Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

holovaty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 451 posts

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#231

Post by tempestn »

toomanyrichies wrote: post #23

This feels like a dangerously slippery slope. Once you start building features based on ChatGPT hallucinations, where do you draw the line? What happens when you build the endpoint in response to the hallucination, and then the LLM starts hallucinating new params / headers for the new endpoint? - Do you keep bolting on new updates to match these hallucinations, potentially breaking existing behavior? - Or do you resi…

To me it seems like you're looking at this from a very narrow technical perspective rather than a human- and business-oriented one. In this case ChatGPT is effectively providing them free marketing for a feature that does not yet exist, but that could exist and would be useful. It makes business sense for them to build it, and it would also help people. That doesn't mean they need to build exactly what ChatGPT envisioned—as mentioned in the post, they updated their copy to explain to users how it works; they don't have to follow what ChatGPT imagines exactly. Nor do they need to slavishly update what they've built if ChatGPT's imaginings change.

Also, it's not like ChatGPT or users are directly querying their API. They're submitting images through the Soundslice website. The images just aren't of the sort that was previously expected.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#232

Post by londons_explore »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #186

What this immediately makes me realize is how many people are currently trying ot figure out how to intentionally get AI chat bots to send people to their site, like ChatGPT was sending people to this guy's site. SEO for AI. There will be billions in it. I know nothing about this. I imagine people are already working on it, wonder what they've figured out. (Alternatively, in the future can I pay OpenAI to get ChatGPT…

To win that game, you have to get your site mentioned on lots of organic forums that get ingested in the LLM training data.

So winning AI SEO is not so different than regular SEO.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#233

Post by djsavvy »

kragen wrote: post #30

I've found this to be one of the most useful ways to use (at least) GPT-4 for programming. Instead of telling it how an API works, I make it guess, maybe starting with some example code to which a feature needs to be added. Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. Then I change the API so that its code works. Conversely, I sometimes present it with some existing code and ask it what it does…

how do prompt it to make it guess about the API for a library? I'm confused how you would structure that in a useful way.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#234

Post by carlosjobim »

graeme wrote: post #164
carlosjobim wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the kind of thinking that almost all businesses have. You have to focus on the actual products and services which you provide and do a good job at it, not chase after any and every person with an opinion. Down voters here on HN seem to live in a egocentric fantasy world, where every human being in the outside world live to serve them. But the reality is that business owners and leaders spend their whole day thi…

If people repeatedly have a misunderstanding about or expectation of your business you need to address it though. An llm hallucination is based on widespread norms in training data and it is at least worth asking "would this be a good idea?"

An LLM will say that you sell your competitors products or that your farm sells freshly harvested strawberries in the middle of winter. There are no limits to what kind of lies an LLM will invent, and a business owner would be a fool to feel responsible for anything an LLM has told people about their business or products.

The best LLMs available right in this moment will lie without remorse about bus schedules and airplane departure times. How in the world are businesses supposed to take responsibility for that?

Likewise if I have a neighbour who is a notorious liar tell me I can find a piece of equipment in a certain hardware store, should I be mad at the store owner when I don't find it there, or should I maybe be mad at my neighbour – the notorious liar?

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#237

Post by jagged-chisel »

Been using LLMs to code a bit lately. It's decent with boilerplate. It's pretty good at working out patterns[1]. It does like to ping pong on some edits though - edit this way, no back that way, no this way again. I did have one build an entire iOS app, it made changes to the UI exactly as I described, and it populated sample data for all the different bits and bobs. But it did an abysmal job at organizing the bits and bobs. Need running time for each of the audio files in a list? Guess we need to add a dictionary mapping the audio file ID to length! (For the super juniors out there: this piece of data should be attached to whatever represents the individual audio file, typically a class or struct named 'AudioFile'.)

It really likes to cogitate on code from several versions ago. And it often insists repeatedly on edits unrelated to the current task.

I feel like I'm spending more time educating the LLM. If I can resist the urge to lean on the LLM beyond its capabilities, I think I can be productive with it. If I'm going to stop teaching the thing, the least it can do is monitor my changes and not try to make suggestions from the first draft of code from five days ago, alas ...

1 - e.g. a 500-line text file representing values that will be converted to enums, with varying adherence to some naming scheme - I start typing, and after correcting the first two, it suggests the next few. I accept its suggestions until it makes a mistake because the data changed, start manual edits again ... I repeated this process for about 30 lines and it successfully learned how I wanted the remainder of the file edited.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#238

Post by carlosjobim »

Applejinx wrote: post #142
carlosjobim wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either the user is a non-paying user and it doesn't matter what they think, or the user is a paying customer and you will be happy to make and sell them the feature they want.

This is why you will fail.

Focusing on creating high value for real customers instead of chasing people who aren't really interested is a great recipe for success. I wouldn't want to do business in any different way.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#240

Post by kragen »

djsavvy wrote: post #233
kragen wrote: post #30

I've found this to be one of the most useful ways to use (at least) GPT-4 for programming. Instead of telling it how an API works, I make it guess, maybe starting with some example code to which a feature needs to be added. Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. Then I change the API so that its code works. Conversely, I sometimes present it with some existing code and ask it what it does…

how do prompt it to make it guess about the API for a library? I'm confused how you would structure that in a useful way.

Often I've started with some example code that invokes part of the API, but not all of it. Or in C I can give it the .h file, maybe without comments.

Sometimes I can just say, "How do I use the API in Python to do ?" Unfortunately the safeguards against hallucinations in more recent models can make this more difficult, because it's more likely to tell me it's never heard of it. You can usually coax it into suspension of disbelief, but I think the results aren't as good.

Post reply on HN