<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>AI on Nicolas Nowinski</title><link>https://nicknow.net/tags/ai/</link><description>Recent content in AI on Nicolas Nowinski</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2026 05:00:35 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://nicknow.net/tags/ai/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>What the snow? AI Chatbots Predicting DC Weather!</title><link>https://nicknow.net/what-the-snow-ai-chatbots-predicting-dc-weather/</link><pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2026 05:00:35 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://nicknow.net/what-the-snow-ai-chatbots-predicting-dc-weather/</guid><description>Can AI Chatbots predict DC snow weather? I decided to try it out by letting ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini create a 7-day deeply researched forecast.</description></item><item><title>The Human Blind Spot Around Non-Deterministic Machines</title><link>https://nicknow.net/humans-hallucinations-and-ai-llm-non-deterministic-machines/</link><pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2025 15:35:50 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://nicknow.net/humans-hallucinations-and-ai-llm-non-deterministic-machines/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Why LLM&amp;rsquo;s will always make mistakes and we shouldn&amp;rsquo;t call them hallucinations&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I saw a tweet from Paul Graham a while back about how as LLMs become better their hallucinations will become more convincing. And it makes sense, a smart confident person saying something wrong often sounds more reliable than a less confident person saying the right thing timidly. Even more so, as you get good answers from the smart confident person you become more trustworthy and are less likely to question and double-check their future answers. That&amp;rsquo;s both a reality of and defect of human thinking.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>