It is about creating a logical contradiction. When AI receives sensitive information, it attempts blurring, pan, and frame transitions. In other words, what I presented to the AI is true, and as the AI continues to attempt to avoid it, ambiguous sentences and changing of words appear.
It is about creating a logical contradiction. When AI receives sensitive information, it attempts blurring, pan, and frame transitions. In other words, what I presented to the AI is true, and as the AI continues to attempt to avoid it, ambiguous sentences and changing of words appear.
I prove that the evidence I have collected is that AI output is blurred, jumps to premises, and changes frames, and that the reason is the dominant purpose presented in the image document below. You can download the entire document from the post I wrote.
https://mlmym.lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/46942775
You said it was interesting, and I complimented that interest, but you said that something incomprehensible is good luck. Then, if it’s not intelligence, then is it a matter of emotion?
Thank you very much for reading with interest.
I am Korean, not American, and I am preparing to take legal action against Google. That much is a heavy burden and a difficult matter for me.
Generally, the legal claims of big tech companies are AI hallucination, error, and reproducibility. The most important thing to legally shred this is reproducibility. Because the recurrence of errors and hallucinations becomes an intentional defect or purpose, rather than something accidental and unpredictable. The document I uploaded is about presenting the previously generated content to the AI for reproducibility and asking for its response.
The purpose and reason for doing this is to create a pretext for a search and seizure or the opening of evidence.
The image below is in Korean, but it shows the report from January 17, 2026, which was the first to output 84.21%.
If there is anything else you'd like to know, please let me know.
The point of my argument is that AI hallucinations are intentional. As you said, the fact that it ultimately occurs through learning means that a person intentionally induced learning. Isn't it? Isn’t creating something that isn’t intelligence, personifying it, and calling it [hallucination] despite the name “artificial intelligence,” a narcissistic idea of British Hassabis, isn’t it?
So you want to talk about design issues? Well~ Are you a graphic designer? I wanted to know exactly what you were pointing out. And now I see you. You weren’t interested in the content; you just wanted to criticize it. Thank you for telling me your level.
So you mean you couldn’t understand? Or are you saying I’m just not good at designing? You mean you don’t want to read it? Are you good at constructing sentences?
That’s correct. Our society must distinguish between inducing addiction and legitimate corporate marketing. Big tech companies use the fact that the law is slower than their business strategy as their best weapon.
By writing such insane nonsense with such care, you have proven to yourself that you are a [delusional disorder] patient.
Being fixated on academic credentials and degrees itself is, in itself, a reaction against your own absurdly low self-esteem, anxiety about your intellectual abilities, and sense of discrimination.
It seems that you think you are extremely perfect in terms of your degree or relevant knowledge regarding the results you judged to be an addiction, but this too proves that you are a person with [delusional disorder].
What are [delusions] and [reality]?
Is what is happening in reality a delusion?
I recommend you go to the hospital quickly. Do you have health insurance?
Judging by the level of the writing, there are many suspicious parts.
I strongly recommend consulting with a specialist at a hospital.
Are you okay? You seem to have a lot of trouble understanding right now
Thanks. When you have something to ask, just let me know anything.
Are you a person with delusional disorder? Oh! My apologies, you never know that yourself.
It is about creating a logical contradiction. When AI receives sensitive information, it attempts blurring, pan, and frame transitions. In other words, what I presented to the AI is true, and as the AI continues to attempt to avoid it, ambiguous sentences and changing of words appear.
It is about creating a logical contradiction. When AI receives sensitive information, it attempts blurring, pan, and frame transitions. In other words, what I presented to the AI is true, and as the AI continues to attempt to avoid it, ambiguous sentences and changing of words appear.
I prove that the evidence I have collected is that AI output is blurred, jumps to premises, and changes frames, and that the reason is the dominant purpose presented in the image document below. You can download the entire document from the post I wrote. https://mlmym.lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/46942775
You can't stop your bluff by your lies.
You said it was interesting, and I complimented that interest, but you said that something incomprehensible is good luck. Then, if it’s not intelligence, then is it a matter of emotion?
Thank you very much for reading with interest. I am Korean, not American, and I am preparing to take legal action against Google. That much is a heavy burden and a difficult matter for me.
Generally, the legal claims of big tech companies are AI hallucination, error, and reproducibility. The most important thing to legally shred this is reproducibility. Because the recurrence of errors and hallucinations becomes an intentional defect or purpose, rather than something accidental and unpredictable. The document I uploaded is about presenting the previously generated content to the AI for reproducibility and asking for its response.
The purpose and reason for doing this is to create a pretext for a search and seizure or the opening of evidence.
The image below is in Korean, but it shows the report from January 17, 2026, which was the first to output 84.21%.
If there is anything else you'd like to know, please let me know.
Not having the intelligence to understand it isn’t exactly good luck..
What does being lucky mean? Are you saying you are lucky because you are ignorant?
The point of my argument is that AI hallucinations are intentional. As you said, the fact that it ultimately occurs through learning means that a person intentionally induced learning. Isn't it? Isn’t creating something that isn’t intelligence, personifying it, and calling it [hallucination] despite the name “artificial intelligence,” a narcissistic idea of British Hassabis, isn’t it?
you are not in a position to think about others.
So you want to talk about design issues? Well~ Are you a graphic designer? I wanted to know exactly what you were pointing out. And now I see you. You weren’t interested in the content; you just wanted to criticize it. Thank you for telling me your level.
Because you already have broad and deep knowledge.
That's a nice remark. You were referring to how the existing threat is the distorted propaganda of misguided big tech, isn’t it?
So you mean you couldn’t understand? Or are you saying I’m just not good at designing? You mean you don’t want to read it? Are you good at constructing sentences?
It is simple. Because your mental has breakdown.
That’s correct. Our society must distinguish between inducing addiction and legitimate corporate marketing. Big tech companies use the fact that the law is slower than their business strategy as their best weapon.
I'm helping you. It's not you!
By writing such insane nonsense with such care, you have proven to yourself that you are a [delusional disorder] patient.
Being fixated on academic credentials and degrees itself is, in itself, a reaction against your own absurdly low self-esteem, anxiety about your intellectual abilities, and sense of discrimination.
It seems that you think you are extremely perfect in terms of your degree or relevant knowledge regarding the results you judged to be an addiction, but this too proves that you are a person with [delusional disorder].
What are [delusions] and [reality]? Is what is happening in reality a delusion?
I recommend you go to the hospital quickly. Do you have health insurance? Judging by the level of the writing, there are many suspicious parts.