541–550 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know the answers are correct? More than once I got eloquent answer that are completely wrong.
How do you address this problem with people? More than once a real live person has told me something that was wrong,
You ask an actual expert.
I don’t treat any water cooler conversation as accurate. It’s for fun and socializing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs suffer from the "Igon Value Problem" https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Igon_Value_Problem Similar to reading a pop sci book, you're getting an entertainment from a thing with no actual understanding of the source material rather than an education.
Oh so you mean I have at my fingertips a tool that can generate me a Scientific American issue on any topic I fancy? That's still some non-negative utility right there :).
I don’t even trust the summaries after watching LLMs think we have meetings about my boss’s cat just because I mentioned it once as she sniffed the camera…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you address this problem with people? More than once a real live person has told me something that was wrong,
Experience. If I recognize they give unreliable answers on a specific topic I don’t question them anymore on that topic. If they lie on purpose I don’t ask them anything anymore. The real experts give reliable answers, LLMs don’t. The same question can yield different results.
Most people don't even know any experts personally, much less have one they could call for help on demand. Meanwhile, the unreliable, occasionally tripping pseudo-experts named GPT-4 and Claude are equally unreliably-expert in every domain of interest known to humanity, and don't mind me shoving a random 100-pages long PDF in their face in the middle of the night - they'll still happily answer within seconds, and the whole session costs me fractions of a cent, so I can ask for a second, and third, and tenth opinion, and then a meta-opinion, and then compare&contrast with search results, and they don't mind that either.
There's lots to LLMs that more than compensates for their inherent unreliability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can divide your approach to asking questions with people (and I do believe this is something people do): 1. You ask someone you can trust for facts and opinions on topics, but you keep in mind that the answer might only be right in 90% of the cases. Also people tend to tell you if the are not sure. 2. For answers you need to rely on you ask people who are legally or professionally responsible if they give you wro…
If ChatGPT keeps giving you wrong answers wouldn’t this make paying customers leave? Effectively “losing its job”. But I guess you could say it acts more like the person that makes stuff up at work if they don’t know, instead of saying they don’t know.
https://danluu.com/nothing-works/
The idea that competition is effective, is often in spherical cow territory.
There’s tons of real world conditions which can easily let a firm be terrible at their core competency, and still survive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, those server farms don't pay for themselves.
sure, but once it's trained there isn't a running maintenance cost
"OpenAI’s is called GPT-4, the fourth LLM the company has developed since its 2015 founding." - that sentence doesn't fill me with confidence in the quality of the rest of the article, sadly.
The article definitely has issues, but to me what's relevant is where it's published. The smart money and experts without a vested interest have been well aware LLMs are an expensive dead for over a year and have been saying as much (Gary Marcus for instance). That this is starting to enter mainstream consciousness is what's newsworthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> GPT-4 would already have qualified as AGI about a decade ago. Did you just make that up?
A lot of people held that passing the Turing Test would indicate human-level intelligence. GPT-4 passes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh so you mean I have at my fingertips a tool that can generate me a Scientific American issue on any topic I fancy? That's still some non-negative utility right there :).
A Scientific American issue where the authors have no idea that they don’t know a topic so just completely make up the content, including the sources. At least magazine authors are reading the sources before misunderstanding the content (or asking the authors what the research means). I don’t even trust the summaries after watching LLMs think we have meetings about my boss’s cat just because I mentioned it once as sh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you address this problem with people? More than once a real live person has told me something that was wrong,
It’s trivial to address this. You ask an actual expert. I don’t treat any water cooler conversation as accurate. It’s for fun and socializing.
I'm sure the debate over the definition of AGI is important and will continue for a while, but... I can't care about it anymore. Between Perplexity searching and summarizing, Claude explaining, and qwen (and other tools) coding, I'm already as happy as can be with whatever you want to call this level of intelligence. Just today I used a completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama. It worked great. Maybe it won…
Could you elaborate? Was it easy to install?