cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1144611/google-disregard-right-now-if-you-want-to-see-where-ai-overviews-fall-short-similar-comm
For comparison, Bing and Kagi responses
Sources
FYI when I tried Kagi’s Quick Answer out of curiosity, even that gave me a dictionary definition for “disregard”. That being the case, I’d trust it about as much as I trust Google’s AI overviews (which is to mean “not at all”). It just doesn’t show up for me unless I prompt it.
FWIW just searching Kagi (the way someone searched Google here) yields a dictionary definition “provided by WordsAPI”. So it’s actually
- trustworthy
- predictable
- fast
- energy-efficient
You can’t say any of those things about AI.
Normally, yes. That always seems to be one of the results.
I specifically forced it to do a quick answer, and it still gave me a definition. Interestingly, for “disregard”, it also covered a bit about the Google nonsense results after defining the word.
There’s an extension called Disable AI that gets rid of those intrusive Google Search AI “replies”. I strongly recommend people to use it, because… seriously, they are convincing but misleading trash.
The two phonemic transcriptions of “disregard” in the first picture are a prime example of that. I could go on a full rant about it, but to keep it short: compare them with the ones provided by Wiktionary, and play “spot the differences”. (Bonus points if you also play “spot the undeclared assumptions”.)
There’s also https://noai.duckduckgo.com/
Ublock origin -> block element
Browser settings -> search engine -> literally anywhere else
Well of course, how else would a chatbot react? Do people really “use” this, intentionally?
Google claims they do. During their last presentation, they boasted about billions of users of their AI. The sheer gall of these people!
Yes, default users “use” this because it’s helpful, until it’s not.
None of these are working for me, except maybe skip which just displays results without the AI box.
