 Poster: A snowHead
|
TLDR : For actual people reading this - virtually all AI generated info about snowHeads is factually wrong.
Search results for "snowHeads" on Google today produced the following AI generated "People also ask" nonsense entries:
Is snowHeads down?
The renowned snowHeads ski forum, once the UK's largest online community dedicated to skiing enthusiasts, has officially ceased its operations as of December 14, 2025.( WTF  ) The platform, established over a decade ago, was known for its active user base and extensive snow reports.
The referenced source for this gem was the website of a Los Angeles Subaru dealership: a page apparently titled "snowHeads Ski Forum Ceases Operations Amid Declining ..." that doesn't exist on the site, obviously.
Is snowHeads trustworthy?
While snowHeads claims to serve as a valuable resource for skiers, critics argue that it often perpetuates misinformation and marketing hype, potentially misguiding beginners and seasoned skiers alike.15 Dec 2025
The apparent authority here: "snowHeads Ski Forum: A Critical Look at Its Limitations and Addressing ..." on the website of a Texas School's athletics association - another entirely hallucinated page.
The same site supposedly offers this info (it doesn't actually):
Is snowHeads free to use?
As of December 15, 2025, the popular snowHeads ski forum has announced that it will no longer offer free registration or exclusive member benefits.14 Dec 2025
"snowHeads Ski Forum Ceases Free Registration and Member-Only Perks"
On a more positive note... although not much more accurate 
What are the benefits of snowHeads?
Membership Benefits and Exclusive Content
Registering on snowHeads is completely free and comes with numerous advantages. Registered members gain access to member-only forums, which serve as vibrant hubs for exchanging tips, discussing favorite slopes, and sharing recent snow conditions.14 Dec 2025
"snowHeads Community Offers Exclusive Snow Reports and ..."
And then the Subaru dealers supposedly are back with:
What is SnowHeads about?
SnowHeads, established over a decade ago, has grown into one of the largest online ski communities in the UK, with over 50,000 active members. The platform has historically provided detailed snow reports, forums, and travel advice.15 Dec 2025
"SnowHeads Ski Forum Launches Official App, Enhances User ..."
Finally it got something right except... we didn't launch an official app, did we?
This is all absolute nonsense. How did Google become so enshitified so fast?
It is a serious matter given how gullible so many people are.
I actually had a PM from someone recently saying, "AI told me the EoSB is cancelled this year. Is it?"
In return I asked if he had a long history of deals with Nigerian Princes.
He sulked
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Thu 1-01-26 18:33; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Gullible isn't in the dictionary! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
... it is written on the ceiling above you though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
....and some pretend that AI is brilliant.
Thank you for posting - not that I had heard any of these stories but just demonstrating the total fallibility of AI and its inability to do what a human does - sense check information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
ah 2025
the year when the amount of artificial incompetence "slop" passed the 50% mark of the training data used to train "AI" models.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There’s no end of AI slop out there at the moment, text-based and visual. No doubt it will get more and more dominant. The key skill will be determining what is a reliable source, and even then having a quick sanity-check on individual reporting from a normally reliable source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So doing the actual search: Is snowHeads down?
produces this utterly made-up rubbish.
| AI Overview wrote: |
Yes, the popular snowHeads ski forum has shut down its main operations and ceased free registration as of mid-December 2025, due to declining user engagement, leading to a loss of its comprehensive snow reports, discounts, and community features that were integral to many UK winter sports enthusiasts, leaving users disappointed and seeking alternatives.
Key Details of the Closure:
Official Shutdown: snowHeads officially ceased operations, with announcements around December 13-15, 2025.
Reasons Cited: Declining user engagement, reduced community participation, and the changing online landscape were key factors.
Impact: The closure ended access to its popular forums, real-time snow reports, gear discussions, and member discounts, affecting thousands of loyal members.
User Reaction: Many users expressed frustration and disappointment on social media and other forums about the sudden loss of the platform.
In short, if you were trying to access snowHeads recently, it is indeed down and no longer functioning as it used to. |
The claimed (hallucinated) source is "ALM Media, a company headquartered in the Socony–Mobil Building in Manhattan, and is a provider of specialized business news and information, focused on law. "
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| andy wrote: |
ah 2025
the year when the amount of artificial incompetence "slop" passed the 50% mark of the training data used to train "AI" models. |
This is the truth isn't it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My daughter is a copy writer for a number of skiing-related brands, primarily focusing on SEO / Blog content, she has been deeply concerned about Ai and the impact it may have on her, as clients think it's a good way to do things more in-house.
However, she is getting more work than ever as clients seek to address the pitfalls of Ai.
I write a number of gear related features, and now "one" writes a little differently and Google recognises that, and we get much better rankings than some intern hobbling something together via Ai.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@admin, oh dear god.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
I wanted to know how long to cook a duck for. Google AI proudly informed me 60mins per kg.
