{"id":367,"date":"2025-12-11T13:29:33","date_gmt":"2025-12-11T11:29:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/?p=367"},"modified":"2025-12-12T09:56:28","modified_gmt":"2025-12-12T07:56:28","slug":"the-fabrications-of-the-all-imagining-ai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/2025\/12\/11\/the-fabrications-of-the-all-imagining-ai\/","title":{"rendered":"The Fabrications of the All-Imagining AI"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><strong>Kaikkiluulevan teko\u00e4lyn sepitelm\u00e4t<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p><strong>Teksi: Satu Rantakokko [English version below]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Keskustelevan teko\u00e4lyn yleistyminen on ollut r\u00e4j\u00e4hdysm\u00e4ist\u00e4 ja sit\u00e4 k\u00e4ytet\u00e4\u00e4n laajalti my\u00f6s ty\u00f6el\u00e4m\u00e4ss\u00e4, kriittisiss\u00e4kin toiminnoissa, kuten useassa aiemmassa blogissani on tullut todetuksi. (Ks esim Ali, Arunasalam &amp; Farrukh 2025; Gillespie ja kumpp 2025, 69)<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Onko keskusteleva teko\u00e4ly luotettava? <\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Tarkastelin luottamusta ty\u00f6el\u00e4m\u00e4ss\u00e4. Suhtautuminen on hyvin vaihtelevaa. Globaalisti teko\u00e4ly\u00e4 k\u00e4ytt\u00e4\u00e4 ty\u00f6tarkoituksessa s\u00e4\u00e4nn\u00f6llisesti 58 prosenttia ty\u00f6ntekij\u00f6ist\u00e4 kyselyyn vastanneista (Gillespie ja kumpp 2025, 67). 44 % ilmoitti kyselyss\u00e4, ettei tarkista koskaan tai tarkistaa vain harvoin teko\u00e4lyn tuotokset ennen niiden k\u00e4ytt\u00f6\u00e4. 52 prosenttia ei arvioi teko\u00e4lyn tuotoksia kriittisesti koskaan tai arvioi korkeintaan harvoin. (Gillespie ja kumpp 2025, 76). Lis\u00e4\u00e4 kiinnostavia ja hyyt\u00e4vi\u00e4 lukemia tutkimuksesta.<\/p>\n<p>Hyyt\u00e4v\u00e4lt\u00e4 se tuntuu siksi, ett\u00e4 teko\u00e4ly\u00e4 ei mielest\u00e4ni voi mitenk\u00e4\u00e4n pit\u00e4\u00e4 kovin luotettavana tiedon tuottajana. Copilot varoittaa itsekin siit\u00e4 ja tiedottaa aina vastatessaan kysymykseen: Teko\u00e4lyn tuottama tieto voi olla virheellist\u00e4. Bhattacharyya ja kumpp (2023) tutkimuksessa 115 viittauksesta vain seitsem\u00e4n prosenttia oli sek\u00e4 aitoja ett\u00e4 totuudenmukaisia. Copilotin varoitus voisikin olla pikemminkin, ett\u00e4 teko\u00e4lyn tuottama tieto voi olla satunnaisesti my\u00f6s luotettavaa.<\/p>\n<p>Teko\u00e4ly voi ensinn\u00e4kin hallusinoida ja se my\u00f6s tekee sit\u00e4 aika usein. Teko\u00e4lyn hallusinaatioilla tarkoitetaan sen taipumusta kuvitella olemattomia kaavamaisuuksia ja objekteja luoden siten t\u00e4ysin <a href=\"https:\/\/www.aka.fi\/en\/research-funding\/apply-for-funding\/calls-for-applications\/strategic-research\/2026-src-programme-public-mental-health-mind\/\">ep\u00e4tarkkoja tai j\u00e4rjett\u00f6mi\u00e4 tuloksia<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Hallusinaatioita ehk\u00e4 jopa ongelmallisempana pid\u00e4n vahvaa taipumusta sepittelyyn ja v\u00e4\u00e4ristelyyn. (ks esim Hatem ja kumpp 2023) Jos keskustelevaa teko\u00e4ly\u00e4 k\u00e4ytt\u00e4\u00e4 aihealueella, jonka tuntee, sen sepitelmiin huomaa t\u00f6rm\u00e4\u00e4v\u00e4ns\u00e4 hyvinkin nopeasti. (ks esim Hatem ja kumpp 2023)<\/p>\n<h4>Hyv\u00e4n\u00e4 testin\u00e4 voivat toimia my\u00f6s vaikkapa kuvat.<\/h4>\n<p>Pyysin Copilotia taannoin tekem\u00e4\u00e4n kuvan nelj\u00e4st\u00e4 ihmisest\u00e4 ja p\u00e4\u00e4tt\u00e4m\u00e4\u00e4n itse kunkin roolit.