25 ms·
> Would a corpus like that have enough suitable data to generate conversational output that feels satisfying? Yes? The point is that we can use LLMs right now
by stale2002 3y ago
> Would a corpus like that have enough suitable data to generate conversational output that feels satisfying?
Yes? The point is that we can use LLMs right now. They mostly work. That is the empirical evidence that is immediately verifiable right now. This is not a hypothetical. LLMs mostly work.
- swatcoder 3y agoHuh? I don't understand how this engages with what I wrote or what I was responding to. Yes, it's very very obvious that the conversational LLM's we engagw with mostly work for conversational UX. The discussion is about the above commenter's reference to "largely true" data. I'm not aware of any leading LLM built on something that could be characterized that way, but I'm genuinely curious to hear otherwise.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rsynnott 3y agoSee Tim Bray’s example; the LLM very much did not mostly work once it was talking about something that he knew about; most of what it said was nonsense. I suspect a _huge_ driver of the hype is that people are not usually experts on the things that they ask these about, so they see a magical oracle rather than a nonsense generator.