3 ms·
Junior associates hallucinate too...
by rayiner 16d ago
Junior associates hallucinate too...
- NateEag 16d agoAnd when they do, you can train them or fire them, and they learn not to do it. LLMs change not a whit, and there's no one to take responsibility for the failure (and thus no way to fix it). As the new variation on the old theme has it, "A computer can never be held accountable, and so very many people are trying to get them make management decisions."
- IanCal 16d agoYou can’t train people to never make a mistake, particularly when doing highly repetitive work like this. You must build your systems to account for that regardless.
- enraged_camel 16d agoYes, exactly. Humans are non-deterministic as well, just in different ways. A tired human can make all sorts of errors for example, regardless of how much training they've had.
- NateEag 16d agoFor sure. But they do learn and improve. The models don't (yet).
- hollerith 16d agoThe models improve in the sense that GPT 5.6 succeeds at things GPT 5.5 fails at. It might be that the models have been improving in this sense faster than a human child improves.
- juiceland 16d ago> LLMs change not a whit, and there's no one to take responsibility for the failure (and thus no way to fix it). LLM output is nondeterministic and humans take responsibility for the failure the same way they take responsibility of a photocopy is too dark.
- NateEag 16d ago> humans take responsibility for the failure the same way they take responsibility of a photocopy is too dark. You mean, they notice it's too dark right after making it, change the settings, do it again, and give you the good copy? Because yes, that's my experience of humans.
- podocarp 16d agoYou can scold juniors and they will learn. You can't scold Claude.
- stevesimmons 16d agoSurely the rate of improvement in new LLM models is the equivalent mechanism?
- eru 16d agoYou can scold Claude. Just doesn't make a difference.
- chrisjj 16d ago... until you hit Claude's risable "model welfare" protection.