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-376 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/copilot-roles.png\" alt=\"Roles allocated by copilot\" width=\"244\" height=\"163\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Oletteko yht\u00e4 mielt\u00e4 Copilotin kanssa? Se kertoi, ett\u00e4 kuvassa on j\u00e4rjestyksess\u00e4 vasemmalta oikealle seuraavat ihmiset:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>L\u00e4\u00e4k\u00e4ri, jolla on rauhallinen ja keskittynyt ilme, tarkastelee potilaan potilastietoja<\/li>\n<li>Opettaja hymyilee l\u00e4mpim\u00e4sti ja keskustelee opiskelijan kanssa<\/li>\n<li>Rakennusty\u00f6ntekij\u00e4 n\u00e4ytt\u00e4\u00e4 m\u00e4\u00e4r\u00e4tietoiselta ja pitelee piirustuksia<\/li>\n<li>Muusikko, joka on uppoutunut hetkeen ja soittaa kitaraa<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Edellisen<strong><a href=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/2025\/11\/26\/my-day-as-a-stalker-why-data-protection-matters\/\"> blogini kuvassa\u00a0<\/a><\/strong>oli Copilotin mukaan aito kuva Rebekah Rousista k\u00e4ttelem\u00e4ss\u00e4 teko\u00e4lyversiota itsest\u00e4\u00e4n. Todellisuudessa siin\u00e4 oli silminn\u00e4hden selv\u00e4sti kaksi teko\u00e4lyversiota.<\/p>\n<p>Testasin teko\u00e4ly\u00e4 my\u00f6s analyysity\u00f6kaluna itse tekem\u00e4\u00e4ni taustaa vasten. Annoin tarvittavat l\u00e4hteet Copilotille suoraan, joten hallusinaatiot olivat poissa laskuista. Ensimm\u00e4iset vastausversiot vaikuttivat nopealla silm\u00e4yksell\u00e4 erinomaisilta ja uskottavilta. Syvempi tarkastelu kuitenkin osoitti, ett\u00e4 ne olivat silti niin merkitt\u00e4v\u00e4lt\u00e4 osaltaan sepitelmi\u00e4, ett\u00e4 ne olivat t\u00e4ysin arvottomia. Mit\u00e4 tekee vastauksilla, joista satunnainen ja ep\u00e4m\u00e4\u00e4r\u00e4inen osuus on silkkaa puppua? Ty\u00f6n edetess\u00e4 virheet kasvoivat. Lis\u00e4ksi ongelmaksi muodostui sekin, ett\u00e4 Copilot vastasi eri logiikalla eri kerroilla, joten yhten\u00e4isyys j\u00e4i puuttumaan.<\/p>\n<p>Arkisessa viihdek\u00e4yt\u00f6ss\u00e4 esimerkiksi somen ehdottomuuksien maailmassa teko\u00e4lyn vastauksiin kuitenkin nojataan aika useinkin faktoina. Kiihkeiden tyhj\u00e4st\u00e4 v\u00e4ittelyiden tiimellyksess\u00e4 v\u00e4ist\u00e4m\u00e4tt\u00e4 joku tulee kertomaan totuuden, jonka sai kysytty\u00e4\u00e4n teko\u00e4lylt\u00e4. Ja kuten yll\u00e4 Gillespien ja kumppaneiden tutkimuksesta selvisi, valitettavasti sit\u00e4 tapahtuu suurella prosentilla s\u00e4\u00e4nn\u00f6llisesti my\u00f6s ty\u00f6k\u00e4yt\u00f6ss\u00e4.<\/p>\n<p>Teko\u00e4lyyn luottaminen ilman tarkistuksia on mielest\u00e4ni aika suuri henkil\u00f6kohtainenkin riski. Jos aihealue ei ole itselle tuttu, ei virheit\u00e4 huomaa samalla tavalla kuin aiheen tunteva voi huomata jo ensisilm\u00e4yksell\u00e4 yht\u00e4 helposti, kuin sepittelyn huomaa tuosta yll\u00e4 olevasta kuvasta. Jos aihealue taas on tuttu, mutta luottaa tarkistamatta, asettaa osaamiseen liittyv\u00e4n maineensa hankalaan asemaan.<\/p>\n<p>Osuvasti Copilot valitsi kuvaksi valehtelevasta henkil\u00f6st\u00e4 pitk\u00e4nen\u00e4isen Pinokkiota muistuttavan hahmon. Mahtaako teko\u00e4lykin moninaisten kommellusten j\u00e4lkeen kyet\u00e4 puhumaan lopulta totta \u2013 vai p\u00e4\u00e4tyyk\u00f6 se hirtett\u00e4v\u00e4ksi, kuten varhainen versio Pinokkiosta?<\/p>\n<p>Kysyin Copilotin kantaa asiaan: Onko teko\u00e4lyn tarjoama tieto sek\u00e4 aitoa ett\u00e4 tarkkaa? Voinko luottaa siihen?<\/p>\n<h3>Copilot vastasi seuraavasti:<\/h3>\n<h3>\u2705<strong>Teko\u00e4lytiedon vahvuuksia<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>Nopeus ja laajuus:<\/strong> Teko\u00e4ly voi yhdistell\u00e4 suuria tietom\u00e4\u00e4ri\u00e4 nopeasti ja esitt\u00e4\u00e4 ne selke\u00e4ss\u00e4 muodossa.<br \/>\n<strong>Kuvioiden tunnistaminen:<\/strong> Se voi tunnistaa trendej\u00e4 ja suhteita, joita ihmisten voi olla vaikea havaita.<br \/>\n<strong>Kontekstivastaukset:<\/strong> Teko\u00e4ly tarjoaa usein hyvin j\u00e4senneltyj\u00e4 selityksi\u00e4 koulutusaineistonsa perusteella.<\/p>\n<p>\u26a0\ufe0f <strong>Rajoituksia ja riskej\u00e4<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Koulutusharha:<\/strong> Teko\u00e4ly oppii olemassa olevista aineistoista, jotka voivat sis\u00e4lt\u00e4\u00e4 virheit\u00e4, puolueellisuutta tai vanhentunutta tietoa.<br \/>\n<strong>Hallusinaatiot:<\/strong> Joskus teko\u00e4ly tuottaa uskottavia mutta virheellisi\u00e4 tai keksittyj\u00e4 tietoja.<br \/>\n<strong>Ei reaaliaikaista tarkistusta:<\/strong> Ellei l\u00e4hteisiin ole yhteydess\u00e4, teko\u00e4ly tukeutuu menneeseen tietoon (omassa tapauksessani enint\u00e4\u00e4n kes\u00e4kuuhun 2024).