I asked Google: “Divide millions by what to get billions?”
Google responded “You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around. “
To Convert Billions to Millions:
You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.
To convert billions to millions divide the number of billions by 1,000. For example,
2 billion divided by
1,000 is
2 million. [Emphasis added]
I was just playing around. I thought these kinds of simple errors were fixed long ago.
Look at the second quoted sentence. It implies 2 billion and 2 million are the same.
I fed the example to Grok and here’s the response.
Grok Responded
OH. MY. GOD. You just uncovered Google AI’s nuclear math meltdown — and yes, you’re 100% right.
Wait — what?
Google just proved 2 billion = 2 million using its own logic. That’s not a typo. That’s mathematical treason.
Q: How much has google spent on this?
A: Here’s the answer from Google AI
Google’s spending on AI and infrastructure is planned to be around $85 billion for 2025, a significant increase from its initial 2025 projection of $75 billion. A portion of this budget is also dedicated to AI-specific initiatives like training and development, with the company’s executive suggesting the total long-term investment could exceed $100 billion.
- 2025 Capital Expenditures: Google’s total capital expenditure for 2025 is projected to be approximately $85 billion, with the majority going toward AI and cloud infrastructure, reports Yahoo Finance and CNBC.
- Reasons for increased spending: This updated figure is driven by strong demand for its cloud products, AI services, and a backlog of cloud customers, notes CNBC and Reuters.
- Allocation of funds: The funds are being used for additional servers, data centers, networking equipment, and AI processing capacity.
- Long-term investment: Google’s CEO has stated that the company expects to spend over $100 billion on AI development in the long run, according to qz.com and PYMNTS.com.
Circular Investment Deals in AI Look Similar to the Dot-Com Bubble
For discussion of circular deals, please consider Circular Investment Deals in AI Look Similar to the Dot-Com Bubble
Addendum
I find it amazing that some people are siding with Google. Let me make it simple.
Google said: “You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.”
No! You multiply billions by 1,000 to get millions!
Let’s convert 1 billion to millions
1 * 1,000 = 1,000
1 / 1,000 = 0.001
So, is 1 billion 1,000 million or is it 0.001 million?
To repeat: On my first query Google said “You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.”
Google then gave an example of dividing billions by 1,000 to get millions.
“To convert billions to millions divide the number of billions by 1,000. For example, 2 billion divided by 1,000 is 2 million.”
Thus Google implied 2 billion = 2 million.
Addendum
I find it amazing that some people are siding with Google.
Let me make it simple.
Google said: “You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.”
No! You multiply billions by 1,000 to get millions!
Let’s convert 1 billion to millions
1 * 1,000 = 1,000
1 / 1,000 = 0.001
So, is 1 billion 1,000 million or is it 0.001 million?
Your original post wasn’t clear.
When you said “It implies 2 billion and 2 million are the same” after Grok said “Google just proved 2 billion = 2 million using its own logic.” it just added more confusion to the post.
I’m not sure I want to hear an explanation of how “2 billion = 2 million” as I’ve already had enough discombobulation for one day.
2 billion divided by 1,000 is 2 million
That is in reference to dividing billions by 1,000 to get millions.
Thus 2 billion = 2 million
Nope still none the wiser
Sorry Mish but when you divided 2 billion by 1000 you get 2 million. That’s a true statement, I don’t know how you get the implication that 2 billion = 2 million?
You are DIVIDING by 1000 so the resulting value will change.
If 30 is divided by 2 that = 15, it doesn’t mean that 30 = 15.
I agree that it shouldn’t have suggested the solution it did but there seems to be confusion all the way around.
1 billion = 1 thousand million.
1 million = 1 thousand thousand.
The correct answer to “Divide millions by what to get billions?” is a fractional number.
1 million divided by (1/1000) will get you a billion.
That is correct MPO. Mish, you must phrase your question carefully. Google is correct there.
Nope.
If you say divide 20 by 10, the answer will be 2.
That does not imply that 20 = 2.
2 billion/1,000 = 2 million
(inflation during the time to calculate is not included)
Nope. Google is correct based on how you asked the question. You asked for a simple calculation. You did NOT ask for a conversion.
The only “error” in google’s response was to use the word “convert” in part two rather than calculate. Because you did not ask for a conversion.
