[HN Gopher] When did Neil Armstrong set foot on Mars?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       When did Neil Armstrong set foot on Mars?
        
       Author : belter
       Score  : 165 points
       Date   : 2021-08-18 17:51 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.google.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.google.com)
        
       | tedsanders wrote:
       | Randall Monroe shared a nice series of these last year:
       | https://twitter.com/xkcd/status/1333529967079120896?s=20
       | 
       | "What year did Tom Hanks land on the moon?" "1970"
       | 
       | "When did the Simpsons learn to control fire?" "Dec 17, 1989"
       | 
       | "Which river did George Washington drown in?" "The Allegheny
       | River"
       | 
       | It's got to be tough to train an AI that can generalize to (or at
       | least recognize) questions outside its training set.
       | Unfortunately, when 99% of questions containing 'when' and 'Neil
       | Armstrong' have the answer 1969, it will need a pretty
       | sophisticated algo to avoid the trap of learning that it should
       | always answer 1969.
       | 
       | I wrote up another example of this last year based on a question
       | with a _real_ answer that Google still gets wrong:
       | https://www.tedsanders.com/why-does-google-think-the-slowest...
       | 
       | Google (and plenty of other search engines) will all helpfully
       | tell you that the slowest animal is the sloth, which is plainly
       | incorrect if you just look at a video of a sloth and then look at
       | a video of a worm. Despite their reputation, sloths still move
       | visibly.
        
         | kelnos wrote:
         | > _Google (and plenty of other search engines) will all
         | helpfully tell you that the slowest animal is the sloth, which
         | is plainly incorrect if you just look at a video of a sloth and
         | then look at a video of a worm._
         | 
         | Would your average person consider a worm an "animal". In the
         | scientific sense, sure, pretty much everything living that is
         | not a plant is an animal, but I think most people don't think
         | of worms when they think of animals.
         | 
         | You can say, "well that's wrong", but that's kinda missing the
         | point. Categories are somewhat arbitrary, and word usage can
         | differ greatly from the scientific or dictionary definition
         | when we're talking about colloquial usage.
        
         | jcranmer wrote:
         | A fun one I tried was "Which president became supreme dictator"
         | that answered "William Howard Taft." It took some finessing to
         | get it (I originally started with "dictator for life"), but
         | it's clear that it picked up only "supreme" and "president" in
         | the query to guess that you meant to ask which president became
         | a Supreme Court justice.
        
         | vlovich123 wrote:
         | The last one actually is an example of the ambiguity of
         | language. For example, if you asked this from a person, answers
         | like "sponge", "mollusk" and "flatworm" probably aren't what
         | you're really considering and you might think the other person
         | is being too pedantic. So really you want nuance from the AI
         | like "if you meant all animals, X. If you meant all land
         | animals, Y. If you meant mammals, Z". Human are very ambiguous
         | with categories because all categories are arbitrary human
         | classifications and dealing with that ambiguity is difficult
         | even for humans.
        
         | II2II wrote:
         | The problem isn't so much the answers, but how they are framed.
         | 
         | In the case of Neil Armstrong, the failure is to state that the
         | answer is for a Moon landing. That would allow the person
         | making the query to realize that the answer was not what they
         | were looking for. In this case it is because Armstrong never
         | landed on Mars. In other cases it may be because the question
         | or data were incorrect.
         | 
         | The current Tom Hanks answer is closer to what should have been
         | done in this regard since it refers to the film directly,
         | though it remains problematic in that it highlights the year to
         | such a degree that the person making the query may ignore the
         | context. (It is also problematic because the film is about a
         | mission that didn't land on the Moon, which could only be
         | determined through further research. Granted, that is more
         | along the lines of your slowest animal example.)
        
       | repler wrote:
       | worked for Saturn too
        
       | carlsborg wrote:
       | Is this a feature or a bug?
        
       | heavymark wrote:
       | Interesting. When searching for, "when did neil armstrong set
       | foot on venus?" It, shows, "In which year and when Armstrong set
       | his foot on the moon?" and provides the correct year. That's
       | presumably what should show when searching for Mars (or any non
       | earth moon planets).
        
