3 ms·
> Sounds good [...] out of LLMs without understanding what they're doing How does Gemini know that the author doesn't understand what they're doing? The contex
by diggan 3y ago
> Sounds good [...] out of LLMs without understanding what they're doing
How does Gemini know that the author doesn't understand what they're doing? The context in the tweet isn't exactly great, but I'm not sure we should put the responsibility of what's safe or not to a glorified prediction machine.
Fine, put some disclaimer that the outputted code could be unsafe in the wrong context, but to just flat out refuse to assist the user? Sounds like a bug if I was responsible for Gemini.
(For the record, since I actually recognize the name of the tweet author, it's the person who's behind Garry's Mod and Facepunch Studios, I'm fairly confident they know what they're doing. But it's also besides the point.)
- badgersnake 3y agoMy comment wasn’t intended to suggest the author of the tweet doesn’t know what they’re doing. It should not be taken that way.
- diggan 3y agoAs mentioned, it's besides the point that this specific author happens to be proficient enough. Why is it up to the LLM to decide if the author is proficient or not to be able to deal with the tradeoffs of the potential solution?
- warkdarrior 3y agoIf you don't like this model, build you own model, with blackjack, hookers, and blow.
- badgersnake 3y agoBuild your own model is never the answer when it comes to LLMs. At least not unless you have a truckload of VC funding. You can fine tune, you can RAG but starting from nothing is not going to be affordable.