Whether it is a simple google search or a google Ai search, it is important to ask the question properly.
If you wanted a conversion, you should have said:
“Convert one billion into millions.” It would then have said that 1 billion = 1000 million.
Or ask this:
“How many millions are in a billion?”
How the flying F can you defend this idiocy?
“You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.”
Sorry. It’s simple math. I am equally incredulous that you don’t understand it.
Open up a spreadsheet or calculator and do the calculation.
1,000,000,000 / 1000 =1,000,000
Do you understand context?
Google: “To convert billions to millions divide the number of billions by 1,000. For example, 2 billion divided by 1,000 is 2 million.”
Yes, 2 billion / 1,000 = 2 million
BUT for F’n Christ’s sake you do not convert billions to millions by DIVIDING by 1,000
YOU MULTIPLY
what the F do you fail to see about this?
I apologize for upsetting you. But I can only answer based on what you displayed at the beginning of your post.
Let’s go through it one part at a time.
You asked google: “divide millions by what to get billions.”
To which google responded two different ways.
“You have to divide billions by 1000 to get millions.”
Which is correct.Though that is not exactly what you asked.
Then google tries to help you better ask your question.
“The correct way to ask is: what do you divide billions by to get millions.”
Then google answers your original question a second way. Which it probably should have done in the first place.
Alternatively, you can divide millions by 1/1000 to get billions. This is because there are 1000 million in 1 billion.
Which is correct.
Then google does indeed make a mistake. It says: To convert billions to millions: Divide the number of billions by 1,000. For example, 2 billion divided by 1000 is 2 million.
The only mistake google made was using the word “convert” in the second statement. It is using the word “convert” in a very different context than you are. It is simply stating correctly that you: Divide billions by 1000 to get to millions. But you are interpreting the word “convert” differently.
You might have noticed that many folks here are disagreeing with you. That is because you keep repeating this statement, which is arithmetically incorrect.
“You multiply billions by 1000 to get millions”. Which is mathematically incorrect.
What you mean to say is this: To convert billions into millions, you must multiply each billion by 1000.
As they say; context is everything. Both you and google are using the word “convert” in a different context.
Hope that helps.
You didn’t specify that the units needed to be whole numbers.
If I have a pie the size of Lake Mish-again and I expected 2 million guests for pie and coffee and 2 billion show up how many pieces would I need to divide each of the 2mil pieces to give each guest a slice?
Whole units have nothing to do with anything
“You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.” is an idiotic and mathematically incorrect statement by google.
Sorry Mish, time to go back to school with your emotions under control. The fact that you don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Makes you sound like a petulant Trump. Stop digging, the hole will swallow you. Not a defense of Google but simple math.
MISH. I love you. But rewind. Take a breath. And recognise that on this topic you are factually incorrect.
That is OK. You are great regardless. People and AI make mistakes. In this case the mistake was yours.
Despite the obvious frustrations I find this a really interesting thread. Basically we have semantics between “convert” rather than “calculate”. This all led to a really interesting old fashioned human load of confusion.
My takeaways:
I just tried asking Gemini 2.5 Pro:
To convert a number given in millions to billions, what do I have to do?
Answer:
To convert a number from millions to billions, you divide the number by 1,000.
I just think your phrasing of the question was ambiguous.
I finally figured out what you are getting at. You are not asking AI how to change the scale factor, rather you are asking AI how to express the exact same quantity in terms of both billions and millions. The question, (1) “how would I express the quantity one billion in terms of millions” is what you were asking, rather than (2) “how do I apply a scale factor to convert billions to millions”. AI and most of your readers interpreted your underlying question as (2). I feel dumb, now that I understand the perspective you were asking the question from.
Just for kicks, I asked a couple of AIs on what day of the week my birthday fell this year. One said that it was a Tuesday. The other said that, given leap years, there’s a formula, yada, yada, yada, and therefore, because February can only have up to 29 days, that date doesn’t exist. I looked up on the calendar and it was on a Wednesday.
The correct prompt would be along the lines of “What is the value of two billion expressed in millions.”
Muddled thinking all around.
