Did it "correct itself", or did someone at Google read Hacker News and adjusted the prompt?

Sounds like. Would be amazing to see a prompt reveal right now.

Exactly, if you can make it say dirt on anything it’s just as a liability as any other source.

This is why I believe these bots should never be taken too seriously, at least until there is a lot more transparency around their sources of information. Until there are bots which are trained on highly verifiable sources of information that's open sourced.

I don't think it's wise to just "trust a doctor" but can you imagine the influence of such a system. Imagine if the wrong person becomes the CEO of OpenAI and people are using it for medical advice, all of a sudden it starts recommending people take opiate based medication for many, many ailments? We have this with doctors today, who would be exposed to a lot more accountability than a mega-corp with access to massive legal teams / robots.

I see this as actually being a real existential risk to large swathes of the populace.

I hate to say it, but I'd already be taking every single thing returned with a grain of salt, and probably doing that forever.

> at least until there is a lot more transparency around their sources of information.

? doesn't this story include the ai giving the exact source it got the information right as it says the untrue info

There are a lot of things to critisise about hallucinating ai but this one literally said where it got the info

In this case yes, others suggested it was manual intervention from the bard team. Again, who knows ?

I’ve been using you.com because it adds sources after each query.

BEO: Bard Engine Optimization

x