4 ms·

Sorry, I'm not following your point.

pulvinar 4y ago
From GTP-4 (or maybe this is bullshitting too?): I believe vba616 is trying to point out that if we consider AI systems that generate plausible-sounding responses to be "bullshitting," then we should also acknowledge that humans who do the same are not necessarily distinguishable from "intelligent" humans. In other words, both AI systems and humans can produce seemingly coherent responses without necessarily having a deep understanding of the subject matter. It raises the question of whether we should hold AI systems to the same standard as humans when it comes to evaluating their output or understanding. If we accept that humans can sometimes provide plausible yet shallow answers, should we not also accept that AI systems, like LLMs, can do the same?
- wpietri 4y ago
  Sorry, I do not give LLM-generated copy-pastes any attention. If you personally have something to say here, I'll read it with interest. But I have no interest in automated bullshit.
  - nullsense 4y ago
    As an AI language model, I fully agree.
  - pulvinar 4y ago
    That's fine, but you will be continuing to prove the double standard.
    - wpietri 4y ago
      What double standard do you have in mind?
      - bheadmaster 4y ago
        That human bullshitters are treated more kindly than AI bullshitters just because of their human race. That's racist!
        wpietri 4y ago
        I'm just going to hope this is comedy.
        bheadmaster 4y ago
        Just wait a dozen years, it won't be.
    - usrbinbash 4y ago
      What matters is how correct a statement is, not how its representation in writing was produced.
  - stavros 4y ago
    Ah, but what he had to say was the same as what GPT-4 had to say, which proves his point.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- usrbinbash 4y ago
  Thank you for this, it's a very valid point to make. We get served bullshit and fiction-presented-as-fact every day from humans. To make matters worse, alot of these lies are not even the result of an error. A lot of them are deliberate, to further some sort of agenda. Yes, AI can fantasize about facts. Yes AI isn't perfect. But at least, when it does spew misinformation, it is virtually always the result of an error. When an AI lies, it's because of errors, not to sell us something, or get our vote, or talk itself out of something.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

From GTP-4 (or maybe this is bullshitting too?): I believe vba616 is trying to point out that if we consider AI systems that generate plausible-sounding responses to be "bullshitting," then we should also acknowledge that humans who do the same are not necessarily distinguishable from "intelligent" humans. In other words, both AI systems and humans can produce seemingly coherent responses without necessarily having a deep understanding of the subject matter. It raises the question of whether we should hold AI systems to the same standard as humans when it comes to evaluating their output or understanding. If we accept that humans can sometimes provide plausible yet shallow answers, should we not also accept that AI systems, like LLMs, can do the same?

wpietri 4y ago
Sorry, I do not give LLM-generated copy-pastes any attention. If you personally have something to say here, I'll read it with interest. But I have no interest in automated bullshit.
- nullsense 4y ago
  As an AI language model, I fully agree.
- pulvinar 4y ago
  That's fine, but you will be continuing to prove the double standard.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    What double standard do you have in mind?
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      That human bullshitters are treated more kindly than AI bullshitters just because of their human race. That's racist!
      - wpietri 4y ago
        I'm just going to hope this is comedy.
        bheadmaster 4y ago
        Just wait a dozen years, it won't be.
  - usrbinbash 4y ago
    What matters is how correct a statement is, not how its representation in writing was produced.
- stavros 4y ago
  Ah, but what he had to say was the same as what GPT-4 had to say, which proves his point.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
usrbinbash 4y ago
Thank you for this, it's a very valid point to make. We get served bullshit and fiction-presented-as-fact every day from humans. To make matters worse, alot of these lies are not even the result of an error. A lot of them are deliberate, to further some sort of agenda. Yes, AI can fantasize about facts. Yes AI isn't perfect. But at least, when it does spew misinformation, it is virtually always the result of an error. When an AI lies, it's because of errors, not to sell us something, or get our vote, or talk itself out of something.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]