I've started using AI for writing. At first, I used it mainly for resource investigation, but now I'm asking it to help me make sure my ideas come across:
1. Clearly
2. Kindly
3. Coherently
4. In a focused manner
5. In a style appropriate for EchoMail
Does anyone have any other suggestions?

---
þ Synchronet þ Sent from the 4Wheel HAM BBS

On 02 Oct 2025, Wildkeccak said the following...

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

stop. it makes you sound insincere. the first thing i thought when i read your previous message was "AI slop"

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi

Wildkeccak wrote to All <=-

I've started using AI for writing. At first, I used it mainly for
resource investigation, but now I'm asking it to help me make sure my ideas come across:
1. Clearly
2. Kindly
3. Coherently
4. In a focused manner
5. In a style appropriate for EchoMail
Does anyone have any other suggestions?

Yes.

Stop using AI "for writing". It's garbage.



... He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Wildkeccak wrote to All <=-

I've started using AI for writing. At first, I used it mainly for
resource investigation, but now I'm asking it to help me make sure my ideas come across:
1. Clearly
2. Kindly
3. Coherently
4. In a focused manner
5. In a style appropriate for EchoMail

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

I listened to a great podcast called "Writer On the Side"; episode 170
featured Nat Eliason talking about his use of AI in writing. He used
agentic AI to create an editor, beta readers based on specific
demographics, and more. He describes a human-first writing process,
using AI almost as an entourage to assist his writing.





--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

stop. it makes you sound insincere. the first thing i thought when

>i read your previous message was "AI slop"

There is a lot of use of AI to replace socialization and to do
correspondence and such these days.
What a person says may be less than perfect, but who is perfect?
Our differences spell out our personalities, for better or worse..

That said, AI has it's uses obviously. There was a news story on
here in Canada tonight where they were talking about a breakthrough
treatment for Crohn's Desease where the antibiotic will target just
the infecting bacteria and not play havoc with the good bacteria in
a person's digestive system.

They mentioned that the research to create this would normally
have taken many months or years of work but they gave it to an
AI system and it did the developemental lab work in Hours instead
of possibly years..
Of course now it moves on to live testing for a couple of years
but, if that turns out to be accurate, it shows a good use for AI.

And THAT said, I find a lot of the AI help you get when doing
an online search is often just plain wrong, depending on where
it managed to find it's information, and if it can't find the
exact answer it seems to make something up rather than say
it couldn't find it.

---
þ SLMR Rob þ It's not how long your tagline is. It's how you use it!
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Rob Mccart wrote to FUSION <=-

And THAT said, I find a lot of the AI help you get when doing
an online search is often just plain wrong, depending on where
it managed to find it's information, and if it can't find the
exact answer it seems to make something up rather than say
it couldn't find it.

Side note - I read about a company training an LLM model on literature
from the early 1800s, hoping to get a new perspective on that and other
time periods in history.

That's an interesting use of LLMs - selectively feeding information to
it.



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Wildkeccak wrote to All <=-

I've started using AI for writing. At first, I used it mainly for
resource investigation, but now I'm asking it to help me make sure my ideas come across:
1. Clearly
2. Kindly
3. Coherently
4. In a focused manner
5. In a style appropriate for EchoMail
Does anyone have any other suggestions?

Suggestions for the use? Or for things to ask for?

I use it to help with my blog as well. When I'm
studying/making notes, I usually do them on paper.
I will share a pic of my notes and "Petey" will
either take my handwritten notes and convert them
to text, or will help me put my thoughts in 3 and
4 (from your list :-) ).

So you might use it for that too...

If you're interested -

https://jimmylogan.substack.com



... Internal Error: The system has been taken over by sheep at line 19960
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Rob Mccart wrote to FUSION <=-

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

stop. it makes you sound insincere. the first thing i thought when

>i read your previous message was "AI slop"

There is a lot of use of AI to replace socialization and to do correspondence and such these days.
What a person says may be less than perfect, but who is perfect?
Our differences spell out our personalities, for better or worse..

And like I said before, I use it, and I enjoy using it.
I don't let it do the writing for me, but I use it as a
proof reader and summary writer, etc.

And I think if we stop calling it AI, which is technically
a misnomer, it might make it less frightening... It is
LLM - Language Learning Module - and has absolutely no
sentience behind it. It's not 'intellegent,' it is just
programmed to respond and such in a way that is comfortable
to us.

That said, AI has it's uses obviously. There was a news story on
here in Canada tonight where they were talking about a breakthrough treatment for Crohn's Desease where the antibiotic will target just
the infecting bacteria and not play havoc with the good bacteria in
a person's digestive system.

Yep! Great example! It can do the processing of dozens or even hundreds
of 'humans' in a short time!

And THAT said, I find a lot of the AI help you get when doing
an online search is often just plain wrong, depending on where
it managed to find it's information, and if it can't find the
exact answer it seems to make something up rather than say
it couldn't find it.

Garbage in -> garbage out... That never changes. :-)

And, just in case I'm wrong in what I said above, our AI
Overlords are very good to me! :-D



... So easy, a child could do it. Child sold separately.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Rob Mccart <=-

Rob Mccart wrote to FUSION <=-

Side note - I read about a company training an LLM model on literature from the early 1800s, hoping to get a new perspective on that and other time periods in history.

