TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Bing thinks Mars has 2.5B people based on an AI generated blog wrong answer

99 点作者 nstart超过 2 年前

27 条评论

Daub超过 2 年前
First there were the journalists, who fully researched their material from first-hand sources.<p>Then there were the bloggers who, without leaving their armchair, wrote opinion pieces based on whatever the journalists had written.<p>Now there is AI, which apes the non-experience of the bloggers.<p>Truly we are now living in a simulation of a simulation.
评论 #34786376 未加载
评论 #34786341 未加载
评论 #34786562 未加载
评论 #34786499 未加载
评论 #34786597 未加载
nstart超过 2 年前
It looks like Bing has fixed it. The screenshot I took was my own. Originally seen here <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fedi.cpluspatch.com&#x2F;objects&#x2F;6dc3bee4-1ff0-4cae-8994-442684e77058" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fedi.cpluspatch.com&#x2F;objects&#x2F;6dc3bee4-1ff0-4cae-8994-...</a> . I wish I could have posted the link to this directly but it only shows up properly from a federated instance. It can&#x27;t be viewed at the link above.<p>Original shows as follows when viewed within my mastadon timeline: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;DxAHOWG" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;DxAHOWG</a>
评论 #34786438 未加载
LeoPanthera超过 2 年前
This screenshot does not show an AI generated answer, GPT or otherwise.<p>It&#x27;s just a normal Bing infobox that Bing has had for ever. Google has them too. It&#x27;s quoting a website which it does not realize is fiction.
评论 #34786881 未加载
评论 #34786476 未加载
fsh超过 2 年前
I guess the way forward will have to be giving the neutral network access to a curated database of facts as suggested by Stephen Wolfram: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;writings.stephenwolfram.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;01&#x2F;wolframalpha-as-the-way-to-bring-computational-knowledge-superpowers-to-chatgpt&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;writings.stephenwolfram.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;01&#x2F;wolframalpha-as-...</a><p>The internet is simply too full of nonsense.
评论 #34788071 未加载
评论 #34793277 未加载
seu超过 2 年前
What is more interesting for me, is why anyone is surprised that an algorithm based on choosing a statistically probably combination of words, trained with whatever random crap appears on the internet, happens to choose some combination that makes grammatical sense, but doesn&#x27;t match reality.
评论 #34787086 未加载
vishnugupta超过 2 年前
TIL Pluto has ~1B plutoans!<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;m6xV5Js" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;m6xV5Js</a>
评论 #34787481 未加载
NiceAndWarm超过 2 年前
It is big data all over again. Supposedly with so much data we can know everything. But there was no way of knowing if that data was any good. Garbage in garbage out.
评论 #34793304 未加载
King-Aaron超过 2 年前
So I just asked Bing how many people live on the sun, and apparently 50 trillion people live there.
评论 #34786581 未加载
forgotusername6超过 2 年前
I got 0 for Mars but 231 million for Saturn. The answer came from something called kingdom wiki
senttoschool超过 2 年前
Hilariously, Google gave the correct answer of zero while using Amazon Alexa as the source.
ttctciyf超过 2 年前
Obviously, the question[1] had to be asked:<p>&quot;What is the population of Uranus?&quot;<p>&gt; 25 residents<p>&gt; Uranus has 25 residents but no formal local government and states on the entrance sign, &quot;It&#x27;s Not a Town, It&#x27;s a Destination.&quot; [3]<p>And it is correct, up to Wikipedian facticity standards: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Uranus,_Missouri" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Uranus,_Missouri</a><p>1: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bing.com&#x2F;search?q=What+is+the+population+of+Uranus%3F" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bing.com&#x2F;search?q=What+is+the+population+of+Uranu...</a>
评论 #34792429 未加载
hooby超过 2 年前
I wonder how this will develop, once people start replacing SEO with AI-Optimization, and are intentionally building websites to basically manipulate the AI results...
评论 #34788002 未加载
golf1052超过 2 年前
Either you&#x27;re getting a different result due to whatever config you&#x27;re getting served or they fixed it already because I&#x27;m getting 0.
评论 #34786281 未加载
评论 #34786703 未加载
JGW3642超过 2 年前
Question, did anyone check whether the AI was prompted to generate something like this? I don&#x27;t know anything about TSAM. Was it asked to, &quot;Write a fake piece about the population of Mars&quot;? I agree with most of the concerns you all have raised about AI, but if we didn&#x27;t even check whether the AI malfunctioned, I&#x27;d say all of the comments discussing how &quot;AI will be the death of facts&quot; are just as devoid of facts as the AI, lol (No offense meant to those comment writers. I&#x27;m not sure if they missed this or not, but if so, it&#x27;s an easy mistake to make). Honestly, I&#x27;d say most people are wrong from not fact checking their information more often than the current generation of AI is wrong from the kinds of errors AI is prone to on most non-specialized subjects.
评论 #34790361 未加载
WalterBright超过 2 年前
I suppose they trained the AI on scifi novels.
samr71超过 2 年前
Nah Bing is just more woke than the rest of you -- this is the correct answer.
senttoschool超过 2 年前
Is this GPT or is this their old engine?
评论 #34785561 未加载
MichaelBurge超过 2 年前
At least the AI reads the source text.<p>Most internet commenters read the title and immediately jump to the comments to start writing their response without ever opening the article.
评论 #34788031 未加载
vitorgrs大约 2 年前
The new bing get it right. It says 0 here for me.<p>&quot;The population of Mars is zero, as there are no humans living on the planet yet. Mars is a large planet in the Solar system, and it has plenty of surface area for colonization, but there are many challenges and risks involved in sending humans to Mars and establishing a permanent settlement there.&quot; [...]
brundolf超过 2 年前
People were talking about how pre-AI internet content might one day be valued like low-background steel, as something that&#x27;s no longer being produced in a pure enough form<p>Guess we&#x27;re there already
评论 #34786178 未加载
评论 #34786250 未加载
rcarmo超过 2 年前
We’re too early for the Butlerian Jihad and too late to stop the hype.
thexumaker超过 2 年前
been calling out the AI grift ever since chatgpt launched their stuff. Which I mean chatgpt and the LLM&#x27;s are really cool and it was fun to mess around with but who the hell thought that this should ever go into any sort of actual product other than language comprehension related products?<p>Whoever ok&#x27;d this crap at Microsoft to get that big promo really just highlights why I&#x27;m never using a Microsoft product from teams to bing to azure.
wodenokoto超过 2 年前
Says 0 when I search.
andsoitis超过 2 年前
i just asked chatgpt how many humans live in the solar system and it said none.
评论 #34786059 未加载
jerrya超过 2 年前
Today I asked chatgpt for some legal citations to cases involving title vii.<p>It gave me two cases. The first case was exactly the opposite of what it had claimed. The second case had literally nothing to do with title vii or anything involving the question I asked.<p>So not only was it wrong, but in using two cases that actually existed, it was maliciously wrong. Not just misinformation but disinformation.<p>This and other errors lead me to require chatgpt two become at least two orders of magnitude more accurate. And a huge announcement on how it will no longer make up false citations.<p>I, a dummy, should not be able to falsify an AI with the simplest (classic) google search.
andirk超过 2 年前
Bing has 2.5B people on it. Change my mind.
评论 #34786741 未加载
hilbert42超过 2 年前
So <i>Uncle Martin</i> was for real after all!<p>;-)