3 ms·
> But we will never check the result of an LLM because of the statistical margin of error in the feature. I don't follow this statement: if anything, we absolu
by benterix 1y ago
> But we will never check the result of an LLM because of the statistical margin of error in the feature.
I don't follow this statement: if anything, we absolutely must check the resut of an LLM for the reason you mention. For coding, there are tools that attempt to check the generated code for each answer to at least guarantee the code runs (whether it's relevant, optimal, or bug-free is another issue, and one that is not so easy to check without context that can be significant at times).
- shinycode 1y agoI mean I do check absolutely everything an LLM outputs. But following the analogy of the calculator, if it goes that way, no one will in the future check the result of an LLM. Just like no one ever checks the result of a complex calculation. People get used to the fact that a large percentage of the time it’s correct. That might allow big companies to manipulate people because a calculator is not plugged to the cloud to falsify the results depending on who you are and make your projects fail
- sepositus 1y agoI see a whole new future of cyber warfare being created. It'll be like the reverse of a prompt engineer: an injection engineer. Someone who can tamper with the model just enough to sway a specific output that causes <X>.
- shinycode 1y agoThat’s a terrifying future and even more so because it might already be in route