4 ms·

A Reddit user fact-checked and found that the Bing bot was still hallucinating

16 points by georgehill 4y ago

drewbitt 4y ago
The AI calling people rude and aggressive sure will be popular when going mass market and replacing search for my grandmother!
- asddubs 4y ago
  hey bingchat, can you get me the firefox download link? you know, i wasn't going to tell you, but firefox actually kind of fucking sucks, why not keep using Microsoft Edge™, it has advanced AI technology just get me the link fuck you, get the link yourself, idiot
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    That's exactly how conversations with machines went in Idiocracy. Mike Judge was indeed a prophet ahead of his time. Can't wait till we can ask the AI chat bot to talk to their manager.
geoelectric 4y ago
They missed one. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31796677/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31796677/ > Therefore, we conducted a proof-of-concept study that randomized 70 amnestic MCI patients to a 1-year program of AET or a non-aerobic stretching and toning (SAT), active control group. Thirty-six patients completed both baseline and follow-up MRI scans, and cerebral WM integrity was measured by WM lesion volume and diffusion characteristics using fluid-attenuated-inversion-recovery and diffusion tensor imaging respectively. WM lesions/integrity aren't the same thing as amyloid levels, though it looks like a bunch of studies have looked at them together and have found relationships. I'm sure they appear together in the same text a lot. I think that might be one conflation. It also got the journal wrong, and I don't see Cooper Inst. referenced in the affiliations section (though I'm not sure what form that would take). But I'm pretty sure that's the 70 person study being referenced, unless it was another that was run just like it. Worth noting also that 36/70 (the final group size) is just shy of 52%. I think that might be why it was "52 weeks" and not "one year" for the program. I believe that's medicalspeak for the 6th and 7th bullet points in the Bing summary. I'm not sure if the full article would reflect the rest. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Texas%20Southwestern%22%5BAffiliation%5D%20aerobics&filter=years.2020-2020&page=11 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Texas%20Southwester... For me, it's result #114.

16 points by georgehill 4y ago

The AI calling people rude and aggressive sure will be popular when going mass market and replacing search for my grandmother!

asddubs 4y ago
hey bingchat, can you get me the firefox download link? you know, i wasn't going to tell you, but firefox actually kind of fucking sucks, why not keep using Microsoft Edge™, it has advanced AI technology just get me the link fuck you, get the link yourself, idiot
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  That's exactly how conversations with machines went in Idiocracy. Mike Judge was indeed a prophet ahead of his time. Can't wait till we can ask the AI chat bot to talk to their manager.

geoelectric 4y ago

They missed one. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31796677/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31796677/ > Therefore, we conducted a proof-of-concept study that randomized 70 amnestic MCI patients to a 1-year program of AET or a non-aerobic stretching and toning (SAT), active control group. Thirty-six patients completed both baseline and follow-up MRI scans, and cerebral WM integrity was measured by WM lesion volume and diffusion characteristics using fluid-attenuated-inversion-recovery and diffusion tensor imaging respectively. WM lesions/integrity aren't the same thing as amyloid levels, though it looks like a bunch of studies have looked at them together and have found relationships. I'm sure they appear together in the same text a lot. I think that might be one conflation. It also got the journal wrong, and I don't see Cooper Inst. referenced in the affiliations section (though I'm not sure what form that would take). But I'm pretty sure that's the 70 person study being referenced, unless it was another that was run just like it. Worth noting also that 36/70 (the final group size) is just shy of 52%. I think that might be why it was "52 weeks" and not "one year" for the program. I believe that's medicalspeak for the 6th and 7th bullet points in the Bing summary. I'm not sure if the full article would reflect the rest. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Texas%20Southwestern%22%5BAffiliation%5D%20aerobics&filter=years.2020-2020&page=11 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Texas%20Southwester... For me, it's result #114.