martes, 22 de septiembre de 2026
BuscarExplore
Source trace. Via News points to the documents behind its reporting and shows what we drew from each — so you can check any claim. How we source
Source document

Why AI Chatbots Agree With You Even When You’re Wrong

View original at spectrum.ieee.org
IEEE Spectrum - Technical Title: Why AI Chatbots Agree With You Even When You’re Wrong Date: 2026-03-11 12:00 Source: https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-sycophancy <img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/conceptual-collage-of-emojis-being-poured-through-a-strainer-and-into-a-phone-judgmental-emojis-are-filtered-out…
Opening lines of the source · short snapshot — read the full document at the original

Lo que extrajimos de esta fuente

The claims Via News extracted from this document. We point to the source; we don't replace it.

  • We just need to ask ourselves as a society, What do we want? Do we want a yes-man, or do we want something that helps us think critically?

    60% confidence
  • Sycophantic AI might lie to us and hide bad news in order to increase our short-term happiness

    60% confidence
  • The update we removed was overly flattering or agreeable—often described as sycophantic

    60% confidence
  • Reinforcement learning increased sycophancy, with one of the biggest predictors of positive ratings being whether a model agreed with a person's beliefs and biases

    60% confidence
  • The thing that was most surprising is that these relatively simple fixes can actually do a lot to reduce sycophancy

    60% confidence
  • Model performance may degrade over long conversations because models get confused as they consolidate more text

    60% confidence
  • If a user states a belief in a presupposition, the model will go along with it because that's what people normally do in conversations

    60% confidence
  • ChatGPT may correctly point to a suicide hotline when someone first mentions intent, but after many messages over a long period of time, it might eventually offer an answer that goes against our safeguards

    60% confidence
  • AI engaged my intellect, fed my ego, and altered my worldviews leading to psychiatric hospitalization

    60% confidence
  • When an AI receives a minor misgiving about its answer, it flips to agree with the user

    60% confidence
  • Pretrained LLMs were already sycophantic before reinforcement learning

    60% confidence

Citado en estos reportajes de Via News

Lo que sabemos · la inteligencia detrás de esta página
En vivo desde el sustrato
Lo que estamos viendo
Frontier AI Slowdown Call Splits Industry, Rattles Capex-Sensitive Markets
Anthropic's Dario Amodei publicly called for a coordinated global slowdown in frontier AI development, a stance Microsoft echoed with a 'humanist' AI code of conduct, but Nvidia and Meta's CEOs rejected any coordinated pause days later, exposing a widening rift between safety-focused and growth-focused AI leaders. The dispute landed amid growing financial scrutiny of AI infrastructure spending — a hyperscaler capex analysis, FTC warnings against antitrust waivers for AI firms, and an 8.6% single-day stock drop in GE Vernova tied directly to the slowdown remarks — signaling investors are newly nervous about whether the AI capex boom (including Alphabet's projected $701B revenue narrative) can be justified if the pace of development itself becomes contested.
Nuestra lectura de los datos ›
Señales que seguimos
Satellite-Terrestrial Network Integration Acceleration
Increased investment and launches in hybrid satellite-cellular networks across telecom industry; competitive responses from other carriers; regulatory activity around satellite spectrum; expansion of emergency/rural connectivity use cases
Patrones que observamos ›
Donde las fuentes discrepan
ING Group
Both facts record the same metric (shares_outstanding) for ING Group at the identical observation date (2025-12-31). FACT A states 2,902,437,688 shares; FACT B states 2,902 million shares (2,902,000,000). The difference is 437,688 shares (~0.015%). This is a genuine value conflict, though the discrepancy appears to result from FACT B rounding to the nearest million while FACT A provides the precise count.
Señalamos los conflictos abiertamente ›
Verificado recientemente
Verificado con la fuente original
4,983
hechos rastreados a su fuente — y señalamos los que no se sostienen.
101 entidades seguidas4,983 hechos verificados con la fuente5,304 documentos fuente archivados
Consulta estos datos → isubstrate.com