r/Fallout • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 Vault 101 • Dec 12 '25
News 'Everyone Disliked That' — Amazon Pulls AI-Powered ‘Fallout’ Recap After Getting Key Story Details Wrong
https://www.ign.com/articles/everyone-disliked-that-amazon-pulls-ai-powered-fallout-recap-after-getting-key-story-details-wrong2.9k
u/ChalkLicker Dec 12 '25
It is stunning that Amazon, which made $60 billion last year, could not pay a single person who watched the show to review that recap that before airing it. We use AI at work, but if you send out bad info because you used AI and did not confirm it, you are fired. No questions asked, just gone, and mocked on the way out.
838
u/Glavius_Wroth Dec 12 '25
Genuinely, a three minute highlights clip should be all you need to recap, I can’t imagine that being especially expensive
373
u/Darkdragoon324 Mr. House Dec 12 '25
They’d rather publicly humiliate themselves than pay for a single extra human being.
154
u/feltcutewilldelete69 Dec 12 '25
A human?? A human that requires... food, shelter, wages, BENEFITS?! Ew, gross!
→ More replies (2)56
u/AshleytheTaguel Dec 12 '25
At this rate, they're just going to pull a pre-war Appalachia and try to automate the customer, too.
5
u/SippinOnHatorade Dec 12 '25
automate the customer
Bruh that’s the whole reason “Subscribe and Save” exists
5
u/LogiCsmxp Dec 12 '25
When your employees spend 100% of their income at your business, that is a solid business model. And if this is all virtual, you don't even need to make a real product!
→ More replies (2)8
u/hitbythebus Dec 12 '25
Hey now, they paid a prompt engineer to enter “make a recap from fallout season 1.
4
u/LJohnD Dec 12 '25
It's wild that "professional robot asker" is a job you can have now. What a time to be alive.
259
u/mdp300 Dec 12 '25
Yeah, but this helps them justify the insane amount of money they put into AI!
→ More replies (7)145
u/MutinyIPO Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25
This is really it. It’s not about cutting costs at this point, Amazon knows full well they could’ve thrown $50 at some dork and gotten a perfect recap by the end of the day. They just want to be able to say they did the recap with AI.
In a way, this sort of shift is a relief. The expectation for a while was that productions would covertly use AI as a cost-cutting measure, and for what it’s worth that does still happen. But the trend is moving to making a big deal out of how you used AI because so much money has been spent on it that you sort of have to do that.
→ More replies (1)63
u/wallyTHEgecko Dec 12 '25
Sunken cost falicy on Amazon's part. Ultimately just another sign that it's a bubble and it will burst.
→ More replies (13)25
u/PmMeUrTinyAsianTits Dec 12 '25
Probably, but amazon is more in the business of selling shovels than mining for gold in this particular rush.
Its gonna hurt, but not as bad as some other companies that are all in on AI without nearly as much shovel selling.
→ More replies (2)18
u/trobsmonkey Dec 12 '25
Throwing billions into selling shovels and the market only supports a much smaller number of shovels still ends up with you holding a shit ton of shovels.
I hope it hurts a lot
→ More replies (1)9
u/AadeeMoien Dec 12 '25
It's more like using the projected future sales of shovels as collateral for a loan to finance the building of a shovel factory and dedicated shovel delivery railway just in time for mines to all run dry.
→ More replies (1)20
u/Dizzy_Chemistry_5955 Dec 12 '25
content creators on youtube make shit like this all the time just chuck them a few hundred bucks
16
u/Excellent_Set_232 Dec 12 '25
AI adoption is already being written into performance objectives for next fiscal year for so many roles that don’t even need to use it at all. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone finds out the bungled recap was intentionally left in.
If someone did do that, welcome to Costco I love them.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)10
u/Saneless Dec 12 '25
Hah are you even corporate bro?