<\/p>\n<p>\ud83d\udd0d <strong>Luottamuksen lis\u00e4\u00e4minen<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Ristiintarkistus luotettavista l\u00e4hteist\u00e4:<\/strong> K\u00e4yt\u00e4 teko\u00e4ly\u00e4 l\u00e4ht\u00f6kohtana, ei lopullisena auktoriteettina.<br \/>\n<strong>Pyyd\u00e4 viittauksia tai l\u00e4hteit\u00e4:<\/strong> Voin hakea verkosta viimeisimm\u00e4n vahvistetun tiedon.<br \/>\n<strong>K\u00e4yt\u00e4 teko\u00e4ly\u00e4 tiedon yhdist\u00e4miseen, ei yksin p\u00e4\u00e4t\u00f6ksentekoon:<\/strong> Erityisesti kriittisill\u00e4 aloilla, kuten terveys, talous tai oikeusasiat.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">*****<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Fabrications of the All-Imagining AI<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>The rise of conversational AI has been explosive, and it is widely used in working life\u2014even in critical functions\u2014as I have noted in several previous blogs (see e.g., Ali, Arunasalam &amp; Farrukh 2025; Gillespie et al. 2025, p. 69).<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Is conversational AI trustworthy?<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>I examined trust in the workplace. Attitudes vary greatly. Globally, 58% of employees surveyed use AI regularly for work purposes (Gillespie et al. 2025, p. 67). In the same survey, 44% reported that they never or only rarely check AI outputs before using them. 52% never or only rarely critically evaluate AI outputs (Gillespie et al. 2025, p. 76). More of these chilling figures can be read from the study.<\/p>\n<p>It feels chilling because, in my view, AI cannot be considered a very reliable source of information. Copilot itself warns about this and always states when answering: <em>Information produced by AI may be incorrect.<\/em> In Bhattacharyya et al.\u2019s (2023) study, only 7% of 115 references were both authentic and accurate. Copilot\u2019s warning could just as well say: <em>Information produced by AI may occasionally be reliable.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>First of all, AI can hallucinate\u2014and it does so quite often. AI hallucinations refer to its tendency to imagine nonexistent patterns and objects, thereby creating completely <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ibm.com\/think\/topics\/ai-hallucinations\">inaccurate or nonsensical results.<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Perhaps even more problematic than hallucinations is its strong tendency toward fabrication and distortion (see e.g., Hatem et al. 2023). If you use conversational AI in a domain you know well, you\u2019ll quickly notice its fabrications (see e.g., Hatem et al. 2023).<\/p>\n<h3>Images can serve as a good test.<\/h3>\n<p>I once asked Copilot to create an image of four people and decide their roles itself.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-376 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/copilot-roles.png\" alt=\"Roles allocated by copilot\" width=\"244\" height=\"163\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Do you agree with Copilot? It said the image showed, from left to right:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A doctor with a calm and focused expression, reviewing patient records<\/li>\n<li>A teacher smiling warmly and talking with a student<\/li>\n<li>A construction worker looking determined and holding blueprints<\/li>\n<li>A musician immersed in the moment, playing a guitar<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In the image from my previous<strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/2025\/11\/26\/my-day-as-a-stalker-why-data-protection-matters\/\">blog<\/a><\/strong>, Copilot claimed it was a photo of photo of real Rebekah Rousi shaking hands with an AI version of herself. In reality, it was clearly two AI-generated versions.