Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > aus.computers > #73880 > unrolled thread

Testing suggests Google’s AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Back to article view | Back to aus.computers

Contents

  Testing suggests Google’s AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> - 2026-04-08 09:38 +1000
    Re: Testing suggests Google’s AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-08 10:28 +1000
      Re: Testing suggests Google’s AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour Ozix <ozix@xizo.am> - 2026-04-08 13:04 +0800
        Re: Testing suggests Google’s AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-08 16:04 +1000
    Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-14 09:05 +1000
      Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-14 09:51 +1000
      Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour Axel <none@not.here> - 2026-04-14 12:31 +1000
        Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-15 08:30 +1000
          Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-15 09:07 +1000
      Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-14 14:41 +1000
        Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-15 08:43 +1000
          Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-15 09:10 +1000
            Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-15 09:18 +1000
              Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-15 09:37 +1000
                Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-17 08:17 +1000
                  Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-17 09:27 +1000
                    Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-18 08:46 +1000
                      Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-18 11:49 +1000
                        Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-22 08:37 +1000
                          Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-22 14:47 +1000
                            Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-23 07:37 +1000
                              Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-23 08:21 +1000
                                Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2026-04-23 13:50 +1000
                                  Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-23 17:04 +1000
                                    Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-24 09:16 +1000
                                      Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-24 10:41 +1000
                                        Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-25 08:20 +1000
                                          Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 09:40 +1000
                                            Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-26 07:54 +1000
                                              Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-26 08:47 +1000
                                                Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-04-27 09:14 +1000
                                                  Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-04-27 14:07 +1000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#73880 — Testing suggests Google’s AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#73882

keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> wrote

> https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/

Hardly surprising that some new tech has some glitches

Only a fool like you refuses to use it when it gets 90% right

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73885

Rod Speed wrote:
> keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> wrote
> 
>> https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/ 
>>
> 
> Hardly surprising that some new tech has some glitches
> 
> Only a fool like you refuses to use it when it gets 90% right

90% is nowhere near good enough. Great if it tells you to buy some part 
for a VY Commodore, which is actually for a VZ, wasting your dollars and 
time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73886

Ozix <ozix@xizo.am> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> wrote

>>> https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/

>>  Hardly surprising that some new tech has some glitches
>>  Only a fool like you refuses to use it when it gets 90% right

> 90% is nowhere near good enough.

You are free to use more than one and compare their results

> Great if it tells you to buy some part for a VY Commodore, which is  
> actually for a VZ, wasting your dollars and time.

You are free to check if its right when you use
the convenience of asking it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73905 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> wrote:
> https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/

This reveals how little reasoning and cross-checking really goes on
when these AIs answer questions:

Scientists invented an obviously fake illness, and AI spread it
like truth within weeks
https://www.osnews.com/story/144787/scientists-invented-an-obviously-fake-illness-and-ai-spread-it-like-truth-within-weeks/

This seems to be the fact some people here can't get their head
around:

"This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no 
 understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually 
 make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with 
 the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between 
 the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already 
 hit. "AI" output understands the world about as much as the 
 pachinko ball does, and as such, can't pick up on even the most 
 obvious of cues that something is a fake or a forgery."

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73906 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> wrote:

>> https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/

> This reveals how little reasoning and cross-checking really goes on
> when these AIs answer questions:

Bullshit it does

> Scientists invented an obviously fake illness, and AI spread it
> like truth within weeks
> https://www.osnews.com/story/144787/scientists-invented-an-obviously-fake-illness-and-ai-spread-it-like-truth-within-weeks/

More bullshit on AI spreading it

> This seems to be the fact some people here can't get their head
> around:

> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>  make sense of anything.

More mindless bullshit, you don't need any of that
to check how authoritative a particular source is

> They are glorified pachinko machines with
>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>  hit.

Complete and utter mindless bullshit

> "AI" output understands the world about as much as the
>  pachinko ball does, and as such, can't pick up on even the most
>  obvious of cues that something is a fake or a forgery."