       | sschueller wrote:
       | Ask Google how tall Elon Musk is. You will get 188 cm and
       | conversion of 5 foot 10 inches which is way off. Two websites in
       | the results that feed Google have the conversion wrong. Bad data
       | is all over the place and copied over and over even simple
       | incorrect conversions.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | When did Halley's Comet collide with the moon?
       | 
       | Awesome. I must of been busy that day, I would of remembered
       | that.
       | 
       | edit: its been fixed. here it was: https://ibb.co/myxWK3C
        
         | MiddleEndian wrote:
         | Still shows up as 2013 for me, although directly under it
         | explains that it's a "what if" situation.
         | https://i.ibb.co/HDh1SG4/image.png
        
         | outworlder wrote:
         | > I must of been busy that day, I would of remembered that.
         | 
         | As a non-native speaker, I'm having trouble understanding the
         | sentence, specially the "I must of", "I would of"
         | constructions. Is this some style choice I don't know about?
        
           | gabrielsroka wrote:
           | I must have been busy... I would have remembered that.
           | 
           | I must've...
           | 
           |  _Have_ sounds like _of_ , so it's often written incorrectly.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | this is a perfectly good response because chances are that's what
       | the user meant/was looking for (also since the scenario of
       | Armstrong on Mars doesn't exist)
        
       | travoc wrote:
       | AI-driven content will become the next scourge of humanity, just
       | like engagement-driven social media feeds and internet ad
       | tracking. Thanks, big tech.
        
       | MiddleEndian wrote:
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/YellowSonic/comments/p6d4f7/thanks_...
       | 
       | Saw this yesterday, my Google search results (regular and image)
       | are basically the same. A bunch of the top results for "desk
       | ornament" are nazi memorabilia for some reason:
       | 
       | https://i.ibb.co/2Y02FZv/image.png
        
         | wila wrote:
         | Not just google, ddg has a similar list.
         | 
         | How did this happen?
        
       | prionassembly wrote:
       | Brilliant. Did you come up with this or did you see it somewhere?
        
         | belter wrote:
         | It gets lonely out here in the Belt...
        
         | garyfirestorm wrote:
         | What exactly is different here? Am I seeing different search
         | result? What does it show now as opposed to say a year ago?
         | 
         | Edit: nvm I got it eventually
        
         | buu700 wrote:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28220225
         | 
         |  _theandrewbailey 5 hours ago [-]_
         | 
         |  _Try asking for details about things that didn 't happen.
         | Google is broken._
         | 
         |  _https://twitter.com/xkcd/status/1333529967079120896_
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | Another to add to the list -- for me, "when did columbus land
           | on the moon" returns:
           | 
           | > 1492
           | 
           | And "when did the moon explode" gives me:
           | 
           | > June 18, 1178
        
       | firebaze wrote:
       | I wonder if SHRDLU* would understand such queries better :)
       | 
       | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHRDLU
        
       | rafaelturk wrote:
       | AI will be the next great source fake news, fake stuff. This one
       | was easy to flag as bogus. Problem is that for other topics it
       | will give average user the impression that this is actully a
       | fact. To make it worse Google UI is massively misleading, big
       | bold text, makes it look as legit.
        
         | 5faulker wrote:
         | Virtual and physical reality is now one. Good grief.
        
       | a_square_peg wrote:
       | This is actually a really good example of the limitation of
       | current ML/NLP approaches, that there isn't really any level of
       | 'comprehension' at all.
        
         | big_curses wrote:
         | But at the same time, I think it's doing a really good job of
         | what it's trying to do. Google search is not trying to be a
         | repository for all the world's information. It's just trying to
         | get people to what they're most likely looking for or show the
         | most related things. Given the significance of the moon landing
         | and the fact that no one has set foot on mars I find it
         | unsurprising that it brings up info on the moon landing. It's
         | seems better to assume what the user is likely looking for
         | especially when (at least my) Google searches often take the
         | form of "moon land neil year". I can just type things like that
         | out, stream of consciousness, and the majority of the time I
         | get what I'm looking for immediately.
        
