TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zoneM to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 2 days agono rule infuriates me morelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square240linkfedilinkarrow-up11.14Karrow-down115
arrow-up11.13Karrow-down1imageno rule infuriates me morelemmy.blahaj.zoneTotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zoneM to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 2 days agomessage-square240linkfedilink
minus-squareG4Z@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·22 hours agoWhat I tend to do, rather than copying the output I just check out the sources it used and then I link those when I’m arguing a point.
minus-squareToga77@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down1·12 hours agoExcept that LLMs often cite completely irrelevant crap or make up citations.
minus-squarePasserby6497@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·9 hours agoI wonder if that’s why they check the sources before using them for their argument 🤔
minus-squareToga77@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·8 hours agoIt’s incredibly easy to go to a “cited” a link, read a title, and assume the content. No one on the internet right now is actually taking the time to read sources like this guy and if you believe they are I have a bridge to sell you.
minus-squarePasserby6497@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 hours agoWeird, didn’t realize my name was “no one”. Either that, or I’m not really on the Internet right now.
minus-squareTheparishofChigwell@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down2·14 hours agoTry asking it for a list of sources on both ends of the spectrum and read both types instead of sources it used to create the most likeable output tailored to your experience
minus-squareironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·9 hours agoSure! Here’s an article from ‘pogromist weekly’ and a scholarly piece published in the journal 1488!
minus-squareTheparishofChigwell@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down3·9 hours agoI’m not following. The only other sources are out of date?
minus-squareHomosexual sapiens@lemmy.blahaj.zonecakelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·3 hours ago1488 in this context is not a year, it’s a reference to the fourteen words
minus-squareTheparishofChigwell@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·5 minutes agoDo llms use that as a source though… I don’t really get this one
minus-squareironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 hour agoThe whole political spectrum, from the secular pogromist to the fanatical neo-odinist!
What I tend to do, rather than copying the output I just check out the sources it used and then I link those when I’m arguing a point.
Except that LLMs often cite completely irrelevant crap or make up citations.
I wonder if that’s why they check the sources before using them for their argument 🤔
It’s incredibly easy to go to a “cited” a link, read a title, and assume the content.
No one on the internet right now is actually taking the time to read sources like this guy and if you believe they are I have a bridge to sell you.
Weird, didn’t realize my name was “no one”. Either that, or I’m not really on the Internet right now.
Try asking it for a list of sources on both ends of the spectrum and read both types instead of sources it used to create the most likeable output tailored to your experience
Sure! Here’s an article from ‘pogromist weekly’ and a scholarly piece published in the journal 1488!
I’m not following. The only other sources are out of date?
1488 in this context is not a year, it’s a reference to the fourteen words
Do llms use that as a source though… I don’t really get this one
The whole political spectrum, from the secular pogromist to the fanatical neo-odinist!