4 ms·

> When I don't understand something, LLMs explain it perfectly well But my man, how do you know if it explains perfectly well or is just generating plausible-s

> When I don't understand something, LLMs explain it perfectly well But my man, how do you know if it explains perfectly well or is just generating plausible-sounding slop? You're learning, so by definition you don't know!

franciscop 1y ago
Because at the beginning I didn't trust it and verified it in many different ways. I've got a fairly decent understanding of what LLMs hallucinate regarding language learning and levels, and luckily/unluckily I'm far enough for this to be a concern. e.g. I asked recently differences between 回答 vs 解答 and it was pretty good. I also checked with some Japanese and my own notes contain more errors than the LLMs output by a large margin.
ted_bunny 1y ago
GPT was dismally, consistently wrong about 101-level French grammar. Isn't that info all over the internet? Shouldn't that be an easy task?
Tijdreiziger 1y ago
Yeah, my experience with AI and Japanese is quite the opposite. I used to use the Drops app for learning vocabulary, until they added genAI explanations, because the explanations were just wrong half the time! I had to uninstall the app! Similarly, I used the Busuu app for a while. One of its features is that you can speak or type sentences, and ask native speakers to give feedback. But of course, you have to wait for the feedback (especially with time zone differences), so they added genAI feedback. Like, what’s the point of this? It’s like that old joke: “We have purposely trained him wrong, as a joke”!
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  Sounds like the other user tolerates the flaws and works around them, while you don't and expect to not be fact checking every statement. I guess people's approaches to this can be very wide. I am more on your side, personally. When learning, I do not want to spend half my time scrutinizing the teacher. At least not on the objective fundamentals. If the fundamentals are broken, how do I trust anything built on top? And that's the scary thing: LLM's don't "build on top", they more or less do the equivalent of running around the globe first and come back with an answer.

franciscop 1y ago

Because at the beginning I didn't trust it and verified it in many different ways. I've got a fairly decent understanding of what LLMs hallucinate regarding language learning and levels, and luckily/unluckily I'm far enough for this to be a concern. e.g. I asked recently differences between 回答 vs 解答 and it was pretty good. I also checked with some Japanese and my own notes contain more errors than the LLMs output by a large margin.

ted_bunny 1y ago

GPT was dismally, consistently wrong about 101-level French grammar. Isn't that info all over the internet? Shouldn't that be an easy task?

Tijdreiziger 1y ago

Yeah, my experience with AI and Japanese is quite the opposite. I used to use the Drops app for learning vocabulary, until they added genAI explanations, because the explanations were just wrong half the time! I had to uninstall the app! Similarly, I used the Busuu app for a while. One of its features is that you can speak or type sentences, and ask native speakers to give feedback. But of course, you have to wait for the feedback (especially with time zone differences), so they added genAI feedback. Like, what’s the point of this? It’s like that old joke: “We have purposely trained him wrong, as a joke”!

johnnyanmac 1y ago
Sounds like the other user tolerates the flaws and works around them, while you don't and expect to not be fact checking every statement. I guess people's approaches to this can be very wide. I am more on your side, personally. When learning, I do not want to spend half my time scrutinizing the teacher. At least not on the objective fundamentals. If the fundamentals are broken, how do I trust anything built on top? And that's the scary thing: LLM's don't "build on top", they more or less do the equivalent of running around the globe first and come back with an answer.