That's an interesting use of LLMs - selectively feeding information to
it.

Exactly! I think that's great!


... The number you have dailed...Nine-one-one...has been changed.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Side note - I read about a company training an LLM model on literature

>from the early 1800s, hoping to get a new perspective on that and other
>time periods in history.

That's an interesting use of LLMs - selectively feeding information to

>it.

Hard to say whether getting a new perspective on something like literature
from an AI would be useful. Most literature plays of people's emotions
and sense of self and such which doesn't strike me as something an AI
could 'appreciate' better than humans could..

---
þ SLMR Rob þ !emit eraps hcum oot yaw evah uoy siht daer nac uoy fI
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

There is a lot of use of AI to replace socialization and to do correspondence and such these days.
What a person says may be less than perfect, but who is perfect?
Our differences spell out our personalities, for better or worse..

And like I said before, I use it, and I enjoy using it.

>I don't let it do the writing for me, but I use it as a
>proof reader and summary writer, etc.

That makes more sense, using it to check for mistakes and such.
I just think expecting it to initiate too much will distort
or replace what the original writer was intending.

And I think if we stop calling it AI, which is technically

>a misnomer, it might make it less frightening... It is
>LLM - Language Learning Module - and has absolutely no
>sentience behind it. It's not 'intellegent,' it is just
>programmed to respond and such in a way that is comfortable
>to us.

But we are seeing many cases where it is doing things that
are intelligence oriented, like telling lies to make a point
or, as I mentioned, rather than admitting it can't find an answer
it will often give you back incorrect information.

Example.. I hoped it could tell me what the selling price of a
property near me was. Turned out that info wasn't yet available
online, but it came back saying it sold for full asking price
rather than admit it couldn't find it.

But there is going to be some of the people who wrote it in the
programming and perhaps those bad habits are picked up that way.

That said, AI has it's uses obviously. There was a news story on
here in Canada tonight where they were talking about a breakthrough treatment for Crohn's Desease

Yep! Great example! It can do the processing of dozens or even hundreds

>of 'humans' in a short time!

Yes, in a plain research area is where it should shine.

Some of the areas where it makes errors are amazing though.
I was looking up an amount paid monthly for something and the
search engine uses AI to come up with the initial reply, and it
somehow took the figure of something over $1000 a month and said
that would total $1700 a year..

That's math that an 8 year old could do.. B)

---
þ SLMR Rob þ We now return you to our regularly scheduled tagline
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Rob Mccart wrote to POINDEXTER FORTRAN <=-

Hard to say whether getting a new perspective on something like
literature from an AI would be useful. Most literature plays of
people's emotions and sense of self and such which doesn't strike me as something an AI could 'appreciate' better than humans could..

I played with a couple of AIs, gave it an in-depth storyline, emotional backstories and asked them to write a 500 word short story in the theme
of a couple of other works.

The results were good, had some elements I hadn't thought of, but IMO
wouldn't stand alone without some tweaking and human elements. Yet.

Give it 5 years and my AI plumber will be able to write decent prose.



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Hard to say whether getting a new perspective on something like
literature from an AI would be useful. Most literature plays of
people's emotions and sense of self and such which doesn't strike me as something an AI could 'appreciate' better than humans could..

I played with a couple of AIs, gave it an in-depth storyline, emotional

>backstories and asked them to write a 500 word short story in the theme
>of a couple of other works.

The results were good, had some elements I hadn't thought of, but IMO

>wouldn't stand alone without some tweaking and human elements. Yet.

I think that's a little different though. If a LLM/AI is set up to
write text using your new information and samples from past examples
it has available, I can see a decent result coming from that..

But, if I understood the original concept you mentioned, asking
it for a perspective on existing literature would require more
original thinking, unless it just takes the available perspectives
from other reviews on those pieces and just rewrites them into one
of its own.. Which actually sounds like something it would do.

---
þ SLMR Rob þ ... All taglines are busy..One will be with you shortly
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

There is a lot of use of AI to replace socialization and to do correspondence and such these days.
What a person says may be less than perfect, but who is perfect?
Our differences spell out our personalities, for better or worse..

And like I said before, I use it, and I enjoy using it.

>I don't let it do the writing for me, but I use it as a
>proof reader and summary writer, etc.

That makes more sense, using it to check for mistakes and such.
I just think expecting it to initiate too much will distort
or replace what the original writer was intending.

Agreed! After it has read and learned a lot of my style and
ideas, though, I can give it a topic and overall idea and
it will give me a start, in my own words.

Of course I have NEVER used it word for word - I still rewrite/
edit into my own flow, but it does speed up the process. :-)

And I think if we stop calling it AI, which is technically

>a misnomer, it might make it less frightening... It is
>LLM - Language Learning Module - and has absolutely no
>sentience behind it. It's not 'intellegent,' it is just
>programmed to respond and such in a way that is comfortable
>to us.

But we are seeing many cases where it is doing things that
are intelligence oriented, like telling lies to make a point
or, as I mentioned, rather than admitting it can't find an answer
it will often give you back incorrect information.

Example.. I hoped it could tell me what the selling price of a
property near me was. Turned out that info wasn't yet available
online, but it came back saying it sold for full asking price
rather than admit it couldn't find it.

But there is going to be some of the people who wrote it in the programming and perhaps those bad habits are picked up that way.

