No, this is Google throwing the cheapest possible shit at you that is barely capable of stringing together 5 coherent sentences and has the reasoning capability of a tapeworm.
Here is the output of the minimalist open Chinese model Qwen3, that runs locally on my 6 year old mid-end PC:
The US states that contain the letter "d" (case-insensitive, as state names are typically capitalized) are as follows. I've verified each state name for the presence of the letter "d" in its standard spelling:
Colorado (contains "d" in "Colorado")
Delaware (starts with "D")
Florida (contains "d" in "Florida")
Idaho (contains "d" in "Idaho")
Indiana (contains "d" in "Indiana")
Maryland (ends with "d" in "Maryland")
Nevada (contains "d" in "Nevada")
North Dakota (contains "d" in "Dakota")
Rhode Island (contains "d" in "Rhode")
South Dakota (contains "d" in "Dakota")
Total: 10 states.
The model that responds to your search query is designed to be cheap, not accurate. It has to generate an answer to every single search issued to Google. They’re not using high parameter models with reasoning because those would be ruinously expensive.
I didn’t understand your comment, so I asked the same LLM as before.
It explained it and I think that I get it now. Low-grade middle-school-“Your Mom”-joke, is it? Ha-ha… 🙄
This also means that AI did better than myself at both tasks I’ve given it today (I found only 9 states with “d” when going over the state-list myself…).
In all fairness, that is one of the strong use cases for computers in general. Doing simple yet tedious tasks accurately. When looking over 50 names checking for a particular letter, humans get bored and make mistakes. We actually aren’t great at that sort of task. I think simply calling this ineptitude both misses the point and under appreciates the reality of being human.
Alas, it is easier to call someone dumb than to try to understand them.
Well, a mindless, repetitive task prone to errors and a task requiring obscure knowledge (“d” as a synonym for dick… one of those self-censoring Gen-Z things?)
Nice to now have tools to solve these tasks and gain some time to do more interesting stuff instead. Lively discussions on Lemmy, e.g. ;-)
No, this is Google throwing the cheapest possible shit at you that is barely capable of stringing together 5 coherent sentences and has the reasoning capability of a tapeworm.
Here is the output of the minimalist open Chinese model Qwen3, that runs locally on my 6 year old mid-end PC:
Exactly.
The model that responds to your search query is designed to be cheap, not accurate. It has to generate an answer to every single search issued to Google. They’re not using high parameter models with reasoning because those would be ruinously expensive.
Illinois contains a hidden D which is in your mom.
I didn’t understand your comment, so I asked the same LLM as before.
It explained it and I think that I get it now. Low-grade middle-school-“Your Mom”-joke, is it? Ha-ha… 🙄
This also means that AI did better than myself at both tasks I’ve given it today (I found only 9 states with “d” when going over the state-list myself…).
Whatever. I’m gonna have second lunch now.
A public proclamation of your ineptitude at simple tasks is an interesting way of defending the utility of LLMs.
In all fairness, that is one of the strong use cases for computers in general. Doing simple yet tedious tasks accurately. When looking over 50 names checking for a particular letter, humans get bored and make mistakes. We actually aren’t great at that sort of task. I think simply calling this ineptitude both misses the point and under appreciates the reality of being human.
Alas, it is easier to call someone dumb than to try to understand them.
Well, a mindless, repetitive task prone to errors and a task requiring obscure knowledge (“d” as a synonym for dick… one of those self-censoring Gen-Z things?)
Nice to now have tools to solve these tasks and gain some time to do more interesting stuff instead. Lively discussions on Lemmy, e.g. ;-)