2 ms·
> I'm thus not sure if the distinction being made here isn't just one of degree. I think humans has two levels here, "that sounds plausible" and "I can't imagi
by Jensson 3y ago
> I'm thus not sure if the distinction being made here isn't just one of degree.
I think humans has two levels here, "that sounds plausible" and "I can't imagine how this could be wrong so I am willing to risk my life on it". The second can still be wrong, but usually it isn't. For example when you walk on a bridge, you assume the bridge is there and confidently put down your foot even though you would die if that part of the bridge happened to be an hallucination.
So science is a set of statements and experiments that sums up to facts that humans can't imagine are wrong. Sometimes they are still a bit wrong, but then only slightly like newtons equations or theories that aren't backed up by experiments. But in general science is full of facts that humans stake their life on every day.
LLMs doesn't seem to have that certainty layer, something so certain that the LLM would stake its life on it. I'd for sure never stake my life on anything an LLM says as it is today, but I happily do it for humans every time I take the elevator etc.
- layer8 3y agoI would count your bridge example firmly in the plausibility category, in that I would find the bridge implausible, but not impossible, to collapse. In Bayesian speak, it’s a matter of credence. We usually don’t consciously think about it when our brain decides it's good enough with sufficient certainty, but in the end it's still based on a likelihood judgement.