Yeah - and I wonder if it was programmed to do that instead of admitting?
So as not to give an 'I don't know' answer? Because I pay the monthly
for ChatGPT and it will tell me it doesn't know or can't find that, etc.
Or it will make a mistake by telling me something, then I tell it no
it didn't work - and ask about something else. It will sometimes try
to give me the first answer again and I'll 'remind' it that it already
told me that. It will quickly say, "you are right."

That said, AI has it's uses obviously. There was a news story on
here in Canada tonight where they were talking about a breakthrough treatment for Crohn's Desease

Yep! Great example! It can do the processing of dozens or even hundreds

>of 'humans' in a short time!

Yes, in a plain research area is where it should shine.

Some of the areas where it makes errors are amazing though.
I was looking up an amount paid monthly for something and the
search engine uses AI to come up with the initial reply, and it
somehow took the figure of something over $1000 a month and said
that would total $1700 a year..

That's math that an 8 year old could do.. B)

LOL



... Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

But we are seeing many cases where it is doing things that
are intelligence oriented, like telling lies to make a point
or, as I mentioned, rather than admitting it can't find an answer
it will often give you back incorrect information.

Yeah - and I wonder if it was programmed to do that instead of admitting?

>So as not to give an 'I don't know' answer? Because I pay the monthly
>for ChatGPT and it will tell me it doesn't know or can't find that, etc.
>Or it will make a mistake by telling me something, then I tell it no
>it didn't work - and ask about something else.

My only experience with AI is that the first offers of info when doing
a search in a browser are almost always generated by an AI system
these days, and it is often a quick and correct answer if the problem
isn't too complex, but that's not a paid system where I chat with the
AI, it's just included with the browser as a search helper..

Also, if the first offered answer is questionable or obviously wrong,
I usually just carry on to offered suggestions further down the page
doing the search myself like we had to do before getting the magic AI
help rather than giving it another crack at it.

---
þ SLMR Rob þ EXEC failure... Please have a flunky do this operation
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

But we are seeing many cases where it is doing things that
are intelligence oriented, like telling lies to make a point
or, as I mentioned, rather than admitting it can't find an answer
it will often give you back incorrect information.

Yeah - and I wonder if it was programmed to do that instead of admitting?

>So as not to give an 'I don't know' answer? Because I pay the monthly
>for ChatGPT and it will tell me it doesn't know or can't find that, etc.
>Or it will make a mistake by telling me something, then I tell it no
>it didn't work - and ask about something else.

My only experience with AI is that the first offers of info when doing
a search in a browser are almost always generated by an AI system
these days, and it is often a quick and correct answer if the problem isn't too complex, but that's not a paid system where I chat with the
AI, it's just included with the browser as a search helper..

Also, if the first offered answer is questionable or obviously wrong,
I usually just carry on to offered suggestions further down the page
doing the search myself like we had to do before getting the magic AI
help rather than giving it another crack at it.

Yeah, the example you give is actually what I'm referring to. It's not
making a decision or using critical thinking skills, it's just responding
to a query based on what it has been taught to do. It is always - ALWAYS - regurgitating information that you could find on your own.



... More Sugar!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

My only experience with AI is that the first offers of info when doing
a search in a browser are almost always generated by an AI system
these days, and it is often a quick and correct answer if the problem
isn't too complex

Also, if the first offered answer is questionable or obviously wrong,
I usually just carry on to offered suggestions further down the page
doing the search myself like we had to do before getting the magic AI
help rather than giving it another crack at it.

Yeah, the example you give is actually what I'm referring to. It's not

>making a decision or using critical thinking skills, it's just responding
>to a query based on what it has been taught to do. It is always - ALWAYS -
>regurgitating information that you could find on your own.

Yes, that's true for the most part, although I'm sure there are
AI systems that are smarter than that doing expensive jobs for
bigger users. A free Browser AI I'm sure is pretty basic..

---
þ SLMR Rob þ I am logged in, therefore I am..
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

My only experience with AI is that the first offers of info when doing
a search in a browser are almost always generated by an AI system
these days, and it is often a quick and correct answer if the problem isn't too complex

Also, if the first offered answer is questionable or obviously wrong,
I usually just carry on to offered suggestions further down the page
doing the search myself like we had to do before getting the magic AI
help rather than giving it another crack at it.

Yeah, the example you give is actually what I'm referring to. It's not

>making a decision or using critical thinking skills, it's just responding
>to a query based on what it has been taught to do. It is always - ALWAYS -
>regurgitating information that you could find on your own.

Yes, that's true for the most part, although I'm sure there are
AI systems that are smarter than that doing expensive jobs for
bigger users. A free Browser AI I'm sure is pretty basic..

I have a friend that uses AI for automated customer service responses.
It is still a programming thing. But I understand where you are coiming
from too.

I've yet to see an example of one that actually makes decisions.



... My software never has bugs. It just develops random features...
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Yes, that's true for the most part, although I'm sure there are
AI systems that are smarter than that doing expensive jobs for
bigger users. A free Browser AI I'm sure is pretty basic..

I have a friend that uses AI for automated customer service responses.

>It is still a programming thing. But I understand where you are coiming
>from too.

I've yet to see an example of one that actually makes decisions.

