Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:AI is just Wikipedia on steroids. It's only as good as the information submitted. .
Will it constantly beg for money like Wikipedia does?
Anonymous wrote:AI is just Wikipedia on steroids. It's only as good as the information submitted. .
But to be honest there are many people like that, who mostly just repeat words they've heard other people say, but couldn't explain things much deeper.Anonymous wrote:Here's where I'm at: AI isn't "Intelligence" at all. It's a Large Language Model. What does that mean? It means it's read a gazillion things in English and has learned English really well and so can "predict" what an English speaker would say. It's not actually intelligent.
Anonymous wrote:The AI search results I see are full of errors and contradictions. Here's the latest, emphasis added:
"If you are unsure about any part of this process, have an unqualified electrician perform the work."
How long will it be until these kinds of results are no longer common?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are just looking at one part of what you think is "A.I." and it is very restricted and biased and limited by the corporations.
Same as the "internet" or clear-web non-deep web, it's only 1% of the total internet.
And corporations like Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc. restrict like 99.99% of that measley 1% of the clear web.
That may be true, but it doesn't change that this is a ridiculous result to an electrical question, and I've seen many more wrong "facts" come up in other searches. Also Google, Bing, and Yahoo and similar are what regular people have available to search on.
Anonymous wrote:You are just looking at one part of what you think is "A.I." and it is very restricted and biased and limited by the corporations.
Same as the "internet" or clear-web non-deep web, it's only 1% of the total internet.
And corporations like Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc. restrict like 99.99% of that measley 1% of the clear web.