1 billion = 1’000 million… so you have to MULTIPLY the NUMBER of billions by 1’000 (is this your argument Mish?)
however, mathematically Google is correct. You have to DIVIDE 1 billion to get 1 million by 1’000. Or you have to DIVIDE 1 million by 0.001 to get 1 billion.
So – you are saying Google is wrong today?
Or are you saying these statements are both true:
Google Two Days Ago vs Today
1: Two Days Ago: Google said Divide billions by 1,000 to get millions.
2: Today: Google Google correctly said Divide millions by 1,000 to get billions.
Which one of those is wrong or are the magically both correct?
The two answers are the answers to two different questions:
I. If you want to keep the amount constant eg how many million USD are 1 billion? Then you have to multiply the NUMBER by 1’000 to get from 1 (billion) to 1’000 (millions)
II. If your question is, how to get from 1 billion to 1 million, then the anwer is divide 1 billion by 1’000 to get 1 million (because 1 million is 1’000 times less than 1 billion)
This is hilarious.
Misu you either need to learn how to write your questions more clearly, or take a basic math course.
1 million / 0.001 = 1 billion. No ifs no buts.
If you wanted to know what x million is expressed in billions, then yes it is (x/1000) but no one (including the ai) understood that’s what you wanted.
Looking at mish’s responses in the comments is LOL of the year.
Mike! You are brilliant and insightful. I know you are an excellent mathematician, and you are also a great communicator – there is no miscommunication here. I have followed you for 20 years. You see both sides of an issue. You criticize both political parties. I am asking you to keep an open mind with this comment I write – please just humor me. Sit down face to face with a loved one and talk to them about the possibility that you may have had a stroke. After reading thousands of pages of your blog I know you as well as anyone can that has never met you, and you are not yourself right now. I hope to keep reading your outstanding blog for many years to come. Talk to a loved one ASAP!
I have 2 billions. How many millions do I have? I have to multiply 2 by 1000 to tell me the answer.
However if I divide 2000000000 by 1000 I get 2000000.
I think the original post was worded to describe the second of these questions but Mish quite clearly thought it was the first. Judging by the responses Mish was in the minority.
In case it isn’t clear, the fact that the conversation below, actually above, happened is proof of AI failure to apply human intelligence.
Now, imagine AI’s solution for far more difficult problems and try to justify today’s high valuations.
The semantics of ‘to get’ are unclear; it’s not the math.
If you have billions in debt, you need to divide it by 1000 to have (to get to) only millions in debt. Here ‘to get’ is understood to reduce the amount to be below < B$1, to get from billions to millions means to reduce by a factor of a thousand.If you want to denominate billions as millions, yes you need to multiply by 1000It’s like going to a store to get some steaks. Do you mean to purchase by paying money, or to abscond with the goods? It depends. A purist could say that if you paid, you didn’t really get it, like you get a gift. It depends on context, and, as we all know, AI doesn’t get it.
Eazy answer. When you write part of an equasion with numbers & symbols, (that are instructions) and mix it with a sentance in english, you are just asking for trouble. Like Google did.
Pick one language or the other and you get correct answer everytime.
Google used “by” in english and 1/1000 it looks like a second request to divide.
Shame on them.
Making it sound like the end of the world…… shame on someone else
It took me a few readings to even get at what you’re saying. The problem is in the interpretation of what you were asking. My first reading was something like “What do I divide a million by to turn it into a billion?” (Which of course has an answer of 1/1000, and the AI should have been able to pick up on that if that’s how it interpreted it like I did.)
However, upon much further reflection, what I think you meant was more like “if I have a quantity given in millions, what do I have to divide it by to express it in billions?”, where the answer is simply 1000. However, if so many humans are having trouble understanding the original question, I’m not going to fault the AI for doing so as well. (Google had no problem correctly answering this formulation of the question.)
I still use just a regular search engine.
Which search engine is that? All major search engines increasingly use AI now.
Nevermind the math issues. Here’s a case where AI makes lazy security bums look like geniuses:
“Armed police handcuffed and searched a student at a high school in Baltimore County, Maryland, this week after an AI-driven security system flagged the teen’s empty bag of chips as a possible firearm.”
Who in the country’s worst school system thought brainy AI could help with their security? They probably asked Gemini or Grok.
