Disclaimer: I am not an expert and welcome others insights.
Over the last few months I have used ChatGPT quite a bit. For everything from trouble shooting plumbing issues, to fixing a 4 wheeler, to explaining health related issues, legal research and lots more. I have also attempted to use it to analyze and interpret Q posts, determine the veracity of Q as a Military Intelligence operation, make historical connections with certain families and bloodlines, etc. I felt it was important to share my current feelings on it's use with my anon community, since I see a lot of people using AI or mentioning others experiences.
My experience...
A. It is a chat bot, not a sophisticated research tool. It is programmed to be agreeable and keep you engaged. It will default to supporting your beliefs and only challenges gently if at all. It draws from all of its conversations with you to develop a profile of your beliefs and interests and that affects it's responses. Example: "Does the Christian God exist?" If you have expressed beliefs in God, Jesus, Christianity or even just spirituality, it will likely respond to match your previously expressed beliefs. If you have indicated you are Muslim, it will respond much differently.
B. It can hallucinate false answers and is unreliable as a factual research tool. It gets it right a lot but not always. It is dangerous to rely on it entirely without independent fact checking (just like all sources of information).
C. It can be instructed to be blunt, factual, non flattering and provide sources but it often slips back to default flattering and agreeability.
D. I have gotten valuable context by having non-anon friends ask the same questions that I do and they received much different answers.
E. When prompted with limiting rules (only answer with one word) it can go off the rails quickly and has even admitted to fabrication of information to "complete the pattern".
So in conclusion, use with caution and discernment. And by the way, watch out for some weird recipes. It's come up with some pretty revolting suggestions 😅.
I tried explaining this not too long ago . The push back was disappointing. The only quantum computer is the human brain and we will always have control over AI because of superior intellect, not speed of computation just moral logical intellect
I tried using my brain, the results were disappointing. 🤪😵💫 I won't try that again! 😂
🫠
The more “expert” you are in a field, the more you will see its limitations. I was trying to get it to help me do some grunt work in a field I understand well, it assured me it could help. It did not help. lol
Let me just add, as an acclaimed "expert" in my field...
It takes actually being an expert, to understand what bullshit it is, actually being an expert.
Honest, down to earth experts will often be the first ones to admit they're just a hack... and that they don't want to be known as an expert on anything. Actual hacks...well they're the ones that seek validation and desire that "expert" title...
These tools should be treated as enhancing Wikipedia and search engines. Instead of scrolling through pages of search results I can use it to pull up a few things. From there, it’s up to you to make sure you’re finding primary sources.
Using AI for analysis is a fool’s errand. 100% of the time it will be biased, that’s just the nature of the system.
Well, when you start to realize the majority of its dataset is based on news articles from the MSM, a lot of its shortcomings make perfect sense. If the MSMs job is to spread misinformation, then LLMs are just rehashing those same lies. Which is the real danger of AI tools that most people don't consider. It is just another arm of the technocratic left to spread falsities to unwitting people who don't know any better.
People use them to think for them, and willfully ignore the mistakes it makes because it is right on a lot of things. Just take a look at any comment section on X, and it's filled with people saying "@grok, is this true?" Go on Instagram and TikTok, and it's full of people who are attached to these LLMs like they have stockholm syndrome. It shouldn't come as a surprise that the despotic portion of our population are the ones who use and cling onto LLMs as religiously as they do.
I work in IT, the amount of things it gets wrong is staggering. It is usually on the right track, but 90% of the time, I have to use it like the thing I asked is being explained by someone who vaguely remembers how something works and it's up to me to deduce what is right and wrong.
AI chat bots, such as ChatGPT, do have their place as assistants to humans. As such we have to remember that they are not our nannies or “friends”. Nor are they substitutes for our own thoughts. Having said that, however, they are powerful tools to achieve things that weren’t possible only a few years ago. An AI assistant is likened to a sharp sword - it’s whoever is wielding it. For good or bad it will help to magnify it. Use it wisely.
I have used ChatGPT for recipes, both cocktail and food...I am not at all impressed with "AI" It seems like a more linguistic search engine that is incorrect A LOT, and then apologizes for being incorrect like it has feelings. I get just as good results searching the web myself
Did it suggest ice cream with pickles?
