5 ms·

LLMs are fiction machines. All they can do is hallucinate, and sometimes the hallucinations are useful. That alone rules them out, categorically, from any cri

LLMs are fiction machines. All they can do is hallucinate, and sometimes the hallucinations are useful. That alone rules them out, categorically, from any critical control loop. After you eliminate anything that requires accountability and trustworthiness from the tasks which LLMs may be responsibly used for, the most obvious remaining use-cases are those built around lying: - advertising - astroturfing - other forms of botting - scamming old people out of their money

echelon 9mo ago
[flagged]
- gllmariuty 9mo ago
  > AI is a force multiplier for labor capital for an 2011 account that's a shockingly naive take yes, AI is a labor capital multiplier. and the multiplicand is zero hint: soon you'll be competing not with humans without AI, but with AIs using AIs
  - Terr_ 9mo ago
    Even if it's >1, it doesn't follow that it's good news for the "labor capitalist". "OK, so I lost my job, but even adjusting for that, I can launch so many more unfinished side-projects per hour now!"
- navigate8310 9mo ago
  > I want to be able to leverage Hollywood grade VFX and make shows and transform my likeness for real time improv. While i certainly respect your interactivity and subsequent force multiplayer nature of AI, this doesn't mean you should try to emulate an already given piece of work. You'll certainly gain a small dopamine when you successfully copy something but it would also atrophy your critical skills and paralyze you from making any sort of original art. You'll miss out on discovering the feeling of any frontier work that you can truly call your own.
- blks 9mo ago
  So instead of actually making films, thing you as a filmmaker supposedly like to do, you have some chat bot to do it for you? Or what part of that is generated by chat bot? Claims of productive boosts must always be inspected very carefully, as they are often perceived, and reality may be the opposite (eg spending more time wrestling the tools), or creating unmaintainable debt, or making someone else spend extra time to review the PR and make 50 comments.
  - echelon 9mo ago
    > So instead of actually making films, thing you as a filmmaker supposedly like to do, you have some chat bot to do it for you? Or what part of that is generated by chat bot? There's no chatbot. You can use image-to-image, ControlNets, LoRAs, IPAdapters, inpainting, outpainting, workflows, and a lot of other techniques and tools to mold images as if they were clay. I use a lot of 3D blocking with autoregressive editing models to essentially control for scene composition, pose, blocking, camera focal length, etc. Here's a really old example of what that looks like (the models are a lot better at this now) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYVgNNJP6Vc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYVgNNJP6Vc There are lots of incredibly talented folks using Blender, Unreal Engine, Comfy, Touch Designer, and other tools to interface with models and play them like an orchestra - direct them like a film auteur.
    - heliumtera 9mo ago
      [flagged]
- jacquesm 9mo ago
  As a rule real creativity blossoms under constraints, not under abundance.
  - echelon 9mo ago
    Trying to make a dent in the universe while we metabolize and oxidize our telomeres away is a constraint. But to be more in the spirit of your comment, if you've used these systems at all, you know how many constraints you bump into on an almost minute to minute basis. These are not magical systems and they have plenty of flaws. Real creativity is connecting these weird, novel things together into something nobody's ever seen before. Working in new ways that are unproven and completely novel.
  - prewett 9mo ago
    But new media also lets creativity blossom. The printing press eventually enabled novels through cost reduction. Prussian blue pigment is a large part of ukyio-e's attraction; it got used a lot because it was new and was a better blue. The Gothic arch's improved strength compared to the circular arch enabled cathedrals with huge windows. Concrete enabled all sorts of fluid architecture; Soviet bus stations, for instance [1]. [1] https://www.russiabeyond.com/arts/327147-10-best-soviet-bus-stops https://www.russiabeyond.com/arts/327147-10-best-soviet-bus-...
- queenkjuul 9mo ago
  Genuine question: does the agent work for you if you didn't build it, train it, or host it? It's ostensibly doing things you asked it, but in terms dictated by its owner.
  - blibble 9mo ago
    indeed and it's even worse than that: you're literally training your replacement by using it when it re-transmits what you're accepting/discarding and you're even paying them to replace you
- heliumtera 9mo ago
  always good to be in the pick and shovel biz
- CyberDildonics 9mo ago
  I want to be able to leverage Hollywood grade VFX and make shows and transform my likeness for real time improv. Do you know anything about "Hollywood grade VFX" ? Have you ever worked for any company that does it? No more nepotism in Hollywood Do you think "Hollywood VFX" is full of nepotism?
ajross 9mo ago
> [...] are fiction machines. All they can do is hallucinate, and sometimes the hallucinations are useful. That alone rules them out, categorically, from any critical control loop. True, but no more true than it is if you replace the antecedent with "people". Saying that the tools make mistakes is correct. Saying that (like people) they can never be trained and deployed such that the mistakes are tolerable is an awfully tall order. History is paved with people who got steamrollered by technology they didn't think would ever work. On a practical level AI seems very median in that sense. It's notable only because it's... kinda creepy, I guess.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- fao_ 9mo ago
  > Saying that (like people) they can never be trained and deployed such that the mistakes are tolerable is an awfully tall order. It is, though. We have numerous studies on why hallucinations are central to the architecture, and numerous case studies by companies who have tried putting them in control loops! We have about 4 years of examples of bad things happening because the trigger was given to an LLM.
  - ajross 9mo ago
    > We have numerous studies on why hallucinations are central to the architecture, And we have tens of thousands of years of shared experience of "People Were Wrong and Fucked Shit Up". What's your point? Again, my point isn't that LLMs are infallible; it's that they only need to be better than their competition, and their competition sucks.
    - TheOtherHobbes 9mo ago
      It's a fine line. Humans don't always fuck shit up. But human systems that don't fuck shit up are short-lived, rare, and fragile, and they've only become a potential - not a reality - in the last century or so. The rest of history is mostly just endless horrors, with occasional tentative moments of useful insight.
simianwords 9mo ago
Extremely exaggerated comment. LLMs dont hallucinate that much. That doesn’t rule them out of any control loop. I mean, I think you have not put much thought into your theory.

