







I've seen a lot of "saying AI is useless is hyperbolic" but the flipside hyperbole is denying that AI still has serious deficiencies. Bullshitting is inherent to the ways LLMs work. Whatever the form—erroneous facts, mangled data, fake cites, or the plagiarism here—it's impossible to fully mitigate.
Timnit Gebru
Speaking of plagiarism: scientificamerican.com/article/openais-latest-math-b…
Sep 7, 2026 at 8:25 PM
If You’re Going To Defend AI And Whine About Its Critics, You Should Probably Be Honest About Its Actual Harms
I think this recent post by AI industry CEO Matt Shumer is worth a read. In it, he basically explains how quickly LLMs (large language models) are evolving to supplant many developers and prog…

LLMs are bullshitters. But that doesn't mean they're not useful.
Note: This is a personal essay by Matt Ranger, Kagi's head of ML In 1986, Harry Frankfurt wrote On Bullshit. He differentiates a lying from bullshitting: Lying means you have a concept of what is true,...

It’s remarkably easy to inject new medical misinformation into LLMs
Changing just 0.001% of inputs to misinformation makes the AI less accurate.

Pluralistic: LLMs are real, AI is fake (12 Sep 2026) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
Once you understand the corporate culture of AI "hyperscalers" consists primarily of everyone cooking their brains by locking themselves in the bathroom, holding flashlights under their chins, and saying "Aaaaaaaaaay Eyeeeeeee" until they wet themselves in terror, a lot of things snap into focus:
Pluralistic: Why I don’t like AI art (25 Mar 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
A law professor friend tells me that LLMs have completely transformed the way she relates to grad students and post-docs – for the worse. And no, it's not that they're cheating on their homework or using LLMs to write briefs full of hallucinated cases.

Teachers Are Not OK
AI, ChatGPT, and LLMs "have absolutely blown up what I try to accomplish with my teaching."

LLMs believe false statements even after explicit warnings that they're false
Fine-tuning tests show "bias... toward confidently representing the claims as true."

Brands Adopt ‘No AI’ Disclaimers to Stand Out Amid the Slop
Marketers move to get ahead of growing consumer skepticism by labeling content that doesn’t use AI.
Google’s AI Is Destroying Search, the Internet, and Your Brain
Google’s AI Overview, which is easy to fool into stating nonsense as fact, is stopping people from finding and supporting small businesses and credible sources.
Have we been measuring AI political bias wrong? A better approach is possible.
Why ideological preferences and epistemic failure in LLMs are not the same thing — and why the difference matters

The AI Attribution Error
If an AI produces something useful it's because of your own skill in model choice, prompting, and steering. If not, it's because the model is a useless lying machine that can't follow directions.

There's Something Fundamentally Wrong With LLMs
LLMs aren't trained on the "vast majority of speech," experts warn, a major blind spot that could have sweeping consequences.

"AI" is Automated Inequality
Tech bros still dominate the discussions about so-called "AI" with false claims. Even most "AI"-critical researchers spend much of their time meticulously debunking (always only a subset of) claims, leaving vast areas of the economic consequences of "AI" unexplored. (Even the "AI"-evangelist Economi

Back-to-basics: on poor conceptualizations in AI work - (Un)rigorous AI
TL;DR — Poor conceptual foundations can severely undermine the credibility and reliability of knowledge claims. (And, no, your metric is not your construct.)
When I say "bullshitting is inherent to LLMs," I don't mean it colloquially, I mean it empirically. Here's the bleeding edge of the frontier (Opus, Sol, Fable, Astra), and the lowest bullshit rate (answering wrongly instead of admitting ignorance) is 45%. artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience