5 ms·
Or it could give out bad information and make everything worse because a subset of people seem to think LLMs are infallible or gods rather than aggregates of th
by Nursie 8mo ago
Or it could give out bad information and make everything worse because a subset of people seem to think LLMs are infallible or gods rather than aggregates of the knowledge they’ve consumed.
- simianwords 8mo agoIf you’ve used LLMs you’d know that they are way more correct than not.
- cindyllm 8mo ago[dead]
- htnthrow11220 8mo agoEven a small % of incorrectness quickly produces compounding effects, if you view LLMs as an information source. True or false statements are made with equal confidence, because the LLM can’t distinguish true from false.
- simianwords 8mo agoThat’s the same as in normal journalism so I’m not sure why you pick LLMs as particularly bad
- jatari 8mo agoDo you really think e.g Opus 4.6 is less reliable than the average facebook/x post (which is where most people get their news from today)? People already just blindly believe whatever is put in front of them by the algorithm gods. Even the "@Grok is this real" spam on every X post is an improvement.
- Nursie 8mo agoI think that neither is especially reliable, but that putting LLMs on some sort of pedestal as 'better' for information lookup here is a bad plan.