• lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    The vast majority of those answers are still just citing another source, though. The only exceptions I can think of are things like math and unit conversions.

    My point is mostly that people insist on treating search engines (and now LLMs) as oracles of truth, and they did that even back when all you got was a list of links with small excerpts. It annoys me to no end when people fail so thoroughly at such a basic test of media literacy and then immediately try to place the blame on someone else.

    • HorseWithNoName@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Where the info comes from doesn’t exactly change that it’s a problem.

      You can talk about media literacy, but why even have the thing exist if it can’t provide correct answers. That’s its only reason for existing.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        You seem to be one of the very people I’m complaining about. The point of a search engine absolutely is not to spoon feed you correct answers. It’s to find information on the internet that’s relevant to a topic. There’s lots of wrong information on the internet and it’s not a search engine’s job to decide for you what’s right and what’s wrong.

        • Corgana@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          Nobody is saying otherwise. The problem being discussed here is that search engines present themselves as “deciding what’s right and wrong” and present themselves as “spoon feeding correct answers”. If we really want to improve media literacy, we can begin by advocating for our search tools to not misrepresent the presentation of their data.