3 ms·

> I'd say I'm getting 10x more non technical business advice in multiple areas than I'm getting with the technical stuff. Probably in large part because you ca

> I'd say I'm getting 10x more non technical business advice in multiple areas than I'm getting with the technical stuff. Probably in large part because you can't verify when its wrong since that isn't your area of expertise, so those advice looks better to you. You should assume your org will be the same quality as a program written by a non-technical person using an LLM if you do it that way.

goshx 2y ago
The same can be said for a human CEO.
j-bos 2y ago
>You should assume your org will be the same quality as a program written by a non-technical person using an LLM if you do it that way. Only if OP is themself not somewhat business savvy
- loloquwowndueo 2y ago
  Way to ignore the first paragraph of the one you’re replying to where he says exactly this: “ because you can't verify when its wrong since that isn't your area of expertise, so those advice looks better to you.”
  - j-bos 2y ago
    I've seen a non programmer navigate bad llm advice on writing code by double checking the info, both with the same llm and with google searches. It isn't their area of expertise, but their light familiarity is enough to build something decent. I can imagine OP doing similar with business advice.
boolit 2y ago
This is a critical insight. Whenever I ask an LLM about a topic I’m knowledgeable about, I can detect that it spews a load of nonsense. Talking to people in other fields, e.g., history and literature, they say it’s the same for them. LLMs are only useful if you know the topic you’re asking questions about. Otherwise, they generate so much nonsense that you cannot verify, that trusting it becomes a liability.
- sebzim4500 2y ago
  Depends what the topic is. IME it hallucines rarely when asked practical programming questions but basically constantly when asked math questions beyond basic calculus.
  - mirsadm 2y ago
    It constantly invents functions that don't exist.
    - timnetworks 2y ago
      Deal with it like Wolfram, implement those functions! It's picking up on something. :D
  - TheNewsIsHere 2y ago
    The more abstract or nuanced something is, the less capable it seems to be unless you have a domain specific LLM trained on a corpus of quality data. As a business owner with both applied experience and formal education on both the tech and the business sides, I wouldn’t trust random LLM-generated advice on business. There are nuances and a certain humanity in good business that an LLM is unlikely to pick up. And the Internet is filled with horrible advice and useless insight on running a business that it can’t distinguish from good advice and valuable insight. My advice to anyone seriously considering a business is that a course or reading a good survey text on business will pay off in ways that ChatGPT can’t (yet?) give you.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 2y ago
    It might be just a glitch but in the last few days it generates such blunders I suspect something must be going on. Like completely messing up random pieces of code on subsequent iteration. I don't remember anything like this before. Normally it would improve the code with each iteration (until going out of the context window and starting to "forget" things, but not putting random characters here and there on second reply).
    - 2y ago
tossandthrow 2y ago
I was speaking to a fellow software engineer the other day. She has a tech lead on their team. She reports that he is really nice, but some times he is insisting that he knows the working of some part of the system and is giving advice based on his understanding. Only thing is that he is wrong. The software engineer needs to "de-hallucinate" him in order to get a proper answer. I think we are at a time where we need not to categorically be critical about these things. Yes, preciseness is an issue. But there is a good chance that the LLM advice is on par with a random dude from a local accelerator.
- oxfordmale 2y ago
  The current generation of ChatGPT hallucinates far more systematically than that. The problem is that it can regurgitate what the random dudes from local accelerators have written in their blog posts. We all know blog posts are often a sales pitch and don't include useful advice, because you can charge for the useful advice you give.
  - tossandthrow 2y ago
    > The problem is that it can regurgitate what the random dudes from local accelerators have written in their blog posts. This is not how modern training pipelines work. The models are trained on proprietary alignments that ensure factuality. Regardless, that random dude from a local accelerator probably regurgitates those blog articles himself.
    - yencabulator 2y ago
      "ensures", really?
      - tossandthrow 2y ago
        Like with so many other thing, it is a process. Just like reviews "ensure" correctness on Wikipedia - which is actually a good case. In my childhood teachers would make us avoid Wikipedia. Now they advice students to use it.
shmel 2y ago
That's a good point, but I think it's important to critically analyze any information you find online. Anything I read online might be bullshit, and yet I've learned a lot from internet. And many other people have as well. I personally see ChatGPT as a better and faster search engine. If I need something basic, it's often on point and almost instant. If I need intricate advanced details about a niche topic, yes, it can be wrong. So are other people. While I lack expertise outside of my main areas to verify it, I usually have enough to judge whether it's a basic knowledge for experts in this area. At very least, ChatGPT doesn't intentionally try to mislead me to sell me something (yet).
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
williamcotton 2y ago
Business ideas can be tested so this epistemic haze isn’t as much of an issue as you’re making it out to be especially when error rates are taken into consideration. I have a friend who has business experience and has been getting verifiably helpful marketing advice from LLMs. Sales are up. That’s all that matters for any set of instructions: does it lead to the expected end result. These “do LLMs always hallucinate” questions are in the category of “do humans have a soul”. This is fine and dandy but the conversation doesn’t always need to go there as there is practical utility to discuss as well.
latexr 2y ago
> Probably in large part because you can't verify when its wrong since that isn't your area of expertise, so those advice looks better to you. Which is a kind of Gell-Mann Amnesia. Which, I just noticed, has “LLM” in the name. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-ge...
greg_V 2y ago
I had the "pleasure" of working for someone who would take the AI's word over mine in my domain of expertise. It was a hair-ripping experience to say the least and I'm while I'm not there anymore, from what I can see they hadn't improved in that area by an inch...

