Is OP stupid
Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
51–60 of 62 posts
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
> moral and ethical to use AI that targets autonomously? First point, vision systems have been used in industry to look for misaligned labels, incorrectly folded papers (in high speed paper presses), wrong items on high speed conveyor belts etc. for thirty odd years now - they have issues that a very distinct from LLM 'AI' hallucinations. That's nomenclature out the way. Landmines are indiscriminate, they trigger on…
Also, why do people keep talking about landmines? I'm talking about software, you are talking about dumb mechanical things from WWII. This isn't a philosophical question about methods of warfare from the past, but the software that controls the dumb hardware.
Land mines are still very much in widespread use
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#53I don't have a problem with hallucinations, rather the confabulations. We want AI to make predictions under uncertainty that could be wrong. What we don't need is getting know facts wrong. One of the best responses I got from ChatGPT was when it said "I don't know", and on questioning it - it responded that it was an unsolved problem and it couldn't objectively take a side iun the argument.
Why not mention the problem?
[dead]
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#54[flagged]
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI drones are being used to autonomously target and kill targets by the Ukraine using technology they have been given. That's real. Right now. That that is happening anywhere on the planet scares me. That's why I keep asking about AI hallucinating, and it's implications when the stakes are life and death.
The "AIs" being used by these drones have little to do with ChatGPT at the moment. And you should be more worried about "AIs" that do aim at the intended target, anyways.
I never said anything about ChatGPT.
And that AIs do aim at intended targets with intent to kill while simultaneously being susceptible to hallucinations is exactly what worries me.
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#56I'd agree with other posters - I'm seeing less hallucination; probably the model-makers are tuning to reduce that, because people make a big deal about it. I see it as a small deal - it reminds us to check the responses against references. LLMs are a statistical construction, and everyone accepts without complaint that statistical models have a predicted false-positive and false-negative rate. I think of "hallucinati…
It's not so much that AI hallucinates, but the fact that we know it does, and it's being used to make independent decisions to use lethal force against a human on the battlefield today.
At least that is my understanding of one of the ways that Ukraine is asymmetrically winning against a foe in Russia with more resources, at least at the start.
It's how we are using it knowing this limitation it has and the decisions being made about when and where it's being used in this capacity are mostly unknown.
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#57You have to be specific. You only have vague comments about your own thoughts. We had this discussion with Tomahawks in the ninetees, it is not an easy one. This is like answering how long is a string. IMHO This feels like a troll, OP have several comments about evil Ukrainian AI drones. I feel it is hard to have a naunced discussion if you only diss one part. Your question is asking for easy technical opinions about…
A couple of things to clarify:
I can understand how you see it that way because I wasn't clear enough.
I don't beleive I characterized what I'm asking in the way you are putting it.
I never said that Ukraine is evil. I competely support and stand with the Ukranian Government and it's people, and I think we, as a country, should be supporting them and their fight to not be conqoured.
Clearly, if I post on a technical forum and am asking a question it is because I don't know the answer. I know how I see it. What I don't know is how everyone else sees it, and that's my motivation. I'm wondering if I'm right or I'm wrong, and have faith that the denizens of the internet will let me know one way or another.
I am asking a legit question and not trying to troll. I am, admittedly, agaist the use of AI on the battlefield, but as it pertains to Ukraine they are defending their existence.
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#58Is OP stupid
I don't know. Perhaps if you elaborate a little more I can answer.
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps you should be concerned about it. I certainly am. This is deployed on the battlefield and has been for months.
What makes you think I'm not concerned about it? I've been positively mortified at the seeming cavalier way in which all caution is thrown to the winds. I've honestly had to fundamentally reassess my understanding of the average character of humanity given the last decade. Fact is, those with the foresight to see how this can go badly are also seemingly the types of people who don't end up in a position to prevent ha…
Thanks for the response. I see it pretty much the same way.
Re: Has the hallucination problem in AI been solved?
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "AIs" being used by these drones have little to do with ChatGPT at the moment. And you should be more worried about "AIs" that do aim at the intended target, anyways.
I never said anything about ChatGPT. And that AIs do aim at intended targets with intent to kill while simultaneously being susceptible to hallucinations is exactly what worries me.
"hallucination" is a term specific to LLMs like ChatGPT and has virtually nothing to do with visual hallucinations.
It is conceivable that agentic edge LLMs are used for the logic of killer drones but I don't think we're there yet.
Machine learning in general does have classification errors so it may mistakenly see an enemy where there is a pile of rocks(right next to the children's hospital).
To the user of the drone, this represents an error rate and wasted munitions(unless they were planning on bombing the hospital later). So it is something they want to minimize.
Again, I'd be more worried about becoming a "legitimate" target to someone's killer drone than an accidental one.