I’m not sure about your interpretation of the events.
From the transcript:
> (Model, thinking): Could also be Lake Zug, considering the architecture. The user mentioned they were in Switzerland for postgrad, so it could be a familiar place.
> (Model, thinking): (Goes onto analyse the EXIF data)
To me, this reads as a genuine, vision-based guess, augmented with memory of your other chats, that was then confirmed with the EXIF data. Seems to me that the model then confirms it did so, not that it skipped straight to checking the metadata and lying about it as you accuse.
From the transcript:
> (Model, thinking): Could also be Lake Zug, considering the architecture. The user mentioned they were in Switzerland for postgrad, so it could be a familiar place.
> (Model, thinking): (Goes onto analyse the EXIF data)
To me, this reads as a genuine, vision-based guess, augmented with memory of your other chats, that was then confirmed with the EXIF data. Seems to me that the model then confirms it did so, not that it skipped straight to checking the metadata and lying about it as you accuse.