• jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Are you just trolling or do you seriously not understand how something which can do a task correctly with 30% reliability can be made useful if the result can be automatically verified.

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Its not a magical 30%, factors apply. It’s not even a mind that thinks and just isnt very good.

      This isnt like a magical dice that gives you truth on a 5 or a 6, and lies on 1,2,3,7, and for.

      This is a (very complicated very large) language or other data graph that programmatically identifies an average. 30% of the time-according to one potempkin-ass demonstration. Which means the more possible that is, the easier it is to either use a simpler cheaper tool that will give you a better more reliable answer much faster.

      And 20 tons of human shit has uses! If you know its providence, there’s all sorts of population level public health surveillance you can do to get ahead of disease trends! Its also got some good agricultural stuff in it-phosphorous and stuff, if you can extract it.

      Stop. Just please fucking stop glazing these NERVE-ass fascist shit-goblins.

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        I think everyone in the universe is aware of how LLMs work by now, you don’t need to explain it to someone just because they think LLMs are more useful than you do.

        IDK what you mean by glazing but if by “glaze” you mean “understanding the potential threat of AI to society instead of hiding under a rock and pretending it’s as useless as a plastic radio,” then no, I won’t stop.

        • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          7 minutes ago

          It’s absolutely dangerous but it doesnt have to work even a little to do damage; hell, it already has. Your thing just makes it sound much more capable than it is. And it is not.

          Also, it’s not AI.

          Edit: and in a comment replying to this one, one of your fellow fanboys proved

          everyone knows how they work

          Wrong

              • jsomae@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Hitler liked to paint, doesn’t make painting wrong. The fact that big tech is pushing AI isn’t evidence against the utility of AI.

                That common parlance is to call machine learning “AI” these days doesn’t matter to me in the slightest. Do you have a definition of “intelligence”? Do you object when pathfinding is called AI? Or STRIPS? Or bots in a video game? Dare I say it, the main difference between those AIs and LLMs is their generality – so why not just call it GAI at this point tbh. This is a question of semantics so it really doesn’t matter to the deeper question. Doesn’t matter if you call it AI or not, LLMs work the same way either way.