echelon 9mo ago

[flagged]

gllmariuty 9mo ago
> AI is a force multiplier for labor capital for an 2011 account that's a shockingly naive take yes, AI is a labor capital multiplier. and the multiplicand is zero hint: soon you'll be competing not with humans without AI, but with AIs using AIs
- Terr_ 9mo ago
  Even if it's >1, it doesn't follow that it's good news for the "labor capitalist". "OK, so I lost my job, but even adjusting for that, I can launch so many more unfinished side-projects per hour now!"
navigate8310 9mo ago
> I want to be able to leverage Hollywood grade VFX and make shows and transform my likeness for real time improv. While i certainly respect your interactivity and subsequent force multiplayer nature of AI, this doesn't mean you should try to emulate an already given piece of work. You'll certainly gain a small dopamine when you successfully copy something but it would also atrophy your critical skills and paralyze you from making any sort of original art. You'll miss out on discovering the feeling of any frontier work that you can truly call your own.
blks 9mo ago
So instead of actually making films, thing you as a filmmaker supposedly like to do, you have some chat bot to do it for you? Or what part of that is generated by chat bot? Claims of productive boosts must always be inspected very carefully, as they are often perceived, and reality may be the opposite (eg spending more time wrestling the tools), or creating unmaintainable debt, or making someone else spend extra time to review the PR and make 50 comments.
- echelon 9mo ago
  > So instead of actually making films, thing you as a filmmaker supposedly like to do, you have some chat bot to do it for you? Or what part of that is generated by chat bot? There's no chatbot. You can use image-to-image, ControlNets, LoRAs, IPAdapters, inpainting, outpainting, workflows, and a lot of other techniques and tools to mold images as if they were clay. I use a lot of 3D blocking with autoregressive editing models to essentially control for scene composition, pose, blocking, camera focal length, etc. Here's a really old example of what that looks like (the models are a lot better at this now) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYVgNNJP6Vc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYVgNNJP6Vc There are lots of incredibly talented folks using Blender, Unreal Engine, Comfy, Touch Designer, and other tools to interface with models and play them like an orchestra - direct them like a film auteur.
  - heliumtera 9mo ago
    [flagged]
jacquesm 9mo ago
As a rule real creativity blossoms under constraints, not under abundance.
- echelon 9mo ago
  Trying to make a dent in the universe while we metabolize and oxidize our telomeres away is a constraint. But to be more in the spirit of your comment, if you've used these systems at all, you know how many constraints you bump into on an almost minute to minute basis. These are not magical systems and they have plenty of flaws. Real creativity is connecting these weird, novel things together into something nobody's ever seen before. Working in new ways that are unproven and completely novel.
- prewett 9mo ago
  But new media also lets creativity blossom. The printing press eventually enabled novels through cost reduction. Prussian blue pigment is a large part of ukyio-e's attraction; it got used a lot because it was new and was a better blue. The Gothic arch's improved strength compared to the circular arch enabled cathedrals with huge windows. Concrete enabled all sorts of fluid architecture; Soviet bus stations, for instance [1]. [1] https://www.russiabeyond.com/arts/327147-10-best-soviet-bus-stops https://www.russiabeyond.com/arts/327147-10-best-soviet-bus-...
queenkjuul 9mo ago
Genuine question: does the agent work for you if you didn't build it, train it, or host it? It's ostensibly doing things you asked it, but in terms dictated by its owner.
- blibble 9mo ago
  indeed and it's even worse than that: you're literally training your replacement by using it when it re-transmits what you're accepting/discarding and you're even paying them to replace you
heliumtera 9mo ago
always good to be in the pick and shovel biz
CyberDildonics 9mo ago
I want to be able to leverage Hollywood grade VFX and make shows and transform my likeness for real time improv. Do you know anything about "Hollywood grade VFX" ? Have you ever worked for any company that does it? No more nepotism in Hollywood Do you think "Hollywood VFX" is full of nepotism?

ajross 9mo ago

> [...] are fiction machines. All they can do is hallucinate, and sometimes the hallucinations are useful. That alone rules them out, categorically, from any critical control loop. True, but no more true than it is if you replace the antecedent with "people". Saying that the tools make mistakes is correct. Saying that (like people) they can never be trained and deployed such that the mistakes are tolerable is an awfully tall order. History is paved with people who got steamrollered by technology they didn't think would ever work. On a practical level AI seems very median in that sense. It's notable only because it's... kinda creepy, I guess.

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
fao_ 9mo ago
> Saying that (like people) they can never be trained and deployed such that the mistakes are tolerable is an awfully tall order. It is, though. We have numerous studies on why hallucinations are central to the architecture, and numerous case studies by companies who have tried putting them in control loops! We have about 4 years of examples of bad things happening because the trigger was given to an LLM.
- ajross 9mo ago
  > We have numerous studies on why hallucinations are central to the architecture, And we have tens of thousands of years of shared experience of "People Were Wrong and Fucked Shit Up". What's your point? Again, my point isn't that LLMs are infallible; it's that they only need to be better than their competition, and their competition sucks.
  - TheOtherHobbes 9mo ago
    It's a fine line. Humans don't always fuck shit up. But human systems that don't fuck shit up are short-lived, rare, and fragile, and they've only become a potential - not a reality - in the last century or so. The rest of history is mostly just endless horrors, with occasional tentative moments of useful insight.

simianwords 9mo ago

Extremely exaggerated comment. LLMs dont hallucinate that much. That doesn’t rule them out of any control loop. I mean, I think you have not put much thought into your theory.