Since pertinent information was withheld (that it didn't know), then by your own post you acknowledge it was a lie of omission.
The stupidity of people these days is truly beyond belief. And, yes, get the f off my lawn.
We learned back in the 80s that trying to get a neural net to emphasise what you want is actually very difficult. What it will tend to emphasise are the assumptions that underly the test data, and that's usually a completely different sort of fiction.
Google Assistant has supported this for like a decade via "hey Google, note to self"
FWIW I live in Queensland and we have several zones which use average speed over distance. There are still plenty of stationary point-in-time cameras but a bunch of average zones. Most recently I think was in some of the tunnels in Brisbane.
Yep. I've read that generative AI doesn't say "I don't know the answer," but will just make something up instead.
I've worked with people like that.
But was that figure provided by AI?
Even if not, we all know that 793% of all statistics are invented.
If something is inaccurately presented as being the truth, then it is a lie of omission because it is dishonest about the fact that the information isn't actually known.
Gemini is exceptionally bad, as LLMs go. I really have no idea why it is so dreadful, even compared to other LLMs. It isn't context window. and it doesn't seem to be training material either.
Cyber Implications have been noted. Mondas security is to be Cyber Vibed until we have Cyber Security capable of defeating The Doctor.
When I test the different AI systems, Google's AI system loses track of complex problems incredibly quickly. It's great on simple stuff, but for complex stuff, it's useless.
Unfortunately.... advice, overviews, etc, are very very complex problems indeed, which means that you're hitting the weakspot of their system.
Nothing is finished until the paperwork is done.
