today in “google AI is fucking useless because it hallucinates things that never happened”, i bought a couple CVS thermometers that have both been acting up, tried to search if there had been a problem with the whole product line:
there is no record of this product recall. it did not happen. the date “feb 8 2024” is the date someone listed a thermometer for sale on ebay.
Google’s trying to save you the time spent clicking on a site full of AI-generated SEO garbage by presenting the AI-generated garbage right up front! Such efficiency.
I was under the impression that we did know why: AI isn’t actually a brain and can’t actually think or understand information, so it has no concept of something being true or not, or what markers indicate truth or falsity, or how to synthesize information. It’s putting a bunch of words in a jar, shaking the jar, and then dumping it out, and acting like that means the jar knows how to talk.
Like, in this case, OP asked for information about a recall. The AI knows that, throughout the entire internet, the word “recall” usually is surrounded by information like a date or a number, so it gives you a date and a number. It doesn’t know what a date is or what it’s for or what it means. (It also apparently doesn’t know the difference between “recall” as in “removing a dangerous product from the shelves” and “recall” as in “remembering,” since it smooshes the two together)
what’s that thing again that you can put into ublock that blocks all the ai results from google?
[ID mostly by @homunculusalphonse : A photo of the Google search results for the phrase “cvs thermometers recall”: “On February 8, 2024, CVS Health recalled its rigid tip digital thermometer with memory recall and fever alarm. The thermometers have a memory recall feature that stores the previous temperature. The item number for the recall is 375235991489.” Both the links attached to this text are from eBay and Pinterest. This module does say “AI overviews are experimental”, in much smaller font. /End ID]
The uBlockOrigin AI blocklist above is super helpful y’all.
General election announced for the 4th of July, make sure you are registered to vote! Remember if you’re a student you can register with your home address and term time address but can only vote in one (could be a good idea to think tactically on this – which constituency more needs your vote to help kick the Tories out)
All fundraisers have been looked into by me or vetted by others. If anyone notices issues in validity with any of the fundraisers listed please let me know. Funding updates daily!
Many of the families that have reached out to me, families on this list, are in Rafah or have family members in Rafah. It is imperative and EXTREMELY urgent we fill these fundraisers as swiftly as possible, the IOF is planning to invade any day. Please, I urge you, to donate whatever you can. People’s lives are at stake.
I will be honest guys, the Red portrait of king Charles is gorgeous asdfghjkl
it’s a bad portrait. Like. Objectively. It does the opposite of what’s intended. It looks like the painter is insulting him. If it was in a contemporary gallery with no context you would see it immediately as the ambivalent criticism of Charles’s reign, how he fades into the overwhelming red background as a tiny little figure, small and insignificant, insufficient for the clothes he’s wearing. It reminds my of Goya’s portraits, how they were so ‘realistic’ that they ended up making these great figures look pathetic to the viewer. So these are our rulers?
the sheer novelty. the surprise and shock, the kinda cunt it’s serving for no reason. I. I love it. It’s an incredible portrait by Jonathan Yeo. By the sheer fact that Charles, the man, is impossible to portray as greater than man because he’s just such a nothingburger of a dude. So a portrait made to make him look huge and interesting made him be swallowed in red brushstrokes. The butterfly, that reminded me immediately of “ we will all laugh at guilded butterflies”, draws more attention than him. It looks like an omen. It looks like a warning in all this red. Something is not right here.
This is the best royal portrait ever 10/10
This is a painting of a monarch whose individual personality and even bodily presence are a mere footnote within the legacy of bloodshed that built the throne he occupies. This is the only way it’s possible to depict him. It’s a photograph of his soul
Me, on the welcome desk in the library: Good morning, how are you today?
Customer: I have welcomed Jesus into my heart and so I am well today and every day.
Me, a little unnerved: Okay then! Is there something I can help you with?
Customer, digging around in his bag and pulling out an iPhone in a box: Unfortunately, Jesus can’t help me with this fucking phone, so I came to the library.
Back in 2014 my fancast for Emily was Lena Headey (Cersei from Game of Thrones). I remember making a little edit of her with Dane Dehaan’s Harry. I reckon she looks the part.
I also think Rosamund Pike (from Gone Girl) looks the part when her hair is brown! I like her as a fancast for 616 Emily.
But ya know what, if someone came to me and was all like, “We’re remaking the Raimi Spider-Man movies and Emily Lyman will appear in the flesh this time, who would you cast?” I would TOTALLY cast the now 42-year-old Kirsten Dunst because of how much a delicious mindfuck that would be
I spent ten years with that company. TEN YEARS and all I got was a message in my inbox saying “We regret to inform your your contract has been terminated.” TEN YEARS. Everyone else was fired too, because we’re worth nothing to them. TEN YEARS of work. I can’t get over it. I’m so fucking angry and depressed.
something inherently wrong to me about doctor who getting released to suit a US audience this year after being a british production and national treasure for 60 years