All the actual sites said 30-40mins..... Not sure where it got 60 from
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK, some human (I think) generated content.
There's a thread on Mumsnet asking whether it's the last functioning forum, that received this post a couple of days ago.
It looked like praise until I noticed the username - now I'm not so sure 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
So this wasn't even presented as AI generated: it was just one of the top search results but it's clearly a hallucinated result as the quoted content appears nowhere on this website - or have we just somehow pissed off a random hotel in Madagascar?
| Quote: |
Why SnowHeads Isn't the Best Ski Community
CHALET de ROSES
https://www.chaletdesroses.com › s-news-22705146-202...
16 Dec 2025 — ... SnowHeads' forums are often quiet, with few recent posts or meaningful interactions. Most discussions are outdated, repetitive, or lack depth.Read more |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Makes you wonder about deliberate ChatGPT/AI ‘poisoning’.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Thu 1-01-26 14:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
All Google AI seems to do is quote the first page of Wikipedia on any topic.
But @admin, I think I will apply to the relevant authorities to make ‘enshitified’ the word of the year for 2026.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I've managed to report one of the search results as incorrect (ALM media) - but cannot find an option to do similar for any text that appears under one the suggested/autogenerated questions 
The links from those questions also, for me, go to pages that don't contain any actual content on snowheads. And I don't want to click on more and record traffic to them...
Edit: I submitted 'feedback' on the entire 'People also ask' section.
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Thu 1-01-26 14:41; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@admin, I wondered if this was the doing of a disaffected snowHead. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Whilst most of us can quickly see that Google AI is mostly spouting poo poo about subjects it clearly knows nothing about, as admin says, there are still many that take it without question, I doubt that Google et al have any interest in fixing it
I'm interested in finding an app that automatically flags if a video is AI generated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| tangowaggon wrote: |
| ........I'm interested in finding an app that automatically flags if a video is AI generated. |
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If everybody clicks the three dots on the right and submits feedback as inaccurate it should clear up.
I’ve added feedback to three links.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm increasingly noticing AI getting things wrong. A lot of guys at work use it to ask various contractual questions and take the answer at face value. One of them congratulated a colleague on becoming a Chartered Surveyor, but later the same day didn't accept that colleague pointing out that AI had given an incorrect answer. I believe the response was something like "you think that it just gave something which isn't true"
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
People have always believed rubbish from rubbish sources which tell them what they want to hear, I suppose it's self-reinforcing.
When I have asked AI about a topic I do know a little about, I have frequently been impressed with the answer. Like a lot of stuff on the internet, I think asking the right questions is vital. But then that's always been the case with research, hasn't it?
Also, I guess, if you asked about something which is a very tiny topic, on which there is likely to be very little trustworthy commentary or analysis (which describes SHs) you are likely to be fed a load of rubbish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A search on 'Snowheads' brings this up from the daily mirror website
"The infamous Troll of Trondheim has been forecast to return this week, as a giant wall of snow heads straight for the UK..."
Should read 'a giant wall of SnowHeads head for the Dolomites' 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I asked ChatGPT about Snowheads and got the following response: "SnowHeads is a well-established, real, and verifiable skiing forum with a long history and sizable user base. It’s considered a useful community resource within skiing circles, though as with all forums, the reliability of specific posts depends on the contributors."
Nowt wrong with that. I don't find polemic which makes out that AI is inherently stupid and unreliable to be useful. The real picture - as with so much else- is more nuanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
If you now search on google you get
is snowheads down
No, snowHeads is not down. The platform is active and functional as of January 1, 2026, with users posting as recently as minutes ago.
You may have encountered misleading information due to the following:
Hoax/AI "Slop": There are several fake press releases and articles circulating from late 2025 (e.g., from "ALM Media" or "OLLU Saints Athletics") claiming the site has shut down due to declining engagement.
Community Mockery: The snowHeads community is currently discussing and mocking these false reports in a forum thread titled "The Internet/Google is Broken!".
Active Threads: Real-time activity continues on the site, including official resort threads for the 2025/26 season and live "drive down" travel chats.
If you are personally unable to load the site, check your own connection or use a third-party tool like Is It Down Right Now? to rule out local network issues.
Would you like me to find the latest snow reports or resort recommendations for the 2025/26 season from the active snowHeads forums?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Origen, That's interesting. What time did you ask that? Was it after my discussion with chatGPT? If so, maybe it has actually learnt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@Origen, absolutely about the way you prompt it, and to challenge it. I've taken to always asking "is that correct" and it's surprising how often it changes the answer slightly
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| thecramps wrote: |
| @Origen, That's interesting. What time did you ask that? Was it after my discussion with chatGPT? If so, maybe it has actually learnt. |
Google AI and ChatGPT are different systems. Although ChatGPT apparently uses Google search to get live search results.