goshx 2y ago

The same can be said for a human CEO.

j-bos 2y ago

>You should assume your org will be the same quality as a program written by a non-technical person using an LLM if you do it that way. Only if OP is themself not somewhat business savvy

loloquwowndueo 2y ago
Way to ignore the first paragraph of the one you’re replying to where he says exactly this: “ because you can't verify when its wrong since that isn't your area of expertise, so those advice looks better to you.”
- j-bos 2y ago
  I've seen a non programmer navigate bad llm advice on writing code by double checking the info, both with the same llm and with google searches. It isn't their area of expertise, but their light familiarity is enough to build something decent. I can imagine OP doing similar with business advice.

boolit 2y ago

This is a critical insight. Whenever I ask an LLM about a topic I’m knowledgeable about, I can detect that it spews a load of nonsense. Talking to people in other fields, e.g., history and literature, they say it’s the same for them. LLMs are only useful if you know the topic you’re asking questions about. Otherwise, they generate so much nonsense that you cannot verify, that trusting it becomes a liability.

sebzim4500 2y ago
Depends what the topic is. IME it hallucines rarely when asked practical programming questions but basically constantly when asked math questions beyond basic calculus.
- mirsadm 2y ago
  It constantly invents functions that don't exist.
  - timnetworks 2y ago
    Deal with it like Wolfram, implement those functions! It's picking up on something. :D
- TheNewsIsHere 2y ago
  The more abstract or nuanced something is, the less capable it seems to be unless you have a domain specific LLM trained on a corpus of quality data. As a business owner with both applied experience and formal education on both the tech and the business sides, I wouldn’t trust random LLM-generated advice on business. There are nuances and a certain humanity in good business that an LLM is unlikely to pick up. And the Internet is filled with horrible advice and useless insight on running a business that it can’t distinguish from good advice and valuable insight. My advice to anyone seriously considering a business is that a course or reading a good survey text on business will pay off in ways that ChatGPT can’t (yet?) give you.
- dvfjsdhgfv 2y ago
  It might be just a glitch but in the last few days it generates such blunders I suspect something must be going on. Like completely messing up random pieces of code on subsequent iteration. I don't remember anything like this before. Normally it would improve the code with each iteration (until going out of the context window and starting to "forget" things, but not putting random characters here and there on second reply).
  - 2y ago

tossandthrow 2y ago

I was speaking to a fellow software engineer the other day. She has a tech lead on their team. She reports that he is really nice, but some times he is insisting that he knows the working of some part of the system and is giving advice based on his understanding. Only thing is that he is wrong. The software engineer needs to "de-hallucinate" him in order to get a proper answer. I think we are at a time where we need not to categorically be critical about these things. Yes, preciseness is an issue. But there is a good chance that the LLM advice is on par with a random dude from a local accelerator.

oxfordmale 2y ago
The current generation of ChatGPT hallucinates far more systematically than that. The problem is that it can regurgitate what the random dudes from local accelerators have written in their blog posts. We all know blog posts are often a sales pitch and don't include useful advice, because you can charge for the useful advice you give.
- tossandthrow 2y ago
  > The problem is that it can regurgitate what the random dudes from local accelerators have written in their blog posts. This is not how modern training pipelines work. The models are trained on proprietary alignments that ensure factuality. Regardless, that random dude from a local accelerator probably regurgitates those blog articles himself.
  - yencabulator 2y ago
    "ensures", really?
    - tossandthrow 2y ago
      Like with so many other thing, it is a process. Just like reviews "ensure" correctness on Wikipedia - which is actually a good case. In my childhood teachers would make us avoid Wikipedia. Now they advice students to use it.

shmel 2y ago

That's a good point, but I think it's important to critically analyze any information you find online. Anything I read online might be bullshit, and yet I've learned a lot from internet. And many other people have as well. I personally see ChatGPT as a better and faster search engine. If I need something basic, it's often on point and almost instant. If I need intricate advanced details about a niche topic, yes, it can be wrong. So are other people. While I lack expertise outside of my main areas to verify it, I usually have enough to judge whether it's a basic knowledge for experts in this area. At very least, ChatGPT doesn't intentionally try to mislead me to sell me something (yet).

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

williamcotton 2y ago

Business ideas can be tested so this epistemic haze isn’t as much of an issue as you’re making it out to be especially when error rates are taken into consideration. I have a friend who has business experience and has been getting verifiably helpful marketing advice from LLMs. Sales are up. That’s all that matters for any set of instructions: does it lead to the expected end result. These “do LLMs always hallucinate” questions are in the category of “do humans have a soul”. This is fine and dandy but the conversation doesn’t always need to go there as there is practical utility to discuss as well.

latexr 2y ago

> Probably in large part because you can't verify when its wrong since that isn't your area of expertise, so those advice looks better to you. Which is a kind of Gell-Mann Amnesia. Which, I just noticed, has “LLM” in the name. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-ge...

greg_V 2y ago

I had the "pleasure" of working for someone who would take the AI's word over mine in my domain of expertise. It was a hair-ripping experience to say the least and I'm while I'm not there anymore, from what I can see they hadn't improved in that area by an inch...