5 ms·
I actually like your first definition a bit better; very in line with the way the term was academically in vogue a few years ago; the idea that you're expressin
by jrm4 2y ago
I actually like your first definition a bit better; very in line with the way the term was academically in vogue a few years ago; the idea that you're expressing information intended to appear factual without regard for how factual it is.
The LLM does it because it's programmed to, and the human does it for some other self gain reason, but both the process and the results are very similar.
- hunter2_ 2y ago> the idea that you're expressing information intended to appear factual without regard for how factual it is. That's my second definition! Sorry if I wasn't clear. My first definition (which aligns with the comment I had originally quoted) is that the speaker is aware that they're saying false things, and therefore has intent to deceive, typically for personal gain (they are bullshitting another person). My second definition is that the speaker has no regard for whether what they're saying is true or false (they are bullshitting with another person). An LLM does not bullshit you, it bullshits with you. It's fluff, not a bluff.