Skip to content

Apple sued by shareholders for allegedly overstating AI progress

Technology
72 46 0
  • 18 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 311 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    S
    Same, especially when searching technical or niche topics. Since there aren't a ton of results specific to the topic, mostly semi-related results will appear in the first page or two of a regular (non-Gemini) Google search, just due to the higher popularity of those webpages compared to the relevant webpages. Even the relevant webpages will have lots of non-relevant or semi-relevant information surrounding the answer I'm looking for. I don't know enough about it to be sure, but Gemini is probably just scraping a handful of websites on the first page, and since most of those are only semi-related, the resulting summary is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out. I also think there's probably something in the code that looks for information that is shared across multiple sources and prioritizing that over something that's only on one particular page (possibly the sole result with the information you need). Then, it phrases the summary as a direct answer to your query, misrepresenting the actual information on the pages they scraped. At least Gemini gives sources, I guess. The thing that gets on my nerves the most is how often I see people quote the summary as proof of something without checking the sources. It was bad before the rollout of Gemini, but at least back then Google was mostly scraping text and presenting it with little modification, along with a direct link to the webpage. Now, it's an LLM generating text phrased as a direct answer to a question (that was also AI-generated from your search query) using AI-summarized data points scraped from multiple webpages. It's obfuscating the source material further, but I also can't help but feel like it exposes a little of the behind-the-scenes fuckery Google has been doing for years before Gemini. How it bastardizes your query by interpreting it into a question, and then prioritizes homogeneous results that agree on the "answer" to your "question". For years they've been doing this to a certain extent, they just didn't share how they interpreted your query.
  • Super Human In Transit - Living

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • The weaponization of Waymo

    Technology technology
    26
    1
    148 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    F
    Not a warzone. A protest. A protest where over twice as many reporters have been assaulted and/or shot than waymo cars have burned.
  • 27 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    R
    Tech execs when the shortage hits: I just had a brilliant idea! Let's just give untrained junior vibe-coding engineers the power of senior engineers, and even more AI tools. Problem solved forever, bonus please!
  • signal blogpost on windows recall

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    69 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    P
    I wouldn't trust windows to follow their don't screenshot API, whether out of ignorance or malice.
  • San Francisco crypto founder faked his own death

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    98 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    S
    My head canon is that Satoshi Nakamoto... ... is Hideo Kojima. Anyway, Satoshi is the pseudonym used on the original... white paper, design doc, whatever it was, for Bitcoin. There's no doubt about that, I was there back before even Mt. Gox became a bitcoin exchange, on the forums discussing it. I thought it was a neat idea, at the time... and then I realized 95% of the discussions on that forum were about 'the ethics of fully informed ponzi schemes' and such, very little devoted to actual technical development... realized this was probably a bad omen.
  • 12 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    C
    Sure, he wasn't an engineer, so no, Jobs never personally "invented" anything. But Jobs at least knew what was good and what was shit when he saw it. Under Tim Cook, Apple just keeps putting out shitty unimaginative products, Cook is allowing Apple to stagnate, a dangerous thing to do when they have under 10% market share.