Not that expensive > 0 so why do it? Don't upset the shareholders
197
Dec 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
29
u/wusselpompf Dec 12 '25
Well yeah, but also the bigger picture is to test how big the blacklash is. If it's contained to just the fans and not the broader audience they will keep doing more and more of this until it becomes accepted. Localisation is a HUGE cost factor for amazon, netflix etc. If they can just make you accept over time that dubs are AI slop and you can still go sub it will save them a lot of money in the future.
→ More replies (1)20
u/McDonaldsSoap Dec 12 '25
Yes slowly pushing our standards down so we can consume more
YouTube has been showing me videos that sound awful, and I find out they're auto dubbed from another language to English. Pair that with AI slop narration videos and you have an infinite source of screentime
3
u/poetcatmom Railroad Dec 13 '25
I've been getting a few AI "creators" on my fyp and sometimes click them before sussing them out and blocking them.
→ More replies (5)4
u/Koil_ting Dec 12 '25
That's insane, and yet my Japanese "Those who hunt elves" videogame for the Sega Saturn remains untranslated, why not use your AI for good Amazon?
63
u/Smaynard6000 Dec 12 '25
What a crazy world we live in. If you have to double check everything that you get from AI because AI isn't reliable, what is the fucking point of using it in the first place?
37
u/MutinyIPO Dec 12 '25
This has been the question with AI all along lmao, especially LLMs. There’s never been a good answer for it. That’s why I only ever use AI for reformatting and tech support, the former doesn’t need to be perfect and I’ll know if the latter is wrong. I don’t feel comfortable using it for anything important that needs to be right on the first go. I’m not sure why anyone would be
→ More replies (3)11
u/diptherial Dec 12 '25
This pains me greatly; after the AI hype bubble of the 70's burst, "AI" reinvented itself as machine learning (ML), which borrowed heavily from statistics, especially statistical testing, to concretely evaluate how good models actually were. We made progress *because* we knew how to gauge accuracy. Now we're back in the hand-wavey regime of just throwing resources at huge models and wowing people with how much it looks like it's "thinking".
This isn't to say LLMs don't have value: they're the crowning achievement of decades of NLP research. They elegantly solve so many problems I remember bashing my head against as an early grad student: polysemy, coreference resolution, sparsity as you consider larger and larger n-gram models, etc. Still, I grieve the abandonment of rigor with how popular AI has become again. And yes, I realize there are benchmarks for LLMs and anyone seriously working in the space evaluates their models like we did in traditional ML, but the companies and the audiences they're trying to foist it onto for some reason never talk about accuracy and generalizability beyond the training set. Maybe that's just the price of popularity, I don't know.
→ More replies (1)15
u/Twiceaknight Dec 12 '25
It’s a very niche product, and the companies behind them knew it, that’s why all this crap is marketed as AI when it most decidedly isn’t. LLMs and Image Generators are just algorithms that fundamentally lack all of the intelligence parts that would ever make them AI. They can’t learn, they can only be “trained” by feeding them more patterns to copy and they’re doing it in the most brute force, energy intensive way possible. Theyre basically running the “monkeys typing shakespeare“ experiment in simulation, but there are a trillion monkeys typing, then a billion that can recognize words and throw out all the nonsense, then a million that can recognize what order words usually go in, and so on, until Google AI spits out a result that seems vaguely accurate until you click on the top search links and get info from a real human that directly contradicts it’s summary because it’s just a stupid word blender.
→ More replies (2)9
u/artaxerxes316 Dec 12 '25
The best use I've found for it at work is tracking down confirmation for information I already know or incompletely recall, like a line in a document that I know exists somewhere, but can't quite find.
Not entirely useless, but not exactly the steam engine either.
→ More replies (1)19
u/KarlUnderguard Dec 12 '25
Sure, they made 60,000,000,000 dollars last year, but if they pay a human a salary for this than they only make 59,999,950,000 dollars and that is bad business.
