6 ms·

There is a huge backlash coming when the general public learns AI is plagued with errors and hallucinations. Companies are out there straight up selling snake o

There is a huge backlash coming when the general public learns AI is plagued with errors and hallucinations. Companies are out there straight up selling snake oil to them right now.

kylebenzle 2y ago
Yes, calling an LLM "AI" was the first HUGE mistake. A statistical model the can guess the next word is in no way "intelligent" and Sam Altman himself agrees this is not a path to AGI (what we used to call just AI).
- pixl97 2y ago
  >is in no way "intelligent" Please define the word intelligent in a way accepted by doctors, scientists, and other professionals before engaging in hyperbole or you're just as bad as the AGI is already here people. Intelligence is a gradient in problem solving and our software is creeping up that gradient in it's capabilities.
  - alienicecream 2y ago
    Intelligence is the ability to comprehend a state of affairs. The input and the output are secondary. What LLMs do is take the input and the output as primary and skip over the middle part, which is the important bit.
add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
Coming? I think the general public has already come to consider "AI" synonymous with hallucination, awkward writing, and cringe art.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  No. From my experience, many people think that AI is an infallible assistant, and even some are saying that we should replace any and all tools with LLMs, and be done with it.
  - kylebenzle 2y ago
    You can probably safely ignore those people's opinions moving forward.
    - bayindirh 2y ago
      Instead I keep this list updated: https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Lists/Discussions+about+Artificial+Intelligence https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Lists/Discussions+about+Art...
    - mannykannot 2y ago
      Not once some of them incorporate hallucinating AI into important products and services.
- pyrale 2y ago
  The art part is actually pretty nice, because everyone can see directly if the generated art fits their taste, and back-and-forth with the bot to get what you want is actually pretty funny. It gets frustrating sometimes, but overall it's decent as a creative activity, and because people don't expect art to be knowledge.
skilled 2y ago
Exactly. This is super evident when you start asking for more complex questions in CS, and when asking for intermediate-level code examples. Also the same for asking about apps/tools. Unless it is a super known app like Trello which has been documented and written about to death - the LLM will give you all kinds of features for a product, which it actually doesn’t have. It doesn’t take long to realize that half the time all these LLMs just give you text for the sake of giving it.
- kylebenzle 2y ago
  Agreed, calling an LLM "AI" is just silly and technically makes no sense, they are text generators based on text context.
  - sph 2y ago
    Meanwhile, on LLM hype threads, people are already thinking about AGI, when we haven't even cracked basic intelligence.
    - terminalcommand 2y ago
      Respectfully, I think we cracked basic intelligence. What do you imagine under basic intelligence? LLMs can do homeworks, pass standardized exams, give advice WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC TRAINING. You can invent an imaginary game, explain the rules to the LLM and let it play it. Just like that. You can invent an imaginary computer language, explain the syntax to the LLM and it will write you valid programs in that language. Just like that. If that is not intelligent I do not know what is. In both cases, the request you put in is imaginary, exists only in your head, there are no previous examples or resources to train on.
      - orwin 2y ago
        If LLM could invent consistent imaginary games (or anything, like a short novel, or a 3 page essay on anything it want), maybe i would agree with you. The issue is that anything it create is inconsistent. The issue might be an artificial limitation to avoid copyright issues, but still.
kibwen 2y ago
Observing the realm of politics should be enough to disabuse anyone of the notion that people generally assign any value at all to truthfulness. People will clamor for LLMs that tell them what they want to hear, and companies will happily oblige. The post-truth society is about to shift into overdrive.
- Loughla 2y ago
  This is shockingly accurate. Other than professional work, AI just has to learn how to respond to the individual's tastes and established beliefs to be successful. Most people want the comfort of believing they're correct, not being challenged in their core beliefs. It seems like the most successful AI business will be one in which the model learns about you from your online habits and presence before presenting answers.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Of course people generally value truthfulness. That value commonly being trumped by other competing values doesn’t negate its existence. I don’t think defeatism is helpful (or correct).
- Ekaros 2y ago
  It depends on situation. People want their health care provider to be correct. Same goes with chat bot when they are trying to get support. On other hand at same time they might not want to me moralized to like told that they should save more money, spend less or go on diet... AI providing incorrect information in many cases when dealing with regulations, law and so on can have significant real world impact. And such impact is unacceptable. For example you cannot have tax authority or government chatbot be wrong about some regulation or tax law.
  - terminalcommand 2y ago
    But tax authorities are also quite often wrong about regulations and laws. That is why objection procedures exist. Legal system is built on such fail-safes. Even judges err on laws some times. If you call the government tax hotline and ask a question not written under the prepared questions list, what would you expect would happen? The call center service personell is certainly not expert on tax laws. You would treat it suspiciously. If LLMs can beat humans on the error rate, they would be of a great service. LLMs are not fail-proof machines, they are intelligent models that can make mistakes just like us. One difference is that they do not get tired, they do not have an ego, they happily provide reasonings for all their work so that it can be checked by another intelligence (be it human or LLM). Have we tried to establish a counsel of several LLMs to check answers for accuracy? That is what we do as humans in important decisions. I am confident that different models can spot hallucinations in one another.
duxup 2y ago
Are they? Every AI use I have comes with a big warning. The internet is full of lies and I still use it.
throwawaysleep 2y ago
Humans are also error plagued. AI just needs to beat them.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  No, AI also needs to fail in similar ways as humans. A system that makes 0.001% errors, all totally random and uncorrelated, will be very different in production than a system that makes 0.001% errors systematically and consistently (random errors are generally preferable).
  - throwawaysleep 2y ago
    In customer service, this appears to be how humans fail. They don’t know, so make up a policy.
drewcoo 2y ago
> Companies are out there straight up selling snake oil to them right now Well snake oil sells. And the margins are great!
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

