Yes, clearly it makes sense to think the AI software that takes McDonalds orders is the same as the AI software that would be used in a classroom. So if McDonalds AI can’t handle its job, neither can the other.
They’d likely use different models, but they’d be based on the same fundamental technology of LLMs. The training data would be different, but they’d have similar issues, but the one that’s supposed to be in a classroom would have significantly more signals to interpret and significantly higher consequences for being wrong.
They’d be different, but if it doesn’t work for McDonald’s, it can’t work for the much more complex task.
If anybody can build a teaching AI worth its salt then every other user facing AI service company would want to copy their architecture, and would be willing to pay for it
So if a megacorporation can’t get the good stuff, and nobody’s even seen the good stuff, it probably doesn’t even exist
I was going to post a reply supportive of you but realized this is an anti-ai grandpa group lol. I can’t stand hearing people talk about topics they don’t know anything about. Yall need to give your order to ChatGPT, and then ask it to repeat your order for you. If you don’t know why McDonalds fails but ChatGPT succeeds you need to shut the fuck up.
Thank you! Clearly we shouldn’t be making a 1 to 1 comparison between the McD’s AI and one used in education. It’s like saying, “If Notepad can’t correct spelling errors or grammar mistakes, then Word shouldn’t be used to rely on such either!” Different programs, both text editors.
inb4 “Notepad can do so now” or “you can if you get this plugin” - that’s not the point.
Yes, clearly it makes sense to think the AI software that takes McDonalds orders is the same as the AI software that would be used in a classroom. So if McDonalds AI can’t handle its job, neither can the other.
They’d likely use different models, but they’d be based on the same fundamental technology of LLMs. The training data would be different, but they’d have similar issues, but the one that’s supposed to be in a classroom would have significantly more signals to interpret and significantly higher consequences for being wrong.
They’d be different, but if it doesn’t work for McDonald’s, it can’t work for the much more complex task.
Both would be built on the same architecture.
If anybody can build a teaching AI worth its salt then every other user facing AI service company would want to copy their architecture, and would be willing to pay for it
So if a megacorporation can’t get the good stuff, and nobody’s even seen the good stuff, it probably doesn’t even exist
I was going to post a reply supportive of you but realized this is an anti-ai grandpa group lol. I can’t stand hearing people talk about topics they don’t know anything about. Yall need to give your order to ChatGPT, and then ask it to repeat your order for you. If you don’t know why McDonalds fails but ChatGPT succeeds you need to shut the fuck up.
Thank you! Clearly we shouldn’t be making a 1 to 1 comparison between the McD’s AI and one used in education. It’s like saying, “If Notepad can’t correct spelling errors or grammar mistakes, then Word shouldn’t be used to rely on such either!” Different programs, both text editors.
inb4 “Notepad can do so now” or “you can if you get this plugin” - that’s not the point.