Complete and utter mindless bullshit

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73908 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> keithr0 <me@bugger.off.com.au> wrote:
>> https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/04/analysis-finds-google-ai-overviews-is-wrong-10-percent-of-the-time/
> This reveals how little reasoning and cross-checking really goes on
> when these AIs answer questions:
>
> Scientists invented an obviously fake illness, and AI spread it
> like truth within weeks
> https://www.osnews.com/story/144787/scientists-invented-an-obviously-fake-illness-and-ai-spread-it-like-truth-within-weeks/
>
> This seems to be the fact some people here can't get their head
> around:
>
> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>   understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>   make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>   the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>   the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>   hit. "AI" output understands the world about as much as the
>   pachinko ball does, and as such, can't pick up on even the most
>   obvious of cues that something is a fake or a forgery."
>

interesting. but if they can't 'think' how do/can they write essays?

-- 
Linux Mint 22.3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73913 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Axel <none@not.here> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> This seems to be the fact some people here can't get their head
>> around:
>>
>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>   understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>   make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>   the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>   the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>   hit. "AI" output understands the world about as much as the
>>   pachinko ball does, and as such, can't pick up on even the most
>>   obvious of cues that something is a fake or a forgery."
> 
> interesting. but if they can't 'think' how do/can they write essays?

Same as everything: Model the language structure of essays found on
the web then reformat text believed relevent to the topic according
to that model. This is the basis of the Large Language Models. Real
AI is what's now being called "Artificial General Intelligence",
the LLMs are a shortcut method that doesn't bother with
understanding things but figures out how words go together in
relevent ways, without regard to whether the words they're
rearrangeing are completely irrelevent or in this case obviously
nonsensical. Hence the convincing BS it shovels onto you when it
hasn't found the equivalent of good search results and reformats
words from irrelevent texts instead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_General_Intelligence

AI generated images of people missing fingers are another example -
it doesn't know what a finger is, and the model is built on example
images where fingers are sometimes visible and sometimes not, so it
follows a model of similar visual characteristics and produces
something obviously wrong.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73916 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Axel <none@not.here> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev wrote

>>> This seems to be the fact some people here can't get their head
>>> around:

>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>   understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>>   make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>   the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>   the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>   hit. "AI" output understands the world about as much as the
>>>   pachinko ball does, and as such, can't pick up on even the most
>>>   obvious of cues that something is a fake or a forgery."

>> interesting. but if they can't 'think' how do/can they write essays?

> Same as everything: Model the language structure of essays found on
> the web then reformat text believed relevent to the topic according
> to that model. This is the basis of the Large Language Models. Real
> AI is what's now being called "Artificial General Intelligence",
> the LLMs are a shortcut method that doesn't bother with
> understanding things but figures out how words go together in
> relevent ways, without regard to whether the words they're
> rearrangeing are completely irrelevent or in this case obviously
> nonsensical.

More of your mindless bullshit

> Hence the convincing BS it shovels onto you when it
> hasn't found the equivalent of good search resultsand reformats   words  
> from irrelevent texts instead.

More of your mindless bullshit

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_General_Intelligence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73910 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>  hit.

Just did this one,
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91

That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
didnt get as useful a result from google

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73914 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>  hit.
> 
> Just did this one,
> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91
> 
> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
> didnt get as useful a result from google

I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
in your AI answer ans disputes that it's the same as a schooner
in the NT:

https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names

"The Northern Territory's beer sizes
 
 The Northern Territory's more tropical weather makes larger sizes 
 slightly less popular to the average drinker, as they go warm quick 
 if not enjoyed fast enough.
 
 Ask for a handle of beer if you're after a 285mL, smaller beer to 
 enjoy (although middy or pot are generally accepted too). These may 
 come with a handle, so you don't warm the beer too quickly holding 
 it in your hand.
 
