Dude.
You could at least look at what you’re replying to before jumping in and going full outrage mode. I didn’t even say anything about what I thought of the validity of that experiment.
Keep putting yourself forward to defend the poor, misjudged car company belonging to a crazy asshole.
They obviously pre-cut the wall, probably for safety reasons, and they were like, let’s make it a silly cartoon impact hole while we’re at it.
Good job.
Only yesterday, I searched for a very simple figure, the number of public service agents in a specific administrative region. This is, obviously, public information. There is a government site where you can get it. However I didn’t know the exact site, so I searched for it on Google.
Of course, AI summary shows up first, and gives me a confident answer, accurately mirroring my exact request. However the number seems way too low to me, so I go check the first actual search result, the aforementioned official site. Google’s shitty assistant took a sentence about a subgroup of agents, and presented it as the total. The real number was clearly given before, and was about 4 times that.
This is just a tidbit of information any human with the source would have identified in a second. How the hell are we supposed to trust AI for complex stuff after that?
The paper was right. I read that and I’m dying right now.