this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
126 points (95.0% liked)

Technology

83261 readers
3154 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
126
OopsGPT - OpenAI just announced a new search tool. Its demo already got something wrong. (www.theatlantic.com)
submitted 2 years ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Perfect data isn’t needed as the errors will “even out”.

That is an assumption.

I do not think that it is a correct assumption.

now there’s the problem that most new content on the Internet is low quality AI garbage.

This reminds me about a recommendation from some philosopher - I forgot who it was - he said that you should read only such books that are at least 100 years old.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I’m extrapolating from history.

15 years ago people made fun of AI models because they could mistake some detail in a bush for a dog. Over time the models became more resistant against those kinds of errors. The change was more data and better models.

It’s the same type of error as hallucination. The model is overly confident about a thing it’s wrong about. I don’t see why these types of errors would be any different.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

I don’t see why these types of errors would be any different.

Well it is easy to see when you understand what LLMs actually do and how it is different from what humans do. Humans have multiple ways to correct errors and we do it all the time, intuitively. LLMs have none of these ways, they can only repeat their training (and not even hope for the best, because to hope is human again)