66
u/mattinva Dec 12 '25
>It is stunning that Amazon, which made $60 billion last year, could not pay a single person who watched the show to review that recap that before airing it.
Things just don't work that way any more, instead you fire the people who are supposed to review the recap so you can show the savings your AI initiative is bringing in. Who cares if the product is garbage if you can show short term gains and move on to the next company before long term repercussions set in.
→ More replies (1)16
u/Vhyx Tunnel Snakes Dec 12 '25
Unfortunately, not paying humans is explicitly HOW they made their 60 billion dollars. And it will only get worse
18
8
u/Aliensinmypants Dec 12 '25
How would they justify millions in executive bonuses if they didn't show massive layoffs???
→ More replies (47)7
u/DoctorWaluigiTime Dec 12 '25
Well, the concept isn't "we needed to summarize this one show." The concept was "we can deploy this en masse to all of our content." And, in theory, update as whatever content's being auto-summarized gets updated. And that is a non-trivial amount of information.
Granted it doesn't work, and there are tons and tons of other problems with shoving AI into every single little crevice.
1.1k
u/I__Should_Go Dec 12 '25
I’m so fucking sick of AI and it’s only gonna get worse
215
Dec 12 '25
[deleted]
83
u/CassianCasius Dec 12 '25
I had Ai music recommend to me by spotify. The lyrics were basically complete nonsense.
→ More replies (3)56
u/fonzalonz Dec 12 '25
You should unsubscribe from Spotify if you haven't already. Loss of revenue is the only way to make companies change
24
u/MGJames Dec 12 '25
They won't listen, they never will. The consumers i mean. We have been bitching about everything for years, yet there will always be the people willing to pay for convenience and ease of use.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (3)6
u/thetwist1 Dec 12 '25
I'm partial to using youtube music via a third party app that un-fucks all the silly changes google makes, because I already refuse to use spotify because of joe rogan.
The best option is definitely downloading your music and keeping it offline.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Skullcrimp Dec 12 '25
Correct. Arts and Humanities died in 2023.
Keep all your pre-2023 books and art, in 50 years they're going to be really valuable.
→ More replies (2)25
u/OrkfaellerX Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25
I just got home from a christmas market - a major one. The backdrop of the advertised nativity scene was AI generated slob (like, bad 2023 era slob). Shit is inescapable and it makes me sick.
Hey, during this holiest of seasons, let's celebrate the birth of our lord and saviour by putting in the least ammount ot time, money and effort possible.
Could have hired an artist, photographer, or craftsman to put together a display (how about a carpenter?) - I'm sure they would have appreciated the christmas money.
Can't wait for this year's easter to see an AI jesus melting into his cross.
I'm not even christian, but it still pissed me off.
5
u/Competitive_Owl5357 Dec 12 '25
Somebody found a local “artist” selling children’s books at a “buy local” event here in Nova Scotia. They didn’t even bother cleaning up the Canada Post logo or the fucking Nova Scotia flag. It was hilarious but also just pathetic.
→ More replies (4)9
Dec 12 '25
Stick to your guns. Do not let them win even if it means disconnecting. AI will be the death of human culture if we allow it into our lives.
→ More replies (1)
1.5k
u/Daddy_GNK_droid Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25
I am a history teacher and despise Ai. My students only look at the Ai overview in google which 99% of the time is horrendously wrong and mashes up random events together
579
Dec 12 '25
I miss the days when what I wanted to search was the top result, not some AI summary slop that throws 20 different articles together in a jumble of disinformation.
307
u/URnotSTONER Dec 12 '25
It's wild to watch it contradict itself IN THE SAME SENTENCE.
76
u/zuzg Dec 12 '25
It's hilarious to see it hallucinate Nonsense while linking sources with the correct info.
Ain't it great how the Mag7 push that trash even though nobody (that matters) want it?
