5 ms·

they can be tricked into performing prohibited tasks This reminds me of the school principal who sent $100k to a scammer claiming to be Elon Musk. The kicker

they can be tricked into performing prohibited tasks This reminds me of the school principal who sent $100k to a scammer claiming to be Elon Musk. The kicker is that she was repeatedly told that it was a scam. https://abc7chicago.com/fake-elon-musk-jan-mcgee-principal-burns-science-and-technology-charter-school-scam/13044937/ https://abc7chicago.com/fake-elon-musk-jan-mcgee-principal-b...

tstrimple 2y ago
This is one of the things which annoys me most about anti-LLM hate. Your peers aren't right all the time either. They believe incorrect things and will pursue worse solutions because they won't acknowledge a better way. How is this any different from a LLM? You have to question everything you're presented with. Sometimes that Stack Overflow answer isn't directly applicable to your exact problem but you can extrapolate from it to resolve your problem. Why is an LLM viewed any differently? Of course you can't just blindly accept it as the one true answer, but you literally cannot do that with humans either. Humans produce a ton of shit code and non-solutions and it's fine. But when an LLM does it, it's a serious problem that means the tech is useless. Much of the modern world is built on shit solutions and we still hobble along.
- lazide 2y ago
  Everyone knows humans can be idiots. The problem is that people seem to think LLMs can’t be idiots, and because they aren’t human there is no way to punish them. And then people give them too much credit/power, for their own purposes. Which makes LLMs far more dangerous than idiot humans in most cases.
  - brookst 2y ago
    No. Nobody thinks LLMs are perfect. That’s a strawman. And… I am really not sure punishment is the answer to fallibility, outside of almost kinky Catholicism. The reality is these things are very good, but imperfect, much like people.
    - lazide 2y ago
      Clearly you haven’t been listening to any CEO press releases lately? And when was the last time a support chatbot let you actually complain or bypass to a human?
    - thecupisblue 2y ago
      Sorry man, but I literally know of startups invested into by YC where CEO's for 80% of their management decisions/vision/comms use ChatGPT ... or should I say some use Claude now, as they think it's smarter and does not make mistakes. Let that sink in.
      - onion2k 2y ago
        I wouldn't be surprised if GPT genuinely makes better decisions than an inexperienced, first-time CEO who has only been a dev before, especially if the person prompting it has actually put some effort into understanding their own weaknesses. It certainly wouldn't be any worse than someone who's only experience is reading a few management books.
        lazide 2y ago
        And here is a great example of the problem. An LLM doesn’t make decisions. It generates text that plausibly looks like it made a decision, when prompted with the right text.
        beardedwizard 2y ago
        Why is this distinction lost in every thread on this topic, I don't get it.
        lazide 2y ago
        A lot more people are credulous idiots than anyone wants to believe - and the confusion/misunderstanding is being actively propagated.
  - 0points 2y ago
    Not people. Certain gullible people, who tends to listen to certain charlatans. Rational, intelligent people wouldn't consider replacing a skilled human worker with a LLM that on a good day can compete with a 3-year old. You may see the current age as litmus for critical thinking.
    - varelse 2y ago
      [dead]
- mplewis 2y ago
  Humans can tell you how confident they are in something being right or wrong. An LLM has no internal model and cannot do such a thing.
  - swiftcoder 2y ago
    > Humans can tell you how confident they are in something being right or wrong Humans are also very confidently wrong a considerable portion of the time. Particularly about anything outside their direct expertise
    - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
      People only being willing to say they are unsure some of the time is still better than LLMs. I suppose, given that everything is outside of their area of expertise, it's very human of them.
    - daveguy 2y ago
      That's still better than never being able to make an accurate confidence assessment. The fact that this is worse outside your expertise is a main reason why expertise is so valued in hiring decisions.
- pineaux 2y ago
  Its quite stunning to frame it as anti-LLM hate. It's on the pro-LLM people to convince the anti-LLM people that choosing for LLMs is an ethically correct choice with all the necessary guardrails. It's also on the pro-LLM people to show the usefulness of the product. If pro-LLM people are right, it will be a matter of time before these people will see the errors of their ways. But doing an ad-hominem is a sure way of creating a divide...
- gf000 2y ago
  But human stupidity, while itself can be sometimes an unknown unknown with its creativity, is a mostly known unknown. LLMs fail in entirely novel ways you can't even fathom upfront.
  - sirsinsalot 2y ago
    GenAI has a 100% failure to enjoy quality of life, emotional fulfillment and psychological safety. Id say those are the goals we should be working for. That's the failure we want to look at. We are humans.
  - halgir 2y ago
    > LLMs fail in entirely novel ways you can't even fathom upfront. Trust me, so do humans. Source: have worked with humans.