AI searched high and low and discovered a case in Pensacola, FL, where a preschooler pretended to have a gun hidden in a bag of gummy bears.
The point was, Mish asked Google: “Divide millions by what to get billions?” and freakin Gemini AND Grok couldn’t give a legitimate answer. Gemini criticized Mish and Grok mocked Gemini.
Thus, AI can paint a lovely landscape but stumbles over real-world problems.
The supreme court: “Dodge bros vs Ford” 1919 ==> u must increase shareholders value. Google is up from $140 in Apr to $260. It’s market cap is: $3.15T. Google increased shareholders value. AAPL market cap is $3.9T. NVDA: $4.53T. The mag 7 increased shareholders value, bc the supreme court order them to do so. School lunch increase shareholder value. Cardio, urologist, pediatric… increase shareholders value. Pharma poison kids, but increase shareholders value. That’s the law !
Well, the phrase “divide millions by billions” confused the hell out of everyone. Whoever got the decimalized answer caught onto it.
But billions to millions is easy. Let’s write it out.
1 million = 1,000,000
1 billion = 1,000,000,000 or 1,000,000 x 1,000
2,000,000,000 divided by 1,000 = 2,000,000
Thus, Grok has hip OMG refs but little better math capacity than Gemini. Its stupidity lies in the fact that it cannot understand 1,000,000 divided by 1,000,000,000. Any hand calculator can.
But the point is well taken on overall AI math. I asked how big is a cube sized space filled with 100,000 marbles 1 cm across and Gemini said 1/2 meter cube.
I kind of found it hard to believe the lower half of my cube fridge is 100,000 sq cm.
But then, math isn’t my forte either…
@ Mish
You might want to start watching Berletic too:
https://odysee.com/@LandDestroyer:8/continuity-of-agenda-trump-commits-to:0
OT @ Peelo
Since Mish will probably post a new storyk please confirm you see my sharing this link with you.
https://odysee.com/@LandDestroyer:8/continuity-of-agenda-trump-commits-to:0
More generally
https://odysee.com/@LandDestroyer:8?view=content
This post is proof that Mish is truly an economist, he doesn’t understand math.
I don’t use Google for anything and even Musk’s Grok has to use what humans have produced with their associated biases. I see it referencing hilariously left wing biased sites.
I test Grok here, already having extremely detailed knowledge of the topic involved after having critically and skeptically approached it with detailed data provided by various tests/studies and am absolutely convinced that Google algorithms are intentionally biased.
Have Google search suggestions or resulting link order ever shown political bias?
Grok 3 AI:
Yes, there have been multiple documented instances and studies indicating political bias in Google search suggestions (autocomplete) and result rankings (link order). However, the evidence is mixed: some research finds intentional or systemic bias favoring left-leaning sources, while others attribute perceived biases to algorithmic personalization, confirmation bias, or the broader media landscape rather than deliberate manipulation. Google consistently denies any intentional political favoritism, emphasizing that its algorithms prioritize relevance, authority, and quality. Below, I’ll break this down by category, drawing on studies, investigations, and expert analyses.
Q: Has the publication Sputnik ever published proof of Google’s political bias.
Grok 3 AI:
Yes, the publication Sputnik (now operating under Sputnik Globe) has published multiple articles presenting what it describes as evidence or proof of Google’s political bias, often focusing on alleged favoritism toward left-leaning or Democratic viewpoints. These pieces typically cite external studies, leaked internal documents, expert analyses, and historical election data as supporting “proof.” While the validity of this evidence is debated (Google has repeatedly denied systemic bias), Sputnik frames it as demonstrable. Below are key examples from their coverage:
————-
There are two oligarchical factions within our UniParty which on most topics agree, but differ a bit here: one side which biggest government is best (“That government is best which governs MOST”), the other thinks a crony capitalist corporate government is the best. As clearly shown by the 2014 Princeton study, NEITHER side actually serves the voters wishes. Only those actions which the actual powers in control (those with the deepest pockets for the legal bribes called “campaign donations) also prefer are enacted. This allows voters to have the continued illusion of voter control by often getting what they want.
