agencies that house our private data.
Comments
It ain't all that, but tech billionaires have invested so much in it that they want a return on their investment.
Maybe using too much AI has affected your ability to recognize an apples and oranges comparison.
https://rasmussen.libanswers.com/faq/403604
https://www.enttoday.org/article/chatgpt-generated-fake-references-in-academic-manuscripts-is-a-problem/
https://insider.govtech.com/california/news/judge-blasts-stanford-ai-experts-credibility-over-fake-ai-created-sources
https://library.missouri.edu/news/resources-and-services/watch-out-for-fake-citations-from-chatgpt-2
https://lib.guides.umd.edu/c.php?g=1340355&p=9880574
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/12/17/ai-fake-news-misinformation/
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/01/10/misinformation-experts-citation-to-fake-ai-generated-sources-in-his-declaration-shatters-his-credibility-with-this-court/
Always a good sign.
And Cuban is way off on this one.