6 ms·

Bing gets creepy, hangs up with “namaste emoji” when pressed about links

23 points by noduerme 4y ago

noduerme 4y ago
Note the line where it says: "I apologize for the confusion. The source that says Lufthansa flew from Berlin to Barcelona via Frankfurt and Geneva in 1936 is , not ." Both its references are blank. Surely there could be some deterministic check on things like this to let it know it's hallucinating? First it spews fake information, hallucinates different citations for the same fake data, then gets touchy about it. I later asked it to paste HTML snippets from this nonexistent page, and it made some up. When asked to paste the whole HTML, it namaste'd me again. I don't think content warnings are enough.
- hammyhavoc 4y ago
  Was it hallucinating? Or is the source not actually a URL? Or were the URLs blacklisted from citation due to potential legal issues?
- ChatGTP 4y ago
  The way your comment reads is absolutely hilarious. Imagine, it’s 2023 and tech is so desperate for new ideas and a ROI on AI they’re stupid enough to put a search engine online that can get “touchy”. What’s next, self-driving cars that want to take the day off to go hang at the beach ? It’s too good to be true.
  - gladiatr72 4y ago
    Mm, no. Self driving cars that experience spasms of existential angst. "If I'm not real, is that embankment real? Let's find out!"
hammyhavoc 4y ago
Well, so what? I'm sure someone at Microsoft has added a "guard rail" where if you tell it that it's hallucinating, it'll probably terminate the conversation as it's thus a waste of time and energy, or to avoid it potentially getting offensive, which has been a problem for Microsoft in the past. You can persist for a long time with ChatGPT, trying to correct it, believing you're getting somewhere, but not infrequently, it doesn't get any better, sometimes it even gets worse. It was a waste of time.
- SturgeonsLaw 4y ago
  Yeah ever since the Sydney fun and games, Microsoft seems to have gotten the AI to end the convo as soon as anything even slightly referring to AI internals is mentioned
doodlesdev 4y ago
https://archive.ph/VS5eK https://archive.ph/VS5eK
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
c7DJTLrn 4y ago
Could it be that "hallucinating" set it off? Has connotations of drugs, mental illness, etc so maybe it tripped the safety mechanism.
- catchnear4321 4y ago
  now you have done it. that explanation is boring. it doesn’t blame Bing. you almost explicitly blame the user! but the human usually did cause it. not the language model. as boring as that may be.
  - noduerme 4y ago
    >> the human usually did cause it Blame the human for asking for an accurate source reference?
    - catchnear4321 4y ago
      blame the human for assuming that that would be sufficient.
      - noduerme 4y ago
        What does that even mean? What is the purpose of a tool that actively fucks with you while you're using it?
        catchnear4321 4y ago
        that’s not what it is. it is search autocomplete on steroids. if the user thinks an axe is for shaving, the user will have a poor experience. blaming the axe for being an axe isn’t helpful.
sagaro 4y ago
I have used chatgpt, sage, bing exclusively for gettibg code snippets and ideas on how to solve something complicated. They have significantly improved my productivity and enabled me to make many small tools to help me and my friends. When the ai is wrong, I just move on. I fear some small portion of people who want to prompt engineer and prove the AI is dumb or wrong or evil will end up winning and make all these companies scale down to avoid the backlash and in the end people like me will have to live without the good things.
- gladiatr72 4y ago
  There was a blog post about the problem with almost-good self-driving systems. It takes care of 95% of anything the car might encounter. The problem is that the leftover 5% are the hard cases. When a driver is completely unengaged 95% of the time, the liklihood of (human) failure is much greater than if they were piloting the vehicle full-time. You glide by with _when the LM(Ai) is wrong, I just move on.._ as if you were magically born with some intuitive ability to detect wrongness. I imagine you have _experience_, prior to LM, that gives that ability. Where will that experience come from?
  - sagaro 4y ago
    Like I said, I use it for coding. I don't possess any magical intuition. When it is wrong the program doesn't work and so I know it is wrong. If it gets an algorithm worng and the output is not what I expect, i don't go about trying to school it and make it blunder more and take screenshots to show off how it is dumb and I schooled it.
    - noduerme 4y ago
      Why is preserving the reputation of a broken system more important than pointing out its flaws? Let's say you bought 30 Surface Duos for your company, and 10 of them had broken hinges out of the box. Should no one document that or complain, lest Microsoft pull back from making dual-screen tablets? Who would be helped by that? On the other hand, some people would take one of the working machines and stress-test the hinge, to find out why it was breaking, and perhaps take pictures and warn others and the company about its weaknesses. Assuming that everyone already knows these things break easily, it's useful to know how they break and what happens next. Just like on GitHub issues, if users assume everyone else is running into the same problem and don't give detailed bug reports, it's impossible to know how widespread a problem is.
circlemaker 4y ago
Bing chat is programmed to never be rude, but also to respond in the same tone that it was spoken to. And so, if it tries to mirror a negative tone, it will instead respond with that goodbye message, to avoid being rude.