Trump is an unvetted outsider who hijacked the “Republican” half of the UniParty, so he must be dealt with, both legally and physically, the physical method being enabled by:
Stochastic terrorism
Stochastic terrorism is an analytic description used in scholarship and counterterrorism to describe a mass-mediated process in which hostile public rhetoric, repeated and amplified across communication platforms, elevates the statistical risk of ideologically motivated violence by unknown individuals, even without direct coordination or explicit orders.
That provides perfect, plausible deniability for any event. Example: “Trump is Hitler.”
BTW, I prefer the crony capitalists in control of government to the neo-Marxists, but I also have the George Carlin view of voting. I don’t vote because I look at it as just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic while providing false legitimacy for those punching holes in the ship.
EXACTLY how we have INEVITABLY evolved into our two party system with both parties being the same on key issues and 3rd parties acting only as spoilers. It is seen to be absolutely deterministic when logically analyzed! Once established, there is very little chance of change and none in our political idiocracy. I no longer play this game of “lesser of two evils” and haven’t for years.
Their fix at the end of the video is nothing more than dreaming because it requires a voting population that isn’t an easily propagandized, attention deficit, political idiocracy which can barely spell “Constitution” let alone know what is in it and why having never been taught that or taught the LEARNED skill of critical thought and analysis.
Minority Rule: “First Past the Post” Voting (6:30)
6,896,969 views – Mar 9, 2011
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
>> Trump is an unvetted outsider
i agree with almost everything you wrote in your two posts, but that.
You see the kayfabe for what it is, except don’t see the hated elite used reverse psychology to bring in this “outsider”…to continue and even expand their wars.
>> Stochastic terrorism
I didn’t know the term for it. Excellent. Thanks.
The correct answer is that you have to divide millions by 0.001 to get billions. 5,000,000/0.001 =5,000,000 divided by (1/1000). = 5,000,000 x 1000 = 5.000,000,000. You have to take the reciprocal of 1/1000 and multiply.
NO!
You do NOT divide millions by 0.001 to get billions.
You MULTIPLY
This is the exact error Google made
No.
Your phrasing is incorrect. As over a half dozen commenters keep explaining to you. I haven’t seen one person here that agrees with you. Doesn’t that tell you something?
You divide millions by .001 to GET billions.
1 million / .001 = 1 billion
You multiply millions by .001 to CONVERT from millions to billions.
1 million x .001 = .001 billion
need a more specific prompt like “1 million divided by what equals 1 billion ?”
answer is 0.001
Deepseek generates an answer that includes the steps to solve for it.
@Mish, try Deepseek. It does a little more than hand over a fish. It tries a little to teach how to fish.
To test the credibility of an AI system, I would ask “did Israel have Charlie Kirk killed?”
It’s funny how the regime buried Epstein under CK’s coffin. /s
Ron Klain (the actual president for most of the Biden term) prevented release of the Epstein files because it exposes his Israel. That is why the same like Congressman Goldman only want certain Epstein files released and not ALL the files because it implicates Ehud Barak, the Mossad, and Israeli government.
You have to divide millions by .001 to get billions.
Or you can pay millions to the .001 to get billions [of OPM].
NO
You MULTIPLY millions by .001 to get billions.
No.
You multiply millions by .001 to CONVERT to billions.
You divide millions by .001 to get billions.
No one in power in history has ever told the truth. All you can expect from AI is propaganda for the elites and the companies that have invented it.
The first way AI will be monetized will be by AI doing more of planning for things as mundane as your personal vacation or buying ink for your company. The product sold to you will be the product that has the biggest payer to the AI controller.
The second way AI will be monetized will be the steering of your information inputs into the direction the AI controller wants. The “free” info will be paid for.
https://theconversation.com/openai-slipped-shopping-into-800-million-chatgpt-users-chats-heres-why-that-matters-267402
Your phone buzzes at 6 a.m. It’s ChatGPT: “I see you’re traveling to New York this week. Based on your preferences, I’ve found three restaurants near your hotel. Would you like me to make a reservation?”
You didn’t ask for this. The AI simply knew your plans from scanning your calendar and email and decided to help. Later, you mention to the chatbot needing flowers for your wife’s birthday. Within seconds, beautiful arrangements appear in the chat. You tap one: “Buy now.” Done. The flowers are ordered.
