4 ms·
Accurate notes are valuable for several reasons. Show me an LLM that can reliably produce 100% accurate notes. Alternatively, accept working in a company where
by namaria 1y ago
Accurate notes are valuable for several reasons.
Show me an LLM that can reliably produce 100% accurate notes. Alternatively, accept working in a company where some nonsense becomes future reference and subpoenable documentation.
- Tadpole9181 1y agoYou show me human meeting minutes written by a PM that accurately reflect the engineer discussions first.
- namaria 1y agoHas it been your experience? That's unacceptable to me. From people or language models.
- bluGill 1y agoIf it is just for people in the meeting we don't need 100%, just close enough that we remember what was discussed.
- namaria 1y agoI really don't see the value of records that may be inaccurate as long as I can rely on my memory. Human memory is quite unreliable, the point of the record is the accuracy.
- bluGill 1y agoWritten records are only accurate if they are carefully reviewed. Humans make mistakes all the time too. We just are better at correcting them, and if we review the record soon after the meeting there is a chance we remember well enough to make a correction. There is a reason meeting rules (ie Robert's rules of order) have the notes from the previous meeting read and then voted on to accept them - often changes are made before accepting them.
- namaria 1y agoDo just that. Enter an organization that has regular meetings and follows Robert's rules of order. Use an LLM to generate notes. Read the notes and vote on them. See how long the LLM remains in use.
- lpapez 1y agoCounterpoint: show me a human who can reliably produce 100% accurate notes. Seriously, I wish to hire this person.
- namaria 1y agoSeriously, do people around you not normally double check, proofread, review what they turn in as done work? Maybe I am just very fortunate, but people who are not capable of producing documents that are factually correct do not get to keep producing documents in the organizations I have worked with. I am not talking about typos, misspelling words, bad formatting. I am talking about factual content. Because LLMs can actually produce 100% correct text but they routinely mangle factual content in a way that I have never had the misfortune of finding in the work of my colleagues and teams around us.
- aaronbaugher 1y agoA friend of mine asked an AI for a summary of a pending Supreme Court case. It came back with the decision, majority arguments, dissent, the whole deal. Only problem was that the case hadn't happened yet. It had made up the whole thing, and admitted that when called on it. A human law clerk could make a mistake, like "Oh, I thought you said 'US v. Wilson,' not 'US v. Watson.'" But a human wouldn't just make up a case out of whole cloth, complete with pages of details. So it seems to me that AI mistakes will be unlike the human mistakes that we're accustomed to and good at spotting from eons of practice. That may make them harder to catch.
- bluGill 1y agoI think it is more like the clerk would say "There never was a US vs Wilson" (well there probably was given how common that name is, but work with me). The AI doesn't have a concept of maybe I misunderstood the question. AI would likely give you a good summary if the case happened, but if it didn't it makes up a case.
- namaria 1y ago
- ewhanley 1y agoMeh, show me a human that can reliably produce 100% accurate notes. It seems that the baseline for AI should be human performance rather than perfection. There are very few perfect systems in existence, and humans definitely aren't one of them.