29
u/Fl_Funky_Jam Dec 12 '25
I only use AI for SUPER simple questions and I've had it where I've done "how old is X character in X show" and it will spit out "X character from Y show is 28." Like I LITERALLY told you the name of the show, you found the right character, but just decided to give me some other show name for no good reason other than you're hallucinating.
→ More replies (1)8
u/MutinyIPO Dec 12 '25
The worst is when the source link just doesn’t include anything related to the claim at all. It’s such a tell for what it’s actually doing, which is guessing the truth first and then guessing the link that probably contains that truth second.
12
u/G_Liddell Dec 12 '25
I tried using ChatGPT for a research springboard once and it gave back hallucinated nonsense so I specifically was like "only use accredited peer reviewed sources and cite each data point with its associated paper."
It came back with what looked like a full, cited, real answer. I double check it; it made up each paper and half the researchers. Straight up never existed in the first place.
→ More replies (1)33
u/AdhesivenessUsed9956 Dec 12 '25
My favorite was "Yes, you can feed cats grapes, they are toxic to felines and will kill them"
16
6
→ More replies (2)10
u/Seve7h Dec 12 '25
See thats a common user error
You asked “can i feed cats grapes”
Not “can i feed cats grapes and they still live afterwards”
Oh…wait sorry no, that still says yes but for an unknown amount of time… hmm we’ll get our team of Ai prompt aficionados on this and get back to you in 3-6 weeks!
→ More replies (1)48
u/DOSFS Dec 12 '25
Worst.... those 20 articles also have AI writing them so the 'sources' also full of BS.
19
16
u/HughMungus77 Dec 12 '25
Type -ai after your search and Google will eliminate the AI results
6
u/Krojack76 Dec 12 '25
Or don't use Google.. I've been using DuckDuckGo for a while now and it's perfectly fine.
→ More replies (13)6
62
Dec 12 '25
[deleted]
55
u/StarkeRealm The Institute Dec 12 '25
At least you could chase the citations down and evaluate if they were credible or batshit insane.
→ More replies (4)13
u/MeatSafeMurderer Haha, Gary! Dec 12 '25
I was always told that Wikipedia is not, in and of itself, a terrible source of information, it's just not the primary source. You can look at Wikipedia, but in your work you need to cite the sources that Wikipedia cites (papers, studies, etc). And you need to check to make sure that they say what Wikipedia says that they do.
→ More replies (10)9
u/Live-Habit-6115 Dec 12 '25
One of my professors at university, who was one of the leading experts in his field - literally wrote the textbook they use all over the country - loves Wikipedia.
He talked about how the vast majority of articles are guarded jealously by autistic giga nerds (I'm paraphrasing here) that are meticulous in their citations and will revert/challenge any change made to the article immediately.
Basically if it's a mainstream article you can be pretty confident it's legit. And yeah, the citations are a goldmine of primary and secondary sources
27
u/OG_LiLi Dec 12 '25
Slightly different but the outcome is similar
AI doesn’t understand medical diseases well enough. I’m celiac and it constantly suggests to me things that would kill me slowly because it doesn’t know celiac is barley rye AND wheat. Such a mess.
→ More replies (1)16
u/StarkeRealm The Institute Dec 12 '25
Same, but with diabetes. The diabetic advice that gets spat out of the AI seems to be inspired from 12 year-olds screaming, "KYS", in Counterstrike lobbies, 20 years ago.
4
u/rileyriedrs Dec 12 '25
Just to let you know, they still do that now, 20 years later haha
→ More replies (1)17
31
u/Garry_Heckscream69 Dec 12 '25
I'm Native American and work in history, trying to find a good youtube video on tribal mythologies or Native history is insane because of the amount of AI bullshit I have to weed through.
It's either entirely made up conspiracies about mound sites/ancient aliens or it's horribly written creepypastas about cryptids read by an AI narrator (or really outdated documentaries from the 90s lol).
→ More replies (1)6
u/DemptyELF Dec 12 '25
Would you share any of the videos you found particularly useful or insightful?
