Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

He mentions this in the same paragraph:

> If you’re still suspicious, try stripping EXIF by taking a screenshot and run an experiment yourself—I’ve tried this and it still works the same way.




Why didn't he do that then for this post?


Even better, edit it and place a false location.


This is a good test - the salient point is that it is fine if the LLM is confused, or even gets it wrong! But what I suspect would happen is that it would confabulate details which aren't in the photo to justify the incorrect EXIF answer. This is not fine.


I agree that it is not fine to confabulate details that are not supported by the evidence.


Because I'd already determined it wasn't using EXIF in prior experiments and didn't bother with the one that I wrote up.

I added two examples at the end just now where I stripped EXIF via screenshotting first.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: