That’s not how it works though. It would be great if these AI models were deterministic but you can get different answers to the same questions at any given time. Given different input and given different goals, the agents wouldn’t likely fail on the same task when given proper instruction.

The main point is that it’s not going to be correct all the time. And neither is a human.

The regulation comes in when you’re dealing with sensitive information, like health diagnoses. There needs to be some logic in place to stop the models from being so confident with wrong answers that could hurt people.

Realistically, neither of us know what’s gonna work until we try it. Theoretically, verification agents would work.

Sure but they’re doing opposite tasks. You’re absolutely right that they could be wrong sometimes. So are people. Over time it gets better, especially with more regulation and smarter models.

The user. You could have the output include the “conversation” between the agents and validate the decisions. Not perfect, but better. People aren’t perfect either.

The checker models aren’t trying to give you a correct answer with confidence. Their purpose is to find an incorrect answer. They’ll both do their task with confidence.

There should be a series of AI agents in place when a GPT is used. The agents intake the query and review the output before sending it off to the user.

Unfortunately this type of logical fallacy is used across the political spectrum. It’s an easy defense that makes people feel justified without having to do any critical thinking.

You don’t like something about my beliefs? You’re a bigot.

When is soon? This song is from 2008.

Humans have failed time and time again. Can’t wait til robots rule the world.

I’m thinking about those terrorist videos that used to come out with dudes yelling “death to America” and beheading people. That stuff could easily be AI generated these days to stir up conflict.

Remember when CIA and MI6 led a coup to overthrow Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh because of oil? And now Iran is threatening to block an oil route? And now Britain is militarizing?

This comment is what a red pill, maga-loving troglodyte who hates progress and equality would say. This comment sounds like somebody who doesn’t know what terf’s are and would definitely use the term out of context while masquerading online as somebody with an ounce of intelligence.

What are you even on about? Policy? Just raise boys better and put an end to red pill terrorism.

You love men. I get it. Go hold a sign that says, “save men!”

You’re just trying to make people think badly about trans people. I don’t believe you’re being genuine.

They did retaliate and it’s more like, make a deal with someone, break the deal, bomb them for doing something that was forbade in the now non-existent deal, call ceasefire and what I’m sure happens next is try make another “deal”.

I’m so perplexed by this. Calling somebody a terf in a situation when it doesn’t make any sense to even use the word.

I feel like this is some sort of anti-trans social engineering.

That’s a reach.

Either way, sounds like the suspects are boys. Go cry about it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/23/france-syringe-attacks-street-music-festival-fete-de-la-musique

I’m confused. What are you trying to say?

I’m sorry, how does this apply to trans people at all?

I’m more worried about the dangers of AI on old people. Scamming is going to a whole new level.

I’m gonna assume it was boys doing the pricking?

EDIT: surprise! It was boys.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/23/france-syringe-attacks-street-music-festival-fete-de-la-musique