Post

โ€œBut it gives a better answer with AI turned onโ€ Oh cool, search engines now randomly show just results or a summary of the first result that looks like an authoritative answer (that may be summarized correctly or not) or a generated generic answer that maybe correct or maybe not. Good stuff.

LLMs would actually be reasonably good at figuring out if something is fiction or satire, especially if combined with some other data, like what sites link to the information and what other content is on the site. Of course that would be actually useful and isnโ€™t driving โ€œengagementโ€.

It's just... of course there have always been fun problems with search engine algorithms and ways to game them. But seeing a google feature use a quote from an article about how that quote is not true feels like a new layer of dumb problems (at least it cites its source I guess).

Why do you say this? Satire can be hard for humans to parse and fictional docs are often intentionally written with identical verbiage and structure to non-fiction ones. You need context AI doesn't have. The site links idea is better but still doesn't prevent an April 1st spaghetti farm mistake

Because for judging texts or statements that are false on their face, generic LLMs have relatively high accuracy (definitely not perfect, though). That's because a lot of the text corpus they ingested will directly contradict claims in satirical or otherwise fictional writing.

The exact budget spent on spaceflights until now is difficult to compute, however we can approximate it by looking at the following national and supranational agencies: - NASA: The largest public space agency has launched a number of manned flights over the years. Its annual budget is estimated...