5 ms·
> This is how I make sense of AI reasoning. LRMs, chains of thought, thinking tokens: It’s wishful mnemonics all the way down — a heady mix of shorthand and sus
by baxtr 2mo ago
> This is how I make sense of AI reasoning. LRMs, chains of thought, thinking tokens: It’s wishful mnemonics all the way down — a heady mix of shorthand and suspended disbelief, like Oprah-style “manifesting” (opens a new tab) with a computer science spin. This isn’t necessarily a dig; all novel research likely requires some version of this mindset just to get off the ground. It certainly doesn’t mean AI reasoning can’t or doesn’t work. But the “wishful” part seems to be as powerful as ever.
“We react to language in a way that is very anthropomorphizing. That’s just the way that we humans work,” Mitchell told me.
I can definitely confirm the last part. Every time I read the output of an LLM, I picture a person talking to me.
- ForHackernews 2mo agoI think sensible legislation might require that commercial AI providers discourage anthropomorphisation by avoiding personal pronouns from chatbot interfaces. "Hey, customer service chatbot, can you help me get a refund for my order?" BAD: "Sure thing, I'll be happy to help you with that, I just need your order details..." GOOD: "Yes, this computer system can start the refund process. Please enter your order number."
- nradov 2mo agoThe last thing we need is governments mandating software functionality.
- ForHackernews 2mo agoBoy have I got bad news for you...
- mdp2021 2mo ago> discourage anthropomorphisation by avoiding personal pronouns The fault is in the naïve antropomorphizer not in that which writes "I" being in fact a "first person".
- ForHackernews 2mo agoIrrelevant. Humans are frail and we shouldn't design systems with dark patterns that take advantage of human frailty.
- mdp2021 2mo ago> we shouldn't design systems with dark patterns that take advantage of human frailty First of all: «humans are frail», so the paramount social and individual objective, goal, is to overcome frailty (in cognitive and psychological and judgement functions). Secondly: you are using a bad argument putting even innocent and somehow proper implementations in the set of "exploitative dark patterns". And importantly: we the adults must not be bound in the Procuste's bed of a world for the use of children. If people cry when e.g. somebody multiplies 123 and 321, they must be brought back to health, and we must be in the condition of making our free and legitimate multiplications.
- ForHackernews 2mo agoThat's a lot of fancy words to say, "I think I'm too smart to fall for the same tricks that work on other humans." How many hours did you spend on your phone last month? How many fewer hours would you have spent if the apps you interact with weren't designed to maximize "engagement"?
- mdp2021 2mo ago> How many hours did you spend on your phone last month? How many fewer hours would you have spent if the apps you interact with weren't designed to maximize "engagement"? ?? Very strictly zero? You are assuming we would install engagement-relevant third party apps on our palm computers?! I use my time exactly as I decide moment to moment. > fancy Eh?! > too smart to fall for Very ill framed. We are adults, we behave like adults, and we need a society of adults.
- ForHackernews 2mo ago
- philipallstar 2mo agoI agree that these concepts seem a little vague and hand-wavy, but this is a) no substitute and b) far vaguer and unsubstantiated.