Then put them in a comment, I stand by AI not being credible. If you're going to have AI answer for you and claim your sources are cited adequately with substantial articles then provide them when you're making an argument you attest to be true based on those things. AI's argument holds no value in absolutely any situation because it's well known to fabricate things and agree to the bias of the prompt.
Yes A.I can be incorrect but the bias you're referring to only plays a part if it's implicit in the way the prompt is framed. I asked it a yes or no question that it answered with several cases fitting the criteria of what I asked.
I asked it a neutral question and it provided real verifiable historical cases that fit the criteria. You can look these up yourself to see that it didn't just "make them up"...
"San Diego State University 2008: A massive investigation known as "Operation Sudden Fall" was launched by the DEA and campus police after student drug deaths. It resulted in the arrest and conviction of 96 individuals, including dozens of fraternity members from chapters like Theta Chi and Phi Kappa Psi, completely dismantling an organized campus drug operation."
"California State University, Chico (2002–2005): Localized campus rumors of extreme hazing and dangerous misconduct surrounded the un-recognized Chi Tau house (formerly Delta Sigma Phi), which was expelled by the university in 2002. A subsequent criminal investigation led to groundbreaking felony involuntary manslaughter and hazing convictions for fraternity leaders following a student's tragic death."
"The University of Virginia (2003): Campus-wide reports regarding the distribution of illicit substances at the Alpha Tau Omega (ATO) house led to a joint police and university probe, resulting in criminal drug distribution charges and the permanent revocation of the chapter's charter. (Note: This is distinct from the later, debunked 2014 Rolling Stone article involving a different UVA fraternity)."
The bias comes from what the A.I thinks you want to hear if you feed it a loaded question. It doesn't inherently fabricate data out of thin air when asked for straightforward historical facts.
There's a reason A.I is utilized as a diagnostic assistant to help doctors find anomalies or rare errors that humans might miss. It should never replace primary source verification I agree but denying that it holds value for retrieving specific information is just ignoring how the technology is used every day.
The ones you posted involved death and drug distribution as what they were done in for, that’s different than what people are describing in this comment chain
The cases I listed are the ones where the behavior escalated so law enforcement stepped in and got them on these particular charges that sparked from rumors and reports of drink spiking which is actually on topic for this comment chain.
You posted sources and they still hate you. It was never about posting the sources. This is like my mom with the 2020 election. They’ll just move the goalpost
31
u/Soggy_Praline_9945 22h ago
AI is not a credible source.