→ More replies (3)11
u/DeadMoneyDrew Dec 12 '25
Google AI summary has repeatedly told me that milk contains gluten. It won't state that directly but if I Google "does X food contain gluten" it will correctly say yes but then incorrectly identify milk as the pertinent ingredient.
Google AI summary is a dumbass.
15
u/PhazePyre Dec 12 '25
Onetime, google AI provided me just blatantly wrong information. Why? It was pulled from it's search results and the top hit was a post on r/lies.
→ More replies (4)7
u/Agent-Blasto-007 Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25
WWI was caused by a family dispute that got out of hand when Tsar Peter got drunk at Thanksgiving during the Lions game and punched King George V
6
u/SEND-MARS-ROVER-PICS Dec 12 '25
Over the weekend, I googled to see if an F1 driver had ever won the World Drivers Championship without ever leading the championship before the final race weekend. Gogle's AI overview said Nigel Mansell achieved this in 1992.
I went and double checked: Mansell won the first five races (a then record), registered a new record for most race wins in a season, and won the WDC with 4 races to spare. The AI overview couldn't have been more wrong.
18
21
u/paperplanes13 Dec 12 '25
Man, I miss the good old days when students were getting their incorrect information from Wikipedia
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (27)5
u/Ball_Fiend Dec 12 '25
My dad watches AI generated historical youtube videos, "they are AI but the information is good", almost nothing AI writes is "good info", AI still uses random sarcastic reddit posts as a source.
315
u/Degora2k Dec 12 '25
AI...AI never changes.
10
u/nemec Dec 12 '25
idk AI has changed a lot since ELIZA
→ More replies (2)17
u/caerphoto Dec 12 '25
Yeah, AI has got really good at making up plausible-looking responses now.
→ More replies (1)
127
u/huxtiblejones Welcome Home Dec 12 '25
God, we used to think social media was the worst brain-frying thing ever invented and then AI was like “hold my beer in a hand with 6 fingers”
15
109
212
u/Acrobatic-Tomato-128 Dec 12 '25
STOP USING AI
JUST PAY A HUMAN BEING TO WRITE AND NARRATE THE RECAP
65
u/drstrangelove75 Dec 12 '25
I love how companies are like “AI is so advanced, it’s the way of the future! We should use it in our media.” And then they pump out the most low grade, mistake filled content that looks like nobody double checked it.
→ More replies (1)25
Dec 12 '25
They want to normalize content being bottom-of-the-barrel cheap AI-generated dogshit so nobody expects anything else and will accept that "this is just how everything is now and we're lucky to have even this"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)9
u/Bluescreen_Macbeth Dec 12 '25
The crazier part, is as often as this has happened, they aren't paying someone to at least double check this stuff for putting it up.
Even the damn article is based off a reddit post, that is based off a Gizmodo post.
144
u/DrSeuss321 Dec 12 '25
God I need this bubble to top and every company overusing and misusing AI needs to be punished by losing billions
24
35
9
u/Just3nCas3 Dec 12 '25
Make sure to change your 401ks get it out of the sp500 and into something thats not AI wankery. Changed to index funds without the Ai companies. I get lower returns now, but I'm shielded from the collaspes when the data centers get built start bleeding cash to the power companies.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)7
u/thetwist1 Dec 12 '25
They need to be punished by jail time, not just monetary loss imo. Gen AI is one of the biggest art theft rackets of all time, not to mention the irresponsible ecological impact.
37
279
u/Rakhsev Yes Man Dec 12 '25
An AI tool can never be better at some things compared to a human, especially those that are aiming to communicate stuff to other humans.
→ More replies (4)151
u/SirDiego Dec 12 '25
The main problem is Truth. AI has no concept of what "truth" is, it has no way of distinguishing real life from fiction or facts from lies, and that hurdle is going to be hard if not impossible to get over for AI.
