11–20 of 83 posts
This is a heavily editorialized title. It’s just a feature that explains a web platform doc using LLMs. They can be inaccurate sometimes, but as long as that’s clear to the end user (in this case, developers) I don’t think that’s a problem. Heck, many of us do this day-to-day with ChatGPT. In this case, the sin was not making the potential for inaccuracies clear enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With placebos, the correct question is: does it displace more efficacious procedures. I'd say yes. Even if something is a placebo, it's ability to displace better solutions is the problem
I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is inaccurate.
This is a heavily editorialized title. It’s just a feature that explains a web platform doc using LLMs. They can be inaccurate sometimes, but as long as that’s clear to the end user (in this case, developers) I don’t think that’s a problem. Heck, many of us do this day-to-day with ChatGPT. In this case, the sin was not making the potential for inaccuracies clear enough.
I cannot see anywhere that MDN say the explanation might be wrong.
No need to make things up if you have the sources anyways.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is inaccurate.
They could for example only use LLM's to match query's and use as source for responses like many other -docs as AI- implementations do, wondering why Mozilla wouldn't do exactly the same. as Hallucinations are a normal occurance if not doing so.
It may look seemingly harmless at first, even a good idea.
But you'll seed doubt. As that will erode the value of the whole site. Which was its main asset.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With placebos, the correct question is: does it displace more efficacious procedures. I'd say yes. Even if something is a placebo, it's ability to displace better solutions is the problem
I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is inaccurate.
The submitter knows the AI isn’t lying and the submitter is being purposefully obtuse in order to drive controversy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is inaccurate.
I compare them to placebos because they can be effective and they can have zero active ingredient.
I don’t really understand viewpoints like these. The submitter knows the AI isn’t lying and the submitter is being purposefully obtuse in order to drive controversy.