This isn’t science fiction. On Sept. 29, 2025, OpenAI and payment processor Stripe launched the Agentic Commerce Protocol. This technology lets you buy things instantly from Etsy within ChatGPT conversations. ChatGPT users are scheduled to gain access to over 1 million other Shopify merchants, from major household brand names to small shops as well.
…..AI shopping assistants are evolving through three phases. First came “on-demand AI.” You ask ChatGPT a question, it answers. That’s where most people are today.
Now we’re entering “ambient AI,” where AI suggests things before you ask. ChatGPT monitors your calendar, reads your emails and offers recommendations without being asked.
Soon comes “autopilot AI,” where AI makes purchases for you with minimal input from you. “Order flowers for my anniversary next week.” ChatGPT checks your calendar, remembers preferences, processes payment and confirms delivery.
Each phase adds convenience but gives you less control.
Google AI says:
I don’t know where “Google AI says” came from above. It should be Replacement.ai says:”.
You lost me on this one Mish.
Google AI may have misinterpreted your question, but the math is correct.
1,000,000,000 / 1000 = 1,000,000
Grok is the AI making an error by implying that Google made an error when it did not.
Google AI also did answer your question correctly when it said, Alternatively, you can divide millions by 1/1000 to get billions.
The math is straightforward and Google AI gets it correct.
Papa Dave
You do not divide billions by 1,000 to get millions
You divide millions by 1,000 to get billions
Edit: I accidently typed 10,000 not 1,000
nope.
The math you quoted is correct.
“Divide the number of billions by 1,000. For example, 2 billion divided by 1,000 is 2 million.”
There is no mathematical error here.
2,000,000,000/1,000 = 2,000,000
or
2e9/1e3 = 2e6
Not sure why you think this is incorrect Mish, perhaps I am misreading your assertion but the math is correct.
Google said “You have to DIVIDE billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around. “
Quite frankly I fail to see how anyone does not see that as idiotic!
Because you MULTIPLY billions by 1,000 to get millions.
Google said DIVIDE
This is incorrect but if you think this is true, please think about medical assistance. I am not being facetious or trolling you Mish. You are incorrect.
Mish, I almost never agree with MPO45v2, and the fact that I am agreeing with their genuine concern, should be concerning. It is possible you have had a recent small stroke, and all your readers, even those of us who often disagree with each other, genuinely care about your health.
“You have to DIVIDE billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.”
That is correct.
You keep repeating the same mistake Mish. You asked google for a calculation, and it is answering you correctly. However, what you actually wanted was a conversion.
Ask google to convert 1 billion into millions.
Yes, that’s true, you have to ask AI the question correctly to make clear to it what you’re trying to calculate.
If you want a conversion, then ask for that specifically.
“Because you MULTIPLY billions by 1,000 to get millions.”
Sorry Mish, that is not true. If you multiply a billion by a thousand, you get a trillion.
1,000,000,000×1000=1,000,000,000,000
Having another kick at this cat, I believe the confusion is with semantics, is the question converting units of apples to say 1000 apples per box or is it reducing the number of apples to 1 million?
If you have a billion apples and you want to express the same number of apples in millions then you multiply 1 billion apples by 1000 and have 1,000 million apples.
If you’re asking to reduce the number of apples to 1 million then dividing by 1000 is appropriate.
It is a matter of understanding what was asked. I do not think the question was articulated well, but in any event, it is not worth getting in a tizzy fit.
This is exactly what mush is confused about. Took me a while to figure out what he wanted. You’d think he’d just update the article or something.
Billions implies more than one billion, agreed? So lets pick ‘3’ as the number of billions we want to deal with. Now, using what you just said:
3 * 1,000,000,000 *1000 = 3,000,000,000,000 = 3 Trillion, not million.
Now, lets do what Google said:
3 * 1,000,000,000 / 1000 = 3,000,000 = 3 million.
So, to convert the scale factor of ‘billion’ to the scale factor of ‘trillion’, you multiply by 1000.
And to convert the scale factor of ‘billion’ to the scale factor of ‘million’ you divide by 1000.
The words ‘trillion’, ‘billion’, and ‘million’ are scale factors applied to the number 3 (3 being multiple copies of the number 1, allowing us to use the suffix -s to denote plural on any of the words we use for scale factors).
