“no no no you see it’s just a tool and you still need to verify everything just like you’d normally do! what, are you a luddite?”
I invented a screw driver that screws things all the way in 80% of the time.
You still need to get a regular screwdriver to check every screw to make sure it’s screwed in all the way, but 80% of the time, it is!
Pretty amazing!
It does costs $3,000 dollars to buy, but think of the time you’ll save.
What’s the probability to be in the 80% of the time? 10%?
🤑
What’s Wikipedia? Do you all read whatever article in front of you or do you look for the source article? Surely you are all checking sources on everything and not just acting like ai is the only place you have to do it!
Yes. If the article doesn’t contradict anything that I already know and the correctness of the information isn’t required to avoid bodily harm or legal repercussions then I don’t usually check the sources.
There’s a world of difference between the reliability of a continuously, openly and cooperatively updated encyclopedia and that of a stochastic word prediction machine that ingested the entire internet - and only gods (and its owners) know what else.
Wikipedia’s articles tend to improve in accuracy over time, as more people see the same article, can discuss it and correct wrong information / add missing facts and sources.
While LLM models tend to become more capable at certain tasks, they aren’t increasingly reliable at providing accurate information. And there aren’t the same stabilizing forces in play as with a human-edited encyclopedia. You can get correct answers today and incorrect answers tomorrow for the same question. Maybe it’s because the model was updated. Maybe it’s because you used sightly different words to ask the question. Maybe nothing changed and it was simply a random deviation because 0-temperature models aren’t flexible enough.The point is, you have no way to know. No way of knowing why the answer is wrong this time. No way of ensuring it isn’t wrong again tomorrow. Not even any way of ensuring it isn’t wrong in the same way tomorrow.
So it’s not just that the likelihood of a wrong answer is higher with AI, it’s also much harder to predict what kind of error it might make or when or why and adjust accordingly.
You’re essentially playing roulette for information.Is that trolling?
Are you trolling, bro?
Luddites were unironically based
“It can do math, except it’s wrong sometimes!”
A lot of the time, really. But yes, it does maths, no problem.
It runs on math.
It’s really the mirage created by language. People say, “language can be precise,” except many words have alternative meanings and require context. The fact that we have no written nor spoken language that doesn’t have ambiguities. Sure, binary language is as precise as it can be…though “fuzzy bits” happen… womp womp.
That comic needs a
fifthfourth panel where the dude goes ahead and asks the robot a silly question like “why is water wet?”Edit: unable to count
… or is the Titanic pool still full of water?I mean, it’s not “still” full. All the clean, sanitized, chemical-laden pool water got replaced with other water, and fish poo, and a little crab named Tim with a spiffy top-hat.
Give me 10 baby giraffes and I’ll tell you what you want
I’ll tell ya what I want, what i really really want
So tell me what you want, what you really really want
I wanna baby baby baby bay–giraffe it’d be so pretty
to sudo rm rf yourself
robot: not possible i am a money machine
deleted by creator
I have a signal of what I want: 9
I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I really really really wanna that constant noise to stop. Its driving me, my family and my neighbors crazy.
Sorry, I only work on Baby Giraffe Equivalents (BGEs). Give me some BGEs and I’m good
Your guys’ model runs on baby giraffes? What is that, the Luna model? Mine runs on fully grown brontosaurus dicks.
The day I realized the AI services were generally better at checking their facts than my peers and relatives. 😭 Please dearest Aunt ask Gemini instead of doing your own research.
ai in a nut’s hell