 Schooners are the same as most other regions of Australia, coming 
 in at 425mL. Pints and jugs are also the same at 570mL and 1,140mL."

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73917 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>  hit.

>> Just did this one,
>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91

>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>> didnt get as useful a result from google

> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
> in your AI answer

The grok response accurately points out that
the volume varys with the location, fuckwit

> ans disputes that it's the same as a schooner   in the NT:

> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names

> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes

Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73919 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> 
>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>>  hit.
> 
>>> Just did this one,
>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91
> 
>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>> didnt get as useful a result from google
> 
>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>> in your AI answer
> 
> The grok response accurately points out that
> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit

But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
425-450mL and always matches a schooner.

>> ans disputes that it's the same as a schooner   in the NT:
> 
>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names
> 
>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes
> 
> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit

Your question to the AI never mentioned any location. It was
speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way off.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73921 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>>>  hit.

>>>> Just did this one,
>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91

>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google

>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>> in your AI answer

>> The grok response accurately points out that
>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit

> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
> 425-450mL

Bullshit does

> and always matches a schooner.

It doesn't say that either

>>> ans disputes that it's the same as a schooner   in the NT:

>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names

>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes

>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit

> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.

But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
been used recently, something google wouldnt have done

> It was   speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way  
> off.

But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used

And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the NT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73928 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> 
>>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't actually
>>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>>>>  hit.
> 
>>>>> Just did this one,
>>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91
> 
>>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google
> 
>>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>>> in your AI answer
> 
>>> The grok response accurately points out that
>>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit
> 
>> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
>> 425-450mL
> 
> Bullshit does
> 
>> and always matches a schooner.
> 
> It doesn't say that either

It says it over and over from the start:

"18 handles of beer" refers to 18 schooners (or pints) of beer in
 Australian slang"
"A "handle" is a common term for a schooner"
"So, "18 handles" means the person drank 18 schooners"

>>>> ans disputes that it's the same as a schooner   in the NT:
> 
>>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names
> 
>>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes
> 
>>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit
> 
>> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.
> 
> But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
> phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
> been used recently, something google wouldnt have done

Which is no excuse for providing an answer that doesn't apply in
the NT when it doesn't even know for sure that the ABC article was
what prompted your question. Plus it clearly said it applied
Australia-wide.

>> It was   speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way  
>> off.
> 
> But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used
> 
> And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the NT

Well my source is an Australian brewery, your Artificial Idiot's
source is... nothing. No cites except the very ABC article that
prompted your question. So there's no way to judge the accuracy
of its statement since you can only guess where it might have got
the info from.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73930 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

>>>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't    
>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>>>>>  hit.

>>>>>> Just did this one,
>>>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91

>>>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google

You just ignored that

>>>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>>>> in your AI answer

>>>> The grok response accurately points out that
>>>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit

>>> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
>>> 425-450mL

>> Bullshit it does

>>> and always matches a schooner.

>> It doesn't say that either

> It says it over and over from the start:

Bullshit on your ALWAYS lie

> "18 handles of beer" refers to 18 schooners (or pints) of beer in
>  Australian slang"
> "A "handle" is a common term for a schooner"
> "So, "18 handles" means the person drank 18 schooners"

Pity about

	A “handle” is a common term for a schooner —
	a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
	425–450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

>>>>> and disputes that it's the same as a schooner   in the NT:

>>>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names

>>>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes

>>>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit

>>> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.

>> But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
>> phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
>> been used recently, something google wouldnt have done

> Which is no excuse for providing an answer that doesn't apply in
> the NT when it doesn't even know for sure that the ABC article was
> what prompted your question.

But it did work that out. So much for your
stupid glorified pachinko machine stupidty

> Plus it clearly said it applied   Australia-wide.

Bullshit it does with

	A “handle” is a common term for a schooner —
	a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
	425–450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

>>> It was speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way
>>> off.

