This depends on whether you mean LLMs in the sense of single shot, or LLMs + software built around it. I think a lot of people conflate the two. In our application e use a multi-step check_knowledge_base workflow before and after each LLM request. Pretty much, make a separate LLM request to check the query against the existing context to see if more info is needed, and a second check after generation to see if output…
if an llm is unreliable, then why would another just-as-unreliable llm make it any better?
If one person is unreliable, why would a group of people make it any better.
> Junior engineers are intelligent enough to understand when they don't understand. They interrogate the intent and context of the tasks they are given Eh, I wouldn't apply that as if it's a general thing. yes, the really good ones do. many will equally plough through into the mud with albeit admirable determination.
Yes but for the purposes of these conversations, we do not need to say "good juniors" "good engineers" every time. After all, for every task, it is possible to find someone who is really bad at it, and we should not need to keep repeating we are not talking about _that_ person.
ah you're a mathematician I see. without loss of generality, let's assume the bottom half doesn't exist. therefore only the top half needs to be bested and the task is now impossible. qed.
if an llm is unreliable, then why would another just-as-unreliable llm make it any better?
If a hard drive sometimes fails, why would a raid with multiple hard drives be any more reliable? "Do task x" and "Is this answer to task x correct?" are two very different prompts and aren't guaranteed to have the same failure modes. They might, but they might not.
RAID only works when failures are independent. E. g. if you bought two drivers from the same faulty batch which die after 1000 power-on hours RAID would not help. With LLM it’s not obvious that errors are not correlated.
Here is another view: some of them maybe do things to perform richness. And others are probably so bored that they just try new extreme things, but nothing fills that inner void. I can't get no satisfaction. Or maybe not. I'll never know.
so the only way to get that inner satisfaction is to do work that you hate? is there another option I'm missing here?
Most people find work that directly addresses their basic needs fulfilling to some degree. Things like growing your own food, hunting, building and maintaining your home, etc.
I have never understood "post scarcity" to mean the end of ALL scarcity, which is essentially impossible by definition. Relative to 500 years ago, we have already nearly achieved post-scarcity for a few types of items, like basic clothing. It seems this is yet another concept for which we need to adjust our understanding from binary to a spectrum, as we find our society advancing along the spectrum, in at least some…
Also for basic food. You can get all the rice and beans you really need for basically no money. That means actual starvation is nowadays a political not a resource issue
But what is scarce now, really? We are just moving up Maslow's hierarchy and strive for more abstract concepts like power, self-actualization or recognition. How would AI provide those to us? Our self-image is linked to other's perception of us. It feels like we would have to radically re-think what it means to be human. As someone above wrote, we need to overcome equating existence with toil, however, it seems so ingrained into human nature to compete that we might all have to hop on antidepressants at some point.
This article is insightful, but I blinked when I saw the headline “Reducing the human bottleneck” used without any apparent irony. At some point we should probably take a step back and ask “Why do we want to solve this problem?” Is a world where AI systems are highly intelligent tools , but humans are needed to manage the high level complexity of the real world… supposed to be a disappointing outcome?
Assuming you buy the idea of a post scarcity society and assuming we can separate our long ingrained notion that spending your existence in toil to survive is a moral imperative and not working is deserving of punishment if not death, I personally look forward to a time we can get off the hamster wheel. Most buttons that get pushed by people are buttons not worth spending your existence pushing. This includes an awfu…
Can you think of any more literature on the topic? Preferably non-fiction?
Assuming you buy the idea of a post scarcity society and assuming we can separate our long ingrained notion that spending your existence in toil to survive is a moral imperative and not working is deserving of punishment if not death, I personally look forward to a time we can get off the hamster wheel. Most buttons that get pushed by people are buttons not worth spending your existence pushing. This includes an awfu…
Do you really want to live in this "post scarcity" world? With no effort required to meet your needs and desires, what motivation will you have to do anything? Kaczynski's warnings seem more apt with every year that passes.
It doesn't solve the problem that people want what other people want.
In a "post scarcity" world we will figure out how to make certain things scarce and more desirable. Then people will start gaming the system to try to acquire the more expensive/scarce items. Some will even make it their life mission to acquire the intentionally scarce items/experiences.
so the only way to get that inner satisfaction is to do work that you hate? is there another option I'm missing here?
Most people find work that directly addresses their basic needs fulfilling to some degree. Things like growing your own food, hunting, building and maintaining your home, etc.
and they can still do that if food is available for free. in fact people today put enormous amounts of effort into growing their own "organic" food instead of buying the cheap stuff from supermarkets. I don't see why that wouldn't still do it when it's essentially free.