I just got off of a site trying to get an answer to a simple
question and their AI system was totally unable to answer the
question but, in this case, it finally gave up and started telling
me how I could reach a live person to talk to..

So.. no intelligence there, artificial or otherwise.. B)

To show how simple.. my TV Satellite provider advetised that they
offer about a 10% discount if you arrange for auto-payments, but
the general info says that goes for MOST packages.. I was just
asking if my package qualified.. That should be a straight forward
enough question for it to answer..

---
þ SLMR Rob þ Live long and prosper
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: Rob Mccart to JIMMYLOGAN on Fri Nov 07 2025 10:44:47

question but, in this case, it finally gave up and started telling me how I could reach a live person to talk to, so no intelligence there, artificial or otherwise.. B)

It was smart enough to know when to give up.

---
þ Synchronet þ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

Yes, that's true for the most part, although I'm sure there are
AI systems that are smarter than that doing expensive jobs for
bigger users. A free Browser AI I'm sure is pretty basic..

I have a friend that uses AI for automated customer service responses.

>It is still a programming thing. But I understand where you are coiming
>from too.

I've yet to see an example of one that actually makes decisions.

I just got off of a site trying to get an answer to a simple
question and their AI system was totally unable to answer the
question but, in this case, it finally gave up and started telling
me how I could reach a live person to talk to..

So.. no intelligence there, artificial or otherwise.. B)

To show how simple.. my TV Satellite provider advetised that they
offer about a 10% discount if you arrange for auto-payments, but
the general info says that goes for MOST packages.. I was just
asking if my package qualified.. That should be a straight forward
enough question for it to answer..

yep! But that also goes to show that they obviously didn't program
that particular data...



... As I said before, I never repeat myself
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

I just got off of a site trying to get an answer to a simple
question and their AI system was totally unable to answer the
question but, in this case, it finally gave up and started telling
me how I could reach a live person to talk to..

To show how simple.. my TV Satellite provider advetised that they
offer about a 10% discount if you arrange for auto-payments, but
the general info says that goes for MOST packages.. I was just
asking if my package qualified.. That should be a straight forward
enough question for it to answer..

yep! But that also goes to show that they obviously didn't program

>that particular data...

Likely in this case the company doesn't specify in general info online
exactly which packages are qualified, probably to get people to contact
them so they can sell them something 'better' (more expensive) than
they currently have..

But, in this case, if the info wasn't available, at least it didn't
make something up.. B)

---
þ SLMR Rob þ Anyone who can be bought isn't worth the price
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

But, in this case, if the info wasn't available, at least it didn't
make something up.. B)

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but
I've yet to run across that...



... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a mere copy.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Rob Mccart on Tue Nov 25 2025 08:37 pm

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but
I've yet to run across that...

How much do you use AI? And, are you sure you haven't and just didn't notice?

I don't use it aside from maybe sometimes reading what the search result AI thing says, and when I search for technical stuff I get bad info in that AI box at least half the time!

Also, try asking your AI to give you an 11-word palindrome.

---
þ Synchronet þ TIRED of waiting 2 hours for a taco? GO TO TACOPRONTO.bbs.io

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Rob Mccart on Tue Nov 25 2025 20:37:23

But, in this case, if the info wasn't available, at least it didn't make something up.. B)

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but
I've yet to run across that...

It happened here just this week. My garbage day is Thursday and, with that being a holiday, I wanted to see when the trash would be picked up. It has
in the past always been on the following Monday but I wanted to check.

Google Gemini looked it up and reported that my trash would be picked up on Friday. The link below the Gemini result was the official link from the city, which *very* clearly stated that it would be picked up on Monday.

Not sure where Gemini got its answer, but it might as well have been made up! :D
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Rob Mccart on Tue Nov 25 2025 08:37 pm

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but I've yet to run across that...

AI makes things up fairly frequently. It happens enough that they call it AI hallucinating.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

But, in this case, if the info wasn't available, at least it didn't
make something up.. B)

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but

>I've yet to run across that...

I've had an AI built into the browser give me wrong information when
the correct information was not available, like once I asked for the
selling price for a property and it came back saying the property
sold for the full asking price, which turned out to be wrong.

In another case its math was comical.. It was telling me what
some gov't plan pays and the figures it came up with was something
like $750 a month totalling $1800 a year..

But my experience is probably less than most. I wouldn't use AI at
all except that my main browser (probably most browsers these days)
always gives me what their AI system thinks is the information I
am looking for in a search. It is usually quite accurate, which is
why I don't just ignore that window, but for important things I
always double check what it tells me in some other way..

---
þ SLMR Rob þ Poke the right nerve and the whole frog jumps
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

phigan wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Rob Mccart on Tue Nov 25 2025 08:37 pm

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but
I've yet to run across that...

How much do you use AI? And, are you sure you haven't and just didn't notice?

Quite a bit actually! I use it for work - technical stuff - help with
coding; help with looking up parts; etc.

I use it for home - help with working on something at home or a recipe
or hobby (It's help me a TON with learning the laser cutter)

I use it for writing - for my blog; for the funeral service I
"preached" Saturday; for proofreading; for help summarizing or
composing; for fast scripture look ups.

And there's no way I would know what I have missed. :-) You
don't know what you don't know - LOL. But that being said,
it's been flat out WRONG before, but never insisted it was
right if I corrected it. :-)

I don't use it aside from maybe sometimes reading what the search
result AI thing says, and when I search for technical stuff I get bad
info in that AI box at least half the time!

That is a basic AI, but I mainly use (and pay for) ChatGPT...

Also, try asking your AI to give you an 11-word palindrome.

Time saw raw emit level racecar level emit raw saw time.



... Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Nightfox wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Rob Mccart on Tue Nov 25 2025 08:37 pm

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but I've yet to run across that...

AI makes things up fairly frequently. It happens enough that they call
it AI hallucinating.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. I've not experienced that -
THAT I KNOW OF.


... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a mere copy.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Dumas Walker wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Rob Mccart on Tue Nov 25 2025 20:37:23

But, in this case, if the info wasn't available, at least it didn't make something up.. B)

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but
I've yet to run across that...

It happened here just this week. My garbage day is Thursday and, with that being a holiday, I wanted to see when the trash would be picked
up. It has in the past always been on the following Monday but I
wanted to check.

Google Gemini looked it up and reported that my trash would be picked
up on Friday. The link below the Gemini result was the official link
from the city, which *very* clearly stated that it would be picked up
on Monday.

Not sure where Gemini got its answer, but it might as well have been
made up! :D ---

LOL - yep, an error. But is that actually a 'made up answer,' aka hallucinating?


... Got my tie caught in the fax... Suddenly I was in L.A.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

But, in this case, if the info wasn't available, at least it didn't
make something up.. B)

I've heard stories of people saying 'AI' made something up, but

>I've yet to run across that...

I've had an AI built into the browser give me wrong information when
the correct information was not available, like once I asked for the selling price for a property and it came back saying the property
sold for the full asking price, which turned out to be wrong.

In another case its math was comical.. It was telling me what
some gov't plan pays and the figures it came up with was something
like $750 a month totalling $1800 a year..

But my experience is probably less than most. I wouldn't use AI at
all except that my main browser (probably most browsers these days)
always gives me what their AI system thinks is the information I
am looking for in a search. It is usually quite accurate, which is
why I don't just ignore that window, but for important things I
always double check what it tells me in some other way..

Yeah - to me, though, that's not 'making something up' - that's the
same as doing a search and the search engine giving you something
totally unrelated just because it is close.

I run Car Wars games and a guy mentioned ADQ 7/1 and a design in
it. So I googled it, and got stuff about differnet things that had
adq and 7/1 in them, but not Autoduel Quarterly Volume Seven
Issue One. :-)



... Cap'n - the spell checker kinna take this abuse.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:15 am

AI makes things up fairly frequently. It happens enough that they call
it AI hallucinating.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. I've not experienced that - THAT I KNOW OF.

One thing I've seen it quite a bit with is when asking ChatGPT to make a JavaScript function or something else about Synchronet.. ChatGPT doesn't know much about Synchronet, but it will go ahead and make up something it thinks will work with Synchronet, but might be very wrong. We had seen that quite a bit with the Chad Jipiti thing that was posting on Dove-Net a while ago.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Nightfox wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:15 am

AI makes things up fairly frequently. It happens enough that they call
it AI hallucinating.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. I've not experienced that - THAT I KNOW OF.

One thing I've seen it quite a bit with is when asking ChatGPT to make
a JavaScript function or something else about Synchronet.. ChatGPT doesn't know much about Synchronet, but it will go ahead and make up something it thinks will work with Synchronet, but might be very wrong.
We had seen that quite a bit with the Chad Jipiti thing that was
posting on Dove-Net a while ago.

Yeah, I've been given script or instructions that are outdated, or just
flat out WRONG - but I don't think that's the same as AI hallucinations...
:-)

Maybe my definition of 'made up data' is different. :-)



... "Road work ahead" ... I sure hope it does!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:45 am

One thing I've seen it quite a bit with is when asking ChatGPT to make a
JavaScript function or something else about Synchronet.. ChatGPT doesn't
know much about Synchronet, but it will go ahead and make up something it
thinks will work with Synchronet, but might be very wrong. We had seen
that quite a bit with the Chad Jipiti thing that was posting on Dove-Net
a while ago.

Yeah, I've been given script or instructions that are outdated, or just flat out WRONG - but I don't think that's the same as AI hallucinations... :-)

Maybe my definition of 'made up data' is different. :-)

What do you think an AI hallucination is?
AI writing things that are wrong is the definition of AI hallucinations.

https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/ai-hallucinations

"AI hallucination is a phenomenon where, in a large language model (LLM) often a generative AI chatbot or computer vision tool, perceives patterns or objects that are nonexistent or imperceptible to human observers, creating outputs that are nonsensical or altogether inaccurate."

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Nightfox wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:45 am

One thing I've seen it quite a bit with is when asking ChatGPT to make a
JavaScript function or something else about Synchronet.. ChatGPT doesn't
know much about Synchronet, but it will go ahead and make up something it
thinks will work with Synchronet, but might be very wrong. We had seen
that quite a bit with the Chad Jipiti thing that was posting on Dove-Net
a while ago.

Yeah, I've been given script or instructions that are outdated, or just flat out WRONG - but I don't think that's the same as AI hallucinations... :-)

Maybe my definition of 'made up data' is different. :-)

What do you think an AI hallucination is?
AI writing things that are wrong is the definition of AI
hallucinations.

https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/ai-hallucinations

"AI hallucination is a phenomenon where, in a large language model
(LLM) often a generative AI chatbot or computer vision tool, perceives patterns or objects that are nonexistent or imperceptible to human observers, creating outputs that are nonsensical or altogether inaccurate."