>> But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used

>> And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the NT

> Well my source is an Australian brewery, your Artificial Idiot's
> source is... nothing.

Pity about the SOURCES it lists, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist

> No cites except the very ABC article that
> prompted your question. So there's no way to judge the accuracy
> of its statement since you can only guess where it might have got
> the info from.

Even a terminal fuckwit like you should be able to check the SOURCES

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73932 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> 
>>>>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't    
>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines with
>>>>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path between
>>>>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has already
>>>>>>>>  hit.
> 
>>>>>>> Just did this one,
>>>>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91
> 
>>>>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google
> 
> You just ignored that

What, that you can't Google?

>>>>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>>>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>>>>> in your AI answer
> 
>>>>> The grok response accurately points out that
>>>>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit
> 
>>>> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
>>>> 425-450mL
> 
>>> Bullshit it does
> 
>>>> and always matches a schooner.
> 
>>> It doesn't say that either
> 
>> It says it over and over from the start:
> 
> Bullshit on your ALWAYS lie
> 
>> "18 handles of beer" refers to 18 schooners (or pints) of beer in
>>  Australian slang"
>> "A "handle" is a common term for a schooner"
>> "So, "18 handles" means the person drank 18 schooners"
> 
> Pity about
> 
>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

Like the USSD definition, in normal grammar the qualification at
the end would only apply to the part after the "--".

>>>>>> and disputes that it's the same as a schooner   in the NT:
> 
>>>>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names
> 
>>>>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes
> 
>>>>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit
> 
>>>> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.
> 
>>> But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
>>> phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
>>> been used recently, something google wouldnt have done
> 
>> Which is no excuse for providing an answer that doesn't apply in
>> the NT when it doesn't even know for sure that the ABC article was
>> what prompted your question.
> 
> But it did work that out. So much for your
> stupid glorified pachinko machine stupidty
> 
>> Plus it clearly said it applied   Australia-wide.
> 
> Bullshit it does with

He says while snipping where it said that.

>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

And replacing it with where talked about something else.

>>>> It was speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way
>>>> off.
> 
>>> But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used
> 
>>> And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the NT
> 
>> Well my source is an Australian brewery, your Artificial Idiot's
>> source is... nothing.
> 
> Pity about the SOURCES it lists, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist
> 
>> No cites except the very ABC article that
>> prompted your question. So there's no way to judge the accuracy
>> of its statement since you can only guess where it might have got
>> the info from.
> 
> Even a terminal fuckwit like you should be able to check the SOURCES

Yeah, sources full of random Reddit discussions, which it probably
paid attention to instead of better results like the brewery I
found. But since it doesn't say specifically where it got those
facts it stated from, you can't tell. Useless.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73935 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

>>>>>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't
>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines  
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path  
>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has  
>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>  hit.

>>>>>>>> Just did this one,
>>>>>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91

>>>>>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>>>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>>>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>>>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google

>> You just ignored that

> What, that you can't Google?

I can and do google

No, that that result is nothing even remotely like what
you would get from a glorified pachinko machine

>>>>>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>>>>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>>>>>> in your AI answer

>>>>>> The grok response accurately points out that
>>>>>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit

>>>>> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
>>>>> 425-450mL

>>>> Bullshit it does

>>>>> and always matches a schooner.

>>>> It doesn't say that either

>>> It says it over and over from the start:

>> Bullshit on your ALWAYS lie

>>> "18 handles of beer" refers to 18 schooners (or pints) of beer in
>>>  Australian slang"
>>> "A "handle" is a common term for a schooner"
>>> "So, "18 handles" means the person drank 18 schooners"

>> Pity about
>>
>>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

> Like the USSD definition,

There was no USSD definition

> in normal grammar the qualification at   theend would only apply to the  
> part after the "--".

Pity about the DEPENDING ON THE STATE
you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist

>>>>>>> and disputes that it's the same as a schooner in the NT:

>>>>>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names

>>>>>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes

>>>>>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit

>>>>> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.