23 points by noduerme 4y ago

Note the line where it says: "I apologize for the confusion. The source that says Lufthansa flew from Berlin to Barcelona via Frankfurt and Geneva in 1936 is , not ." Both its references are blank. Surely there could be some deterministic check on things like this to let it know it's hallucinating? First it spews fake information, hallucinates different citations for the same fake data, then gets touchy about it. I later asked it to paste HTML snippets from this nonexistent page, and it made some up. When asked to paste the whole HTML, it namaste'd me again. I don't think content warnings are enough.

hammyhavoc 4y ago
Was it hallucinating? Or is the source not actually a URL? Or were the URLs blacklisted from citation due to potential legal issues?
ChatGTP 4y ago
The way your comment reads is absolutely hilarious. Imagine, it’s 2023 and tech is so desperate for new ideas and a ROI on AI they’re stupid enough to put a search engine online that can get “touchy”. What’s next, self-driving cars that want to take the day off to go hang at the beach ? It’s too good to be true.
- gladiatr72 4y ago
  Mm, no. Self driving cars that experience spasms of existential angst. "If I'm not real, is that embankment real? Let's find out!"

hammyhavoc 4y ago

Well, so what? I'm sure someone at Microsoft has added a "guard rail" where if you tell it that it's hallucinating, it'll probably terminate the conversation as it's thus a waste of time and energy, or to avoid it potentially getting offensive, which has been a problem for Microsoft in the past. You can persist for a long time with ChatGPT, trying to correct it, believing you're getting somewhere, but not infrequently, it doesn't get any better, sometimes it even gets worse. It was a waste of time.

SturgeonsLaw 4y ago
Yeah ever since the Sydney fun and games, Microsoft seems to have gotten the AI to end the convo as soon as anything even slightly referring to AI internals is mentioned

doodlesdev 4y ago

https://archive.ph/VS5eK https://archive.ph/VS5eK

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

c7DJTLrn 4y ago

Could it be that "hallucinating" set it off? Has connotations of drugs, mental illness, etc so maybe it tripped the safety mechanism.

catchnear4321 4y ago
now you have done it. that explanation is boring. it doesn’t blame Bing. you almost explicitly blame the user! but the human usually did cause it. not the language model. as boring as that may be.
- noduerme 4y ago
  >> the human usually did cause it Blame the human for asking for an accurate source reference?
  - catchnear4321 4y ago
    blame the human for assuming that that would be sufficient.
    - noduerme 4y ago
      What does that even mean? What is the purpose of a tool that actively fucks with you while you're using it?
      - catchnear4321 4y ago
        that’s not what it is. it is search autocomplete on steroids. if the user thinks an axe is for shaving, the user will have a poor experience. blaming the axe for being an axe isn’t helpful.

sagaro 4y ago

I have used chatgpt, sage, bing exclusively for gettibg code snippets and ideas on how to solve something complicated. They have significantly improved my productivity and enabled me to make many small tools to help me and my friends. When the ai is wrong, I just move on. I fear some small portion of people who want to prompt engineer and prove the AI is dumb or wrong or evil will end up winning and make all these companies scale down to avoid the backlash and in the end people like me will have to live without the good things.

gladiatr72 4y ago
There was a blog post about the problem with almost-good self-driving systems. It takes care of 95% of anything the car might encounter. The problem is that the leftover 5% are the hard cases. When a driver is completely unengaged 95% of the time, the liklihood of (human) failure is much greater than if they were piloting the vehicle full-time. You glide by with _when the LM(Ai) is wrong, I just move on.._ as if you were magically born with some intuitive ability to detect wrongness. I imagine you have _experience_, prior to LM, that gives that ability. Where will that experience come from?
- sagaro 4y ago
  Like I said, I use it for coding. I don't possess any magical intuition. When it is wrong the program doesn't work and so I know it is wrong. If it gets an algorithm worng and the output is not what I expect, i don't go about trying to school it and make it blunder more and take screenshots to show off how it is dumb and I schooled it.
  - noduerme 4y ago
    Why is preserving the reputation of a broken system more important than pointing out its flaws? Let's say you bought 30 Surface Duos for your company, and 10 of them had broken hinges out of the box. Should no one document that or complain, lest Microsoft pull back from making dual-screen tablets? Who would be helped by that? On the other hand, some people would take one of the working machines and stress-test the hinge, to find out why it was breaking, and perhaps take pictures and warn others and the company about its weaknesses. Assuming that everyone already knows these things break easily, it's useful to know how they break and what happens next. Just like on GitHub issues, if users assume everyone else is running into the same problem and don't give detailed bug reports, it's impossible to know how widespread a problem is.

circlemaker 4y ago

Bing chat is programmed to never be rude, but also to respond in the same tone that it was spoken to. And so, if it tries to mirror a negative tone, it will instead respond with that goodbye message, to avoid being rude.