How much of this is LLM reasoning and how much is training bias? I'm negatively surprised that nobody mentions this in the comments. Do you not remember black nazis LLMs used to generate? How can you all default to LLM being unreasonable and not understanding that a car needs to be driven as opposed to LLMs being trained with certain bias towards green agenda for example?
I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
351–360 of 998 posts
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the version used by the free chatgpt now? ( https://chatgpt.com/ ) > Since the car wash is only 50 meters away (about 55 yards), you should walk. > Here’s why: > - It’ll take less than a minute. > - No fuel wasted. > - Better for the environment. > - You avoid the irony of driving your dirty car 50 meters just to wash it. the last bullet point is amusing, it understands you intend to wash the car you drive bu…
> You avoid the irony of driving your dirty car 50 meters just to wash it. The LLM has very much mixed its signals -- there's nothing at all ironic about that. There are cases where it's ironic to drive a car 50 meters just to do X but that definitely isn't one of them. I asked Claude for examples; it struggled with it but eventually came up with "The irony of driving your car 50 meters just to attend a 'walkable nei…
That's actually an amusing example from Claude.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the number of outlandish requests in business logic is countless. Like... In most accounting things, once end-dated and confirmed, a record should cascade that end-date to children and should not be able to repeat the process... Unless you have some data-cleaning validation bypass. Then you can repeat the process as much as you like. And maybe not cascade to children. There are more exceptions, than there are rul…
So, in human interaction: When the business logic goes wrong because it was described with a lack of specificity, then: Who gets blamed for this?
I wasn't specific, because I'd rather not piss of my employer. But anyone who works in a similar space will recognise the pattern.
It's not underspecified. More... Overspecified. Because it needs to be. But AI will assume that "impossible" things never happen, and choose a happy path guaranteed to result in failure.
You have to build for bad data. Comes with any business of age. Comes with international transactions. Comes with human mistakes that just build up over the decades.
The apparent current state of a thing, is not representative of its history, and what it may or may not contain. And so you have nonsensical rules, that are aimed at catching the bad data, so you have a chance to transform it into good data when it gets used, without needing to mine the entire petabytes of historical data you have sitting around in advance.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know that when A. Karpathy released NanoLLM (or however it was called), he said it was mainly coded by hand as the LLMs were not helpful because "the training dataset was way off". So yeah, your argumentation actually "reinforces" my point.
No, your opinion is wrong because the reason some models don't seem to have some "strong opinion" on anything is not related to predicting words based on how similar they are to other sentences in the training data. It's most likely related to how the model was trained with reinforcement learning, and most specifically, to recent efforts by OpenAI to reduce hallucination rates by penalizing guessing under uncertainty…
Well, you do understand the "penalising" or as the ML scientific community likes to call it - "adjusting the weights downwards" - is part of setting up the evaluation functions, for gasp - calculating the next most likely tokens, or to be more precise, tokens with the highest possible probability? You are effectively proving my point, perhaps in a bit hand-wavy fashion, that nevertheless still can be translated into the technical language.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#355Sometimes I find these stories hard to replicate when I try them myself, but I just asked ChatGPT the same question and it indeed told me I need to walk to the car wash even though I told it I need to wash my car. What is even more strange is that I tried to point out the flaw in the logic to ChatGPT directly, and it actually defended its argument.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#356LLM failures go viral because they trigger a "Schadenfreude" response to automation anxiety. If the oracle can't do basic logic, our jobs feel safe for another quarter. Wrong.
You are right about the motivation behind the glee but it actually has a kernel of truth in it: With making such elementary mistakes, this thing isn't going to be autonomous anytime soon.
Such elementary mistakes can be made by humans under influence of a substance or with some mental issues. It's pretty much the kind of people you wouldn't trust with a vehicle or anything important.
IMHO all entry level clerical jobs and coding as a profession is done but these elementary mistakes imply that people with jobs that require agency will be fine. Any non-entry level jobs have huge component of trust in it.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#357I have a bit of a similar question (but significantly more difficult), involving transportation. To me it really seems that a lot of the models are trained to have a anti-car and anti-driving bias, to the point that it hinders the models ability to reason correctly or make correct answers. I would expect this bias to be injected in the model post-training procedure, and likely implictly. Environmentalism (as a politi…
Yes Grok gets it right even when told to not use web search. But the answer I got from the fast model is nonsensical. It recommends to drive because you'd not save any time walking and because "you'd have to walk back wet". The thinking-fast model gets it correct for the right reasons every time. Chain of thought really helps in this case. Interestingly, Gemini also gets it right. It seems to be better able to pick u…
Thanks, I did not know about that pre-training bias. This does make sense.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lmao, and this is what they are saying will be an AGI in 6 months?
There's probably a comedy film with an AGI attempting to take over the world with its advanced grasp of strategy, persuasion and SAT tests whilst a bunch of kids confuse it by asking it fiendish brainteasers about carwashes and the number of rs in blackberry. (The final scene involves our plucky escapees swimming across a river to escape. The AIbot conjures up a speedboat through sheer powers of deduction, but then j…
There is a Star Trek episode where a fiendish brainteaser was actually considered to genocide an entire (cybernetic, not AI) race. In the end, captain Picard choose not to deploy it.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#359Yesterday someone on was yapping about how AI is enough to replace senior software engineers and they can just "vibe code their way" over a weekend into a full-fledged product. And that somehow finally the "gatekeeping" of software development was removed. I think of that person reading these answers and wonder if they changed their opinion now :)
No, those people refuse evidence get in the way.
Re: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?
#360Yesterday someone on was yapping about how AI is enough to replace senior software engineers and they can just "vibe code their way" over a weekend into a full-fledged product. And that somehow finally the "gatekeeping" of software development was removed. I think of that person reading these answers and wonder if they changed their opinion now :)
Does this mean we're back in favor of using weird riddles to decide programming skills now? Do we owe Google an apology for the inverse binary tree incident?
Not riddles but "requirements" :)