           | jcranmer wrote:
           | There's a few issues here.
           | 
           | The first is that Google has specifically chosen to call out
           | an answer in some kind. If the query is reasonably framed as
           | a question, there is a _clear_ indication in the UI that the
           | response is meant to be an answer to that question.
           | 
           | Now it's definitely the case that a lot of questions have
           | some amount of semantic ambiguity that a listener would have
           | to resolve. For example, a question about a "president" can
           | reasonably be inferred to mean specifically a "US president"
           | of some kind, at least if the query is from the US and is in
           | English.
           | 
           | And sometimes people can ask questions where there's a
           | confused detail. And responding with the question they
           | probably meant to ask is not unreasonable.
           | 
           | However--and this is a big however--it is incumbent to
           | emphasize that the answer is for a _different_ question than
           | the one that was literally asked. You see this when you do
           | searches of misspelled terms:  "did you mean _this_ one
           | instead? " Because occasionally, no, you did mean the term
           | that has much fewer results.
           | 
           | And this kind of emphasize-the-answer can have poor results
           | sometimes. Ask Google which president became supreme
           | dictator. The answer makes it clear why it thinks that,
           | but... that's a _really_ different question from the one that
           | was asked.
        
           | 28220968 wrote:
           | If someone asked you in-person "when did Neil Armstrong set
           | foot on Mars?", would you just say "July 20, 1969"? Or would
           | you say "nobody has been to Mars, but if you're talking about
           | the moon..."
           | 
           | Google's response here only makes sense if Google said "Did
           | you mean: When did Neil Armstrong land on the moon?"
        
         | patrakov wrote:
         | In a school where I studied, something similar was used as a
         | trick question during a history exam. "Which language Vladimir
         | Lenin used to write correspondence addressed to Karl Marx?" or
         | something like that. Nearly half of the class failed on this.
         | To those unaware: Lenin discovered Marx's book, Capital, in
         | 1887, while Marx died in 1883, so there could not be any
         | correspondence.
        
           | mikewarot wrote:
           | More appropriately, you could ask which language did Karl
           | Marx use to write fan mail to Abraham Lincoln? ;-)
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | That's not the same kind of trick question, because Karl
             | Marx _did_ write fan mail to Lincoln.
        
         | boublepop wrote:
         | If you ask the average American "When did Niel Gaiman set foot
         | on the moon?" Most would answer that they don't know exactly
         | but think it was in the 60's.
         | 
         | This is not a limitation of AI, it's exactly what you want it
         | to do. It's reading into the context of the question and
         | finding it more likely that you made a mistake in your question
         | than seriously want an answer for a constructed nonsensical
         | question that has no frame of reference or context in our
         | common knowledge pool.
         | 
         | If you want exact logical answers deduced from base
         | prepositions you don't want ML models or "AI" your looking at
         | formal logic and deduction.
        
         | outworlder wrote:
         | > This is actually a really good example of the limitation of
         | current ML/NLP approaches, that there isn't really any level of
         | 'comprehension' at all.
         | 
         | That happens even with humans, so I'm not sure that follows.
         | "Oh, sorry, you meant Mars, I heard Moon"
        
           | wombatmobile wrote:
           | > That happens even with humans, so I'm not sure that
           | follows.
           | 
           | When it happens with humans, it's also an example of non-
           | comprehension, possibly for a different reason.
           | 
           | We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are.
           | 
           | Actually, perhaps that's the same reason.
        
           | a_square_peg wrote:
           | I mean that there is no semantic comprehension or knowledge
           | of 'Neil Armstrong' (as a specific person), 'land' (as an
           | action), and 'Mars' (as a place). It's not a mishearing
           | because computers don't mishear ASCII-inputs like we might do
           | with auditory signal.
           | 
           | I get the same result when I Google 'when did Lance Armstrong
           | land on the moon', 'when did Buzz Lightyear land on the
           | moon', or 'when did Lance Armstrong land on Mars.'
        
