i just had an older relative contact me because he wants to buy a retirement house in the country-side but google tells him all the places he searches are susceptible to flooding.
you see, if ONLY ONCE, it rained too hard in the last 50 years, wouldn't you know it, google knows it, and will tell you the place you want to move to will get flooded?!
i tried explaining to my relative that the result he got from google was an A.I. generated text, not real. but he wouldn't believe me. you know why?
because he got so used to google in the past decade, it helped a lot with information. correct information. real facts. facts that google got from the first results and made into the snippet we all know.
now that snippet is no more, but it looks exactly the same but it is not actually the same. it is made up info.
imagine all the non-savvy users that depend on google for information, now they get an A.I. answer that WILL ALMOST ALWAYS have something to say about ANYTHING.
it doesn't matter if you ask stupid questions, google will tell you "great questions".
Google, how could you be so careless with your HUGE userbase? there are old, young, naive, etc, people depending on you and what do you do? feed them misinformation
rant over sorry
Do you own an ISP and an AS? Hardware to connect with? They'll get you if they want.
The needless ego stroking of these AI chatbots drives me up the wall. Not all my questions are insightful and good questions. They are often obvious follow-ups from a contradiction in a previous reply.
The Kagi Assistant used to not do this, and now it does it on nearly every response.
> Google, how could you be so careless with your HUGE userbase?
Based on some of the things Apple said around the Siri delay, I think this is part of why they didn’t release an anything major. Of course, now they’re releasing a repackaged version of Gemini, so I guess the market has said it cares about AI more than accuracy. Either that, or it’s a tactic to blame shift when things do go bad.
Pretty soon the AI will tell your father things that are more difficult to disprove and it will be done the same way "news" and Wikipedia do it - telling you how to feel before telling you what happened, reporting only part of the story, and not covering most happenings at all.
Now is the time to teach your circle psyop avoidance skills. Or build an honest competitor (if it were allowed to exist - Marc says only three will be permitted to exist).
Maybe I tried explaining the wrong thing EG: showing real information that you found* from a website proving the location is not prone to flooding, rather than gaslighting them on their efforts and AI usage.
*Past results are not indicative of future performance.