>>>> But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
>>>> phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
>>>> been used recently, something google wouldn't have done

>>> Which is no excuse for providing an answer that doesn't apply in
>>> the NT when it doesn't even know for sure that the ABC article was
>>> what prompted your question.

>> But it did work that out. So much for your
>> stupid glorified pachinko machine stupidty

>>> Plus it clearly said it applied   Australia-wide.

>> Bullshit it does with

> He says while snipping where it said that.

>>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

Pity about the

         A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
         a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
         425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

Which you carefully omitted from what you quoted

> And replacing it with where talked about something else.

Bullshit it talked about something else

>>>>> It was speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way
>>>>> off.

>>>> But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used

>>>> And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the  
>>>> NT

>>> Well my source is an Australian brewery, your Artificial Idiot's
>>> source is... nothing.

>> Pity about the SOURCES it lists, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit  
>> artist

>>> No cites except the very ABC article that
>>> prompted your question. So there's no way to judge the accuracy
>>> of its statement since you can only guess where it might have got
>>> the info from.

>> Even a terminal fuckwit like you should be able to check the SOURCES

> Yeah, sources full of random Reddit discussions,

More of your barefaced lies on the random

> which it probably  paid attention to insteadof   better results like the  
> brewery I found.

Bullshit it did and it basically said the same
thing, that handle normally means 425-450 ml

> But since it doesn't say specificallywhere   it got those  facts it  
> stated from,

Yet another bare faced lie

> you can't tell. Useless.

Yet another bare faced lie

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73936 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> 
>>>>>>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have no
>>>>>>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't
>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines  
>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path  
>>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has  
>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>>  hit.
> 
>>>>>>>>> Just did this one,
>>>>>>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91
> 
>>>>>>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>>>>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>>>>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>>>>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google
> 
>>> You just ignored that
> 
>> What, that you can't Google?
> 
> I can and do google
> 
> No, that that result is nothing even remotely like what
> you would get from a glorified pachinko machine
> 
>>>>>>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>>>>>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>>>>>>> in your AI answer
> 
>>>>>>> The grok response accurately points out that
>>>>>>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit
> 
>>>>>> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
>>>>>> 425-450mL
> 
>>>>> Bullshit it does
> 
>>>>>> and always matches a schooner.
> 
>>>>> It doesn't say that either
> 
>>>> It says it over and over from the start:
> 
>>> Bullshit on your ALWAYS lie
> 
>>>> "18 handles of beer" refers to 18 schooners (or pints) of beer in
>>>>  Australian slang"
>>>> "A "handle" is a common term for a schooner"
>>>> "So, "18 handles" means the person drank 18 schooners"
> 
>>> Pity about
>>>
>>>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.
> 
>> Like the USSD definition,
> 
> There was no USSD definition
> 
>> in normal grammar the qualification at   theend would only apply to the  
>> part after the "--".
> 
> Pity about the DEPENDING ON THE STATE
> you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist
> 
>>>>>>>> and disputes that it's the same as a schooner in the NT:
> 
>>>>>>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names
> 
>>>>>>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes
> 
>>>>>>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit
> 
>>>>>> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.
> 
>>>>> But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
>>>>> phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
>>>>> been used recently, something google wouldn't have done
> 
>>>> Which is no excuse for providing an answer that doesn't apply in
>>>> the NT when it doesn't even know for sure that the ABC article was
>>>> what prompted your question.
> 
>>> But it did work that out. So much for your
>>> stupid glorified pachinko machine stupidty
> 
>>>> Plus it clearly said it applied   Australia-wide.
> 
>>> Bullshit it does with
> 
>> He says while snipping where it said that.
> 
>>>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.
> 
> Pity about the
> 
>         A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>         a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>         425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.
> 
> Which you carefully omitted from what you quoted
> 
>> And replacing it with where talked about something else.
> 
> Bullshit it talked about something else
> 
>>>>>> It was speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be way
>>>>>> off.
> 
>>>>> But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used
> 
>>>>> And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the  
>>>>> NT
> 
>>>> Well my source is an Australian brewery, your Artificial Idiot's
>>>> source is... nothing.
> 
>>> Pity about the SOURCES it lists, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit  
>>> artist
> 
>>>> No cites except the very ABC article that
>>>> prompted your question. So there's no way to judge the accuracy
>>>> of its statement since you can only guess where it might have got
>>>> the info from.
> 
>>> Even a terminal fuckwit like you should be able to check the SOURCES
> 
>> Yeah, sources full of random Reddit discussions,
> 
> More of your barefaced lies on the random
> 
>> which it probably  paid attention to insteadof   better results like the  
>> brewery I found.
> 
> Bullshit it did and it basically said the same
> thing, that handle normally means 425-450 ml

