> Users should be aware that despite our best attempts to reduce such issues, the bot may be inappropriate, rude, or make untrue or contradictory statements. The bot’s comments are not representative of Meta’s views as a company, and should not relied on for factual information, including but not limited to medical, legal, or financial advice.
And to answer her questions about "sources":
> The bot supplements its knowledge by accessing the internet live (via an API with our partners, Mojeek) and by accessing its long-term memory that summarizes historical conversations you’ve had with the bot. You can see and reset these memories when the “look inside” link appears in your chat. You can also click on a message to see more information about how it was constructed, including search queries that were made by the bot.
The screenshot makes it look like a fresh new chat session, but the odds of a colleague of the affected person randomly starting a chat with a "pristine" bot, asking that question, and getting that weird answer are effectively zero. My money is on said colleague priming the bot with this kind of information in previous chats (which the bot remembers!) just to create this screenshot.
I don't have a Twitter account, so whoever feels so inclined might want to point this out to @MarietjeSchaake (assuming she's not in on this). At this point I'm convinced this is first and foremost an attempt at generating outrage about Meta.