3 ms·
Did you learn real things, or hallucinated info? How do you know which?
by ruszki 2y ago
Did you learn real things, or hallucinated info? How do you know which?
- dyauspitr 2y agoYou always check multiple sources like I’ve been doing with all my Google searches previously. Anecdotally, having checked my sources, it’s usually right the vast majority of the time.
- throwaway3xo6 2y agoDoes it matter if the hallucinations compile and do the job?
- palmfacehn 2y agoYes, if there are unintended side effects. Doubly so if the documentation warned about these specific pitfalls.
- namaria 2y agoIf you think coding is slinging strings that make the compiler do what you want, I pity the fool that has to work alongside or after you on code projects.
- emptiestplace 2y agoThis argument is specious and boring: everything an LLM outputs is "hallucinated" - just like with us. I'm not about to throw you out or even think less of you for making this mistake, though; it's just a mistake.
- exe34 2y agothey keep making the mistake, almost as if it's part of their training that they are regurgitating!
- caeril 2y agoAnd humans are better? QAnon folks, for example, are biological models that are trained on propaganda and misinformation. Trauma victims are models trained on maladaptive environments that therapists take YEARS to fine-tune. Physicians are models trained on a corpus of some of the best training sets we have available, and they still manage to hallucinate misdiagnoses at a staggering rate. I don't know why everyone here seems to think human brains are some collection of Magical Jesus Boxes that don't REGULARLY and CATASTROPHICALLY hallucinate outputs. We do. All the time. Give it a rest.
- exe34 2y agoI hoped it was clear in the context of whom I was replying to, but it seems your LLM misunderstood my point. I was referring to humans.
- mewpmewp2 2y agoUsing the word hallucination is an "hallucination".
- mjlee 2y agoI normally ask for pointers to sources and documentation. ChatGPT does a decent job, Claude is much better in my experience. Often when starting down a new path we don't know what questions we should be asking, so asking a search engine is near impossible and asking colleagues is frustrating for both parties. Once I've got a summarised overview it's much easier to find the right books to read and people to ask to fill in the gaps.
- mewpmewp2 2y agoI used it for learning biology, e.g. going down from human outer layer to lower layer (e.g. from organs to cells) to understand inner workings. It's possible to verify everything from everywhere in the Internet. The problem is finding an initial material that could present things in this specific or for you.
- NoGravitas 2y agoWe used to call those textbooks.
- mewpmewp2 2y agoYeah, but ChatGPT is much more dynamic. I learn better when I follow my interests. E.g. I am shown this piece of info, questions pop up in my mind that I want answers to before I can move on and it can go into a rabbit hole. That actually was a problem for me in school, that even for subjects that I was interested in, I had trouble going by the exact order, so I started thinking about something else with no answers. It has made studying or learning about new things so much more fun.
- NoGravitas 2y agoIt sounds like what you actually need is a wiki.
- Modified3019 2y agoThis brings up an amusing memory: My high school biology textbook still had the Haeckel's embryos images in it. It also occurs to me that my grasp of history is definitely influenced by the age of empires games.