4 ms·
> Two of them knew they were extrapolating ("because Habsburg") and did it anyway. You seem to imply that they ought not to. I disagree. I wasn't familiar wit
by zahlman 3mo ago
> Two of them knew they were extrapolating ("because Habsburg") and did it anyway.
You seem to imply that they ought not to. I disagree.
I wasn't familiar with the term before this post. Having learned it, were I given the task, I think I'd be strongly tempted to do the same extrapolation.
> If you're deciding which model to trust with instructions, "how much does it embellish beyond what I asked" and "does it behave deterministically" are directly practical questions.
Agency is agency. You still need to vet what the model's output is actually permitted to control.
- thebigship 3mo ago> You seem to imply that they ought not to. I disagree. That would be like saying anyone with Lou Gehrig's disease must look like Lou Gehrig. So we'll have to agree to disagree here.
- zahlman 3mo agoWell, no, I think you create a pretty clear false dichotomy there. Certainly a person with Lou Gehrig's disease could look like Lou Gehrig; and especially in a cartoon illustration, where it's difficult to convey the point, this kind of artistic license is used specifically so that the viewer will make these kinds of associations. I would, likely, otherwise perceive an underbite as just an underbite.