[pradn]

It's certainly wrong, but its not out of place w/ the sheer number of recipes and blogs saying the same thing. It's parroting "common wisdom" which is wrong.

It's not as egregious as some of the generative AI results spewed out by the lowest-cost-inference LLMs they hooked up to Google search a few months back.

[nox101]

It was still a common occurrence for google to display incorrect results that weren't common wisdom.

I had tons of such experiences. One I remember was searching for "healthy body weight for x of age y" where x was man,woman and y was my age. Google said 50lbs higher than I expected. I clicked through to the article. The article said the average was this high number, not a healthy weight.

[pradn]

Yes, totally. Automated, fallible systems.

Ultimately it's a cost issue. If they wanted to, they could fact check the top million question queries - but they don't want to spend on that.

[kevindamm]

How familiar are you with the knowledge graph update process? There is actually a significant amount of spend going into reviewing the wrong answers to top queries and updating to fix/tweak them.

[pradn]

Yes, there's humans in the loop for the knowledge graph. I'm unsure if snippets are reviewed in the same way.

[refulgentis]

Your assumption basis is completely wrong, not only on when it came about. Bizarrely, Google spelled out that the AI answers weren't from an LLM in post-debacle PR, like it was a good thing