From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox
On 7/20/25 08:41, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Mon, 14 Jul 2025 03:48:11 -0000 (UTC),
David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote in >>news:d7457kp1rg8scl0ksrl0a7n8iugfi06lm2@4ax.com:
......
That would account for it, and I certainly would never have suspected
Youtube. This also, I think, shows the advantage of talking to people
instead of so-called AI. I doubt if any AI now or even later could have >>> considered all the factors I brought up, (Although if it read your post, >>> maybe it would cite it.)
Never ever trust anything AI! LLMs look more human than my 1980's Eliza >>implementation. They (thankfully) don't understand anything yet, including >>what they just told you on Google. It is just advanced language >>manipulation.
Good enough for most purposes. Sanity check is essential.
Have you noticed that Google AI, and maybe others, repeat every word in
one's question, to make it look like every thing in the question was considered and is answered. To make it look like you are getting
personal attention.
Perplexity (and probably others, but I like P because it generates nice
.pdf files) actually DOES address each of my concerns, unlike doctors
who seem to have a lot of selective deafness. This, if nothing else,
leads me to believe that medical AI has a really great future.
I'm really tired of dealing with doctors, all of whom seem to have
tunnel vision -- except the generalists (family, internists, etc.), who
are generally a waste of time unless you know you need a prescription
for a mammogram etc.
Personal? Only the bottom half believes that.
--
Cheers, Bev
Nobody needs to speak on behalf of idiots, they manage
to speak entirely too much for themselves already.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2