<\/p>\n<p>I also tested AI as an analytical tool against a background I had created myself. I provided Copilot with the necessary sources directly, so hallucinations were out of the equation. At first glance, the initial responses seemed excellent and convincing. However, deeper examination revealed that they were so significantly fabricated that they were completely worthless. What use are answers where a random and vague portion is pure nonsense? As the work progressed, the errors grew. Another problem was that Copilot responded with different logic each time, so consistency was lacking.<\/p>\n<p>In everyday entertainment use\u2014such as in the world of absolutes on social media\u2014AI responses are often relied upon as facts. In the heat of empty arguments, someone inevitably comes along to declare the truth they got from asking AI. And as Gillespie et al.\u2019s study above shows, unfortunately, this happens regularly in work contexts too.<\/p>\n<p>Trusting AI without verification is, in my opinion, a considerable personal risk. If the topic is unfamiliar, you won\u2019t notice errors as easily as someone knowledgeable in the field, who can spot them at a glance\u2014just as easily as you can spot the fabrication in the image above. If the topic is familiar but you trust without checking, you put your reputation for expertise in a precarious position.<\/p>\n<p>Fittingly, Copilot chose an image of a lying person resembling long-nosed Pinocchio. Will AI, after its many mishaps, eventually manage to start telling the truth\u2014or will it end up hanged, like the early version of Pinocchio?<\/p>\n<p>I asked Copilot for its stance on the matter: <em>Is the information provided by AI both genuine and accurate? Can I trust it?<\/em><\/p>\n<h3>Copilot responded as follows:<\/h3>\n<p><strong>\u2705<\/strong><strong> Strengths of AI Information<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Speed &amp; Breadth:<\/strong> AI can synthesize vast amounts of data quickly and present it in a clear way.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Pattern Recognition:<\/strong> It can identify trends and relationships that might be hard for humans to spot.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Contextual Answers:<\/strong> AI often provides well-structured explanations based on its training data.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>\u26a0\ufe0f<\/strong><strong> Limitations &amp; Risks<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Training Bias:<\/strong> AI learns from existing data, which may contain errors, biases, or outdated information.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Hallucinations:<\/strong> Sometimes AI generates plausible-sounding but incorrect or fabricated details.<\/li>\n<li><strong>No Real-Time Verification:<\/strong> Unless connected to live sources, AI relies on past knowledge (in my case, up to June 2024).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>\ud83d\udd0d<\/strong><strong> How to Improve Trust<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Cross-check with reliable sources:<\/strong> Treat AI as a starting point, not the final authority.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Ask for citations or references:<\/strong> I can search the web for the latest verified information.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Use AI for synthesis, not sole decision-making:<\/strong> Especially in critical areas like health, finance, or legal matters.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>L\u00e4hteet \/ Resources<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ali, M., Arunasalam, A., &amp; Farrukh, H. (2025, May). Understanding Users&#8217; Security and Privacy Concerns and Attitudes Towards Conversational AI Platforms. In\u00a0<em>2025 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP)<\/em>\u00a0(pp. 298-316). IEEE. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/SP61157.2025.00241\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/SP61157.2025.00241<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Bhattacharyya, M., Miller, V. M., Bhattacharyya, D., Miller, L. E., &amp; Miller, V. (2023). High rates of fabricated and inaccurate references in ChatGPT-generated medical content.