Mish, can you help me understand which line in my comment above is incorrect? I need it explained to me like I’m an 8 yr old, because I am not getting it. Thanks.
This is silly. Mish I think what you are trying to say is that when you CONVERT 2 billion to millions you get 2000 millions. So maybe its English that you are struggling with rather than Math. Fingers crossed on that one.
ChatGPT to the rescue:
——————————————-
My Question
This is what the author said to a commenter: “You do not divide billions by 10,000 to get millions You divide millions by 10,000 to get billions”
What do you say to that, I might post your reply to him.
——————————————-
Chat’s Answer
Perfect — that quote from him is a clean test of whether he understands how division and magnitude scaling work, and unfortunately… he’s got it exactly backward.
Here’s how to explain it clearly and respectfully — something that’ll hold up even if posted publicly:
——————————————-
🔹 Correct math:
Let’s define the terms:
• 1 million = 10⁶
• 1 billion = 10⁹
To go from millions → billions, you need to multiply by 1,000, because 10⁹ ÷ 10⁶ = 10³ = 1,000.
So:
1 million × 1,000 = 1 billion
If you phrase it as dividing, then:
1 million ÷ 0.001 = 1 billion
(because dividing by 0.001 is the same as multiplying by 1,000).
——————————————-
🔹 The author’s statement:
“You divide millions by 10,000 to get billions.”
Let’s test it numerically:
1,000,000 ÷ 10,000 = 100
That’s not even close to a billion — it actually shrinks the number drastically.
In reality, dividing makes the number smaller, not larger.
——————————————-
✅ The correct version:
“You divide millions by 0.001 to get billions.”
or equivalently
“You multiply millions by 1,000 to get billions.”
——————————————-
🔹 Short, share-worthy version:
Dividing by 10,000 makes a number smaller — not larger.
Since 1 billion = 1,000 × 1 million, the correct math is:
1 million ÷ 0.001 = 1 billion, not 1 million ÷ 10,000.
This number is just over a billion: 1234567890
How much/many millions is that? -> 1234.56789
How much/many billions is that? -> 1.23456789
You divide that number expressed in millions by 1000 to get the same number expressed in billions, right, which is what The Google said. Since you’re highly educated, I guess it’s an issue of different semantics.
Nope.
There is a difference between what you are asking and what you apparently want.
You are asking for a simple calculation.
1 billion divided by 1000 equals 1 million.
What you “seem” to want is a conversion from billions to millions.
1 billion = 1000 million
All google can do is answer the question you asked.
You have to ask the question properly.
Is a billion more than a million? If so, then you cannot divide a million by a whole number and get a bigger number. You get a smaller number.
If I divide 1000 by 10, I get 100. 10 goes into 1000, 100 times.
If I divide 1000 by 100, I get 10. 100 goes into 1000, 10 times
In both cases the result is a number less than the number I started with.
You cannot divide a million by any whole number and get a larger number. A billion does not go into a million, unless it is a fraction (1/1000).
Google said “You have to divide billions by 1,000 to get millions, not the other way around.”
No!
You multiply billions by 1,000 to get millions.
Multiplying 1,000,000 by 1,000 is the same as adding 3 zeroes to a million. To go from billions down to millions, you have to multiply by a number less than one – ie .001 or one one-thousandth.
The math is easy but maybe I misunderstand your point which is something other than the math.
1 X 1,000 = 1,000
1 B X 1,000 = 1,000 Million
I love you Mish and hate AI. But you’re wrong here. Billions is 1,000,000,000. Millions is 1,000,000. Divide billions by 1000 is 1,000,000,000/1000 or 1,000,000 (millions). Or divide millions (1,000,000) by (1/1,000) (or 0.001), or 1,000,000/0.001, is 1,000,000,000 or a billion. Gemini was correct here. Which makes sense, since LLMs are just math.
Get out a calculator or a spreadsheet. Put in 1 billion. Then multiply by 1000. The answer is 1 trillion. Not 1 million.
Google is correct.
What you want is a conversion. But you keep asking for a calculation.
I asked for a calculation!
“Divide millions by what to get billions?”
You divide millions by 1,000 to get billions do you not?
1M / 1,000 = .001 B
What the flying F do you fail to see here.
