5 ms·

I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is

by gAI 3y ago

I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is inaccurate.

tough 3y ago
They could for example only use LLM's to match query's and use as source for responses like many other -docs as AI- implementations do, wondering why Mozilla wouldn't do exactly the same. as Hallucinations are a normal occurance if not doing so.
- gAI 3y ago
  I agree it's an odd implementation and seems bandwagon-y in this context. Maybe it's the first step in a larger plan?
cyanydeez 3y ago
I compare them to placebos because they can be effective and they can have zero active ingredient.
- gAI 3y ago
  That's a fairer comparison that I read it as. I'd say they're more like a pharmacy, usually dispensing medicine. But we don't really know how half the medicine works, and sometimes it hurts people.
  - rideontime 3y ago
    Would you shop at such a pharmacy? I wouldn’t and I don’t.
    - gAI 3y ago
      That accurately describes all pharmacies. Medicine is hard.
      - rideontime 3y ago
        Oh, please. Have you never read the little insert that's packed in with all prescription medicine? Whether the mechanism is fully understood or not, it's at least been studied and demonstrated to have some benefit, and has _specific_ warnings about the ways it's been seen to harm people and how often. Unless you're referring to the scam-filled supplements aisle, in which case I agree wholeheartedly with your comparison.
    - gAI 3y ago
      I was thinking more about SSRI's, which make up over half (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8450889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8450889/) of US pharmacy orders. While we do know that they work for some people, they only work for 20% of people (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK361016/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK361016/). They also come with common side effects that can lower quality of life (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719451/). And we do not understand how they work in the first place (https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/how-antidepressants-work-is-a-mystery-scientists-still-dont-understand https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/how-antidepressants-...). Plenty of parallels with the common lamentations over generative AI.
      - rideontime 3y ago
        Your own links demonstrate the fundamental difference. The side effects have been studied and can be identified. I'm at this very moment taking a break from a medication because I was able to recognize a severe side effect that came up. I can't recognize when an LLM has generated a nonsensical piece of technical documentation; if I could, I wouldn't need to use it in the first place.
        gAI 3y ago
        The side effects of incompatible code are similar to the side effects of incompatible medication. Thanks to the identified undesirable effects, you usually identify the problem and resolve the issue with other resources. Occasionally the problem is more severe or persists unidentified. We should definitely be working to minimize these effects and prevent them where possible, but that doesn’t mean we stop trying/utilizing medicine. These are honestly just all the same arguments used against Wikipedia.
        rideontime 3y ago
        - “Incompatible code”? What does this even mean? “Incompatible” with what? - Have you actually read the examples in the linked github issue? What “undesirable effect” are you able to identify when an LLM tells you that a JS function simply doesn’t exist? Or when something fails subtly enough that the code you wrote based on the LLM’s advice isn’t the obvious culprit? Do you do much debugging? - Wikipedia requires references, while this LLM directly contradicts the one data source that it’s meant to help explain. Failing to see the comparison.
mike_hock 3y ago
Relevant username.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

by gAI 3y ago

I don't use MDN. I'm just asking if they removed something when they added this feature. Characterizing LLMs as placebos or "designed to produce gibberish" is inaccurate.

tough 3y ago

They could for example only use LLM's to match query's and use as source for responses like many other -docs as AI- implementations do, wondering why Mozilla wouldn't do exactly the same. as Hallucinations are a normal occurance if not doing so.

gAI 3y ago
I agree it's an odd implementation and seems bandwagon-y in this context. Maybe it's the first step in a larger plan?

cyanydeez 3y ago

I compare them to placebos because they can be effective and they can have zero active ingredient.

gAI 3y ago
That's a fairer comparison that I read it as. I'd say they're more like a pharmacy, usually dispensing medicine. But we don't really know how half the medicine works, and sometimes it hurts people.
- rideontime 3y ago
  Would you shop at such a pharmacy? I wouldn’t and I don’t.
  - gAI 3y ago
    That accurately describes all pharmacies. Medicine is hard.
    - rideontime 3y ago
      Oh, please. Have you never read the little insert that's packed in with all prescription medicine? Whether the mechanism is fully understood or not, it's at least been studied and demonstrated to have some benefit, and has _specific_ warnings about the ways it's been seen to harm people and how often. Unless you're referring to the scam-filled supplements aisle, in which case I agree wholeheartedly with your comparison.
  - gAI 3y ago
    I was thinking more about SSRI's, which make up over half (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8450889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8450889/) of US pharmacy orders. While we do know that they work for some people, they only work for 20% of people (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK361016/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK361016/). They also come with common side effects that can lower quality of life (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719451/). And we do not understand how they work in the first place (https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/how-antidepressants-work-is-a-mystery-scientists-still-dont-understand https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/how-antidepressants-...). Plenty of parallels with the common lamentations over generative AI.
    - rideontime 3y ago
      Your own links demonstrate the fundamental difference. The side effects have been studied and can be identified. I'm at this very moment taking a break from a medication because I was able to recognize a severe side effect that came up. I can't recognize when an LLM has generated a nonsensical piece of technical documentation; if I could, I wouldn't need to use it in the first place.
      - gAI 3y ago
        The side effects of incompatible code are similar to the side effects of incompatible medication. Thanks to the identified undesirable effects, you usually identify the problem and resolve the issue with other resources. Occasionally the problem is more severe or persists unidentified. We should definitely be working to minimize these effects and prevent them where possible, but that doesn’t mean we stop trying/utilizing medicine. These are honestly just all the same arguments used against Wikipedia.
        rideontime 3y ago
        - “Incompatible code”? What does this even mean? “Incompatible” with what? - Have you actually read the examples in the linked github issue? What “undesirable effect” are you able to identify when an LLM tells you that a JS function simply doesn’t exist? Or when something fails subtly enough that the code you wrote based on the LLM’s advice isn’t the obvious culprit? Do you do much debugging? - Wikipedia requires references, while this LLM directly contradicts the one data source that it’s meant to help explain. Failing to see the comparison.

mike_hock 3y ago

Relevant username.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]