The worst thing is when it is right about something, and then it explains why it concluded that, and the process is wrong in every way.
That’s ok. The explanation is also a made up guess. It didn’t actually do those things.
The leaders of my company have openly said this in multiple all-hands meetings, yet still push harder and harder for everyone to use AI as much as possible.
Easy solution, don’t ask AI for anything, then you will only get bullshit from humans.
The only problem with that is that the humans just parrot nonsense from AI without fact checking it
Fortunately if you know either which bullshitters often used AI, or run it yourself first, you can weed out these replicants
Meat proxy is my favourite term for these people.
Well but meat proxy or bio API are just already used terms for ppl that copy stuff from one system to the other
I take issue with this phrase because that person is not a meat proxy, they are an AI proxy or a silicon proxy. A proxy is a substitute. They are not a substitute for meat, they are a substitute for a computer. I suppose it’s caught on because the phrase sounds compelling, even though it’s stupid.
That term came from AI boosters, who want you to make the AI generated output “yours” (reword it before eventually posting it).
Ugh, bullshit squared.
That seems like an improbable shape for bullshit…
You’d think so.
It makes you wonder if being a barely or ill-informed, but self-confident, source has been directly copied by AI from an increasing amount of modern journalism
