I notice Wikipedia is talking about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-02-20/Essay For example...
"Is this a real problem? I believe it is. Many of the articles sound reasonable but may have serious errors. The conversation at the administrators' noticeboard includes an analysis of a generated article on geckos. The article contains a lot of specific
plausible-sounding information (e.g., size range), much of which is wrong.
ChatGPT will even provide references if requested, but those references are synthesized from its input text and, while sounding correct, usually do not point to real articles. For example, when I asked it for references on an article ChatGPT wrote for me
on Sabethes cyaneus (a mosquito), one of the references was "Sabethes cyaneus" (Encyclopedia of Life):
https://eol.org/pages/133674. That page does exist, but is for Clavaria flavopurpurea, a fungus. Another reference it provided also had a link, but the
link pointed to an article about a mink, and the reference itself was fictional."
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)