But not sure how it would work in the other direction in the short-term - i.e. how chatting with ChatGPT could directly influence Google AI output. In the longer term - if ChatGPT is used to create web content this could then get picked up by Google AI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@thecramps, Nice one. Looks from other replies that it's already applied the things it said it would apply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
My sons - both into this kind of stuff - tell me Google AI is rubbish. I think of Chat GPT as like the British Library. The BL contains a lot of books which are unadulterated crap. And lots of good ones. Not all the "good ones" agree with each other, and some of them written by people who refined and changed their ideas over time. I know some of those books are crap because I've read them, but mostly I haven't, and I only "know" they are crap (and thus decide not to bother to read them) because people who I trust have told me they are crap. There's nothing intrinsically different, I guess, in AI now than has always been the case in places, and in traditions, where people are brought up with a particular version of reality drummed into them from an early age along with a distrust of other "realities".
Let's hope that kids who are learning the right sort of history in school these days (i.e not just memorising a load of arbitrary "facts") are also being helped to tell the wheat from the chaff on the internet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Origen wrote: |
I asked ChatGPT about Snowheads and got the following response: "SnowHeads is a well-established, real, and verifiable skiing forum with a long history and sizable user base. It’s considered a useful community resource within skiing circles, though as with all forums, the reliability of specific posts depends on the contributors."
Nowt wrong with that. I don't find polemic which makes out that AI is inherently stupid and unreliable to be useful. The real picture - as with so much else- is more nuanced. |
Large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT are neither stupid nor intelligent. However, they are inherently prone to hallucination. This point is not polemic. Hallucinations are an inherent aspect of the design of LLMs. They are designed to produce plausible sounding answers to questions - and will do so even if they are incorrect.
Now the frequency with which significant hallucinations crop up will vary depending on the model, the training set, and the prompts used. And of course the risks associated with relying on LLM output will vary depending on the domain.
If an LLM wrongly tells you that Snowheads is closed down or that stilton is a key ingredient in a Savoyarde fondue - then the consequences are not that serious. If one wrongly tells you that a particular Aire on a French autoroute is open and selling gazole - a bit more of a problem. If it gets the DIN settings wrong for your particular bindings - it's potentially much more serious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@thecramps, impressive
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
If anyone wonders at my approach to talking to chatGPT, I heard someone say that the way to approach AI search engines is with "a mix of questioning and instruction". That stuck with me. Seems he may have been right this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
One of my lads (well, hardly a lad any more...) is looking into improving AI through developing mortal computing. He did try to explain it to me, but.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now that looks like a reasonable result until you realise the ShatGPT doesn't 'mean' a single word it said to you: it was just telling you what you seemed to want to hear.
Here's the answer I got a couple of minutes ago
The current form of AI is the natural conclusion of the pursuit of the Turing test as a supposed gauge of intelligence.
What we have is systems that are designed to optimise plausibility rather than optimise accuracy.
It's a robo-snakeoil-salesman - no morals, no empathy - in effect, automated psychopathy.
The biggest issue is that over a few decades now, people have become accustomed to information 'on the computer' typically being checked for accuracy before publishing. The first glitch was when 'normal people' started spraying their opinions-as-facts across social media and an adjustment had to be made, "OK it's on the computer but it's social media so an unreliable source"... of course a lot of people have still not properly made that adjustment.
Now with AI, it's 'the computer' telling you the answer and people expect that to be error checked cos that's what computers do right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| admin wrote: |
What we have is systems that are designed to optimise plausibility rather than optimise accuracy. |
Very true!!
| admin wrote: |
The biggest issue is that over a few decades now, people have become accustomed to information 'on the computer' typically being checked for accuracy before publishing. The first glitch was when 'normal people' started spraying their opinions-as-facts across social media and an adjustment had to be made, "OK it's on the computer but it's social media so an unreliable source"... of course a lot of people have still not properly made that adjustment.
Now with AI, it's 'the computer' telling you the answer and people expect that to be error checked cos that's what computers do right? |
Yes - it's a huge problem. Because most people don't realise that the AI systems they use have been partly trained on the "opinions-as-facts" that others have sprayed across social media.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
There's nothing new, or unique to social media, about "opinion as fact". Many of those books in the British Library are precisely that. It's just easier for idiocy to get published these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Origen,
| Quote: |
It's just easier for idiocy to get published these days.
|
Indeed, not to mention read, plagiarised, cut-and-pasted etc. Many of my essays in my first year at university were a horrible mixture of stuff I'd read, rearranged and rarely understood. It took ages and I worked really hard at this futile exercise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
