I was watching this video and at the 8:00 minute mark, they say that popcorn does not have gluten. To prove this point, they edit in a screenshot showing the first result of google for “does popcorn have gluten,” which is the ai answer. I’ve seen similar in other videos or reels and it feels forced in a way. And to me, it doesn’t prove their claim correct because it’s the ai answer.
I don’t know, I’ve just noticed this more recently and wanted to make sure I wasn’t going crazy.
Ray William Johnson keeps plugging Leonardo AI and I suspect that’s what he’s using for the clips in his videos. So disappointing.
Is this supposed to be a joke post?
To be fair, the answer is true - popcorn is made of corn, and corn doesn’t have either gliadin or glutelin, which together form what we know as gluten.
(Source: am food scientist, can back up with articles if necessary)
But using AI as a source is still a crime against humanity.
Maybe not on the main channels I tend to watch on yt, but there’s one who I have pretty much completely stopped watching ( GrayStillPlays ) because I just wasn’t as interested anymore. I come back one day recently to check out a Universe Sandbox video he just posted that day and the second he started asking I think it was chatgpt something about a little laser pointer, IIRC, I immediately noped out of the video.
I ain’t supporting him if he’s just gonna use an “AI” LLM to get the info he wants. I could at least, before LLMs became the big bubble they are, look past him just casually asking g••gle using the shitty voice assistant thing because it’s whatever, but can’t for “AI” LLMs.
No, but I’ve sure noticed people complaining about it.
Yeah, and I like AI being used for what it’s good at, but using LLMs as a source of truth shows a fundamental misunderstanding of LLMs.
It’s the marketing. I can’t really blame people for thinking LLMs can do what they’re advertised.
Of course you can! I blame people all the time, and for a lot less!
And am I dead? Only socially.
I can absolutely blame people for uncritically accepting whatever the fuck advertisers tell them to believe.
Yes, I can blame people
It takes almost no effort to figure out that LLMs are unreliable daydreamers
There’s also a compounding problem right? Like if people take AI as a source and make content with it, that content will be rescraped for AI data sets thereby reaffirming information that may be false.
I’ve noticed it used much more by younger content creators.
People are really stupid, almost no one has a working knowledge of LLMs unless they are actively coding one
And we are getting to the point with iterative training that soon no human will understand how the context black box works.
Considering what we have access to now, I have no doubt that there are already private models that the devs have no insight into the tokenization process
You don’t need to fully understand how an LLM works at a deep level to know that it doesn’t in any way check if what it’s outputting corresponds to truth - it doesn’t check the meaning of it at all.
That’s not exactly true for the last and current generation, there are coach expert systems that verify certain outputs before they’re ever presented to the consumer but still are only about 75% useful, though that number is growing.
Still less reliable than a subject expert human though
I agree
Nearly every YouTube video I watch is narrated by AI. I usually call it out in the comments and request people stop watching their shit videos until they hired human beings to voice them.
Not personally, and if a creator I follow did so I would unsub immediately. It’s lazy and insulting to the audience.
Anyone who cites an LLM or AI-generated summary as a legitimate source can’t be trusted to provide truthful or accurate information.
I see more AI generated videos or photo segments used to present something. Like a Linux related guy’s thumbnails are an AI generated penguin, and a sourdough bread science girl frequently uses AI video segments
These really make me feel uneasy, although I haven’t seen a similar youtuber who goes so in depth into bread science
Yes, everytime i go on YouTube it’s one of those weird “filmed vertically” vids with yellow text that changes colour as the “person” talks and then halfway through they say a sentence which makes no sense. pure slop content
Its not forced or an concerted effort or a conspiracy to get content creators to use/promote AI.
It’s laziness/simplicity.
They Google the question and screenshot the first result, which nowadays happens to be the AI-answer due to how the search engine presents the results.
Not everyone does it this way, but those that do show AI don’t do it because they want to show AI specifically. It’s more likely those that does differently does it because they specifically don’t want to use that first option because it’s AI.
I’ve noticed a lot are using AI image generation now as “filler” while they talk about certain subjects. I understand, it’s a lot faster and easier to generate an image according to your instructions than trying to find it in stock images or manually photoshopping something yourself. As long as this remains limited to this, I don’t really have a problem with it. But it won’t.
Yeah, quick visual representation of something is where genAI really shines. You give it a prompt, it spits out an image, you tweak it a few times and there’s your slide 4 for a presentation.
Yes, I also have the internet. I don’t know if you’re going crazy or not, but it’s a strong trend, yes.
Well yeah obviously ai is a huge thing. What I mean is specifically, in a yt video for example, the creator makes a concerted effort to show how they used ai to find an answer.
Some probably just want something to flash on screen to grab attention and never understood what a good source was.
I’m sure lots of people just screencap the first google result or chatgpt answer, yeah.
That’s what I meant too. It’s what you were asking about.
The Passive Aggression of the Christ.
XD Do you mind if I use that in the future?
Lol not at all, it’s not mine though.
Thank you.
At least cite the source that the LLM used. They give it to you. Lazy.
And also check if the source actually says what LLM says.
I once tested Perplexity for article search and it did absolutely terrible job, citing wrong articles, sometimes hallucinating, sometimes picking info from entirely different articles I found later.
Totally. It’s the same as seeing a post on social media and just believing it 100%
if it was an automatic response to a search then it’s most likely whatever the fuck Google is using
I doubt any creator would use duckduckgo live on stream
deleted by creator
