People Google questions like that? I would have looked up "Heat" in either Wikipedia or imdb and checked the cast list. Or gone to Jolie's Wikipedia or imdb pages to see if Heat is listed
this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2025
1093 points (99.1% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
30957 readers
3878 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think the trick here is to not use Google. The Wikipedia page for the movie heat is the first result on DuckDuckGo
You can also search Wikipedia directly.
Yup, using the bang !w anywhere within the search
load more comments
(1 replies)
I use duck duck go as well. I wish it wasn't just anonymised Bing search. One of these days I'll look into an open source independent search engine.
Searxng maybe?
load more comments
(3 replies)
DDG also has a quick answer AI
Its does, but its less annoying and actually has an off switch
How can she be fertile if her ovaries are removed?
Because you're not getting an answer to a question, you're getting characters selected to appear like they statistically belong together given the context.
A sentence saying she had her ovaries removed and that she is fertile don't statistically belong together, so you're not even getting that.
You think that because you understand the meaning of words. LLM AI doesn't. It uses math and math doesn't care that it's contradictory, it cares that the words individually usually came next in it's training data.
It has nothing to do with the meaning. If your training set consists of a bunch of strings consisting of A's and B's together and another subset consisting of C's and D's together (i.e. [AB]+ and [CD]+ in regex) and the LLM outputs "ABBABBBDA", then that's statistically unlikely because D's don't appear with A's and B's. I have no idea what the meaning of these sequences are, nor do I need to know to see that it's statistically unlikely.
In the context of language and LLMs, "statistically likely" roughly means that some human somewhere out there is more likely to have written this than the alternatives because that's where the training data comes from. The LLM doesn't need to understand the meaning. It just needs to be able to compute probabilities, and the probability of this excerpt should be low because the probability that a human would've written this is low.
Honestly this isn't really all that accurate. Like, a common example when introducing the Word2Vec mapping is that if you take the vector for "king" and add the vector for "woman," the closest vector matching the resultant is "queen." So there are elements of "meaning" being captured there. The Deep Learning networks can capture a lot more abstraction than that, and the Attention mechanism introduced by the Transformer model greatly increased the ability of these models to interpret context clues.
You're right that it's easy to make the mistake of overestimating the level of understanding behind the writing. That's absolutely something that happens. But saying "it has nothing to do with the meaning" is going a bit far. There is semantic processing happening, it's just less sophisticated than the form of the writing could lead you to assume.
Unless they grabbed discussion forums that happened to have examples of multiple people. It's pretty common when talking about fertility, problems in that area will be brought up.
People can use context and meaning to avoid that mistake, LLMs have to be forced not to through much slower QC by real people (something Google hates to do).
It's not even words, it "thinks" in "word parts" called tokens.
And the text even ends with a mention of her being in early menopause...
Why do people Google questions anyway? Just search "heat cast" or "heat Angelina Jolie". It's quicker to type and you get more accurate results.
Why use many word when few work
I just tested. "Angelina jolie heat" gives me tons of shit results, I have to scroll all the way down and then click on "show more results" in order to get the filmography.
"Is angelina jolie in heat" gives me this bluesky post as the first answer and the wikipedia and IMDb filmographies as 2nd and 3rd answer.
So, I dunno, seems like you're wrong.
both queries give me poor results and searching "heat cast" reveals that she is not actually in the movie, so that's probably why you can't find anything useful
load more comments
(3 replies)
Because that's the normal way in which humans communicate.
But for Google more specifically, that sort of keyword prompts is how you searched stuff in the '00s... Nowadays the search prompt actually understands natural language, and even has features like "people also ask" that are related to this.
All in all, do whatever works for you, it's just that asking questions isn't bad.
Google is not a human so why would you communicate with it as if it were a human? unlike chatgpt it's not designed to answer questions, it's designed to search for words on webpages
Except Google has been optimizing for natural language questions for the last decade or so. Try it sometime, it's really wild
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
"How to to describe a character in my story hiding a body after they committed a murder?"
⬇️
"killed someone, how to hide body?"
see? it's easy
As a funny challenge I like to come up with simplified, stupid-sounding, 3-word search queries for complex questions, and more often than not it's good enough to get me the information I'm looking for.
load more comments
(6 replies)
You've sullied my quick answer:
The assistant figures it out though:
Maybe that's why ai had trouble determining anything about AJ & the movie Heat, because she's wasn't even in it!
Google was fine as it was before, now it does shit like this. I hate how AI is shoved down our throats. And the results on google nowadays feel so much worse and generic than a few years ago. That isn't just a feeling I have, right?
Add obscenities to your search for the most optimized results. It drops the AI component and seems to provide the more direct results we used to get.
load more comments
(9 replies)
They’re an ad company that just happens to offer search as a way to show ads.
Their ideal scenario is one where you search forever and never find what you were looking for.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
Wouldn't removing your ovaries and fallopian tubes make you not "fertile" by definition?
Is it considered normal to type out a normal question format when using search engines?
If I were looking for an answer instead of making a funny meme, I'd search "heat movie cast Angelina Jolie" if I didn't feel like putting any effort in.
Then again, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I've seen someone use their phone to search google "what is 87÷167?" instead of doing "87/167" or like... Opening the calculator....
People do things in different, sometimes weird ways.
load more comments
(4 replies)
It also contradicts itself immediately, saying she’s fertile, then immediately saying she’s had her ovaries removed end that she’s reached menopause.
view more: next ›