most users understand that AI outputs aren’t always accurate and must be verified.
So the point of the overview is what then? If you have to research to verify then why give info that most likely is false?
this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
143 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
85278 readers
4355 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Luddite!! Don’t you understand that number go up??
To be fair, Google has lost a lot of business to ChatGPT & friends who are not offering a list of actual content associated with the search at all. Hate Google as much as you want and I'm sure most of it is warranted, but they're not completely evil in this case
"Their turd sandwich has vegetables in it" doesn't excuse the fact that they took the ham sandwich off the menu entirely.
This is the value proposition of llms in general. They are great if you don't care about quality. They second quality matters their time-saving value drops off to near 0.
they drop into negatives. its hard to find valuable infprmation because ai written articles make it hard to find correct sources.
It could hypothetically help you direct your search by surfacing useful keywords or relevant events or names or something like it. But since they didn't make it do that, it's not really reliable for anything but an energy expensive way to remind yourself of things you already know (what was the command for X again)
most likely is false?
I think the idea is that the info is probably true, but has high enough likelihood of being false that you better check anyway, if it's something that matters. There's a whole topic in machine learning called "probable approximate correctness" that tries to make that notion precise. Les Valiant's book of a similar title introduced the concept and looks very good. I have it but haven't read it yet.