61–66 of 66 posts
Why are LLM mistakes said to be hallucinations and not simply mistakes?
Because LLMs don't think, and a mistake implies logic. "Hallucination" is an attempt to differentiate the problem and further emphasize its lack of basis in reality.
Could LLM's libel an individual? What's the duty of care for LLM's? Who would that person sue, should it come to that?
I asked an LLM 'Are false statements on a physical pamphlet posted in public considered libel?' with this response : To successfully sue for libel, the defamed party generally must prove five key elements: * Publication: The pamphlet was seen or read by a third party other than the person making the claims. * Identification: The false statements clearly identify or point to a specific person or organization. * Falsit…
I recalled Google says "AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses", and wondered why it wasn't in the screenshot. I see it's because you need to click the "show more"/expand button to see that disclaimer. -- Seems silly design to hide the disclaimer like that.
What a stupid disclaimer. "we have spent billions developing this technology and marketing it as smarter than 99% of humans, we put it at the top of nearly every search page, but it's all just for funsies. you're not actually supposed to use it, duh"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I asked an LLM 'Are false statements on a physical pamphlet posted in public considered libel?' with this response : To successfully sue for libel, the defamed party generally must prove five key elements: * Publication: The pamphlet was seen or read by a third party other than the person making the claims. * Identification: The false statements clearly identify or point to a specific person or organization. * Falsit…
It's the "defamatory" and "negligence" bits that are interesting. What's wrong can be obviously defamatory, and negligence speaks to an expectation of a duty of care on the part of the providers of the information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because LLMs don't think, and a mistake implies logic. "Hallucination" is an attempt to differentiate the problem and further emphasize its lack of basis in reality.
Words are inexact abstractions, and meanings change over time. If they can't think, how can they even hallucinate? Remember the old definition of "computer", and how its usage shifted from humans to man-made machines. I just think that "mistake" is a better analogy than "hallucination": It gives a result that does not concur with our shared experience of reality, like shifting signs on a maths exam. The human shiftin…