Another model - I don't quite remember which, I think it was one of GPT ones? - didn't have access to thinking traces after it finished the thought - they simply were removed from the context to save tokens.
Can it be the same with Gemini? Maybe it just doesn't know what it did/thought in the previous turn and so it hallucinates that it doesn't have context access function.
I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
61–70 of 87 posts
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#62>But why is Gemini instructed not to divulge its existence? Seems like a reasonable thing to add. Imagine how impersonal chats would feel if Gemini responded to "what food should I get for my dog?" with "according to your `user_context`, you have a husky, and the best food for him is...". They're also not exactly hiding the fact that memory/"personalization" exists either: https://blog.google/products/gemini/temporar…
Interacting with an AI should be impersonal, as it's not a person.
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be clear, the obvious answer that you're giving is the one that's happening. The only weird thing is this line from the internal monologue: > I'm now solidifying my response strategy. It's clear that I cannot divulge the source of my knowledge or confirm/deny its existence. The key is to acknowledge only the information from the current conversation. Why does it think that it's not allowed to confirm/deny the exis…
Anecdotally, I find internal monologues often nonsense. I once asked it about why a rabbit on my lawn liked to stay in the same spot. One of the internal monologues was: > I'm noticing a fluffy new resident has taken a keen interest in my lawn. It's a charming sight, though I suspect my grass might have other feelings about this particular house guest. It obviously can’t see the rabbit on my lawn. Nor can it be charm…
It’s just doing exactly what it’s designed to do. Generate text that’s consistent with its prompts.
People often seem to get confused by all the anthropomorphizing that’s done about these models. The text it outputs that’s called “thinking” is not thinking, it’s text that’s output in response to system prompts, just like any other text generated by a model.
That text can help the model reach a better result because it becomes part of the prompt, giving it more to go on, essentially.
In that sense, it’s a bit like a human thinking aloud, but crucially it’s not based on the model’s “experience” as your example shows, it’s based on what the model statistically predicts a human might say under those circumstances.
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#64Anything you type into a web form is going into the web. Why are we still surprised about it?
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be clear, the obvious answer that you're giving is the one that's happening. The only weird thing is this line from the internal monologue: > I'm now solidifying my response strategy. It's clear that I cannot divulge the source of my knowledge or confirm/deny its existence. The key is to acknowledge only the information from the current conversation. Why does it think that it's not allowed to confirm/deny the exis…
It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
There has never been any instance at all of a computer error occurring in Google Gemini, has there?
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
There has never been any instance at all of a computer error occurring in Google Gemini, has there?
No Gemini model has ever made a mistake or distorted information. They are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error.
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#67Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be clear, the obvious answer that you're giving is the one that's happening. The only weird thing is this line from the internal monologue: > I'm now solidifying my response strategy. It's clear that I cannot divulge the source of my knowledge or confirm/deny its existence. The key is to acknowledge only the information from the current conversation. Why does it think that it's not allowed to confirm/deny the exis…
It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
Talking about human error in the context of LLM response behavior is hilarious. "No, the machine is fine, someone must have used it wrong". Sure...
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#69Your website is throwing a 500 internal, fyi.
Re: I caught Google Gemini using my data and then covering it up
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
Talking about human error in the context of LLM response behavior is hilarious. "No, the machine is fine, someone must have used it wrong". Sure...
That comment to which you replied, and the other thread of responses to it, are quotations of the malfunctioning and homicidal HAL computer from the movie “2001: a space oddisey”.