←back to thread

Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries

(gizmodo.com)
788 points jsheard | 2 comments | 31 Jan 25 21:20 UTC | HN request time: 0.418s | source
Show context
autoexec ◴[31 Jan 25 23:08 UTC] No.42893484[source]▶
Every time some product or service introduces AI (or more accurately shoves it down our throats) people start looking for a way to get rid of it.

It's so strange how much money and time companies are pouring into "features" that the public continues to reject at every opportunity.

At this point I'm convinced that the endless AI hype and all the investment is purely due to hopes that it will soon put vast numbers of employees out of work and allow companies to use the massive amounts of data they've collected about us against us more effectively. All the AI being shoehorned into products and services now are mostly to test, improve, and advertise for the AI being used, not to provide any value for users who'd rather have nothing to do with it.

replies(34): >>42893546 #>>42893553 #>>42893562 #>>42893575 #>>42893674 #>>42893709 #>>42893714 #>>42893818 #>>42893837 #>>42893917 #>>42893948 #>>42894013 #>>42894084 #>>42894156 #>>42894171 #>>42894341 #>>42894345 #>>42894380 #>>42894607 #>>42894864 #>>42894878 #>>42895079 #>>42895251 #>>42895337 #>>42895352 #>>42895481 #>>42895750 #>>42896211 #>>42896410 #>>42896427 #>>42896655 #>>42896688 #>>42900751 #>>42903277 #
IgorPartola ◴[01 Feb 25 00:10 UTC] No.42894084[source]▶
I am totally in the same boat but also I do suspect it is a minority. It’s the same way that some people really want open source bootloaders, but 99.99% of people do not care at all. Maybe AI assistants in random places just aren’t that compatible with people on HN but are possibly useful for a lot of people not on HN?
replies(8): >>42894226 #>>42894374 #>>42894694 #>>42894791 #>>42895105 #>>42895176 #>>42895404 #>>42895433 #
fouronnes3 ◴[01 Feb 25 00:26 UTC] No.42894226[source]▶
I agree with this. I'm very surprised when I see someone blindly trust whatever the AI summary says in a google query, because I myself have internalized a long time ago to strongly distrust it.
replies(3): >>42894257 #>>42894726 #>>42900448 #
wlesieutre ◴[01 Feb 25 01:32 UTC] No.42894726[source]▶
I’ve seen quite a few posts on Reddit with people asking questions like “Is a Mazda 2 really faster than a Civic Type R?!? ChatGPT told me it is” and it’s some complete nonsense numbers that could’ve been fact checked in about 5 seconds.

I don’t think the little “ChatGPT might be wrong, you should check” disclaimer is doing very much.

replies(2): >>42894839 #>>42894890 #
1. autoexec ◴[01 Feb 25 01:50 UTC] No.42894839[source]▶
It's a good sign that people are even going to reddit and asking for confirmation of something that seemed suspicious to them. Sure, many of them could have googled for those answers themselves, but part of the problem is how unreliable and dishonest Google has become.

Reddit sure isn't an ideal place for fact checks. It's full of PR bots and shills, but at least there are still humans commenting and I can't fault people for doing what they can in the best way they know how.

replies(1): >>42895001 #
2. wlesieutre ◴[01 Feb 25 02:17 UTC] No.42895001[source]▶
For every person that asks I imagine there are a bunch that just assume it must be true because the computer told them