3rd shooting in Minnesota.

[Knows]

Thats very interesting. I tried following your link, and I wasn't able to find any more info on what you had posted.

It makes me curious why law enforcement hasn't done more to go after these groups that are instigating violence. Unless that is the affect the government is looking for in order to push there agenda. In which case it would implicate themselves in the use of paid protesters to promote there own agenda.

Any further links that you could share?

I just used Google AI. It's common knowledge. AI is good for mundane things like public records. Unless it is programmed to hide things. Google is mainstream Official story. So it isn't outlandish.

[DBCowboy]

Excellent.  Kill them...

Well, since you insist. . . . . .

[Oldcarpy2]

Well, since you insist. . . . . .

'I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

[ReturnofBroccoli]

'I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

Some people call him the space cowboy  

[chr0naut]

I just used Google AI. It's common knowledge. AI is good for mundane things like public records. Unless it is programmed to hide things. Google is mainstream Official story. So it isn't outlandish.

AI is, at this stage of the game, a marketing term only.

What we have now are LLM's - Chat bots. They accumulate tables of words and phrases used in proximity to a 'search' term, and then they assemble the most frequently adjacent words and phrases together, according to the rules of language (like nouns, adjectives, prepositions and where they fall in a sentence).

They have no understanding of the meaning of the words they present. Also, they are designed to be verbose in their responses, something with which we associate to expertise. It isn't. They'll prattle on about nothing and 'hallucinate' a response if they don't have sufficient data.

And they have zero ability to discern truth from fiction. Whatever they scrape, they present.

[putnam6]

AI is, at this stage of the game, a marketing term only.

What we have now are LLM's - Chat bots. They accumulate tables of words and phrases used in proximity to a 'search' term, and then they assemble the most frequently adjacent words and phrases together, according to the rules of language (like nouns, adjectives, prepositions and where they fall in a sentence).

They have no understanding of the meaning of the words they present. Also, they are designed to be verbose in their responses, something with which we associate to expertise. It isn't. They'll prattle on about nothing and 'hallucinate' a response if they don't have sufficient data.

And they have zero ability to discern truth from fiction. Whatever they scrape, they present.

The words aren't just AI dialect; they are many times direct quotes, and scraped up just like the numbers tabulations are curated from different sources.

Every AI response is sourced, where you can find the falsehoods and the facts

[chr0naut]

but, but, but No one is paying them ! This is a grass roots, spur of the moment effort by people who care about their community !

All those professionally designed and printed posters are just Karen and Kevin doing their civic duty by volunteering their time and effort to the cause !

We are a technological society that has had in-home computers, desktop publishing software and colour printers for decades. In America, it would be unusual for a family home to not have these.

No longer do we have to toddle down to the printing press, in our buckle shoes wearing our best waitcoats and tricorne hats, so they can set out the block type for us.

[chr0naut]

The words aren't just AI dialect; they are many times direct quotes, and scraped up just like the numbers tabulations are curated from different sources.

Every AI response is sourced, where you can find the falsehoods and the facts

AI search engines fail accuracy test, study finds 60% error rate

Don't believe the hype.

I initially bought the hype and had several LLM apps that I was in the process of developing and in the end, I just dropped them because they are garbage for anything that you need to have assurance about.

Even with RAG and all the other attempts to prevent errors, they just don't cut the mustard. I saw generation after generation of supposed 'improvements' but in the real world, not really.

Yeah, they are quick to reply, and they accumulate from a lot of sources, but they are without even a modicum of intelligence. You have to fact check everything they output and that is getting harder because so many searches and checkers are just using other LLM models trained on the same data, and so they have the same errors!

[David64]

We are a technological society that has had in-home computers, desktop publishing software and colour printers for decades. In America, it would be unusual for a family home to not have these.

No longer do we have to toddle down to the printing press, in our buckle shoes wearing our best waitcoats and tricorne hats, so they can set out the block type for us.

I wear Ariat boots and a Stetson, but the waistcoat is a good idea.

Single breasted I think. Double is too fancy for anything other than special occasions.

[putnam6]

AI search engines fail accuracy test, study finds 60% error rate

Don't believe the hype.

I initially bought the hype and had several LLM apps that I was in the process of developing and in the end, I just dropped them because they are garbage for anything that you need to have assurance about.

Even with RAG and all the other attempts to prevent errors, they just don't cut the mustard. I saw generation after generation of supposed 'improvements' but in the real world, not really.

Yeah, they are quick to reply, and they accumulate from a lot of sources, but they are without even a modicum of intelligence. You have to fact check everything they output and that is getting harder because so many searches and checkers are just using other LLM models trained on the same data, and so they have the same errors!

AI is just another source that has to be vetted. Message boards were filled up with different slants and BS inaccuracies long before AI...

Suffice it to say, I want every inaccuracy I may use pointed out, but hell, "professionals" retract all the time and are inaccurate all the time.

I use it for many things, like finding out the last time a political party held the trifecta through midterm last real time was 78, besides 2002 (9/11)

So it is indeed rare AH and isn't the gotcha moment many pretend it is.

Just one example...

But we are so divided, everything is magnified to seem worse than it is.

AI, as it's used on DI, is just a tool that compiles the info, so sometimes you have a few sources, but others, there are dozens, so a quick perusal, you can ascertain what may be bunk and what may be right.

Which brings up another point, AI responses can be questioned till you get a more focused and accurate response.

Besides Id have double the obnoxious MAGA conservative Trump lover posts, and nobody wants thats

More than a few times Id see a story I want to post, but Grok suggests it's questionable.