4 ms·
An LLM is not me. It is capable of doing more "work" but it also doesn't have my mental models and experience. My colleagues know roughly my areas of expertise.
by yuliyp 2mo ago
An LLM is not me. It is capable of doing more "work" but it also doesn't have my mental models and experience. My colleagues know roughly my areas of expertise. If I say "I think that X is happening" they'll assume that is the result of my expertise being applied and react accordingly. If I say "[LLM] thinks X is happening" they'll react differently and I want them to. Just like I might say "I suspect X is happening because Y" or "X is definitely happening" when I want to modulate their trust in what I'm saying.
- jdub 2mo agothe phrase "[LLM] thinks X is happening" is good chunk of the problem it didn't. it produced an output, and you hopefully invoked some human judgement before believing it was worth sharing, and you are hopefully expecting to be accountable if that judgement was incorrect (whatever the failure mode)
- pants2 2mo agoYou must be fun at parties
- yuliyp 2mo agoFine. "The LLM produced a chain of reasoning consistent with a belief that X is happening." I've found it fairly helpful to anthropomorphize systems to communicate things about their behavior, despite them obviously not being human ("The load balancer thought the West US region was chilling", or "that cluster was unhappy because of bad packet loss"). I don't really have many problems with people taking those statements that I think computers have emotions.