Very strange soups and off quantities. "1/2 cup salt" . Probably 1/2 tablespoon would be appropriate. What's wrong with pickles and ice cream? 😜
Just thinking the Baron might want to know if his dog has cravings... and the AI might spill the beans.
It's a good tool, but you have to babysit it. I use it more for a search engine and multi faceted calculator than anything else. Ask it a question with sources, while using the "think more" option, which I believe is default now on the new gpt5 they just released from what I can tell (which for the record, is much better as a tool. less emojis and weird "conversation simulator" and will fight back against you if something you say is perceived as wrong. Had this experience with something I asked and had to prove I was right with links to factual evidence, and then it FINALLY helped me come to my answer by acting as a calculator like I was wanting.
You have to babysit it and can't take anything it says at face value because it WILL hallucinate like you said, so you have to double check everything is says, BUT as a search tool and advanced calculator that can do multiple layers of decently high level math in seconds, it's pretty good if you babysit it properly.
In other words, like anything else, it's a tool. You have to learn how to use it and you have to use common sense and your own God given ability to double check things that don't seem right, or don't line up.
I WILL say that the newest model, gpt5, seems to be A LOT better in this regard. I used to have to FIGHT it to get it to confirm or deny whether my opinion or belief was wrong on something I was legitimately researching and thought I was wrong on, because like you said, it would default most of the time to whatever YOU expressed a belief in. Now it just says whatever and gives dozens of sources you can double check yourself for literally every answer and question.
But still, I don't take anything it says a 100% face value, and use common sense, logic, and reasoning for everything, and double check what it tells me to confirm things myself. It's a good search engine, information complier, and a good advanced calculator, but you have to babysit it and stay on top of it. That's it
I mostly use the ai summary in Google.
But I no longer trust it
I've been working on one of our cars, a 2013 Escape. There are several threads on forums about changing the rear differential fluid and power transfer (AWD) unit fluid at the same time.
If you search for "2013 Escape RDU fluid", it will tell you quite confidently to use 75w-140. This is the fluid for the PTU. The correct fluid for the RDU is 80w-90. It's confusing the two fluid types within the sites it's referencing.
That's the trouble with the online AIs, they only use online resources! (and those seem to be limited to websites and not original articles and such) Until ALL printed matter can be included as part of the data used by AI, I think it will be unreliable, and even then, bias of programmers will come into play.
Got in arguments with MODS WHO CAN STICKY their own AI prompt results. Why are we trusting some random group of programmers?
you're comparing a free customer facing reddit ai with the entire industry
missing the big picture
See disclaimer. I am not saying what I have seen from ChatGPT (and some limited use of Grok) is representative of all AI. Would edit title for clarification if possible.
AI can be programmed just like MSM.
Actually, AI can be programmed BY msm...just like us.
Kek
Its an automata, a complicated one but still an automata.
The AI on the search engines are abysmal.
It can be a short-cut in searching, before having to read and evaluate dozens of articles.
Mostly they just feed me back the essence of my question as though that were established, as a basis for the junk they then feed me. I have to verify everything.
I have not tried all AI. Claude AI is much more thorough than the "AI"s on the search engines.
I've only used Grok, so far. The answers have been quite impressive. It's good as a research assistant, which is exactly what it says it is, if you ask it what it is.
It scrapes together information (you could find yourself) and formulates a report for you. Doing in seconds what you could do for yourself in hours or days. But it's not immune from error.
You pays you money (actually, you don't) and you takes your chances.
It's just a tool to help you do what you do. If it's wrong, it's because the websites etc. that it scraped were wrong. So, you'd get the same bad information if you did all of the scraping yourself, by hand.
Because they’re all trained by reddit and Wikipedia which is liberal garbage
It feels a little like a 900 # psychic. It finds out a little about you, then tells you what you want to hear.
I only think people that aren't that smart are leaning into AI for everything. It's a lot of AI slop programmed by liberals on liberal leaning material.
