>>508675673 (OP) >citations = true a bold claim. do they want people to read the papers cited or only have a paper cited and that is enough? do they want people to replicate the tests of the paper in order to check the facts properly?
>>508675998 If a study first of all, exists, then has been peer-reviewed, then it's fair to assume it's accurate until proven otherwise. Welcome to your 101 science course!
>>508677170 because it learned literally everything it knows from humans. Why would it not lie? And who's to say it's lying anyway? Mistakes happen, LLMs aren't perfect. They're far from it, which is why this croaky old retard shouldn't be using it.