I asked ChatGPT to describe the abandoned railway line between Åkersberga and Rimbo, it responded with a list of stations and descriptions and explained the lack of photos and limited information as due to the stations being small and only open for a short while.
My explanation is that there has never been a railway line between Åkersberga and Rimbo directly, and that ChatGPT was just lying.
it’s not lying, because it doesn’t know truth. it just knows that text like that is statistically likely to be followed by text like this. any assumptions made by the prompt (e.g. there is an old railway line) are just taken at face value.
I asked ChatGPT to describe the abandoned railway line between Åkersberga and Rimbo, it responded with a list of stations and descriptions and explained the lack of photos and limited information as due to the stations being small and only open for a short while.
My explanation is that there has never been a railway line between Åkersberga and Rimbo directly, and that ChatGPT was just lying.
Claude’s reply:
Perfectly accurate!
it’s not lying, because it doesn’t know truth. it just knows that text like that is statistically likely to be followed by text like this. any assumptions made by the prompt (e.g. there is an old railway line) are just taken at face value.
also, since there has indeed been a railway connection between them, just not direct, that may have been part of the assumption.
I expected it to talk about the actual railway, not invent a fantasy line