Pulling the levers behind artificial intelligence
Opinion
Sometimes, artificial intelligence looks downright stupid. Other times, it just looks dangerous.
A rather famous recent AI mistake/mashup involved both Meta AI and Google being asked about the time zone in Cape Breton, N.S., and both telling users that the area was 12 minutes ahead of Atlantic Standard Time and 18 minutes behind Newfoundland time. It isn't. The AI systems had merely sampled all they could find on the topic of Cape Breton and time zones — a satirical piece on the comedy site The Beaverton — and presented it as fact.
As the old saying about computers goes, garbage in, garbage out
FILE
Elon Musk
AI is getting better, especially in areas where it can sample a large variety of sources of information, but there are still cases where AI has simply invented sources. For that reason, there's a lot at stake if AI answers are accepted at face value, and if people aren't willing to go further to verify the sources of material the AI devices are using.
Because many are doing just that, taking an AI one-and-done approach to 'proof.'
So much so that, on social media sites like X (formerly Twitter), users regularly go to that site's Grok AI to try to establish whether things cited as fact on the site are actually true, or whether images posted by other users are accurate. It's certainly better than just accepting everything you see on social media, but it's become such an accepted form of proof that users happily post Grok's answers, and even say that Grok was their one and only source.
(In unintended hilarity, Grok's owner, Elon Musk was labelled a 'top misinformation spreader' by Grok itself, a position Grok seems to have mysteriously mellowed on since then, arguing that Musk is both a spreader of misinformation and a target of those who don't like Musk's self-claimed free speech absolutism.)
But think about the following situation.
Elon Musk posted that 'the far left is murderously violent' after two Democrat politicians and members of their families were shot in Minnesota and the alleged shooter was misidentified at first as a Democrat supporter.
When X users, responding to the post, asked Grok, 'Who commits more domestic terrorism? The 'far-left' or the 'far-right?', it responded, 'Data consistently shows far-right groups commit more domestic terrorism in the U.S. than far-left groups, both in frequency and lethality.'
Musk then replied, 'Major fail, as this is objectively false. Grok is parroting legacy media. Working on it.'
Working on what? Grok cited sources from the U.S. Government Accountability Office to the Department of Homeland Security to the FBI to the University of Maryland, all saying that far-right terrorism easily outstrips far-left terrorism. Only two of 15 sources were even from the media — and they were reporting on other studies.
Weekday Mornings
A quick glance at the news for the upcoming day.
Clearly, Musk was letting his own beliefs dictate what was objectively true or objectively false — which he's welcome to do, because that's how personal opinions tend to work. You believe things to be true if you agree with them, and doubt their veracity if you don't.
But 'working on it' suggests a new — and real — concern about depending on AI to determine 'truth.' Because the machine is only as accurate as its programmer wants it to be.
And that leaves the possibility of a thumb on the scales.
In the next few weeks, a Grok 'tweak' may well change its position on just who leads the way in domestic terrorism in the U.S.
If, at the end of the day, AI is only as accurate as the rich person standing behind the machine wants it to be, we're in deep, deep trouble.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Tesla Stock (TSLA) Buying Opportunity if Robotaxis are Another ‘Musk Mirage'
Tesla's (TSLA) much-anticipated robotaxi launch later this week is a 'pivotal' moment for the under-fire business, with any failure likely to severely hit its valuation and long-term revenue hopes. Confident Investing Starts Here: Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter Another 'Musk Mirage,' however, could create a buying opportunity for investors. Grand Illusion The warning from Saxo's global head of investment strategy Jacob Falkencrone comes ahead of Tesla's robotaxi launch on June 22 in Austin, Texas. 'It is a concept Elon Musk [Tesla chief executive] has relentlessly hyped as the cornerstone of Tesla's next trillion-dollar chapter,' he said. 'Investors now hold their breath. Will this launch deliver transformative change or prove yet another of Musk's grand illusions?' The robotaxi pilot will deploy roughly ten autonomous Model Y vehicles powered by Tesla's Full Self-Driving (FSD) software. Falkencrone said that while this is being marketed as fully autonomous, these robotaxis will initially operate within strict geo-fenced areas under remote human supervision—a controlled test environment 'reflecting cautious regulatory navigation rather than bold innovation.' Mobility Revolution Analysts estimate robotaxis could cut travel costs by up to 70%, revolutionizing urban transport and shifting Tesla from a carmaker to a global mobility giant. 'Robotaxis could redefine Tesla's revenue model, potentially surpassing its car business,' Falkencrone said. However, he said skepticism remains warranted given intense scrutiny from regulators and public safety advocates. Indeed, Democratic legislators in Texas recently publicly urged Tesla to postpone its rollout until new safety laws take effect on September 1. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is also actively investigating Tesla's autonomous driving systems following multiple incidents. 'Historically, Tesla's stock follows a predictable pattern around product launches—rising sharply on anticipation and falling on reality,' Falkencrone said. 'The payoff potential is enormous, but so are the pitfalls. Positive early signs could signal a powerful, investable opportunity. Conversely, setbacks could create short-term buying opportunities amid volatility.' Is TSLA a Good Stock to Buy Now? On TipRanks, TSLA has a Hold consensus rating based on 14 Buy, 12 Hold and 9 Sell ratings. Its highest price target is $500. TSLA stock's consensus price target is $286.14 implying an 11.15% downside. See more TSLA analyst ratings