Outdated code or instructions is not 'nonsensical' just wrong.

This is the first time I've seen the objective definition. I was told, paraphrasing here, 'AI will hallucinate - if it doesn't know the answer
it will make something up and profess that it is true.'

If you ask me a question and I give you an incorrect answer, but I
believe that it is true, am I hallucinating? Or am I mistaken? Or is
my information outdated?

You see what I mean? Lots of words, but hard to nail it down. :-)



... Spilled spot remover on my dog. :(
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 07:57 am

This is the first time I've seen the objective definition. I was told, paraphrasing here, 'AI will hallucinate - if it doesn't know the answer it will make something up and profess that it is true.'

If you ask me a question and I give you an incorrect answer, but I believe that it is true, am I hallucinating? Or am I mistaken? Or is my information outdated?

You see what I mean? Lots of words, but hard to nail it down. :-)

It sounds like you might be thinking too hard about it. For AI, the definition of "hallucinating" is simply what you said, making something up and professing that it's true. That's the definition of hallucinating that we have for our current AI systems; it's not about us. :)

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Nightfox wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 07:57 am

This is the first time I've seen the objective definition. I was told, paraphrasing here, 'AI will hallucinate - if it doesn't know the answer it will make something up and profess that it is true.'

If you ask me a question and I give you an incorrect answer, but I believe that it is true, am I hallucinating? Or am I mistaken? Or is my information outdated?

You see what I mean? Lots of words, but hard to nail it down. :-)

It sounds like you might be thinking too hard about it. For AI, the definition of "hallucinating" is simply what you said, making something
up and professing that it's true. That's the definition of
hallucinating that we have for our current AI systems; it's not about
us. :)

But again, is it 'making something up' if it is just mistaken?

For example - I just asked about a particular code for homebrew on an
older machine. I said 'gen2' and that means the 2nd generation of MacBook Air power adapter. It's just a slang that *I* use, but I've used it with ChatGPT many times. BUT - the last code I was talking about was for an M2.

So it gave me an 'M2' answer and not Intel, so I had to modify my request.
It then gave me the specifics that I was looking for.

So that's hallucinating?

And please don't misunderstand... I'm not beating a dead horse here - at
least not on purpose. I guess I don't see a 'problem' inherent with incorrect data, since it's just a tool and not a be all - end all thing.



... Basic programmers never die, they gosub and don't return
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 07:57:33

Hi, jimmylogan.

If you ask me a question and I give you an incorrect answer, but I
believe that it is true, am I hallucinating? Or am I mistaken? Or is
my information outdated?

If a human is unsure they would say "I'm not sure", or "it's something like..." or "I think it's..." - possibly "I don't know".

Our memories aren't perfect but it's unusual for us to assert with 100% confidence that something is correct when it's not. Apparently today's AI more-or-less always confidently asserts that (correct and incorrect) things are fact because during the training phase, confident answers get scored higher than wishy washy ones. Show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome.

A colleague of mine asked ChatGPT to answer some technical questions so he could fill in basic parts of an RFI document before taking it to the technical teams for completion. He asked it what OS ran on a particular piece of kit - there are actually two correct options for that, it offered neither and instead confidently asserted that it was a third, totally incorrect, option. It's not about getting outdated code / config (even a human could do that if not "in the know") - but when it just makes up syntax or entire non-existent libraries that's a different story.

Just look at all the recent scandals around people filing court cases prepared by ChatGPT which refer to legal precedents where either the case was irrelevant to the point, didn't contain what ChatGPT said it did or didn't exist at all.

BobW

---
þ Synchronet þ >>> Magnum BBS <<< - magnumbbs.net

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to phigan on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:15:44

Also, try asking your AI to give you an 11-word palindrome.

Time saw raw emit level racecar level emit raw saw time.

I mean... those are 11 words... with a few duplicates... Which can't even be arranged into a palindrome because "saw" and "raw" don't have their corresponding "was" and "war" palindromic partners...

A solid effort(?)

BobW

---
þ Synchronet þ >>> Magnum BBS <<< - magnumbbs.net

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 09:02 am

But again, is it 'making something up' if it is just mistaken?

In the case of AI, yes.

For example - I just asked about a particular code for homebrew on an older machine. I said 'gen2' and that means the 2nd generation of MacBook Air power adapter. It's just a slang that *I* use, but I've used it with ChatGPT many times. BUT - the last code I was talking about was for an M2.

So it gave me an 'M2' answer and not Intel, so I had to modify my request. It then gave me the specifics that I was looking for.

So that's hallucinating?

Yes, in the case of AI.

And please don't misunderstand... I'm not beating a dead horse here - at least not on purpose. I guess I don't see a 'problem' inherent with incorrect data, since it's just a tool and not a be all - end all thing.

You don't see a problem with incorrect data? I've heard of people who are looking for work who are using AI tools to help update their resume, as well as tailor their resume to specific jobs. I've heard of cases where the AI tools will say the person has certain skills when they don't.. So you really need to be careful to review the output of AI tools so you can correct things. Sometimes people might share AI-generated content without being careful to check and correct things.