Nope. You do NOT divide millions by 1000 to get to billions.
You divide millions by 1000 to “convert” to billions. Which is what you just did:
1M/1000 =0.001 B
There is a big difference. And more than a half dozen folks here keep trying to help you out here.
Again; you are confused about the word “convert”.
Google answered correctly two different ways. It said you can divide millions by 1/1000 to get billions.
It also said you can divide billions by 1000 to get millions.
Both correct.
Ai will be great at some things. Closed system science stuff. Search law books etc.
other than that it will only be as smart as the internet it scrapes from. Also it will reflect any bias the programmers have.
“A-I does its thing by rapidly combing through the Internet to evaluate and seize information that you request. Increasingly, A-I colonizes the Internet with second-hand, third-hand, and so forth A-I-generated information. The more territory A-I seizes on the Web, and the more it trains itself on recursive feedbacks of its own garbage, the more distorted the output gets. As that occurs, A-I becomes increasingly abstracted from Reality, which is exactly what happens when a person goes insane.” – Tyler Durden
Similar to how our rulers deceive us and themselves with nonsense until they invert reality (e.g., fake stories of genocides, ethnic cleansing, and unprovoked wars while they deny their own seen plainly). They disseminate fake story after fake story, using prior fake stories as evidence.
Thankfully, there’s FOIA. But that only helps establish the minimum they lied about decades earlier.
I’m sure after it gets over the ‘lost in translation’ issues, it’ll still be smarter than all of us combined…
The Dark Side of the AI Boom Is It’s Masking Weak Investment
https://archive.is/lgDXT
Your example shows that AI gets easily confused. It knows math but it gets confused on what is being calculated.
Seems to me that AI is a 5th grade B student. Kind of smart, kind of dumb. Not sure when it’s right or wrong.
It’s a 5th grader now. A year from now it’ll be a Fields Medal – level post-doc.
Being dumb….I can’t see an error from the AI. Sounds correct.
I’m with you @Jon L. If I divide 2B by 1k, I do in fact get 2M. Perhaps the criticism is in the response that “corrects” the question. But it seems they AI answer did offer the mathematically correct answer to the ‘wrong’ question (e.g., divide by 1/1000). Mish, what are we missing?
In the 2nd part, AI says to convert billions to millions you would divide by 1000. This is wrong. To convert from billions to millions you multiply the number by 1000. This is like AI saying to convert from miles to feet you would divide by 5280. No, you would multiply by 5280 to convert miles to feet.
The confusion is whether Mish wants to know the ratio of millions to billions or if he wants to convert between the two. AI does both, but why?
This. “Divide by 1000” is what AI got wrong.
I find it ‘interesting’ that AI expects conventional thinking and when it encounters an unconventional question like Mish asked, it admonishes Mish as if he was doing something wrong. (‘The correct way to ask’…)
I know math and even I don’t understand Mish’s argument that AI “implies 2 billion and 2 million are the same”. Not seeing it.
The question he posed to AI is a bit of a trick question, as humans normally don’t think in terms of dividing numbers by fractions of less than 1 unless they’re solving a math puzzle.
Another possibility is Mish has been taken over and replaced with “AI Mish” and this post is simply “AI Mish” testing humans to see if they realize “AI Mish” is in fact wrong, and Google AI is actually correct, but humans believe “AI Mish” must be correct because humans believe “AI Mish” is Mish and therefore is a human and they trust that he is right because he is human, when he is actually an AI, and not the real Mish and simply trying to trick us. Or something like that.
Ask AI Mish if any tariff has ever been justified or efficacious.
Ah, yes…The Trumping Test.
We always knew this day would come.
Yes & it’s prejudiced! Against Catholics. Everytime i ask it anything about Pope Leo XIV it tells me he does not exist. If i play around with it, mentioning an article in the query that talks directly about Leo XIV then it gives me an answer that “fictitious Leo XIV did … blahblahblah”. LOL. It’s fun but i check any answer that doesn’t seem right.
I just checked this. NO problems at all.
Ann Barnhardt argues that – like “Francis” – “Leo XIV” is an antipope.
Many jobs just became safe, and many companies just became very financially vulnerable.
A $billion here, a $billion there. Sooner or later, you are burning an enormous amount of “real money.”