3 ms·

What difference does it make? If it happened today with an LLM the outcome should be the same.

petesergeant 3y ago
> What difference does it make? In liability, none, but it'd at least be more understandable if it was an LLM, rather than something that should have been hard-coded with the right answers.
- xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
  I'm not sure I follow. I wrote an "AI" chatbot in highschool and it certainly didn't reproduce hard-coded "right answers". LLMs don't somehow invalidate the work of their predecessors. Chat bots aren't new. I'm not really sure why you brought up LLMs at all. Are chat bots synonymous with LLMs now? I sure hope not because then this sort of scenario only gets worse.
  - petesergeant 3y ago
    > I'm not really sure why you brought up LLMs at all I didn't > I wrote an "AI" chatbot in highschool and it certainly didn't reproduce hard-coded "right answers" Sounds like it would have been a poor choice for a customer-service bot then?
    - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
      My apologies, I misread. And it would certainly have been a poor choice for customer service, but I have definitely used chat bots that are far worse than that one was.
  - darylteo 3y ago
    > Are chat bots synonymous with LLMs now? I sure hope not because then this sort of scenario only gets worse. You're right. LLMs are now the de facto standard implementation for Support Chatbots. Almost every chatbot platform offers a AI Chatbot product in some form. - they're also frequently shown to be prone to hallucinations - and also shown to be tricked - and can be gamed into breaking it's prompt cage https://twitter.com/ChrisJBakke/status/1736533308849443121 https://twitter.com/ChrisJBakke/status/1736533308849443121 This case therefore sets a precedent for these scenarios, with or without a disclaimer that you should confirm this information with the dealership. If you assume the liability for the accuracy of "ye old bot" responses, then it raises the possibility that you assume the liability for the accuracy of "ye new bot" responses. My opinion is that once the AI wild west phase has ended, and the legal reckoning is upon it, everyone will learn that using AI does not absolve one of liability. This would essentially kill the dream of full self-driving automation, among other things.
    - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
      I don't think that's true. I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope. Replicable, intelligent but fallible and disposable minds have incredible potential to positively impact our society. But somewhere there is an ethical and moral boundary to be crossed. It's the journey, not the destination.

> What difference does it make? In liability, none, but it'd at least be more understandable if it was an LLM, rather than something that should have been hard-coded with the right answers.

xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
I'm not sure I follow. I wrote an "AI" chatbot in highschool and it certainly didn't reproduce hard-coded "right answers". LLMs don't somehow invalidate the work of their predecessors. Chat bots aren't new. I'm not really sure why you brought up LLMs at all. Are chat bots synonymous with LLMs now? I sure hope not because then this sort of scenario only gets worse.
- petesergeant 3y ago
  > I'm not really sure why you brought up LLMs at all I didn't > I wrote an "AI" chatbot in highschool and it certainly didn't reproduce hard-coded "right answers" Sounds like it would have been a poor choice for a customer-service bot then?
  - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
    My apologies, I misread. And it would certainly have been a poor choice for customer service, but I have definitely used chat bots that are far worse than that one was.
- darylteo 3y ago
  > Are chat bots synonymous with LLMs now? I sure hope not because then this sort of scenario only gets worse. You're right. LLMs are now the de facto standard implementation for Support Chatbots. Almost every chatbot platform offers a AI Chatbot product in some form. - they're also frequently shown to be prone to hallucinations - and also shown to be tricked - and can be gamed into breaking it's prompt cage https://twitter.com/ChrisJBakke/status/1736533308849443121 https://twitter.com/ChrisJBakke/status/1736533308849443121 This case therefore sets a precedent for these scenarios, with or without a disclaimer that you should confirm this information with the dealership. If you assume the liability for the accuracy of "ye old bot" responses, then it raises the possibility that you assume the liability for the accuracy of "ye new bot" responses. My opinion is that once the AI wild west phase has ended, and the legal reckoning is upon it, everyone will learn that using AI does not absolve one of liability. This would essentially kill the dream of full self-driving automation, among other things.
  - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
    I don't think that's true. I do think it is a bit of a slippery slope. Replicable, intelligent but fallible and disposable minds have incredible potential to positively impact our society. But somewhere there is an ethical and moral boundary to be crossed. It's the journey, not the destination.