3 ms·
>What irks me is how LLMs won't just say "no, it won't work" or "it's beyond my capabilities" and instead just give you "solutions" that are wrong. This is one
by dingnuts 2y ago
>What irks me is how LLMs won't just say "no, it won't work" or "it's beyond my capabilities" and instead just give you "solutions" that are wrong.
This is one of the clearest ways to demonstrate that an LLM doesn't "know" anything, and isn't "intelligence." Until an LLM can determine whether its own output is based on something or completely made up, it's not intelligent. I find them downright infuriating to use because of this property.
I'm glad to see other people are waking up
- genewitch 2y agoIntelligence doesn't imply knowing when you're wrong though. Hackernews has Intelligent people... Q. E. D. % LLMs can RAG incorrect PDF citations too
- scarface_74 2y agoThat’s an easily solvable problem for programming. Today ChatGPT has an embedded Python runtime that it can use to verify its own code and I have seen times that it will try different techniques if the code doesn’t give the expected answer. The one time I can remember is with generating regex. I don’t see any reason that an IDE especially with a statically typed language can’t have an AI integrated that at least will never hallucinate classes/functions that don’t exist. Modern IDEs can already give you real time errors across large solutions for code that won’t compile. Tools need to mature.
- kvgr 2y agoYeah, but it would have to reason about the thing it just halucinated. Or it would have to be somehow hard prompted. There will be more tools and code around LLM, to make it behave like a human then people can imagine. They are trying to solve everything with LLMs. They have 0 agency.