decrypt·
A peer-reviewed audit in BMJ Open found that nearly 50% of health responses from five major AI chatbots were problematic, with fabricated sources and confident delivery.
Read full articlePeople report that their personal contact info was surfaced by Google AI—and there’s apparently no easy way to prevent it. A Redditor recently wrote that he was “desperate for help”: for about a month, he said, his phone had been inundated by calls from “strangers” who were “looking for a lawyer, a product designer, a…
Exclusive: Doctors say ‘highly concerning’ poll highlights risk to patients of turning to AI for medical advice One in seven people are using AI chatbots for health advice instead of seeing their GP, a UK study has found. The poll of more than 2,000 people found that – of the 15% turning to chatbots – one in four had done so because of long NHS waiting lists. Continue reading...
Seattle-based mpathic released mPACT, a clinician-led benchmark that evaluates how leading AI models handle conversations involving suicide risk, eating disorders, and misinformation. Read More
Oxford researchers found AI chatbots trained for warmth make significantly more factual errors and validate false beliefs more often Oxford researchers found AI chatbots trained for warmth make significantly more factual errors and validate false beliefs more often, according to…
Journalist Jamie Bartlett on the people trying to get AI to say things it shouldn’t … for the safety of us all All the major AI chatbots – from ChatGPT to Gemini to Grok to Claude – have things they should and shouldn’t say. Hate speech, criminal material, exploitation of vulnerable users – all of this is content that the most successful large language models in the world shouldn’t produce, that their safety features should guard against. Continue reading...
Insider Brief Today’s AI safety guardrails may not be enough once robots begin operating around people in the physical world, according to a new study warning that AI-powered machines require far more context-aware safety systems than chatbots. Researchers from University of Pennsylvania, Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Oxford, report finding that safety techniques […]
AI chatbots are the new norm. What earlier was “ask Google” has now largely become “ask Claude”. And that is not just a change of platforms. The new form of conversational guidance goes a whole lot deeper than trying to find the best car for you or looking for an upskilling course. It now spills […] The post How People are Figuring Out Life With Claude appeared first on Analytics Vidhya.
AI is getting faster. But slow-responding AI is perceived as better by users. At least that’s the conclusion reached by new research presented at CHI’26, which is the Association for Computing Machinery’s Barcelona conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Two researchers — Felicia Fang-Yi Tan and Professor Oded Nov at the NYU Tandon School of Engineering — tested 240 adults by having them use an AI chatbot. The answers were artificially delayed by two, nine, or 20 seconds. (The delay had nothing to do with the question or the answer.) Afterwards, the researchers asked how they liked the answers. In general, participants preferred the answers that took longer (although sometimes users got frustrated with the 20-second delay). Why? Because a delay led the users to believe the AI was “thinking” or showing “deliberation” — invaluable input for AI companies and an interesting result. In almost every product category, faster usually means better. But for AI chatbots, it turns out
