Thank you!
Let's build an open, fair, and reliable ecosystem!
Follow us on:
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Imagine a routine court hearing thrown into chaos because an AI fabricated the evidence. In 2023, two New York lawyers learned this the hard way when they submitted a brief brimming with fictitious case citations – all generated by a supposedly reliable AI assistant. The citations looked legitimate, complete with case names and numbers, but none of the cases were real. “We made a good faith mistake in failing to believe that a piece of technology could be making up cases out of whole cloth,” the embarrassed firm admitted. In other words, their AI lied to them – and it did so with supreme confidence. This isn’t an isolated incident or a quirky glitch; it’s a symptom of a growing problem with today’s artificial intelligence. AI models are increasingly hallucinating – a polite term for when an AI generates false but convincing information. And as we’ll see, these “AI lies” are not just harmless quirks; they’re undermining trust in high-stakes domains and revealing a critical weakness in how AI operates
It sounds confident, cites fake facts, and makes things up without warning. And the worst part? You often won’t know it’s lying.
AI chatbots and large language models have a well-documented habit of making stuff up. Ask one a tough question and it might confidently present you with an answer that sounds authoritative – complete with detailed facts, quotes, even references – which is completely fabricated.
Why do these hallucinations happen? Fundamentally, LLMs are probabilistic text generators. They are engineered to predict likely word sequences, not to verify facts. When details are missing, the model often “scrambles to make something up” to fill the gap. If the AI’s training data lacks a certain citation or if the prompt pressures it to provide one, it may fabricate a source that looks plausible. The root issue is that current AIs have no built-in mechanism to distinguish real, vetted data from invented data – they lack an internal fact-checker.
These hallucinations span domains. In healthcare, where accuracy is literally life-and-death, AI’s tendency to improvise is alarming. One study testing ChatGPT’s medical knowledge found it could give incomplete, incorrect, and potentially harmful information about common eye diseases. Imagine a patient querying an AI symptom checker and getting a confident but wrong recommendation – the consequences could be dire. From health advice chatbots to virtual customer service agents, these systems are often convincing liars, not because they intend to deceive, but because they lack the means to know when they are wrong.
Why do AI models lie so easily? Part of the answer is that they’re black boxes. Modern AI, especially deep learning models like GPT-style language models, operate in ways that even their creators struggle to explain. These models absorb vast amounts of data and statistically predict outputs; they have no built-in mechanism to cross-check facts or reveal the source of their assertions.
If an AI tells you that Alexander Hamilton’s middle name was Zebediah, it will say it in the same confident tone as a true statement – and you, the user, cannot peek under the hood to see where that “fact” came from (in this case, probably nowhere). The AI won’t cite a source unless explicitly designed to, and even then, as we saw, it might just make one up.
This opacity is at the heart of the trust problem. Transparency, traceability, and accountability are largely missing. Because we can’t see inside the AI’s mind, we’re forced to treat its outputs like pronouncements from an oracle. Either you trust it, or you double-check everything by doing your own research (which defeats the purpose of using the AI for assistance). The implications of this black-box nature are profound. We’ve already seen it go wrong in dramatic ways, and as AI continues to be integrated into critical applications, the need for a solution is becoming urgent. We need a way to make AI’s decisions and outputs traceable, verifiable, and accountable. In short, we need a truth guarantee – something to transform the AI from a black box to a glass box.
This is where an unlikely hero enters the story: Blockchain
How do you keep a trustworthy record of what an AI is doing and saying? One compelling answer is blockchain technology. Blockchains, best known as the tech behind cryptocurrencies, are essentially tamper-proof ledgers – databases that are maintained by a decentralized network of computers and secured by cryptography. Once you add information to a true blockchain, it’s nearly impossible to alter or delete it without everyone noticing. This property turns out to be incredibly useful for establishing truth and provenance. If we combine this with AI, we start to get a picture of how to address the AI’s lying problem.
Imagine if every step an AI took and every piece of data it consulted was logged on an immutable ledger. Every time an AI model generated an answer or pulled in a source, that event would be recorded transparently on the blockchain. Instead of a mysterious black box, we’d have a comprehensive audit trail of the AI’s activities. In fact, researchers are already proposing exactly this: “Blockchain-based audit trails record every AI agent’s decision, input, and outcome in immutable blocks.”
Crucially, blockchain removes the need to trust any single authority through mathematics and decentralization. Applied to AI, it means you wouldn’t have to trust the AI developer blindly; you could trust the code and the ledger. If the AI outputs a controversial claim, stakeholders can verify on the shared ledger whether that claim had any basis in the vetted data or if it was an unsupported leap.
Let’s break down how blockchain could help fix AI’s truth problem:
In sum, blockchain introduces the qualities that current AI lacks: traceability, verifiability, and persistent accountability. By providing a transparent backbone for AI processes, it turns the AI from an unknowable oracle into something more akin to a well-audited ledger. Importantly, this isn’t just theoretical. The convergence of AI and blockchain is already underway in research labs and industry pilots such as LazAI - Web3-Native AI Network.
LazAI is built for verifiable AI data, combining three innovations – the Data Anchoring Token (DAT), Individual-centric DAO (iDAO), and Verifiable Computation (VC) – to ensure AI outputs remain truthful, transparent, and traceable (more on this in the next article, stay tuned!)
We’re at the dawn of AI x Blockchain as a field, and the rationale is clear: if we want AI we can trust, we need an infrastructure that guarantees that trust.
The more we rely on AI in daily life, the more we need it to tell the truth and show its work.
Blockchain offers a path forward by providing the transparency and trust framework that AI desperately needs. It shifts us from having to trust what the AI says to being able to verify what it says. In much the same way that society moved from “trust me” bookkeeping to double-entry accounting and audits, AI is moving from a paradigm of unverified outputs to one of provable claims. An AI paired with blockchain might say, “Here is my answer, and here is the proof of why this is likely correct,” with a chain of evidence we can inspect. That kind of system is far more aligned with human norms of credibility – we generally don’t accept serious claims from a person without asking “how do you know?” In the future, we’ll ask the same of AI, and with blockchain under the hood, the AI will actually be able to answer.
What’s emerging is the vision of verifiable, human-aligned intelligence. “Human-aligned” because an AI that can be audited and that operates under transparent rules is one that can be governed to serve human interests and values. And “verifiable” because we won’t have to take the AI’s word for anything – we will verify. We stand on the cusp of AI systems that are not just powerful and persuasive, but honest and accountable by design.
The era of AI’s “errors with confidence” may soon give way to an era of verified confidence – and that could make all the difference in whether we truly trust the machines that are increasingly a part of our lives.
.png)