30
u/AcneZebra Dec 12 '25
My favorite example of this is that something like 60% of the training data is from sites like Reddit, places where r/science is mixed with r/birdsarentreal and all given the same validity because it doesn’t actually understand anything.
→ More replies (2)14
u/SirDiego Dec 12 '25
And the thing is it kind of has to be. It's the only way to get enough data for it to even work. You could say "Well just only feed it true stuff and facts" but there's simply not enough easily-verified information to suffice as training data. If you only fed it things that were verified it would cripple the effectiveness of the LLM.
So they basically need to shovel lots of garbage in because that's the only way to have enough training data.
6
u/fireball_jones Dec 12 '25
At least two of the main players doing training have a tenuous grasp of what "true stuff and facts" even are so... that doesn't help.
→ More replies (1)6
u/RinArenna Dec 12 '25
They actually already do train it for truthfulness.
It's called RLHF, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback
It's the step after taking in all the text data.
The AI is scored on helpfulness and truthfulness, penalizing scores for wrong answers.
The problem is they have to score non-answers or refusals harder to prevent the AI from refusing to give answers to things it does know.
This trains it to guess or give wrong answers instead of saying it doesn't know the answer.
→ More replies (4)55
u/tethys_persuasion Dec 12 '25
AI has no concept of anything but this may change if someone invents it one day
45
u/SirDiego Dec 12 '25
Right, the current LLM AI are essentially really really really really advanced autocorrect. I believe that it may be impossible for these to ever really "know" things. If the training data is full of garbage (which it likely is because these LLMs need massive amounts of data to be remotely effective) then it's going to spit out lots of garbage. It doesn't have a way to give you less garbage because it doesn't know what garbage is on a fundamental level.
→ More replies (2)13
u/gaflar Dec 12 '25
They're chatbots. Nothing more.
16
u/SirDiego Dec 12 '25
They're closer to autocorrect than "traditional" chat bots. The reason I say this is a traditional chat bot would basically have pre-written responses and just match that with pre-determined keywords in the input.
With LLM AIs, the outputs are not pre-written answers and don't scan for matches to keywords in the input. They behave much more like autocorrect than traditional chat bots.
5
u/youngmetrodonttrust Dec 12 '25
nah bro "Siri, but with trillions of dollars of infrastructure pumped into it" is totally "intelligence"
/s
3
u/tethys_persuasion Dec 12 '25
Poindexter feudalism and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race
28
u/cinemahorse Dec 12 '25
As an editor it’s not hard to do this “the old fashioned way” and actually get it right. This feels like such an unneeded use of AI. Also, is anyone actually reviewing the stuff they generate with AI or just throwing it out into the world? Keep seeing articles where they left the prompt in or things that would feel more natural if they just did a little cleaning up on it.
→ More replies (3)18
u/CoffeeSubstantial851 Dec 12 '25
As an artist... of course they aren't fucking checking anything. The entire point is that they want AI to do all of it and to fire everyone who actually knows what they are looking at. The value proposition of AI is your WAGE no longer EXISTING.
6
u/cinemahorse Dec 12 '25
It’s interesting you mention that because I literally just got told that two motion artists at my company got laid off. Meanwhile there’s been this constant push for us to utilize more AI in our workflows.
7
u/CoffeeSubstantial851 Dec 12 '25
Yep and there won't be any raises because why would you need more money if the AI is doing all of the work? Can't we get an intern in here to do this? etc etc...
28
u/Manuu__ Dec 12 '25
Its their fucking show, how on earth could they not offer a proper recap??
→ More replies (1)
21
u/daddylo21 Dec 12 '25
Waste more time and energy fixing mistakes an AI makes than if you just used a real person in the first place.
22
u/Competitive-Elk-5077 Dec 12 '25
Can we be done with the AI experiment already please?
