Meta “programmed it to simply not answer questions,” but it did anyway.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    35 months ago

    Yeah, the average person is the idiot here, for something they never asked for, and for something they see no value in. Companies threw billions of dollars at this emerging technology. Many things like Google Search have hallucinating, error-prone AI forced into the main product that is impossible to opt-out or use the (working) legacy version now…

    • @doodledup
      link
      English
      -2
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Nobody is forcing you to use it.

      I’m using it and I see great value in it. And if there are people that see value in a product then it’s worth the investment.

      • @jeeva
        link
        English
        55 months ago

        Yes, people are being forced to use it if they want to, for instance, search using Google or Bing.

        As the parent comment suggested, or there’s no way to opt out, currently.

        I’m glad you see value in it; I think the injection of LLM queries into search results I want to contain accurate results (and nothing more) a useless waste of power.

        • @doodledup
          link
          English
          15 months ago

          Injecting that into search result is a bad thing, I’m with you on that. Try DuckDuckGo. They use Bing but don’t insert all of that AI crap. The results are much more vanilla. It’s actually easier to find stuff because it’s not that cluttered.

      • @trollbearpig
        link
        English
        15 months ago

        I always ask all people defending AI, or rather LLMs, what’s the great value they all mention in their comments. So far the “best” answer I got was one dude using LLMs to extract info from decades old reports that no one has checked in 20 years hahaha. So glad we are allowing LLMs to deetroy the environment and plagiarize all creative work for that lol.

        So, what is the great value you see man?

        • @doodledup
          link
          English
          0
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          It was never made for information retrieval. It’s made for high-level reasoning and language understanding. That is where it shines. You completely misunderstand what this is all about. You’re trying to use a car to paint a wall.

          There is really no argument against LLMs if they are used correctly. Just relax a bit and embrace it with a bit more curiosity. It won’t kill mankind, just like fire, agriculture, or the steam engine has.

          • @trollbearpig
            link
            English
            15 months ago

            Me? I’m not using LLMs at all hahaha. I’m asking you, who says they have great value, to provide examples of their uses. I just provided pretty much the only one I have heard, which some random dude told me in a different thread. Everyone else, like you, just keeps it abstract and just bullshits and bullshits hahaha.

            • @doodledup
              link
              English
              05 months ago

              Great use is subjective. But I use them to better understand university lectures. I can have a real discussion, ask questions, ask for examples and so on. I had countless situations where web searches would not have helped me because the ressources cannot do reasoning to explain intuitions. I’m also using it for coding. It’s awesome for boilerplate code. I also sometimes ask it to improve my existing code, so I can learn new coding practicesand tricks from that.

              None of these applications require the LLM to be correct 100% of the time. It’s still great value for me. And when I suspect that it’s wrong about something or it’s hallucinating or bad at explaining something, I’ll just do some web searches for validation.

              You might not find it useful because you’re using it wrong, or simply because you have no application for the value it can provide. But that doesn’t mean it’s all bad. OP certainly doesn’t know how to use it. I would never even think about asking it about historical events.

              • @trollbearpig
                link
                English
                15 months ago

                So literally you use it for information retrieval hahahaha. I did use copilot, codium, and the jetbrains one for a bit. But I had to disable each one, the amount fo wrong code simply doesn’t justify the little boilerplate it generates.

                • @doodledup
                  link
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  That’s not information retrieval. There is a difference between asking it about historical events and asking it to come up with their own stuff based on reasoning. I know that it can be wrong about factual questions and I embrace that. OP and many others don’t understand that and think it’s a problem when the AI gives a wrong answer about a specific question. You’re simply using it wrong.

                  It’s been a while since ChatGPT4 has spit out non-working bullshit code for me. And if it does, I immediately notice it and it’ll still be a time-saver because there is at least something I can take from every response even if it’s a wrong response. I’m using it as intended. And I see value in it. So keep convincing yourself it’s terrible, but stop being annoying about it if others disagree.

                  • @trollbearpig
                    link
                    English
                    15 months ago

                    Jesus man, chill. Why are all AI people so sensitive? Hahahaha. My man, during this conversation I have only asked about what are the great apps that LLMs have provided. You answered with the usual ones, chatgpt and copilot. It’s nice that you find them useful, no need to insult me just because I don’t think they are useful. I was honestly hoping for something else, but that’s it. Seriously, chill dude.