3 ms·
AI is not like some random person posting on the Internet. A random person on the Internet often has surrounding context to help discern trustworthiness. A re
by rockskon 2y ago
AI is not like some random person posting on the Internet.
A random person on the Internet often has surrounding context to help discern trustworthiness. A researcher can also query multiple sources to determine how much there is concensus about.
You can't do that with LLMs.
I cannot stress strongly enough that direct comparisons between LLMs and experts on the Internet are inappropriate.
- TeMPOraL 2y ago> I cannot stress strongly enough that direct comparisons between LLMs and experts on the Internet are inappropriate. In this context, I very much agree. But I'd like to stress that "experts on the Internet" is not what 99% of the users read 99% of the time, because that's not what search engines surface by default. When you make e.g. food or law or health-related queries, what you get back isn't written by experts - it's written by content marketers. Never confuse the two. > A researcher can also query multiple sources to determine how much there is concensus about. > You can't do that with LLMs. A person like that will know LLMs hallucinate, and query multiple sources and/or their own knowledge, and/or even re-query the LLM several times. Such people are not in danger - but very much annoyed when perfectly reasonable queries get rejected on the grounds of "safety".
- Y_Y 2y agoWhy can't you estimate the trustworthiness of an LLM? I happen to think that you can, and that the above analogy was fine. You don't need to read someone's forum history to know you shouldn't to trust them on something high-stakes. Maybe instead of strongly stressing you should present a convincing argument.
- rockskon 2y agoBecause if I already knew the answer then I wouldn't be asking the LLM?