tstrimple 2y ago

This is one of the things which annoys me most about anti-LLM hate. Your peers aren't right all the time either. They believe incorrect things and will pursue worse solutions because they won't acknowledge a better way. How is this any different from a LLM? You have to question everything you're presented with. Sometimes that Stack Overflow answer isn't directly applicable to your exact problem but you can extrapolate from it to resolve your problem. Why is an LLM viewed any differently? Of course you can't just blindly accept it as the one true answer, but you literally cannot do that with humans either. Humans produce a ton of shit code and non-solutions and it's fine. But when an LLM does it, it's a serious problem that means the tech is useless. Much of the modern world is built on shit solutions and we still hobble along.

lazide 2y ago
Everyone knows humans can be idiots. The problem is that people seem to think LLMs can’t be idiots, and because they aren’t human there is no way to punish them. And then people give them too much credit/power, for their own purposes. Which makes LLMs far more dangerous than idiot humans in most cases.
- brookst 2y ago
  No. Nobody thinks LLMs are perfect. That’s a strawman. And… I am really not sure punishment is the answer to fallibility, outside of almost kinky Catholicism. The reality is these things are very good, but imperfect, much like people.
  - lazide 2y ago
    Clearly you haven’t been listening to any CEO press releases lately? And when was the last time a support chatbot let you actually complain or bypass to a human?
  - thecupisblue 2y ago
    Sorry man, but I literally know of startups invested into by YC where CEO's for 80% of their management decisions/vision/comms use ChatGPT ... or should I say some use Claude now, as they think it's smarter and does not make mistakes. Let that sink in.
    - onion2k 2y ago
      I wouldn't be surprised if GPT genuinely makes better decisions than an inexperienced, first-time CEO who has only been a dev before, especially if the person prompting it has actually put some effort into understanding their own weaknesses. It certainly wouldn't be any worse than someone who's only experience is reading a few management books.
      - lazide 2y ago
        And here is a great example of the problem. An LLM doesn’t make decisions. It generates text that plausibly looks like it made a decision, when prompted with the right text.
        beardedwizard 2y ago
        Why is this distinction lost in every thread on this topic, I don't get it.
        lazide 2y ago
        A lot more people are credulous idiots than anyone wants to believe - and the confusion/misunderstanding is being actively propagated.
- 0points 2y ago
  Not people. Certain gullible people, who tends to listen to certain charlatans. Rational, intelligent people wouldn't consider replacing a skilled human worker with a LLM that on a good day can compete with a 3-year old. You may see the current age as litmus for critical thinking.
  - varelse 2y ago
    [dead]
mplewis 2y ago
Humans can tell you how confident they are in something being right or wrong. An LLM has no internal model and cannot do such a thing.
- swiftcoder 2y ago
  > Humans can tell you how confident they are in something being right or wrong Humans are also very confidently wrong a considerable portion of the time. Particularly about anything outside their direct expertise
  - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
    People only being willing to say they are unsure some of the time is still better than LLMs. I suppose, given that everything is outside of their area of expertise, it's very human of them.
  - daveguy 2y ago
    That's still better than never being able to make an accurate confidence assessment. The fact that this is worse outside your expertise is a main reason why expertise is so valued in hiring decisions.
pineaux 2y ago
Its quite stunning to frame it as anti-LLM hate. It's on the pro-LLM people to convince the anti-LLM people that choosing for LLMs is an ethically correct choice with all the necessary guardrails. It's also on the pro-LLM people to show the usefulness of the product. If pro-LLM people are right, it will be a matter of time before these people will see the errors of their ways. But doing an ad-hominem is a sure way of creating a divide...
gf000 2y ago
But human stupidity, while itself can be sometimes an unknown unknown with its creativity, is a mostly known unknown. LLMs fail in entirely novel ways you can't even fathom upfront.
- sirsinsalot 2y ago
  GenAI has a 100% failure to enjoy quality of life, emotional fulfillment and psychological safety. Id say those are the goals we should be working for. That's the failure we want to look at. We are humans.
- halgir 2y ago
  > LLMs fail in entirely novel ways you can't even fathom upfront. Trust me, so do humans. Source: have worked with humans.