No, it only talked about the term being used in the NT, and for the
same 285ml quanity as a "middy" or "pot" in other sates. Plus it
didn't know where you were asking about anyway so shouldn't assume
what it "normally means" there.

You say it did correctly pick the article that prompted your
question:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-14/pedestrian-death-flinders-island-coroner-dismissal/106562466

So I did a web search for "coronial findings tasmania" and found
the actual coroner's report that had prompted the article here:

https://www.magistratescourt.tas.gov.au/coronerscourt/findings/coronialfindings/2026/Investigation-into-the-death-of-David-Stanley-Bailey-Ruling.pdf

Footnote number 6, on page 3, is of interest:

"6 A handle of beer is 285mls in volume."

So your Artificial Idiot lied about the quantity meant in the exact
article that prompted your question! Its total quantity would be
off by at least 2.52L!

An intelligent web search on the other hand helps get you the
actual answer from the source of the article that prompted your
question, instead of that useless AI BS.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73937 — Re: Testing suggests Google's AI Overviews tell millions of lies per hour

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

>>>>>>>>>>> "This shouldn't come as a surprise. After all, "AI" tools have  
>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>>  understanding, no intelligence, no context, and they can't
>>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>>>  make sense of anything. They are glorified pachinko machines
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>  the output - the ball - tumbling down the most likely path
>>>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>>>  the pins based on nothing but chance and which pins it has
>>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>>>  hit.

>>>>>>>>>> Just did this one,
>>>>>>>>>> https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_ff894a2f-e630-4557-92e9-435a87b51d91

>>>>>>>>>> That result is nothing even remotely like what you would
>>>>>>>>>> get from a glorified pachinko machine and yes I got that
>>>>>>>>>> question from that news item in the ABC Just In feed and
>>>>>>>>>> didnt get as useful a result from google

>>>> You just ignored that

>>> What, that you can't Google?

>> I can and do google

>> No, that that result is nothing even remotely like what
>> you would get from a glorified pachinko machine

There you go, ignoring that again

>>>>>>>>> I get this page from a brewery by searching for "handles of beer"
>>>>>>>>> with Duck Duck Go, which contradicts the "425-450mL" range given
>>>>>>>>> in your AI answer

>>>>>>>> The grok response accurately points out that
>>>>>>>> the volume varys with the location, fuckwit

>>>>>>> But inaccurately states the volume only varies between in range of
>>>>>>> 425-450mL

>>>>>> Bullshit it does

>>>>>>> and always matches a schooner.

>>>>>> It doesn't say that either

>>>>> It says it over and over from the start:

>>>> Bullshit on your ALWAYS lie

>>>>> "18 handles of beer" refers to 18 schooners (or pints) of beer in
>>>>>  Australian slang"

>>>>> "A "handle" is a common term for a schooner"

>>>>> "So, "18 handles" means the person drank 18 schooners"

>>>> Pity about

>>>>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>>>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>>>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

>>> Like the USSD definition,

>> There was no USSD definition

>>> in normal grammar the qualification at   theend would only apply to the
>>> part after the "--".

