4 ms·
> The submitter knows the AI isn’t lying You've somehow internalized something as "obvious to everyone" that's actually very wrong and dangerous about AI. Of c
by feoren 3y ago
> The submitter knows the AI isn’t lying
You've somehow internalized something as "obvious to everyone" that's actually very wrong and dangerous about AI. Of course the AI is lying. Or, perhaps a better term would be "bullshitting", defined as "sounding convincing while having no regard for the truth". By that definition, bullshitting is all LLMs ever do.
- gAI 3y agoThat's an ungenerous way of describing direct access to semantic space. gAI is creative. Rules-based AI is logical. We need them both.
- slotrans 3y agoIt may be "ungenerous" but it's accurate. Unlike the output of LLMs.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ImaCake 3y agoThis is a good point. The problem is that most people simply don’t care about these nuances. If the AI hallucinates or is wrong, then in their eyes it is lying. It doesn’t matter if that opinion is wrong because its still the opinion that matters.
- feoren 3y agoBut MDN's "AI Explain" is just straight LLM output, right? It's neither generative (LLMs are transformers, not GANNs, right?) nor rules-based: it's predictive. We need that too. But not for technical documentation! Not on its own!
- gAI 3y agoAye, I agree this sounds like a strange and ill-fitting implementation. And it bums me out, because the more LLMs are used incorrectly, the harder it is to get people to use them at all.