Winnipeg Free Press
5 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Pulling the levers behind artificial intelligence
Opinion Sometimes, artificial intelligence looks downright stupid. Other times, it just looks dangerous. A rather famous recent AI mistake/mashup involved both Meta AI and Google being asked about the time zone in Cape Breton, N.S., and both telling users that the area was 12 minutes ahead of Atlantic Standard Time and 18 minutes behind Newfoundland time. It isn't. The AI systems had merely sampled all they could find on the topic of Cape Breton and time zones — a satirical piece on the comedy site The Beaverton — and presented it as fact. As the old saying about computers goes, garbage in, garbage out FILE Elon Musk AI is getting better, especially in areas where it can sample a large variety of sources of information, but there are still cases where AI has simply invented sources. For that reason, there's a lot at stake if AI answers are accepted at face value, and if people aren't willing to go further to verify the sources of material the AI devices are using. Because many are doing just that, taking an AI one-and-done approach to 'proof.' So much so that, on social media sites like X (formerly Twitter), users regularly go to that site's Grok AI to try to establish whether things cited as fact on the site are actually true, or whether images posted by other users are accurate. It's certainly better than just accepting everything you see on social media, but it's become such an accepted form of proof that users happily post Grok's answers, and even say that Grok was their one and only source. (In unintended hilarity, Grok's owner, Elon Musk was labelled a 'top misinformation spreader' by Grok itself, a position Grok seems to have mysteriously mellowed on since then, arguing that Musk is both a spreader of misinformation and a target of those who don't like Musk's self-claimed free speech absolutism.) But think about the following situation. Elon Musk posted that 'the far left is murderously violent' after two Democrat politicians and members of their families were shot in Minnesota and the alleged shooter was misidentified at first as a Democrat supporter. When X users, responding to the post, asked Grok, 'Who commits more domestic terrorism? The 'far-left' or the 'far-right?', it responded, 'Data consistently shows far-right groups commit more domestic terrorism in the U.S. than far-left groups, both in frequency and lethality.' Musk then replied, 'Major fail, as this is objectively false. Grok is parroting legacy media. Working on it.' Working on what? Grok cited sources from the U.S. Government Accountability Office to the Department of Homeland Security to the FBI to the University of Maryland, all saying that far-right terrorism easily outstrips far-left terrorism. Only two of 15 sources were even from the media — and they were reporting on other studies. Weekday Mornings A quick glance at the news for the upcoming day. Clearly, Musk was letting his own beliefs dictate what was objectively true or objectively false — which he's welcome to do, because that's how personal opinions tend to work. You believe things to be true if you agree with them, and doubt their veracity if you don't. But 'working on it' suggests a new — and real — concern about depending on AI to determine 'truth.' Because the machine is only as accurate as its programmer wants it to be. And that leaves the possibility of a thumb on the scales. In the next few weeks, a Grok 'tweak' may well change its position on just who leads the way in domestic terrorism in the U.S. If, at the end of the day, AI is only as accurate as the rich person standing behind the machine wants it to be, we're in deep, deep trouble.
Globe and Mail
13 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Why Alphabet Stock Flopped on Friday
Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG)(NASDAQ: GOOGL) stock didn't finish the trading week on a high note. The Google parent company's two listed shares both sank by nearly 4% in price that day, thanks in no small part to a development on the regulatory front. Those declines were notably more pronounced than the S&P 500 index's 0.2% slip on the day. An unappealing request? Alphabet's key business unit Google is on the hook to pay a 4.1 billion euro ($4.7 billion) fine to the European Union (EU), after it ruled in 2018 that the company actively stifled search engine competition with its Android mobile operating system. The tech giant has, not surprisingly, appealed that fine. That appeal is now pending at the highest court in the EU, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In what has to be considered a setback for Google/Alphabet, the CJEU's advocate-general -- the court's top advisory official -- recommended that Google's appeal be dismissed. In her recommendation, Juliane Kokott said that "Google held a dominant position in several markets of the Android-ecosystem and thus benefited from network effects that enabled it to ensure that users used Google Search." Although Kokott's recommendations are non-binding, CJEU justices typically accept and follow the advice of the court's advocate-general. Alphabet has not yet publicly commented on this latest development in its appeal. One break was enough Alphabet did get something of a break with the fine, as it was cut slightly from the original amount of over 4.3 billion euros ($4.9 billion) to the 4.1 billion euros currently hanging over it. The company, sprawling and powerful as it is, can easily afford the fine in the likely case its appeal fails. However, a defeat would illustrate Alphabet's continued vulnerability to anti-competitive lawsuits like the EU's. Should you invest $1,000 in Alphabet right now? Before you buy stock in Alphabet, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Alphabet wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $659,171!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $891,722!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is995% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to172%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025