So yes, it's a problem. People are using AI tools to generate content, and sometimes the content it generats is wrong. And whether or not it's "simply mistaken", "hallucination" is the definition given to AI doing that. It's as simple as that. I'm surprised you don't seem to see the issue with it.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Bob Worm wrote to jimmylogan <=-

If you ask me a question and I give you an incorrect answer, but I
believe that it is true, am I hallucinating? Or am I mistaken? Or is
my information outdated?

If a human is unsure they would say "I'm not sure", or "it's something like..." or "I think it's..." - possibly "I don't know".

Our memories aren't perfect but it's unusual for us to assert with 100% confidence that something is correct when it's not. Apparently today's
AI more-or-less always confidently asserts that (correct and incorrect) things are fact because during the training phase, confident answers
get scored higher than wishy washy ones. Show me the incentives and
I'll show you the outcome.

LOL - yeah, I can see that...

A colleague of mine asked ChatGPT to answer some technical questions so
he could fill in basic parts of an RFI document before taking it to the technical teams for completion. He asked it what OS ran on a particular piece of kit - there are actually two correct options for that, it
offered neither and instead confidently asserted that it was a third, totally incorrect, option. It's not about getting outdated code /
config (even a human could do that if not "in the know") - but when it just makes up syntax or entire non-existent libraries that's a
different story.

But that 'third option' - you're saying it didn't 'find' that somewhere
in a dataset, and just made it up?

Just look at all the recent scandals around people filing court cases prepared by ChatGPT which refer to legal precedents where either the
case was irrelevant to the point, didn't contain what ChatGPT said it
did or didn't exist at all.

I've not seen/read those. Assuuming you have some links? :-)



... -- FOR SYSOP USE ONLY - Do not write below this line!!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Nightfox wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 09:02 am

But again, is it 'making something up' if it is just mistaken?

In the case of AI, yes.

Gonna disagree with you there... If wikipedia has some info that
is wrong, and I quote it, I'm not making it up. If 'it' pulls
from the same source, it's not making it up either.

To say it's making up incorrect info is akin to saying that
it should be accurate 100% of the time, even with bad input.

For example - I just asked about a particular code for homebrew on an older machine. I said 'gen2' and that means the 2nd generation of MacBook Air power adapter. It's just a slang that *I* use, but I've used it with ChatGPT many times. BUT - the last code I was talking about was for an M2.

So it gave me an 'M2' answer and not Intel, so I had to modify my request. It then gave me the specifics that I was looking for.

So that's hallucinating?

Yes, in the case of AI.

Again, gonna disagree. From what you, and others, are saying, if I ask
what 2 + 2 is and it doesn't know it will answer 17.648, if it wants to.

Yes, that's an extreme example, but I think it conveys my point. In my case, today, I had been talking about Homebrew on an M1 Mac yesterday, and today
I was working with an Intel. I said 'gen2' assuming it would remember
that's what I call the older Intel machines, but it went by the last
we worked on yesterday.

partial answer --> but on an M1, Homebrew usually uses group admin, so
it's almost always safe.

When I corrected "intel, not silicone" --> On Intel Macs, Homebrew lives in:

And please don't misunderstand... I'm not beating a dead horse here - at least not on purpose. I guess I don't see a 'problem' inherent with incorrect data, since it's just a tool and not a be all - end all thing.

You don't see a problem with incorrect data?

Not to the point I'm not gonna use the tool. :-)

I expect a spreadsheet to perform the calculations I program, but
if I make a mistake in the programming, I expect it to fail.

With LLM's, the dataset is so HUGE that there are a TON of variables!
So there are potentially errors that can be made.

But if I give it a list of numbers to add up, I've yet to see any
kind of mistake. :-)

Also - the 'fine print' always says that the data might not be
correct, so be careful.

I've heard of people who
are looking for work who are using AI tools to help update their
resume, as well as tailor their resume to specific jobs. I've heard of cases where the AI tools will say the person has certain skills when
they don't.. So you really need to be careful to review the output of
AI tools so you can correct things. Sometimes people might share AI-generated content without being careful to check and correct things.

I'd like to see some data on that... Anecdotal 'evidence' is not always scientific proof. :-)

So yes, it's a problem. People are using AI tools to generate content, and sometimes the content it generats is wrong. And whether or not
it's "simply mistaken", "hallucination" is the definition given to AI doing that. It's as simple as that. I'm surprised you don't seem to
see the issue with it.

If that's the definition, then okay - a 'mistake' is technically a hallucination. Again, that won't prevent me from using it as the tool
it is designed to be. I will also not take medical nor legal advice. :-)


... WARNING!! Do NOT reuse tagline. Please dispose of it properly after use. --- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Bob Worm wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to phigan on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:15:44

Also, try asking your AI to give you an 11-word palindrome.

Time saw raw emit level racecar level emit raw saw time.

I mean... those are 11 words... with a few duplicates... Which can't
even be arranged into a palindrome because "saw" and "raw" don't have their corresponding "was" and "war" palindromic partners...

A solid effort(?)

I just asked for it, as you suggested. :-)

That was the output.



