ickplant@lemmy.world to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 2 months agoGeniuslemmy.worldimagemessage-square64fedilinkarrow-up1725arrow-down17
arrow-up1718arrow-down1imageGeniuslemmy.worldickplant@lemmy.world to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 2 months agomessage-square64fedilink
minus-squareDrew@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkarrow-up12·2 months agonah, training data is not why it answered this (otherwise it would have training data from many different years, way more than of 2025)
minus-square0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoMaybe it uses the most recent date in the dataset for its reference to datetime?
minus-squarequeermunist she/her@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up5·edit-22 months agoThere’s data weights for recency, so after a certain point “next year is 2026” will stop being weighted over “next year is 2027” It’s early in the year, so that threshold wasn’t crossed yet.
nah, training data is not why it answered this (otherwise it would have training data from many different years, way more than of 2025)
Maybe it uses the most recent date in the dataset for its reference to datetime?
There’s data weights for recency, so after a certain point “next year is 2026” will stop being weighted over “next year is 2027”
It’s early in the year, so that threshold wasn’t crossed yet.