4 ms·

The same argument can be used for Tesla full self driving: basically it has to be (nearly) perfect, and after years of development, it's not there yet. What's

The same argument can be used for Tesla full self driving: basically it has to be (nearly) perfect, and after years of development, it's not there yet. What's different about LLMs?

ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
GPT-4 is 1 year old; 3.5 is 1 and a half. Before 3.5, this wasn't really a useful technology. 7 years ago it was a research project that Google saw no value in pursuing.
dpkirchner 2y ago
There's hundreds+ of companies making LLMs we can choose from, and the switching cost is low. There's only one company that can make self-driving software for Tesla. Basically, competition should lead to improvements.
- ben_w 2y ago
  Tesla aren't the only people trying to make self-driving cars, famously Uber tried and Waymo looks like they're slowly succeeding. Competition can be useful, but it's not a panacea.
  - nativeit 2y ago
    Mercedes seems to be eating Tesla’s breakfast on FSD, in particular where safety and real-world implementation is concerned. Their self-driving vehicles are equipped with aqua-colored lights to alert other drivers that it is being controlled via computer, and Mercedes has chosen to honor its liability for incidents/accidents.
    - rvnx 2y ago
      In Europe yes, especially with the Level 3, it means that Mercedes is taking the liability. In the US it's different, because the US' FSD has nothing to do with the capabilities of the FSD in Europe (which is some sort of glorified driver assist), and it can clear navigate in many streets. Mercedes in the US is very limited.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jaapbadlands 2y ago
They don't have to be perfect to be useful, and death isn't the price of being wrong.
- ale42 2y ago
  Death actually can be the price of being wrong. Just wait for someone to do the wrong thing with an AI tool they weren't supposed to use for what they were doing, and the AI to spit out the worse possible "hallucination" (in terms of outcome).
  - ben_w 2y ago
    What you say is true, however with self-driving cars death, personal injury, and property damage are much more immediate, much more visible, and many of the errors are of a kind where most people are qualified to immediately understand what the machine did wrong. An LLM that gives you a detailed plan for removing a stubborn stain in your toilet that involves mixing the wrong combination of drain cleaners and accidentally releasing chlorine, is going to happen if it hasn't already, but a lot of people will read about this and go "oh, I didn't know you could gas yourself like that" and then continue to ask the same model for recipes or Norwegian wedding poetry because "what could possibly go wrong?" And if you wonder how anyone can possibly read about such a story and react that way, remember that Yann LeCun says this kind of thing despite (a) working for Facebook and (b) Facebook's algorithm gets flack not only for the current teen depression epidemic, but also from the UN for not doing enough to stop the (ongoing) genocide in Myanmar. It's a cognitive blind spot of some kind. Plenty smart, still can't recognise the connection.
  - DoughnutHole 2y ago
    Google’s recent AI assistant has already been documented recommending people mix bleach and white vinegar for cleaning purposes. Someone’s going to accidentally kill themselves based on an AI hallucination soon if no one has already.

The same argument can be used for Tesla full self driving: basically it has to be (nearly) perfect, and after years of development, it's not there yet. What's different about LLMs?

ToValueFunfetti 2y ago

GPT-4 is 1 year old; 3.5 is 1 and a half. Before 3.5, this wasn't really a useful technology. 7 years ago it was a research project that Google saw no value in pursuing.

dpkirchner 2y ago

There's hundreds+ of companies making LLMs we can choose from, and the switching cost is low. There's only one company that can make self-driving software for Tesla. Basically, competition should lead to improvements.

ben_w 2y ago
Tesla aren't the only people trying to make self-driving cars, famously Uber tried and Waymo looks like they're slowly succeeding. Competition can be useful, but it's not a panacea.
- nativeit 2y ago
  Mercedes seems to be eating Tesla’s breakfast on FSD, in particular where safety and real-world implementation is concerned. Their self-driving vehicles are equipped with aqua-colored lights to alert other drivers that it is being controlled via computer, and Mercedes has chosen to honor its liability for incidents/accidents.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    In Europe yes, especially with the Level 3, it means that Mercedes is taking the liability. In the US it's different, because the US' FSD has nothing to do with the capabilities of the FSD in Europe (which is some sort of glorified driver assist), and it can clear navigate in many streets. Mercedes in the US is very limited.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

jaapbadlands 2y ago

They don't have to be perfect to be useful, and death isn't the price of being wrong.

ale42 2y ago
Death actually can be the price of being wrong. Just wait for someone to do the wrong thing with an AI tool they weren't supposed to use for what they were doing, and the AI to spit out the worse possible "hallucination" (in terms of outcome).
- ben_w 2y ago
  What you say is true, however with self-driving cars death, personal injury, and property damage are much more immediate, much more visible, and many of the errors are of a kind where most people are qualified to immediately understand what the machine did wrong. An LLM that gives you a detailed plan for removing a stubborn stain in your toilet that involves mixing the wrong combination of drain cleaners and accidentally releasing chlorine, is going to happen if it hasn't already, but a lot of people will read about this and go "oh, I didn't know you could gas yourself like that" and then continue to ask the same model for recipes or Norwegian wedding poetry because "what could possibly go wrong?" And if you wonder how anyone can possibly read about such a story and react that way, remember that Yann LeCun says this kind of thing despite (a) working for Facebook and (b) Facebook's algorithm gets flack not only for the current teen depression epidemic, but also from the UN for not doing enough to stop the (ongoing) genocide in Myanmar. It's a cognitive blind spot of some kind. Plenty smart, still can't recognise the connection.
- DoughnutHole 2y ago
  Google’s recent AI assistant has already been documented recommending people mix bleach and white vinegar for cleaning purposes. Someone’s going to accidentally kill themselves based on an AI hallucination soon if no one has already.