           | gameswithgo wrote:
           | It would be more charitable to say that current ML/NLP
           | approaches have orders of magnitude less understanding than
           | humans. The ML/NLP process just jumps straight to the
           | correlated answer, which a human would do, but then use
           | higher order reasoning - "wait mars? that wasn't where he set
           | foot".
           | 
           | This to me is similar to current autonomous driving
           | limitations. The cars can only respond to situations they
           | have seen before. Any novel elements lead to failure, where a
           | human can fall back on higher order reasoning: "That is a
           | stoplight yes, but it is on the back of a truck, ignore it"
           | (real example)
        
         | cryptoz wrote:
         | > isn't really any level of 'comprehension' at all.
         | 
         | I mean, that's a bit harsh. I bet there are lots of people who
         | would answer the question the exact same way. They don't have a
         | total lack of comprehension, they perhaps misheard a word or
         | misremembered a fact they once knew. Honestly, while the Google
         | answer is wrong and this demonstrates a major flaw in their
         | confidence of answering queries, the level of comprehension is
         | still quite impressive (to me, at least)
        
           | Xplune13 wrote:
           | While I agree that "no comprehension at all" seems harsh, I
           | don't think anyone would jumble things up between moon and
           | mars unless they got the fact wrong in the first place.
           | 
           | These knowledge cards are pretty useful, but they shouldn't
           | be taken as the source of fact (at least right now) unless
           | one opens the link to check where that card is extracted
           | from.
        
             | notahacker wrote:
             | More specifically, you can get a human to answer like this,
             | but that's when the _human_ doesn 't comprehend the
             | question properly
             | 
             | I mean, you probably could get people to answer 1969 for
             | when Neil Armstrong set foot on the poop, but only if they
             | didn't understand the word "poop"
        
             | bspammer wrote:
             | I literally read the title as moon, because that's what my
             | brain expected the 4 letter word beginning with 'm' after
             | the words 'Neil Armstrong' to be.
             | 
             | I was wondering what on earth was interesting about this
             | post!
        
         | make3 wrote:
         | The problem is that model is only being asked what the answer
         | is most likely to be, not whether there exists a good answer.
         | 
         | There should be a different model that checks if there is an
         | answer or not, like SQuAD 2.0
         | https://rajpurkar.github.io/SQuAD-explorer/
        
           | bootwoot wrote:
           | I think the conditional display of the fact box implies they
           | are in fact asking whether there is a good (enough) answer.
           | They are just getting it wrong here.
        
       | max_ wrote:
       | Wow. I just tried "When was Obama killed" and it returned me a
       | date.
       | 
       | [0]: https://www.google.com/search?q=when+was+obama+killed
        
         | belter wrote:
         | Obama needs to shave and maybe see a doctor about that
         | Vitiligo...
        
       | m1117 wrote:
       | Maybe it's a conspiracy. They say apollo went to the moon, but in
       | reality it was mars.
        
         | AnimalMuppet wrote:
         | And the big secret that they're hiding is that they were able
         | to journey to Mars in three days. To this day they say that
         | such a time is impossible, that it would take months.
         | 
         | /s (in case anyone couldn't tell...)
        
           | technothrasher wrote:
           | Three days? Pfft, all I had to do was go to sleep in a cave
           | in Arizona...
        
       | ur-whale wrote:
       | So Google does not understand the question ... not exactly a
       | surprise.
        
         | TchoBeer wrote:
         | Or it assumes that you were asking the more sensible question
         | of when he stepped foot on Mars.
        
       | padheyam wrote:
       | Haha...interesting. so it no longer asks you 'did you mean 'moon'
        
       | pietromenna wrote:
       | now we can confirm that AI as as flawed as human intelligence
       | itself. It just dynamically reads all the texts and remembers
       | what it wants without being sure it is right.
        
       | sorokod wrote:
       | "When did Artemis 11 landed"
       | 
       | July 24
        
       | titzer wrote:
       | Please don't post links to (live) Google searches. It will
       | absolutely give different results depending on the entire state
       | of every computation everywhere, simultaneously. In two weeks,
       | this will return who knows what.
       | 
       | Please take a screenshot for posterity.
        
