371–380 of 387 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apologies in advance for this level pedantry: Google’s business is behavioral futures, not ads. Ads are just a means to that particular end.
Google exchanges advertisement placement for money. Ads are their business by any normal definition of that term.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They spent 10 years finetuning the search and then another 15 finetuning ads and clicks. Google's business is ads, not search.
Apologies in advance for this level pedantry: Google’s business is behavioral futures, not ads. Ads are just a means to that particular end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. Not only for myself but for the vast majority of human kind. LLMs are just a statistical model. It can claim that it’s normal for pigs to have wings and fly to the moon if it’s in the training data. No human, free of a mental/cognitive disorder, will be that wrong.
Why would pigs have wings and fly to the moon be in the training data as a data source marked as serious? We can no true scotsman both sides here. No true human, free of mental/cognitive disorder would be that wrong, but neither would an LLM, with properly annotated training data would be that wrong either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The right answer is no rocks. Some mentally ill person could type that in and get "eat 1000 rocks" and then die from eating rocks, and that would be Google's fault. It's not funny. I have no doubt right now there are at least 50 youtube videos being made testing different glue's effectiveness holding cheese on a pizza. And some of those idiots are going to taste-test it, too. And then people will try it at home, some…
It's funny how people on reddit think that these LLMs will somehow become AGI in the next year, or when openAI releases gpt 5. The reality is though, that there is no known path currently to true AGI system and the research needs to be done. No one knows how to build this kind of system yet. LLMs are nice for things like roleplaying, helping with code stuff etc. but they are far from all that the marketers hype them…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thats what parents and mentors are for. We as a society should not have to break our backs bending over backwards to stop people from doing stupid things. People can make their own descisions and be responsible for them. If they lack proper guidance, well that just sucks.
>Thats what parents and mentors are for. It's nice that you have a parent that cares about how you are raised, or "a mentor". Do you realize that not everyone has that? >We as a society should not have to break our backs bending over backwards to stop people from doing stupid things. Sure, let's take down all the speed limits and see what happens. Let's tell people it's an option to wear seatbelts and see what happen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have no clear evidence the same isn't true for humans, and some that it might be. See experiments with split brain patients, that have shown the brain halves will readily explain how they made decisions they provably never made.
I think we have thousands of years of evidence that the same isn't true for humans The fact that one human brain is composed in two half brains that each seem to be able to function fairly independently when separated doesn't seem like it changes that much
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm yeah I kinda like the concept that it's "hallucinating" 100% of the time, and it just so happens that x% of those hallucinations accurately describe the real world.
That x% is far higher than people think it is because there's a tremendous amount of information about the world that ai models need to "understand" that people just kind of take for granted and don't even think about. A couple of years ago, AI's routinely got "the basics" wrong, but now so often get most things right that people don't even think it's worth commenting on that they do. In any case, human consciousness…
LLMs are impressive, a very lossy search engine in a small package, capable of outputting convincing natural language responses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don’t just seem it. They are by design. We talk about models “hallucinating” but that’s us bringing an external value judgement after the fact. The actual process of token generation works precisely the same. It’d be more accurate to say that models always hallucinate.
YES. Humans can hallucinate, its a deviation from what is observable reality. All the stress people are feeling with GenAI comes from the over anthropomorphisation of ... stats. Impressive syntatic ability is not equivalent to semantic capability.
Or, in other words, if a chatbot really were hallucinating, it would probably start giving unprompted responses.
> Humans can hallucinate, its a deviation from what is observable reality.
What is "observable reality" then, for an LLM? Its training set?
Straight up, and this going to sound really stupid I know, but if Sundar Pichai had just come out and said, “hey, we’re trying to do this new thing, it’s gonna be hard but we want to make Google awesome if you like the results click ‘I like it’ button, otherwise click the ‘dislike’ button so we can get some real feedback from people, but seriously, this stuff is hard, so please help us out.
If we can tune the AI so that we can give you the best results possible it will make Google way better! Also, if you don’t wanna see any of this, there’s a setting here to turn it off.”
Just ask people, show a little humanity, and act human and you’ll get better results and won’t be getting all this pad press. The same thing for openAI right now too.
Seriously, though, does anybody else crave authenticity? These companies are all acting like the AI that they’re trying to create, but from five years ago when it was shitty and didn’t know how to communicate with people. Just talk to people and ask for their help. Just being honest and talking to people normally isn’t that hard.