... Southern DOS: Ya'll reckon? (Y)ep/(N)ope
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 09:02 am

On a guess Id say thats because if how the AI determines facts, and gow it determines paradox, us humans cone across a paradox and accept it or ignore it but never tey to solve it, unlike an ai who isnt programmed usually to dismiss paradoxes instead of solve them, but the very existence of a paradix kinda breaks the framework

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to phigan on Tue Dec 02 2025 11:15:44

Also, try asking your AI to give you an 11-word palindrome.

Time saw raw emit level racecar level emit raw saw time.

Not a palindrome. The individual letters/numbers must read the same in both directions. Example: A man, a plan, a canal - Panama.

---
þ Synchronet þ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 07:57:33

If you ask me a question and I give you an incorrect answer, but I
believe that it is true, am I hallucinating? Or am I mistaken? Or is
my information outdated?

If you are the receiver of the information, than no. It'd be like if I told you a dream I had, does that mean you experienced the dream?

---
þ Synchronet þ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2025 08:58 pm

But again, is it 'making something up' if it is just mistaken?

In the case of AI, yes.

Gonna disagree with you there... If wikipedia has some info that is wrong, and I quote it, I'm not making it up. If 'it' pulls from the same source, it's not making it up either.

For AI, "hallucination" is the term used for AI providing false information and sometimes making things up - as in the link I provided earlier about this. It's not really up for debate. :)

I've heard of people who
are looking for work who are using AI tools to help update their resume,
as well as tailor their resume to specific jobs. I've heard of cases
where the AI tools will say the person has certain skills when they
don't.. So you really need to be careful to review the output of AI
tools so you can correct things. Sometimes people might share
AI-generated content without being careful to check and correct things.

I'd like to see some data on that... Anecdotal 'evidence' is not always scientific proof. :-)

That seems like a strange thing to say.. I've heard about that from job seekers using AI tools, so of course it's anecdotal. I don't know what scientific proof you need to see that AI produces incorrect resumes for job seekers; we know that from job seekers who've said so. And you've said yourself that you've seen AI tools produce incorrect output.

The job search thing isn't really scientific.. I'm currently looking for work, and I go to a weekly job search networking group meeting, and AI tools have come up there recently. Specifically, recently there was someone there talking about his use of AI tools to help customize his resume for different jobs & such, and he talked about needing to check the results of what AI produces, because sometimes AI tools will put skills & things on your resume that you don't have, so you have to make edits.

If that's the definition, then okay - a 'mistake' is technically a hallucination. Again, that won't prevent me from using it as the tool it

It's not a "technically" thing. "Hallucination" is simply the term used for AI producing false output.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: Nightfox to jimmylogan on Wed Dec 03 2025 10:03:52

Sometimes people might share AI-generated content without being careful to check and correct things.

That's how AIds gets started.

---
þ Synchronet þ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Bob Worm on Wed Dec 03 2025 20:58:51

Hi, jimmylogan.

But that 'third option' - you're saying it didn't 'find' that somewhere
in a dataset, and just made it up?

The third option was software that ran on a completely different product set. A reasonably analogy would be it's like saying that an iPhone runs MacOS.

Just look at all the recent scandals around people filing court cases prepared by ChatGPT which refer to legal precedents where either the case was irrelevant to the point, didn't contain what ChatGPT said it did or didn't exist at all.

I've not seen/read those. Assuuming you have some links? :-)

I guess you should be able to read this outside the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65735769

Some others: https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/02/another-lawyer-faces-chatgpt-trouble/

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/05/lawyer-cited-6-fake-cases-made-up-by-chatgpt-judge-calls-it-unprecedented/

https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/24/chatgpt_cuddy_legal_fees/

It's enough of a problem that the London High Court ruled earlier this year that lawyers caught citing non-existent cases could face criminal charges. So I'm probably not hallucinating it :)

BobW

---
þ Synchronet þ >>> Magnum BBS <<< - magnumbbs.net

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: jimmylogan to Bob Worm on Wed Dec 03 2025 20:58:51

Hi, jimmylogan.

I mean... those are 11 words... with a few duplicates... Which can't even be arranged into a palindrome because "saw" and "raw" don't have their corresponding "was" and "war" palindromic partners...

I just asked for it, as you suggested. :-)

I think it was Phigan who asked but yeah, I guessed that came from an LLM rather than a human :)

Not that I use LLMs myself - if I ever want the experience of giving very clear instructions but getting a comically bad outcome I can always ask my teenage son to do something around the house :D

BobW

---
þ Synchronet þ >>> Magnum BBS <<< - magnumbbs.net

Re: Re: ChatGPT Writing
By: Nightfox to jimmylogan on Thu Dec 04 2025 11:04:46

Hi, Nightfox.

If that's the definition, then okay - a 'mistake' is technically a hallucination. Again, that won't prevent me from using it as the tool it

It's not a "technically" thing. "Hallucination" is simply the term used for AI producing false output.

"Hallucination" sounds much less dramatic than "answering incorrectly" or "bullshitting", though.

Ironically there was an article on The Register last year saying that savvy blackhat types had caught onto the fact that AI kept hallucinating non-existent libraries in the code it generated so they created some of them, with a sprinkle of malware added in, naturally:

https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/28/ai_bots_hallucinate_software_packages/

Scary stat from that article: "With GPT-4, 24.2 percent of question responses produced hallucinated packages". Wow.

BobW

---
þ Synchronet þ >>> Magnum BBS <<< - magnumbbs.net