Nalivai

You do have this issue, you can't not have this issue, your LLM, no matter how big the model is and how much tooling you use, does not have criteria for truth. The fact that you made this invisible for you is worse, so much worse.

And some of those citations and quotes will be completely false and randomly generated, but they will sound very believable, so you don't know truth from random fiction until you check every single one of them. At which point you should ask yourself why did you add unneccessary step of burning small portion of the rainforest to ask random word generator for stuff, when you could not do that and look for sources directly, saving that much time and energy

I like how in your quest for moral absolutism you came full circle and found the basis for absolute immortality.

No, that would be bad. But if that retirement stealer continues to steal, and the law doesn't do anything, and the whole system is made so he will never get any consequences, there could be a moment when shooting him in the back is the only moral decision

Nah, you don't get to claim "I didn't mean it it was a joke" when people disagree with your opinion

Yeah, but something something genocide, so voting is bad actually

Conservatives didn't start it now, it's a long game they're playing for decades, it just became obvious now when it's in final stage.
Their goal always was to break checks and balances for them but only for them, and they are able to because they broke enough already. Id Dems will try to do a fraction of what Cons are doing, they will be politically and judicially murdered, partially because of that, and partially because breaking shit is easy and fixing it requires abiding by the letter of law, and that's hard when the law was deliberately destroyed

Said the guy that "doesn't support a murderer" no matter what.

I think they can just move it as a judgement as a matter of law, or whatever else rule applies. It was a pretty clear case afterall

But now all of the internet got incorporated into a magic 8-ball and when it gives you it's random bullshit, you don't know is it quoting anon from 4chan or a scientific paper or a journal or random assortment of words. And you don't have any way to check it in confines of the system

Thd fuck do you mean without telling? I am very explicitly telling you that I don't use them, and I'm very openly telling you that you also shouldn't

I somehow know when it's going to be accurate

Are you familiar with Dunning-Kruger?