thedruid

Yep. That’s is exactly correct.

I know. it would be a lot better world if a. I apologists could just admit they are wrong

But nah. They better than others.

You’re just as bad.

Let’s focus on a spell check issue.

That’s why we have trump

No, the task was To tell me the difference in the two modes.

It provided incorrect information and passed it off as accurate. It didn’t complete the task

You know that though. You’re just too invested to admit it. So I will withdraw. Enjoy your day.

That’s a huge, arrogant and quite insulting statement. Your making assumptions based on stereotypes

Not relevant to the conversation.

And anyone who understands marketing knows it’s all a smokescreen to hide the fact that we have released unreliable, unsafe and ethicaly flawed products on the human race because , mah tech.

That’s not completing a task. That’s faking a result for appearance.

Is that what you’re advocating for ?

If I ask an llm to tell me the difference between aeolian mode and Dorian mode in the field of music , and it gives me the wrong info, then no it’s not working as intended

See I chose that example because I know the answer. The llm didn’t. But it gave me an answer. An incorrect one

I want you to understand this. You’re fighting the wrong battle. The llms do make mistakes. Frequently. So frequently that any human who made the same amount of mistakes wouldn’t keep their job.

But the investment, the belief in a.i is so engrained for some of us who so want a bright and technically advanced future, that you are now making excuses for it. I get it. I’m not insulting you. We are humans. We do that. There are subjects I am sure you could point at where I do this as well

But a.i.? No. It’s just wrong so often. It’s not it’s fault. Who knew that when we tried to jump ahead in the tech timeline, that we should have actually invented guardrail tech first?

Instead we let the cart go before the horses, AGAIN, because we are dumb creatures , and now people are trying to force things that don’t work correctly to somehow be shown to be correct.

I know. A mouthful. But honestly. A.i. is poorly designed, poorly executed, and poorly used.

It is hastening the end of man. Because those who have been singing it’s praises are too invested to admit it.

It simply ain’t ready.

Edit: changed “would” to “wouldn’t”

Nn. It’s to make people who don’t understand llms be cautious in placing their trust in them. To communicate that clearly, language that is understandable to people who don’t understand llms need to be used.

I can’t believe this Is the supposed high level of discourse on lemmy

So working as designed means presenting false info?

Look , no one is ascribing intelligence or intent to the machine. The issue is the machines aren’t very good and are being marketed as awesome. They aren’t

No. This is a thinly veiled pr price supporting Google as a monopoly

Sounds wonderful

Oh I get that. Just sounded like passing all testing responsibilities off to others.

Major bank

There’s your answer

You don’t test your own code as well?

yep. all we have to do is keep incrementally improving lives with tech, instead of being assholes to each other. Imagine the world, if peace was the most researched branch

fair enough

I like brave

they are both wrong. one is just as bad

no, its built into other apps. doesnt ask for anything then, the other apps do, Alphonso just listens in those apps