4 ms·
Suppose you tell it not to upset anyone. Someone asks if a question and it thinks the answer might be upsetting. The machine declines to answer. The asker clari
by jncfhnb 3y ago
Suppose you tell it not to upset anyone. Someone asks if a question and it thinks the answer might be upsetting. The machine declines to answer. The asker clarifies that it would be happy to receive the answer. Contextually, this does seem less likely to upset the human with an answer. It’s not very practical as a safeguard obviously although real humans are susceptible to contextual nudging all the time. Adding it to the prompt would be an awkward half solution to the awkward half problem they’ve created by making their bot less likely to offend by crippling its own capabilities.
- shanusmagnus 3y agoThis makes sense. In the "token window" of a human being, the same strategy would also work, e.g., p1: "What do you think of my story? Be honest." p2: "I'd rather not say." p1: "Seriously, tell me what you think, it's fine if you hate it. I need the feedback." When you think about it from that perspective, it's no dumber than people are.
- CamperBob2 3y agoThat's what I find so interesting about LLMs. I have yet to see a single criticism of them that doesn't apply to humans. "Well, it's just a stochastic parrot." And most people aren't? "Meh, it just makes stuff up." And people don't do that? "It doesn't know when it's wrong." Most people not only don't know when they're wrong, they don't care. "It sucks at math." Yeah, let's not go there. "It doesn't know anything that wasn't in its training." Neither do you and I. "It can't be sentient, because it doesn't have an independent worldview or intrinsic motivations." Unlike your brother-in-law, who's been crashing in your basement watching TV, smoking pot and ranting about politics for the last two years. Got it.
- jncfhnb 3y agoHow about “it cannot tell if you if it made something up / guessed with intuitive levels of confidence”.
- yunwal 3y agoThis is really the main one. I don’t really understand why this isn’t the sole topic of research at every org working on LLMs/general purpose models
- famouswaffles 3y agoPeople can't do that either. Not accurately (though better than current SOTA LLMs) Look at this. People wish they were as calibrated as the left lol. https://imgur.com/a/3gYel9r https://imgur.com/a/3gYel9r
- jncfhnb 3y agoYou cannot tell me if you think you made a guess?
- famouswaffles 3y agoPeople don't know when they don't know and often inflate their knowledge unknowingly. I'm not saying we can't do it at all. I'm saying we're not great at it. There's research that shows we can't even be trusted to accurately say why we make certain decisions or perform certain actions. It's all post-hoc rationalization. If you make someone believe they made another decision, they'll make something up on the fly to justify it. When humans say "I've made a guess and this is how likely it is to be true", the graph is closer to the right than the left. https://www.bi.team/blogs/are-you-well-calibrated-results-from-a-survey-of-1154-bit-readers/ https://www.bi.team/blogs/are-you-well-calibrated-results-fr... And sometimes we present information that is really a guess as fact.
- jncfhnb 3y agoYou are still talking about a different concept entirely. For example, if I take this test, every single answer I give is a guess. I am 100% certain of this. This test is explicitly asking people things they don’t know.
- 3y ago
- shanusmagnus 3y agoBeautifully put. Esp the brother-in-law one :)