3 ms·

I'd argue that AI insiders are also out of touch with the wider world and are missing opportunities to develop tools that'd be useful for everyone. For instanc

by 23B1 3y ago

I'd argue that AI insiders are also out of touch with the wider world and are missing opportunities to develop tools that'd be useful for everyone. For instance, hallucinations. They're a function of LLMs. But they're also something that everyday people have to deal with from each other in the miasma of the post-truth world. What an opportunity, within the artificial intelligence field, to think of these tools not just as automation and fact-finding, but teaching how to avoid hallucinations in your own life? Personal finance Grammar, rhetoric, logic, reason Information literacy Media literacy The list goes on...

smt88 3y ago
LLMs are not an opportunity to teach humans how to avoid hallucinations because they don't work even the slightest bit like human brains and we don't even know how to make them stop hallucinating in the first place.
- 23B1 3y ago
  Ahh but we known that both humans and LLMs 'hallucinate'. The study of the latter potentially provides insight to former; after all, isn't the core question we're asking in all of these discussions is 'what is intelligence?'
  - smt88 3y ago
    > The study of the latter potentially provides insight to former It absolutely does not. Using the term "hallucinate" for LLMs has nothing to do with the underlying cause or process. It's a metaphor that I feel was specifically chosen by the AI industry to avoid terms like "lying" or "making a mistake". LLMs hallucinate because they're next-word prediction engines, not logical engines. They have no conceptual understanding, which is why their hallucinations range from small factual errors to bizarre lies that are obviously false. Humans hallucinate because our brains are reality-simulation engines that evolved to model the perception of events that aren't currently happening (remembering the past, imagining the future, etc.) and sometimes we lose our autonomy over our brains. The underlying process has nothing to do with predicting the next word we're going to say. In fact, there's an even more fundamental difference: human hallucinations aren't necessarily tied to speech. We have thoughts that don't require output. There's nothing in LLMs that doesn't "come out" as output.
    - 23B1 3y ago
      Note my use of scare quotes around 'hallucinate' The user of an LLM still gets a vote, right or wrong. If we have a good understanding of how the human mind works - empathy - we can gain a better understanding on how to clarify the very semantic confusion of which you speak! Here's another example that just popped up in my feed: https://kottke.org/23/07/will-ai-change-our-memories https://kottke.org/23/07/will-ai-change-our-memories

by 23B1 3y ago

smt88 3y ago

LLMs are not an opportunity to teach humans how to avoid hallucinations because they don't work even the slightest bit like human brains and we don't even know how to make them stop hallucinating in the first place.

23B1 3y ago
Ahh but we known that both humans and LLMs 'hallucinate'. The study of the latter potentially provides insight to former; after all, isn't the core question we're asking in all of these discussions is 'what is intelligence?'
- smt88 3y ago
  > The study of the latter potentially provides insight to former It absolutely does not. Using the term "hallucinate" for LLMs has nothing to do with the underlying cause or process. It's a metaphor that I feel was specifically chosen by the AI industry to avoid terms like "lying" or "making a mistake". LLMs hallucinate because they're next-word prediction engines, not logical engines. They have no conceptual understanding, which is why their hallucinations range from small factual errors to bizarre lies that are obviously false. Humans hallucinate because our brains are reality-simulation engines that evolved to model the perception of events that aren't currently happening (remembering the past, imagining the future, etc.) and sometimes we lose our autonomy over our brains. The underlying process has nothing to do with predicting the next word we're going to say. In fact, there's an even more fundamental difference: human hallucinations aren't necessarily tied to speech. We have thoughts that don't require output. There's nothing in LLMs that doesn't "come out" as output.
  - 23B1 3y ago
    Note my use of scare quotes around 'hallucinate' The user of an LLM still gets a vote, right or wrong. If we have a good understanding of how the human mind works - empathy - we can gain a better understanding on how to clarify the very semantic confusion of which you speak! Here's another example that just popped up in my feed: https://kottke.org/23/07/will-ai-change-our-memories https://kottke.org/23/07/will-ai-change-our-memories