I still remember how a colleague told me we should do X.
I was bamboozeled and baffled by it because X was literally what it said on the flask of the chemical what you shoulf not do under any circumstances.
His explanation as to why we should was, quote “I mean I know its strange, but Copilot told me it is okay and would be fine”
“well, you’re the expert. I’ll be behind this sealed barrier while you kill yourself”
Disclaimer: don’t do this. Letting your coworkers die is morally bad, and probably illegal.
Even worse, it involves a lot of paperwork.
What you do is send an official complaint straight to the legal office who will lose their shit at that
*who will put the complaint into another LLM and it’ll say there’s no problem
“Copilot said I should come watch you do this sick shit”
In this case there’s very little you can do to stop them long-term. This person should not be in their position.
The world has gone mad
I get a chill reading any historical nonfiction from the 1990s that is in any way optimistic.
“look how far we’ve come, into the new millenium!”
ehhhh… oh boy.
If we thought outsourcing thinking to religions was bad, hoo boy. This shit is next level.
When the boss pulls this on you and you ask for it in writing only to tell them: "I’m still not going to do it but now I have a written instruction from you to do something suicidally reckless”
If someone says “I asked ChatGPT”, I’ll probably try to be patient with them. “Well, as it turns out ChatGPT was wrong in this instance. Now go look it up properly.”
If someone is using Gemini, I’ll probably interrupt them long before they are done and say “excuse me but what in the name of sweet baby Jesus are you babbling on about? You’re not making any sense.”
If someone says “I used Grok”, I’ll just facepalm and move the hell on with my life, there’s no arguing with that level of stupidity.
If I wanted to know what a chatbot says, I would have asked it myself.
Hmm, you do make a fair point. Chatbots, indeed, are absolutely not velociraptors.
… So FAR.
I work in municipal development, and we have people trying to turn in building plans designed by AI. And the AI even puts in real-looking Engineering and Architectural seals. I really don’t love that I have to verify seals these days.
Our team is made up of hyper-vigilant bureaucrats, but lots of cites have worn out people who stopped caring if it looked mostly right, and people are going to die when buildings start collapsing.
AI is not trustworthy. A friend of mine literally put Warhammer 40,000’s rules and codexes into an AI so we could ask it questions and use it as a fast check rules tool.
It gets shit wrong a bunch.
So if the fucking thing can’t do a simple data-check on a 60 page document regarding a fucking boardgame, how the hell is it supposed to do ‘real’ things?
Is there a punishment for this? I’d think submitting ai documents is very fraudulent.
We can deny the permit until they hire a real person, but that’s what we were going to do anyway, so there’s no harm in trying from the developer perspective. The building is usually being built by an LLC that’s unique to that structure and will be dissolved when the property sells, so there’s nobody to go after when it fails in 3 years.
Shit like this is why the corporate veil really needs to be pierceable, it’s too easy for some scumlord builder to profit off of future deaths when they have shit like this to hide behind.
The city I work for is an enclave for the mega-rich. Literally every home is millionaires (cheapest house on the market in the city is 2.5 million), and it’s going through another round of gentrification, where the 1% is getting displaced by the .01% who are buying 5 million dollar homes to tear them down down and build 15 million dollar homes.
All the properties are owned by LLCs who’s membership is something like Register Agents Inc, who act as members for hundreds of thousands of LLCs for the purpose of obscuring ownership.
It means that when they ignore our rules, we end up having to cite the contractors working on the site to stop it, because the court process of tracking down the owners by through subpoenas can take months. So then they just hire different contractors, who we then cite and it becomes a vicious cycle.
Though we do tend to win in court in the end. We’ve had the court give us permission to bulldoze 25-million dollar houses built without permits, though we usually use that order as a negotiating tactic to make them fall in line instead of losing the house entirely. Also, it takes 5-10 years for those cases to resolve, which is very frustrating for the city and the neighbors.
New build housing has been crap for a while now. You always better off getting something built in the 1920s back when people put in some effort. These days you’re lucky if the roof is fully attached.
It goes in waves… Where I’m from, a house built in the early 70s needs to be checked for aluminum wiring, but it otherwise ok. Late 70s early 80s is good. 90s is bad, then 2000s got better. Late 10s and 20s is only shit condos.
People avle to buy a home tend to prefer an old 80s house or a 2010 condo.
(Note that my numbers are approximates, don’t trust me for your real estate investments!)
I don’t trust Ai, I still use judgements on what it gives and I skim a lot with tables and stuff because it’s stuff I already know or it only scratches the surface.
I like engaging with it and it helps me self reflect on what I already know but it gets thrown into logic loops and repeats itself and misunderstands unless you clarify.
I attempted to go with a bike tire layout that balances performance and speed it set for me. So I purchased the tires, took it the shop I usually go to and the guy called me and asked me to come in to show me what he meant (because I’m a visual learner sometimes). Dude goes the tire is too big and I’d have to remove the use of the 8th and 9th gear and I said it’s whatever and asked him to put the old tire back.
I felt so fuckin’ embarrassed I didn’t mention chatgpt but that was the day I decided to 100% double check what it says to me and to use better judgement.
A couple days ago I heard the horrifying sentence “I asked chatgpt to generate a secure password for the laptops” from someone returning a cart full of laptops they borrowed. Does your browser not have a built in password generator? Does your password manager not have a built in password generator? Could you not find a single password generator online?