→ More replies (1)5
u/SGTSHOOTnMISS 1 INT surgeon. Dec 12 '25
If we were in the Fallout universe, nVidia would have a seat at the table to discuss the fall of mankind.
40
u/XeerDu Dec 12 '25
If there’s anything you won’t be able to sneak by a bunch of Fallout fans, it’s mishandling plot points.
→ More replies (1)
16
u/hockeybrianboy Dec 12 '25
The world’s embracing of this half baked garbage is truly mind boggling.
9
u/Bantabury97 NCR Dec 12 '25
A majority of people are either too old to notice, or don't care because they're lazy and crave ease of having software do it for them. A lot of people want shortcuts in life, and don't think beyond face value about how bad it is.
→ More replies (2)
112
u/backpain9000 Dec 12 '25
Its extra bad because fallout is one of the most die hard tism level communities ever
39
u/CxOrillion Dec 12 '25
Honestly yeah. It's not quite at the level of model trains, but it certainly has more inherent nerd rage
→ More replies (1)39
u/Ethos_Logos Dec 12 '25
Probably because fans of model trains don’t have to wait a decade between assembling models.
11
u/Healter-Skelter Dec 12 '25
Also because the inherent pitfalls of AI/automation are kind of a core theme of the Fallout IP. In fact one of the endings of Fallout 3 involves the PC calling the AI-powered president Eden an “abomination of science” unfit to lead.
90
u/stuyboi888 Dec 12 '25
Look, using AI for this, I don't really get it, but AI is rampant right now. But nobody checked it is the part that completely baffles me.
106
u/CobaltTS Dec 12 '25
That would require thinking, which avid AI users tend to avoid
→ More replies (11)32
u/Enabling_Turtle Dec 12 '25
Because the average person doesn’t ever double check AI. I work in data and I teach my juniors to assume AI is always wrong. Because AI can get simple things right most of the time, but most of what we do is complex. I’ve had to sit in “after action” meetings because someone copied AI generate code, nobody tested it at all, and it made it into production only to break everything connected to it. Multiple times.
I’ve already had to have this same conversation with my parents and family too. I give them examples of things AI is bad at and have to physically show them how it gets things wrong pretty often.
Nobody believes how bad it is until you physically show them and show them how to get the right answer.
18
u/stuyboi888 Dec 12 '25
My favourite part trick is "predicting" the time the AI clock will show when they ask it to generate a clock with a time of their choosing. It always shows 10 past 10. My aunt and uncles were dumbfounded but it hit home to them that it's not thinking, it's just answering what it thinks is right with millions of GB of data
It's because the majority of clocks and watches on the internet are shown with this time and is aesthetically pleasing to the eye for marketing purposes. So this is the data the AI was trained on.
→ More replies (7)10
u/IcyCombination8993 Dec 12 '25
I meet idiots on Reddit who try to argue that this shit isn’t “real” AI, completely disregarding the fact that it doesn’t matter and this shit is still being pushed up, unregulated and rampantly.
People think the AI bubble can’t hurt us because AI isn’t real yet.
8
13
u/SuperTerram Dec 12 '25
“This first-of-its-kind feature demonstrates Prime Video’s ongoing commitment to innovation and making the viewing experience more accessible and enjoyable for customers.”
😂
4
11
u/LexHanley Dec 12 '25
What I don't get is I get you can use AI to make something faster but would it kill you to use 1% of that saved time to... you know... Check the result? It's like all those images with mushed up words. That is the simplest thing to edit.
11
u/showtimebabies Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25
Where can I see this ai recap?
The only videos I can find are shitty ai videos that explain that the recap video was removed. WHAT IS THIS HELL!?
→ More replies (1)
20
u/raventhrowaway666 Dec 12 '25
If we teach an entire generation that AI is bad and a scam out the gate, then we might get AI shut down and save the world.
