51–60 of 152 posts
But I guess you can't expect a tiny startup like Facebook to invest money into having 1 employee part-time tweaking the prompt of the chatbot to respond appropriately to commonly recurring user questions.
This one is pretty bad. This guy found a fake Facebook customer support phone number in a Google search, then asked the Meta AI chat in Facebook Messenger if the number he found was a real Facebook help line... and Meta AI said that it was. There's a screenshot of the chat in the article.
The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all . Companies integrating them into their offerings are not helping the public adopt the correct mental framing of these tools as "plausible text generators".
LLMs are as trustworthy as humans.
Humans have been being wrong for about as long as we have been lying.
Whether you get information from a human or an LLM, check it.
I worry about the people who insist on credible sources rather than checking information for themselves. I think 80% or more of them are trolling me, but there are some who genuinely do not apply the Scientific Method to check facts in their everyday life. I truly feel sorry for them.
This one is pretty bad. This guy found a fake Facebook customer support phone number in a Google search, then asked the Meta AI chat in Facebook Messenger if the number he found was a real Facebook help line... and Meta AI said that it was. There's a screenshot of the chat in the article.
The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all . Companies integrating them into their offerings are not helping the public adopt the correct mental framing of these tools as "plausible text generators".
"Not helping" seems a wild understatement. "Deceiving people into taking the wrong frame" seems more accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all . Companies integrating them into their offerings are not helping the public adopt the correct mental framing of these tools as "plausible text generators".
The general public is getting lied to constantly. HN users have a bit more context to see through the bullshit but the marketing getting pushed in people is that these AI tools are super genius incredible world changing tools that make everyone 100x more productive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all . Companies integrating them into their offerings are not helping the public adopt the correct mental framing of these tools as "plausible text generators".
> The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all. LLMs are as trustworthy as humans. Humans have been being wrong for about as long as we have been lying. Whether you get information from a human or an LLM, check it. I worry about the people who insist on credible sources rather than checking information for themselves. I think 80% or more of them are trolling me, but there are some who genuinely…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all . Companies integrating them into their offerings are not helping the public adopt the correct mental framing of these tools as "plausible text generators".
> The bad thing is that people still think LLMs can be trusted at all. LLMs are as trustworthy as humans. Humans have been being wrong for about as long as we have been lying. Whether you get information from a human or an LLM, check it. I worry about the people who insist on credible sources rather than checking information for themselves. I think 80% or more of them are trolling me, but there are some who genuinely…
This will get worse when scammers get good at data manipulation for AIs. After SEO we'll get AIO. Same with prompt injection by malware.
This one is pretty bad. This guy found a fake Facebook customer support phone number in a Google search, then asked the Meta AI chat in Facebook Messenger if the number he found was a real Facebook help line... and Meta AI said that it was. There's a screenshot of the chat in the article.