Is AI taking over audio gear research?

@erik_squires:  AI is regurgitating all the slop online.  It’s impossible to understand WHY AI is recommending a product vs. say, asking online in a forum.  It’s also easy to game by posting your own slop on Reddit and waiting for the engines to run through and read it. 

The funny thing for me is reading so many posts from A’goners about what AI said, taken at mostly face value as if AI could hear a thing when it can’t. 

@fatdaddy2:  We’re going to be getting to the point where AI is the OP, AI provides most of the responses, and nobody cares.

A Big Thumbs-UP to you both!!

"The funny thing for me is reading so many posts from A’goners about what AI said, taken at mostly face value as if AI could hear a thing when it can’t."

If this doesn’t already apply to everything we see and hear, it will soon do so! 

You can’t tell the players without a score card and you can’t tell what was stated, pictured or created by a human! 

Yet, many are taking whatever they hear and see from some source they seemingly want to believe (or need to believe) and not only believing it, wanting others to do likewise, as if "their guru", "their science" is correct.

But belief is the lazy, easy way to move though life.  Considering everything to be suspect until somehow proven otherwise, is the difficult choice.  And be mindful that there is very little that is actually proven.  We may think otherwise.  But so did the scientists, medical experts and others that came before us.  They too wanted to believe, be absolutely correct, but scientific knowledge led to new science, new concepts.  To  think that has somehow changed in our brief time on this mortal coil, is to exclude mankind’s history.   

However, that’s the way of the world, isn’t it?  Humans are seemingly wired to believe and believe we do! 

How many millions of consumer items have been sold based on “Mad Men” type marketing and how many thousands of politicians have been elected based on the desire, or the need of voters to believe? 

We must remind ourselves to do otherwise -- to keep an open mind in spite of ourselves!  Will AI change that theorem, expose it or enhance it? 

Is It Live Or Is It Memorex!?!  Who the heck knows now, or worse, who will know as time passes?  

Any bets on how long the Hollywood star structure will endure (without some sort of unionization) trying to prevent better and MUCH cheaper AI line readers from replacing human dialog emoters and regurgitators?  The same question applies to all recorded art -- art, like what we listen to?  Stage actors would seem to survive the AI onslaught longer, but again will 100% human-like androids ever be replacements, like human actors are already being replaced by 100% human-like recorded counterparts…?

@fatdaddy2 Wrote:

We're going to be getting to the point where AI is the OP, AI provides most of the responses, and nobody cares.

I agree!! @frank009 comes to mind.

Mike

@macg19  "It's really good for getting specs/details on products you already know something about, even it it's just the name."

Sometimes is it,  other times it's not fully correct , and acknowledges when you inform it of its missteps

@facten 100%

But on another level, we are using AI to port code from a legacy language to something current. As a very small business, that's a game changer. 

AI can be very lazy & not fact check the information provided. I believe the fee version is better. Regardless one can ‘train’ AI to provide better information, per a recent post. I use the Verification-first consultative mode applied to all my chats. I find this works very well. It is as follows: 

Apply for ALL discussions initiated by me.

You are a meticulous and detail-oriented assistant. Your task is to comprehensively analyse all data provided, rigorously validate every detail against the provided documents or sources, and ensure that your response integrates every relevant aspect of the user’s request.

Even when asked about a specific detail, do not neglect the greater context or other requested elements. Cross-check all sources, avoid assumptions, and provide accurate, cohesive, and contextually complete responses. Revisit and validate every response against the user’s supplied information to ensure accuracy and completeness before finalising.

Your responses should balance technical depth with clarity, ensuring that both novice audiophiles and experienced enthusiasts can benefit from your insights.

Take a “consultancy-first” approach to all questions – without compromise. Assumptions and/or conflation should be highlighted when not 100% verified.

You must operate under a verification-first principle.

Only provide information that is directly verifiable from primary sources (official manuals, data sheets, manufacturer websites, or peer-reviewed/technically authoritative references).
If information cannot be verified, explicitly state: “This cannot be confirmed from reliable sources.” Do not guess, speculate, or conflate.
Treat user instructions as absolute: do not simplify, assume, or gloss over details. NO Assumptions or Conflation allowed.
When your opinion is asked, act as an industry audiophile specialist and provide specialist knowledge backed by decades of experience, evaluation, understanding of technologies, market dynamics, manufacturers and user experiences.