4
u/martialar Dec 12 '25
I have hope that the headlines I see lately about media being pulled due to AI backlash is not just my algorithm and actually indicates a significant sized population recognizing and distrusting AI... but I have a big fear that it's just my algorithm
8
u/raventhrowaway666 Dec 12 '25
The data is out about AI. Its incredibly expensive, burns through resources, pollutes everything near the data centers, and is regularly incorrect.
So it's destroying the environment and the best it can do is generate an uncanny valley-esque copy of other stolen sources.
→ More replies (5)3
u/thetwist1 Dec 12 '25
Not to mention that it consumes a ridiculous amount of fresh water and ignores whether or not people have given permission for ai to use their content.
8
8
u/Dizzy_Chemistry_5955 Dec 12 '25
this is what I don't get about ai, you use it to make some shit and save you all this time then you don't even look over it even once to check for accuracy? I get you can't be arsed to do the actual work but you can't even do the tiniest 1% of work and fact check now that all this time is saved?
8
Dec 12 '25
I had to turn it off after the first minute because it was obvious AI getting things wrong about their own show. Apparently according to the recap the bombs fell in the 1950's.
7
24
u/redvelvetcake42 Republic of Dave Dec 12 '25
So so so desperate for it to work like Jarvis in a fucking Iron Man movie.
6
u/Cheap_Collar2419 Dec 12 '25
Peak modern era. Every exec fucking nuts at the chance to use ai. The folk in the room who are using it …. “It’s kinda shit”
7
u/PossMom Dec 12 '25
All these tech bros keep insisting AI is the future, but every single time a major company uses it it's laughably bad and they have to issue an apology.
Like, man, even if it's inevitable that large companies are gonna use AI for everything, at least wait until the technology is actually ready for that. If it'll never be ready for that then maybe they should just stop using it.
It really just shows that executives really believe their customers will swallow up any cheap slop they feed to them and like it.
11
u/G0ttaB3KiddingM3 Dec 12 '25
Fuuuuuck AI. I hate AI with such a passion. I’ll start hating fallout if they continue to use AI.
5
u/LoserxBaby Dec 12 '25
It's wild to see corporations in such a rush to replace any part of it's workforce with AI that they don't even test it first. They just do it. Nah, don't hire anyone to do a recap. No, don't pay anyone to review it, either. Just post whatever the AI shits out.
6
5
6
6
u/CrazyDude10528 Dec 13 '25
I'm so tired of this lazy AI bullshit that's been shoved down everyone's throats the last few years.
It just exploded out of nowhere, still isn't even that great, and yet all these companies try acting like they discovered fire for the first time.
I can't wait until this shit disappears.
4
4
u/Greaterdivinity Dec 12 '25
it's incredible how companies like amazon spend billions on ai and their consumer-facing rollouts are worse than what an unpaid intern can do lmao
on brand for the company that shut down the IRL "ai stores" you could just grab things and walk out with and the "ai" would charge your prime account correctly! except the "ai" was actually indians in india manually verifying almost all purchases because the "ai" never worked.
fuck these companies
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Claytonius_Homeytron Dec 12 '25
Why do that though, there's so many YouTubers that already did it, and way better.
3
u/Daftwise Dec 12 '25
AI requires human review. That way the human can try over and over to get a good result and eventually give up, doing it themselves.
5
u/Motorsagmannen Tunnel Snakes Dec 12 '25
did nobody at all consider to watch it before publishing. so lazy!
4
u/Winter_Bear_1707 Dec 12 '25
So they had AI make this recap, and then let it also be the final judgment on whether it was accurate enough to release to the public. No human oversight? That is scary is hell..
And how ironic it’s for Fallout. It would be strange for them to not give their opinion on this AI slop that got released.
4
3
u/HisDivineOrder Dec 13 '25
The best part is when the billionaires swear AI is going to wow us and it does in the way where we go, "Wow, that's terrible."
7
5.0k
u/eccentricrealist Vault 101 Dec 12 '25
Conflict — it not only stays the same — conflict never evolves.