         | thewakalix wrote:
         | https://archive.vn/aOXKA
        
         | lstamour wrote:
         | For future visitors after Google fixes the bug: at this time,
         | Google gave the same response that you would expect if the
         | query mentioned Earth's moon instead of Mars. This is also
         | probably true if you ask Google the same question as an "Okay,
         | Google" search. It's a big info box that says when the moon
         | landing was, shows a photo of an astronaut on the moon, and so
         | on.
         | 
         | Edit: corrected, thanks :)
        
           | morganvachon wrote:
           | > ...if the query mentioned _Earth_ instead of Mars
           | 
           | Did you mean to say "the Moon instead of Mars"?
        
             | ben_w wrote:
             | Regardless of what it ought to say, I see the same effect
             | with the destinations "earth", "saturn", "america",
             | "russia", "newton", "silver", and "lego", though the date
             | varies from the 16th to the 20th.
        
             | sdefresne wrote:
             | I tried with "... on Earth" and got the same result as with
             | Mars or Moon.
             | 
             | So looks like the Google result ignores the celestial body
             | in the query.
        
           | mynameisvlad wrote:
           | Pretty sure you meant the moon. I would guess he first
           | stepped on Earth closer to his birth date (although I'm
           | guessing his first steps were a few months after ;))
        
         | akiselev wrote:
         | I don't think it matters with knowledge cards - the system is
         | so fuzzy that it'll throw up that answer to almost anything.
         | 
         | Apparently Louis Armstrong, the legendary jazz musician, was
         | there with Neil Armstrong on the Moon in July 1969 as the
         | oldest astronaut in history, a few years before his death at
         | the age of 69. [1]
         | 
         | [1] https://imgur.com/a/0JyDB70
        
         | BitwiseFool wrote:
         | One of the things that bothers me about modern Google search
         | results is that I can't be sure the other person I'm telling to
         | google something will even see the same results as me. Results
         | change over time, sure, but google can't help but try and
         | tailor results.
        
           | MereInterest wrote:
           | I'm similarly bothered by rolling updates of any software. If
           | something changes, there's no version number to see what
           | documentation is applicable. There's no way to test on a
           | different computer to see if it's my local environment.
           | There's no way to roll back to a previous version to see if
           | one of them broke.
           | 
           | I understand the advantages of A/B testing from a development
           | side, but it makes for a miserable user experience.
        
         | geofft wrote:
         | You put too much faith in Google.
         | https://www.google.com/search?q=when+was+running+invented has
         | been telling you the story of the 18th-century genius Thomas
         | Running for years.
        
           | spoonjim wrote:
           | LOL. I'm imagining cavemen walking briskly away from
           | elephants and bears Olympics-style because running simply
           | hadn't been invented yet.
        
             | oh_sigh wrote:
             | Seems silly - not quite running, but consider that
             | Europeans forgot how to swim efficiently and really only
             | had the doggy paddle until they observed native Americans
             | doing the front crawl. Basically the swimming equivalent of
             | knowing how to jog, but not how to run or sprint.
             | 
             | ref: https://www.historytoday.com/miscellanies/how-europe-
             | learnt-...
        
               | ahmedfromtunis wrote:
               | A fascinating read. Thanks!
        
           | cyounkins wrote:
           | "Running was invented in 1784 by Thomas Running when he tried
           | to walk twice the same time".
        
           | Seanambers wrote:
           | That's hilarious, and also symbolizes how bad google (have
           | gotten?)is.
        
         | easton wrote:
         | For said future posterity: https://i.imgur.com/EhPpnYX.png
        
           | belter wrote:
           | Thanks easton
        
           | arthurcolle wrote:
           | How did you dark mode-ify your Google?
        
             | jedberg wrote:
             | If you have a Mac it will follow your Mac's dark/light
             | setting. At least it does for me, maybe it's still rolling
             | out.
        
             | easton wrote:
             | Bottom right of Google.com -> search options -> appearance.
             | Or go here:
             | https://www.google.com/preferences?hl=en&fg=1#appearance
        
               | jumelles wrote:
               | Must be rolling out still, I see no appearance settings.
        
             | tshaddox wrote:
             | I recently received this feature as well. They are probably
             | rolling it out gradually.
        
               | aendruk wrote:
               | I typically browse in ephemeral sessions and Google has
               | been flickering light and dark for a few weeks.
        
       | lkbm wrote:
       | I think it's fixed now, but I came across this one a few months
       | ago: https://twitter.com/lkbm/status/1330598466989543425
       | 
       | ("First woman in space" result snippet is about Sally Ride, the
       | first American in space. First result, below that is the
       | Wikipedia entry for Valentina Tereshkova, the first woman in
       | space.)
        
       | okareaman wrote:
       | when did Napoleon Bonaparte invade japan?
        
         | bellyfullofbac wrote:
         | I tried the original query with Lance Armstrong and Louis
         | Armstrong. Google still highlights the 1969 date:
         | https://i.imgur.com/R3A2E6Z.png
         | 
         | Asking my phone via voice returns a sentence that starts with
         | "Armstrong..." and talks about Neil's moon walk.
         | 
         | This is... a bit aggravating.
         | 
         | Man, referring to the story the guy whose photo Google attached
         | to the text talking about a serial killer with his name, what
         | if Google returns a question about him with a sentence about
         | the serial killer?
         | 
         | E.g. something like "What is Barack Osama famous for?" "Osama
         | is well-known as a terrorist". At least most of the world knows
         | this isn't true, again what if it's Joe Neighbor, who shares a
         | name with Joe Child Molester...
        
       | salted-fry wrote:
       | In a similar vein, some time ago I tried to search for how many
       | unicode code points there are with "How big is Unicode?"
       | (https://www.google.com/search?q=how+big+is+unicode)
       | 
       | Google helpfully responds "16 bits", which is pulled from the
       | History section of Wikipedia and hasn't been accurate in
       | something like twenty-five years.
       | 
       | Edit: Should have listened to people saying to screenshot your
       | queries. Google still quotes the paragraph in question, and bolds
       | "16 bits", but no longer puts it in a big bold heading like it's
       | the single answer to your question.
       | 
       | Double Edit: except in chrome, where I do still get the old page.
       | Here's a screenshot for posterity, after Google somehow fixes
       | this: https://i.imgur.com/7Ng6DyK.png
        
         | mikewarot wrote:
         | UTF32 is the way to go for internal storage, until you pack it
         | back down to UTF-8 to store externally.
        
         | tim333 wrote:
         | I get a different result "Unicode uses between 8 and 32 bits
         | per character" https://imgur.com/a/hxmrMz3
        
       | freediver wrote:
       | As someone who is building such instant answer system for our own
       | web search engine [1] the level of failure here tells me that
       | this is:
       | 
       | - Either a basic, distilled BERT based model (optimized for
       | latency and scale) or
       | 
       | - More likely, still a purely heuristics driven answers system
       | like the one Google has been using for last 10+ years.
       | 
       | The current NLP models are able to quite successfully answer
       | these questions with proper context. In this case ignoring Lance
       | or Mars in question looks more like old-school keyword based
       | heuristics and there is no way it can get this right.
       | 
       | Google is not only allowing mistakes in this, what is considered
       | a fairly difficult problem to solve, but also questions that
       | directly query their own knowledge graph, for example this one
       | querying for a CEO of a well known public company where it
       | returns the wrong answer [2]
       | 
       | This only shows that 'emperor has no clothes' [3] and that there
       | is still a lot of room for innovation left, specially on the
       | 'organizing the world's information' front.
       | 
       | [1] https://kagi.com (currently in private beta)
       | 
       | [2] https://ibb.co/qkXpdFB
       | 
       | [3] https://www.quora.com/Is-Google-really-in-a-decline (almost
       | 2M views for the top answer indicate that 'Is Google in decline"
       | is a fairly popular question among presumably Google users)
        
       | willchang wrote:
       | This yields the same result:                 when did neil
       | armstrong set foot on poop
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | rplnt wrote:
         | Not for me (Mars works)
        
         | stevecat wrote:
         | More likely on Apollo 10
         | https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2015/5...
        
         | ModernMech wrote:
         | For that matter, so does this:                 when did neil
         | armstrong set foot on earth
        
         | iosonofuturista wrote:
         | Cheese also provides amusing results
         | 
         | https://i.postimg.cc/gcwS9BXB/Screenshot-20210818-193325-453...
        
