Google’s AI-driven Search Generative Experience have been generating results that are downright weird and evil, ie slavery’s positives.

  • livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    To be fair no one expects The Lancet to publish falsified data. Only it does occasionally and getting it to retract is like trying to turn a container ship around in the Panama Canal.

    But yeah this is part of what I mean. Media cycles and digital reproduceability and algorithms that seek clicks can all potentially give AI-generated errors a lot of play and rewrites into more credible forms etc.

    • Sodis@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Filtering falsified data before publishing it is near impossible. If you want to publish falsified data, you easily can. No one can verify it without replicating the experiment on their own, which is usually done after the publication by a different scientific group. Peer review is more suited to filter out papers with bad methodology.