3 ms·
Have you tried using it as a knowledge retrieval mechanism, I. E., in lieu of Google? Because if not, you really should.
by HeavyStorm 11mo ago
Have you tried using it as a knowledge retrieval mechanism, I. E., in lieu of Google? Because if not, you really should.
- AndrewDucker 11mo agoI would invite you to read the other comments on this post by people who have tried to use it for that, and found that it makes regular fundamental errors. Most of the time you're better off reading a few responses to a given question (on, say, Stack Overflow) and synthesizing your own understanding out of them, rather than taking one that an AI has synthesized for you.
- mingus88 11mo agoI feel that calling it AI is a big part of the problem. An LLM parses and generates language exceedingly well. I use LLMs daily now and they are a boon for certain tasks. An LLM is not an all knowing Oracle. It doesn’t know anything. People who treat the language generator as an authority on anything are fools.
- simianwords 11mo agoWho is getting fundamental regular errors? I don’t get any.
- croon 11mo agoDo you verify regularly against real documentation/outside sources/subject authorities/question the output? I do, and regularly get wrong information from premier LLMs. I still use it for information retrieval because interrogating large corpora of text and double checking key information can still be faster, but I'm not fully convinced it's long term beneficial for my intellect or knowledge retention.
- franktankbank 11mo agoI need a way to block specific people on HN.
- Yizahi 11mo agoIt's mostly useless for anything with numbers or other hard facts. Sure, 80% of the numbers would be correct, but we can never know which 80% and would need to manually verify everything. Not that Google is better in complex tasks). LLMs are mostly useful for producing some vague non-factual business speak, or some abstract imprecise media. This is natural result of the architecture of these programs.