Maybe we don’t need 30 remedial IQ points from a magic hallucination box?
“I used many words to ask the AI to tell me a story using unverified sources to give me the answer I want and have no desire to fact check.”
GIGO.
I mean, how many people fact check a book? Even at the most basic level of reading the citations, finding the sources the book cited, and making sure they say what the book claims they say?
In the vast majority of cases, when we read a book, we trust the editors to fact check.
AI has no editors and generates false statements all the time because it has no ability to tell true statements from false. Which is why letting an AI summarize sources, instead of reading those sources for yourself, introduces one very large procedurally generated point of failure.
But let’s not pretend the average person fact checks anything. The average person decides who they trust and relies on their trust in that person or source rather than fact checking themselves.
Which is one of the many reasons why Trump won.
This is a two part problem. The first is that LLMs are going to give you shoddy results riddled with errors. This is known. Would you pick up a book and take it as the truth if analysis of the author’s work said 50% of their facts are wrong?The second part is that the asker has no intent to verify the LLM’s output, they likely just want the output and be done with it. No critical thinking required. The recipient is only interested in a copy-paste way of transferring info.
If someone takes the time to actually read and process a book with the intent of absorbing and adding to their knowledge, mentally they take the time to balance what they read with what they know and hopefully cross referencing that information internally and gauging it with “that sounds right” at least, but hopefully by reading more.
These are not the same thing. Books and LLMs are not the same. Anyone can read the exact same book and offer a critical analysis. Anyone asking an LLM a question might get an entirely different response depending on minor differences in asking.
Sure, you can copy-paste from a book, but if you haven’t read it, then yeah…that’s like copy-pasting an LLM response. No intent of learning, no critical thought, etc.
you read books and eat vegetables like a loser
my daddy lets me play nintendo 64 and eat cotton candy
we are not the same
Imagine thinking “I outsource all of my thinking to machines, machines that are infamous for completely hallucinating information out of the aether or pulling from sources that are blatantly fabrications. And due to this veil of technology, this black box that just spits out data with no way to tell where it came from, and my unwillingness to put in my own research efforts to verify anything, I will never have any way to tell if the information is just completely wrong. And yet I will claim this to be my personal knowledge, regurgitate this information with full confidence and attach my personal name and reputation to its veracity regardless, and be subject to the consequences when someone with actual knowledge fact checks me,” is a clever take. Imagine thinking that taking the easy way out, the lazy way, the manipulative way that gets others to do your work for you, is the virtuous path. Modern day Tom Sawyers, I swear. Sorry, AI bros, have an AI tell you who Tom Sawyer is so you can understand the insult.
Obviously it’s the fact checkers who are wrong /s
After all that long description, AI tells you eating rocks is ok.
while you were studying books, he studied a cup of coffee. TBH I can spend an hour both reading and drinking coffee at the same time idk why it’s got to be its own thing.
Look at this guy over here, bragging about multitasking. Next he’ll tell us he can drink coffee and write multiple prompts in an hour. /s
You’re right OOP, we are not the same. I have the full context, processing time, an enjoyable reading experience and a framework to understand the book in question and its wider relevance. You have a set of bullet points that, when asked to talk about on the mind numbing mens rights/crypto podcast you no doubt have, you cannot talk about, a lot of which will be wrong anyway.
spittakes coffee all over keyboard
I just spent the last 57 minutes drinking that coffee, I was almost done too, thanks a lot.
This is the most Butlerian Jihad thing I’ve ever read. They should replace whatever Terminator-lite slop Brian Herbert wrote with this screengrab and called it Dune Book Zero.
It makes me think of The Time Machine by H. G. Wells.
Imagine being proud of wasting the time drinking coffee instead of reading and understanding for yourself…
Then posting that you are proud of relying on hallucinating, made up slop.
Lmfao.
They also imply that 2+58 minutes is equal to 2 hours
-Look at you. Spent four years in a college. Six months to go through the documentation of the programming language. Another six months to read the manual of the library and practice those example code. Finally, three months to implement the feature and complete the automated tests. Meanwhile, I write a prompt in thirty seconds and AI gives me the whole project, in a programming language I don’t know, and with me not knowing any of the technical detail.
-And somehow you are proud of that?
Except it won’t. There’s no LLM that can help someone with no or little experience build a full application. You can get away with a website once and struggle through updates, but there’s no LLM making Netflix. There isn’t a chance there will be in our lifetimes. Anyone who tells you anything else is selling you something or not educated enough on the topic to have an opinion.
The LLM will eventually steal the code, though, and people will claim it invented something.
-And somehow you are proud of that?
Further, I find it EXTREMELY disturbing that someone would desire the secrets of our wonderous journey to be so cynical, solvable and perfectly designed for authoritarian consolidation of power.
Oh no not the reading! Great thing we had AI to create AI and we did not have to depend on all those computer scientists and engineers whose only skill is to read stuff.
my overseer agent
Welp. That’s all I need!
2 minutes + 58 minutes = 2 hours
Bro must have asked the LLM to do the math for him
The additional hour might be the time they have to work so that they can pay for the LLM access.
Because that is another aspect of what LLMs really are, another Silicon Valley rapid-scale venture capital money-pit service hoping that by the time they’ve dominated the market and spent trillions they can turn around and squeeze their users hard.
Only trouble for fighting this with logic is that the market they’re attempting to wipe out is people’s ability to assess data and think critically.
Indeed. Folks right now dont understand that their queries are being 99.9% subsidized by trillions in VC hoping to dominate a market. Tech tale as old as time and people are falling for it hook, line, and sinker
Impressed that he can think of the information he needs in 2 minutes - why even bother researching if you already know what you need …
Seriously though, reading and understanding generally just leaves me with more, very relevant, questions and some answers.
Might be that it takes them an hour to read the summary
Two hours to read a book? How long has it been since he touched a piece of adult physical literature?
And not THAT kind of adult literature.
ChatGPT please tell me if spot does indeed run.
Welp, that’s gonna fuck up my search algorithm for a while.
“Chuck Tingle”. :D
I have read books in which the definition of certain words get redefined to be more precise and clear in the communication while making things less verbose. I don’t think an ai summary will reliably properly introduce me to the definition on page 100 of a book that took the previous 99 pages to set up the required definitions to understand the definition it gives on page 100.
But I could be wrong.