There is a huge backlash coming when the general public learns AI is plagued with errors and hallucinations. Companies are out there straight up selling snake oil to them right now.

kylebenzle 2y ago

Yes, calling an LLM "AI" was the first HUGE mistake. A statistical model the can guess the next word is in no way "intelligent" and Sam Altman himself agrees this is not a path to AGI (what we used to call just AI).

pixl97 2y ago
>is in no way "intelligent" Please define the word intelligent in a way accepted by doctors, scientists, and other professionals before engaging in hyperbole or you're just as bad as the AGI is already here people. Intelligence is a gradient in problem solving and our software is creeping up that gradient in it's capabilities.
- alienicecream 2y ago
  Intelligence is the ability to comprehend a state of affairs. The input and the output are secondary. What LLMs do is take the input and the output as primary and skip over the middle part, which is the important bit.

add-sub-mul-div 2y ago

Coming? I think the general public has already come to consider "AI" synonymous with hallucination, awkward writing, and cringe art.

bayindirh 2y ago
No. From my experience, many people think that AI is an infallible assistant, and even some are saying that we should replace any and all tools with LLMs, and be done with it.
- kylebenzle 2y ago
  You can probably safely ignore those people's opinions moving forward.
  - bayindirh 2y ago
    Instead I keep this list updated: https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Lists/Discussions+about+Artificial+Intelligence https://notes.bayindirh.io/notes/Lists/Discussions+about+Art...
  - mannykannot 2y ago
    Not once some of them incorporate hallucinating AI into important products and services.
pyrale 2y ago
The art part is actually pretty nice, because everyone can see directly if the generated art fits their taste, and back-and-forth with the bot to get what you want is actually pretty funny. It gets frustrating sometimes, but overall it's decent as a creative activity, and because people don't expect art to be knowledge.

