>let me explain why that bad thing is actually a good thing
they do be like that doe

video games?

>>736143386
I wish this fucking AI shit just straight up told you "NO" or "i do NOT know the answer to your question" , instead of hallucinating some bullshit and being so damn certain about it...

I dunno, these bots tell me "NO" here and there.

They may be digital yes-men, but at least they're more emotionally supportive than you are.

>>736143386
better than a realistic no-man who needs $320 to draw me a simplistic picture they do for $0

new captcha test

>>736144036
Really, it would be much better this way.

>>736144036
That's what annoys me most about it. The only thing they can do is answer questions and they do it wrong half the time.

>>736144365
Claude told me "To be honest, I can't answer with 100% certainty" and I think that's the right direction.

>>736143386
>when the bot tells me no but always acknowledges men are stronger than women

>>736147912
That bullshit happens so often. You ask it something and it gives an answer based on political correctness rather than factual correctness and you always have to push back for details before it makes any concessions about the actual facts.

Every time I get into an argument with someone about something that is related to politics they always want to prove they are right by going to AI which does in fact support their position with the first reply and I always have to say "Now ask it about..." and only then does it start to give something close to the truth. What help is this crap if you have to already know the right answer to everything you ask it so you know when it's talking shit?

>>736143386
At the moment AI can't really think on its own, but it can interpret your input thus allowing you to reinterpret your own thoughts through a machine. Basically it's only about as intelligent as its user.