Wait, so breaks containment means spreads misinformation? What timeline is this?
this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2026
893 points (99.1% liked)
Science Memes
19845 readers
3600 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's a screenshot of a post on bsky. Don't read too much into the specifics of the language...
AI's dont know that birds arent real, or that sometimes the pressure from being under water for an extended period of time can cause fish to explode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bohannon#Intentionally_misleading_chocolate_study
We did the same before AI. AI is once again just putting an old problem on steroids.
they do the same to protect doctors from malpractice lawsuits. there is a (laughably peer reviewed) study that claims tylenol and morphine are equally effective at pain management.
“When the text looks professional and written as a doctor writes, there’s an increase in the hallucination rates,” says Omar.
Huh, now there’s something we have in common. Trying to make sense of something a doctor wrote makes me feel like I’m hallucinating, too. Is there a class in medical school on “Illegible Handwriting,” or is it just a coincidence?
In all seriousness though, I wish I could be surprised by AI failing at this. We have entered the Misinformation Age. There’s no closing Pandora’s Box, though this time I can’t find the “hope” that’s supposed to be in the bottom of it. Society would have to turn real skeptical real fast, but I’ve met enough people to know that such a tranformation is going to take time - and by “time” I mean “decades or longer.” With AI already here, we’d have to wise up immediately… but I fear that humanity isn’t mature enough for that yet.
We've crossed the point where natural skepticism could've saved us months ago. Feedback loops of made up sources where a problem way before ai was a thing, but now you can be five sources deep, reading trough papers published by multiple different scientific magazines or universities, and still won't have found the actual data all the papers depend on cause there wasn't any in the first place.
And once a single one of these papers gets published, there will be about one million SEO articles on shitty clickbait websites that, in this case, would try to sell you a home remedy for your supposed illness. So searching for any useful information is pretty much off the table.
ask the ai about a blue waffle
Why am I not surprised? >.>
I wonder if we got a group together to go on reddit and stack overflow and give really wrong programming answers and vote them to the top, if Claude would start sucking? They could always just revert to a previous model and it would probably be too hard to get enough people and content to have an effect with such large training sets. Maybe if you use ai? Lol
Didnn't something similar happen to Grok but ended up with it generating a ton of CSAM material that circulated twitter?
Sorry for being that guy today for you, but you can just say CSAM. It stands for Child Sexual Abuse Material". smh my head :P
Your last sentence saves you from being pedantic. Fun stuff, RIP in peace ✌️
Classic RAS syndrome! (Redundant Acronym Syndrome)
Pardon, but what... I did say CSAM, may I ask what exactly you mean?
Did you drop your ATM machine?
Does it take small size compact CD discs?
Some people, when they see an acronym, will replace it with the words it stands for in their head. A subset of that group of people get annoyed when the sentence gets all muddled up by repeated words; in this particular case, you said 'CSAM material', which their brain read as 'child sexual abuse material material'.
It isn't a big deal, but as one of those people, I totally get the urge to point it out (I've gotten pretty good at looking past it but it's still a bit of a compulsion).
They are referring to your use of "CSAM material" in your sentence.
chain tea, coffee coffee, cream cream.
Woo, woo, chugga, chugga, choo, choo
load more comments
(1 replies)
Good. This shows plainly how LLMs don't think, don't truly understand anything, and have no critical ability to do introspection or fact-checking. It seems the only way to teach the world of these things is to make it impossible to ignore via absurd demonstrations like this. If the "AI" well must be poisoned in order to wake people up, I'm all for it.
Isnt 80% of its data from Reddit anyways, seems quite poisoned already given the amount of confidently incorrect people.
With how Reddit is monetizing itself now I'd assume Lemmy actually becomes more widely used than Reddit however, since it should be totally free.
Before anyone shits on these scientists it said over and over again it was made up and that officially the USS Enterprise labs were used to make this discovery.
The Federation would never publish fake data, so it must be true!
Wouldn't humans do the same thing if someone literally writes lies on the internet?
If it were convincing lies made to deceive, then sure. But in this case the papers were deliberately made to be immediately obviously fake, to anyone actually reading them.
So I guess the question would be "would humans do the same thing if someone literally writes obvious jokes on the internet?"
More shockingly, three Indian researchers published a research paper that cited the preprint on the fake disease in Cureus, a peer-reviewed journal published by Springer. It was subsequently retracted.
lol
Looks at Flat-Earthers
Yes they would
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bohannon#Intentionally_misleading_chocolate_study
Yes, people would exactly do the same, because nobody reads anything but the headline of a paper. Even journalists don't.
AI didn't invent the problem, but it put the problem on steroids.
Even journalists don't
Not sure what point your making here, I wouldn't expect most journalists to be great at reading the details of papers like this...
Research and fact checking is what separates journalists from hacks.
"Journalist" implies factual information, not science fiction. If someone writes a "news" story about the magic land of Xanth because they can't tell the difference between a Piers Anthony novel and a scientific study it's not Piers Anthony's fault for being too "tricky".
Vetting sources is the one thing we need journalists for. If they don't vet their sources, their work is without merit.
Reading at least the methodology section of a paper and googling if the researchers and the institute exists, is the bare minimum of what a decent journalist should do.
If they can't do that, then there's no advantage of a journalist over some random person posting on Facebook. Even Youtubers usually vet their sources better.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Absolutely! Once false information is out there it can't be retracted even if the article itself is retracted. Bumblebees can't fly and vaccines cause autism are good examples of that. The only difference i can imagine is that LLMs have a much larger reach and may spread shit faster
But the Lancet did not retract the Wakefield paper for 12 years. The Lancet should have been shut down for that.
This. Here's a comparable case where human journalists did exactly what LLMs are doing now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bohannon#Intentionally_misleading_chocolate_study
The difference is the scale.
I give you... "The Grant Money Printing machine!"
Need a grant? Create a disease and submit a paper. Then write a grant asking for money to solve your invented disease.
If you want research grants there is already a glitch for that. You just jam "AI" in your research and suddenly government cares about progress now.
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›