skilled 2y ago

Exactly. This is super evident when you start asking for more complex questions in CS, and when asking for intermediate-level code examples. Also the same for asking about apps/tools. Unless it is a super known app like Trello which has been documented and written about to death - the LLM will give you all kinds of features for a product, which it actually doesn’t have. It doesn’t take long to realize that half the time all these LLMs just give you text for the sake of giving it.

kylebenzle 2y ago
Agreed, calling an LLM "AI" is just silly and technically makes no sense, they are text generators based on text context.
- sph 2y ago
  Meanwhile, on LLM hype threads, people are already thinking about AGI, when we haven't even cracked basic intelligence.
  - terminalcommand 2y ago
    Respectfully, I think we cracked basic intelligence. What do you imagine under basic intelligence? LLMs can do homeworks, pass standardized exams, give advice WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC TRAINING. You can invent an imaginary game, explain the rules to the LLM and let it play it. Just like that. You can invent an imaginary computer language, explain the syntax to the LLM and it will write you valid programs in that language. Just like that. If that is not intelligent I do not know what is. In both cases, the request you put in is imaginary, exists only in your head, there are no previous examples or resources to train on.
    - orwin 2y ago
      If LLM could invent consistent imaginary games (or anything, like a short novel, or a 3 page essay on anything it want), maybe i would agree with you. The issue is that anything it create is inconsistent. The issue might be an artificial limitation to avoid copyright issues, but still.

kibwen 2y ago

Observing the realm of politics should be enough to disabuse anyone of the notion that people generally assign any value at all to truthfulness. People will clamor for LLMs that tell them what they want to hear, and companies will happily oblige. The post-truth society is about to shift into overdrive.

Loughla 2y ago
This is shockingly accurate. Other than professional work, AI just has to learn how to respond to the individual's tastes and established beliefs to be successful. Most people want the comfort of believing they're correct, not being challenged in their core beliefs. It seems like the most successful AI business will be one in which the model learns about you from your online habits and presence before presenting answers.
llamaimperative 2y ago
Of course people generally value truthfulness. That value commonly being trumped by other competing values doesn’t negate its existence. I don’t think defeatism is helpful (or correct).
Ekaros 2y ago
It depends on situation. People want their health care provider to be correct. Same goes with chat bot when they are trying to get support. On other hand at same time they might not want to me moralized to like told that they should save more money, spend less or go on diet... AI providing incorrect information in many cases when dealing with regulations, law and so on can have significant real world impact. And such impact is unacceptable. For example you cannot have tax authority or government chatbot be wrong about some regulation or tax law.
- terminalcommand 2y ago
  But tax authorities are also quite often wrong about regulations and laws. That is why objection procedures exist. Legal system is built on such fail-safes. Even judges err on laws some times. If you call the government tax hotline and ask a question not written under the prepared questions list, what would you expect would happen? The call center service personell is certainly not expert on tax laws. You would treat it suspiciously. If LLMs can beat humans on the error rate, they would be of a great service. LLMs are not fail-proof machines, they are intelligent models that can make mistakes just like us. One difference is that they do not get tired, they do not have an ego, they happily provide reasonings for all their work so that it can be checked by another intelligence (be it human or LLM). Have we tried to establish a counsel of several LLMs to check answers for accuracy? That is what we do as humans in important decisions. I am confident that different models can spot hallucinations in one another.

duxup 2y ago

Are they? Every AI use I have comes with a big warning. The internet is full of lies and I still use it.

throwawaysleep 2y ago

Humans are also error plagued. AI just needs to beat them.

llamaimperative 2y ago
No, AI also needs to fail in similar ways as humans. A system that makes 0.001% errors, all totally random and uncorrelated, will be very different in production than a system that makes 0.001% errors systematically and consistently (random errors are generally preferable).
- throwawaysleep 2y ago
  In customer service, this appears to be how humans fail. They don’t know, so make up a policy.

drewcoo 2y ago

> Companies are out there straight up selling snake oil to them right now Well snake oil sells. And the margins are great!

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]