6 ms·

You have to very carefully ask your question for it to not make things up. For example don't ask "how do I do this in in x?". Ask "can I do this with x?" These

You have to very carefully ask your question for it to not make things up. For example don't ask "how do I do this in in x?". Ask "can I do this with x?" These "AI" s are like "yes men". They will say anything to please you even if it's untrue or impossible. I have met people like that and they are very difficult to work with. You can't trust that they will deliver the project they promised and you always have to double check everything. You also can't trust them that what they promised is even possible.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ithkuil 3y ago
The analogy is apt indeed. It's all about training and selection. As long as the incentives are that you either behave in that way "or else" it's unsurprising that we end up with a system that uses its intelligence to meet the goals you've set up. Fortunately that doesn't tell much about the limitations of the underlying intelligence but mostly about the limitations of the incentive structure you put around it
impulsivepuppet 3y ago
Before ChatGPT, human language translation had a similar problem but people weren't as vocal about it. What I find frustrating that it's increasingly challenging to have DeepL translate thou -> du, as this was my go-to "hack" to overcome the incompatibility of the English language due to its missing features. To somewhat remedy the "yes man" problem, one needs to become a pedantic mathematician about posing your questions and I don't believe that LLM technology alone is capable of overcoming it entirely. As silly as it sounds, I must concede to the existence of "prompt engineering" as I can forsee the development of abstractions aimed to decompose questions for you.
tudorw 3y ago
I've had some success with 'Ask follow up questions where additional clarity is required'. My best experiences start with a much more freeform conversation about what we are going to attempt to do, doing a Q&A first to make sure that both I and the AI are thinking about the same domain and sharing associated nomenclature seems to help.
empath-nirvana 3y ago
I have often had it tell me that things I want to do with various technologies aren't possible or that there are better ways to do it.
bonzaidrinkingb 3y ago
Current AIs are RLHFd to avoid being a "yes man"/sycophant. The point about employing better prompting is well taken. Don't ask "Who was the first female president?", ask "Was there ever a female president?". Much like on StackOverflow you want to ask the right question and not assume things (since you don't know enough to make assumptions). Imagine if every time on early Google you found a spam result and then blame the search engine for that (and not your choice of keywords, or ignoring that you always want to return something, even if remotely related). Like a user banging a slab of concrete with a chisel and complaining that this does not produce a beautiful statue.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ithkuil 3y ago

The analogy is apt indeed. It's all about training and selection. As long as the incentives are that you either behave in that way "or else" it's unsurprising that we end up with a system that uses its intelligence to meet the goals you've set up. Fortunately that doesn't tell much about the limitations of the underlying intelligence but mostly about the limitations of the incentive structure you put around it

impulsivepuppet 3y ago

Before ChatGPT, human language translation had a similar problem but people weren't as vocal about it. What I find frustrating that it's increasingly challenging to have DeepL translate thou -> du, as this was my go-to "hack" to overcome the incompatibility of the English language due to its missing features. To somewhat remedy the "yes man" problem, one needs to become a pedantic mathematician about posing your questions and I don't believe that LLM technology alone is capable of overcoming it entirely. As silly as it sounds, I must concede to the existence of "prompt engineering" as I can forsee the development of abstractions aimed to decompose questions for you.

tudorw 3y ago

I've had some success with 'Ask follow up questions where additional clarity is required'. My best experiences start with a much more freeform conversation about what we are going to attempt to do, doing a Q&A first to make sure that both I and the AI are thinking about the same domain and sharing associated nomenclature seems to help.

empath-nirvana 3y ago

I have often had it tell me that things I want to do with various technologies aren't possible or that there are better ways to do it.

bonzaidrinkingb 3y ago

Current AIs are RLHFd to avoid being a "yes man"/sycophant. The point about employing better prompting is well taken. Don't ask "Who was the first female president?", ask "Was there ever a female president?". Much like on StackOverflow you want to ask the right question and not assume things (since you don't know enough to make assumptions). Imagine if every time on early Google you found a spam result and then blame the search engine for that (and not your choice of keywords, or ignoring that you always want to return something, even if remotely related). Like a user banging a slab of concrete with a chisel and complaining that this does not produce a beautiful statue.