That’s where the fun really ends. I’m looking forward to trying out the new GPT 5 and then something like this. 8.8 – 8.11 = -0.31. Seriously?
Yet another example of the fact that generative AI still cannot be trusted! What I find particularly worrying is the persistence of GPT 5 (see chat transcript).
Because the bottom line is that we can only really “rely” on generative AI if we are able to check the result. A very important insight!
I recently received a “scientific” paper – great list of sources – but only at first glance. Because generative AI had a hand in it: 80% of the sources did not exist. Invented book titles and ISBNs, invented links, all pointing either nowhere or somewhere else entirely. I had to grade the paper with a five (= failed).
Of course my students can and should use AI, because of course AI will and should be used in the company later on. But we all have to learn to deal with it properly, responsibly and critically.
However, the evaluation of AI systems or of results generated with the help of AI systems is an important task that will form the cornerstone of our future.
So: trust is good, control is better – at least with generative AI.
#informatikersindcool#it-sachverständigeauch
P.S.: Grok (from X) is now officially allowed to generate deep fakes. Perhaps this madness of fake news, fake images and fake videos will make us think a little more about what is right (or real) and wrong.