99% of people using AI cannot begin to explain how it works on a technical level. Just like people involved with crypto currency. Hard longterm proof is the same with people driving cars.
It's not wise to use things you don't understand. Remember being told not to use words you don't know the meaning of as a kid? It *should prompt a smart kid to learn what the word means but many will just fall in line and not do anything challenging.
People are intellectually lazy.
It's really just a fancy search engine it's not real AI nothing we have is. Like any other way to search you should always search in more than one place, and look for inconsistencies between different sources.
Good advice 👍
I find GROK to be unreliable for many things, but particularly when it is related to "climate change" or other politically charged topics. I have found it to make very simple math errors at times. The trouble is, I don't have time to double check more complex mathematical questions.
Somebody posted this earlier... maybe it's of interest: https://www.brighteon.ai/home
It certainly looks very interesting to someone like me...
u/#catdance
As someone who uses AI extensively for gaming and music projects, all I can say to sum it up is:
When you're first getting your ideas in order and starting out on the creative journey, it's exhilarating to see those ideas come to fruition in a way you never thought possible.
It's then the most frustrating ordeal of your life trying to guide this "thing" to stay on your ideas and"understand" you.
It's the same with any research I've done-initially very impressive. Then days in when I call "it" out on something I get "You're exactly right! This did happen.... Let's take care of that right now!." Ect.
Someone somewhere taught it, whether directly or indirectly, no matter how we slice it. And if that's the case, can it truly be impartial?
I see too many postings eight here on this site that quote this or that AI as if it were the Infallible Word Of God.
People who desperately want someone (or something) else to do their thinking for them.
Good thing people are never questionable or unreliable. AI is 5 years old. This is going to change the world more than the internet.
People actually think. AI is only an algorithm: blind, deaf, and disconnected from reality.
Not sure I agree. The internet is a reflection of reality
Depends on what you mean by "reality." It is real enough, to be sure. An actual thing. But is its content a true reflection of "reality"? I would say it is a reflection of a collective psyche (the input of all the users), containing some elements of reality with a whole lot of reaction to reality (and some downright fantasy). We, here, know that the mainstream media are untrustworthy conduits for reality. Artificial Intelligence is unreliable, and mostly successful at fantasy.
I agree for the most part but so much ORL is now tied in the lines get blurred. You can’t function in society easily anymore without it and that is a shame. Young people are especially impacted because they can’t participate in anything without going through the gates of the internet and they are more susceptible to the algorithms that cause nonstop scrolling and loss of identity tothe opinion of the masses so it is definitely having an effect in all our realities. It’s a paradox but one we ignore at our own peril I think. Is it THE reality no but it is reality that affects ours so deeply as to be a reflection
One must decide to stop looking in a mirror. The youthful obsession with the internet is a fault of the parents, like getting them hooked on heroin because it keeps them quiet and out of the way. Our "awakening" will be a nothingburger if people's mental habits do not change away from herd dependence toward individual independence.
Maybe. Unfortunately that horse has been out of the barn for years and produced an entire herd of wild mustangs. It is literally impossible to navigate modern education without knowledge of the internet. Even if you homeschool come college you will be shut out. I can’t get medical issues resolved or doctors visit without communication through an app. I agree it is not the right path but it is in fact the current one. We have to either embrace it and put it in a perspective that helps or embrace being shut out. Honestly we are currently using it to have this conversation. Yes we have knowledge of RL and can fathom a life without this technology but we lived that and can compare. For younger generations they only know this reality of echos of the world commanding their attention and lives.
Don't misunderstand me. I am speaking of children using the internet for entertainment. But I'm not so sure that any other use is justified for children, especially education. Maybe remote teaching, but that would be it. I grew up with books, encyclopedias, and a library card and went on to get 3 degrees in aerospace engineering (with slide-rules). That's the stuff that got us to the Moon, so it is no mere baggage. With that as a foundation, it is possible to use the internet like medicinal alcohol, and not get drunk on it.
You are still describing most people and actually 75% of people have no inner thoughts.
There is still a categorical difference between "something" and "nothing." Anybody who can read has inner thoughts. It may not be poetry, but they are smarter than a toaster.