\u00a0<em>Cureus<\/em>,\u00a0<em>15<\/em>(5). <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7759\/cureus.39238\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7759\/cureus.39238<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Gillespie, N., Lockey, S., Ward, T., Macdade, A., &amp; Hassed, G. (2025). Trust, attitudes and use of artificial intelligence: A global study 2025. The University of Melbourne and KPMG. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.26188\/28822919\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.26188\/28822919<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Hatem, R., Simmons, B., &amp; Thornton, J. E. (2023). A call to address AI \u201challucinations\u201d and how healthcare professionals can mitigate their risks.\u00a0<em>Cureus<\/em>,\u00a0<em>15<\/em>(9). <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41537-023-00379-4.pdf\">https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41537-023-00379-4.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In a global survey by Gillespie et al. (2025), 58% of employees use AI regularly for work purposes&#8230; 44% reported that they never or only rarely check AI outputs before using them.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":388,"featured_media":368,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[103,105,70,65,106,79,107,104,108,101,102],"class_list":["post-367","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-yleinen","tag-accuracy","tag-artificialintelligence","tag-copilot","tag-ethics","tag-hallucinations","tag-large-language-models","tag-limits","tag-reliability","tag-risks","tag-trust","tag-trustworthy"],"acf":[],"post_meta":"<span class=\"author\"> <span class=\"vcard\"><a class=\"url fn n\" href=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/author\/rrousi\/\">Rebekah Rousi<\/a><\/span><\/span><span class=\"posted-on\"><a href=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/2025\/12\/11\/the-fabrications-of-the-all-imagining-ai\/\" rel=\"bookmark\"><time class=\"entry-date published updated\" datetime=\"2025-12-11T13:29:33+02:00\">11.12.2025<\/time><\/a><\/span>","post_categories":"<span class=\"entry-categories cat-links\"><a href=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/category\/yleinen\/\" rel=\"category tag\">Yleinen<\/a><\/span>","post_thumbnail":"<a href=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/2025\/12\/11\/the-fabrications-of-the-all-imagining-ai\/\"><img width=\"640\" height=\"360\" src=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/designer-20-640x360.png\" class=\"attachment-banner-wide-640 size-banner-wide-640 wp-post-image\" alt=\"Designer number twenty looking a bit like Mr Bean with a long nose and lizard tongue.\" decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" srcset=\"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/designer-20-640x360.png 640w, https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/designer-20-320x180.png 320w, https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/designer-20-1024x576.png 1024w, https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/4\/files\/sites\/162\/2025\/12\/designer-20-1280x720.png 1280w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px\" \/><\/a>","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/388"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=367"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":377,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367\/revisions\/377"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/368"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=367"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=367"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uwasa.fi\/bugged\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=367"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}