>> Pity about the DEPENDING ON THE STATE
>> you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist

>>>>>>>>> and disputes that it's the same as a schooner in the NT:

>>>>>>>>> https://stoneandwood.com.au/blogs/all/our-guide-to-australias-beer-sizes-and-names

That doesnt even say what the volume of a handle of beer is

And neither does anything else that google turns up

>>>>>>>>> "The Northern Territory's beer sizes

>>>>>>>> Pity we arent discussing the NT, fuckwit

>>>>>>> Your question to the AI never mentioned any location.

>>>>>> But it did accurately work out where I was getting that
>>>>>> phrase from, presumably by checking when that phrase has
>>>>>> been used recently, something google wouldn't have done

>>>>> Which is no excuse for providing an answer that doesn't apply in
>>>>> the NT when it doesn't even know for sure that the ABC article was
>>>>> what prompted your question.

>>>> But it did work that out. So much for your
>>>> stupid glorified pachinko machine stupidty

>>>>> Plus it clearly said it applied Australia-wide.

>>>> Bullshit it does with

>>> He says while snipping where it said that.

>>>>        A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>>>        a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>>>        425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

>> Pity about the

>>         A "handle" is a common term for a schooner --
>>         a beer glass with a handle, typically holding around
>>         425-450 ml (about 15 oz) of beer, depending on the state.

>> Which you carefully omitted from what you quoted

>>> And replacing it with where talked about something else.

>> Bullshit it talked about something else

>>>>>>> It was speaking about all of Australia and in the NT it could be  
>>>>>>> way   off.

>>>>>> But isnt with Flinders Island which is where the phrase was used

>>>>>> And you don't even know if the stoneandwood is accurate even for the
>>>>>> NT

>>>>> Well my source is an Australian brewery, your Artificial Idiot's
>>>>> source is... nothing.

>>>> Pity about the SOURCES it lists, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit
>>>> artist

>>>>> No cites except the very ABC article that
>>>>> prompted your question. So there's no way to judge the accuracy
>>>>> of its statement since you can only guess where it might have got
>>>>> the info from.

>>>> Even a terminal fuckwit like you should be able to check the SOURCES

>>> Yeah, sources full of random Reddit discussions,

>> More of your barefaced lies on the random

>>> which it probably paid attention to instead of better results like the  
>>> brewery I found.

>> Bullshit it did and it basically said the same
>> thing, that handle normally means 425-450 ml

> No, it only talked about the term being used in the NT,

Which isnt where we are discussing,
so is a completely useless result

> and for the same 285ml quanity as a "middy" or "pot" in other sates.

> Plus it didn't know where you were asking about anyway

Corse it did when it named that explicitly

> so shouldn't assume   what it "normally means" there.

It didn't assume anything you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist

> You say it did correctly pick the article that prompted your   question:

It clearly did

> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-14/pedestrian-death-flinders-island-coroner-dismissal/106562466

> So I did a web search for "coronial findings tasmania" and found
> the actual coroner's report that had prompted the article here:

> https://www.magistratescourt.tas.gov.au/coronerscourt/findings/coronialfindings/2026/Investigation-into-the-death-of-David-Stanley-Bailey-Ruling.pdf

> Footnote number 6, on page 3, is of interest:

> "6 A handle of beer is 285mls in volume."

Just because that fuckwit got that wrong...

No one serves 285mls of beer in a glass with a handle

> So your Artificial Idiot lied about the quantity meantin the exact    
> article that prompted your question!

More of your mindless bullshit

> Its total quantity would be off by at least 2.52L!

Wrong, as always

> An intelligent web search on the other hand helps get you the
> actual answer from the source of the article that prompted your
> question, instead of that useless AI BS.

The fuckwit coroner actually got it wrong
No one serves 285mls of beer in a glass with a handle

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | aus.computers

csiph-web