917
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
917 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
2268 readers
50 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
TBH I'm curious what the difference between this and "hallucinating" would be.
I think 'hallucinating' means when it makes up the source/idea by (effectively) word association that generates the concept, rather than here it's repeating a real source.
Couldn't that describe 95% of what LLMs?
It is a really good auto complete at the end of the day, just some times the auto complete gets it wrong
Yes, nicely put! I suppose 'hallucinating' is a description of when, to the reader, it appears to state a fact but that fact doesn't at all represent any fact from the training data.
Well it's referencing something so the problem is the data set not an inherent flaw in the AI
i'm pretty sure that referencing this indicates an inherent flaw in the AI
No it represents an inherent flaw in the people developing the AI.
That's a totally different thing. Concept is not flawed the people implementing the concept are.
-- Dan Olson, The Future is a Dead Mall
yeah thanks
The inherent flaw is that the dataset needs to be both extremely large and vetted for quality with an extremely high level of accuracy. That can't realistically exist, and any technology that relies on something that can't exist is by definition flawed.