4 ms·

Why do people that hand wave away the entire concept of LLMs because of one instance of it doing one thing poorly that they could do better, and yet always seem

Why do people that hand wave away the entire concept of LLMs because of one instance of it doing one thing poorly that they could do better, and yet always seem to fail to just show us their concrete example?

barrkel 3y ago
FWIW I didn't wave away the entire concept. LLMs definitely have uses.
FrustratedMonky 3y ago
Technically the garbage in/garbage out, problem is not being hand waved away. I've seen a lot of articles on this, or sometimes called a degrading feedback loop. The more of the web that is LLM generated, then the more new models will be trained on generated data, and will fuzz out. Or 'drift'. For a specific example. Sorry, I didn't grab screen shots at the time. It had to do with updating a datafame in pandas. It gave me solution that generated an error, I'd continue to ask it to change steps to fix previous errors, and it would go in a circle, fix it, but generate other warnings, and further changes to eliminate warnings, and it would recommend the same thing that originally caused an error. Also. I'm a big fan. Use GPT-4 all the time. SO not waving away, but kind of curious how it sometimes fails in un-expected ways.
- fkyoureadthedoc 3y ago
  > The more of the web that is LLM generated, then the more new models will be trained on generated data, and will fuzz out And yet it's so obvious that a random Hackernews independently discovers it and repeats it on every Chat GPT post, and prophesies it as some inevitable future. Not could happen, will happen. The clueless researchers will be blindsided by this of course, they'll never see it coming from their ivory tower. And yes Chat GPT fails to write code that runs all the time. But it's not very interesting to talk about without an example.
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    How? It isn't exactly easy to re-produce these examples. I'd have to write a few pages to document and explain it. And scrub it to remove anything too internal, so create a vanilla example of the bug. And then it would be too long to go into a post, so what then, I'd have to go sign up to blog it somewhere and link to it. I'm not arguing that GPT is bad. Just that it is as susceptible to rabbit wholes as any human. I'm actually having a hard time narrowing down where your frustration is aimed. At naysayers? At those that don't put effort into documenting? At GPT itself? Or that a news site on the internet dares have repetition ?
- cozzyd 3y ago
  So someone could sabotage LLMs by writing some scripts to fill GitHub (or whatever other corpus is used) with LLM-generated crap? Someone must be doing this, no?

barrkel 3y ago

FWIW I didn't wave away the entire concept. LLMs definitely have uses.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago

Technically the garbage in/garbage out, problem is not being hand waved away. I've seen a lot of articles on this, or sometimes called a degrading feedback loop. The more of the web that is LLM generated, then the more new models will be trained on generated data, and will fuzz out. Or 'drift'. For a specific example. Sorry, I didn't grab screen shots at the time. It had to do with updating a datafame in pandas. It gave me solution that generated an error, I'd continue to ask it to change steps to fix previous errors, and it would go in a circle, fix it, but generate other warnings, and further changes to eliminate warnings, and it would recommend the same thing that originally caused an error. Also. I'm a big fan. Use GPT-4 all the time. SO not waving away, but kind of curious how it sometimes fails in un-expected ways.

fkyoureadthedoc 3y ago
> The more of the web that is LLM generated, then the more new models will be trained on generated data, and will fuzz out And yet it's so obvious that a random Hackernews independently discovers it and repeats it on every Chat GPT post, and prophesies it as some inevitable future. Not could happen, will happen. The clueless researchers will be blindsided by this of course, they'll never see it coming from their ivory tower. And yes Chat GPT fails to write code that runs all the time. But it's not very interesting to talk about without an example.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  How? It isn't exactly easy to re-produce these examples. I'd have to write a few pages to document and explain it. And scrub it to remove anything too internal, so create a vanilla example of the bug. And then it would be too long to go into a post, so what then, I'd have to go sign up to blog it somewhere and link to it. I'm not arguing that GPT is bad. Just that it is as susceptible to rabbit wholes as any human. I'm actually having a hard time narrowing down where your frustration is aimed. At naysayers? At those that don't put effort into documenting? At GPT itself? Or that a news site on the internet dares have repetition ?
cozzyd 3y ago
So someone could sabotage LLMs by writing some scripts to fill GitHub (or whatever other corpus is used) with LLM-generated crap? Someone must be doing this, no?