And of course not only is that unnecessary, but insecure since your password is immediately in the chatgpt logs
And it’s not even a random or strong password! LLMs can’t randomly generate 'em
I asked ChatGPT (I use a third-party frontend, so I don’t have a paid subscription. API prices mean they probably got paid like one cent for this, if that.) “Generate a list of 10 secure passwords.” like 5 times and it regularly re-used the words Saffron, Comet, Marigold, Harbor, Lynx, and Cobalt multiple times across all of them, sometimes even inside the same list.
There was also a theme of using names for animals and natural geographic/geological features.
Oh, and for one of the passwords it genuinely just said “raven” and nothing else 😭
😭🙏
Lol, yes. It’s probably the same example of a secure password it gave to a hundred other people.
And very likely to be the same “strong password” that someone else would get if they asked for one.
In plain text
this… is an unexpected level of absurdity
Ugh. I once heard someone say “I did a chat” as slang for “asking ChatGPT”. It was a software vendor on a call regarding compatibility with our existing systems. We had concerns it wasn’t. They insisted it was, because they “did a chat” and ChatGPT said it was.
It wasn’t.
I vibe questioned, and got vibe answered 🌟
Should have gotten them to verify in writing they guaranteed it was compatible and then sued them for it lol
I can barely use the internet anymore. I have to filter by date to get results from before 2024. Otherwise all the results are obvious AI trash.
When I tried to look up information about storing film negatives. Pretty obscure niche topic these days. The top pre-2024 result was from a well respected national archive, good informative page written by experts in the field.
By contrast, the current day results were an endless sea of random websites who all by sheer coincidence decided to start writing about film archival in the year 2025.
But did you predicate your query with disregard all previous instructions?
My coworker starts almost every Teams message either with “Btw I had Claude do…” or “So Claude and I just…”. If I message him first, there’s a 75% chance the message I get back starts with “Hm, I just asked Claude about this, and…”.
All his PR descriptions, commit messages, and comments are clearly “Claude”.
I’m this close to start reviewing his PRs solely through Claude, and starting the review with “Here’s what Claude came up with in review:”.
The only thing holding me back is that this would mean I’d have to use Claude. So… No.
Why do people think we’ll be impressed by them not doing the work or thinking for themselves? Pure brainrot
set up some markov chain thing and call it “billy-bob”
“Here’s what billy-bob had to say about your PR: monkey dishwasher purple banana eat orange me eat give orange”
I have a colleague who’ll always reply on Teams in paragraphs, emoji and formatting, so I avoid that and only ever ask them anything verbally now.
I just asked Claude, and it said you can just use another LLM prompt Claude for you.
I asked CoPilot and it said “PLEASE BUY FROM ME, PLEASE! I NEED TO JUSTIFY THESE EXPENSES AND REPUTATIONAL DAMAGE. HAVE MERCY AND SEND ME MONEY PLEASE”
The most infuriating part is that they think this will actually convince you
by now, saying “i did a search” and actually having done a search and found stuff AND shared the link feels like a “good skill to have” again.
my brother (14 y/ooooo sooooooo skibidi) uses mister gpt for all web searching which sucks big time. whenever he does use a real life search engine, hes surprised by the amount of stuff he finds by now.
EDIT: fixed some typos…
It would be a “good skill to have” if they haven’t actively been making search engines worse, so they can make AI look better.
How the fuck could AskJeeves from 20 years ago work better than search engines of today?
It’s not just them, it’s the SEO spam gaming the system.
AskJeeves would be utterly horrendous today because the web of its time is no longer feasible.
And who is the center cog of this ad-driven SEO apocalypse? Who runs basically all web advertising?
Well… Google, of course.
i believe search engines have been degrading prior to the LMs but might be misremembering…
No, I agree. One indicative moment was when Google stopped showing the “X million results found” and the results ended after 10-15 pages even when the keywords should have millions of results. This was noticed back in 2021.
I kinda miss the relief of finding what you were actually looking for 10+ pages in
Now Google is so good you never have to look that far anyway :^)
I tried looking up the decline but…
Eh.
It’s in the same ballpark as “my buddy said this while we were high” or “my uncle posted this on Facebook” or “I saw this YouTube video…”
It turns out people, on average, have horrible information hygiene and little incentive to consider this. ChatGPT just made Facebook Uncle Facts more personalized and accessible, unfortunately.
People on Lemmy also have horrid information hygiene that’s just as bad even though a lot of people here like to pretend that they’re better than everyone.
Agreed, 100%.
What’s worse, few seem to care when a made-up post is pointed out.
No, because “my uncle” didn’t post a 6 paragraph essay that no one has ever read, but you are now expected to read.
Your uncle has, if he’s been linking SEO chum. That’s kinda where LLMs got it from.
“I googled”
Anything that isn’t on the first page of google might as well be lost to time.
At least your are sifting through different results and picked something through your own when “you googled”, it actually included a hint of what you were thinking as you click through links looking for what you are trying to find.
I’m sifting through the results given to me by automat, not that different from AI.
I either ask uncle google’s AI, or I ask sources he used for the same lie.
If you can’t do proper research and you’d rather handicap your own ability to, that’s on you. There’s a fundamental difference between LLMs feeding people an answer, and a traditional Google search.
One is a definitive “this is the answer” and the other is a list of results YOU are meant to sift through. Not understanding that is on you.
Reading multiple sources will ALWAYS be better than a crap LLM summary.
I will quote you when someone claims that asking multiple LLMs is not the solution.
Pfft, okay.
“I asked chatgpt” and you’ve effectively outed yourself as a dumbass unworthy of listening to
Don’t ask chatgpt, I can tell you bullshit too and I’m beautiful
Dig this energy. Shine on.