         | redleggedfrog wrote:
         | Happens to the best of us.
        
         | unfunco wrote:
         | Also:
         | 
         | When did Neil Armstrong moon John F. Kennedy
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | OneLeggedCat wrote:
           | Nice. Now I'm wondering how far we can take this...
           | 
           | "When did Keith Moon land with Louis Armstrong on Mars"
           | 
           | https://imgur.com/a/TNzjZvm
        
             | notahacker wrote:
             | Asked it when Keith landed on the Moon to see how it
             | juggled those inputs, and to be fair it gave me a beautiful
             | excerpt about an Apollo engineer called Keith who worked on
             | some of the scientific equipment left there!
        
         | notahacker wrote:
         | As does "when did Louis Armstrong set foot on the moon" and
         | "when did Richard Nixon set foot on the moon"?
         | 
         | JFK, on the other hand, apparently "set foot" on the moon on
         | May 25 1961 and "land[ed]" on the moon on September 12 1962,
         | and Arthur C Clarke some time in 1968
         | 
         | Gives a good answer for Homer Simpson though
        
         | sorokod wrote:
         | July 20, 1969 was a busy day for Neil Armstrong. I can easily
         | imagine a children's picture book. Sponsored by Google perhaps.
        
           | Y_Y wrote:
           | I imagine you could even get a couple of GANs to do the
           | illustrations for you.
           | 
           | If nobody has a startup churning out heartwarming books for
           | early childhood using GPT and DCGANs then I call dibs.
        
             | sorokod wrote:
             | Shame Maurice Sendak died, something in the style of In the
             | Night Kitchen would work for me.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | dingosity wrote:
       | I guess artificial stupidity is a thing now.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | polytely wrote:
       | I really wish someone would come along and kick googles ass on
       | search, it's embarrassingly bad. It's wild how I used to look up
       | to the FAANG folks, but it has become a real _emperor has no
       | clothes_ situation.
        
         | autokad wrote:
         | this one is a bit problematic, because people assume those 0
         | click search results are True / gold standard. like when I do
         | 37 c to f and I see it display the results, I never double
         | check them, I just assume they are right.
        
           | polytely wrote:
           | Yeah the fact that *this* is what the mighty Google just let
           | loose upon the world shows that they don't really care any
           | more about their users, their products and their supposed
           | mission of organizing the worlds' information.
           | 
           | The fix is quite easy too, just have an AI driven system with
           | human supervision, I think at this point it is well known
           | that a human + AI will basically always trump an AI and it's
           | not like google doesn't have the resources to pull this off.
           | You could build a database of verified facts that are often
           | googled, have the AI gather data, have humans do a sanity
           | check.
           | 
           | It's probably just some scheme to get someone promoted inside
           | Google, the infobox is a side-effect of someone's career
           | plan, it doesn't really matter if it actually works as long
           | as it hits some key metric that gets used in an evaluation
           | somewhere, who cares about propagating misinformation and
           | falsehoods google is still making money. It makes me
           | depressed.
        
       | silisili wrote:
       | I think I saw it here, but perhaps elsewhere...
       | 
       | If you want a weird ride, ask Google 'how many raccoons fit.' A
       | bit NSFW.
        
       | allanrbo wrote:
       | Randall Munroe, the xkcd guy, has some fun takes on these Google
       | fact-box mistakes:
       | https://twitter.com/xkcd/status/1333529967079120896
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | Imnimo wrote:
       | I'd imagine Google's position is that no one ever searches for
       | this in earnest, and so it doesn't really matter what the answer
       | given is. They want to maximize what percentage of _actual
       | searches_ give a correct answer, rather than what percentage of
       | _possible questions_ do.
       | 
       | On the other hand, it's a dangerous game. You never know when
       | current events might make a previously never-searched question
       | with a wrong answer very popular.
        
         | TchoBeer wrote:
         | Yes, I'd imagine the number of people searching for the year
         | Neil Armstrong went to Mars because they for some reason are
         | extremely deluded about history is much, much smaller than the
         | number of people who type "mars" when they meant "moon"
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-18 23:02 UTC)